Two legal organizations, European Lawyers for Democracy and Human Rights and the Cyprus Democratic Lawyers Association, have called for the termination of British claims over the military bases at Akrotiri and Dhekelia, describing them as remnants of colonial rule that undermine the sovereignty of the Cypriot people.
In a joint statement, the organizations argued that Cyprus remains only partially decolonized more than six decades after gaining independence. They said the agreements establishing the bases in 1960 were imposed as a condition for independence, allowing Britain to retain control over parts of the island for strategic military use.
The statement challenged Britain’s assertion that Akrotiri and Dhekelia are sovereign British territories. According to the groups, the arrangement was established under unequal and coercive circumstances at the time of independence and therefore cannot be considered the result of genuine consent.
UN resolution cited on territorial integrity
The organizations pointed to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 of 1960 on decolonization, which they say prohibits the fragmentation of colonial territories during the decolonization process and protects their territorial integrity.
They also cited the 2019 advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice regarding the Chagos Archipelago. In that case, the court determined that the decolonization of Mauritius was not lawfully completed after Britain separated the islands in 1965 and concluded that the UK should end its administration of the territory.
According to the statement, the same legal reasoning applies to Cyprus. The groups argued that the British bases represent a continuation of colonial authority under a different framework, dividing the island’s territory and turning it into a staging ground for foreign military operations.
Security risks from foreign military activity
The organizations also warned that the use of the bases by other states, including the United States, could expose Cyprus to regional conflicts. They said activities conducted from the bases, including operations that could be interpreted as unlawful self-defense, might threaten the island’s security and territorial integrity.
The statement additionally cited a 2024 advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice regarding Israeli policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, arguing that third-party states must not assist in maintaining situations that violate international law.
The organizations said the issue ultimately concerns international law, decolonization, and the protection of the Cypriot people’s rights. They argued that Cyprus has the right to challenge the arrangement in international forums and demand the complete end of colonial-era structures.
Finally, the groups urged the Government of Cyprus to stop its tolerance of the British bases and to begin discussions with the United Kingdom on steps toward their removal and the return of all Cypriot territory to national control.
The incident comes amid escalating regional tensions following coordinated US and Israeli strikes on Iran. Tehran has since launched missile and drone attacks across the region, with British officials noting that some projectiles were fired in the direction of Cyprus.
Hezbollah foiled an Israeli landing in the town of Nabi Sheet in the eastern Lebanese region of Bekaa before dawn overnight on Friday-Saturday.
Hezbollah’s Military Media said Islamic Resistance fighters observed four Israeli enemy helicopters infiltrating from the Syrian direction and landing an Israeli infantry force at the mountainous triangle linking the towns of Yahfoufa, Khraibeh, and Maaraboun.
“The enemy unit then advanced toward the eastern neighborhood of Nabi Sheet, (Al-Shukr). At 11:30 AM, upon reaching the cemetery area, the Israeli force was engaged by a group of resistance fighters using light and medium weapons, triggering a fierce clash after the infiltrating force was exposed,” the Military Media’s first statement for Saturday read.
As the confrontation intensified, the Israeli enemy unleashed heavy firepower, launching around forty airstrikes by warplanes and helicopters, to cover the withdrawal of its troops from the engagement zone, according to the statement.
Meanwhile, Hezbollah resistance artillery delivered concentrated fire with appropriate weapons on the perimeter of the battlefield and along the enemy’s withdrawal route, while residents of nearby villages joined in providing supporting fire, the first statement added.
The video shows exchange of fire between resistance fighters and Israeli enemy forces in Nabi Sheet.
In another statement, the third one on Saturday, Hezbollah’s Military Media said: “In response to the enemy’s landing in the Bekaa region, the Islamic Resistance fighters targeted the evacuation area in the outskirts of Nabi Sheet with rocket barrages at 04:15 on Saturday.”
Hebrew media reported that Israeli forces attempted to withdraw after resistance forces revealed the military activity in eastern Lebanon, and that Israeli warplanes and helicopters eventually retreated from the area after the failed airborne landing attempt.
