Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Egypt unveils Gaza reconstruction plan ahead of emergency Arab summit

Al Mayadeen | March 4, 2025

On Tuesday, Egypt’s Al-Qahera Al-Ikhbariya channel published Egypt’s plan for rebuilding Gaza, which will be presented to Arab leaders at the emergency summit hosted in Cairo on Tuesday.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty previously stated that the plan was designed to ensure the Palestinian people’s dignity and rights, and would be presented on March 4.

According to Abdelatty, Egypt’s alternative reconstruction plan will not be solely Egyptian or Arab but will include international support and funding to ensure its effective implementation.

“We will hold intensive talks with major donor countries once the plan is adopted at the upcoming Arab Summit,” he stated during a press conference with European Union Commissioner for the Mediterranean Dubravka Suica.

Into Egypt’s plan

The plan, which is based on preserving the rights and dignity of the Palestinian people, includes the formation of a Gaza Administration Committee to oversee the governance of the territory during a six-month transitional period. This committee will be independent, composed of non-partisan technocrats, and will operate under the Palestinian government.

According to the plan, the committee will be established throughout the current phase and pave the way for the full return of the administration, which would manage the next phase under Palestinian decision-making.

The plan also states that Egypt and Jordan will train Palestinian police forces in preparation for their deployment in Gaza. It calls for mobilizing political and financial support to back Egyptian-Jordanian efforts in training Palestinian security personnel.

Additionally, the plan suggests that the UN Security Council consider an international presence in the Palestinian territories, including the West Bank and Gaza, and issue a resolution to deploy international peacekeeping forces as part of a comprehensive framework for establishing a Palestinian state.

On stabilizing the ceasefire

The reconstruction statement also condemned the killing and targeting of civilians, as well as the high levels of violence and humanitarian suffering caused by “Israel’s” war on Gaza, claiming that the two-state solution is the most viable resolution under international law and consensus, emphasizing that Gaza is an inseparable part of Palestinian territory.

Egypt stressed the importance of safeguarding Palestinian rights and ensuring their continued presence on their land without displacement, calling on the international community to unite on a humanitarian basis above all else to address the catastrophic consequences of the war.

Any attempt to strip the Palestinian people of their hope for statehood or seize their land would only further fuel the struggle and instability, it also warned.

Additionally, the plan also underscored the need to maintain the ceasefire in Gaza, ensure the sustainability of the current truce, and secure the release of prisoners and detainees. It noted that successful reconstruction requires transitional governance arrangements and security measures that uphold the prospects of a two-state solution.

Furthermore, it urged the international community to support Egypt, Qatar, and the United States in stabilizing the ceasefire agreement, warning that a collapse of the truce would severely hinder humanitarian efforts and the reconstruction process.

The plan emphasized the importance of a gradual approach that ensures the Palestinian people’s right to remain on their land while also safeguarding their legitimate aspirations for an independent state with territorial continuity between Gaza and the West Bank. It called for handling Gaza’s situation through a political and legal framework that aligns with international legitimacy and UN Security Council resolutions.

The plan also stressed the need to begin planning for the early recovery phase in a way that guarantees Palestinian ownership of the process. It underscored the importance of continued efforts by the Palestinian Authority to take further steps in strengthening and developing Palestinian institutions and governance structures.

March 5, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Kissinger, Ford outraged by Israel humiliating the US in the eyes of Arabs, British documents reveal

By Amer Sultan | MEMO | February 18, 2025

Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was deeply frustrated by Israel’s behaviour, which he saw as “blowing up” the American foreign policy and “humiliation” of the US, declassified British documents reveal.

The documents, unearthed by MEMO in the British National Archives, also indicate that US President Gerald Ford shared Kissinger’s “outrage” over Israel’s approach to negotiations with Arab states.

Kissinger criticised Israel’s strategy of “giving with one hand and taking away with the other” and condemned Israelis’ total “unrealism” and “lack of understanding the Arabs”.

In January 1974, Kissinger brokered the first Egyptian-Israeli disengagement agreement in just eight days. By May, he had successfully mediated a similar deal between Syria and Israel. In early 1975, he resumed efforts, alongside his deputy, Joseph Sisco, to negotiate a second Egyptian-Israeli disengagement agreement as a prelude to broader peace talks. However, negotiations collapsed in late March.

On his way back to the US, Kissinger met with his British counterpart James Callaghan at London airport, where he blamed Israel for the breakdown of the talks. According to meeting records, Kissinger stated that Israelis “had locked themselves into a more inflexible position than they need have done”. He understood that Israel “seemed intended” to be inflexible from the outset of his mission.

Kissinger described Israeli negotiators as “hopelessly confused” about the military and political aspects of their demand for a formal non-belligerency statement from Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. He noted that Israel insisted on both military assurances and political concessions, although the main purpose of the negotiations was to reach a deal on non-engagement of forces. He described this confusion as “a Talmudic wrangle”, adding that the Israelis “had shown a total lack of realism”. When the Israelis asked him whether their demands were not unreasonable, he replied they were “disastrous”.

Kissinger’s step-by-step diplomatic strategy aimed at gradually resolving the Israeli-Arab conflict, but he warned that if this process stalled, “things would start going rapidly against Israel”. He expressed frustration over Israel’s “extraordinary lack of understanding” of both Arabs and the wider international scene”.

Before negotiations broke down, Ford attempted to push Israel to change its position. Kissinger informed Callaghan that the US president had sent a message to Israel containing “some very stern language” warning that the Israelis “couldn’t expect the Americans to go on financing a stalemate”.

Following the failure of Kissinger’s mediation, Israeli Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Yigal Allon blamed Egypt for “hardening of attitude” which he alleged “manifested itself only in the concluding phase”.

In a message to British Prime Minister Harold Wilson and Foreign Secretary Callaghan, Allon asserted that Egyptians were prepared to concede to Israel “far less than might have been assumed before the talks began” while the Israelis “went substantially beyond that maximum” to which they “had initially considered it possible” for them to go.

He insisted that at every stage of the negotiation the Israelis showed themselves “ready to move closer towards the Egyptian position but without response on their side.”

Kissinger, however, dismissed Allon’s version of events as “weird” and “almost wholly fictitious,” calling Israel’s supposed concessions “an outright lie.”

In late March 1975, Kissinger told British Ambassador in Washington Peter Ramsbotham that there had “never at any times had there been any real movement” on Israel’s side. “What they gave with one hand, they took away with the other,” he said.

During negotiations, Israel presented six key demands, which Kissinger called “conditions”, including an Egyptian pledge of non-belligerency, end to propaganda against Israel in the Egyptian media, allowing Israeli cargos through the Suez Canal using ships of a third country, allowing overflights in Sinai, an end to the economic boycott and an end to actions against Israel in the international forum.

Kissinger revealed that Sadat had not only shown willingness to meet these demands but also offered additional concessions. These included allowing some Israeli crew members on third-party ships passing through the Suez Canal, preventing paramilitary activities, giving Israel private assurances on maritime passage through the Bab El-Mandeb Strait, and establishing a joint Israeli-Egyptian commission under UN supervision to resolve future disputes. Sisco, who accompanied Kissinger in the meeting with the British ambassador, said these concessions “had come as a surprise”.

