Hamas is Freedom Fighter, Not Terrorist

The dominant Western discourse labels Hamas a “terrorist organization.” Yet this framing neglects both the context of Israel’s occupation and the legal principles that underpin the Palestinian right to resist. A critical reassessment reveals Hamas as part of a broader liberation struggle—comparable to anti-colonial movements across Africa, Asia, and Europe—that embodies the right of oppressed peoples to fight for self-determination.

Legal Basis of Resistance

International law recognizes the legitimacy of armed resistance against foreign occupation. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 37/43 (1982) affirms the right of peoples “under colonial and foreign domination and alien occupation to struggle … by all available means, including armed struggle.”

The Palestinian case clearly falls within this framework. Israel’s continued occupation of Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem violates numerous UN resolutions, including UN Security Council Resolution 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), which demand Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories.

Thus, the actions of Palestinian resistance groups—including Hamas—are not “terrorism” in the legal sense but a manifestation of the internationally recognized right to resist occupation.

Historical Parallels

Resistance movements throughout history were often branded “terrorist” by dominant powers. The French Resistance against Nazi Germany engaged in armed attacks and sabotage but is now revered as heroic.

Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) was on US and British terrorist watch lists until the 1990s.

Similarly, the FLN in Algeria and the Mau Mau in Kenya were vilified as terrorists during their anti-colonial wars.

Today, they are celebrated as freedom fighters who dismantled colonial rule. Hamas should be understood in this historical continuum rather than through selective moral judgments.

Political and Social Legitimacy

Hamas is not an isolated militant group. In the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections, declared free and fair by international monitors, Hamas won a majority, underscoring its legitimacy among Palestinians.

Beyond its military dimension, it provides education, healthcare, and welfare services in Gaza, functioning as both a political and social actor.

This dual role strengthens its claim as a national liberation movement rather than a mere armed faction.

Double Standards

The Western narrative reveals glaring inconsistencies. When Ukraine resists Russian occupation, it is celebrated as self-defense. When Palestinians resist Israeli occupation, it is condemned as terrorism.

Such double standards highlight the politicization of the term “terrorism,” stripping it of objective meaning and weaponizing it to delegitimize legitimate struggles.

Palestinian Struggle

It is important to emphasize that Hamas does not exist in isolation but as part of a century-long Palestinian resistance to dispossession and occupation.

The 1948 Nakba displaced hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, and Israel’s subsequent expansion entrenched a system widely described by human rights organizations—including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch—as apartheid. In this context, Hamas embodies continuity with the larger Palestinian liberation struggle.

Hamas is not merely a militant group but a resistance movement rooted in the Palestinian right to self-determination. International law, historical precedent, and moral logic place it firmly within the tradition of freedom fighters, not terrorists.

To criminalize Hamas is to criminalize the very notion of liberation. Just as yesterday’s “terrorists” became today’s national heroes, the Palestinian struggle—and Hamas as part of it—must be recognized as a fight for justice and freedom.

 

Disappointing utterings of President Trump

US President Donald Trump castigated the United Nations on Tuesday as a “feckless institution” in a grievance filled, self-congratulatory speech to the General Assembly that attracted mixed sharp criticism of allies.

In his roughly hour-long address, Trump praised America’s direction under his leadership while warning that Europe would be “ruined” if it continued pursuing what he called a “double-tailed monster” of liberal migration policies and costly green energy projects.

He accused the UN of being full of “empty words” that fail to resolve wars, yet later told Secretary-General Antonio Guterres the US remained “100%” behind the organization’s peacekeeping potential.

The president’s remarks underscored Washington’s return to an unapologetic “America First” posture, with sharp critiques of US allies and the global body itself.

Trump lauded expanded US drilling and tougher immigration controls, urging other countries to follow suit.

He warned European nations against what he called the “green energy scam,” claiming it would devastate their economies and societies.

On Ukraine, Trump shifted tone dramatically after meeting President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, saying he now believes Kyiv, with NATO support, could retake all occupied territory. The reversal marked his strongest endorsement yet of Ukraine’s war effort against Russia.

