Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Iran in the face of the armed diplomacy of imperialism

By Sayid Marcos Tenorio | MEMO | February 23, 2026

The ongoing negotiations between the United States and Iran, mediated by Oman and recently held in Geneva, have been presented by Western diplomacy as a technical effort to contain nuclear risks. This version is a carefully constructed farce.

What is at stake is not the so-called “non-proliferation”, but a direct dispute between national sovereignty and imperial domination, conducted in order to preserve the regional hegemony of “Israel” and to keep the Middle East under the strategic tutelage of the US–Zionist axis.

The United States does not negotiate in the name of peace or international security. It negotiates as the diplomatic and military arm of the Zionist regime, tasked with neutralising any regional power that escapes the colonial control imposed after the Second World War.

Iran is today the principal target of this machinery because it dares to assert political, scientific, and strategic autonomy in a region that Washington and Tel Aviv treat as a protectorate.

The real nature of these “negotiations” becomes evident in the adopted method. While speaking of dialogue, the US reinforces its military presence in the Gulf, deploys aircraft carriers, issues public threats, and makes it clear that the alternative to an agreement is violence.

This is the old gunboat diplomacy, in which the empire demands concessions under blackmail. This is not negotiation between sovereign states; it is political extortion disguised as a diplomatic process.

Washington’s central argument, wrapped in an alleged Iranian nuclear risk, does not withstand any honest analysis. Iran does not possess nuclear weapons, has not announced any intention to produce them, and accepts international verification mechanisms. The real problem is not nuclear; it is geopolitical.

What troubles the US and “Israel” is the existence of a state that refuses to integrate into the West’s colonial security architecture, that maintains its own deterrent capability, and that politically and morally supports the peoples of the region against occupation and aggression.

This is why the demand for “zero enrichment” reappears as a mantra of the Zionist consortium. It is an illegal, discriminatory, and politically obscene imposition. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons explicitly recognises the right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

Even so, this right applies only to allies of the empire. “Israel”, a clandestine nuclear power outside the NPT, with an atomic arsenal that has never been inspected, remains untouched. Iran, by contrast, is required to submit completely. That is the double standard that sustains the current international system.

Sanctions play a central role in this hybrid war. They are not legal instruments, but weapons of collective punishment, used to strangle the Iranian economy, generate social suffering, and attempt to produce internal fractures.

Washington uses civilian suffering as a bargaining tool, hoping to force political concessions that it would never obtain under normal circumstances. It is a form of economic warfare that openly violates the most elementary principles of international law.

When the US attempts to expand the agenda of the negotiations to include Iran’s missile programme and defensive capability, it reveals its intentions even more clearly. Asking a country to negotiate its own defence is equivalent to demanding prior surrender.

No sovereign power would accept such an imposition. Iran has firmly rejected this manoeuvre, making it clear that its defensive capability is not under negotiation and never will be.

Iranian distrust does not arise from ideological paranoia, but from concrete historical experience. The United States unilaterally withdrew from the previous nuclear agreement, dismantled multilateral commitments, and, in 2025, went so far as to bomb peaceful Iranian nuclear facilities during ongoing negotiations.

This record renders any demand for “trust” on the part of Washington laughable. Imperialism does not inspire trust. It inspires caution and preparation.

Even so, Iran negotiates. And this point is central. It negotiates because it is a responsible state, aware of the gravity of the regional scenario, and willing to seek structured solutions. It accepts verification, accepts technical commitments, accepts dialogue. But it resists, and will continue to resist, because it is sovereign. To negotiate does not mean to kneel.

As repeatedly stated by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatullah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, Iran does not build its foreign policy under threat, nor does it accept agreements imposed in the shadow of aircraft carriers.

Iranian diplomacy walks side by side with deterrence because recent history has shown, brutally, that unilateral concessions to imperialism do not produce peace, only new aggressions.

What is unfolding in Geneva, therefore, is not a technical debate about centrifuges or enrichment percentages. It is a chapter in the structural crisis of American imperial power, which can no longer impose its will without resorting to brute force and blackmail.

It is also a desperate attempt to preserve the regional supremacy of “Israel”, now shaken by the resistance of the peoples, and by the military and political failure of the Zionist project.

Ultimately, this is a historical choice: sovereignty or submission. The United States acts as the diplomatic arm of the Zionist regime, attempting to impose on Iran what it never demands of “Israel”: limits, inspections and obedience. Iran negotiates because it is responsible. But it resists because it is sovereign.

February 23, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Iran in the face of the armed diplomacy of imperialism

Iran to US: Sanctions and war failed; try diplomacy and respect

Press TV – February 23, 2026

A top Iranian diplomat says the time is ripe for the United States to abandon its “fruitless” sanctions and failed policy of war against Iran, urging genuine respect for diplomacy as the only viable path forward.

“Iran’s enemies may start a war, but they will not be able to determine the end,” Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs Kazem Gharibabadi said in an address to the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland, on Monday.

“You have tried sanctions and war in relation to Iran and got nowhere. Now it is time to experience diplomacy and respect,” he said.

He said Iranians do not seek aggression against other countries but will firmly stand against any military or political conspiracy against the Islamic Republic and will defend their homeland.

Gharibabadi said the consequences of war will not be limited only to the parties to the conflict, “but will engulf the region.”

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened military action against Iran since early January, following his public support for foreign-linked riots.

Trump has since ordered a significant military buildup in regional waters near Iran and warned of strikes if Tehran does not accept a deal on US terms.

Iranian officials have reiterated their readiness for a fair agreement on the country’s nuclear program but warned that even a limited attack would trigger a decisive response.

Elsewhere in his address, Gharibabadi said the so-called advocates of human rights supported the United States and the Israeli regime during the 12-day war against Iran in June 2025, which killed more than 1,060 Iranians and injured some 6,000 others.

“They did not even allow the UN Security Council and the Human Rights Council to condemn the aggression.”

Gharibabadi said Iran’s enemies, who suffered a severe defeat in the June war, attempted to set the stage for another military offensive by inciting unrest in the country and turning peaceful economic protests into deadly riots.

The Iranian official condemned the terrorists for committing Daesh-style crimes that resulted in the martyrdom of 2,427 civilians.

Gharibabadi said those who place the least value on human dignity are exploiting human rights as a tool to serve their own interests.

The Iranian deputy foreign minister said the main instigators of the January unrest, notably the United States and Israel, must be held accountable for crimes against humanity.

February 23, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Iran to US: Sanctions and war failed; try diplomacy and respect

Your Enslavement Begins in Gaza: The ‘Board of Peace’

Propaganda & Co. | February 22, 2026

Jared Kushner presents the dystopian future being built for us all with his Board of Peace Master Plan for Gaza.

Follow us on X: https://x.com/propandco

February 23, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Video | , , , | Comments Off on Your Enslavement Begins in Gaza: The ‘Board of Peace’

What is Zionism? And what is anti-Zionism?

By David Miller | Tracking Power | January 25, 2026

I am asked to give definitional answers to this question quite often. So, here, for the record are the key extracts from my witness statement written in August 2023 (some weeks before the launch of Al Aqsa Flood by the Palestinian Resistance ion 7 October of that year.

Glancing over the statement at this distance I am struck by how long and detailed it is – 97 pages – and how, even then I was naive about malevolence of Zionism. If you look below you will see that I refer to Zionism as being inherently genocidal. This was not a popular view then, but it has certainly been more than amply borne out by the events since.