While Sadat could not agree to a formal non-belligerency statement, he offered a compromise pledging not to use force during the disengagement period. This pledge, Kissinger explained, was not only “to be signed by the Egyptian military and diplomatic personnel” but there would be a provision that the pledge “would remain in force until suspended by some other agreement”. He described these as “substantial concessions” to Israel, and advised the British that it was “totally wrong” for the Israelis to say the Egyptians hadn’t made any real concessions.

However, Israel rejected Sadat’s offer and continued to insist on a formal non-belligerency agreement, prompting Kissinger to “blow up” and tell them “they couldn’t get this”.

Kissinger informed the British of a heated exchange between Sadat and Egyptian Defence Minister, General Abdel Ghani El-Gamasy, on more concessions Sadat was prepared to concede with regard to the control of strategic passes and oilfields in Sinai. The US minister confirmed that the concessions “brought an explosion” from El-Gamassy, who expressed “vehement objections”. But these objections “were brushed aside by Sadat as had his other objections earlier in the negotiations”.

Despite Sadat’s willingness to compromise, negotiations collapsed due to Israeli obstinacy. Upon learning of the breakdown, Ford “immediately” sent a letter “in a very strong language” to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.

Kissinger, who showed the British ambassador a copy of the letter, noted that he had “never seen President Ford so outraged.” The president felt “personally betrayed” by Israel’s conduct. To emphasise the gravity of the situation, Kissinger arranged for a prominent American Jewish leader to meet Ford. After the meeting, Kissinger remarked that the man had emerged “a shaken man.”

Kissinger also made it clear to the British government that “all along, there was an Arab willingness to negotiate,” but Israel responded only with “intransigence.” He cited King Hussein of Jordan’s stance on the Allon”s plan as an example of Arab flexibility. Contrary to public statements, Hussein had privately told the U.S. that he “was prepared to accept half of the plan” and “half of the West Bank”.

The plan, which was presented by Allon, the then Israeli minister of labour, in July 1967 and was amended over years, aimed at Judaisation of the Palestinian territory especially the West Bank. It would enable Israel to annex most of the Jordan Valley, from the river to the eastern slopes of the West Bank hill ridge, East Jerusalem, and the Etzion bloc of settlements. At the same time, the heavily populated areas of the West Bank, together with a corridor that included Jericho, would be offered to Jordan.

Meanwhile, in a meeting with Kissinger, Saudi King Faisal expressed his belief that Israel “shouldn’t remain in the occupied areas” he expressed his “support” to the US efforts to “reach a solution in the Middle East”.

Kissinger lamented that Israel’s actions had “destroyed this support.”

Although Kissinger stressed that it was not in the US interest to be “publicly critical” of Israel, he believed that the Israelis “had to learn to be flexible and not believe that because of their friendly links with various governments, they could always count on support regardless of their behavior.” When British Ambassador Ramsbotham asked whether the Israeli behaviour could have any backlash inside the US, Kissinger said that “it wouldn’t be difficult for the Administration to generate a wave of indignation in the US against Israel”. But, the Americans “would not do so”, he added

Kissinger also stressed that the Israelis “had to realise that they could not blow up the US foreign policy, humiliate the United States in the Arab eyes”. The Ford Administration “felt more and more outraged” by what happened, in a reference to the Israeli behaviour that led to failure of the negotiations.

After the collapse of negotiations, Callaghan considered visiting the Middle East. Kissinger advised him to caution Israel that it “had tried the US patience too far”. He also advised that “it was very important not to give the impression to the Israelis that the British government were sympathetic with the position they had got themselves”.

Kissinger believed that if Callaghan had any new proposals, it would probably be “a mistake at this time for him to put them forward himself”.  He asked for any suggestions to be “offered to him in private”.

Despite the impasse, negotiations resumed a few months later, leading to the signing of the Sinai II Agreement on 4 September 1975, in Geneva. The accord allowed Egypt to recover parts of Sinai occupied since 1967. While Sadat saw the deal as strengthening ties with the West, it strained Egypt’s relations with the Arab States, particularly with Syria and the Palestine Liberation Organisation.

February 20, 2025 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Leave a comment

With US Or Against US? America’s ultimatum to Arab leaders

By Robert Inlakesh – Al Mayadeen – February 18, 2025

For 15 months, the majority of the Arab and Muslim World’s leaders sat back as the first live-streamed genocide took place inside the land of Palestine. Praying for a return to the status quo that once supported their rules, they have now been faced with an ultimatum. Now, it’s time to pick a side.

While US President Donald Trump presented his idea of clearing out Gaza’s civilian population, taking control of the territory, and reconstructing it, he did so using the tone of someone believing such actions would be humanitarian in nature. In reality, what was being proposed was an invasion, mass murder, and ethnic cleansing.

To be clear, the likelihood of such an invasion occurring is slim, not least because it involves an enormous amount of planning to implement correctly and there is simply no evidence that any moves are being made in this direction. However, the threat of such a monstrosity alone has proven enough to instantly mobilise the Arab and Muslim nation’s leaderships in a way we have not witnessed in decades.

Suddenly, they woke up, after behaving as if the people of the Gaza Strip were not being mass murdered on an industrial scale, on the land of the Prophets, on the land of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Holy Sepulchre. Not even the invasion of Lebanon, the murder of some 3,000 people, nor the occupation of more Syrian lands, nor the threats of annexation in the West Bank, had mobilised these leaders. The screams of Gaza’s youths, the tears of Gaza’s mothers, the honor stripped from the tortured and raped, nothing registered.

But now, for the first time, we feel a pulse. Why? Because everyone’s head is on the chopping block. A glimpse was caught of what Donald Trump’s proposed future could cause and the likes of Jordanian King Abdullah II realised they are just another Arab in the eyes of the Israeli-US alliance, nothing more and nothing less. The only reason they remain is because they capitulate. This was Trump’s true message; it was not so much as a threat but a reminder.

Without delving too deep into the issue of an American invasion of Gaza, it would prove disastrous in so many ways that it seems unrealistic on the face of things. This is not least due to the enormous costs involved in a US occupation that could travel north of hundreds of billions in US taxpayer dollars, while the US soldier casualties would be high and place enormous domestic pressure on Trump. This would likely be America’s new Vietnam, as the star-spangled coffins would trigger outrage across the States.

A US invasion would also fail to achieve the objectives set out by Trump, because Palestinians will not leave willingly and this could easily turn into a situation where the US army picks up from where the Israelis left off; inflicting Genocide. If the ethnic cleansing would work partially, the destabilizing effects would be horrific.

As mentioned above, the majority of the leaders of Arab and Muslim nations may have stood aside and allowed the Gaza Genocide to unfold, yet their populations are now more motivated to defeat the Zionist occupiers than ever before.

Opening the ‘gates of hell’

When Hamas announced that it would postpone the weekly prisoner exchange arrangement until the Israelis allowed sufficient humanitarian aid to enter Gaza, in accordance with the ceasefire agreement, Donald Trump’s reaction was to threaten opening the “gates of hell”. Despite the threats that came from Trump and Netanyahu, the Israelis caved under pressure and were quickly set to allow the prisoner exchange to go ahead as planned.