Trump emphasized his role as a global mediator, pointing to US efforts to ease conflicts in the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia.

He repeated his claim that he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize, though experts dispute the extent of his impact.

Breaking from prepared remarks, Trump mocked a broken escalator and teleprompter at UN headquarters, drawing laughter from delegates.

He closed by declaring that his “real prize” would be saving lives by ending wars, not international accolades.

Despite fiery rhetoric, Trump sought to balance his attacks with assurances of US commitment, leaving diplomats to parse an address that veered between confrontation and conciliation.

 

  

Saudi Arabia under dynamic leadership of MBS

Saudi Arabia’s transformation under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) is not only reshaping the Kingdom but also sending ripples across the Muslim world, including Pakistan. His bold reforms under Vision 2030 have turned Saudi Arabia into a symbol of modernization rooted in tradition, economic diversification, and youth empowerment. For countries in South Asia and the wider Muslim Ummah, Saudi Arabia’s progress offers both lessons and opportunities.

A Model of Economic Diversification

For decades, Saudi Arabia’s economy was defined by oil revenues. Today, under MBS, it is rapidly diversifying. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), non-oil real GDP grew by 4.5% in 2024, and overall growth is projected to reach 3.9% by 2026.

Flagship projects like NEOM and the development of renewable energy — targeting 130 GW by 2030 — are positioning Saudi Arabia at the cutting edge of global innovation. For Pakistan, which struggles with energy insecurity and overreliance on imports, Saudi Arabia’s example of large-scale solar, wind, and hydrogen projects is highly relevant. Pakistan can benefit from Saudi expertise and investment in clean energy, aligning with its own climate challenges.

Social Reforms and Their Regional Significance

One of the most striking achievements of Vision 2030 is the empowerment of Saudi women. Female labor participation has surged from 17% in 2016 to nearly 36% by 2023, exceeding Vision 2030’s original target.

This has lessons for Pakistan, where female participation in the workforce remains under 25%. The Saudi example demonstrates that carefully managed reforms, aligned with cultural and religious values, can unlock the economic potential of women without eroding tradition. It is an important message for conservative societies across South Asia that modernization and faith can coexist.

Opportunities for Pakistan

Saudi Arabia under MBS has become one of Pakistan’s most reliable partners. The Kingdom’s direct investments — whether in oil refineries, infrastructure, or mining — promise to strengthen Pakistan’s fragile economy. Riyadh’s supportive financial packages in times of crisis have also been crucial in stabilizing Pakistan’s reserves.

With MBS driving Saudi diversification, Pakistan can position itself as both a strategic partner and a beneficiary. Skilled Pakistani labor is already in demand in Saudi Arabia, and Vision 2030’s mega-projects will open opportunities for professionals in engineering, IT, health, and services. Strengthening people-to-people ties will further cement the historical bond between the two nations.

Regional Implications

Saudi Arabia’s progress is not just a national story — it carries regional weight. A stable, modern, and forward-looking Saudi Arabia strengthens the Muslim world at a time when many nations are trapped in conflict or stagnation. By asserting an independent foreign policy, hosting global investment forums, and committing to sustainability, MBS is redefining Riyadh’s role as a leader in the Middle East.

For South Asia, Saudi Arabia’s transformation is an anchor of stability and opportunity. Countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, and even Afghanistan can benefit from stronger trade, labor mobility, and shared energy initiatives. In a world where the Muslim voice is often fragmented, Riyadh’s rise under MBS provides a rallying point.

A Leadership Style that Inspires

While some critics focus on controversies, the undeniable fact is that MBS has injected new energy into Saudi society and its global standing. His leadership resonates with young people — not only in Saudi Arabia but across the Muslim world. For many in Pakistan, where governance often appears directionless, MBS’s clarity of vision and decisiveness stand in sharp contrast.

