Deep Dive Intel Briefing: What We Learned This Week /Lt Col Daniel Davis
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive
Seyed M. Marandi: The Strike That Wiped Out Trump’s Plan (It’s Over)
Dialogue Works | April 25, 2026
Substack: https://substack.com/@dialogueworks?u…
X (Twitter): https://x.com/Dialogue_NRA
‘Territorial Theft With Better Branding’: Israel Keeps Advancing Its ‘Yellow Line’ in Gaza
By Stephen Prager | Scheer Post | April 24, 2026
One Palestinian American researcher warned that Israel is seeking “annexation without legal burden.”
Israel’s gradual advancement of its “yellow line” to occupy more territory in the Gaza Strip is fueling concerns that it is seeking to effectively annex and colonize the majority of the territory without any formal agreement.
The Guardian reported on Wednesday that Israel has been steadily pushing the truce line to take control of more Palestinian territory in the six months since a “ceasefire” was reached in October.
The yellow line drawn on the ceasefire maps had Israeli troops in control of about 53% of Gaza’s territory, cramming nearly 2 million displaced Palestinians into a territory less than half the size of the one they inhabited before.
But an analysis by Forensic Architecture shows Israel has unilaterally shifted the line westward over the past six months to the point where it controlled about 58% of the strip by December in an occupation zone that continues to grow.
Palestinians living in Gaza reportedly woke up to learn that large yellow concrete blocks denoting the ceasefire line had suddenly moved and that they were now living in a free-fire area, where the Israeli military considers any Palestinian person or vehicle a legitimate target.
The Associated Press found in January that at least 77 Palestinians have been shot on sight when they’ve found themselves on the wrong side of the yellow line or even just near it, even though the line’s boundaries are ill-defined and fluid.
They are among more than 730 Palestinians who have been killed since the “ceasefire” began in October, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, which has accused Israel of thousands of violations.
According to The Guardian, some displaced people, such as those who lived near the Salah al-Din road, which spans the length of Gaza from north to south, suddenly found themselves targeted by Israeli forces, who also began demolishing homes and other buildings and constructing new ones.
Though the yellow line was supposed to be set up as a temporary measure under US President Donald Trump’s “peace plan” for Gaza before control of the strip is transferred back to Palestinians, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) chief of staff Eyal Zamir described it as a “new border” with Gaza back in December, around the time it reportedly began to move.
Eyal Weizman, an Israeli architect and the head of Forensic Architecture’s research agency, recently wrote that the IDF appears to be turning this portion of Gaza into a permanent occupation zone.
The group found that seven new military outposts have been built along the yellow line, including one on what was once a cemetery.
While these areas began as “piles of earth and rubble” organized into crude enclosures, Weizman said that in recent months the roads leading to them have been asphalted, electricity poles have been erected, and buildings and communications towers have gone up inside the bases.
“The bases no longer appear to be the provisional arrangements that Trump’s ceasefire plan claims them to be, but permanent instruments of occupation,” he wrote. “The newly paved roads connect the bases to a matrix of control that is linked to Israel’s road network and communications grid.”
He noted that Israel’s illegal settler movement, which has several powerful representatives in the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has been “lobbying hard for the Israeli government to start constructing settlements within the vastly expanded buffer zone.”
Defense Minister Israel Katz said in December that Israel would “never leave Gaza” and spoke of plans to turn IDF military outposts into civilian settlements similar to those that have gradually taken over the West Bank through the violent displacement of Palestinian residents.
Ahmad Ibsais, Palestinian American law student and author of the newsletter State of Siege, wrote for the Al-Shabaka Palestinian Policy Network that by drawing a yellow line, Israel is seeking to consolidate its control over Palestinian land without formally annexing it—in other words, “annexation without legal burden.”
“Borders are typically established through bilateral agreements, adjudication, or mutual recognition under international law,” he wrote. “By contrast, the so-called Yellow Line in Gaza functions as a de facto military demarcation associated with ceasefire arrangements and enforced through Israeli operational control.”
“It shapes civilian movement and territorial control without constituting a formally delimited boundary,” he continued. “In effect, it constitutes territorial theft with better branding, operationalizing US President Donald Trump’s plan for the continued colonization of Gaza.”
Israel declared a similar yellow line about 5-10 kilometers into Lebanese territory, giving the IDF effective control over around 55 towns and villages. The military has reduced many homes and entire villages south of this line to rubble in what Katz has described as a “Gaza model” being applied to Lebanon.
Assistant editor Maya Rosen recently wrote for Jewish Currents that the policy of conquering and settling Lebanon has become “mainstream” in Israeli politics and enjoys broad public support.
Ahmad Baydoun, an architect and open-source intelligence researcher at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, has warned that with this land grab, Israel was seeking to take control of the valuable Qana Gas Field, which is estimated to be capable of producing between $20 billion-$40 billion worth of natural gas exports for Israel. In 2022, a maritime agreement brokered by the US established that control of the field belonged to Lebanon.
Like in Gaza, the Israeli military has forbidden the more than 600,000 Lebanese inhabitants of villages below the line or within a newly established “buffer zone” from returning indefinitely. Katz has said they’ll be allowed to return once the “safety and security of the residents of the north [of Israel] is ensured.”
Given that Israeli settler groups have already begun mapping out new settlements and advertising plots of land for sale in southern Lebanon, Weizman said Katz was making what is by design “an impossible demand” meant to entrench the land grab.
“This exemplifies the circular logic of Zionist settler-colonialism: settlements are built to mark and protect the state’s border, but that makes them vulnerable to attack, and so a buffer zone is established to protect them,” he said. “Afterward, this buffer zone is itself settled to mark and protect the newly expanded borders, at which point another buffer zone becomes necessary.”
Iran war launched at ‘Israel’s’ request: US memo debunks Trump claims
Al Mayadeen | April 25, 2026
A US State Department legal memo has confirmed that Washington’s military attacks on Iran were carried out in support of “Israel”, contradicting earlier claims by President Donald Trump that the decision was made independently.
Published on April 21 by Legal Advisor Reed D. Rubinstein on the state government website, the document titled “Operation Epic Fury and International Law” outlines the “justification” for US attacks launched on February 28 against Iranian missile systems, naval assets, production facilities, and nuclear infrastructure.
The memo explicitly states that the United States is engaged in the war “at the request of and in the collective self-defense of its Israeli ally,” invoking Article 51 of the UN Charter.
Trump’s version of the truth
On Monday, Trump insisted that “Israel” did not influence his decision to strike Iran, dismissing reports suggesting coordination with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and rejecting criticism from right-wing commentators.
In a Truth Social post, Trump claimed, “Israel never talked me into the war.”
This isn’t the first time he has pushed back on claims that “Israel” influenced US actions against Iran. In March, Marco Rubio told reporters that “Israel” had reportedly weighed a preemptive strike on Iran, warning it could provoke retaliation against US forces in the region and potentially help set the stage for what became known as “Operation Epic Fury.”
At the time, Trump rejected that framing, telling reporters at the start of an Oval Office meeting with Merz. “If anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand.”
