Tuesday, 30 September 2025
Warning for Gold Investors
Monday, 29 September 2025
Trump-Netanyahu Peace Plan: Ceasefire or Trap
At the
heart of the plan are four pillars: 1) an immediate ceasefire if accepted, 2) release
of hostages within 72 hours, 3) a phased Israeli withdrawal, and 4) disarmament
of Hamas. On paper, this sounds like a path out of a devastating war. In
reality, it looks more like an ultimatum dressed as diplomacy.
The governance structure proposed is even more telling. Gaza
would not return to the Palestinians in any meaningful sense but be handed over
to a technocratic committee under international oversight. A “Board of Peace”
chaired by Trump—flanked by international figures like Tony Blair—would
supervise the transition. Hamas,
the very power broker in Gaza, is not only excluded but delegitimized entirely.
This is less a peace plan than a regime-change blueprint.
The Trump–Netanyahu
warning was clear, Hamas must accept the plan “the easy way,” or Israel—with
full American backing—will impose “the hard way.” This is not mediation; it is
coercion.
For Netanyahu, who faces political vulnerability at home, US
cover for renewed aggression is a golden ticket. For Trump, the deal enhances
his image as a global dealmaker ahead of a bruising election cycle.
Yet the glaring omission remains Palestinian statehood. By
skirting this fundamental issue, the plan buys short-term tactical gains but
undermines any sustainable settlement.
Arab
capitals, from Cairo to Doha, understand that without Hamas’ consent, the
blueprint collapses under its own weight. No technocratic committee or
international board can govern Gaza in defiance of its most powerful actor.
Trump and Netanyahu call this peace. In truth, it is a
gamble - either Hamas yields, or Gaza is marched toward another round of
bloodshed under international applause.
Far from solving the conflict, the deal risks deepening it. A plan that sidelines one side while empowering the other is not peace—it is merely the pause before the storm.
Global Sumud Flotilla approaching Gaza
“We are 570 kilometers (307.7 nautical miles) away from
reaching Gaza,” the International Committee for Breaking the Siege on Gaza said
on X.
Tony La Piccirella, an Italian activist from the Global
Sumud Flotilla, said in a video statement that they will reach on Tuesday the
point that Madleen and Handala aid ships had been intercepted by Israeli naval
forces in previous attempts to lift the Israeli siege and deliver humanitarian
aid.
On July 26, Israeli naval forces intercepted the Handala aid
ship as it neared Gaza’s shores and escorted it to Ashdod Port. The vessel had
reached about 70 nautical miles from Gaza, surpassing the distance covered by
the Madleen, which made it 110 miles before it had been stopped.
A group of activists joined the Global Sumud Flotilla from
the Mediterranean on Monday, and two more boats are joining from the Greek
Cypriot Administration and Turkey. The biggest ship of the flotilla will set
sail on Tuesday with 100 on board, the activist said.
La Piccirella said in addition to Italian and Spanish navy
vessels that provide protection for the flotilla, three more countries are
considering sending more military vessels, without revealing the names of these
countries.
“So, it's getting bigger. And it's not about us, about the
Global Sumud Flotilla. It's like a movement with hundreds of people at sea and
millions of people on land, and it's not stoppable until the siege is broken,”
he said.
The Global Sumud Flotilla, made up of about 50 ships, set
sail earlier this month to break Israel’s blockade on Gaza and deliver
humanitarian aid, particularly medical supplies, to the war-ravaged enclave.
Since March 02, Israel has fully closed Gaza’s crossings,
blocking food and aid convoys and deepening famine conditions in the enclave.
The Israeli army has killed over 66,000 Palestinians, most
of them women and children, in Gaza since October 2023. The relentless
bombardment has rendered the enclave uninhabitable and led to starvation and
the spread of diseases.
Israel’s Obsession with Iran: Supremacy, Not Survival
At the center of this tension is Iran’s nuclear program.
Israel is the Middle East’s only nuclear power, though it never admits it
officially. For decades it has enjoyed this monopoly as the ultimate insurance
policy.
Iran, even without a bomb, is branded an existential menace.
What alarms Tel Aviv is not that Tehran would attack with nuclear weapons, but
that a nuclear-capable Iran would undermine Israel’s unrivaled leverage. In
other words, it is not fear of destruction, but fear of parity.
The second driver is Iran’s support for resistance groups.
Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza—these are not armies that
can topple Israel, but they have repeatedly punctured its aura of
invincibility. Each rocket barrage, each fortified position along the border,
is viewed in Tel Aviv as an extension of Iranian influence, shrinking Israel’s
space for unchecked action.
Ideology
intensifies the clash. Iran refuses to recognize Israel, while Israeli
leaders—from Netanyahu onward—frame Tehran as the new Nazi Germany. This
absolutist narrative forecloses compromise and justifies covert assassinations,
cyber sabotage, airstrikes in Syria, and endless lobbying for harsher
sanctions.
The deeper layer is geopolitical. Among Middle Eastern
states, only Iran possesses the population, resources, and regional reach to
contest Israel’s dominance. Neutralizing Tehran means securing Israel’s role as
the region’s undisputed military power—backed by Washington, tolerated by Arab
monarchies, and free to redraw the political map to its liking.
Israel’s Iran obsession is not about survival. It is about
ensuring that no other state can balance its power. By disguising this pursuit
of supremacy as self-defense, Israel sustains a cycle of hostility that makes
genuine peace impossible.
The world buys the existential threat narrative, but the
truth is starker - Israel seeks not containment of Iran, but its permanent
crippling.
Sunday, 28 September 2025
Crude oil prices drifting down
The immediate triggers are clear. The resumption of Kurdish
crude exports has added barrels back to an already saturated market. OPEC Plus,
once a disciplined enforcer of scarcity, is instead edging up production to
defend market share. Add to this the steady increase in US output, and the
result is an unmistakable surplus. In Washington, reports of rising crude
stockpiles reinforce the perception that inventories will keep swelling into
2026.
Demand is hardly roaring either. The end of the US summer
driving season has clipped consumption, while China—the world’s most important
incremental buyer—remains stuck in an uneven recovery. India, though growing
fast, cannot absorb the excess.
Analysts now project that inventories will rise by more than
two million barrels per day through early next year. In oil economics, that is
the equivalent of a slow-motion glut.
Layered on top is the dollar’s strength. Every tick upward
in the greenback makes oil more expensive for non-US buyers, further cooling
appetite. And unlike past cycles, geopolitical flashpoints—sanctions on Iran,
Russia’s war economy, Middle East tension—have not translated into major supply
disruptions. Traders, ever cynical, now discount the “risk premium” that once
propped up prices.
The real story is structural. Oil is losing its tightrope
balance between scarcity and abundance. Producers are pumping more
aggressively, while demand faces limits from efficiency gains and a global
economy weighed down by debt and weak growth.
Unless OPEC Plus suddenly reverses course or a geopolitical
shock knocks supply offline, the path of least resistance for oil is downward.
For consumers, cheaper fuel may feel like relief. For
producers, especially those whose budgets depend on oil, it is a creeping
crisis. And for the global system, it is a reminder the age of automatic oil
windfalls is over, and volatility is the new name of the game.
MAGA and Nazism: A Disturbing Comparison
Is
MAGA just politics, or is it an early verse in a dangerous rhyme of history?
Both Trump and Hitler rose from discontent. Hitler exploited
post–World War I humiliation, economic despair, and national insecurity; Trump
harnessed the frustration of a middle America alienated by globalization, immigration,
and cultural liberalism. Both channeled that anger not toward solutions, but
toward scapegoats — Jews and minorities in Nazi Germany, immigrants, Muslims,
and “global elites” in Trump’s America.
The rhetoric of victimhood is another striking parallel.
Hitler constantly reminded Germans they were betrayed by “traitors” and cheated
by the world. Trump, in turn, insists that America has been “stabbed in the
back” by foreign nations, immigrants, and even domestic institutions — media,
courts, and his political opponents. The cry of “America First” is less about
revival than about us-versus-them tribalism.
Though, MAGA has not built concentration camps or embarked
on genocide. But the infrastructure of hate is disturbingly familiar -
demonization of minorities, delegitimization of institutions, glorification of
strongman rule, and calls to suppress dissent. Nazism began not with gas
chambers but with words, slogans, and rallies that normalized extremism —
precisely where MAGA thrives today.
Critics may argue that comparing Trump to Hitler is
alarmist. Yet democracies don’t collapse overnight; they are chipped away, one
“movement” at a time. MAGA, like Nazism, cloaks itself in the flag, promises
restoration of greatness, and scapegoats the vulnerable. The lesson of history
is clear: when leaders weaponize nationalism and fear, the road to
authoritarianism is short and perilous.
Arab Silence on Iran Sanctions: Hypocrisy at Its Peak
For decades, Arab regimes have painted Iran not as a fellow
Muslim state but as a sectarian rival, a destabilizing Shia power encroaching
on their Sunni domains. From Hezbollah in Lebanon to the Houthis in Yemen,
Tehran’s fingerprints unsettle Arab rulers. For them, US-led sanctions are not
injustice—these are containment.
Add to this the dependency on Washington. The Gulf
monarchies thrive on American protection, arms, and trade. To defy US diktats
is to risk the very foundations of their security. So they remain mute, even
when sanctions cripple ordinary Iranians.
These same states cry foul over Palestine, condemn Western
double standards in Gaza, and rally Muslim solidarity—only to abandon it when
it comes to Iran. The truth is simple - Arab rulers see a weakened Iran as good
for oil markets, good for their regimes, and good for their new friends in Tel
Aviv.
Sanctions on Iran are discriminatory, yes. But the bigger
betrayal is the silence of Arab leaders who claim to defend Muslim dignity yet
quietly cheer when one of their own is strangled.