Another video shows heavy destruction in the town of Nabi Sheet after the Israeli landing.
Lebanese Heaslth Ministry announced that the Israeli assault on Nabi Sheet led to martyrdom of 16 people and the injury of 53 others.
The Islamic Resistance in Iraq – Saraya Awliya al-Dam announced that its fighters carried out an attack using a swarm of drones targeting a US forces base near Erbil International Airport, a hotel in Erbil used by US forces as accommodation for their soldiers, and a vital target in Jordan.
The group said the operations came in retaliation for the assassination of Iranian Leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei, and as a deterrent against the aggression that led to the martyrdom of several young Iraqi resistance fighters.
In a separate statement, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq said its fighters carried out 27 operations on Tuesday, using dozens of drones and missiles targeting “enemy bases in Iraq and across the region.”
In a related development, the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) announced that US occupation forces targeted one of the headquarters belonging to the Al-Jazira Operations Command in Jurf al-Nasr, confirming that the attack did not result in any casualties or losses.
Iraq asserts stance with Iraq
In a separate development, Al Mayadeen’s correspondent in Baghdad reported that a vehicle belonging to Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) was targeted on the Musayyib–Iskandariya road, north of Babil province.
The correspondent added that the Iraqi government has taken what were described as significant positions regarding the US-Israeli aggression against Iran, reflecting Baghdad’s official stance amid the escalating regional tensions.
He also noted that mourning gatherings have been held in most Iraqi cities for Sayyed Ali Khamenei, with councils of condolence organized in several provinces.
US Bases Targeted
The developments come amid a widening regional confrontation following the US-Israeli military aggression on Iran, which has triggered a series of retaliatory actions by groups aligned with the Axis of Resistance across the region.
In recent days, Iraqi resistance factions have warned that US military installations in Iraq and neighboring countries would remain legitimate targets as long as Washington continues its military operations against Iran and its allies.
The escalation has raised concerns about the growing vulnerability of US bases across West Asia, many of which host American troops as part of the so-called “anti-ISIS coalition” but have increasingly come under attack since the outbreak of the broader regional conflict.
Iraqi Resistance factions have issued a firm warning to Washington, declaring that continued US military presence on Iraqi soil will not go unanswered.
In a statement released Wednesday, the Iraqi Resistance Coordination Committee, an umbrella body bringing together six anti-terror formations, said it stands ready to act if the United States refuses to end the “ongoing occupation” and persistent interference in national affairs.
The committee accused Washington of failing to respect its obligations under its agreement with Baghdad, which provides for the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Iraq. Despite repeated official declarations that the US combat mission ended years ago, Resistance groups argue that foreign troops remain entrenched under different titles.
“The US actions in Iraq ‘leave us with no choice but to assume our legal and moral responsibilities in taking positions befitting the dignity of our people and their legitimate right to end the occupation, if American forces insist on maintaining their presence and imposing their will on the country,” the statement said.
The coalition also charged that US forces continue to violate Iraqi airspace and undermine the country’s stability, describing such conduct as a “blatant violation” of national sovereignty and dignity.
Advisory mission pretext
While Washington claims that approximately 2,500 American troops remain only in an “advice and assist” capacity following the declared end of combat operations in December 2021, resistance factions view this designation as cosmetic. They argue that the continued deployment, however limited in scale, preserves military infrastructure, intelligence networks, and rapid-response capabilities that entrench US influence rather than end it.
From their perspective, the counter-ISIS mandateincreasingly functions as a framework that justifies a long-term strategic foothold in a country central to regional power balances. Even a reduced presence, they contend, enables Washington to retain leverage over Iraqi decision-making while projecting influence across neighboring theaters.
Beyond the security dimension, the Resistance Coordination Committee pointed to direct American meddling in Iraq’s political process, saying that Washington effectively determines which Iraqi political figures may assume senior government positions.
Maliki pressure campaign
The reference was widely understood as relating to Nouri al-Maliki, whose potential return to the premiership has faced US opposition. Washington threatened sanctions on Iraqi individuals and institutions should Maliki take office. Recent reports indicate that the United States has given Iraq’s largest parliamentary bloc until February 27 to withdraw his candidacy, despite Maliki’s insistence that he will not step aside.
For Resistance factions, such moves are examples of direct political coercion, reinforcing their claim that Iraq’s sovereignty remains constrained more than two decades after the US-led invasion of 2003, a war launched on the now-discredited allegation that Baghdad possessed weapons of mass destruction.
Israel’s pattern of ceasefire violations suggests a deliberate attempt to reshape deterrence rules in Lebanon rather than isolated tactical operations.
Provocations aimed at Hezbollah appear designed to trigger a response that would justify a broader Israeli escalation under new “rules of engagement.”
Hezbollah’s restraint signals long-term strategic patience rather than weakness, indicating preparation for a larger confrontation tied to regional dynamics.
The northern front is increasingly linked to US–Iran tensions, raising the likelihood that Lebanon could become either a preemptive battlefield or a secondary theater in a wider war.
The balance of power on the ground—particularly Hezbollah’s missile capabilities and ground forces—creates significant deterrent risk for Israel, limiting its escalation options despite mounting pressure.
Escalation under the Cover of Ceasefire
Since the beginning of Ramadan, Israel has notably ramped up its campaign of aggression against Lebanon. Although airstrikes committed throughout Lebanese territory have been routine since the implementation of the November 27, 2024, ceasefire agreement, what we are seeing now is a sign of panic amid rising tensions between Tel Aviv and Tehran.
Israel has committed the most violations of any ceasefire in recorded human history in Lebanon. At the tail end of November of 2025, UNIFIL – the United Nations peacekeeping forces – confirmed that Israel had committed upwards of 10,000 violations of the ceasefire agreement. This is no accident and confirms that the Zionist regime never had any intention of adhering to a cessation of hostilities with Hezbollah.
Instead, the Israelis sought to impose new equations on the ground, enabling total freedom of action, while also using their US allies to pressure the Lebanese state and its army to pursue a policy of undermining the group within the country.
It was never a realistic prospect that the Lebanese army was going to disarm Hezbollah; therefore, the only possible outcomes were going to be civil war or a campaign of pressure. Both favor Tel Aviv, with a civil war conflict being their preferred outcome.
Several times, the Israelis have attempted to provoke a reaction from Hezbollah, which has adhered to the ceasefire and not fired a single munition at their occupiers, who have now illegally established a military presence, intended to be permanent, in southern Lebanon.
These major provocations have included acts such as the assassination of Haytham Ali Tabatabai in southern Beirut. Tabatabai had taken over the role of Hezbollah’s top military chief following the assassination of Fouad Shukr the year prior. The Israelis have attacked the southern suburbs of the Lebanese capital, Dahiyeh, on a number of occasions, also committing civilian massacres in the south of the country up to the northern Bekaa Valley’s Baalbek.
Each of these waves of aggression was clearly designed to draw responses but failed to make Hezbollah bite. The idea was to set new rules of engagement, red lines, and establish a precedent for what constitutes aggression against Israel that would provoke a major bombardment of Lebanon.
Strategic Patience and Military Recalibration
On Hezbollah’s part, it appears that they understood what Israel was attempting to lure them into and instead refrained from responding, waiting for the opportune time to initiate a major war that would enable them to reclaim their territory and inflict what they see as sufficient acts of revenge on the Israeli enemy.
So, while Israel has been provoking Hezbollah and committing its daily acts of aggression against the civilian population in southern Lebanon in particular, Hezbollah has been working to rebuild and establish new battle plans. It has also become clear that the fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria did not end the weapons transfers between Syria and Lebanon, something that both Israeli and US think tanks have themselves admitted.
Since the beginning of Ramadan, this campaign of incitement has only increased. On Friday, Israel launched an assassination strike, using three missiles, on the Palestinian refugee camp of Ain al-Hilweh, killing two members of Hamas and injuring a number of civilians. Then, later that same day, Israel bombed three populated buildings in the Bekaa Valley, killing 10, eight of whom were members of Hezbollah, and injuring 50 people.
The Northern Front
Israel and its Trump administration are now poised to enter a new conflict with Iran, as the largest US military buildup in the region since the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 continues. It has become clear that in the event a regime-change war is waged against the Islamic Republic, Hezbollah will very likely engage in a battle with the Israelis.
Nobody truly understands just how powerful Hezbollah currently is, yet it is clear from the final week of the 2024 Lebanon-Israel war that they possess ballistic missiles capable of successfully striking high-rise buildings in Tel Aviv, along with a large attack drone arsenal. However, their missile and drone power aside, Hezbollah’s biggest asset has proven to be their ground forces, which inflicted the largest number of military casualties during the war.
In other words, Hezbollah will act as Iran’s ground force in any regional war. If they can manage to breach the border into northern occupied Palestine, it will represent a major blow to the Israeli state, yet a battle in the heart of the Bekaa Valley and southern Lebanon could prove even more costly to the Israeli occupying forces.
It is because of this inevitable escalation in the north that the Israelis are displaying signs of panic and continue to target both Hezbollah members and civilians alike. There has even been a campaign of spraying cancer-causing chemical substances in the south, alongside a campaign of intimidation using their drone power, a similar strategy to what we saw in Gaza for decades.
If anything, the Israelis may even urge the United States to help them go after Hezbollah in Lebanon. There is a chance this could lead to a scenario where Lebanon is attacked prior to Iran, yet the inherent risks to this strategy could be that they then lose any element of surprise in their planned assault on Iran, especially in the event that Tehran comes to the aid of Hezbollah.
– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine.
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.”
An unidentified drone was downed in the early hours of 17 February after entering the airspace above Hamat Air Base in northern Lebanon, a Lebanese security source revealed exclusively to The Cradle.
The incident unfolded when security at the base, which also hosts US forces, intercepted the aircraft, causing it to crash into nearby woodland.
According to the source, patrols from Hamat municipal police and units of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) headed to the area to examine the wreckage.
US personnel at the scene intervened to stop the inspection of the downed aircraft. According to The Cradle’s source, US troops drew their weapons and prevented Lebanese officials, including the local mayor, from approaching the crash site, asserting that the drone might have been booby-trapped with explosives.
Lebanese authorities did not take possession of the aircraft, the source said, and US officials later revealed that the drone was no longer at the location initially identified as the crash site.
A US general stationed at the base reportedly sought to contact the Hamat mayor to apologize, but the mayor refused the gesture, objecting to the behavior of the forces hosted at the base in northern Lebanon.
The drone infiltration of Lebanese airspace comes as the Israeli army continues to violate the terms of the US-sponsored “ceasefire” without repercussion.
In early February, troops from the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) near Kfar Kila, southern Lebanon, observed two drones, one carrying an unidentified object assessed as an “immediate threat.” It entered close range, dropped a stun grenade, exploded about 50 meters from the UNIFIL troops, and then headed toward Israeli territory, with no injuries caused.
The UN mission assessed that the drone belonged to the Israeli army and had crossed the Blue Line “in violation of Security Council resolution 1701,” describing the use of armed drones in this manner as “unacceptable.”
Since November 2024, when Lebanese resistance movement Hezbollah ceased attacks against Israel under the terms of the US-brokered truce, the Israeli army has committed over 12,000 violations of Lebanon’s territorial sovereignty, including more than 8,000 airspace breaches and 700 airstrikes.
Israeli attacks have killed 343 Lebanese and caused nearly 1,000 injuries, with civilian casualties including dozens of women and children.
Israeli forces maintain an active military presence at several border outposts on Lebanese territory, hindering the return of more than 64,000 displaced residents after a campaign of destruction that rendered much of the southern border zones uninhabitable.
“Our presence at five points in southern Lebanon is not part of the ceasefire agreement, but we imposed it, and the United States accepted it,” Israel Defense Minister Israel Katz declared on 18 February.
His remarks come as Lebanon’s government acknowledged that the army will need at least four months to implement the next phase of a plan aimed at disarming Hezbollah.
What do we know about Jeffrey Epstein’s ties to Israel? We talk with Craig Mokhiber, who spent decades inside the UN system, about what millions of newly released files reveal about Epstein’s effort to reshape the Middle East in Israel’s favor, why this story remains underreported, and what it means for how power operates globally.
In this episode:
Craig Mokhiber (@craigmokhiber), Human Rights Lawyer and Former UN Official
This episode was produced by Marcos Bartolomé, Chloe K. Li, and Tamara Khandaker, with Melanie Marich, Maya Hamadeh, Tuleen Barakat, and our guest host, Kevin Hirten. It was edited by Alexandra Locke.
Our sound designer is Alex Roldan. Our video editors are Hisham Abu Salah and Mohannad al-Melhemm. Alexandra Locke is The Take’s executive producer. Ney Alvarez is Al Jazeera’s head of audio.
The world’s largest shipping firm, Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), has been transporting goods from the illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank to the US, including via European ports.
According to a joint investigation by Al-Jazeera and the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM) published on 9 February, commercial documents obtained through US import databases show that between 1 January and 22 November 2025, MSC facilitated at least 957 shipments of goods from Israeli settlements to the US.
Of these shipments, more than half transited through European ports, including 390 in Spain, 115 in Portugal, 22 in the Netherlands, and two in Belgium.
MSC is privately owned by Italian billionaire Gianluigi Aponte and his Italian-Israeli wife, Rafaela Aponte-Diamant.
“Israeli settlements are widely considered illegal under international law, because they are built on occupied territory, in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention,” noted Nicola Perugini, senior lecturer in international relations at the University of Edinburgh.
“Commercialising products from these settlements effectively supports the illegal settlements,” she affirmed.
A wide range of products are produced in the settlements, from food items and textiles to skin care and natural stones, Al-Jazeera noted.
Israel conquered the West Bank and Gaza during the Six-Day War in 1967 and has sought to oust the native Palestinian Muslims and Christians and replace them with Jewish Israelis in an effort to create “Greater Israel.”
Professor Perugini called on states to ban trade with illegal settlements entirely. “You cannot normalize the profits of an illegal occupation,” he said.
The US and EU allow imports of products from Israeli settlements, despite policies formally acknowledging the settlements are illegal.
MSC also facilitates shipments from the US and Europe to the Israeli settlements.
In 2025, MSC facilitated at least 14 shipments from the Italian port of Ravenna, listing the names and zip codes of Israeli settlements as recipients.
MSC also holds cooperation and vessel-sharing agreements with Israel’s publicly held cargo shipping company, ZIM.
Such shipments may be illegal under international law following a 2024 opinion by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) advising that third states are obliged to “prevent trade or investment relations that assist in the maintenance of the illegal situation created by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”
The ICJ opinion does not directly address the responsibility of private corporations like MSC.
PYM, a grassroots, international pro-Palestinian movement, found last year that Danish shipping firm Maersk, the world’s second largest, also ships products to and from Israeli settlements.
According to UN estimates, businesses located in illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem contribute about $30 billion to the Israeli economy each year.
Settlement businesses are often unusually profitable as they are established on stolen Palestinian land that the company has not paid for.
Israel has recently accelerated efforts to expand the E1 settlement project, designed sever the West Bank into two parts, isolate it from East Jerusalem, and ensure a two-state solution becomes impossible.
The plan calls for constructing 3,500 apartments next to the existing settlement of Maale Adumim.
On Sunday, the Israeli government approved sweeping changes to land registration and civil control in the occupied West Bank, which will dramatically expand settlement construction, Middle East Eye(MEE) reported on Monday.
Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Defense Minister Israel Katz said the policy changes are intended to pave the way for expanded settlements and land seizures.
Under the new measures, the military will be allowed to demolish Palestinian buildings and homes for which Israel refused to issue a building permit in areas A and B of the West Bank
The changes would also open West Bank land registries to the Israeli public, enabling settlers to identify Palestinian landowners and pressure them to sell their land.
Making ownership records public could also make it easier for settlers to forge claims over Palestinian land, and thereby seize Palestinian land through Israeli courts, MEE added.
The measures also loosen restrictions on the sale of Palestinian land to Israelis, overturning a Jordanian-era law prohibiting transfers to non-Palestinians.
The US military intervention in Venezuela in January 2026 – known as Operation Absolute Resolve – sent shockwaves far beyond Caracas. By striking targets in the Venezuelan capital and capturing President Nicolás Maduro, Washington signaled a decisive return to hard power in the Western hemisphere. The operation was not merely a tactical move against a hostile regime; it was a strategic message about influence, hierarchy, and control in the Americas. For China, which had invested heavily in Venezuela’s political and economic survival, the intervention raised immediate questions about the limits of its global reach and the evolving rules of great-power competition in an increasingly multipolar world.
China’s response to Operation Absolute Resolve was swift in tone but cautious in substance. Official statements from Beijing condemned the US action as a violation of international law and national sovereignty, framing it as destabilizing and emblematic of unilateral hegemony. Chinese foreign ministry officials repeatedly urged Washington to respect the UN Charter and cease interference in Venezuela’s internal affairs, positioning China as a defender of state sovereignty and multilateral norms.
Yet the rhetoric was not matched by escalation. Beijing avoided threats of retaliation or offers of direct military assistance to Caracas. Instead, it confined its response to diplomatic channels, reaffirmed opposition to unilateral sanctions, and issued travel advisories warning Chinese citizens to avoid Venezuela amid heightened instability. Chinese analysts emphasized that the priority was damage control: protecting long-standing economic and strategic interests without provoking a direct confrontation with US military power in the Western Hemisphere.
This measured reaction highlights a defining feature of China’s approach to Latin America. Beijing has pursued deep economic engagement and vocal support for sovereignty, but it has consistently avoided military competition with the US in a region where American power remains overwhelming. Operation Absolute Resolve exposed both the strengths and the limits of that strategy.
China’s relationship with the Maduro government was neither symbolic nor superficial. Over the past two decades, Venezuela emerged as one of Beijing’s most important partners in the Americas. In 2023, the two countries elevated ties to an “all-weather strategic partnership,” China’s highest level of bilateral designation. This status reflected ambitions for durable cooperation across energy, finance, infrastructure, and political coordination, and placed Venezuela among a small circle of states Beijing regarded as strategically significant.
Chinese policy banks extended large-scale financing to Caracas, much of it structured as oil-backed loans that allowed Venezuela to maintain access to global markets despite US sanctions. Chinese companies became involved in energy projects, particularly in the Orinoco Belt, while bilateral trade expanded substantially. Venezuelan heavy crude, though difficult and expensive to refine, accounted for a meaningful share of China’s oil imports, contributing to Beijing’s broader strategy of supply diversification.
Security cooperation also developed, albeit cautiously. Venezuela became one of the largest buyers of Chinese military equipment in Latin America, and Chinese technicians gained access to satellite tracking facilities on Venezuelan territory. At the same time, Beijing drew clear red lines. It avoided formal defense commitments, permanent troop deployments, or the establishment of military bases – signals that China did not seek to challenge US strategic primacy in the hemisphere.
Beijing’s interests in Venezuela extended well beyond oil and arms sales. The country served as a key node in China’s wider Latin American strategy, which emphasized infrastructure development, trade expansion, financial integration, political coordination, and cultural exchange within multilateral frameworks. This model sought to build influence through connectivity and economic interdependence rather than coercion or force, reinforcing China’s image as a development partner rather than a security patron.
The post-intervention reality, however, has significantly altered this equation. With Maduro removed from power, the US assumed effective control over Venezuela’s oil exports, redirecting revenues and setting the terms under which crude reaches global markets. While Washington has allowed China to continue purchasing Venezuelan oil, sales are now conducted strictly at market prices and under conditions that erode the preferential arrangements Beijing previously enjoyed. This shift directly affects China’s energy security calculations and weakens the leverage embedded in its oil-backed lending.
US control over oil flows also grants Washington influence over debt restructuring and creditor negotiations, potentially complicating China’s efforts to recover outstanding loans. The result is a sharp reduction in Beijing’s bargaining power in Caracas and a reassessment of the long-term viability of its investments. For China, the dilemma is acute: how to defend economic interests without crossing a strategic threshold that would invite confrontation with the US.
These developments align closely with the broader direction of US policy articulated in the 2025 National Security Strategy. The document places renewed emphasis on the Western Hemisphere as a core strategic priority and reflects a clear revival of Monroe Doctrine logic. It signals Washington’s determination to assert influence in the region and to limit the military, technological, and commercial presence of external powers – particularly China.
For Beijing, this creates a structural asymmetry. Decades of investment, trade, and diplomatic engagement cannot offset the reality of US military dominance in the Americas. China’s preferred toolkit – economic statecraft, infrastructure finance, and non-interference – faces inherent constraints when confronted with decisive uses of hard power. At the same time, Beijing’s emphasis on sovereignty and multilateralism continues to resonate with segments of Latin American political opinion that are wary of external intervention and eager to preserve strategic autonomy.
A comparison between US and Chinese strategies reveals different worldviews. The US approach, as outlined in the 2025 strategy, treats the hemisphere as a strategic space to be secured against external challengers through security partnerships, economic inducements, and military readiness. China’s approach prioritizes integration, development cooperation, and respect for national choice, relying on gradual influence rather than explicit enforcement.
Viewed through the lens of ‘Donroe Doctrine’ and the transition to multipolarity, the Venezuelan episode marks a critical inflection point. The US has reasserted hemispheric dominance in unmistakable terms, while China has been forced to acknowledge the limits of its reach far from home.
China may well lose ground in Venezuela, but this does not necessarily signal retreat from the region. Instead, it suggests adaptation. Diversified partnerships with countries such as Brazil and Mexico, along with continued engagement through trade and investment, offer alternative pathways forward. More broadly, the emergence of implicit spheres of influence may align with China’s interests elsewhere, particularly in Asia, where Beijing seeks greater recognition of its own strategic space.
In an international system increasingly defined by negotiated boundaries rather than universal dominance, both Washington and Beijing are testing how far their power extends – and where restraint becomes strategic. The outcome will shape not only Venezuela’s future, but also the evolving architecture of global order in a multipolar age.
Ladislav Zemánek is a non-resident research fellow at China-CEE Institute and expert of the Valdai Discussion Club.
The president of Somalia has strongly denounced the Israeli regime’s interference in his country’s internal affairs and vowed to “confront” any Israeli military presence in the breakaway region of Somaliland.
In an interview on Saturday, Hassan Sheikh Mohamud said Israel’s recognition of Somaliland as an independent state is a “reckless, fundamentally wrong and illegal action under international law.”
Somaliland is a breakaway region in northwestern Somalia, covering territory that was once part of the British Protectorate. Despite its unilateral separation, it remains internationally recognized as part of Somalia.
The region occupies a strategic position along one of the world’s most vital maritime choke points, an area already surrounded by overlapping conflicts in the Horn of Africa and West Asia.
In recent years, Somaliland has sought foreign support by developing ties with the United Arab Emirates (UAE), a signatory to the Abraham Accords with Israel, as well as Taiwan, in an effort to gain international acceptance outside Mogadishu’s authority.
Israel’s move followed reports that the regime had contacted actors in Somaliland to discuss using the territory for the forced displacement of Palestinians during its genocidal war on Gaza, which has killed more than 72,000 Palestinians and wounded another 172,000, most of them women and children.
While Israeli and Somaliland authorities rejected those reports, a Somaliland official told Israel’s Channel 12 in January that an Israeli military base is “on the table and being discussed,” with its establishment tied to specific conditions.
Somalia has described Israel’s recognition of Somaliland as a direct assault on its territorial integrity and national unity, a position endorsed by most African and Arab countries, and has demanded that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reverse the decision.
Mohamud also made clear that Mogadishu will resist any Israeli military presence on Somali soil: “We will fight in our capacity. Of course, we will defend ourselves … And that means that we will confront any Israeli forces coming in, because we are against that and we will never allow that.”
He said Israel’s actions, which are “interfering with Somalia’s sovereign and territorial integrity,” also “undermine stability, security and trade in a way that affects the whole of Africa, the Red Sea and the wider world.”
Mohamud stressed that Israel’s deadly use of force against Palestinians in Gaza cannot be separated from developments in Somaliland, saying both reflect the erosion of global norms and restraints.
“Key among the global concerns is the weakening of the established rules-based international order. That order is not intact anymore,” he said.
He warned that institutions created after World War II “are under grave threat,” as the idea that “the mighty is right” increasingly replaces respect for international law.
The administration of US President Donald Trump, meanwhile, has yet to signal a significant change in its position on Somaliland.
An Israeli Merkava tank, accompanied by two military vehicles, invaded the outskirts of the southern Lebanese town of Yaroun on Thursday, according to Al Mayadeen’s correspondent.
The correspondent said the Israeli force positioned itself near a residential home on the edge of the town. The house was inhabited prior to the arrival of the Israeli armored unit, raising concerns over civilian safety amid the incursion.
The Lebanese citizens inhabiting the house fled at the sight of the approaching occupation force.
This violation marks a further escalation along Lebanon’s southern border in recent months, where Israeli ground incursions have repeatedly violated Lebanese territory and sovereignty, as well as the ceasefire agreement, under the pretext of security operations.
Fresh attacks target southern Lebanon
Last week, Israeli occupation forces (IOF) carried out fresh attacks across southern Lebanon, targeting multiple towns including Kfar Chouba, Blida, Kfar Kila, and Odeisah, in continued violation of Lebanese sovereignty and international resolutions.
Al Mayadeen’s correspondent in southern Lebanon reported that artillery shelling targeted the outskirts of Kfar Chouba, located in the Hasbaya district. Meanwhile, occupation forces stationed at the Bayad Blida border post opened machine gun fire toward the eastern edges of the town.
Further reports confirmed that Israeli forces bombed the town of Kfarkela and carried out two additional strikes on Odeisah, located in the Nabatieh Governorate.
Continued violations of UN resolution 1701
An Israeli drone strike on the town of al-Mansouri in the Tyre district on Friday morning resulted in one martyr and one injured, according to Al Mayadeen’s correspondent in southern Lebanon.
This comes after an Israeli drone strike on Thursday targeted a vehicle traveling on the road between the towns of Zawtar and Mayfadoun in the Nabatieh district, resulting in the death of a citizen. In a separate escalation, Israeli warplanes carried out air raids on multiple locations in the Bekaa region of eastern Lebanon on Thursday.
It’s worth stressing that the repeated airstrikes and drone attacks come as part of a wider Israeli campaign targeting areas in southern Lebanon, the Bekaa Valley, and the southern suburbs of Beirut. These actions are clear violations of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which calls for a cessation of hostilities and respect for Lebanese sovereignty.
By Kit Klarenberg and Wyatt Reed | The Grayzone | October 5, 2025
A roving reporter who covered Italy’s top politicians explains to The Grayzone how his country was reduced to a joint US-Israeli “aircraft carrier,” and raises troubling questions about an Israeli role in the killing of Prime Minister Aldo Moro.
For years, Israel’s Mossad monitored and secretly influenced a violent communist faction that carried out the March 16, 1978 kidnapping and murder of Italian statesman Aldo Moro, veteran investigative journalist Eric Salerno has documented.
Having worked closely alongside multiple Italian heads of state during his 30-year career as a correspondent, Salerno published an expose of their secret relationship with Israeli intelligence in 2010 called Mossad Base Italy. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
A roving reporter who covered Italy’s top politicians explains to The Grayzone how his country was reduced to a joint US-Israeli “aircraft carrier,” and raises troubling questions about an Israeli role in the killing of Prime Minister Aldo Moro.
Aletho News 