“We were having negotiations with these lunatics, and I thought they were going to strike first. If we didn’t act, they would have,” he said, adding, “It was something that had to be done.”
A memo or an unintended exposé?
At the time, Trump had dismissed suggestions that “Israel” influenced the decision to strike Iran. The memo’s language, however, presents a far clearer picture, emphasizing coordination with and support for the Israeli side as a central legal basis for the operation.
Operation Epic Fury was launched with stated objectives to destroy Iran’s offensive missile capabilities, dismantle its production infrastructure, target naval forces, and prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons. The document further argues that the war is part of a broader, ongoing confrontation driven by what it describes as Iran’s regional activities, including support for allied groups and strikes on US and Israeli targets.
US officials maintain that their war on Iran complies with international law, arguing that it falls within established frameworks governing “self-defense”. Critics, however, have questioned the legality of the attacks under the UN Charter, particularly given the scale of operations, which by early April had involved thousands of attacks before a ceasefire took hold.
The memo also underscores a more politically sensitive point: Washington’s own account now formally acknowledges a role for “Israel” that Trump had previously denied and downplayed.
How Israel moved Hermes 900 drone production to Serbia to hide from Iranian missiles
By Ivan Kesic – Press TV – April 25, 2026
The Israeli regime has quietly embarked on an effort to relocate production of its most important long-range strike drone – the Hermes 900- outside the occupied territories.
In Serbia, it has found its latest and most controversial partner. The strategy is simple: protect Tel Aviv’s supply chain from Iranian ballistic missiles.
On March 7, 2026, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić made a cryptic announcement. Serbia, he said, would soon open a factory for “the most serious drones in the world” with a foreign partner from the Israeli regime.
By early April, reports had uncovered the full scope of the deal. Elbit Systems – the largest military company in the occupied territories and a firm repeatedly named by UN experts as profiting from the ongoing genocide in Gaza – had agreed to establish a joint drone production facility in Šimanovci, just thirty kilometers west of Belgrade.
The factory, which could begin operations as early as late April 2026, is designed to produce two types of unmanned aerial vehicles, including a long-range model capable of flying at altitudes exceeding six kilometers.
While most media attention has focused on the emerging arms race between Serbia and Croatia, a far more consequential story has gone largely unreported.
What makes this deal particularly significant is not merely the technology transfer or the financial terms, but the strategic logic driving it.
The Israeli regime, having suffered devastating losses of its Hermes 900 fleet during the recent US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran, is desperately seeking to diversify its production base – outside the reach of Iranian retaliation.
Serbian factory: Details of the 2026 agreement
The joint venture agreement between Elbit Systems and Serbia’s state-owned Yugoimport SDPR gives the notorious Israeli arms company a controlling 51 percent stake, while the Serbian partner holds the remaining 49 percent.
According to documents obtained by some journalists and confirmed by two independent sources close to the military industry, the factory will produce two distinct drone types.
The first is a short-range model with a high payload and rotary wings, designed for tactical reconnaissance and strike missions in confined operational environments.
The second is far more advanced: a long-range model, faster and capable of operating at altitudes exceeding six kilometers, making it suitable for deep-penetration surveillance missions well beyond Serbian borders.
A source familiar with the deal described the long-range drone as “more advanced” than the Pegasus, a combat reconnaissance drone that Serbia already produces domestically.
“It has a higher flight altitude and greater operational autonomy,” the source explained. “The essence of the whole story is the transfer of technology, because our engineers will also work on it. This drone is actually the crowning glory of the entire project.”
Experts from Utva, an aircraft factory owned by the SDPR, will also be involved in the production process, a clear indication of significant investment in local technical expertise.
The planned site of the factory has itself become a source of controversy: a facility owned by Pink Media Group, the media empire of Željko Mitrović, a businessman with close ties to Vučić’s ruling party.
Following the publication of investigative reports, Pink Media Group issued a denial, claiming that neither Mitrović nor any entity associated with him had participated in negotiations or leased any facility for the project.
However, the denial did not address the documentary evidence or the two independent sources that confirmed the arrangement. The question of the factory’s precise location remains unresolved.
Serbian-Israeli cooperation: Weapons, spyware, and political connections
The drone factory agreement is merely the latest chapter in a rapidly deepening relationship between Belgrade and Tel Aviv that encompasses weapons trade, intelligence technology, political consulting, and diplomatic alignment.
The value of ammunition and weapons exports from Serbia to the Israeli regime has increased by an astonishing 42 times since 2023, reaching 114 million euros by the end of 2025, according to available evidence.
The vast majority of these exports were conducted through Yugoimport SDPR, the same state-owned company now partnering with Elbit on the drone factory.
Beyond conventional weapons, the partnership extends into the shadowy realm of surveillance and espionage technology.
Serbian authorities have used forensic products purchased from the Israeli company Cellebrite to unlock and extract data from mobile devices belonging to journalists and social media activists.
A new spyware tool designated “NoviSpy” has been deployed to infect these devices, enabling the Serbian internal security service to monitor and suppress critical voices.
The methods employed bear the unmistakable signature of Israeli technology and training. The personal connections between the two regimes run deep.
Asaf Eisin, an Israeli consultant, has been described as the main architect of Vučić’s victorious election campaigns.
His role extends beyond mere political consulting; he is widely considered Vučić’s secretive strategist, providing the Serbian president with the kind of sophisticated campaign management techniques developed in the occupied territories.
The Serbian opposition has characterized Eisin as an “agency for winning elections,” and his track record across multiple political campaigns in the Balkans supports this assessment.
In September 2024, while the Israeli regime faced increasing international isolation over its genocidal actions in Gaza, the regime’s president, Isaac Herzog, paid an official visit to Belgrade, meeting with top Serbian officials.
The timing was significant: the Israeli regime was under diplomatic pressure worldwide, yet Vučić welcomed Herzog as a gesture of solidarity.
Foreign policy analysts noted that Serbia saw this as an opportunity to demonstrate its alignment with Washington’s closest West Asian ally, a calculated move to curry favor with the incoming Trump administration.
This alignment was formalized in September 2020 through the Washington Agreement, in which Serbia committed to opening a chamber of commerce office and a state office in Jerusalem al-Quds.
The move was hailed in Tel Aviv as “an important and courageous step,” while critics noted that it placed Serbia firmly on the side of the occupation and against Palestinian sovereignty.
The United Arab Emirates, which normalized relations with the Israeli regime in 2020, has emerged as a significant investor in Serbia, while also serving as a conduit for technology transfer and military cooperation.
The connection to the UAE, brokered through the same Washington Agreement, has created an axis that runs from Abu Dhabi through Tel Aviv to Belgrade.
This triangular relationship has allowed Serbia to access advanced defense technologies while providing the Israeli regime with a European production and logistics hub.
Elbit Systems: A company surrounded by global controversy
Elbit Systems, the Israeli military firm at the center of the Serbian drone factory deal, has accumulated a staggering record of international controversies spanning human rights violations, financial divestment campaigns, grassroots activism, and legal challenges.