I should note that it was on the basis of my statement and my testimony under cross examination that the Tribunal determined that my anti-Zionist views were worthy of respect in a democratic society which is the legal test for philosophical beliefs to be protected under the Equality Act 2010. The definition of Zionism I have used is thus of greater import than just my own views and beliefs it has been accepted by the court as satisfying the five key elements of the so-called ‘Grainger’ test of which being worthy of respect is the fifth.

For a belief to be protected under Section 10 of the Equality Act, it must:

  1. Be genuinely held: It cannot be a fictitious or insincere claim.
  2. Be a belief, not an opinion: It must be more than a viewpoint based on the “present state of information available”.
  3. Relate to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behavior: It must concern significant matters rather than trivial or minor ones.
  4. Attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion, and importance: The belief must be intelligible and internally consistent.
  5. Be worthy of respect in a democratic society: This has three components

    a. The belief must not be akin to Nazism or totalitarianism. It does not have to be a popular or mainstream belief; even beliefs that are shocking or offensive to others may still be worthy of respect. The belief must be consistent with the principles of a pluralist society.

    b. Not incompatible with human dignity: It must not dehumanize or degrade others.

    c. Not in conflict with the fundamental rights of others: The belief must not seek to destroy the basic freedoms and rights of other individuals.

Here are some key excerpts from my statement including, first of all, a declaration of my anti-racism and then a very short and neutral definition of Zionism, and why I oppose it, which I have italicised. (The statement was in the form of numbered paragraphs which I reproduce here)

_________________________________________________________________

PHILOSOPHICAL BELIEFS

7. I believe it self-evident that racism, imperialism and colonialism are offensive to human dignity and that each of those interconnected phenomena should be opposed. Human beings are all equal and are of equal value. The arrogance and supremacism of racism and racist systems and practices – which assert that it is acceptable for one group of people to dominate others on racial or ethnic lines – can in my view never be tolerated.

8. I believe that Zionism, an ideology that asserts that a state for Jewish people ought to be established and maintained in the territory that formerly comprised the British Mandate of Palestine, is inherently racist, imperialist, and colonial. I consider Zionism to be offensive to human dignity on that basis, and I therefore oppose it.

9. These beliefs, and the work (academic and political) which I have done in consequence of them, are at the heart of the case before the Tribunal. It is because I believe the things I do about Zionism, and because I have been prepared to say them out loud and without apology, that I have lost my job. It is therefore important that I explain in some detail why I believe the things that I do about Zionism, and to be more precise as to what Zionism is, and what I believe about it.

…

24. By the late 1990s, my beliefs in relation to Zionism were fully formed. I have at all times since that date believed Zionism to be a settler-colonial and ethno-nationalist movement that seeks to assert Jewish hegemony and political control over the land of historic Palestine.

…

31. I believe Zionism to be a form of racism because it necessarily calls for the displacement and disenfranchisement of non-Jews in favour of Jews, and it is therefore ideologically bound to lead to the practices of apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and genocide in pursuit of territorial control and expansion. This is not just a matter of historic observation: my belief concerns the nature of Zionism itself. Nor is it of only historic interest. Zionism remains, today, a colonial project which necessitates the oppression of the Palestinian population that remain within the territory that formerly comprised the mandate of Palestine (that is, modern-day Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories in the West Bank and Gaza Strip).

32. Crucially, Zionism requires not only the oppression of Palestinians, but also coercion of non-Palestinians who oppose the racist practices of the State of Israel. Zionism has implications that go beyond the territory of Palestine. A central facet of my research has been the identification of a transnational Zionist movement as a key supporting element of the continued ethnic cleansing in Palestine. This movement, and its allied constellation of organisations, seeks to pressure, censor and suppress critics of Israel, which is evident in my case and many others.

33. For example, Israel’s Law of Return, which was passed by the Knesset in 1950, allows Jews from outside of Israel, who have no material or ancestral ties to historic Palestine, to migrate to the State of Israel, at the expense of indigenous Palestinians who were expelled from their homes in the war of 1948 (or since) who are not permitted to return (and whose return was, in fact, prohibited by law in 1952). All of this flows directly from the logic of Zionism.

…

36. Anti-Zionism stands as the antithesis of the racist Zionist movement, calling for an end to the practises of apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and genocide against the Palestinian people, and calling for the liberation and decolonisation of Palestine. As someone who is fervently opposed to racism and colonialism, it is only natural for me to believe in anti-Zionism. Indeed, it is my strong belief in the repudiation of the racist values that Zionism exists to promote that make anti-Zionism an irrevocable part of my personal worldview, identity, and belief system.

…

39. … Zionism is, as I have described, a belief that a Jewish ethno-state should be established in historic Palestine: a land that has at all times since Zionism’s inception had a very substantial non-Jewish population (indeed, when Israel was created in 1948, the non-Jewish population of Palestine was the overwhelming majority of historic Palestine). Zionism is inherently and necessarily racist for that reason, and it is inherently and necessarily settler-colonial in its nature. The racist and colonial logic that sits at the very heart of Zionism necessitates the racist practices that have had, and continue to have, severe consequences for indigenous Palestinians, beginning with the forced expulsion of the majority of the Palestinian population from their homeland in 1948.

40. The idea of a non-racist Zionism is, however, hypothetical: it is outside the realm of actual history and at odds with existing Zionist ideology. Herzl said openly in The Jewish State that the state he wished to conceive was for European colonists and must be created somewhere that is comfortable for their sensibilities rather than a wild expanse of land. He suggested that were a patch of suitable land to be found, for example, “natives” might be put to work draining swamps and killing snakes on behalf of these European colonists with promises of future employment in a land to which they would later be deported.

41. What is at the heart of my anti-Zionist beliefs is an objection to – at least since the coming into prominence of Theodor Herzl’s views – Zionism as an inherently racist movement because of its ideological and practical commitment to settler-colonialism. This necessitates racist practices that have had, and continue to have, severe consequences for indigenous Palestinians.

…

47. There is nothing racist or “anti-Semitic” about anti-Zionism, and the Israeli-state-directed efforts to vilify anti-Zionism as a form of anti-Jewish hatred should be rejected. It is precisely because Zionism – on its own terms, as expressed through its chief ideologues and leaders – is a racist and settler-colonial movement, that so much effort is invested in defending Zionism and even rebranding it as so-called “Jewish self-determination”.

48. To be an anti-Zionist is, in my view, a moral and political duty as an anti-racist, and it has no relation to the “denial” of anyone’s “rights” or “self-determination”. On the other hand, it is Zionism that denies indigenous Palestinians their right to self-determination, among many other of their human rights.

___________________________________________________________________

I await the judgement in the appeal to my victory at the Employment Tribunal. The University of Bristol appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) and there was a hearing in mid-November last year.

Here is the statement on it from my law firm Rahman Lowe. The judgement is supposed to appear within three months. However, the Judge, Lord Fairley, who is the President of the EAT, said that while he hoped to have the judgement ready within three months, he could not guarantee it. So, we wait.

February 22, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Comments Off on What is Zionism? And what is anti-Zionism?

Why the US-Israeli alliance will lose against Iran

By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | February 21, 2026

While it is impossible to predict precisely what the war on the Islamic Republic of Iran and its regional allies will result in, the winnability of the regional conflict is clear. The only thing driving this attack is sheer Israeli arrogance, as there is no conceivable situation where all out regional war delivers anything short of uncontrollable chaos.