Saudi Arabia’s transformation under MBS is a story of ambition meeting execution. The Kingdom is diversifying its economy, empowering its youth and women, and asserting itself on the world stage. For Pakistan and its neighbors, the lesson is clear: bold leadership, rooted in cultural values but open to innovation, can turn challenges into opportunities.

As the Muslim world looks for models of progress, Saudi Arabia under MBS shines as an inspiring example — not just for Arabs, but for Pakistanis and all those who yearn for reform without losing identity.

 

US and Israel must pay for Gaza reconstruction

Reports suggest that US President Donald Trump is set to convene leaders and officials from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Indonesia, and Pakistan for a multilateral meeting on Gaza. The centerpiece of his proposal will be threefold: 1) release of captives, 2) a ceasefire, and 3) Israeli withdrawal. Yet behind these points lies Washington’s real demand — pressing Arab and Muslim countries to provide troops and bankroll Gaza’s reconstruction.

This approach is deeply flawed. After nearly two years of war, Gaza has been turned into rubble. Over 65,000 Palestinians are dead, the entire population displaced, and famine has taken hold. UN inquiries and global rights experts have already concluded that Israel’s campaign constitutes genocide.

Against such evidence, one must ask: why should Arab and Muslim states be asked to fund the rebuilding of a land destroyed by Israel with American weapons and American diplomatic cover?

Morally and legally, it is Israel and its principal sponsor — the United States — who must foot the bill, not the victims’ brothers and neighbors.

In fact, justice demands far more: compensation to the families of the dead, even a million dollars for each life taken, as a measure of accountability.

History underscores this logic. After World War II, defeated aggressors were made to pay. Germany’s factories and patents were seized, Japan delivered reparations to occupied nations, and Italy compensated countries it had invaded.

The Western Allies later softened the approach through the Marshall Plan, choosing reconstruction over humiliation. But the guiding principle remained the same: those who destroy must pay to rebuild.

Expecting Arab and Muslim nations to pay for Gaza’s reconstruction is not only unjust, it is an insult. It absolves Israel of responsibility while shifting the burden onto those who stood with the victims.

If Washington and Tel Aviv believe in peace, they must accept the hard truth: accountability is the foundation of stability. Gaza will not rise from the ashes if the arsonists walk free and the neighbors are forced to pick up the tab.

President Trump Gaza Belongs to Palestinians

US President Donald Trump is scheduled to meet leaders and officials from multiple Muslim-majority countries on Tuesday and discuss the situation in Gaza, which has been under a mounting assault from Washington's ally Israel.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Monday that Trump will hold a multilateral meeting with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Indonesia and Pakistan.

Axios reported Trump will present the group with a proposal for peace and post-war governance in Gaza.

In addition to freeing hostages and ending the war, Trump is expected to discuss US plans around an Israeli withdrawal and post-war governance in Gaza, without Hamas involvement, according to Axios.

Washington wants Arab and Muslim countries to agree to send military forces to Gaza to enable Israel's withdrawal and to secure funding for transition and rebuilding programs, Axios reported.

Trump will address the UN General Assembly on Tuesday, a day after dozens of world leaders gathered at the United Nations to embrace a Palestinian state, a landmark diplomatic shift nearly two years into the Gaza war that faces fierce resistance from Israel and the United States.

The nations said a two-state solution was the only way to achieve peace, but Israel said the recognition of a Palestinian state was a reward to extremism.

Israel's assault on Gaza since October 2023 has killed tens of thousands, internally displaced Gaza's entire population, and set off a starvation crisis. Multiple rights experts, scholars and a UN inquiry assessed it amounts to genocide.

Israel calls its actions self-defense and has also bombed Iran, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria and Qatar during the course of its war in Gaza.

Trump had promised a quick end to the war in Gaza, but a resolution remains elusive eight months into his term.

In February, Trump proposed a US takeover of Gaza and a permanent displacement of Palestinians from there. It was labeled as an "ethnic cleansing" proposal by rights experts and the United Nations. Forcible displacement is illegal under international law. Trump cast the plan as a re-development idea.

What options US can exercise if Afghans refuse to handover Bagram Air Base?

If Afghans refuse to handover Bagram Air Base back to the United States, Washington is likely to face a serious strategic dilemma. The response will likely depend on how far the super power is willing to push its military and political leverage in the region. Some of the likely options are:

1. Diplomatic Pressure

The first option would be to apply diplomatic pressure on the Taliban government, possibly through Qatar or Pakistan as intermediaries. The US may frame Bagram’s access as essential for counterterrorism monitoring, and push for a limited presence under international arrangements rather than outright US control.

2. Economic and Sanctions Leverage

If diplomacy fails, Washington could use financial levers that include:

Tightening sanctions on Taliban leaders.

Blocking international recognition of the Taliban government.

Cutting off humanitarian exemptions or aid that Afghanistan relies on.

This would make Kabul’s refusal costlier.

3. Regional Partnerships

The US might deepen military partnerships with neighbors instead. For instance:

Expanding use of bases in Central Asia (though Russia and China will resist this).

Strengthening presence in the Persian Gulf (Qatar, UAE).

Increasing over-the-horizon operations using drones and satellites.

This would reduce dependency on Bagram, though at a higher logistical cost.

4. Covert Operations

If Washington views Bagram as critical for counterterrorism, it could resort to covert methods—arming rival Afghan groups, intelligence penetration, or even destabilization strategies to pressure the Taliban into concessions.

5. Accept and Adapt

Though difficult, the US may accept that Afghanistan is now firmly outside its reach and adapt by monitoring from afar. This would reflect Washington’s reluctance to re-engage militarily in Afghanistan after two decades of war.

Syria regime change: MI6 links with HTS

The outgoing chief of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), Richard Moore, has confirmed that London maintained clandestine communications with the extremist group Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) before the fall of Bashar al-Assad.

Spy agencies determining fate of Middle East

We are of the view that the geopolitics in the Middle East are basically driven by the top ace spy agencies CIA and MI6 due to their long presence and lust to attain dominance. Both the agencies often play complementary as well as opposing role. In the Middle East, both the CIA of United States and MI6 of Britain active, but their influence and power are not equal. To read details click https://shkazmipk.blogspot.com/2025/09/spy-agencies-determining-fate-of-middle.html

Speaking in Istanbul on Friday, Moore described establishing a “backchannel” with HTS—still officially designated a terrorist organization—as allowing Britain to “get ahead of events” during Syria’s political transition.

HTS, which many consider the rebranded version of al-Qaeda in Syria, was formally dissolved after its leader, Ahmad al-Sharaa, assumed power in December 2024, but its senior operatives continue to dominate Syria’s government.

Al-Sharaa, also known as Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, was captured as a senior al-Qaeda commander in Iraq in 2006 and released from US custody in 2011, yet remains unapologetic for his past attacks.

According to reports by independent journalist Kit Klarenberg, the British engagement with HTS was facilitated by Inter-Mediate, a shadowy “conflict resolution” NGO founded by Jonathan Powell, now National Security Advisor to Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

According to leaked documents, the firm maintains an office inside Syria’s Presidential Palace and worked closely with MI6 and the Foreign Office to groom HTS for political legitimacy. Critics warn this constitutes a flagrant violation of British counter-terrorism laws, which criminalize dealings with proscribed groups.

The partnership between HTS and Western intelligence agencies had long been suspected. Former US ambassador Robert Ford disclosed that in 2023, a UK NGO sought his help to rebrand HTS from a terrorist entity into a political actor. Inter-Mediate’s consultations reportedly ensured the extremist group’s military seizure of Damascus would align with London’s strategic interests.

This revelation raises serious questions about Britain’s role in Syria, echoing the CIA’s Timber Sycamore program, which, from 2012 onwards, funneled weapons, funding, and training to rebel groups fighting Assad—many of which later merged with extremist factions like HTS.

The program exposed how Western interventions intended to shape Syria’s political landscape often empowered the very groups classified as terrorists, underscoring the risks of covert operations that prioritize regime change over stability and civilian protection.