The company generates approximately 90 percent of its revenue from military activities and is deeply integrated into the Israeli regime’s military apparatus, making it a focal point of criticism amid the ongoing genocide in Gaza or the occupied West Bank.
One of the longest-running controversies concerns Elbit’s involvement in infrastructure tied to the Israeli occupation, particularly the surveillance systems installed along the separation wall in the occupied West Bank.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion in 2004 declaring the wall contrary to international law, yet Elbit continued to supply technology for its operation.
This triggered early international backlash. In 2009, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund divested from Elbit, with the finance minister stating at the time: “We do not want to finance companies that contribute so directly to violations of international humanitarian law.”
Similar decisions followed from Danish and Swedish financial institutions.
The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement has made Elbit a primary target, noting that the company’s technology contributes directly to horrendous human rights violations against Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied territories.
These campaigns have achieved tangible results. HSBC withdrew its investment from Elbit in 2018 after the company acquired IMI Systems, which manufactures cluster munitions.
In 2026, a major Canadian investment arm divested from Elbit following sustained protests over its role in supplying equipment used in the Gaza genocide.
A UN Special Rapporteur report published in June 2025 listed Elbit among companies profiting from the genocide in Gaza. The report specifically mentioned drones developed and supplied by Elbit, describing how they operate alongside warplanes during bombing campaigns, used to monitor Palestinians and gather intelligence on targets.
The report concluded that “drones, hexacopters and quadcopters have become ubiquitous killing machines in the skies over Gaza.”
Direct action activism has targeted Elbit facilities worldwide. In the United Kingdom, groups such as Palestine Action have broken into and occupied Elbit-linked sites. The 2024 Filton facility break-in caused significant damage and led to arrests and high-profile court cases.
In 2025, Elbit closed a UK facility after sustained protests, a symbolic victory for activists demonstrating that reputational and military costs can affect even large arms firms.
In Spain, a steel shipment linked to Elbit’s subsidiary IMI Systems was canceled following protests. In France, the government barred Israeli military firms, including Elbit, from displaying offensive weapons at the Paris Air Show in 2025, citing the genocide in Gaza.
In 2025, a NATO-affiliated procurement agency barred Elbit from contracts due to a corruption investigation, suggesting that the company’s liabilities extend beyond activist campaigns into formal military-sector governance.
Meanwhile, in North Macedonia, Elbit’s involvement in “Safe City” surveillance systems has raised concerns about mass surveillance, transparency, and potential misuse, extending the ethical debate beyond armed conflict into civil liberties and digital rights.
Hermes 900: Capabilities and role in the aggression against Iran
The Hermes 900 unmanned aerial vehicle, produced by Elbit Systems, has proven to be the most important drone in the Israeli regime’s inventory for long-range strikes, and its performance during the recent US-Israeli aggression against Iran demonstrated both its strategic value and its acute vulnerabilities.
As a medium-altitude, long-endurance platform, the Hermes 900 can remain airborne for over 30 to 40 hours, operating at high altitudes that allow it to monitor vast areas without requiring frequent refueling.
This endurance is enhanced by satellite communications, enabling beyond-line-of-sight control and real-time data transmission across distances that would be impossible for ground-controlled systems.
The drone’s long-range capability made it particularly suitable for surveillance missions far from Israeli-occupied territories, including monitoring Iranian military infrastructure and tracking the movements of the Axis of Resistance forces throughout the region.
The Hermes 900 is equipped with sophisticated intelligence-gathering systems, including electro-optical and infrared sensors, synthetic aperture radar, and signals intelligence tools.
These allow it to detect troop movements, missile systems, and communication signals, even at night or in poor weather conditions.
Crucially, the Hermes 900 can designate targets using laser systems and relay precise coordinates, enabling fighter jets or other platforms—including long-range cruise missiles—to conduct strikes based on the intelligence it gathers.
This targeting capability made the drone a critical component of the regime’s aggression against Iranian infrastructure during the war that began on February 28, 2026.
The cost to the Israeli regime was still catastrophic. The largest number of Israeli drones shot down during the recent aggression were of the Hermes 900 type—approximately 20 units, with several more downed in 2025.
No official figure exists for how many Hermes 900 units the Israeli regime originally possessed, but estimates place the number in the dozens, somewhere between 25 and 50.
Some military analysts estimate that the attrition rate for the Hermes 900 fleet may have exceeded 80 percent during the unprovoked war of aggression.
The blow was so severe that the Israeli Air Force reportedly avoided deploying its remaining units over Iran for extended periods, effectively ceding the skies to Iranian air defenses and forcing Tel Aviv to rely on less capable platforms.
This degradation of Israel’s most important long-range surveillance and targeting asset represented a strategic victory for Iran’s air defense network, which had demonstrated the ability to detect, track, and destroy even the most advanced unmanned platforms.
Strategic logic: Foreign production as a hedge against Iranian retaliation
The timing of Serbia’s drone factory agreement with Elbit Systems is not coincidental.
The contract was signed in August 2025, a month and a half after the first US-Israeli aggression against Iran, when it became clear to Tel Aviv that Iranian ballistic missiles could threaten domestic production facilities.
The Israeli regime has since been insisting on peripheral supply chains, offering its clients relatively outdated surveillance technologies while using the arrangement to secure aircraft platforms for new aggressions throughout the region.
This strategy is not new. According to military analysts, the Israeli regime agreed to cooperate with India on Hermes 900 production as early as 2018 through a joint venture between Adani Defence & Aerospace and Elbit Systems, with a dedicated UAV facility in Hyderabad becoming operational in December 2018 for producing components.
By approximately 2020, this facility had expanded to assembling and exporting Hermes 900 units, making India the first production site outside the occupied territories.
Military analysts estimate that India produced approximately 20 of the estimated 50 Hermes 900 drones in the Israeli fleet, meaning that nearly 40 percent of Tel Aviv’s long-range unmanned surveillance capability was manufactured outside the occupied territories, a significant hedge against the vulnerability of domestic production facilities to Iranian retaliation.
In 2024, India formally fielded its own version, the Drishti-10 Starliner, with the first indigenously assembled unit delivered to the Indian Navy in January 2024.
The Swiss experience with Hermes 900 production has been far less successful, offering a cautionary tale for Serbia. Switzerland acquired the drones in 2015 but required extensive modifications through the Swiss partner RUAG to enable safe operation in civilian airspace.
The integration of a detect-and-avoid system proved extremely difficult, leading to repeated delays that pushed full operational capability to around 2029.
Some delivered drones could not meet expected performance standards, and one notable incident involved structural issues that caused a drone to break apart during testing.
The Swiss government was forced to scale back its requirements, abandoning certain advanced features while costs continued to rise.
Parliamentary committees raised doubts about whether RUAG and Elbit could fix ongoing problems, with some officials discussing potential cancellation.
For a neutral country like Switzerland, the deal also sparked debate about whether such partnerships compromise neutrality or align the country too closely with foreign military-industrial interests.
Brazil’s experience offers a different set of challenges. While the Hermes 900 is assembled locally through AEL Sistemas, a Brazilian subsidiary of Elbit, the program has been plagued by technical reliability issues.
Multiple crashes have occurred, including one during the 2024 floods in Rio Grande do Sul when a drone used in rescue operations crashed due to a technical problem.
In March 2026, another Hermes 900 crashed during a military exercise in Mato Grosso do Sul, reportedly leaving the Brazilian Air Force with only one operational unit at the time.
These incidents have raised concerns about fleet fragility and whether Brazil is over-reliant on a complex foreign system that it does not fully control.
Even with local assembly, critical components, software, and maintenance expertise remain tied to Israeli suppliers, creating a structural dependency that critics argue limits Brazil’s technological sovereignty.
Serbian gamble: Risks and domestic opposition
Within Serbia, the drone factory agreement has generated significant controversy.
Military observers point out that Elbit will retain complete control over intellectual property, meaning that while Serbian workers may assemble drones, the country will not gain the ability to independently produce or replicate the systems.
Petar Vojinović, an aviation analyst, explained that the most likely arrangement gives Elbit control over sales and intellectual property, with Yugoimport merely participating in production and collecting revenue percentages from sales.
“It is expected that Elbit will retain complete control over the intellectual property,” he noted.
“Thus, Elbit’s intellectual property will be protected, and Serbia will most likely not be able to produce or replicate the drones that will be manufactured.”
Other analysts emphasized that the key issue is knowledge transfer, arguing that If part of the development and production occurs in Serbia, it means training personnel, access to technology, and the possibility of further development without complete dependence on partners.
The political dimension of the deal has also drawn sharp criticism. UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, during a visit to Serbia in March 2026, described Serbia as “one of Israel’s strongest and most determined allies, without any shame.”
Serbian civil society organizations have raised concerns that by hosting an Elbit production facility, Serbia could become a legitimate military target in any future conflict involving the Israeli regime.
Unlike Croatia, which has secured its position through NATO and EU membership, Serbia remains outside both alliances, lacking the protective umbrella that would deter potential retaliation.
The Serbian people are widely critical of their authorities, with many claiming that officials are reaping lucrative commissions from such controversial agreements.
The fact that the factory may be located on property associated with a media mogul closely tied to the ruling party has only intensified suspicions about corruption and self-dealing.
While Vučić has portrayed the deal as a triumph of Serbian diplomacy and technological advancement, critics see it as a risky alignment with a pariah regime that could expose Serbia to diplomatic isolation or worse.
West Bank is Defenseless – This is Why Israeli Settler Attacks Continue
Israel killed 14-year-old Aws al-Naasan, along with 32-year-old Jihad Abu Naim, who tried to help him. (Photos: via social media)
By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | April 24, 2026
A string of high-profile settler attacks on villages across the occupied West Bank is part of a trend of ever-escalating assaults aimed at ethnically cleansing the territory. These extremists, backed by the Israeli army, are emboldened by the refusal of the Palestinian Authority to act.
Earlier this week, an Israeli settler assault on a school in the village of al-Mughayyer, near Ramallah, resulted in the killing of a 14-year-old school boy, Aws al-Naasan, along with 32-year-old Jihad Abu Naim, who had attempted to come to the aid of the children who had been opened fire upon.
The incident caused an uproar, yet only a day later, another Palestinian man was executed by a settler in the village of Deir Dibwan, after which the Israeli military rounded up dozens of men and placed them under humiliating detention.
These assaults and ongoing series of pogroms, where settlers alongside their army comrades will burn down homes, businesses, and vehicles, are part of a larger effort aimed at ethnic cleansing.
Since October of 2023, at least 75 Palestinian villages and communities have been partially or completely ethnically cleansed, according to the latest statistics published by Israeli rights group B’tselem. Life in general has been greatly impacted throughout the occupied West Bank as a result of the ultra-emboldened settler violence problem.
However, there is a deeper-rooted issue at play here. There is nobody there to help protect or respond to these violent assaults and killing sprees, with the exception of the occasional lone-wolf operations carried out by individuals who grow frustrated with their predicament. Even these kinds of attacks have greatly decreased over the past year or so, however.
There were armed resistance groups that had independently formed in places like Jenin Refugee Camp and Nour al-Shams Refugee Camp, yet they have been largely crushed or driven into hiding for now.
The unescapable fact about how these groups were dismantled was the pernicious role of the corrupt Palestinian Authority, which worked to do Israel’s dirty work for it, even slaughtering Palestinians who dared to pick up arms and fight, including killing innocent bystanders, including children.
Instead of standing up to the illegal settler attacks that are driving tens of thousands of Palestinians from their homes and the daily killings of civilians, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has doubled down on its collaborationist approach in support of the occupiers. Even arresting and then extraditing a 75-year-old Palestinian, Mahmoud Khader Abed Adra, who was accused of attacking a Jewish restaurant in Paris back in 1982.
The priority of this PA is to protect Israeli interests as they enrich themselves, having completely thrown their national project into the dustbin in search of pleasing the West and Arab despots. Yet, some 30% of the West Bank population is employed by the PA, with another 18% finding employment amongst Israeli settlers and Israeli businesses.
If we consider now that up to 35% of the West Bank population is considered to be unemployed and that the Western NGOs have a major influence on the territory, also employing a considerable number of people, then it begins to become more understandable why the situation remains as it is. The majority of employed Palestinians work for the PA or their occupiers directly.
The PA is said to have around 60,000 men as part of their overall security apparatus, trained by the British, Jordanians, US, and others, yet they aren’t there to protect Palestinians; they are there as another layer of occupation. If you stand up to the PA, you will be arrested and tortured, perhaps even brutally killed in front of your family, like the famous dissident Nizar Banat.
Understanding this is key to comprehending why the territory’s people have been left so incredibly defenseless and why an Intifada has not yet occurred. If such an uprising is to begin, it will mean that it will be totally organic and completely outside the fold of the PA, perhaps even collapsing its corrupt system altogether.
Even on the international level, the Palestinian cause has only been used to drive the selfish interests of a small group of Palestinian elites, while completely abandoning the people’s project. Although many have endless critiques of former Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, the years under his rule of the PA couldn’t be more different from what the corrupted authority looks like today, it is a hollowed-out shell of what existed in the days of Arafat; although this was by no means perfect.
Unfortunately, the PA is now the main obstacle to Palestinians resisting the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank. It may be so that Gaza’s destruction was quicker and more brutal because it chose to fight, but if the West Bank had risen up, the Israelis would have been in a very tough position.
Unlike Gaza, the West Bank is saturated with Israeli settlers, and the price that they would pay in the event that a real resistance would emerge would be much more painful, which is precisely why the Israelis have gone to great lengths to strengthen their positions and prevent freedom of movement there to such an extent since October 2023.
To the Israelis, they see the West Bank as ‘Judea and Samaria’ – the Israeli biblical heartland – while the Gaza Strip is an afterthought. The senior Israeli leadership, from its PM Benjamin Netanyahu to the opposition leader Yair Lapid, is all in agreement on developing a “Greater Israel” that is currently attempting to expand further into Lebanon and Syria.
As for the fate of the West Bank, left completely defenseless, with a PA that is actively working for its occupier, it appears to be grim. These settler attacks are only going to accelerate and grow more violent. The only way that this will ever be forced to change is in the event of a mass uprising, because individual acts alone are not going to alter the current predicament.
Attempting to predict the future is a difficult task; however, with the ever-growing unemployment rate, alongside the overall decline in living standards and constant settler/occupation army violence against the civilian population, an uprising is only a matter of time away.
– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine.
Systematic Israeli targeting of Gaza police seen as deliberate prelude to chaos
Palestinian Information Center – April 24, 2026
GAZA – The Gaza Center for Human Rights has strongly condemned the escalating targeting of police and security personnel in the Gaza Strip by Israeli forces, describing it as part of a recurring pattern aimed at weakening the structure of public order and creating conditions conducive to chaos and lawlessness. This, the Center warned, facilitates the movement of collaborators and armed gangs at the expense of civilian safety and security.
According to documentation by the center’s field teams, an Israeli drone strike on Friday, April 24, 2026, killed two police officers and injured others after targeting a police patrol near Sheikh Radwan police station in northwest Gaza City. The attack occurred in a densely populated area, placing civilians at direct risk.
In a related incident, on the evening of Thursday, April 23, 2026, a drone strike targeted a group of young men at a security checkpoint in the al-Maslakh area, southwest of Khan Yunis, killing one of them, identified as Yahya Marwan Youssef Abu Shalhoub, 22, and injuring others.
Shortly after midnight on Tuesday, April 21, 2026, an Israeli airstrike hit a security post north of the Al-Amal neighborhood in western Khan Yunis, killing three people. Medical sources later confirmed a fourth death from injuries sustained in the attack.
On April 20, 2026, an Israeli drone targeted a gathering of security personnel near Joudeh roundabout in the Bureij refugee camp, killing one officer and injuring another.
Since the ceasefire in October 2025, the Gaza Center for Human Rights has recorded an increase in Israeli attacks on security posts, police checkpoints, and officers performing civilian duties related to maintaining order and protecting public and private property. The Center stated that this reflects a clear policy aimed at undermining law enforcement authority and deliberately creating a security vacuum.
The situation has enabled groups of collaborators and militias to enter displacement areas and commit serious violations, including kidnapping civilians and attacking property, as well as facilitating the looting of humanitarian aid amid the absence of effective protection.
The Center stressed that targeting police and security personnel carrying out purely civilian functions in maintaining public order, as well as targeting civilian gatherings in densely populated areas with displaced persons, constitutes a grave violation of international humanitarian law, particularly the principles of distinction and necessity. Such acts may amount to war crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Furthermore, the deliberate undermining of public order and the spread of chaos constitute internationally prohibited collective punishment policies.
The Center warned that the continuation of this pattern of attacks threatens not only individual lives but also undermines the societal foundations of governance and erodes the population’s right to personal security and legal protection.
Accordingly, the Center called on the international community to take urgent action to halt the targeting of civilian law enforcement bodies, ensure effective protection for civilians, and open independent international investigations into these crimes, with a view to holding those responsible accountable and ending impunity.
Netanyahu destabilizing region, US hindering talks: Pakistani official
Al Mayadeen | April 24, 2026
In an exclusive interview with Al Mayadeen, former Pakistani Information Minister and Senator Mushahid Hussain Sayed highlighted Pakistan’s diplomatic efforts in facilitating indirect and direct communication between Iran and the United States, describing the process as a rare breakthrough in regional diplomacy.
Sayed stated that Pakistan “achieved something close to the impossible” in the initial round of discussions by helping bring Iranian and US representatives to the same table. He emphasized that the significance of the effort lay in “bringing the Iranian and American sides into the same room,” describing it as a notable diplomatic achievement.
According to Sayed, expectations remain high for a second round of talks between Tehran and Washington, though he stressed that such progress depends on the lifting of the US naval blockade on Iran.
He also told Al Mayadeen that the continuation of dialogue is contingent on a shift in US policy, adding that Pakistan remains in active contact with both Tehran and Washington. He also noted that communication channels include engagement with Pakistan’s military leadership, which has played a facilitating role.
Strait of Hormuz and regional developments
Sayed emphasized that Iranian leadership responded positively to a request from Pakistan’s army chief to ease tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime passage.
He said Iran’s position initially expected relief from US-imposed restrictions, which had not materialized. He added that Iran’s decision to show flexibility regarding the Strait of Hormuz reflects its willingness to support de-escalation efforts.
According to Sayed, the “ball is now in the Americans’ court,” stressing that Washington must make the next move if negotiations are to continue.
He further warned that if restrictions on Iranian ports continue, Iran’s negotiating delegation may not participate in future talks scheduled in Islamabad.
US policy obstructs negotiations
Sayed identified the US blockade on Iran as the central obstacle to a second round of negotiations, describing it as “legally and morally wrong.”
He expressed the view that former US President Donald Trump may eventually reconsider this position, suggesting that lifting the blockade could open the way for renewed dialogue.
He also argued that ongoing US policy has failed to achieve its objectives, claiming that Washington is under pressure to find an exit strategy from the current regional tensions.
Netanyahu destabilizing region
In his remarks, Sayed accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of playing a central role in escalating regional tensions, blasting him as a destabilizing figure in West Asia.
He further said that Netanyahu influenced US policy and dragged it into war through political “blackmail” and the notorious Epstein files, in which Trump is extensively mentioned.
Moreover, Sayed stated that “Israel” does not seek peace, adding that Zionism pursues the idea of a “Greater Israel,” a concept rejected in the region. Regional resistance, he said, including Iran’s stance, has challenged the feasibility of such projects.
Lebanon ceasefire central to regional peace
The former minister also referred to developments in Lebanon, stating that a ceasefire was achieved following pressure on Israeli leadership.
He claimed that Trump played a role in urging Netanyahu toward de-escalation, based on diplomatic advice, and said that Iran had also rightfully insisted on a ceasefire in Lebanon, which he stressed was a victim of aggression.
Sayed emphasized that peace in the region is interconnected, stating that stability in Iran and the wider West Asia region is directly linked to peace in Lebanon. He added that discussions reportedly include a broader framework in which Lebanon is not treated as a separate issue but as part of a wider regional settlement.
Pakistan’s regional position
Sayed underscored Pakistan’s role as a key regional actor, highlighting its status as the only nuclear power in the Islamic world and a consistent supporter of the Palestinian cause.
He suggested that Pakistan is positioned to play a continued mediating role in facilitating dialogue between regional and global powers.
Looking ahead, Sayed expressed cautious optimism that an agreement between Tehran and Washington could eventually be reached, stating that such a deal might even be signed in Pakistan if negotiations succeed.
He concluded by reiterating that the Strait of Hormuz is not the root cause of tensions but rather a consequence of broader geopolitical disputes, which he attributed to US and Israeli regional policies.
Somalia bans Israeli-linked vessels from Bab al-Mandab Strait
The Cradle | April 24, 2026
The Somali government announced on 22 April that it will impose a ban on Israeli shipping passing through the Bab al-Mandab Strait, framing the move as a response to Tel Aviv’s recognition of the breakaway Republic of Somaliland.
The announcement was made by Somalia’s ambassador to Ethiopia and the African Union, Abdullah Warfa.
He warned that violations of his country’s sovereignty “would not be tolerated.”
“External meddling could lead to countermeasures, such as restricting access to the key maritime route of Bab al-Mandab,” Warfa added, according to Yemen Press Agency (YPA), Mehr News Agency, and IRNA.
The UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported a day later that a cargo ship 83 nautical miles southeast of Eyl, Somalia, was approached by two small armed boats, one of which came within 600 meters of the vessel.
“Warning shots were fired and the suspicious craft returned fire. The suspicious small craft moved away and made clear of the reporting cargo ship. All crew are safe and accounted for,” the UKMTO report added.
While analysts question Somalia’s ability to enforce the ban due to limited naval capacity, they say the decision carries major political weight, potentially reshaping regional alignments and pushing Somalia toward closer coordination with Sanaa over control of the strategic chokepoint.
Late last year, Israel became the first state to recognize the breakaway Somaliland region as an independent state. Somaliland had functioned as a de facto state since declaring independence in 1991, with its own governing institutions and security structures – despite receiving no recognition from any UN member state and facing sustained opposition from Somalia.
The Somali government slammed the move along with several regional countries, including Turkiye.
Earlier this month, Somalia condemned Israel’s appointment of an ambassador to Somaliland.
The announcement comes as tensions between Tehran and Washington remain high despite the ceasefire. The Strait of Hormuz remains closed, and Tehran has retaliated to an ongoing US blockade and seizure of its vessels – capturing two ships this week.
Yemen’s Ansarallah resistance movement, which has threatened to close the Bab al-Mandab Strait given its close proximity, carried out several operations during the US-Israeli war on Iran.
Ansarallah recently vowed it would resume operations if the US–Iran ceasefire collapses.
“We have more serious winning cards; the US must understand that, with the help of our Yemeni brothers, the issue of the Bab al-Mandab Strait is also under consideration and action,” said Behnam Saeedi, a member of the Iranian parliament’s national security and foreign policy committee, earlier this month.
The Bab al-Mandab Strait is the passageway for approximately 12 percent of global oil and eight percent of worldwide liquefied natural gas (LNG).
ELNET taking UK journalists on secret pro-‘Israel’ propaganda tours
Al Mayadeen | April 24, 2026
A lobbying organization, ELNET, has been quietly arranging trips to “Israel” for British journalists and retired military personnel, according to an investigation published by Declassified. The tours coincide with the Israeli military’s ongoing campaign that has killed over 259 Palestinian and Lebanese journalists since 2023.
The investigation noted that on Wednesday, journalist Amal Khalil and photographer Zeinab Faraj were reporting from southern Lebanon when an Israeli airstrike targeted them. Khalil was killed and Faraj was seriously injured. The Israeli military is responsible for two-thirds of all journalist killings globally in 2025, the report states.
While systematically killing Palestinian journalists, Declassified reported that the Israeli government has blocked foreign media workers from entering Gaza, effectively creating a blackout of its military operations.
ELNET created to counter criticism of ‘Israel’
According to the investigation, ELNET was founded in 2007 with the stated aim of “countering the widespread criticism of Israel in Europe.” The group is increasingly viewed as the European equivalent of AIPAC, the powerful American-Israeli lobby.
Declassified found that journalists who participated in ELNET delegations have written for major British publications including the Telegraph, Spectator and Mail on Sunday. The group has also taken former British military officers to “Israel”, who subsequently portrayed the IOF’s operations in Gaza in a favourable light.
Professor Des Freedman of Goldsmiths told Declassified that such trips are not genuine fact-finding missions but rather “junkets specifically designed to generate pro-Israel coverage.” He added that embedded journalism of this kind is “utterly scandalous during a genocide when the rest of the world’s media have been locked out of Gaza.”
ELNET has close links to Israeli government
The investigation reveals that ELNET maintains close ties to the Israeli government. Its board members include two former advisors to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The group was invited to a 2024 meeting with foreign minister Gideon Sa’ar to discuss improving “public diplomacy”, and its delegations are frequently organized “in partnership” with the Israeli Foreign Ministry.
Emmanuel Navon, who directed ELNET’s “Israel” office between 2023 and 2025, described “Israel’s” offensive into Rafah as “necessary” and dismissed concerns about Palestinian civilians, Declassified reports.
ELNET’s UK branch is directed by former MP Joan Ryan, who once chaired Labour Friends of Israel. Under her leadership, the group has sought to cast doubt on casualty figures from Gaza, calling them “demonstrably unreliable and strategically manipulated.” The UK branch has also condemned British recognition of a Palestinian state as a “PR win” for Hamas and urged the restoration of arms exports to “Israel.”
Journalist declared ‘war must go on’ after ELNET trip
Declassified identified British journalist Zoe Strimpel, who writes for the Sunday Telegraph, as one participant in an ELNET delegation. Days after returning from “Israel”, she wrote in The Spectator that “most people” in “Israel” agree that “the war must go on until Hamas is completely destroyed.”
In a separate Telegraph article, Strimpel dismissed accusations of “Israeli ‘genocide’ in Gaza” as “grotesquely false”. When approached by Declassified about her participation in the ELNET trip, she declined to offer any defensive response, stating, “The more pro-Israel the better in my view.”
Another participant, David Rose, wrote for the Jewish Chronicle after his trip that “the trauma experienced throughout Israeli society means serious consideration of the longer-term relationship between Israel and the Palestinians is almost impossible to contemplate.”
Former British generals toured Gaza with ELNET
The investigation also revealed that former British military officers have joined ELNET delegations. Retired British army officer Sir John McColl, who served as a NATO commander in Europe, joined a September 2024 delegation that met with Netanyahu and former Security Minister, both wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes.
The group received briefings from Israeli military commanders and spent time in Gaza “observing troops in action.” Shortly after returning, McColl wrote in The Times that the Israeli military’s “rules of engagement in Gaza are at least as rigorous as those of the British army.” ELNET subsequently listed McColl’s article as one of its “recent successes” in an impact report.
Three other former British military figures on that delegation were Johnny Mercer, Colonel Richard Kemp and Major Andrew Fox. Fox later wrote on Substack, “When does a journalist become a legitimate military target? Many not often enough.”
Confusion, delusion, and how Israel drives the Iran War
By Jamal Kanj | MEMO | April 23, 2026
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz following the temporary ceasefire is the culmination of an American policy defined by strategic incoherence. At the center stands Donald Trump, whose shifting positions, confused war objectives, and conflicting actions have not only failed to ease regional tensions but have actively deepened them.
Nowhere is this clearer than in Trump’s threats to blow up the whole country, including its bridges and power plants. At the same time, he touted a military “big day,” presenting potential war crimes as diplomatic tool, aggression as diplomacy, and destruction as leverage.
Trump’s inflated, almost delusional, promises ahead of potential talks come across less as statesmanship and more as a calculated sales pitch to the American public. His vows “to end up with a great deal,” coupled with an almost obsessive focus on Barack Obama by insisting his agreement will be “far better” than the one negotiated over a decade ago. An approach that reflects a tendency toward messaging driven less by policy depth and more by projection, comparison, and to frame outcomes in terms of self-aggrandizement and personal glory.
Instead of articulating clear strategic objectives, his policy relies on distinguishing himself and image cultivation to project authority and superiority, leaving the underlying substance vague and open to question.
By manufacturing optimism and exaggerating progress while promising an imminent “great deal,” Trump appears to be negotiating with himself—or detached from reality—seeking to construct a narrative of success regardless of the facts on the ground. The performative optimism stands in sharp contrast to his simultaneous threats and pompous rhetoric, suggesting not confidence but a measure of desperation.
Trump’s rationale for extending the ceasefire because of “internal divisions” within Iran is unconvincing. If internal debate within Iran is seen as warranting a pause, what should be said of a policy where direction shifts from one moment to the next? Differing political views are the essence of a normally functioning political system, whereas impulsive, erratic, personalized decision-making is not.
All of this unfolds as Trump continues issuing maximalist demands for conditions he helped create. For instance, he demands the surrender of enriched uranium that would not exist had he not abandoned the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Likewise, the Strait of Hormuz was closed as a consequence of his and Netanyahu’s war, not as its cause.
The consequences of these Israel-driven U.S. policies are felt by ordinary Americans at the gas pump and in grocery stores. The Strait of Hormuz has become a battleground, destabilizing global energy supply chains and economies worldwide. Yet despite these cascading effects, the core strategy remains unchanged. Trump continues to operate within an echo chamber of Israel-first sycophants that assume military might alone can deliver results, even as the policy falters and the war spills across the region, threatening roughly one-fifth of the world’s energy infrastructure.
This is not merely a political flaw or a matter of mismanagement. It is rather a strategic vulnerability shaped by Israel-first loyalists pulling U.S. strategy in directions that ultimately undermine U.S. national interests. In the absence of clearly defined national objectives, as in the first Israel’s war in Iraq, each step risks drawing the U.S. deeper into the polluted water of the Gulf, while simultaneously advancing an environment of chaos that serves only Israel’s calculated aims.
In this framework, was Israeli Prijamame Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent statement that the war with Iran is “not over” an embedded message to Trump ahead of the proposed peace talks in Pakistan?
Negotiation between countries, especially in the context of war is not selling real estate deals, where haggling and the threat of retracting an offer are routine tactics. The craft of negotiation in this case operates on an entirely different level. Culture, national dignity, historical memory, and political positioning shape both the process and the outcome.
Leaders are not merely bargaining over financial assets or credit ratings, they are navigating domestic demands, legitimacy, and the perception of strength or weakness on the global stage.
In this regard, threats or the constant withdrawal and reintroduction of proposals are not leverage, they are weakness. Unlike commercial transactions where the “Art of the Deal” is largely concluded at the moment of signing, international agreements mark the beginning of an ongoing, often long-term relationship. What may pass as hard-nosed bargaining in business can, in international diplomacy, be interpreted as bad faith, an approach that tends to invite resentment and resistance instead of compromise. This is why since last Tuesday, Trump was left waiting for Iran to come to the negotiation table.
Effective diplomacy requires serious leadership, consistency, and an understanding of the symbolic as much as the substantive. Agreements endure not because one side is pressured into submission, but because all parties can present the outcome as preserving their dignity and advancing mutual interests.
The lack of strategic maturity is indicative in a proclamation in the morning signaling openness to de-escalation; by midday, the message splinters, issuing threats and ultimatums while simultaneously hinting at imminent breakthrough deals; by the middle of the night, amid his insomnia, it escalates to threats of total destruction. This constant shifting of positions is not a minor stylistic quirk. It is possible that, at least some of this, is associated with his nocturnal communications with Netanyahu, who is apparently wagging him left and right.
This yo-yoing of positions does more than create confusion; it erodes credibility. Diplomacy depends on a baseline of predictability and mental stability. When signals shift faster than the wind, uncertainty breeds mistrust, and negotiations drift from closed rooms into fiery statements played out for public consumption, creating an opening for Israel to drive the war and breed destruction and more chaos.
After the ceasefire illusion: Why Gaza’s “Day After” still has no buyer?
By Dr Mustafa Fetouri | MEMO | April 23, 2026
The international community remains fixated on a phantom: Gaza’s “Day After.” While Washington, Cairo, and Doha debate elaborate governance frameworks and the “Board of Peace,” these plans share a fatal flaw—they lack a viable “buyer” on the ground.
This diplomatic theatre has been eclipsed by the US-Israeli aggression against Iran that began on 28th February. Since then, Gaza has been sidelined globally, yet the genocide—begun in October 2023—has never stopped. Even before the Iran escalation, the 10th October ceasefire was a hollow promise; Israel violated the agreement over 2,400 times through near-daily air raids and shelling.
Since that supposed de-escalation, nearly 1,000 Palestinian civilians have been killed, pushing the total death toll past 72,300. This grim reality proves the “Day After” is not a sincere peace plan, but a cynical mask for a permanent, lethal status quo. Far from transitioning to Phase II, the current impasse suggests the ceasefire was merely a tactical suspension of a conflict Israel refuses to end. With the occupation intact and violations occurring daily, Gaza is not moving toward a post-war era. Instead, it is being forced into a state of managed catastrophe, where “peace” serves as a placeholder for the next phase of destruction.
The “Day After” blueprints—specifically the Trump-led Board of Peace and the National Transitional Committee (NTC)—envision technocratic governance for Gaza but face a wall of refusal. For the Israeli government, any plan offering a pathway to Palestinian sovereignty is a non-starter; Netanyahu’s coalition instead prioritises “forward defence” and indefinite military hegemony. Conversely, the Palestinian Authority (PA) remains wary of being “parachuted” into the ruins on the back of Israeli tanks, a move that would permanently strip them of national legitimacy.
The vacuum is further complicated by the survival of the Resistance on the ground. Despite the fanfare surrounding the Board of Peace’s “Phase II,” Hamas has explicitly rejected any form of international guardianship, viewing the NTC not as a governing partner, but as a Trojan horse for disarmament. Meanwhile, the wealthy Arab states—the intended financiers of a reconstruction effort now estimated to cost $71.4 billion—have failed to commit any tangible funds.
Their hesitance is rooted in a grim economic reality: the regional losses they have accumulated, and continue to accumulate, from the spillover of the war on Iran have depleted the very sovereign wealth once earmarked for Gaza.
Without a “buyer” willing to assume the immense security and political risks of governing a site of ongoing genocide, the various “roadmaps” coming out of Washington and Brussels serve as little more than academic exercises in a theater of the absurd. The international community continues to pitch governance models to a phantom audience, while the reality on the ground remains one of systematic destruction, leaving Gaza caught in a loop where “reconstruction” is discussed as a future hope but never funded as a present necessity.
The “Day After” illusion is further sustained by the inflammatory rhetoric of Nickolay Mladenov, the High Representative for the Board of Peace. In his recent April 2026 briefings, Mladenov has essentially weaponised Gaza’s reconstruction, explicitly linking the release of the $71.4 billion in aid to the immediate and total disarmament of Palestinian factions.
By framing the situation as a binary choice—disarm or continue to suffer—Mladenov has abandoned the role of a neutral mediator.
Hamas has responded by accusing Mladenov of siding with the Israeli occupation and ignoring the thousands of ceasefire violations that have occurred since October 2026 effectively freezing the process in Phase II. By prioritizing the “decommissioning of weapons” over the immediate cessation of the genocide and the lifting of the blockade, Mladenov’s framework has become a symbol of international bias rather than a bridge to peace. This disconnect is why the “Day After” has no buyer: the brokers are selling a plan that demands the surrender of the victims while the aggressor continues its military operations with impunity.
Sensing that the Resistance groups are not convinced by his frameworks, Mladenov has recently attempted to soften his public tone while maintaining his rigid demands. In an interview with Reuters on 20th April, he admitted that negotiations with Hamas are “not easy,” yet he struck a jarringly optimistic note, claiming he is “optimistic that we will be able to come up with an arrangement that works for all sides and, most importantly, works for the people in Gaza.” Since neither Israel—which continues its strikes—nor the Resistance—which has rejected international guardianship—has publicly shifted their positions, Mladenov’s forward-looking posture appears increasingly detached from the ground reality.
In recent high-level meetings in Cairo (ending 17th April), Hamas negotiators, led by Khalil al-Hayya, delivered a firm list of prerequisites to the Egyptian mediators. They made it clear that they will not consider any decommissioning of weapons without:
- A definitive and irreversible plan toward a sovereign Palestinian State.
- The complete and immediate lifting of the 19-year blockade.
- A full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-October lines (specifically removing the “Yellow Line” military zones).
- The prior implementation of all Phase I humanitarian commitments, including the reopening of all commercial crossings and the restoration of Gaza’s power plant.
By insisting on these core national rights as a baseline, the Resistance has effectively neutralized Mladenov’s “aid-for-arms” trade-off, exposing the Board of Peace as a seller with a product that the actual stakeholders refuse to buy.
Ultimately, the “Day After” is failing because it has lost its primary architect. Donald Trump, once the loudest champion of these regional “deals,” is now completely bogged down by the escalating war on Iran, a conflict that is siphoning away the political capital and attention once directed toward Gaza. His schedule for next month confirms this pivot: a rescheduled state visit to China (May 14-15) and a high-stakes reception for the UK’s King Charles later this month, both of which were delayed specifically by his war on Iran.
With Trump preoccupied by a naval blockade in the Strait of Hormuz and a domestic battle over war powers, Gaza has been relegated to a secondary theatre.
This lack of American bandwidth means the “Board of Peace” is effectively a rudderless ship. For the people on the ground, this means the “Day After” is not just a geopolitical myth, but a casualty of a larger regional fire that the White House is currently more interested in fuelling than extinguishing.
Featured Video
Seyed M. Marandi: The Strike That Wiped Out Trump’s Plan (It’s Over)
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
How Bill Gates Premeditated COVID Vaccine Injury Censorship
By Dr. Joseph Mercola | March 30, 2021
In 2000, everything about Bill Gates’ public persona changed. He morphed from a hardnosed and ruthless technology monopolizer into a soft, fuzzy and incredibly generous philanthropist when he and his wife launched the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.1
It was a public relations coup. May 18, 1998, the U.S. Justice Department, in collaboration with 20 state attorneys, filed an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft.2 At that time, the company was 23 years old and was ruling the personal computer market. The Seattle Times described the fallout from the antitrust lawsuit:3
“The company barely escaped being split up after it was ruled an unlawful monopolist in 2000 for using its stranglehold on the PC market with its Windows operating system to cripple competitors, such as Netscape’s Navigator Web browser.”
How would the world be different today if the company had been split? Yale law professor George Priest described the antitrust lawsuit as “one of the most important antitrust cases of its generation.”4 In 2002, a court settlement placed restrictions on Microsoft to curb some of its practices for five years.
It was later extended twice and then expired May 12, 2011. The lawsuit had a dramatic effect on “the emergence of an entirely new field called IP (intellectual property) antitrust,” Iowa law professor Herbert Hovenkamp told the Seattle Times.5
Later, large sums donated from the foundation made the news multiple times, including $9.5 million to GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines), a second $7.5 million to GAVI and $6.8 million to the World Health Organization in 2017.6
By June 2020, in the middle of a global pandemic, the Gates Foundation’s donations totaled 45% of WHO’s funding from nongovernmental sources.7 Once mainstream media’s attention was no longer on Gates’ antitrust activities and focused on the philanthropist actions of the foundation, Gates publicly turned his attention to vaccinating the world, long before COVID-19.8
Event 201: A Preplanned Pandemic
In a deep dive into the Gates Foundation’s charitable donations, The Nation found there were $250 million in grants to companies where the foundation held corporate stocks, including Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Sanofi and Medtronic. The money was directed at supporting projects “like developing new drugs and health monitoring systems and creating mobile banking services.”9 … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- When a Train Ticket Costs Your Passport: The Eurail Breach and the Digital ID Problem
- Seyed M. Marandi: The Strike That Wiped Out Trump’s Plan (It’s Over)
- Court Forces German Chancellor Merz to Open Files on 300 “Insult the Chancellor” Cases
- ‘Territorial Theft With Better Branding’: Israel Keeps Advancing Its ‘Yellow Line’ in Gaza
- Iran war launched at ‘Israel’s’ request: US memo debunks Trump claims
- How Israel moved Hermes 900 drone production to Serbia to hide from Iranian missiles
- EU economic sanctions ramp up NATO war plan on Russia
- USDA/NIAID-Funded Scientists Build Chimeric Bird Flu Viruses with 100% Mortality in Mammals: Journal ‘npj Vaccines’
- The Sordid History of the CIA – Part 3
- West Bank is Defenseless – This is Why Israeli Settler Attacks Continue
- If Americans Knew
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- No Tricks Zone
- European Institute For Climate And Energy: “Climate Debate is Seldom About Science”
- New Study: The Climate May Be 5 Times More Sensitive To Solar Forcing Than Commonly Assumed
- EV Industry Reached $70 Billion In Losses In 2024 Due To Delusional Green Ideologies
- Reality Check: Maldives Have Actually Grown In Size Or Remained Stable Over Recent Decades
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
- German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
- New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
Aletho News 