Why is an all out regional war unwinnable? Although there are various reasons as to why this is the case, it suffices to say that the US and Israelis have no way of controlling its outcomes, in addition to this, they simply do not possess the military industrial capacity to wage such a war for a long period of time.

Now, when this argument is made, it is not done from an idealistic point of view. Therefore, it is important to preface this piece on the fact that there is a clear Israeli-US superiority in terms of technology and the kinds of weapons they possess. Nobody disputes this. There is also clear superiority in the field of their intelligence agencies.

So, let us first assume that the United States and the Zionist entity manage to score all of their desired tactical victories. Working on this assumption will then definitively prove the injudicious nature of the endeavour.

Therefore, under the best case scenario for the Zionist coalition, perhaps they succeed in conducting another decapitation strike on the Iranian military leadership, manage to penetrate and destroy some missile bases, nuclear facilities, while gutting the Islamic Republic’s air defences. These are very likely goals that they will seek to achieve.

Let’s also work under the assumption that they manage to put Tehran on the backfoot for at least a week, due to the intensity of their air campaign, making it difficult for the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) to fire large bursts of ballistic missiles at a single time. Then, after achieving air dominance, strikes on essential infrastructure begin, including cultural sites, government buildings, the media, but also the likes of oil facilities, agricultural areas and water systems.

On top of all of this, assume hybrid warfare tactics will be ongoing. Militant groups, especially those focused along the Iranian periphery, will start major offensive operations, working in conjunction with foreign intelligence agents and operatives on the ground, similar to what we witnessed during the 12-day War in June of 2025.

Note that the much debated potential goal of assassinating Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei is not included above. Although many have speculated that the strategy could very well hindge upon this, it guarantees a war with no predictable end, no escalation ladder and will likely trigger calls for global Jihad.

An inevitable US-Israeli defeat

Giving the Zionist coalition the best possible conditions and achievements as a result of their opening offensive, this strategy will quickly begin to run into major issues.

As we saw last June, decapitation strikes against the Iranian leadership do not work at crippling the government and its military, they are simply replaced by another line of leadership, who implement a whole series of pre-planned counter attack strategies.

The Israelis wrongfully believed that their success during the initial attack on Iran last year was going to yield major results, even attempting to utilise their asset in the United States, the son of the deposed Iranian dictator, to call for a revolt. Not only did no such action take place, as Iranians outside of the diaspora do not support this clear Zionist puppet, but the very opposite occurred as the population rallied behind the flag.

Within 15 hours, the Iranians not only managed to get their air defences back online, but captured the initiative and began launching huge volleys of ballistic missiles into the heart of Tel Aviv. As the conflict evolved, a few important developments occurred: the Israeli air defences began to buckle – with the draining of anti-air munitions – while their agents on the ground carried out most of the attacks, something that is key to note.

While it is clear that the US will bring in greater firepower than the Israelis can muster, an air force is still run by human operators who get tired and operate equipment that needs to be serviced. Iran will very easily be able to launch drones waves constantly at US and Zionist positions, and even if their ability to launch large salvos of missiles is constrained during the first week of the conflict, eventually the opportunity will present itself.

If the Iranian State has not crumbled and civil war has not erupted within this time, then the US and Israelis will then be subjected to wave after wave of counterattacks. Inevitably, this means that airbases will be struck, equipment will be lost, and with fewer assets, this means less ability to keep up the pace of their offensive.

Bear in mind that warhawks employed by Washington and Tel Aviv based pro-war think tanks, who claim that the Iranian State is crumbling at least once a year, are far detached from reality. Take the latest round of foreign backed riots for example, the Western corporate media invented an alternate reality in order to sell the idea that Iran was falling, yet the entire ordeal was more or less over in two days.

It is clear to any learned observer, that without a significant ground element, toppling the Iranian government is impossible. Which then leads to the obvious next question: What if major militant offensives occur inside Iranian territory?

Answering this in depth would take time and a more nimble military mind. Yet, again assuming some level of success on the behalf of separatist militias and al-Qaeda linked Takfiri groups, even if they were to seize territory, Iran is a massive country that allows for mistakes. None of these groups compare and can stand up to the Iranian army and IRGC, nor do they likely possess any considerable advanced capabilities.

What this means is that even if they manage to see some level of initial success, the much larger, well trained, motivated and well equipped Iranian armed forces will eventually crush these insurgents. The only real threat is some kind of mass civilian mobilisation that will deal a blow to the Iranian economy, for which there is no indication this will happen, especially as the nation is suffering through a bloody war of aggression against it.

Then come the attacks on missile bases and nuclear sites. Even if some of these attacks are successful, they won’t destroy all of Iran’s capabilities, and as we saw in June of last year, the US attacks on the nuclear facilities don’t appear to have stopped the nuclear program. If it were that easy to simply take out Iran’s capabilities, it would have been done long ago. The Israelis tried last year and failed. If anything, on the nuclear issue, such a war could end up leading to Tehran actually reversing course on its stance against developing the bomb.

Even with full US-Israeli air superiority, the remaining air defences of Iran will at some point come back online, but even in the event that 100% of their anti-air capabilities are gone, their power is in their offensive, not defensive capabilities.

Once this initial period of assumed US-Israeli offensive dominance is over, Iran can easily block the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf, inflict large casualty events on US and Israeli targets, while taking out assets. It is impossible to predict which strikes will be the most effective, however, it is clear that everything will become a target. So expect a big hit on the global oil market, resulting in an economic crisis.

If Iran simply keeps up a pace of fire against the Israelis, the likes of which we saw during the 12-day War, then they only have a matter of weeks before their air defences also become useless.

This is all without factoring in Iran’s various allies, which may enter at any level of intensity at any point in this conflict. There’s Ansar Allah, which has the capability of striking the Israelis, but also assets throughout the Persian Gulf. If Hezbollah manages to wage a considerable ground war, the Israelis have proven in the past to be the weakest in this arena.

The Iraqi Popular Mobilisation Units (PMU/PMF, Hashd al-Shaabi) are around 250,000 men strong, alongside Saraya Awliya al-Dam, who can use their own capabilities to not only target the US, but the Israelis also. So far, since October 7, 2023, we have not seen a true demonstration of their power. Another factor which is not often discussed, but is also very important, is the role of the Palestinian resistance, who are more likely to wait for the right opportunity, but can also pose a major ground challenge to the Israelis from Gaza.

None of this considers the other elements that could come into play, such as the roles played by regional nations, armed groups we may not have previously heard of, the likes of the Fatemiyoun of Afghanistan and Zainabiyoun of Pakistan, or the general populations throughout the region and what we could see in the event that chaos erupts. Governments could be overthrown, the civilian populations of Jordan and Egypt could become active and out of control. There is also the possibility that some groups in Syria could seize the opportunity to attack the Israelis.

In the event that such a war occurs, the longer it goes on, the more chaotic and unpredictable it becomes. A situation will be totally out of the US’s control, especially as the only means of combating this regional explosion is through the air. As we witnessed with the US campaign against Yemen, airstrikes alone change very little. Even in Gaza, the armed resistance groups fought for over 2 years with no supply chain, and by the admissions of the US and Israelis, their fighting force is still roughly the same size.