Whether the US President is truly the mastermind behind his own rhetoric or not, which is quite frankly unlikely, reading between the lines has actually helped achieve four objectives:

  1.  The outrageous and illegal proposals that Trump has put forth have helped save the image of Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu in front of his extremist coalition.
  2. The rhetoric has therefore given the Zionist regime more wiggle room to reach the second phase of the agreement, as the more extreme elements in the regime now feel as if they will get to complete their ethnic cleansing, settlement, and occupation endeavors.
  3. Upon the initial conclusion of the ceasefire agreement, the momentum in terms of popular understanding of power dynamics – manufactured as a result of the ongoing media war – had Hamas painted as the victor and the Zionist regime a loser. Trump managed to suddenly shift the conversation and manipulate popular understandings of who is in control and “winning” the war.
  4. It has brought together the Arab and Muslim leaders who were previously inactive or distant from the post-war Gaza plan.

Donald Trump is actively speaking as if he is a more extreme Zionist fanatic than Netanyahu, but is yet to follow through on any of his threats. If he continues to speak in such a way, it is possible that the US will have to start following through on some of the President’s rhetoric, however, in order for Washington to maintain credibility.

The reality in the region is that the leaderships of West Asia are still trying to revert back to the status quo that existed pre-October 7, 2023. Now they are having to come to terms with the fact that this is no longer an option.

Although this may seem hyperbolic, the “Israel” that everyone knew from before is no more, it no longer exists. To those who have studied the issue closely, this was somewhat inevitable. Right now, we are living through a scenario that occurred prior to 1948, where the Zionist regime had to try and define itself. For some time, they managed through their military superiority to pacify those around them or overcome armed confrontations with brute force, all while developing their economy and pretending as if they were operating a European State in the Eastern Mediterranean.

This was never going to last, not least because the Palestinian to Jewish population inside the borders of historic Palestine had become roughly 50/50. On top of this, the fastest growing Jewish group has been the Haredim (Ultra-Orthodox), who do not serve in the army and don’t even believe in the worth of modern Nation States. Yet, all Israelis wanted the West Bank and to rule over occupied Jerusalem. With land concessions to the Palestinian Authority off the table, there were only ever going to be two options that the Zionists were going to have to choose from: Commit a genocide or mass ethnic cleansing; or both.

With the rise of right-wing nationalist religious fundamentalism, the secular-leaning right-wing system that modelled itself off of “Western Liberal Democracies” suddenly found itself under threat. Prior to October 7, 2023, this was a dominant theme in Israeli politics, where the religious ultra-nationalists were challenging the somewhat contradictory vision that was held onto by around half of the Israeli Jewish population.

What happened here is that the secular-leaning Israelis were trying to cling onto their delusion that they could simply live in a liberal Jewish supremacist Apartheid colony forever and expect a level of stability that they had long enjoyed due to the overwhelming power of their military. On the other hand, the extremist right-wing coalition of Benjamin Netanyahu that won power in late 2022 began to present an alternative vision in a way that hadn’t been done before.

Then came the wakeup call, Hamas launched Operation al-Aqsa Flood, and the Zionists were forced to wrestle with the fact that you cannot continue oppressing the Palestinian people and expect them to simply go away or give up on their struggle for national liberation. Because of the racist collective narcissism trained into the minds of the Zionist settlers, they reacted in the most emotional way possible. This is why Zionists in the West have also been working overtime to suppress any criticism; their racism is being challenged.

The knee-jerk reaction of the Zionists was to think “how dare these people challenge our supremacy”. For the first time in its history, the Zionist Entity had been militarily torn to pieces and proven incapable of overcoming an indigenous resistance force armed primarily with light weapons and self-produced armaments. US-Israeli supremacy in West Asia appeared to be crumbling, so the occupying entity and its imperialist backer responded in the only way they know how, mass murder.

What happened in Gaza was a frenzy of racist violence that was supposed to “teach a lesson” to the Arab and Muslim peoples that they will remain forever inferior. The genocide was calculated to send a message: resist our supremacy and you will die.

Two things are now happening:

  1. The “Israel” of the past died, now it is scrambling to redefine and recreate itself.
  2. The US is attempting to revive its efforts to transform the region through normalisation and the construction of new trade routes, but is going to do so using maximum force in order to put down any semblance of dissent.

So where does this all fit into Donald Trump’s crazy threats? It’s simple. The United States is projecting its intention to remodel the entire region. This message is clear, yet it won’t likely come through a US invasion of Gaza, rather from putting tremendous pressure on the nations of the region to capitulate and work as slaves of the US-Israeli alliance.

If Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia do not capitulate, their leaderships will be replaced by ones that do. In the event that either a US invasion of Gaza or mass ethnic cleansing occurred, Egypt would be destabilised and likely face a limited Israeli incursion into the Sinai, while the Jordanian government could be toppled, or at the very least the nation will be totally destabilised, then, in the backdrop, Saudi Arabia could also be in the cross-hairs.

Hundreds of thousands of Gazans being ethnically cleansed into the Kingdom of Jordan would inevitably birth a new Palestinian Resistance front also, which could happen regardless at this point.

The ethnic cleansing of Palestine between 1947-49 left a major scar on the Arab World as a whole, one that has never healed. What just occurred in Gaza is a much deeper wound that will inspire Resistance until the end of the Zionist regime. Although it is often not factored into the equation, the Israelis also murdered 3,000 people in Lebanon too, including the late Secretary General of Hezbollah, Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah.

A mistake often made by the imperialists and settler colonialists is assuming that because a population appears pacified today, it will also be tomorrow. In reality, revolutions and resistance movements take time, with mass mobilisation sometimes occurring due to what could be perceived as mere chance when it emerges.

Meanwhile, the US is now offering the same option to the Arab and Muslim World that was presented by George W. Bush Jr. upon his announcement of the so-called “War on Terror”: “You are either with us or with the terrorists!”

It may be presented in a different way, but the truth is that there is no way to play the role of holding a middle-ground position. Now is the time, submit to being a slave, even losing your territory, pride and stability; or you decide to resist. The problem for a nation like Jordan is that if you resist, you may also be overthrown.

Donald Trump’s comments for now were designed to force the Arab and Muslim leaders to come to a joint consensus and present an alternative plan to his insane proposal, which appears to be working. Interestingly enough, it appears as if this is actually helping to allow for the Gaza ceasefire to reach phase 2.

Unfortunately for these leaders, the Palestinian issue they now face is not over with Gaza. In the event of the Israelis annexing the West Bank, this could eventually trigger the downfall of the Palestinian Authority and/or initiate a major uprising. In such a scenario, the Israeli military could then seek to ethnically cleanse large swathes of the West Bank too. The destination of these displaced refugees could also end up being Jordan.

Even former US Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned, in his second last address about foreign policy, of the collapse of the normalization agreements between the Zionist regime and its neighbours in Amman and Cairo. Speaking at a conference organised by the Atlantic Council, Blinken used the first part of his speech to espouse pure Israeli propaganda, before speaking candidly on a few issues towards the latter half of his address. He stressed that without a so-called “Two-State solution”, the normalisation deals with Egypt and Jordan could collapse.

If a resistance front opens inside Jordan, it could be the beginning of the end for the Zionist regime. Jordan shares the largest, mostly undefended, land border with occupied Palestine. Once a major resistance movement is rooted there, the war would expand in such a way that no one is capable of predicting. It is also clear that the Zionists seek to continue their aggression against Iran, Yemen, and to degrade Hezbollah at all costs in Lebanon.

