Fatah-Hamas rift deepens

Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz’s visit on Sunday to Ramallah termed a sign of improved relations between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority (PA).

However, this visit has dampened hope of resolving the dispute between the PA and its archrival, Hamas. In fact, the meeting between Gantz and PA President Mahmoud Abbas has exacerbated tensions between the two Palestinian factions.

Hamas was one of the first Palestinian groups to strongly condemn the visit by the “Zionist minister of war” to Ramallah. A number of Hamas officials accused Abbas of “stabbing the Palestinians in the back” and “betraying the blood of the Palestinian martyrs.”

A Palestinian official dismissed the charges as “idiotic” and accused Hamas of working to serve the agenda of “foreign powers” in the region, an apparent reference to Iran and Qatar. The serious accusations mean the split between the PA-ruled West Bank and Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip is likely to continue, at least as long as Abbas is in power.

The rivalry between Abbas’s Fatah faction and Hamas reached its peak in 2007 when the Islamist movement violently seized control of the Gaza Strip after removing the PA from power.

Abbas has never forgiven Hamas for the humiliation. Worse, he is convinced that Hamas was behind a plot to assassinate him in the Gaza Strip.

Over the past 14 years, several attempts by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey to achieve reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas have failed.

Last year, Fatah and Hamas seemed close to burying the hatchet when they announced they had reached an agreement, under the auspices of Egypt, to hold long-overdue elections for the PA presidency and parliament, as well as the PLO’s legislative body, the Palestinian National Council.

But Abbas’s decision in April to call off the elections again put Fatah and Hamas on a collision course. Since Abbas’s announcement, tensions between the two groups have been intensifying.

After the 11-day Israel-Hamas war in May, strains between the two sides further escalated, especially in light of the mass pro-Hamas demonstrations that swept many parts of the West Bank.

Several Palestinians who participated in the demonstrations were arrested or beaten by Palestinian security officers in the West Bank. Additionally, Fatah and Hamas have been unable to reach agreement on who would be responsible for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the war.

The honeymoon between Fatah and Hamas was credited to former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former US president Donald Trump. Last year, Fatah and Hamas even reached agreement to work together to topple Trump’s plan for Middle East peace, also known as the “Deal of the Century,” and Netanyahu’s “schemes” against the Palestinians.

Netanyahu and Trump managed, where some Arab leaders had failed, to unite the Palestinian rival parties.

Things have since changed, however, and neither Netanyahu nor Trump is in power. The absence of the two men from the political scene and the change of government in Jerusalem and Washington paved the way for the restoration of relations between the PA and Israel and the US.

Abbas has reached the conclusion that he has more to gain from dealing with the new governments in Israel and the US than from making peace with Hamas. The Biden administration has resumed financial aid to the Palestinians and is talking about the need to strengthen the PA, and this is precisely what Abbas wants to hear.

Similarly, the new Israeli government has already changed its attitude toward Abbas and the PA. At the behest of the Biden administration, the government has announced a series of gestures to strengthen the Palestinian economy and improve the living conditions of the Palestinians.

The Israeli measures could help Abbas and the PA leadership in the short term. But in the long term, the gestures are not going to change the hearts and minds of most Palestinians toward Israel. Nor will these gestures assist Abbas in regaining credibility among his own constituents.

Gantz traveled to Ramallah with one mission, to strengthen the PA and its leaders. The visit could also be seen as a bear hug for the 85-year-old Abbas. It is no wonder that the PA leadership refused to publish any photos of the meeting. Abbas is well aware that a photo op with the “Zionist minister of war” would cause great damage by making him appear as a “subcontractor” for the Israeli security establishment.

Abbas has long been facing sharp criticism because of his support for security coordination between the PA and Israeli security forces in the West Bank. About six years ago, Abbas drew strong condemnation from many Palestinians when he was quoted as telling a group of Israelis he considered security coordination to be “sacred.”

Abbas’s political enemies, including Hamas, are now exploiting the Gantz-Abbas meeting to incite against the PA leadership. Their main argument is that Abbas has chosen to align himself with the Israelis and Americans instead of working to reunite the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and end his conflict with Hamas.

Last week, a document leaked to Palestinian media revealed that Abbas had made it clear he will not allow Hamas to join any Palestinian unity government unless the Islamist group that controls the Gaza Strip accepts all international resolutions pertaining to the Israeli-Arab conflict.

This means Hamas must recognize Israel’s right to exist and accept the two-state solution as a precondition for joining any Palestinian government – a demand that has been vehemently and repeatedly rejected by Hamas officials. The leaked document set off a war of words between Fatah and Hamas, with each accusing the other of foiling efforts to achieve national unity.

For now, Abbas and the PA leadership appear satisfied with the policies and measures of the Biden administration and the Israeli government. A senior PA official on Tuesday praised the recent agreements with Israel, especially family reunifications and financial matters, as a significant achievement.

Earlier, Palestinian officials said they were satisfied with the new approach of the Biden administration, namely to strengthen the PA.

The three men running the PA – Abbas, Civil Affairs Minister Hussein al-Sheikh and General Intelligence chief Majed Faraj – are all known for their hostility toward Hamas. They have decided the Palestinians are better off dealing with the Biden administration and the government of Naftali Bennett than joining forces with Hamas.

No need to blame Bennett, whatever he got is Irony of fate

Prime Minister Naftali Bennett failed to stand up to pressure from US President Joe Biden on the Iranian issue, opposition representative Tzachi Hanegbi (Likud) said Tuesday in a special session of the Knesset during its summer recess.

Hanegbi, who is one of the longest-serving MKs, recounted the history of Israeli prime ministers resisting pressure from US presidents, from Menachem Begin to Benjamin Netanyahu. He said Bennett had failed to follow in their footsteps, but he should have learned from Netanyahu’s controversial 2015 speech to Congress on the Iran deal, which Hanegbi attended.

“It wasn’t easy or comfortable for them, but our prime ministers are not elected to receive compliments in the White House,” Hanegbi said. “Bennett collapsed when he should have said, “Mr. President, I respect your view that the Iran deal should be resumed, but we will not be obligated by the agreement, and we will not let Iran gain the power to wipe us off the map. We don’t need permission to defend ourselves.” That is what was not said in the White House, and because it

Religious Services Minister Matan Kahana (Yamina), a close confidant of Bennett, responded on his behalf that the government had inherited the situation with Iran from Netanyahu and was not party to the Iran deal.

“Israel reserves the right to decide for itself on the Iran issue,” he said. “On the Iranian issue, the opposition should give its support and not make it a tool for politics.”

Defense Minister Benny Gantz had asked on Monday to speak on the government’s behalf but was turned down by Bennett’s associates, who were angry at him for meeting with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

Opposition MKs mocked Bennett for sending the religious services minister to speak on Iran instead of the defense minister.

“I guess on the Iran issue, like other security matters, all we can do is pray, so they sent us the religious services minister to deal with that,” Religious Zionist Party MK Simcha Rothman said.

Bennett’s associates and right-wing ministers in the government continued to criticize Gantz on Tuesday for the meeting with Abbas. Gantz’s No. 2 in his Blue and White Party, Aliyah and Integration Minister Pnina Tamano-Shata, defended him.

“The cowards criticizing Defense Minister Gantz are narrow-minded politicians who are jealous of his leadership,” she told Army Radio. “They are jealous because he has earned the public’s trust on security issues and the fight against coronavirus.”

Ten lessons from the lost US war in Afghanistan

I feel privileged in sharing an article by Andrew Korybko. He has rightly concluded everything that went wrong was entirely foreseeable and many even warned about what was happening but their concerns were dismissed. 

The truth finally came out and now everyone knows that the entire war was built upon a mountain of lies and easily avoidable mistakes. The US reputation is ruined and it's no longer regarded as a superpower.

Tens of thousands of lives were lost and over US$2 trillion were wasted only for the situation to revert back to how it was almost exactly twenty years ago. Now it is the time for the decision-makers, strategists, media, and civil society to somberly find out what went wrong and to plan nothing like this ever happens again. Here are the ten lessons to be learned:

Legitimate anti-terrorist actions mustn't be exploited for ulterior motives

The US attacked Afghanistan on the pretext that it had the right to militarily respond against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan in self-defense after it concluded that the terrorist group's leader there was responsible for planning the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but its greatest mistake was exploiting this as the pretext to engage in so-called “nation-building”. 

Nation-building will never succeed

It's impossible to sustainably support the cause of so-called “nation-building” whereby a foreign country aggressively imposes its completely different way of life onto a targeted state's inhabitants who historically organized their society on the basis of other morals, ethics, principles, and values. 

Local allies must be held to account

After regrettably getting caught up in the Afghan quagmire, America had the responsibility to hold its allies there to account instead of letting them steal from their people, enrich themselves from the drug trade and other forms of organized crime, and carry out extrajudicial killings on the pretext of targeting the Taliban.

International coalition doesn't have impunity

America and its international coalition allies arrogantly thought that they could commit crimes against the Afghan people with impunity, but that was impossible since the rest of the world inevitably found out about their killings and other such unsavory acts even if justice isn't yet served to the culprits. 

Winning hearts and minds is more important than winning territory

Strategically speaking, the war was lost shortly after it began once the US and its allies started abusing the Afghan people in terrible ways and therefore turned their hearts and minds towards the Taliban, which therefore made it impossible for the government to hold its ground despite being backed by the US military. 

Western mainstream media always lies

The dramatic developments of the past two weeks during the Taliban's lightning-fast conquest of the country shattered the countless lies spread by the Western mainstream media about the true state of affairs there, proving that they can't ever be trusted about anything, whether it's Afghanistan, China, or whatever else. 

Inevitable military withdrawals must be carried out responsibly

The US inevitable withdrawal wasn't carried out responsibly since America should have ensured that it didn't leave any military equipment behind, established tripwires for deterring Taliban attacks until it already left the country, and compelled former President Ghani to politically compromise towards a transitional government. 

Political proxies sometimes defy their patrons

Part of the problem with the US withdrawal was that its political proxy, former President Ghani, refused to make any meaningful compromises towards a transitional government that could have facilitated a smoother transfer of power and prevented America from being humiliated even more than it already was in recent days. 

Local allies must be rescued during the withdrawal

The US shamefully abandoned tens of thousands of its Afghan allies who fear for their futures after their American-backed government just fell, which shows how unreliable the US is as an ally that it would leave its local allies to fend for themselves under such uncertain conditions instead of letting them relocate to America.

Andrew Korybko is a political analyst, journalist and regular contributor to several online journals. He is a member of the expert council for the Institute of Strategic Studies and Predictions at the People’s Friendship University of Russia. He has published various works in the field of Hybrid Wars, including “Hybrid Wars: The Indirect Adaptive Approach to Regime Change” and “The Law of Hybrid War: Eastern Hemisphere”.

Longest war in the history of United States comes to an end

The longest war in the history of United States has come to an end with the departure of the last American military flight out of Afghanistan almost 20 years after troops first landed in the country. American planes took off from the Kabul airport shortly before midnight local time, US Central Command head Marine Corps Gen. Frank McKenzie told reporters on Tuesday.

The last C-17 left the Hamid Karzai International Airport clearing Afghanistan's airspace just under the Biden administration’s 31st August 2021 deadline to remove all US forces from the country, McKenzie said.

"I’m here to announce the completion of our withdrawal from Afghanistan and the end of the mission to evacuate American citizens, third-country nationals and vulnerable Afghans," McKenzie said.

"Every single US service member is now out of Afghanistan," he later added.

The Pentagon later released a photo of the last American soldier to board the flight, identifying him as Maj. Gen. Chris Donahue.

McKenzie could not say how many people were aboard the aircraft or where it was headed, as it was still in flight, but he confirmed that 82nd Airborne Division head Maj. Gen. Christopher Donahue and Ambassador Ross Wilson were on board and “were in fact the last people to stand on the ground, step on the airplane.”

The flight also carried the last remaining US troops and the core diplomatic staff of the US Embassy in Kabul.

But there are still several hundred Americans in Afghanistan who were unable to reach the airport, along with thousands of Afghans who assisted the US military during the war effort.

McKenzie said no American civilians were on the last five flights to leave.

“We maintained the ability to bring them in up until immediately before departure, but we were not able to bring any Americans out. That activity ended probably about 12 hours before our exit. ...  None of them made it to the airport,” he added. 

But he maintained that even if the Biden administration had extended the deadline, “we wouldn’t have gotten everybody out that we wanted to get out and there still would’ve been people who would’ve been disappointed with that. It’s a tough situation.”

McKenzie also said the United States will continue the diplomatic evacuation mission to recover those Americans and vulnerable Afghans.

“I want to emphasize again that simply because we have left that doesn’t mean the opportunities for both Americans that are in Afghanistan who want to leave and Afghans who want to leave. They will not be denied that opportunity,” McKenzie added.

McKenzie also said the United States will continue the diplomatic evacuation mission to recover those Americans and vulnerable Afghans.

“While the military evacuation is complete, the diplomatic mission to ensure additional US citizens and eligible Afghans who want to leave continues,” he said.

“Tonight's withdrawal signifies both the end of the military component of the evacuation but also the end of the nearly 20-year mission that began in Afghanistan shortly after 11th September 2001. It was a mission that brought Osama bin Laden to a just end, along with many of his al Qaeda co-conspirators," McKenzie added.

"And it was not a cheap mission. The cost was 2,461 US service members and civilians killed and more than 20,000 who were injured. Sadly, that includes 13 service members who were killed last week by an ISIS-K suicide bomber. We honor their sacrifice today as we remember their heroic accomplishments,” he said.

McKenzie said the final days of the withdrawal, beginning from 1th August 2021, was the “largest non-combatant evacuation” in the US military’s history.

In those 18 days, American forces evacuated 79,000 civilians from the airport, including 6,000 Americans and more than 73,000 Special Immigrant Visa holders, consular staff, at-risk Afghans and their families, McKenzie said. Since the end of July, more than 123,000 civilians have been evacuated.

McKenzie laid out the final hours US troops were in the country, noting that the military destroyed or removed remaining equipment.

Forces kept a counter rocket, artillery, and mortar (C-RAM) system in place “up until the very last minute” to protect against any rocket attacks before they “demilitarized those systems so that they’ll never be used again.”

In addition, troops made unusable up to 70 Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, 27 Humvees and 73 aircraft.

McKenzie said the Taliban were “very pragmatic and very businesslike” during the withdrawal and that Donahue spoke to the Taliban commander before leaving to coordinate “but there was no discussion” of turning over the airfield. 

 

Israeli Defense Minister meets Palestinian President

According to an Associated Press report, Israeli Defense Minister held talks with Palestinian President in Ramallah, the first high-level meeting between the two sides in years. 

The meeting between Benny Gantz and Mahmoud Abbas signaled a possible shift of direction after the near-complete breakdown of communication between Abbas and Israeli leaders in recent years.

It came two days after President Joe Biden urged Israeli Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett during a White House meeting to take steps toward improving the lives of Palestinians.

Gantz’s office said he told Abbas that Israel will take new measures to strengthen the Palestinian economy. It said they also discussed security issues and agreed to remain in touch. It was believed to be the highest level public meeting between the sides since 2014.

A Palestinian official said Gantz and Abbas discussed possible steps toward improving the atmosphere. He said this included Palestinian demands for a halt in Israeli military operations in Palestinian areas of the occupied West Bank, allowing unification of families with relatives inside Israel and allowing more Palestinian workers into Israel. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the late-night meeting.

Bennett is a hard-liner who opposes Palestinian independence, as do key partners in his diverse, ruling coalition. But Bennett has said he supports building up the Palestinian economy and expanding autonomy for Palestinians. He also is interested in bolstering Abbas in his rivalry with the ruling Hama  in Gaza.

While Biden supports a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians, his administration is focused on interim confidence-building measures. Israel’s former Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, pursued a hard-line policy toward the Palestinians, backed by former President Donald Trump.

The Trump administration took a number of steps, including moving the US Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to contested Jerusalem. Abbas halted most contacts with the US and Israel in return.

Netanyahu had repeatedly claimed Abbas was not a reliable partner for negotiating a peace deal, a portrayal dismissed by Netanyahu critics as a pretext for avoiding making concessions.

Hussein Sheikh, a top Abbas aide, confirmed the meeting in a statement on Twitter. It took place on Sunday night in Ramallah in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, where Abbas maintains his headquarters.

Iran announces new regional policy

From the beginning, the new Iranian government of Ayatollah Seyed Ebrahim Raisi made it clear that change in the executive branch would bring about a shift in foreign policy. 

The new Iranian foreign minister, Hossein Amir Abdollahian, indicated how this shift would play out under Ayatollah Raisi.

In his speech at the Baghdad summit, Abdollahian reiterated what his predecessor often underlined in such regional platforms that Iran wants closer cooperation with the countries of the region, especially Iran’s neighbors. 

But at the same time, he was keen to let it be known that this cooperation should be done in a new spirit, one that would respect the legitimate interests of Iran and refrain from pursuing a zero-sum game. In addition, the top Iranian diplomat made it clear that no one should seek to change the balance of power in the region by relying on outside forces. 

Underlining Iran’s support for the Iraqi efforts to create areas for cooperation and interaction among the countries of the region, Abdollahian noted, “Our region has all the religious, cultural and civilizational characteristics as well as material and spiritual capacities for regional cooperation and convergence, but unfortunately, due to foreign interventions and the dominance of security-oriented ideas, it has many problems, including war, instability and insecurity.”

In pointing to a foreign role in the region, the Iranian foreign minister put the focus on the main thrust of the Baghdad summit. The Iraqi government put much energy and effort into holding this summit to bring closer the views of stakeholders of a region suffering from political divergence and polarization. 

The Iraqis portrayed the summit as a unique platform to foster intra-regional cooperation and partnership. From their point of view, bringing together officials from rival countries would make Iraq more secure and spare it the prospect of being collateral damage for regional rivalry. 

In addition, the Iraqi government was eager to convey the message that they want, and are able, to work with all countries of the region regardless of their political standing.
 
Iran welcomed the Iraqi efforts and underlined the need to strengthen regional security through dialogue among the players in the region. “What we need today more than ever before is "sustainable regional security" with the participation of regional countries. Regional security will materialize depending on the use of economic resources to build a coalition for peace and development,” Abdollahian told the summit. 

He added, “The Islamic Republic of Iran expresses its support for the Iraqi government and people and its internal decisions including the withdrawal of foreign troops and holding early elections, and it welcomes Iraq’s constructive role in promoting a culture of dialogue and regional cooperation. Iran considers cooperation within the region as the basis for establishing stability and peace in this way. The Islamic Republic of Iran, emphasizing the important role of other countries in the region, declares its readiness to advance these goals.”

At the end of his speech, the top Iranian diplomat underlined that Iran is adopting a new approach toward the region under Ayatollah Raisi, who has reiterated more than once that Iran’s foreign policy should focus on regional cooperation particularly in economic arenas.

Abdollahian pointed to this new pivot and said, “With great pleasure, I declare, at the inauguration of Iran’s new government that our foreign policy, being ‘balanced, active and smart’, emphasizes the priority of relations with neighbors and other countries in the region, and we warmly shake hands with all neighboring and regional nations.”

Whether this new approach would lead to the normalization of ties with regional heavyweights such as Saudi Arabia remains to be seen. But it seems that there is still a long road ahead until relations are fully normalized. 

Two things happened at the Baghdad summit that dampened hopes for closer regional cooperation. First, Syria was not invited to the summit despite being a major neighbor of Iraq. Some press reports suggested the exclusion of Syria was due to foreign pressure on the Iraqi government. 

Iran objected to this exclusion both before and during the summit. “We believe that Syria, as one of Iraq’s important neighboring countries, should have been invited to this meeting, too,” said Abdollahian before leaving Tehran for Baghdad.

During the summit, Abdollahian once again alluded to Syria’s absence. “I would like to emphasize the role and support of regional nations in stabilizing and resorting security to Iraq including the friendly and brotherly country of the Syrian Arab Republic. I would like to express regret that Syria is not attending this summit,” he said. 

Second, there were no reports of a meeting between Abdollahian and his Saudi Arabian counterpart Faisal bin Farhan in Baghdad. This is while many important meetings were held on the sidelines of the summit. One such meeting was between the Emir of Qatar and the president of Egypt. Another meeting was between the Emir and the governor of Dubai, who also met with Abdollahian.

US strikes vehicle loaded with explosives heading towards Kabul airport

A drone strike by the US on Sunday targeted a vehicle in Kabul loaded with explosives that officials said posed an imminent threat to the airport amid the final days of a massive military evacuation effort of Americans and allies from Afghanistan.

US Navy Capt. Bill Urban said in a statement that the airstrike eliminated "an imminent ISIS-K threat” to the Hamid Karzai International Airport, referring to the Islamic State faction in Afghanistan.

Urban called the strike an act of “self-defense” and said military officials were still assessing the possibility of any civilian casualties. 

“We are confident we successfully hit the target,” Urban said. “Significant secondary explosions from the vehicle indicated the presence of a substantial amount of explosive material.”

The Associated Press reported earlier Sunday that "multiple suicide bombers" had been targeted in a vehicle that was headed to the airport.

It was the second US military strike in Afghanistan since a suicide bomber killed 13 US service members and dozens of Afghans on Thursday at an airport gate, which officials blamed on ISIS-K.

On Saturday, officials said two ISIS-K members were killed in a US airstrike in the Nangarhar province.

A rocket attack that killed a child was also reported early Sunday in a neighborhood northwest of the airport, according to an Afghan police chief.