If things don’t go their way very quickly, then the Zionist coalition is going to get battered, and not even nuclear weapons will get them out of it. Therefore, [if] the US and Israelis, as long as we again grant them another assumption, that they are somewhat sane, choose to go to war, they will have to try and establish an escalation ladder, devising a real exit strategy.

The question becomes whether the Iranians and their allies allow them to exit the fight. An all out war will be bloody, it will claim an enormous amount of civilian lives, and it will also inflict considerable damage on civilian infrastructure. Truly, the effects of such a war are not desired by anyone in the region, yet the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance have long prepared their capabilities in order to combat what appears to have been inevitable.

Another thing to be mentioned here is that the US government, under the Trump administration, is totally captured by the Zionist entity. For all the reasons noted above, no previous administrations have dared escalate to this extent. If it were easy to launch a regime change operation against Iran, it would have been carried out many years ago.

However, a Zionist stooge is occupying the White House, a narcissistic man whose already low cognitive abilities are clearly declining. He is a President that an FBI report concluded had been compromised by the Mossad, but even if that report isn’t to be taken seriously, his whole campaign was bankrolled by Zionist donors, and his administration is an embarrassing collection of Zionist war hawks. If there was ever any US administration that was foolish enough to launch such a war, it is that of Donald Trump.

February 21, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Why the US-Israeli alliance will lose against Iran

US envoy Huckabee claims Israel has ‘biblical right’ to conquer all West Asia

The Cradle | February 21, 2026

During a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee claimed Israel has a biblical right to take over “all” of West Asia.

“It would be fine if they took it all,” Huckabee said when asked whether a passage from the Book of Genesis can be interpreted as granting Israel the right to steal all the land between the Nile River in Egypt and the Euphrates in Syria.

Huckabee was appointed by President Donald Trump as Ambassador to Israel in 2025. He is a former Arkansas governor and Southern Baptist minister.

Carlson and Huckabee discussed interpretations of Old Testament (Torah) scripture used by Christian Zionists to justify Israel’s killing and expulsion of native Christians and Muslims from the Holy Land.

Carlson asked Huckabee about a biblical verse in which God promises Abraham that his descendants will receive land “from the wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates – the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites.”

“Israel is a land that God gave, through Abraham, to a people that he chose. It was a people, a place, and a purpose,” Huckabee claimed.

Carlson responded, saying this would include “like, basically the entire Middle East.”

“The Levant … Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon – it’d also be big parts of Saudi Arabia and Iraq,” Carlson said.

“I’m not sure it would go that far, but it would be a big piece of land,” Huckabee answered.

Since 7 October 2023, Israel has launched wars to occupy land in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria, including to establish settlements for Israeli Jews. Israel has also escalated its efforts to steal and annex Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank.

Israel has killed at least 72,000 Palestinians during its effort to conquer Gaza, the majority of whom were women and children. Tens, if not hundreds, of thousands more may die from the indirect effects of Israel’s destruction of the strip.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sought to justify the eradication of Palestinians in Gaza at the start of the war, calling them “Amalek,” a reference to the Biblical account of a people exterminated by ancient Israelites.

Israeli Finance Minister and settler leader, Bezalel Smotrich, has stated that Israel would expand “little by little” and eventually encompass all Palestinian territories as well as Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia.

“It is written that the future of Jerusalem is to expand to Damascus,” he said, referencing the “Greater Israel” ideology.

Carlson also pressed Huckabee about Israel’s role in pushing the US to go to war against Iraq in 2003, which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of US soldiers.

“How many Americans put their boots on the ground for Israel?” the US ambassador asked.

“Everybody who served in Iraq,” Carlson responded, adding that the intelligence falsely claiming that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction had come from Israel.

As Gary Vogler has detailed, neoconservatives inside the government of George W. Bush worked secretly with the Israeli lobby and government to launch the invasion of Iraq to satisfy Israel’s energy needs.

Since the start of the genocide in Gaza, members of Trump’s so-called “America First” political movement have become increasingly critical of Israel’s dominant influence in the US government, in particular at the expense of US citizens.

President Trump has currently amassed an “armada” of US forces in West Asia to prepare for a possible attack on Iran, long a key priority for Israel and Netanyahu, which would lead to the deaths of additional US citizens for Israel’s sake.

February 21, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on US envoy Huckabee claims Israel has ‘biblical right’ to conquer all West Asia

Macron: French citizens fighting for Israel cannot be labeled ‘genociders’

Press TV – February 18, 2026

President Emmanuel Macron has insisted that French citizens fighting for Israel cannot be labeled “genociders,” as French judges pursue legal action against nationals also holding Israeli passports who are accused of aiding Israel’s aggression on Gaza.

Speaking to Radio J, Macron said that the French who also hold Israeli passports are “children of France” who must never be accused of genocide.

“We cannot accept, we must never accept that any of our children, that any French person, be accused of being genocidal,” he stressed, adding, “That is impossible, and it represents a reversal of values to which we must not yield.”

Amid mounting legal scrutiny, Macron further claimed that “some people who sometimes played an active role in the anti-racist struggle, people who defended causes, have used, distorted what is happening internationally to try to dehumanize, essentialize” fellow French citizens who also hold Israeli passports.

On February 3, French authorities issued warrants requiring two French women who also hold Israeli passports to appear before an investigating magistrate for “complicity in genocide” over allegations they attempted to block humanitarian aid from entering the besieged Gaza Strip during Israel’s ongoing genocidal aggression.

The warrants, however, do not order their arrest.

The women, born in France and now living in the occupied Palestinian territories, are Nili Kupfer-Naouri, head of the group “Israel Is Forever”, and Rachel Touitou, an activist linked to Tsav 9, which is a far-right group formed by the families of Israeli settlers who were taken captive in Gaza.

Complaints were filed by the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, Al-Haq and Al-Mezan over direct obstructing of life-saving aid between 2023 and 2025.

Back in June 2024, the US Department of State designated Tsav 9 a “violent extremist Israeli group that has been blocking, harassing and damaging convoys carrying lifesaving humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians in Gaza.”

Additional legal action has targeted two French soldiers fighting for Israel, Sasha A and Gabriel B H, who are accused in a July NGO complaint of “war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide” for killing dozens of unarmed Palestinian civilians outside combat zones in 2023 and 2024, according to Le Monde.

Although Israeli law exempts nationals that hold other passports and live abroad from mandatory service, Israeli military data indicates that more than 6,100 French nationals voluntarily served in the army during the genocide.

Meanwhile, Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur for occupied Palestinian territory, rebuked Macron, writing, “We do not label someone a criminal or a genocidaire based on their nationality: it is up to the courts to decide.”

She also stressed that anyone serving in a military suspected of crimes may face investigation, prosecution and conviction if evidence warrants.

February 19, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , | Comments Off on Macron: French citizens fighting for Israel cannot be labeled ‘genociders’

US eyes Gaza security force drawn from armed gangs

Al Mayadeen | February 19, 2026

The United States is advancing plans to establish a new Gaza security force, potentially staffed by members of armed clans with documented links to organized crime, according to multiple Western officials who spoke with The Telegraph.

The proposal, promoted by the Trump administration, envisions forming a Gaza police force drawn in part from existing anti-Resistance militias operating in the Strip. The initiative is understood to have the backing of “Israel”, which has armed and supported some of these groups since the war on Gaza began on October 7, 2023.

The proposal has triggered “pushback” from senior American commanders, who have raised concerns over the reliability of such security partners.

Internal US, Western concerns

The armed clans to be involved, largely structured along extended family lines, have longstanding ties to organized crime networks. Civilians in Gaza are reported to view them with deep mistrust.

In recent months, members of these groups have been accused of looting humanitarian aid trucks, committing murders, and carrying out kidnappings. At least two major clan factions include individuals who have either fought alongside ISIS or declared allegiance to the organization.

Senior US military officials have expressed reservations about the broader peace framework. One source told The Telegraph that Trump’s “peace process” “will not work without reliable security partners.”

Britain, France, and other countries involved in discussions on post-war Gaza governance have also voiced concern.

Ceasefire context, governance deadlock

Four months after the ceasefire, efforts to establish an imposed Gaza police force appear to have stalled. Disagreements persist over the composition, oversight, and funding of the proposed Gaza security force, while Hamas stated that disarmament is out of the question.

Trump is scheduled to host the inaugural meeting of his “Board of Peace” in Washington, with delegations from more than 20 countries expected to attend. Organizers aim to secure funding pledges for reconstruction and commitments of personnel for a United Nations-mandated International Stabilization Force (ISF).

The ISF is expected to operate above the proposed Gaza security force and coordinate with the IOF outside the Strip.

Trump said on Sunday that $5 billion had already been pledged for reconstruction and that “thousands” of personnel had been committed to the ISF and local policing structures.

Disputes over clan recruitment

The plan to recruit members of armed clans reportedly emerged before Christmas and prompted disagreements at the multinational Civil-Military Coordination Centre in southern “Israel”.

One Western source told The Telegraph, “There was significant pushback along the lines of ‘this is ridiculous – they’re not only criminal gangs, but they’re sponsored by Israel’.”

Which specific clans US and Israeli officials proposed recruiting from remains unclear. The White House did not deny that the approach had been discussed.

Role of Kushner and strategic planning

Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, is described by officials as central to advancing the administration’s 20-point “peace initiative”.

He has been leading efforts to establish temporary “safe” communities in parts of Gaza under IOF control, aimed at encouraging Palestinians to relocate from Hamas-controlled areas if the group refuses to disarm.

The first such community is under construction on the site of the former city of Rafah, in an area dominated by the “Popular Forces” gang, a group backed by “Israel” and accused of drug smuggling and aid looting.

Its former leader, Yasser Abu Shabab was killed in December.

Kushner has worked closely with Aryeh Lightstone, chief executive of the Abraham Accords Institute, in shaping discussions over Gaza’s future. Informal meetings reportedly held in Tel Aviv with international investors have drawn criticism from Western officials, who have questioned what they describe as an “ideological” approach.

One official told The Telegraph, “There is a feeling that Kushner, Lightstone et al believe that if they can just give Palestinians the chance to flee Hamas, then they will take it.”

The source added, “But the reality on the ground is that while lots of Gazans don’t like Hamas, they really don’t like or trust the clans. They see them as criminals.”

“There is also a concern that the more ideological members of the administration will at some point turn around and say ‘we’ve given you the opportunity to leave Hamas; if you’re still there, you must be a sympathiser’. Then Israel gets the green light to restart the war,” they continued.

February 19, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Comments Off on US eyes Gaza security force drawn from armed gangs

The Only Motive Behind The ‘Imminent’ U.S. War With Iran Is The Zionist Lobby

The Dissident | February 19, 2026

Barak Ravid in Axios reports that , “The Trump administration is closer to a major war in the Middle East than most Americans realize. It could begin very soon” in reference to Iran.

According to a source in the Trump administration, “it would likely be a joint U.S.-Israeli campaign that’s much broader in scope — and more existential for the regime — than the Israeli-led 12-day war last June.”

The report adds, “Trump’s armada has grown to include two aircraft carriers, a dozen warships, hundreds of fighter jets and multiple air defense systems. Some of that firepower is still on its way” adding, “The Israeli government — which is pushing for a maximalist scenario targeting regime change as well as Iran’s nuclear and missile programs — is preparing for a scenario of war within days, according to two Israeli officials.”

If this report is accurate, and the Trump administration actually is about to carry out a regime change war in Iran, there is only one driving motive behind it: the Zionist lobby’s control over Trump and broader U.S. foreign policy.

A Zionist Regime Change Campaign

During the June U.S./Israeli “12 day war”, Trump claimed it was about stopping Iran from obtaining Nuclear weapon, but Trump’s own Director of National Intelligence report from March found no evidence Iran was building a Nuclear weapon, writing, “We continue to assess Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and that Khamenei has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003”.

The real motive behind the Israeli pushed war, was regime change in Iran.

An inside source in the Trump administration told journalists Max Blumenthal and Anya Parampil that Israeli intelligence officials who were pushing for U.S. involvement in the war “have demonstrated a single-minded focus on regime change, clamoring for authorization to assassinate Iran’s leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The Israeli officials have emphasized that the moment to take out Khamenei is now.”

The Times of Israel later reported on leaked transcripts of Israeli officials during the June bombing, which showed that the real motive was to “find an opportunity to assassinate Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and destabilize Tehran’s regime”.

One senior Israeli intelligence official was quoted as saying that “for years” there was an Israeli “intelligence operation to disrupt enemy activities, including activity to destabilize the regime”.

The Times of Israel noted, “While not initially publicly stated as a goal of the war, the transcripts make it clear that Israel was also looking to destabilize the regime and even to kill Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei” adding, “Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said that Israel needed to ‘keep searching for the leader,’ referring to Khamenei” and “Netanyahu also said entire Iranian neighborhoods and districts should be evacuated, and that Israel should work on destabilizing the Islamic regime.”

Israel’s real motive behind the bombing, being regime change, is also underscored by the fact- uncovered by the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab – that during the bombing, social media bots backed by Israeli intelligence ran a propaganda campaign “promoting regime change in Iran”. During the bombing, the Israeli bot network “published a series of posts highlighting the alleged economic upheaval in Iran after the first few rounds of bombings. The network told followers to head to ATMs to withdraw money, emphasized that the Islamic Republic was ‘stealing our money to escape with its officials,’ and urged followers to rise up against the regime,” and “urged followers to get on their balconies at 8 p.m. each evening and shout ‘Death to Khamenei’”.

In a later interview with the Daily Caller, Trump boasted that he took part in the bombing at the behest of Israel, boasting, “Israel is amazing, because, you know, I have good support from Israel. I have. Look, nobody has done more for Israel than I have, including the recent attacks with Iran”.

Following the “12-day war,” the U.S. and Israel exploited protests in Iran in an attempt to destabilize the Iranian government before the apparent upcoming regime change war.

After protests started in Iran due to citizens’ economic concerns, Trump’s Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent repeatedly boasted that the protests were the intended effect of U.S. sanctions on Iran designed to crash the Iranian economy, saying:

What we can do at treasury, and what we have done, is created a dollar shortage in the country, at a speech at the Economic club in New York in March I outlined the strategy, it came to a swift -and I would say grand- culmination in December when one of the largest banks in Iran went under, there was a run in the bank, the central bank had to print money, the Iranian currency went into free fall, inflation exploded and hence we have seen the Iranian people out on the street

and

If you look at a speech I gave at the economic club of New York last March, I said that I believe the Iranian currency was on the verge of collapse, that if I were an Iranain citizen, I would take my money out.

President Trump ordered treasury and our OFAC division, (Office of Foreign Asset Control) to put maximum pressure on Iran, and it’s worked because in December, their economy collapsed, we saw a major bank go under, the central bank has started to print money, there is a dollar shortage, they are not able to get imports and this is why the people took to the streets.

This is economic statecraft, no shots fired, and things are moving in a very positive way here

(Emphasis: Mine)

Similarly, the former Democratic Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, boasted in response to the question, “Is there a way to bring about the (Iranian) regime falling without using American force?” : “Use economic force, there are ways that you can cripple their economy and some of that has been in the works. It’s more about just weaken their economy and it weakens the support they do have, because they do have support in the rural areas in the more conservative Imams and the rest of that, but we have to make them feel the pain as well”.

Following the protests sparked by economic sanctions on Iran, the Mossad and CIA infiltrated the protests to turn them into a pro-regime change direction.

A Mossad-connected social media account wrote in Persian, to Iranian protestors, “Come out to the streets together. The time has come. We are with you. Not only remotely and verbally. We are also with you in the field,” while former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo wrote , “Happy New Year to every Iranian in the streets. Also to every Mossad agent walking beside them.”

Israel’s Channel 14 similarly reported that, “foreign actors are arming the protesters in Iran with live firearms, which is the reason for the hundreds of regime personnel killed” while Israel’s Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu said , “When we attacked in Iran during ‘Rising Lion’ we were on its soil and knew how to lay the groundwork for a strike. I can assure you that we have some of our people operating there right now”.

Afterwards, the mainstream media ran a propaganda campaign claiming that Iran had killed tens of thousands of Iranian protestors, citing anonymous sources and explicitly pro-war and pro-regime change sources, including the German-Iranian eye surgeon Amir Parasta – a lobbyist for the Israeli puppet Reza Pahlavi – and Iran International, an outlet which journalist Barak Ravid said , “the Mossad is using… quite regularly for its information war”.

Given the likelihood of a U.S./Israeli regime change war happening, the propaganda campaign can be seen in the context of previous “atrocity propaganda” campaigns used to justify war such as the false claims that Saddam Hussein was throwing babies out of incubators in Kuwait used to justify the first Iraq war, false claims that Muammar Gaddafi was killing civilians in Libya used to justify the 2011 regime change war, and false claims that Hamas committed mas rape and beheaded babies on October 7th used to justify the genocide in Gaza.

Trump Controlled By The Zionist Lobby

If Trump launches a regime change war in Iran, his main motivating factor is the Zionist lobby’s influence over him.

While Trump began diplomatic talks with Iran in Oman, Benjamin Netanyahu flew to Washington to pressure Trump to make unrealistic demands, including demanding Iran give up its ballistic missiles, in order to sabotage diplomacy and force a U.S. war on Iran.

As journalist Glenn Greenwald noted , “Israel is demanding that the U.S. go to war with Iran even if Tehran satisfies Trump’s demands on its nuclear program. Netanyahu is insisting that Trump also require Iran to give up its ballistic missiles before any deal can be signed: something no country would ever do.”

Given Trump’s record, it is highly likely that he will follow the demands of the Zionist lobby and go to war with Iran on behalf of Israel.

Trump has repeatedly boasted that the Zionist lobby- more specifically, pro-Israel mega donor Miriam Adelson – controls his Middle East policy.

Trump boasted during his speech to the Israeli Knesset that Miriam Adelson -and during his first term her late husband Sheldon- were “responsible for so much” of his Middle East policy, adding, “I actually asked her (Miriam Adelson) once, so Miriam, I know you love Israel, what do you love more, the United States or Israel? She refused to answer, which might mean Israel.”

Trump boasted that at the behest of the Adelsons, he “terminated the disastrous Iran nuclear deal”, “authorized the spending of billions of dollars which went to Israel’s defense” and “officially recognized the capital of Israel and moved the American Embassy to Jerusalem”.

Trump later boasted that , “Miriam (Adelson) gave my campaign $250 million” adding that during his first term in office, “her husband Sheldon was an amazing guy, he’d come up to the office, and there was nobody more aggressive than Sheldon … he would always say ten minutes it turned out to be an hour and a half and what he did was he fought for Israel, it’s all he really fought for”.

Along with Trump’s self-admitted capture by the Zionist lobby, there is even the possibility – given Trump’s connection to Jeffrey Epstein and the growing body of evidence that Epstein was an Israeli intelligence asset – that Israel will use sexual blackmail to get its way on Iran.

This was argued by former Israeli intelligence official Ari Ben-Menashe who said , “The Israeli’s are holding some of the sensitive stuff (in the Epstein files) and they might let it out when they feel threatened by Trump” adding, “I believe the Israelis have quite a bit of information that they can release that the Department of Justice doesn’t want to release” and adding that Israel is “very much against the talks with the U.S. and Iran”.

The Final Phase Of The ‘Clean Break’

An Israeli pushed American regime change war in Iran is nothing new, and is in reality the final phase of a long-term Zionist plot to “reshape the Middle East” in Israel’s favour, going back to the Iraq war.

As Columbia University’s Jeffrey Sachs explained:

In 1996, Netanyahu and his American advisors devised a ‘Clean Break’ strategy. They advocated that Israel would not withdraw from the Palestinian lands captured in the 1967 war in exchange for regional peace. Instead, Israel would reshape the Middle East to its liking. Crucially, the strategy envisioned the US as the main force to achieve these aims—waging wars in the region to dismantle governments opposed to Israel’s dominance over Palestine. The US was called upon to fight wars on Israel’s behalf.

The Clean Break strategy was effectively carried out by the US and Israel after 9/11. As NATO Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark revealed, soon after 9/11, the US planned to “attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—starting with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.”

The first of the wars, in early 2003, was to topple the Iraqi government. Plans for further wars were delayed as the US became mired in Iraq. Still, the US supported Sudan’s split in 2005, Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 2006, and Ethiopia’s incursion into Somalia that same year. In 2011, the Obama administration launched CIA operation Timber Sycamore against Syria and, with the UK and France, overthrew Libya’s government through a 2011 bombing campaign. Today, these countries lie in ruins, and many are now embroiled in civil wars.

Netanyahu was a cheerleader of these wars of choice–either in public or behind the scenes–together with his neocon allies in the U.S. Government including Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Victoria Nuland, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, and others.

Sachs documented that war with Iran in the final phase of this plan, noting:

In September 2023, Netanyahu presented at UN General Assembly a map of the ‘New Middle East’ completely erasing a Palestinian state. In September 2024, he elaborated on this plan by showing two maps: one part of the Middle East a “blessing,” and the other–including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran–a curse, as he advocated regime change in the latter countries.

Israel’s war on Iran is the final move in a decades-old strategy. We are witnessing the culmination of decades of extremist Zionist manipulation of US foreign policy.

Lindsay Graham – one of Israel’s closest allies in the U.S. Senate outright admitted that the hope behind a U.S. regime change war in Iran is that it will cripple resistance in the Middle East to Israel and cause Arab States to normalize with Israel without a Palestinian State – paving the way for the “New Middle East” laid out by Netanyahu at the UN in 2023.

Graham boasted referring to regime change in Iran, “If we can pull this off, it would be the biggest change in the Mid East in a thousand years: Hamas, Hezbollah gone, the Houthis gone, the Iranian people an ally not an enemy, the Arab world moving towards Israel without fear, Saudi-Israel normalize, no more October the 7th”.

Graham’s comments mirror Netanyahu’s at the UN weeks before the start of the Gaza genocide.

As journalist Jeremy Scahill reported :

Just two weeks before the October 7 attacks, the Israeli leader delivered a speech at the UN General Assembly in New York, brandishing a map of what he promised could be the “New Middle East.” It depicted a state of Israel that stretched continuously from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. Gaza and the West Bank, as Palestinian lands, were erased.

During that speech, Netanyahu portrayed the full normalization of relations with Saudi Arabia as the linchpin of his vision for this “new” reality, one which would open the door to a “visionary corridor that will stretch across the Arabian Peninsula and Israel. It will connect India to Europe with maritime links, rail links, energy pipelines, fiber-optic cables.”

In 2024, Netanyahu held up another map at the UN portraying Iran and the axis of resistance as a “curse” in the way of this Israeli goal.

It is surely not a coincidence that Israel is hoping to resume the full-scale genocide in Gaza in a few months.

The Times Of Israel reported that , “Israel plans to afford Hamas a 60-day period to disarm, and if it does not, the Israeli military will go back to war in the Gaza Strip, a senior adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday.”

This is an obvious attempt to force the failure of ceasefire negotiations in Gaza to justify resuming the full scale genocide, given the fact, as journalist Jeremy Scahil reported , that, “Hamas will not accede to sweeping demands that the Palestinian resistance unilaterally disarm, nor will it submit to a total demilitarization of the Gaza Strip” adding, “the group is willing to negotiate on disarmament of resistance forces only if it is linked to a long-term ceasefire that restrains Israel and is accompanied by a political process that leads to the establishment of a Palestinian state and armed force capable of defending itself”.

Israel hopes that after a regime change war in Iran, it will be clear to carry out its ethnic cleansing plan in Gaza and the West Bank without opposition – and it wants to get the U.S. to carry out the operation on its behalf.

February 19, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on The Only Motive Behind The ‘Imminent’ U.S. War With Iran Is The Zionist Lobby

Trump eyes 350-acre US military base housing 5,000 troops in Gaza

Al Mayadeen | February 19, 2026

The Trump administration is preparing plans to construct a military base in Gaza capable of housing 5,000 personnel and covering more than 350 acres, according to “Board of Peace” contracting documents reviewed by The Guardian.

The proposed installation is designed to serve as an operational headquarters for a future “International Stabilization Force” (ISF), envisioned as a multinational military contingent made up of pledged troops. The ISF falls under the authority of the newly established “Board of Peace,” which is intended to govern Gaza. The Board is chaired by US President Donald Trump and partially led by his son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Documents reviewed by The Guardian outline a phased construction process for a fortified compound measuring approximately 1,400 meters by 1,100 meters. The base would include 26 trailer-mounted armored watchtowers, a small-arms firing range, protective bunkers, and a warehouse for operational equipment. Barbed wire fencing would surround the entire facility.

The site is planned for a barren stretch of land in southern Gaza, marked by saltbush and white broom shrubs and scattered debris from years of Israeli bombardment. The Guardian has examined video footage of the location.

A source familiar with the planning told The Guardian that a select group of international construction firms experienced in operating in war zones has already visited the area.

‘International Stabilization Force’ and Indonesian involvement

Indonesia has reportedly offered to contribute up to 8,000 troops to the force. The Indonesian president was scheduled to attend the inaugural “Board of Peace” meeting in Washington, D.C., alongside three other Southeast Asian leaders.

The UN Security Council authorized the “Board of Peace” to establish the temporary ISF in Gaza. According to the UN mandate, the force would secure Gaza’s borders, maintain internal peace, protect civilians, and assist in training and supporting “vetted Palestinian police forces.”

However, uncertainty remains regarding the ISF’s rules of engagement in the event of renewed Israeli assaults. It is also unclear whether the force would “play a role in disarming Hamas,” an Israeli precondition for reconstruction efforts in Gaza.

Governance concerns and international skepticism

While more than 20 countries have joined the “Board of Peace,” many governments have declined participation. Although the organization was created with UN approval, its charter appears to grant Trump permanent leadership authority.

Adil Haque, a law professor at Rutgers University, criticized the structure of the body. “The Board of Peace is a kind of legal fiction, nominally with its own international legal personality separate from both the UN and the United States, but in reality it’s just an empty shell for the United States to use as it sees fit,” he stressed.

Observers have raised concerns about the Board’s funding and governance transparency. Several contractors told The Guardian that discussions with US officials frequently occur over Signal rather than official government email channels.

A source familiar with the contracting process said the military base document was issued by the Board of Peace with assistance from US contracting officials.

Infrastructure and security measures

The plans detail a network of reinforced bunkers measuring six meters by four meters and 2.5 meters in height, equipped with advanced ventilation systems for troop protection.

“The Contractor,” the document states, “shall conduct a geophysical survey of the site to identify any subterranean voids, tunnels, or large cavities per phase.” The clause appears to reference what it termed “Hamas’s extensive underground tunnel network in Gaza.”

Another section outlines a “Human Remains Protocol.” “If suspected human remains or cultural artifacts are discovered, all work in the immediate area must cease immediately, the area must be secured, and the Contracting Officer must be notified immediately for direction,” the document says. Gaza’s civil defense agency estimates that around 10,000 Palestinian bodies remain buried beneath the rubble.

Legal and political questions

Ownership of the land designated for the base remains unclear, though much of southern Gaza is currently under Israeli occupation. The UN estimates that at least 1.9 million Palestinians have been forcibly displaced during the war.

Diana Buttu, a Palestinian-Canadian lawyer and former peace negotiator, condemned the project. “Whose permission did they get to build that military base?” she asked, describing it as an act of occupation if undertaken without Palestinian governmental consent.

US Central Command declined to comment, directing inquiries to the “Board of Peace”, as per the report.

A Trump administration official also refused to discuss the contract, stating, “As the President has said, no US boots will be on the ground. We’re not going to discuss leaked documents.”

February 19, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , , , , , | Comments Off on Trump eyes 350-acre US military base housing 5,000 troops in Gaza

Meet The Liberal Zionist And Ukraine War Supporter Advising AOC On Foreign Policy

The Dissident | February 18, 2026

Democratic representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s recent appearence at the Munich Security Conference, which was billed as her showcasing her foreign policy chops gearing up for a possible presidential run, has faced widespread criticism and backlash, not only for her embarrassing mistakes (saying Venezuela was located below the equator, being unable to answer a question about Taiwan and saying the “Trans-Pacific Partnership” when meaning to say the Trans Atlantic Partnership) but for her weak criticism of U.S. foreign policy and repeating of pro-war narratives.

This, however, can be easily explained by the fact that she is being coached by Matt Duss, a longtime foreign policy advisor and a liberal Zionist and staunch supporter of the NATO proxy war in Ukraine.

Ahead of the conference, the New York Times reported :

She has been receiving regular briefings from the Center for International Policy, a left-wing foreign policy think tank in Washington. Matt Duss, a vice president at the group and a former Sanders aide, said he was among those who had tutored her on foreign policy.

“She is someone who is engaged with parts of the world that are often not represented in Munich,” Mr. Duss said.

Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s appearance will undoubtedly ignite speculation that she is burnishing her foreign policy credentials before a White House run. But she is keeping everyone guessing. Unlike other more obviously ambitious Democrats, she has not made winking, presidential-coded trips to early primary states in recent months or written a tell-all memoir.