All of what is mentioned above will not likely just unfold overnight, everything takes time. Yet there is no question that the war is far from over.

February 18, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Egypt’s options for the displacement of Palestinians from Gaza

By Mahmoud Hassan | MEMO | February 4, 2025

US President Donald Trump’s insistence that Egypt and Jordan will accept displaced Palestinians from the Gaza Strip raises significant concerns about a potential deal being negotiated behind closed doors to facilitate their forced displacement. In other words: ethnic cleansing. The final details of such a deal may not yet be fully formed, especially given the official rejection by the six-party Arab meeting in Cairo last Saturday. Egypt, Jordan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE concluded their meeting with a call for the US administration to pursue the moribund two-state solution.

Let’s be clear, though. The displacement plan is not a direct consequence of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood in October, 2023, or the subsequent genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza. Ethnic cleansing has been on the table since the 1940s, although attempts have failed repeatedly.

It is a concern, however, that Trump’s rhetoric this time was stated with immense confidence and an implicit threat. “We do a lot for them [Egypt and Jordan],” he said last Thursday, “and they will do this.” Rebuilding Gaza, added the US president, will take 15 years.

Trump reiterated his statement on Friday, reported Reuters: “Jordan and Egypt will accept people from Gaza. I heard someone say they wouldn’t, but I think they will. I’m confident they will.”

The carrot-and-stick approach has long been used by Trump to advance his agenda.

He has already offered Egypt incentives by exempting it, along with Israel, from the US freeze on aid to countries worldwide.

The US president may resort to courting his Egyptian counterpart, Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, with an official invitation to the White House, a package of financial assistance from Gulf nations, economic and military deals, and the potential write-off of part of Egypt’s external debt (which stands at a staggering $153 billion). These incentives could serve to soften Cairo’s stance.

Egyptian opposition figures warn that there may be undisclosed negotiations taking place, with concerns that Al-Sisi could leverage the situation for his own benefit, using it to solidify his grip on power and push for more constitutional amendments allowing a fourth presidential term and an extension of his rule until 2036.

Fuelling these suspicions is the reality that the Egyptian president faces a significant internal crisis due to failed economic policies and dwindling public support. Moreover, regional and Western actors fear that his regime might collapse as that of Bashar Al-Assad did in Syria. This gives Washington leverage, allowing it to hint at backing a suitable alternative to prevent instability in Egypt; such pressure could influence Al-Sisi’s stance.

Egypt’s response appears inconsistent and disjointed across multiple levels. On one hand, Al-Sisi personally declared Egypt’s rejection of Palestinian displacement during a press conference with Kenyan President William Ruto in Cairo. He described such displacement as an injustice in which Egypt could not participate, reiterating that the solution lies in establishing a Palestinian state with historical rights, based on the pre-June 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

Egypt escalated its stance by orchestrating what appeared to be staged protests at the Rafah border crossing last Friday.

These demonstrations were coordinated with security agencies, involved pro-government parties and lawmakers from both parliamentary chambers, and featured slogans condemning the displacement plan. At the same time, the Egyptian authorities denied permission to the Civil Democratic Movement (a coalition of liberal and leftist parties) to organise a protest outside the US Embassy in Cairo against the same issue.

And last month, the Cairo regime renewed the detention of 173 young Egyptians for an additional 45 days pending investigation, following their participation in pro-Palestine demonstrations on 20 October, 2023.

Despite this public stance, Al-Sisi appeared to be courting Trump again, stating that the American president’s leadership could usher in a “golden age of peace” in the Middle East. According to a statement from the Egyptian presidency, Al-Sisi emphasised that the international community was counting on Trump’s ability to reach a historic and lasting peace agreement that would resolve the long-standing conflict in the region.

Jamal Al-Masri, an expert in Palestinian affairs, noted that the Egyptian government is attempting to manufacture a facade of popular support for its position. This, he argued, is meant to send a message to Washington that accepting the displacement plan could destabilise the Egyptian regime, threaten national security and provoke public unrest that might even lead the military to remove Al-Sisi from power.

Although Egypt’s options are limited, they are not non-existent. One possibility is reviving the idea of relocating displaced Palestinians to the Negev Desert (12,500 square kilometres), which is occupied by Israel and borders Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula. Al-Sisi actually suggested this plan at the onset of the Gaza war in October 2023.

A political analyst who requested anonymity warned that an undeclared displacement operation could take place. Egypt might quietly accept a certain number of displaced Gazans as “refugees”, integrating them in a manner similar to that of Syrian and Sudanese refugees already in the country. Another scenario could involve receiving injured Palestinians and their companions under humanitarian pretexts, without ensuring their return to Gaza. Additionally, Gazan families might be resettled informally in Rafah and El-Arish within Egypt.

Adam Boehler, the US special envoy for hostage affairs, has urged Egypt and Jordan to present alternative solutions if they reject the displacement plan. He noted that Trump has proposed what he considers a suitable option for both countries but remains open to other alternatives.

Egypt is unlikely to escalate tensions or confront the US administration directly, especially given the strong support that Trump provided to Al-Sisi during his first term (2017-2020), when he famously referred to him as “my favourite dictator.”

Egypt could, however, manoeuvre out of US pressure by leveraging its role as a mediator in negotiating a ceasefire agreement and securing a hostage exchange deal between Israel and Hamas. Cairo’s strategic importance to Israel, which is acknowledged openly by Israeli officials, also provides it with some diplomatic leverage.

It could also further consolidate Arab and Islamic opposition to the displacement plan and seek backing from global powers such as Russia and China. Additionally, the popular rejection of displacement, both within Egypt and among Palestinians, could be used to pressure Washington into reconsidering its approach.

A particularly significant card Egypt could play is the potential collapse of the Egypt-Israel peace treaty if forced displacement to Sinai proceeds. Such a scenario might provoke Palestinian attacks from Egyptian territory on Israeli targets, significantly escalating tensions. This is an outcome that Washington would certainly wish to avoid.

Observers also suggest strengthening the Palestinian Authority’s control over Gaza, accelerating reconstruction efforts, and possibly deploying an international or Arab peacekeeping force to separate Gaza from Israeli settlements.

If displacement fails as an option, Trump might pivot towards allowing Israel to annex settlements in the West Bank or resume military operations against Hamas.

Ultimately, realpolitik will likely shape upcoming negotiations between Egypt and the US. Both Trump and Al-Sisi share an interest in removing Hamas from power, ensuring Israeli security and preventing a repeat of the 7 October incursion. However, for Egypt to agree to a displacement plan, it would require massive concessions that Al-Sisi might be unwilling, or unable, to provide due to the significant political, security and strategic risks involved.

With upcoming diplomatic engagements, including Jordan’s King Abdullah’s visit to Washington next week, and ongoing behind-the-scenes negotiations between Egyptian and US officials, the coming days are bound to bring new developments. The outcome will depend on how far Trump is willing to push his carrot-and-stick approach.

February 4, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump’s call for Palestinians’ relocation will threaten regional peace, Arab nations warn

Press TV – February 1, 2025

Major Arab nations have expressed their opposition to US President Donald Trump’s proposal to relocate Palestinians from Gaza and the occupied West Bank to neighboring Egypt and Jordan under any circumstances.

In a joint statement following a meeting in Cairo, the foreign ministers and officials from Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, the Palestinian Authority and the Arab League presented a unified stance against the US president.

They warned that such a move would threaten regional stability, risk spreading the conflict, and undermine prospects for peace and coexistence among its peoples.

“We affirm our rejection of [any attempts] to compromise Palestinians’ unalienable rights, whether through settlement activities, or evictions or annex of land or through vacating the land from its owners… in any form or under any circumstances or justifications,” the statement read.

The top diplomats emphasized that they were looking forward to working with Trump’s administration to achieve a just and comprehensive peace in the region, it noted.

Trump said last week that he had spoken with the king of Jordan about potentially building housing and moving more than 1 million Palestinians from Gaza to neighboring countries.

The US president added that he would like both Jordan and Egypt — which borders the battered enclave — to house the Palestinians displaced by 15 months of the Israeli regime’s genocidal war.

However, critics said that Trump’s suggestion would be tantamount to ethnic cleansing.

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi on Wednesday opposed the idea that his country would facilitate the displacement of Gazans and said Egyptians would take to the streets to express their disapproval.

Trump on Thursday insisted that Egypt and Jordan would accept displaced Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, despite the two nations having dismissed his plan to relocate Gazans there.

Jordan is already home to several million Palestinians, while tens of thousands live in Egypt. The foreign ministries of Egypt and Jordan have both rejected Trump’s suggestion in recent days.

February 1, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Russian media reach soars as NATO eyes countermeasures – report

RT | January 30, 2025

A fresh NATO report highlights a sharp increase in the reach of Russian state media outlets RT and Sputnik, particularly in Africa and the Middle East, where the news outlets have gained millions of new followers.

The report, published on Tuesday by the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence (StratCom COE), examines how Russian media operations have expanded their influence after the escalation of the Ukrainian conflict in early 2022. With Russian state-backed media subjected to blanket bans in the West, the outlets diverted their resources elsewhere.

According to the report, RT Arabic saw its audience grow by ten million users since the breakout of fighting between Ukraine and Russia. Sputnik Arabic also significantly increased its content output, posting 30–35% more frequently, while the news agency’s engagement on social media surged by 80%. Russian embassies in Africa also saw a 41% rise in social media followers, reflecting a broader trend of growing Russian media influence in non-Western regions, the report notes.

It also claims the outlets have been capitalizing on “anti-colonial narratives” and overall frustration with Western policies, particularly in Africa, and blames this on historical ties to the Soviet Union that still shape public perceptions there. In some cases, the narratives have resonated strongly with audiences already skeptical of Western institutions like the International Monetary Fund and the International Criminal Court, the report notes.

While StratCom COE projected its findings to the entirety of the Global South, the report actually examined the work of Russian media – as well as social media activities it had linked to Russia without any solid evidence – in Egypt, Mali, Kenya, South Africa and the UAE.

The authors of the report appeared to struggle with terminology, rejecting the ‘Global South’ over an “increasing pushback” against the name, and shot down the term ‘majority countries,’ claiming it has been promoted by assorted “malign actors” to push their agenda. Instead, the report uses the term ‘Multi-aligned Community,’ vaguely defining it as “states existing outside of the Western environment who have exhibited a preference for aligning or partnering with chosen states depending on specific spheres or issues.”

In response to the expanding reach of Russian media, the NATO report proposes new countermeasures aimed at reducing Moscow’s ever-growing influence. One recommendation is to establish a NATO-led initiative to engage with audiences in Africa and the Middle East, improving direct communication and addressing concerns about Western policies.

The report also suggests that NATO should work with local media outlets to “counter disinformation” and to bankroll local “independent journalism.” It also calls for stronger partnerships with civil society organizations to promote diverse viewpoints and counter what it describes as “one-sided narratives” from Russian state media.

January 31, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump administration pressuring Egypt to push Hamas out of Gaza

Press TV – January 29, 2025

The administration of US President Donald Trump is pressuring Egypt to push the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas out of the besieged Gaza Strip.

On Tuesday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told his Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty that the two sides must maintain “close cooperation” in an attempt “to ensure Hamas can never govern Gaza.”

Israel began its campaign of genocide in Gaza in October 2023, after Hamas carried out Operation Al-Aqsa Flood in retaliation for Israel’s intensified atrocities against the Palestinian people.

However, after 15 months of ruthless aggression, the occupying regime failed to achieve its prime objective of eliminating Hamas, despite killing at least 47,306 Palestinians, mostly women and children.

The campaign has currently paused amid a fragile ceasefire.

The US State Department added on Tuesday that Rubio also “reinforced the importance of holding Hamas accountable.”

A day earlier, Trump once again called for forced relocation of Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and Jordan, despite strong opposition from Cairo and Amman to the plan which has been slammed by the United Nations as “ethnic cleansing.”

The Palestinian leadership has been divided between Fatah and Hamas since 2006, when the latter scored a landslide victory in parliamentary elections in the Gaza Strip.

Hamas has ever since been running the Palestinian enclave, while the Palestinian Authority (PA), which is run by the ruling Fatah party and led by President Mahmoud Abbas, has been based in the autonomous parts of the occupied West Bank.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had declared that the goal of the war for the regime was the total defeat and elimination of Hamas.

However, former US Secretary of State Antony Blinken implied in one of his final appearances, on January 14, that the regime had failed in achieving this goal.

Blinken said assessments by the US had revealed that “Hamas has recruited almost as many new” fighters “as it has lost.”

“That is a recipe for an enduring insurgency and perpetual war,” he added.

Israel managed to assassinate two top leaders of the movement – namely Ismail Haniyeh and Yahya Sinwar – and according to the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), its weapons stockpile is also depleted, but as the dust settles in Gaza, it is clear that the resistance movement has not been eliminated and is still there.

Hamas fighters have prominently featured in the handover of Israeli captives as part of the ceasefire deal with Israel. And members of the Hamas-run civil administration have resumed work. If there is any authority in Gaza, it still appears to be Hamas, Al-Jazeera said in a report.

After “over a year of fighting, the [Hamas] fighters remain very much in control of Gaza,” Hugh Lovatt of the ECFR said.

“Hamas is trying to show Israel that it failed to destroy it but also that the movement will have a veto over Gaza’s future going forward because neither Israel and the PA nor the international community will be able to impose a post-conflict governance or security arrangement,” Lovatt said.

Israel aimed to destroy Hamas’s infrastructure, particularly its extensive tunnel network. However, Israeli media reports suggest that much of the network remains functional, though estimates of its intactness vary widely.

Hamas members told the ECFR that many tunnels have been preserved, restored, or even expanded in some areas.

According to the ECFR, Hamas even recycles “unexploded Israeli rockets, bombs, and artillery shells to use as improvised explosive devices and produce new projectiles.”

The Gaza Strip, home to some 2.4 million Palestinians, has been under Israeli siege since June 2007. The blockade has caused a decline in the standards of living as well as unprecedented levels of unemployment and unrelenting poverty.

January 29, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Egypt’s Parliament rejects plans for Palestinian resettlement after Trump’s call

MEMO | January 27, 2025

The Egyptian Parliament reiterated rejection, on Monday, of any plans aimed at relocating the Palestinian people from their land, warning that such actions pose “a grave threat” to regional security and stability, Anadolu Agency reports.

“We cannot overlook the significant danger posed by the proposals being circulated regarding the relocation of Palestinians from their land,” Parliament Speaker, Hanafi Gebali, told a parliamentary session.

“These ideas completely disregard the well-established fact that the Palestinian cause is not merely a population issue or a geographical dispute, but a cause of a people striving for their legitimate and historical rights.

“Everyone must realise that the Palestinian people are not merely a group seeking shelter. They are a people with a rich history, sacred land and inalienable rights that cannot be erased with time. They will never relinquish these rights, nor will the Arab nation before them,” Gebali affirmed.

The Egyptian Speaker warned that any proposals bypassing Palestinian rights “pose a grave threat to regional security and stability”.

“The only solution for achieving lasting peace is implementing the two-state solution, which ensures the Palestinian people can establish their independent state along the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, while also ensuring the security and stability of the entire region.”

“Egypt, which has sown the seeds of peace in the region for many years, reaffirms today that it will continue to defend the rights of the Palestinian people and firmly reject any attempts to liquidate the Palestinian cause or infringe upon the rights of this great people,” he said.

On Saturday, US President Donald Trump called to “just clean out” Gaza and resettle Palestinians to Egypt and Jordan, describing the enclave as a “demolition site” after Israel’s genocidal war.

Egypt, Jordan, the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation issued statements and immediately rejecting any call for the displacement or relocation of Palestinians from their land.

Trump’s proposal came a week after a ceasefire agreement took effect in Gaza on 19 January,  suspending Israel’s genocidal war that has killed more than 47,300 Palestinians, most of them women and children, and injured more than 111,000 since 7 October, 2023.

The Israeli onslaught has left more than 11,000 people missing, with widespread destruction and a humanitarian crisis that has claimed the lives of many elderly people and children in one of the worst global humanitarian disasters ever.

The International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants in November for Netanyahu and his former Defence Minister, Yoav Gallant, for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

Israel also faces a genocide case at the International Court of Justice for its war on the enclave.

January 27, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US suspends aid to Ukraine – Politico

RT | January 24, 2025

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has frozen nearly all new aid grants to Ukraine for 90 days, Politico reported on Friday. The move comes after President Donald Trump ordered a full review of all foreign assistance.

Rubio instructed diplomatic and consular posts to issue “stop-work orders” on nearly all “existing foreign assistance awards,” Politico said, citing an internal document.

According to Politico, the order “shocked” State Department officials and appears to apply to funding for military assistance to Ukraine.

The magazine cited three current and two former officials familiar with the matter as saying Rubio’s guidance means that “no further actions will be taken to disperse aid funding to programs already approved by the US government.”

The BBC, which also reviewed the State Department memo, reported that it appears to “affect everything from development assistance to military aid.”

Although the Pentagon previously told Voice of America that the aid freeze would not affect “security assistance to Ukraine,” Rubio’s memo reportedly only granted exceptions for military aid to Israel and Egypt, without mentioning any other country.

Journalist Ken Klippenstein posted what he said was a copy of Rubio’s guidance, which “pauses all new obligations of funding, pending a review, for foreign assistance programs” funded through the State Department and the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

Trump, who took office on Monday, has ordered a 90-day suspension of all “foreign development assistance for assessment of programmatic efficiencies and consistency with United States foreign policy.”

A USAID official told Reuters that among the programs that were frozen are assistance to schools and healthcare, including emergency maternal care and the vaccination of children.

Since February 2022, USAID has provided $2.6 billion in humanitarian aid, $5 billion in development assistance, and more than $30 billion in “direct budget support,” according to its website.

The US has provided nearly $66 billion in military aid to Ukraine since February 2022, according to the Pentagon.

Trump has repeatedly criticized his predecessor, Joe Biden, for approving unconditional aid to Ukraine and has vowed to implement cost-cutting measures. He also promised to quickly negotiate a peace deal between Moscow and Kiev.

January 25, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Normalizing expansion: Israel sets its sights on Egypt’s Sinai

By Robert Inlakesh | The Cradle | January 10, 2025

As Israel accuses Egypt of military buildup in the Sinai Peninsula, tensions between the two states – bound by their 1979 normalization treaty – are reaching a boiling point. Israeli officials and allied neoconservative think tanks are now actively escalating rhetoric alleging Cairo’s breach of the peace treaty while hinting at Tel Aviv’s ambitions to expand into Egyptian territory.

In September 2024, the Washington-based Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) published a report accusing Egypt of allegedly aiding Hamas through tunnels leading into Gaza to enable the Palestinian resistance movement to build its military capabilities. The charges are a stretch, given Cairo’s long-held acrimony toward Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations.

Sinai standoff intensifies 

These claims were further contradicted by recently leaked documents showing Egypt’s aggressive measures to destroy over 2,000 tunnels between 2011 and 2015. Senior Egyptian military officials even explored the construction of a canal to obliterate these underground networks. 

Also in September, Israeli military analyst Alon Ben-David admitted on Channel 13 News that “no single open tunnel has been found in the Egyptian territory. No single usable tunnel has been discovered under the Philadelphi Corridor.”

However, Tel Aviv’s allegations did not end there. Israel’s former ambassador to Egypt, David Govrin, has now accused Cairo of violating the normalization treaty by strengthening its military presence in the Sinai. He was quoted by Yedioth Aharonoth as saying, “after all these years, and even after 7 October 2023, questions remain about Egypt’s genuine recognition of Israel within its 1948 borders.”

On 7 January, the occupation state formally demanded explanations from Egypt regarding its military activities in Sinai, citing treaty violations related to demilitarization. The US, which brokered the 1979 treaty, joined the chorus, withholding $95 million in military aid to Egypt – a recurring tactic used to exert pressure on Cairo. 

Washington then redirected those funds to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), echoing similar cuts in 2023 when Egypt-bound aid was diverted to Taiwan. The move ties with intensified pressure on Beirut, aiming to coerce and incentivize compliance with US influence over its internal affairs, especially with newly-elected President Joseph Aoun. 

While Egypt’s human rights violations have been copiously documented, this is a card that the US government will routinely roll out when they want to see their North African ally play ball. It is worth noting that Egypt has historically been the second-largest US foreign aid recipient after Israel.

Stand-off in the Sinai

In 2005, following Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip to its periphery, an agreement was reached allowing 750 Egyptian security personnel to enter the Sinai Peninsula. 

At the time, Yuval Steinitz, then chairman of Israel’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, vehemently opposed the deal, calling it a “black day” and cautioning:  

“We are inviting the cat to keep the cream. This is a solar eclipse that has befallen the government, which is giving up on demilitarizing Sinai in exchange for a lentil stew of compliments and gestures.”

Since then, Cairo has submitted hundreds of requests to deploy additional forces and equipment into Sinai, most of which were approved by Tel Aviv, especially after the rise of a takfiri insurgency in 2013. In 2018, the New York Times revealed that Israel had conducted airstrikes inside Sinai at the request of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi to counter the insurgent activity.

In the aftermath of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, relations between Cairo and Tel Aviv began to sour significantly. The occupation state initially proposed that Egypt facilitate ethnic cleansing via a mass expulsion of Gaza’s population into Sinai, creating a buffer zone between Gaza and occupied Palestine. President Sisi outright rejected the plan, sparking further tensions.

By early 2024, the occupation military had intensified its invasion of Gaza, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu signaling an assault on Rafah, Gaza’s southernmost city. Egypt swiftly issued warnings against any attempt to reclaim the Philadelphi Corridor, a border area that separates Egypt and Gaza, arguing that such actions would breach the 1979 normalization treaty.

In a dramatic escalation on 6 May, Israel launched its Rafah offensive on the same day Hamas agreed to a ceasefire proposal. This offensive, which included the seizure of the Rafah Crossing and the Philadelphi Corridor, drew condemnation even from former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who described it as “a blatant violation of the peace agreement with Egypt.” Despite threats from Cairo to annul the treaty, Sisi’s primary response was to join South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza.

When Israeli tanks first entered the Rafah Crossing, they desecrated the area and taunted the Egyptian guards stationed there. Later that same month, a clash broke out, and Israeli soldiers killed an Egyptian soldier. Israel then launched a series of airstrikes in June against targets in the Sinai Peninsula. 

The Zionist vision for expansion into Egypt

Last year, uncovered documents in the British National Archives shed light on Israel’s historical campaign to legitimize its claim over the Sinai Peninsula. During Israel’s occupation of Sinai following the 1967 war, pro-Israel lobbyists and think tanks in the west disseminated narratives to delegitimize Egyptian sovereignty over the strategic region. 

Only two years after the occupation of the Sinai, which had come as a result of Israel’s war of aggression in June of 1967, the Jewish Observer and Middle East Review published an article that featured a provocative front cover, “Sinai without the Egyptians — a new look at the past, present and future.”

The Zionist Federation of Britain even argued that since Sinai had been under Turkiye’s control until 1923, it should have been incorporated into the British Mandate for Palestine, laying the groundwork for Israel’s claims to the territory. 

Fast forward to today, similar arguments have resurfaced to justify Israel’s expansionist ambitions. On 6 January, Israeli-Arabic social media accounts published a map showcasing the supposed territories of the ancient kingdoms of Judah and Israel, sparking condemnation from Jordan and the Persian Gulf states. While these claims overtly target Jordanian, Lebanese, and Syrian lands, they also subtly include parts of modern Egypt, particularly Sinai.

In July of last year, Israel’s Heritage Minister, Amichai Eliyahu, retweeted a post made on X that called for the occupation army to occupy the Sinai Peninsula, along with southern Lebanon, southern Syria, and eventually part of Jordan. 

Back in September, as Israel was launching its assault on Lebanon, the Jerusalem Post ran an article entitled ‘Is Lebanon part of Israel’s promised territory?’ that was later removed after considerable backlash.

An existential threat for the WANA region 

At this current moment, Israel is openly talking about remaining in southern Lebanon even after the 60-day ceasefire implementation period, as it currently expands its occupation further into Syrian territory by the day. It also seeks an imminent annexation of the occupied West Bank. All of these moves are indicative of Israel’s seriousness in expanding its undeclared borders.

In March 2023, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich openly displayed a “Greater Israel” map, fueling speculation about the Zionist leadership’s long-term goals. The “Greater Israel” vision encompasses parts of Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq. 

Israeli leaders employ fluid justifications – historical, religious, and political – to advance these claims, a strategy the late Hezbollah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah warned would continue unabated unless confronted by a unified Arab resistance.

January 10, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Syrian ‘end-game’ will change the Middle East

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – December 20, 2024

The fall of the Assad regime in Syria may have been a geopolitical loss for Iran (and Russia), but the fact that Islamists have overthrown the regime threatens both Iran and Arab states, creating prospects for their cooperation in the near future and minimising whatever gains the ‘winners’ of this ‘end-game’ may have made.

The ‘Winners’ and the ‘losers’

There are clear ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ in the fall of the Assad regime in Syria. But geopolitics is a very dynamic field in which gains and losses are hardly one-sided. In some ways, the fall of the Assad regime – and the inability of Iran to rescue its key ally in the region – may have been an outcome of Israel’s war on Palestine and Hezbollah, but it does not necessarily mean a permanent weakness of Iran and a permanent gain for Israel. For now, Israel is consolidating this gain by a) seizing Syrian territory, and b) bombarding the Syrian military positions to decimate its ability to launch any counter-offensive at all.

In other words, Israel’s steps show a clear direction. First, it weakened Hezbollah by engaging it in a brutal war. Second, it is now supporting the Islamist takeover of Syria. The Islamists have declared that they have no problem with Israel as their neighbour. Israel’s Netanyahu, on the other hand, has already claimed the credit for “reshaping” the Middle East.

Another clear ‘winner’ is Turkey, which had long wanted Assad to go. For years, the Turkish military had been maintaining a direct presence in Syria’s Idlib province, which also happened to be the main province under (partial) control of the so-called “rebel” Islamists. For years, Turkish forces shielded these groups from the Syrian (and Iranian and Russian) strikes and offensives. In addition, the fact that Turkey allowed these groups to conduct trade across the Turkish border provided these groups with economic support too. Now that Assad is gone, Turkey finds itself in a much better position than it was earlier to counter Kurdish groups.

But there are no ‘losers’

All of this apparently translates into crucial geopolitical gains for Israel (Washington) and Ankara, except there are no permanent ‘losers’ here. The fall of the Assad regime has brought to power a well-known Islamist group globally designated as terrorist. It is said to be only previously allied with al-Qaeda, but the way it controlled Idlib for years provides a sufficiently sound snapshot of where the group stands as an ultra-orthodox network, with serious questions remaining about whether the group was ever able to shun its ideological past.

Still, there is little denying that the ability of armed Islamists to overthrow Assad and capture power has upset not only Tehran but also Riyadh, Doha, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait, and even Cairo. All of these states previously faced actual, or prospects, of popular discontent during the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. All of these states are Muslim-majority states, which makes them vulnerable to groups operating both regionally and domestically to overthrow monarchies and/or existing regimes. Can any of them face similar prospects as Syrians did? Let’s not forget that the “rebels” first emerged in Syria in the wake of the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. If the end of the Asad regime is the continuation of the same ‘movement’, there is no denying that it can reach other states too. A clear logic for these states to cooperate with each other against this Islamist threat, backed as it is by Turkey and Israel, exists.

Therefore, while Iran may have become ‘isolated’ and the fall of the Assad regime may have blocked its ability to support Hezbollah via Syria, Iran’s prospects of developing new – and deeper – relations with the Arab world have also increased manifold. Therefore, while Netanyahu might be right in claiming that he is “reshaping” the Middle East, the new shape might not be exactly to his liking. The coming together of Iran and Arab states would directly undermine Israeli ability to defeat Iran in the short and long run.

Iran and the Arab world

They are already cooperating. Iran, Saudia, Qatar, and Iraq were all quick to oppose Israeli incursions into Syrian territory. A Saudi official statement called the Golan Heights “occupied” territory. This is not an isolated development triggered by Israeli actions. It is an outcome of an ongoing policy convergence between Riyadh and Tehran vis-à-vis Israel. On Nov. 11 at a summit of Islamic nations in Riyadh, the Saudi crown prince called on the international community, i.e., the US mainly, to compel Israel to “respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not to violate its lands.” At the same gathering, he described the Israeli war on Palestine as “collective genocide.”

In Egypt, the fall of the Assad regime has brought back echoes of the fall of the Mubarak regime more than a decade ago. When the present Egyptian ruler overthrew the government of Mohammad Morsi, a Turkish ally, Erdoğan said he would never talk to Sisi. Yet, he met Sisi twice in 2024. The fact that Turkey is now backing Islamists – and it has always supported the Egypt-based Muslim Brotherhood – there is yet again every reason for Egypt to align its policies in ways that might help keep the Islamists at bay. This way includes closer ties with the rest of the Arab world, plus Tehran.

Quoting senior Western diplomats, a recent report in Middle East Eye described the situation as particularly unravelling for the UAE, which has “been unnerved by the US’s manoeuvring to open backchannels of communication to HTS via Turkey”.  The report also mentions the UAE’s efforts to “broker talks between the government of Bashar al-Assad and the US. The UAE wanted to strike a grand bargain to keep the Assad family in power”. The only reason why the UAE wanted Assad to stay in power was that the alternative to Assad would cause more damage to Emirati interests than any potential benefits. The Islamists are that alternative now that no one, except the Turks and the Israelis, wants.

Therefore, a logical response of these states (Arab and Iran) is to develop coordinated action to thwart any prospects of an Islamist revival, including the revival of the Islamist State, which has a sizable presence in Afghanistan. This is probably the only way that the Arab states can collectively outmanoeuvre Turkey and Israel. There is also little denying that any effort to deepen Gulf-Iran cooperation will be squarely seen as a welcome development in Moscow and Beijing, both of which have vital interests in the region.

Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

December 20, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

War in Sudan and its Grim Prospects

By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – November 29, 2024

Russia used its veto power in the UN Security Council (UNSC) to block a draft resolution calling for an end to the 20-month war in Sudan and the commencement of negotiations between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

The draft resolution, widely seen as neo-colonial in its design, was proposed by the UK, which holds the UNSC presidency on Sudan, and Sierra Leone, a non-permanent UNSC member, which London appears to have pressured into supporting Western interests in this instance.

Reasons for the Russian Veto

During the drafting process leading up to the vote, several concerns regarding the wording were raised. However, following the vote, it became clear that constructive proposals from UNSC members were disregarded, and their legitimate concerns were not adequately addressed. The Chinese representative stressed that any UNSC resolution or action must “respect the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of Sudan.” He warned that, “Imposing external solutions will only worsen the situation and will neither help end the war nor protect the civilian population.”

Explaining the outcome of the vote, the Russian representative stated: “The main problem with the British draft lies in its misunderstanding of who bears responsibility for protecting the civilian population, as well as border control and security within the country.” According to the Russian representative, “this should be exclusively a matter for the Sudanese government.” He further accused British diplomats of “clearly denying Sudan this right.” He concluded, “Our country will continue to consistently use its veto power to prevent such occurrences against our African brothers.”

Sudanese Support

According to Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the draft resolution’s wording violated Sudan’s sovereignty. An Arab diplomatic source at the UN explained al-Burhan’s position, stating that the draft “implied an equivalence between the SAF and the RSF, which is something al-Burhan could not accept, especially now that the army is making gains on the ground and receiving stronger political support regionally and internationally.”

Many diplomatic sources in the region agree that the draft resolution failed to reflect the balance of power on the ground, which, according to one, has “definitely shifted in favour of the SAF.” The army currently controls much of Sudanese territory, and al-Burhan enjoys greater international recognition than the RSF and its leader, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, also known as Hemeti. They point out that Hemeti heads the RSF, a militia created in 2013 by Omar al-Bashir to protect his brutal regime and responsible for numerous atrocities, particularly in Darfur. Hemeti, along with other RSF figures, has been accused by international humanitarian organisations of ethnic cleansing targeting non-Arab tribes in West Darfur.

The Rift Between al-Burhan and Hemeti

Al-Burhan appointed Hemeti as his deputy on the Transitional Sovereign Council (TSC) formed after the overthrow of al-Bashir. This move drew criticism from the African Union, which stated that it was “a very bad sign, showing that al-Bashir’s successors were attempting to recreate his dictatorial regime, albeit under a democratic façade.” The TSC, it seems, was designed more for the internal distribution of power within al-Bashir’s clique than for any other purpose.

The conflict began in mid-April 2023. Following al-Bashir’s removal, al-Burhan and Hemeti initially joined forces, seizing control but allowing for limited power-sharing with civilians. However, when al-Burhan dismissed the interim civilian government in October 2022, Hemeti seized the opportunity to oppose al-Burhan, claiming the move was “anti-democratic.” According to Arab diplomatic sources, including those who served in Khartoum, Hemeti’s pronouncements on democracy ring hollow. In reality, they say, Hemeti has always aspired to power and believed he could strike a deal with the civilian government to replace al-Burhan as commander-in-chief.

Sudan’s problems are largely driven by regional powers vying for control of the country’s natural resources and exploiting its strategic location. It’s no secret that an Arab capital, with significant investments and interests in Sudan, pushed the West to draft a self-serving resolution which they attempted to sneak through the UNSC. They failed! However, the West remains undeterred, continuing its sophisticated attempts to bring Sudan entirely under its control.

Attempts to Resolve the Conflict

The international community has been closely monitoring the situation in Sudan since the conflict began and, over the past year, has been working with like-minded regional partners to create an opportunity for peace. Cairo, a view shared by Ankara and Tehran, believes that the best chance for peace lies in a unified Sudanese army under a single command, arguing that “otherwise, the country will simply move from one war to another.” Over the past 11 months, a series of meetings have been held in Cairo with representatives from Sudan’s armed, political, and religious forces, aiming to forge a united front capable of cooperating with the SAF based on power-sharing and stability. As the SAF has made military gains against the RSF, the number of Sudanese actors willing to participate has increased. Many believe it is only a matter of time before the RSF is forced to acknowledge its weakening position, despite the support it receives from regional allies.

Since the start of the war, 11 million Sudanese have been displaced. The UN estimates that half are children, the majority of whom lack access to basic nutrition. Furthermore, a further 15 million Sudanese are suffering from food insecurity and a lack of access to essential healthcare.

It was only in mid-August that significant UN humanitarian aid reached Sudan via the Adre crossing point connecting Darfur to Chad. According to the UNHCR, just over 50% of the $2.7 billion budget required for humanitarian assistance in Sudan has been secured in 2023. The UN believes that “Sudan needs more than just immediate humanitarian aid; it needs a proper and workable peace plan. This is what we are working on, and we have the support of several global and regional capitals.”

According to David Patteritt, US envoy to Sudan, outgoing US President Joe Biden is making every effort to secure a deal on Sudan before leaving office on 20 January. However, according to Cairo’s Al-Ahram, this deadline is overly optimistic. The newspaper warns that “we’ll be lucky to see any movement by then, and a deal will take considerably longer,” suggesting that much will depend on the stance of US President Donald Trump’s new administration.

It is therefore abundantly clear who is fanning the flames of civil war in Sudan, attempting to profit from the Sudanese people’s suffering. But this is the 2020s, and neo-colonial politics, however alluringly packaged, no longer hold sway.

Victor Mikhin is a Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences (RANS).

November 29, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »