Palestinian factions reject Israeli vote on West Bank sovereignty
Al Mayadeen | July 23, 2025
Palestinian resistance factions strongly condemned the Israeli Knesset’s vote on Wednesday in favor of a bill to impose “Israeli sovereignty” over the occupied West Bank and Jordan Valley, calling it a dangerous escalation and a blatant violation of international law.
The Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, described the Knesset’s approval of the bill as “null and void,” stressing that the decision had no legitimacy and constituted a direct challenge to international resolutions. In a statement, Hamas urged Palestinians in the West Bank to unite and escalate resistance “in all its forms” to thwart the occupation’s plans to annex the territory.
Formalization of control expands settler-colonialism
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) warned that while the occupation already exerts de facto control over the territory, the formalization of this through legislation strengthens its colonial grip, expands the settler-colonial and Judaization project, and advances a policy of ghettoization and forced displacement.
The PFLP emphasized that unity and resistance remain the only path to confront what it described as a “dangerous scheme,” equating its severity to the genocidal campaign waged by the Israeli occupation in Gaza.
The Palestinian Resistance Committees said the Knesset vote further exposes the colonial nature of the Israeli entity, adding that “the enemy’s ambitions extend beyond Palestine and target the entire region.” The committees called on Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, al-Quds, and the territories occupied in 1948 to “take the initiative, launch a popular revolution, and ignite a widespread intifada to thwart Zionist schemes.”
‘Legally and morally void’
Fatah also rejected the bill “categorically,” calling it legally and morally void. In its statement, the movement reaffirmed that the West Bank, including East al-Quds, is occupied Palestinian land, and the Israeli occupation has no legal authority to impose sovereignty over it under any pretext.
Fatah urged the international community, particularly the United Nations and the European Union, to support a Palestinian legal campaign before the International Court of Justice and other international legal bodies. The movement also called for full recognition of a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with East al-Quds as its capital, as a clear political response to annexation efforts.
PA condemns Knesset decision
Palestinian Authority official and Deputy President Hussein al-Sheikh also condemned the Knesset’s move, calling it “a direct assault on the rights of the Palestinian people and a serious escalation that undermines peace prospects and the two-state solution.”
Al-Sheikh described the unilateral Israeli measures as flagrant violations of international law and global consensus, urging states worldwide to recognize the State of Palestine and denounce the Knesset’s decision.
The bill passed with 71 votes in favor and 13 opposed. While it carries no binding legal effect, the legislation asserts that the West Bank and Jordan Valley are “an inseparable part of the historic homeland of the Jewish people” and calls for “strategic steps” to solidify this so-called historical right in pursuit of Israeli “national security.”
Red states back Israeli annexation of West Bank
Several Republican-led states in the US have moved forward with legislation compelling the official use of the term “Judea and Samaria” instead of the West Bank, following a bill passed in Arkansas last month.
The legislative push is part of a broader effort to support the annexation of occupied Palestinian territories. Spearheaded by Yossi Dagan, head of a regional council representing Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, the initiative aims to influence US policy in favor of extending Israeli control over the area.
Dagan has framed the ethnic cleansing campaign as one of “historic justice,” seeking to persuade US leaders, including President Donald Trump, to support the annexation of what he described as “the land of the bible.” According to Dagan, using the term “Judea and Samaria” in official US documents is part of reinforcing that narrative.
The decision by Republican states to consider adopting the terminology followed meetings with Dagan during the annual conference of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). After Dagan’s address, ALEC unanimously endorsed the initiative, giving the proposal broader momentum across GOP-controlled legislatures.
Federal-level support grows
In addition to state-level initiatives, a similar move is underway at the federal level. Brian Mast, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, announced that the committee intends to adopt the historical terms promoted by Dagan. Mast’s support signals growing alignment between certain US political circles and Israeli settlement interests.
States reportedly considering the bill include Utah, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Idaho, Iowa, and Oklahoma. These bills also include language declaring the West Bank as the biblical cradle of the Jewish people, arguing it should not be considered occupied territory.
The adoption of such terminology by US lawmakers carries significant political implications. By aligning with Israeli settlement narratives and rejecting the international consensus that views the West Bank as occupied territory, this legislation risks legitimizing ongoing ethnic cleansing and violations of international law.
This comes as settler attacks escalate across the occupied West Bank as part of the Israeli occupation’s ongoing efforts to annex Palestinian territory. These incursions are taking place under direct military protection and with full political backing from the Israeli government, according to rights groups and local sources.
Historic First: Brussels Court Judge Orders Halt to Arms Transit to Israel
By Marc Vandepitte | Global Research | July 23, 2025
In a landmark ruling, the Brussels Court of First Instance has ordered the Flemish government not only to block a specific container of military equipment bound for Israel, but also to ban any further transit of military material to the country.
The judge ruled that Flanders — a region in the north of Belgium — is systematically failing to meet its obligations under arms legislation and international treaties, and even imposed a penalty for each shipment that goes through despite the ruling.
The four Flemish NGOs that filed the case were granted full victory on all points.
The container at the center of the case is located in the port of Antwerp. It contains so-called tapered roller bearings, produced by Timken via a French branch, and destined for Ashot Ashkelon Industries, an Israeli defense company that supplies components for Merkava tanks and Namer armored vehicles.
According to the organizations, these systems are used daily in the genocide in Gaza.
In its ruling, the court immediately prohibits the Flemish government from authorizing any new arms transit to Israel. Since 2009, there has been an agreement not to export weapons to Israel that could reinforce its armed forces — a policy that has been seriously eroded in practice.
To enforce this, the court has imposed a penalty of 50,000 euros for each shipment that still leaves for Israel.
Containers may only be shipped to Israel if the Flemish government has written proof that the goods are intended for civilian use. According to lawyer Lies Michielsen of Progress Lawyers Network, who pleaded the case, the ruling implies that the government must actively verify the final destination of goods exported to Israel.
Significance
This ruling is highly significant because the court has confirmed that facilitating the delivery of weapons to a state committing war crimes or possible genocide is illegal.
“The court is stating what politics refuses to acknowledge,” says Fien De Meyer from the League for Human Rights.
This means an end to impunity: governments can no longer look away while their weapons are used for atrocities.
The ruling sets a legal precedent that forces European and other governments to take responsibility. Similar lawsuits in other countries are expected to follow.
In any case, it is a victory for peace and solidarity movements, showing that resistance works.
Follow-Up
Around the same time, another lawsuit was filed in Belgium — this time against the federal government. A group of Palestinian claimants and Belgian organizations sent a formal notice to the federal government, accusing Belgium of passive complicity in the genocide in Gaza.
If no satisfactory response is received, they will proceed to court — which would also be a global first.
The action is led by a Palestinian citizen, several Belgian NGOs, and a legal expert. They demand that Belgium halt all military deliveries to Israel, confiscate imports from occupied Palestinian territories, block investments in those areas, and suspend the EU-Israel association agreement.
According to them, Belgium’s passivity is both morally and legally unacceptable. The action is supported by a group of artists and intellectuals who are raising funds for legal costs.
There is also movement at the European level. The legal NGO JURDI is taking both the European Commission and the Council of the European Union to the Court of Justice for their “negligence” regarding the violence in Gaza. For the first time in history, these two powerful institutions are being sued for failing to uphold their own treaty obligations.
JURDI cites Article 265 of the EU Treaty, which makes institutional inaction punishable. According to them, EU institutions are applying double standards: Russia was heavily sanctioned, while Israel remains untouched despite clear human rights violations.
JURDI is demanding, among other things, the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, the termination of subsidies, and sanctions against Israeli officials. The complaint argues that the EU is both legally and morally obligated to act and warns that even European leaders could be prosecuted for complicity in genocide.
Complicity
At the heart of these cases lies the question: does a country — or by extension, the European Commission — have a legal obligation, as a third party, to prevent genocide elsewhere? According to the Genocide Convention, it does. That treaty obliges every country not only to punish genocide but also to actively prevent it.
In January, the International Court of Justice already called on Israel to take all necessary measures to prevent genocide. But does that obligation also apply to countries like Belgium, which are not directly involved?
According to eighteen top Belgian jurists, the answer is yes. In a letter, they warn that a country like Belgium risks being brought before the International Court of Justice itself if it continues to remain silent about the situation in Gaza. Passivity can be legally interpreted as complicity.
The jurists are demanding sanctions against Israel and consider suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement as an absolute minimum. Countries too often hide behind diplomatic caution, but according to them, that attitude is legally and morally untenable. Only concrete actions — not words — can save the credibility of Belgium and the EU.
No Pause
The court victory in Flanders and other ongoing legal proceedings represent a qualitative leap in the fight against genocide. But that fight is far from over. Genocide does not pause. While politicians delay, people in Gaza suffer end die.
Now is the time to maintain and intensify pressure. Legal actions must be brought in other countries as well. Key demands include the immediate enforcement of the ban on arms deliveries, full transparency about the export of military equipment, and prosecution of those complicit in these crimes.
Lawsuits like this are very important, but certainly not sufficient to stop the killing in Gaza. Political leaders worldwide must be pressured through mass protests and acts of solidarity.
That is why the Palestinian resistance movements in Gaza have jointly issued a call for global mobilization starting on 20 July 2025 to save the population in Gaza from genocide, hunger, and thirst caused by the Israeli occupation.
They denounce the international silence and call on countries and citizens around the world to take to the streets and act to halt the genocide.
Marc Vandepitte is a member of the Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Humanity and was an observer during the presidential elections in Venezuela.
West Bank: Army Abducts Many Palestinians, Shoots Child, Young Man

Mosab Shawer – ActiveStills
IMEMC | July 23, 2025
On Tuesday afternoon and evening, Israeli forces abducted several Palestinians and shot both a child and a young man during military invasions across multiple areas of the occupied West Bank.
One Palestinian youth was violently assaulted and detained at the Hizma military roadblock, northeast of occupied Jerusalem in the West Bank.
According to eyewitnesses, soldiers stopped the vehicle he was traveling in, forced him out, and beat him with batons and fists, leaving him with multiple injuries.
He was then restrained and transported to an unknown location in a military vehicle. The roadblock was temporarily closed, and civilians were prevented from passing or documenting the incident.
Israeli forces routinely escalate restrictive and punitive measures at military roadblocks surrounding Jerusalem, including field abductions and physical assault, as part of what observers describe as a systematic policy aimed at obstructing Palestinian movement and instilling fear.
In a separate incident, three Palestinians, former political prisoners from Nablus, were detained at a temporary roadblock near the Qaber Hilwa bridge, east of Bethlehem.
The detainees were identified as Emad Abdul-Halim Abu Mosallam, Ala’ Mohammad Jom’a, and Samer Nidal Issa.
They were taken to the Ush Ghorab military base east of Beit Sahour, interrogated, and later released. Their vehicle remains confiscated. Hours earlier, Israeli forces at the same site reportedly abducted another unidentified youth.
In the towns of Beit Fajjar and Al-Khader, south of Bethlehem, forces sealed off main streets and concentrated their invasions in central areas.
Israeli troops also surrounded Rafidia Hospital and the Arab Specialized Hospital in Nablus, in the northern West Bank, targeting the vicinity of emergency departments and firing concussion grenades.
The soldiers parked their military vehicles in front of the gates of the Emergency Department, blocking patients from entering.
The soldiers also stopped Palestinians’ ambulances heading to the two hospitals and searched them, in addition to surrounding a residential building.
In Jenin, in the northern West Bank, a youth identified as Mohammed Jihad Zaid was abducted from his home in Nazlet Zaid village.
Soldiers also invaded the residence of Saleh Zaid, seizing gold jewelry estimated at 29,000 shekels and an additional 1,500 shekels in cash.
In Qabatia, in northern West Bank, the soldiers shot a 15-year-old child in the chest [killing him] and a young man in the leg during a military invasion involving multiple military vehicles.
Both were transported to hospital for treatment. The shootings occurred after soldiers closed intersections, ransacked homes, and clashed with protesting residents.
The military offensive across the Jenin governorate have intensified since the launch of an Israeli offensive targeting Jenin city and its refugee camp on January 21.
These invasions are marked by mass abductions, violent home searches, and widespread infrastructural damage.
In addition, Israeli forces raided Al-Am’ari refugee camp in Al-Bireh, in the central West Bank, particularly the Sateh Marhaba neighborhood, where they fired tear gas canisters at residential homes, causing several cases of suffocation.
Earlier Tuesday, the army abducted many Palestinians across the West Bank, especially in Hebron, Bethlehem and Nablus, in addition to Ramallah.
Since the beginning of this year, Israel has killed 181 Palestinians in the occupied West Bank; 63 in Jenin, 32 in Nablus, 27 in Tubas, 17 in Tulkarem, 12 in Hebron, 11 in Ramallah, 6 in Bethlehem, 4 in Qalqilia, 5 in Jerusalem, 3 in Salfit and 1 in Jericho.
Israel has now killed 1,016 Palestinians in the occupied West Bank since October 7, 2023; 270 were killed in Jenin, 124 in Nablus, 94 in Tubas, 213 in Tulkarem, 89 in Hebron, 70 in Ramallah, 27 in Bethlehem, 37 in Qalqilia, 23 in Jerusalem, 32 in Jerusalem suburbs, 7 in Salfit and 13 in Jericho and Northern Plains.
Syrian prisoners: A ticking bomb between Beirut and Damascus?
By Mohamad Shamse Eddine | The Cradle | July 23, 2025
A political storm is gathering over a long-festering crisis in Lebanon’s prisons: more than 2,000 Syrians, many detained without charge or trial, remain locked away in overcrowded and crumbling facilities.
The worsening humanitarian conditions are no longer just a domestic issue. It has morphed into a potent diplomatic flashpoint between Beirut and the new interim government in Damascus, with the latter signaling it will not tolerate further delay in resolving the status of its citizens.
The spark came from a Syria TV report quoting an official from the administration of interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa (Abu Muhammad al-Julani), who stated that Damascus is “mulling gradual escalation choices against Lebanon,” starting with the freezing of some security and economic channels if the detainee issue remains unresolved.
Official denials followed, but the message had already landed in Beirut. The prisoner file, dormant for years, is now wide open—and loaded with political implications that stretch far beyond the bars of Lebanon’s Roumieh Prison.
This comes as the Lebanese judiciary teeters on the verge of collapse and its prisons edge into crisis. At the same time, a transformed Syrian state under Sharaa’s Al-Qaeda-rooted administration is recalibrating its regional footing following years of civil war, western isolation, and struggles to assert sovereignty.
Damascus frames the detainee issue as a humanitarian one. However, political observers in Beirut view it as a strategic lever, part of a broader power play unfolding at a time when Lebanon faces internal divisions and competition between Turkiye and Saudi Arabia over influence within its Sunni community.
The detainees also represent more than individual cases—they are a legacy of the previous Syrian order, and a test for Lebanon’s ability to deal with the political costs of its judicial dysfunction.
Who are the detainees?
The Syrian prisoners in Lebanon fall into three categories. First, the political detainees: Syrians imprisoned over the past decade for joining militant factions like the Free Syrian Army (FSA) or the UN-designated terrorist Nusra Front – or for speaking out against the former Syrian government.
Most were never formally charged. Now, with former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad gone and a new government in Damascus, these individuals are being recast not as enemies but as participants in a national cause. Their return is being framed by Damascus as part of Syria’s internal reconciliation process.
Second are the jihadist-linked detainees. These prisoners are accused of ties to terror groups such as ISIS or Al-Qaeda. Some have faced trial, but many continue to be held without verdicts. Legal definitions of terrorism vary significantly between Beirut and Damascus, complicating any coordinated legal handling.
The lack of evidence in many cases has raised questions about the fairness of prolonged detentions, especially in the absence of transparent legal standards or international oversight.
Third are the criminal offenders: Syrians charged with routine crimes like theft or smuggling. In theory, they fall under Lebanon’s legal system like any foreign national. In practice, a broken judiciary and Kafkaesque bureaucracy have left many in legal limbo, detained for years without resolution.
What unites all three groups is Lebanon’s failure to classify or process their cases adequately. Without access to lawyers, interpreters, or diplomatic support, most Syrian detainees are effectively voiceless and invisible. According to legal advocates, some have waited up to seven years for a single court appearance.
Damascus’ extrajudicial demands
The names requested by Damascus include figures deeply linked to past violence on Lebanese soil. Salafi preacher Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir, sentenced in connection with the 2013 Abra clashes that left several Lebanese army soldiers dead, is among them. His case is closed under Lebanese law, so his inclusion signals political calculation, not legal necessity.
Also on the list are Sheikh Omar al-Atrash and Naeem Abbas, both tied to Al-Qaeda’s operations in Lebanon and implicated in the 2013 bombings in Beirut’s southern suburb of Dahieh. Their convictions are firm. Their extradition, if attempted, would ignite a political firestorm.
Damascus is not seeking the return of petty criminals. It aims to influence what it considers political actors tied to the Syrian conflict—individuals it now views as part of its national narrative. Beirut, however, sees potential manipulation.
Syrian sources inform The Cradle that any returnees would undergo formal security and judicial oversight. But victims’ families fear the deals may serve regional interests, not justice. The Lebanese judiciary, lacking independence and burdened by years of foreign and sectarian interference, offers little public confidence.
Roumieh: A prison on the brink
Roumieh Prison was built to house 1,500 inmates. It currently holds over 4,000, including hundreds of Syrians. Many have been held without charges. Conditions in the Islamist wing, “Block B,” are dire—overcrowded, unsanitary, and deprived of basic medical and psychological care.
In February, more than 100 Syrian detainees began a two-week hunger strike. The protest followed months of inaction on promised reforms, including improved legal access and prison conditions. Security officials acknowledge the risk that unrest could escalate into a full-blown revolt, especially as external actors view the prison crisis as an opportunity to stir instability. Lebanese security sources warn that militant groups could exploit grievances inside Roumieh, turning a detention center into a flashpoint for wider conflict.
No legal architecture
Despite the gravity of the issue, there is no formal prisoner exchange treaty between Lebanon and Syria. An older extradition agreement remains on paper, but it does not cover sentenced prisoners. Lebanese law bars deportation unless a detainee has received a final verdict—and even then, not for crimes committed on Lebanese soil with Lebanese victims.
This legal grey zone explains why detainees like Abbas and Atrash remain in Lebanon, at least for now. However, a new judicial agreement is reportedly being negotiated between the justice ministries in Beirut and Damascus that may allow the repatriation of 370 convicted Syrians.
Lebanese judicial sources tell The Cradle that the draft agreement includes provisions for sentence continuation and post-transfer monitoring, but faces political opposition from factions aligned with western interests.
While Damascus demands its citizens back, Lebanon is silent on its nationals imprisoned in the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)-run detention camps in northeast Syria. Hundreds of Lebanese citizens—many detained alongside their families—languish there without trial, without consular access, and without official advocacy. Some have been held since 2019, captured during the final battles against ISIS.
This silence exposes Lebanon’s deeper dysfunction. Its institutions are too eroded to defend their own citizens, let alone negotiate a reciprocal deal with a fragile state like Syria, which now speaks from a position of renewed regional assertiveness. The contradiction is glaring: Beirut is expected to process Syrian cases with care, while ignoring its nationals trapped in US-backed detention zones under the SDF.
Is a deal possible?
Senior political sources tell The Cradle that Beirut may begin by releasing detainees with no political baggage, setting the stage for a broader settlement. This would allow both states to test the waters while avoiding immediate controversy. Some Lebanese officials argue this phased approach could also reduce overcrowding in prisons like Roumieh, while fulfilling Syria’s minimal expectations.
But any lasting resolution requires more than tactical moves. It demands a sweeping overhaul of Lebanon’s judicial architecture, the depoliticization of its detention policies, and a binding bilateral framework. Damascus, for its part, will have to offer clear guarantees that repatriated detainees are not used to settle old scores but reintegrated into a legal system that reflects its new political reality.
Until then, Lebanon’s prisons will remain overstuffed, its judiciary paralyzed, and the Syrian detainee file unresolved—exposing the unfinished reckoning between two states still mired in the legacies of occupation, war, and political dependency.
‘Peacemaker’ Trump beats Biden’s bombing record since return to office: Report
The Cradle | July 23, 2025
US President Donald Trump has ordered hundreds of airstrikes across West Asia and Africa since his return to office, carrying out more attacks in the first five months of his second term than former president Joe Biden did during his entire presidency, according to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data (ACLED).
“In just five months, Trump has overseen nearly as many US airstrikes (529) as were recorded across the entire four years of the previous administration (555),” said ACLED President Clionadh Raleigh.
Among the countries bombed by Trump are Iran, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen. The majority of strikes were carried out against Yemen.
“The US military is moving faster, hitting harder, and doing so with fewer constraints. Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and now Iran are all familiar terrain, but this isn’t about geography – it’s about frequency,” Raleigh added.
The surge in attacks contradicts Trump’s campaign promises, which framed him as “anti-war.”
In March this year, Trump renewed the Biden government’s campaign against Yemen with much greater intensity.
Months of brutal and deadly attacks struck the country in response to the Yemeni Armed Forces’ (YAF) naval operations against Israeli interests and its missile and drone strikes in support of Palestine.
Yemeni forces consistently responded to US attacks by targeting US warships in the Red Sea, during both Biden and Trump’s terms.
A ceasefire between Sanaa and Washington was reached in May, after the US campaign burned through munitions and failed to impact Yemeni military capabilities significantly.
However, the campaign took a heavy toll on civilians and compounded the humanitarian crisis the country has faced due to over a decade of war.
An investigation released by Airwars last month revealed that Trump’s war on Yemen killed almost as many civilians in less than two months as in the last 23 years of Washington’s military action in the country combined.
“In the period between the first recorded US strike in Yemen to the beginning of Trump’s campaign in March, at least 258 civilians were allegedly killed by US actions. In less than two months of Operation Rough Rider … at least 224 civilians in Yemen [were] killed by US airstrikes – nearly doubling the civilian casualty toll in Yemen by US actions since 2002,” it said.
In Iraq, Syria, and Somalia, Trump has also continued to strike what Washington says are ISIS and Al-Shabab targets.
Despite vowing to end “forever wars,” Trump has recently threatened to expand them.
On 22 July, the US president threatened to launch new attacks on Iran, after late June bunker-buster strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities which were carried out on behalf of Israel.
Iranian Navy helicopter intercepts US destroyer in Sea of Oman
Press TV – July 23, 2025
An Iranian Navy helicopter has intercepted the US destroyer USS Fitzgerald in the Sea of Oman, issuing warning signals and ultimately forcing the American vessel to alter its course southward.
According to a statement from Iran’s military, the US warship approached waters monitored by Iran, prompting a rapid-reaction helicopter from the Third Naval Region of the Iranian Army’s Navy (NEDAJA) to deploy.
The helicopter hovered over the destroyer and delivered a clear radio warning to steer clear of Iranian-monitored waters.
In the ensuing standoff, the crew of the USS Fitzgerald threatened to engage the helicopter if it remained in proximity.
Iran’s Army Air Defense Command then intervened, declaring the helicopter under full air defense protection and ordering the American destroyer to change its course.
According to the statement, the USS Fitzgerald complied, heading south away from the disputed area.
The US military has not issued a public statement on the incident, which unfolded amid elevated tensions in the Persian Gulf following the recent US-Israeli war on Iran.
Iranian and US naval forces have had a long history of encounters in the Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, and the Strait of Hormuz since the 1980s.
In 2019, Iran shot down a US RQ-4A Global Hawk drone near the Strait of Hormuz due to airspace violation.
The Iranian Navy frequently conducts large-scale drills in the Persian Gulf and Sea of Oman, showcasing its capabilities and signaling deterrence against foreign powers.
US congresswoman labels Zelensky ‘dictator’
RT | July 23, 2025
US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has labeled Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky “a dictator” and called for his removal, citing mass anti-corruption protests across Ukraine and accusing him of blocking peace efforts.
Her comments came after Zelensky signed a controversial bill into law that places the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) under the authority of the prosecutor general.
Critics argue that the legislation effectively strips the bodies of their independence. The law has sparked protests across Ukraine, with around 2,000 people rallying in Kiev and additional demonstrations reported in Lviv, Odessa, and Poltava.
“Good for the Ukrainian people! Throw him out of office!” Greene wrote Wednesday on X, sharing footage from the protests. “And America must STOP funding and sending weapons!!!”
Greene, a longtime critic of US aid to Kiev, made similar comments last week while introducing an amendment to block further assistance. “Zelensky is a dictator, who, by the way, stopped elections in his country because of this war,” she told the House.
“He’s jailed journalists, he’s canceled his election, controlled state media, and persecuted Christians. The American people should not be forced to continue to pay for another foreign war.”
Her statements come amid mounting speculation over Zelensky’s political future. Journalist Seymour Hersh has reported that US officials are considering replacing him, possibly with former top general Valery Zaluzhny.
Senator Tommy Tuberville also called Zelensky a “dictator” last month, accusing him of trying to drag NATO into the conflict with Russia. Tuberville claimed that Zelensky refuses to hold elections because “he knew if he had an election, he’d get voted out.”
Zelensky’s five-year presidential term expired in 2024, but he has refused to hold a new election, citing martial law, which has been extended every 90 days since 2022.
US President Donald Trump has also questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy, calling him “a dictator without elections” in February.
Russian officials have repeatedly brought up the issue of Zelensky’s legitimacy, arguing that any agreements signed by him or his administration could be legally challenged by future leaders of Ukraine.
Western media admits humanitarian catastrophe in Ukraine
By Lucas Leiroz | July 23, 2025
Western media is finally admitting that Ukraine is lying about its official casualty figures. A recent article published by Le Monde revealed that there is ample evidence that military casualties in Ukraine are much higher than official figures indicate, given the growing demand for cemetery space for new burials.
According to Le Monde, all cemetery areas in Ukraine reserved for soldiers are already fully occupied. The overload is forcing authorities to use common cemetery space, which is normally reserved for civilians, as well as to establish various projects to expand current cemeteries and create new ones. The demand for burial space is enormous as more and more dead bodies arrive from the front lines.
“Sections reserved for soldiers are at capacity. Across the country, teams of architects have been working on memorials that reflect not only the scale of the ongoing carnage but also the evolving ideas about national identity,” the article reads.
The journalists interviewed several local Ukrainian architects involved in cemetery construction. Currently, this is one of the country’s main demands, with projects in several regions to build cemeteries exclusively for the burial of soldiers killed on the battlefield. The new cemeteries being built are truly large, with space for approximately ten thousand dead or more. This is consistent with a growing number of casualties, revealing a contradiction between this and the official data published by the Ukrainian government.
The article describes one of the projects, commenting on a cemetery being built along the highway connecting Kiev to Odessa. The project is said to be particularly sensitive, considering that the cemetery will destroy rural communities in the region, causing environmental problems such as deforestation.
“It’s a sandy track, well-hidden among the pines, off the highway connecting Kiev to Odesa in the Hatne region. (…) This is the highway exit that will serve as Ukraine’s future national military memorial cemetery. The project is enormous, highly sensitive and not just because environmental activists and residents of the small village of Markhalivka – 40 kilometers from the capital, but right at the base of the future cemetery – worry about deforestation and the loss of their rural quiet. In the village, only a new brown sign, the color used to mark national sites, marks the road that leads trucks to the site. It reads in English: ‘National Military Memorial Cemetery.’ The first section, designed to hold 10,000 graves and already laid out with broad granite paths, benches and lime trees, is due to receive its first burial this summer. But in the long term, ‘130,000 or even 160,000’ people will be laid to rest at this future burial ground, explained architect Serhi Derbin,” the text adds.
The scale of these cemeteries contrasts sharply with Kiev’s repeated claims of minimal losses, exposing a growing gap between official discourse and the physical reality of war. While government spokespeople continue to insist on controlled casualty rates, the magnitude of the planned cemeteries suggests a conflict with a much greater human cost. The death toll clearly highlights the Kiev regime’s absolute military bankruptcy. There is no way a country can maintain this level of casualties and continue to have “control” over the military situation. If casualties continue at this level, there will soon simply no longer be enough people to fight in the ranks of the neo-Nazi regime.
As is the case in every conflict situation around the world, both sides avoid publishing their real figures. However, there is abundant evidence of the humanitarian tragedy in Ukraine. For example, there have recently been several rounds of body swaps. The difference in numbers was alarming, with a few hundred Russians bodies compared to thousands of Ukrainians. This, combined with information about cemeteries, shows that there are undoubtedly many more Ukrainians dead than Russians—a vital information for assessing which side will win this war.
Until recently, Western media was complicit in hiding the Ukrainian reality. However, the situation has reached an unsustainable point. No one believes narratives like “military stalemate” or “Russian failure” anymore. It’s clear to everyone that the Ukrainian military crisis is irreversible and that Kiev has no future in this conflict. So, to maintain credibility, Western outlets are gradually beginning to admit that the situation in Ukraine is catastrophic.
What these newspapers fail to admit, however, is that the cause of this tragedy is the Kiev regime’s irrational insistence on continuing to fight an unwinnable war. To stop hostilities, Ukraine simply needs to accept Russian peace terms. The quicker the capitulation, the fewer Kiev’s human and territorial losses will be.
Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.
You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.