This better explains why she was so weak of U.S. foreign policy: Duss styles himself a U.S. foreign policy critic but often repeats the narratives of the U.S. foreign policy establishment, and at times, such as on Ukraine, is with it 100 per cent.

Peddling Liberal Zionism

On Israel and the Zionist lobby, Matt Duss is a typical liberal Zionist, offering some criticism of Israel but ultimately supporting Zionism and Zionist narratives.

A 2011 article on Matt Duss in Politico wrote , “Duss says he’s mischaracterized by his critics as anti-Israel. He is quick to note that he sympathizes with Israel, in part from his personal roots in American evangelical Christianity and that if American criticism of Israel should be harsher, it should also be done with the recognition that Israel is a democracy that should be held to high standards. Iran, meanwhile, is ‘abusing their own people, they support terrorism, and they say all sorts of horrible things about the U.S. and Israel,’ he said.”

This liberal Zionism, apparently influenced by a Christian Zionist upbringing, was on full display during the early months of the Israeli genocide in Gaza, where Duss, repeated Israeli propaganda, smeared actual anti-Zionists and even opposed calls for a ceasefire.

After the October 7th Hamas breakout from the Gaza concentration camp, Duss quoted an article, from New York Magazine, writing, “What we actually witnessed was not ‘the Palestinians’ mounting a violent struggle for justice but a far-right theocratic organization committing mass murder in the name of blood-and-soil nationalism” without mentioning any of the history preceding October 7th, including the Israeli blockade on Gaza which former UK prime minister David Cameron admitted turned Gaza into a “a prison camp” and an “open-air prison”, the previous peaceful protests against the blockade in Gaza in 2018, which were met with Israeli slaughter , the Abraham Accords which sought to get Arab States to abandon the Palestinian cause, and Benjamin Netanyahu putting up a map at the UN which “depicted a state of Israel that stretched continuously from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea” where “Gaza and the West Bank, as Palestinian lands, were erased” weeks before October 7th.

In December of 2023, Matt Duss repeated the fabricated claim that Hamas carried out mass rape on October 7th, writing, “Denying the rape and sexual violence that Hamas committed on Oct 7 is disgusting”, repeating a hoax that was used not only to justify the Gaza genocide, but also actual mass rape against Palestinian detainees in Israel’s torture dungeons.

In another article written by Duss in December of 2023, he wrote , “Israel’s methods are not as extreme as Russia’s, and it’s very important to acknowledge that”, ignoring the fact that in November of 2023 , Israel had killed over 10,000 civilians in Gaza while Russia killed 9,806 in Ukraine since the start of the war in 2022.

In a New York Times article, Matt Duss celebrated Israel’s pager attack in Lebanon, which even former CIA director Leon Panetta conceded was “a form of terrorism” writing, “There’s no question that Israel’s decapitation of Hezbollah’s leadership in Lebanon in recent weeks was an impressive tactical feat”.

In November of 2023, Duss even opposed calls for a ceasefire in Gaza by defending Senator Bernie Sander’s comments in opposition to a ceasefire at the time (which were approvingly shared by AIPAC ), saying, “I think what the Senator said there about the challenges of a ceasefire being negotiated with an organisation like Hamas are valid”.

While peddling Zionist talking points, Duss took the time to smear actual anti-Zionists, such as labelling the brilliant Anti-Zionist academic Norman Finkelstein, a Jewish son of holocaust survivors, as an anti-semite.

Referring to the Jewish Zionist billionaires attempting to shut down pro-Palestine protests on college campuses, Finkelstein wrote , “The Jewish billionaire class has declared war on our nation’s universities: Either you support Israel’s genocidal war or we will destroy you” and Duss replied , “We can and must have a conversation about the very real dangers to academic freedom without antisemitic ‘Jewish billionaire class’ nonsense, which both endangers Jews and undermines the struggle for Palestinian liberation.”

Supporting The Ukraine Proxy War

Along with his peddling of Zionist narratives, Duss fully supported NATO and the Biden administration’s proxy war in Ukraine.

In an article for the New Republic in 2022, Duss wrote, “The Biden team clearly did not seek this war (in Ukraine), in fact, they made a strenuous, and very public, diplomatic effort to avert it. Having been unable to do that, they’ve acted with restraint and care not to get drawn into a wider war with Russia while also making clear the stakes of the conflict for the U.S., for Europe, and for the international system.”

In reality, last year, one of Biden’s top advisors for Europe policy, Amanda Sloat, admitted that the Biden administration could have ended the war in Ukraine, and chose not to, saying, “We had some conversation even before the war started, about what if Ukraine comes out and just says to Russia, ‘fine, you know, we won’t go into NATO if that stops the war, if that stops the invasion,’ which at that point it may well have done” and adding, “I guess if you want to do an alternative version of history, one option would have just been for Ukraine to say in January of 2022, ‘fine, you know, we won’t go into NATO, we will stay neutral.’ Ukraine could have made a deal around March/April of 2022 around the Istanbul talks. There is certainly a question, almost three years on now, would that have been better to do before the war started, would that have been better to do in Istanbul talks, it certainly would have prevented the destruction and the loss of life”.

Matt Duss on serval occasions denied the fact that the war could have ended in April of 2022 has Boris Johnson not intervened and stopped the peace deal that Russia and Ukraine agreed to in Istanbul. On Twitter, Duss wrote , “If you’re so committed to your narrative that you believe that Zelensky Could’ve simply ended the devastating war on his country in April but then Boris Johnson showed up and said nah so he didn’t, I recommend stepping back and taking a series of deep, relaxing breaths” and “ doesn’t matter how quickly the Sy Hersh story gets refuted, it’s already become part of the alternate reality where Biden induced Putin to invade and Russia would’ve ended the war in March if Boris Johnson hadn’t said nah.”

This is despite the fact that Boris Johnson’s blocking of the peace deal in Istanbul has been confirmed by

  • Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett
  • Lead Ukrainian negotiator Davyd Arakhamia
  • The foreign minister of Turkey, Mevlut Cavusoglu
  • Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
  • Gerhard Schröder, the ex-leader of Germany
  • Victoria Nuland then U.S. under secretary of state for political affairs
  • Oleksii Arestovych a member of the Ukrainian delegation at the peace talks
  • Amanda Sloat, lead Biden advisor on Ukraine
  • Andrej Babiš, the Prime Minister of the Czech Republic

Duss has repeatedly praised the Biden Administration for the proxy war in Ukraine, saying in 2023, “The administration … on the way the president has helped manage alliance and partnerships in response to Russia’s invasion of last February, I think has been impressive, I think it shows a way of practising U.S. leadership that forges consensus and then mobilises that consensus.”

As late as January of last year, Duss said, Biden can “claim some credit for rallying allies for the defence of Ukraine against Russia’s invasion”.

Duss even admitted in reference to the Ukraine proxy war that, “the policy I support continues to enrich defense contractors, enriches the military-industrial complex” adding, “I think the goal of reforming that military industrial complex and weakening its power over our politics, that project continues in the longer term even though the policy I support in the shorter term is essentially paying them off.”

The fact that AOC is being “tutored” by Matt Duss on foreign policy explains her failures when speaking on it.

February 19, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | , | Comments Off on Meet The Liberal Zionist And Ukraine War Supporter Advising AOC On Foreign Policy

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »