Labelling the Palestinian resistance: Political propaganda or legal classification?
By Sayid Marcos Tenorio | MEMO | August 30, 2025
The dominant narrative in the West portrays the Islamic Resistance Movement – Hamas – as a “terrorist group”, uncritically repeating the rhetoric of Israel and its allies. However, when analysing the issue from the perspective of international law and the history of national liberation movements, it is clear that the “terrorism” label is more a tool of political propaganda than a legal definition.
In light of international law and the United Nations Charter, Hamas should be understood as a Palestinian resistance movement in the face of more than seven decades of Israeli colonisation, ethnic cleansing, and military occupation. This also includes almost two years of uninterrupted confrontation with genocide in the Gaza Strip.
The United Nations (UN) has never declared Hamas a terrorist group. Only a few countries, such as the United States, the European Union, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia, have unilaterally adopted this classification. International law, in turn, does not criminalise resistance against occupation.
Since 1967, Israel has maintained its occupation of the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem, in flagrant violation of the UN Charter and Security Council resolutions. According to International Humanitarian Law, peoples subjected to foreign occupation have the legitimate right to resist, including by armed means, against the occupying power.
This principle is supported by Article 51 of the UN Charter, as well as Resolutions No. 2649/1970, 2787/1971, 3070/1973, and 3103/1974, which explicitly recognise the inalienable right of peoples to fight against colonial domination, foreign occupation, and apartheid. Furthermore, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Additional Protocols of 1977, along with the practice of the International Criminal Court (ICC), distinguish between armed resistance and terrorism.
Therefore, the existence of an armed struggle against occupation does not constitute terrorism, but rather a legitimate exercise of resistance.
Founded in 1987 during the First Intifada, Hamas is not just an armed group; it is also a political, social, and religious movement deeply rooted in Palestinian society.
Its surprising victory in the 2006 legislative elections, which were recognised as free and democratic by international observers, demonstrates its popular representation. It won 76 of the 132 seats, while its main rival, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah, won 43 seats.
Over the decades, Hamas has administered social institutions, hospitals, schools, and assistance programmes, playing a similar role to liberation movements in Algeria (FLN), Vietnam (Viet Minh), or South Africa (ANC), all of which were also labelled terrorists at some point in history. Today, many of these movements are recognised as legitimate builders of their national states.
The classification of Hamas as “terrorist” serves the clear objectives of Israeli policy: To silence the debate on occupation, apartheid, and genocide, diverting attention from the root cause of the conflict; to justify massive attacks against civilians in Gaza, presented as “the fight against terrorism”; to criminalise all forms of Palestinian resistance, whether armed or peaceful – from NGOs to journalists and students.
Judith Butler, an American philosopher from the University of Berkeley, observes that armed resistance under occupation cannot be reduced to terrorism, as this ignores the structural causes of violence: colonialism, supremacism, and military occupation.
Since 2007, Israel has imposed a land, air, and sea blockade on the Gaza Strip, which the UN classifies as collective punishment – a practice prohibited by international law. Millions of Palestinians live without freedom of movement, drinking water, electricity, and medicines. With each Israeli offensive, thousands of civilians are massacred, homes and hospitals are destroyed, and entire neighbourhoods are razed.
The current scenario of indiscriminate attacks on hospitals, schools, and refugee camps is described by international law experts and UN rapporteurs as ongoing genocide, due to the scale of the destruction and the explicit intention to expel or exterminate the original Palestinian population of Gaza.
In the face of this reality, Hamas’s armed resistance should be understood not as terrorism, but as the exercise of a people’s right to self-defence under occupation and ethnic cleansing. The Palestinian struggle is, in essence, a struggle for physical and cultural survival in the face of a colonial project to eliminate all forms of life in Palestine.
The framing of Hamas as a terrorist group is a political construct of Israel and its Western allies, without a basis in international law. Palestinian resistance, whether armed or not, is recognised as legitimate by the UN, the BRICS countries, and international treaties whenever it is intended to confront foreign occupation and colonial oppression.
Calling Hamas “terrorist” is an attempt to delegitimise the struggle of a people seeking freedom, justice, and self-determination. The truth is that Israel, as the occupying power, systematically violates international law, practices apartheid, and commits war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Hamas is an integral part of the Palestinian resistance and must be understood as a national liberation movement, not as terrorism. Recognising this fact is a fundamental step towards a fair and honest reading of the conflict and for seeking a solution based on historical truth, justice, and the right of peoples to self-determination.
The coming war on Iran will be regional, perhaps international
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | September 2, 2025
It is unlikely that the anticipated continuation of the war on Iran, spearheaded by the Israelis but led by the United States, will be confined to a simple tit-for-tat missile trade-off as we saw earlier this year. The reason for this is simple: too much is at stake if this front again flares up.
Since the US-brokered ceasefire between “Israel” and Iran went into effect on June 29, the United States and the Zionist regime have scrambled to move around military equipment, engage in mass surveillance flights over Lebanon and the Persian Gulf. More recently, the US began an early withdrawal of its forces from the Ain al-Assad base and other installations inside Iraq.
The first point of entry to understanding what is currently brewing across West Asia is understanding the mentality at play on both sides of the divide.
On one side, we have the Zionist regime and its Western allies, who are the aggressors and believe themselves to be fighting what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calls a “seven-front war”. Although the front in the Gaza Strip has pervaded public consciousness over the past 23 months, overshadowing the wars on Lebanon, seizure of territory in Syria, bombing of Yemen, and attack on Iran, it is very much part of this wider war.
From the Israeli-American perspective, their ongoing war carries the goal of eliminating what is known as the Axis of Resistance, the leader of which is the Islamic Republic of Iran. The thinking clearly is that this period in time has provided a unique opportunity to crush the regional resistance and with it, achieve regime change in Tehran.
In June, the Israelis clearly got ahead of themselves and believed that they could inflict a similar blow in Iran to the blow they inflicted on Lebanese Hezbollah back in September of 2024. In the first few hours of the Zionist Regime’s illegal attack on Iran, their media boasted of landing such a blow. However, to everyone’s surprise, within 15 hours, the Iranians were back on their feet and began firing bursts of ballistic missiles into central “Tel Aviv”.
Even the US strikes didn’t inflict any kind of kill blow that degraded Iran sufficiently, as it proved more than anything that their nuclear facilities could survive US strikes, even if they were badly damaged. The United States certainly poses a major threat to Iran, but the takeaway here is that the Zionist regime can’t take them on alone.
If there is another battle between Iran and the Israelis, the Zionist Entity is already low on interceptor missiles, and its arsenal would be severely drained within around a week or so. We also still do not know the extent of the damage inflicted by Iran’s ballistic missile strikes, due to Israeli military censorship. Simply put, they don’t even allow the public to know the true number of soldiers killed and wounded in Gaza, so forget the notion that they’d admit what Iran did to them.
Another major player here is Lebanese Hezbollah, which appears to be successfully rebuilding itself and is at an intelligence deficit compared to what they had built up over decades and utilized late last year. Yet, what the Israelis do understand is that in the event that a conflict with Iran arises where Hezbollah chooses to enter the fight on the ground, they may face an existential battle for their very survival.
If, and this evidently depends on varying factors, Hezbollah chooses to launch an all-out ground offensive as Iran fires ballistic missiles in bursts across occupied Palestine, it is plausible that the Lebanese party will inflict a total defeat on the Israeli ground forces and seize huge swaths of territory in the north of Palestine.
The Zionist regime is now claiming to be preparing for mission impossible in the Gaza Strip, amassing troops in order to try and occupy Gaza City, an operation that would take between two to five years to complete, according to Israeli military estimates. It would also be extremely costly for the Israeli ground forces and their military vehicles. If they do commit to this, it would leave them open on the northern front. There is, however, the possibility that this is all a bluff.
If the Israelis are bluffing, they could be preparing for an offensive against Lebanon instead. The thinking here would be to try and halt Hezbollah’s rebuilding process, setting it back even further, and could even involve a ground operation, likely using Syrian territory to invade the Bekaa Valley area.
Such a conflict would be existential for Hezbollah, especially as the US works with the Lebanese government to impose a seizure of its weapons. A repeat of what occurred a year ago would work only to advance the US-Israeli goal of seizing Hezbollah’s weapons, while a victory could at the very least liberate Lebanese territory and represent a massive blow to the disarmament agenda.
Therefore, if Iran is currently in the scope of the Zionists, it would make strategic sense for them to either attack Lebanon first or launch a major offensive at the same time it attacks Iran.
The US withdrawal of forces from Iraq is another major indicator of a regional escalation involving Iran, specifically because of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) and the potential they have to inflict enormous damage, given that they enter the fold of the war.
Iraq’s PMU is yet to be mobilized, and its role in the ongoing regional conflict has been minimal. The reason for this is that if some 230,000 men are mobilized, or even a portion of them, it is difficult to suddenly put a halt to their operations, and this will mean a dramatic regional escalation, the likes of which the United States will not be able to manage inside Iraq and will instead use their economic levers as a primary weapon of war.
Depending on how far such a conflict is going to go, there is even the possibility that it could go global. While there is currently no evidence to support this notion, there has been talk that the US naval deployment to the Caribbean, triggering a mass militia mobilization across Venezuela, could be connected. Additionally, China and Russia could use the opportunity of a major Iran-US war to carry out some of their long-desired goals, at a time when Washington has diverted its resources to West Asia.
There is again the possibility that another attack on Iran could look similar to what the world witnessed during what is dubbed the “12-day war”, yet the same stalemate outcome would only lead us back to square one again and beget yet another war. At some point, something will have to give.
The reason why the danger of an all-out regional conflagration appears high as of now is purely down to the Israeli-US refusal to end their genocide against Gaza, indicating that they seek total defeat of the Axis of Resistance and nothing less. Inevitably, one side must win and the other lose; there is currently no such thing as deterrence for either side, only who will triumph and carve out a new regional reality.
With traps and tactical ingenuity, Al-Qassam fighters outmaneuver invaders in Gaza

By Ivan Kesic | Press TV | August 30, 2025
In the smoke-filled streets of Gaza, a powerful message is being written these days in the language of resistance and fire by the Palestinian armed resistance groups.
As the Israeli military machine grinds forward with its brutal offensive, it is being met not with submission but with a fierce and strategic defiance from the Palestinian resistance, led by the fighters of the Al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of the Gaza-based Hamas resistance movement.
From the dense urban labyrinths of Gaza City to the southern approaches of Khan Younis, every inch of Palestinian land is being contested in a series of devastating engagements that have exposed the fragility of the Israeli occupation’s so-called invincibility.
The Israeli regime’s latest assault, codenamed Gideon’s Chariots II, has been met with a humiliating and painful reception. Yesterday, as many as three “security incidents” were officially acknowledged, implying heavy casualties and possibly the deadliest day for the invaders in more than a year.
In the Al-Zaytoun and Al-Sabra neighborhoods of Gaza City, resistance fighters have pushed to the city’s edges, refusing to wait behind barricades and instead taking the fight directly to the advancing invaders in intense, close-quarter combat.
At least four regime soldiers have been missing since Friday, most likely captured by the resistance fighters or eliminated by the occupation forces to prevent them from being captured.
Their advanced night vision capabilities allowed them to detect and ambush Israeli units, triggering fierce clashes that forced the occupation army into a panicked deployment of reinforcements.
The resistance has entrenched itself in formidable defensive positions, turning entire districts into deadly traps where every alleyway holds the threat of a well-planned ambush.
Nowhere is the resistance’s effectiveness more starkly illustrated than east of Hamad City, where a brilliantly executed Al-Qassam Brigades’ ambush targeted the Israeli Kfir Brigade.
In a sophisticated joint operation with the Al-Quds Brigades, resistance fighters struck an Israeli Eitan armored personnel carrier with a Kornet guided missile, scoring a direct hit that necessitated a desperate helicopter evacuation for the crew.
This is not an isolated event; it is part of a sustained campaign of sophisticated warfare.
Israeli Merkava tanks, the pride of their armored corps, have been repeatedly destroyed by Al-Yassin 105 shells and powerful landmines in Jabalia, turning these multi-million dollar vehicles into smoldering monuments to Palestinian ingenuity and resolve.
Faced with this steadfast resistance, the Israeli regime has revealed its true nature: a desperate and criminal enterprise lashing out with indiscriminate force.
Its warplanes strike the Nuseirat refugee camp, its artillery pounds civilian neighborhoods, and its leadership enacts the horrific Hannibal Directive, a policy so barbaric that it involves killing its own soldiers and settlers to avoid capture.
Abu Obeida’s remarks
As Al-Qassam Brigades’ spokesperson Abu Obeida stated on Friday, Netanyahu and his ministers have effectively “decided to cut the number of living captives by half,” knowingly endangering them through their reckless military escalation in a cynical gambit to avoid future prisoner exchanges.
The Palestinian resistance, in stark contrast, operates with a principled transparency and honor that shames its oppressors. Abu Obeida’s pledge to announce the name and provide proof for any captive killed by Israeli strikes stands as a powerful testament to their moral high ground.
“The enemy’s criminal plans to occupy Gaza will be disastrous for its political and military leadership. The enemy’s army will pay the price in the blood of its soldiers, and the chances of capturing new soldiers will only increase,” the Al-Qassam Brigades spokesperson said.
“Our fighters are on full alert, ready and in high spirits. They will present exceptional examples of heroism and bravery, and they will teach the invaders harsh lessons, with God’s help,” he added.
His warning that the invasion of Gaza City will be “disastrous” for Israel’s political and military leadership is not mere rhetoric; it is a promise backed by the extraordinary heroism and high morale of Al-Qassam fighters, who are prepared to deliver harsh lessons to the invaders.
They fight as the guardians of a people who have been left with no other option but to resist a genocidal occupation, and through their bravery, they are not just defending Gaza; they are exposing the world’s greatest military powers as paper tigers and writing a new chapter of dignity in the Palestinian liberation struggle
Deadly summer continues
The summer of 2025 has proven to be a season of profound humiliation and strategic failure for the Israeli regime. Despite unleashing the full, brutal force of its military machine in a series of operations with biblical pretensions like “Gideon’s Chariots,” the occupation forces have been met with an unyielding and devastating response from the Palestinian resistance.
Far from being crushed, Hamas has adeptly shifted to a sophisticated war of attrition, leveraging its intimate knowledge of the rough terrain and unparalleled ingenuity to turn Gaza into a graveyard for Israeli ambitions and advanced weaponry.
The regime’s much-hyped “Operation Gideon’s Chariots,” which ran from May to early August, was a catastrophic endeavor despite its claims of territorial gain.
While the regime forces boasted of controlling 75 percent of the Strip, this “victory” was revealed as hollow and illusory. The operation failed in its core objectives: Hamas’s governance and military capabilities remain potent, and the goal of freeing all hostages was abandoned.
More damningly, it came at a staggering cost, with former Israeli army Chief of Staff Moshe Yaalon estimating a shocking 15,000 Israeli soldiers killed or wounded by March 2025—a number that has only swelled throughout this deadly summer. This is not the sign of a victorious army but of one being bled dry in a quagmire of its own making.
In response to this aggression, Hamas launched its own “Stones of David” counteroffensive, a masterclass in asymmetric warfare.
This campaign has seen resistance fighters move with audacious skill, refusing to cede the initiative. Instead of waiting behind barricades, Al-Qassam Brigades fighters have pushed to the edges of Gaza City, engaging invading forces in close-quarter combat and springing devastating ambushes.
Their tactics are a testament to their strategic acumen: operating in small, agile cells, they have exploited the extensive tunnel network not as a hiding place, but as a dynamic web for staging attacks, storing weapons, and moving undetected beneath the feet of a disoriented enemy.
The results of this resistance have been tangibly catastrophic for the Israeli war machine.
In a stunning display of effectiveness, the Al-Quds Brigades alone announced the destruction of over 52 military vehicles in the eastern neighborhoods of Gaza City—including Shuja’iyya, al-Tuffah, and al-Zaytoun—using a combination of pre-planted Thaqib and Zelzal explosive devices and reverse-engineered bombs crafted from Israeli munitions.
These are not random acts of violence but the outcome of meticulous preparation and battlefield intelligence. The Al-Qassam Brigades have consistently targeted the enemy’s nervous system, striking command and control centers, as with the attack on a site on Mansoura Street using machine guns and Rajum rockets.
Rushing to repeat mistakes
The launch of “Operation Gideon’s Chariots II” by the Israeli regime, aimed at seizing Gaza City, is not seen as a sign of strength but an admission of the first operation’s failure.
It is a move of sheer desperation, one that has been met with widespread international condemnation and deep fear for the fate of the remaining captives.
The regime’s response—calling up 60,000 more reservists to throw into the meat grinder—speaks to a leadership devoid of strategy, relying solely on overwhelming and indiscriminate force.
Through their bravery and strategic genius, the Palestinian resistance has exposed the fundamental weakness at the core of the Israeli military project.
They have turned the regime’s multi-billion-dollar Merkava tanks into smoldering wrecks and its much-vaunted technological superiority into an irrelevant talking point.
Each ambush, each destroyed vehicle, and each fallen soldier is a testament to the failure of the occupation and the unstoppable will of a people fighting for their freedom.
The resistance does not just endure; it prevails, teaching the Israeli regime and the world a harsh lesson in the power of a just cause.
Here is why the Israeli occupation of Gaza won’t work
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | August 26, 2025
At every key juncture of the Zionist regime’s “seven front war”, it has announced new plans that it will claim are going to defeat Hamas or that they will reach a ceasefire agreement. The truth is that they have no intention of reaching a negotiated settlement, nor do they have a plan to achieve “victory” in Gaza.
At the beginning of the Zionist entity’s ground invasion of the Gaza Strip, in late October of 2023, its military campaign had focused on northern Gaza. For those who remember, the major goal of their operation at the time was to take control of al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, claiming it to be a “Hamas command and control center”.
Back then, the Western corporate media reported that US intelligence reports supported the notion that at the very least, there was a Hamas “command node” based there, as the Israeli army released CGI footage featuring an extensive tunnel network under the hospital.
After committing various massacres, in and around al-Shifa Medical Complex, it became clear that the claims were all lies and no Hamas infrastructure existed underneath the hospital. However, the Israelis and their Western allies did not admit that the entire military operation was based upon a pack of lies and that no Hamas targets were there; instead, they simply moved on to the next major set of lies, as the Zionist military finished off its genocidal missions in northern Gaza.
Failing to inflict any major blow, let alone a total defeat upon Hamas or any of the some dozen Palestinian armed groups in northern Gaza, then came the claim that “the real Hamas headquarters” were in Khan Younis. In December of 2024, again with the full backing of their Western allies and their media machines, the Israelis launched the invasion of Khan Younis.
After besieging Khan Younis in January of 2024, they eventually made it their final mission to assault the Nasser Hospital, again claiming that it was used by Hamas as a major base. By this time, the Israelis had launched a campaign to systematically target every hospital their forces worked in the vicinity of, seizing medical workers and the injured as captives, inflicting massacres, setting up bases inside the hospitals, and always claiming that Hamas was there.
As the military campaign on the ground waged on, the Israeli public realised that they were not even one step closer to the “total defeat” of Hamas that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had promised them. So then began the talk of invading Rafah.
Israeli political leaders vowed that without invading Rafah, they could not “win the war”. They claimed that tunnels were leading into Gaza from Egypt, despite knowing they were all sealed off around a decade ago.
In the lead-up to the invasion of Rafah, a massive deception campaign was launched with the full unquestioning complicity of the Western media. We heard about then US President Joe Biden’s alleged “red line” being Rafah. Up until that point, we had also heard about Biden hanging up the phone on Netanyahu, yelling at him and even swearing, for which there was never any evidence produced.
We had the propaganda of a “Christmas ceasefire” and a “Ramadan ceasefire”, with even the UN Security Council voting on the temporary Ramadan ceasefire that never materialised. The public was also informed about all of the alleged hard work that the US government was doing to achieve a ceasefire, which we would later learn never happened from Israeli media leaks; Biden never once asked his Israeli allies for a ceasefire.
In the lead-up to the invasion of Rafah, which would eventually happen on May 6 with full US support, we heard two main narratives. One warned of the impending humanitarian disaster after the Israelis had displaced the majority of the population to Rafah, the second was the idea that this would mean the defeat of Hamas and would rob the group of its financing networks.
Evidently, the Israelis launched their invasion, and unsurprisingly, it was more of the same; they continued mass murdering civilians and destroying Gaza’s infrastructure. Hamas still lived. There were even initiatives then like the failed US military aid pier, which only appeared to have been used one time, for a deadly military operation in Nuseirat that killed around 300 civilians to seize back Israeli captives.
Fast forward to October 2024, when we began to hear about the infamous “General’s Plan”, an operation that was again sold by the Israeli regime and its media as the final blow to end Hamas by besieging northern Gaza entirely and then starving out the remaining fighters. This went on for months, until there was a ceasefire declared in January.
On March 18, the Israelis violated the Gaza Ceasefire. Then came an escalation in its genocidal campaign against civilians in the territory, an uptick once again in the bombardment, coupled with the total blockade on all aid into the territory that would last over 80 days.
For some time after violating the ceasefire, the Israeli media and regime’s officials promoted the idea of a new operation that was going to be the most explosive yet and the final blow against Hamas. They spoke of potentially new weapons and strategies, hyping up the campaign to be a game changer.
The May offensive was then labelled “Operation Gideon’s Chariots”, dubbed “Phase 2” of the Gaza war. First, the Israeli media hyped it up and put out reports that 20,000 reservists had been called up to duty, then we heard 60,000, the next day 50,000, some even claimed 100,000 soldiers would be used to invade Gaza.
The real result was a few small incursions into the outskirts of major cities and camps, which were met with deadly ambushes carried out by the Palestinian resistance. “Gideon’s Chariots” was a game changer, but repeated the exact same cowardly strategy as every Israeli operation before it.
So now we have the approval of plans to “occupy Gaza”. Originally, the idea communicated across Israeli media platforms was that all of Gaza would be occupied, which is what Netanyahu would go on to claim. Then it went back and forth between all of the territory and just Gaza City, which is not the established goal of the newly approved operation.
Logistically, this plan makes no sense for an already overburdened Zionist military force that does not want to fight in the Gaza Strip at all anymore. They’ll need an absolute minimum of 200,000 soldiers just to occupy Gaza City, a plan that, according to Israeli military analyst,s will take between 2 to 5 years to properly complete.
On top of this, the strategy runs contrary to the Israeli military’s doctrine and strategy that it has followed throughout the entire war. The reality on the ground is that with the exception of a limited number of special forces operations, the Israeli army never targeted Hamas. They invaded with the intention of making Gaza unlivable and have systematically dismantled the territory’s infrastructure, while inflicting a genocide.
The truth is that they have no military strategy to defeat Hamas. They don’t even have an answer as to how to end the fighting at all, even as their allied Arab regime attempts to give them solutions. A ceasefire would happen within a day if they wanted it to, but they clearly don’t, and no Israeli politician even accepts the notion of the Palestinian Authority taking over Gaza because they believe it will lead to a so-called “Two-State solution”.
So here we are again, back to the same old tired Israeli script. They send negotiating delegations with no intention of reaching deals and launch new operations that will ultimately fail to achieve anything other than continuing the slaughter of civilians.
The Zionist Entity has done everything except actually target and try to fight the Palestinian Resistance on the ground, hiding in fortified areas and inside their military vehicles, occasionally getting picked off by ambushes. This is also why they have no battle footage despite having fought for 22 months, because they only engage in armed clashes on the ground when they are being attacked by the Palestinian armed groups. There is no real army, it’s a glorified police force that was built to bully teenagers, with a sophisticated intelligence apparatus and air force behind it.
It appears very unlikely that we will see Israeli soldiers manning checkpoints in between tent cities in Gaza and managing everyday life like we see in the occupied West Bank. Simply put, they are too cowardly for this task, and unlike the case in the West Bank, it will be extremely dangerous for them to do this, costing them thousands of casualties over a long period of time.
More likely than not, this has all been psychological warfare, as the Israeli military prepares to attack on a different front. Although it does seem likely they will launch some kind of operation in northern Gaza, one which will accelerate its mass murder of civilians, but will fail to achieve its stated objectives.
Hamas agrees to Gaza ceasefire proposal presented by mediators
Palestinian Information Center – August 18, 2025
GAZA – An official Hamas source said on Monday that the Movement delivered a positive response to an Egyptian-Qatari proposal for a 60-day ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.
An informed Palestinian official also said, on condition of anonymity, that the proposal forms a framework for indirect negotiations over a permanent ceasefire between Hamas and Israel.
The response came after internal consultations held by Hamas with major Palestinian factions.
The source did not reveal details of the proposal, but other informed Palestinian sources reported that the proposal stipulates a prisoner exchange deal that includes the release of 10 living Israeli captives and 18 bodies in exchange for the release of 140 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences and 60 others serving sentences of more than 15 years, as well as 1,500 from Gaza.
The sources explained that the new Egyptian-Qatari proposal includes a modification to the Israeli withdrawal lines from the Gaza Strip during the 60-day truce period, limiting them to a distance of 800 meters along the eastern, northern, and southern borders of the coastal enclave.
According to the proposal, discussions on a comprehensive agreement or permanent ceasefire will begin immediately once this truce takes effect
The proposal also includes the entry of urgent humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip immediately after the agreement enters into force, including fuel and water, and stipulates the rehabilitation of hospitals and bakeries, and the provision of rescue teams with rubble removal equipment.
The UN and its agencies, along with the Red Crescent and international organizations operating in the Gaza Strip, should be responsible for aid distribution.
Over the past two years, the Hamas leadership has accepted proposals for a ceasefire and the release of Israeli captives and Palestinian prisoners only for Israel to reject them and insist on continuing the war.
The major sticking point has been the duration of the ceasefire. Hamas wants a permanent end to the war, but Israel has been seeking a temporary truce that would allow it to resume its genocide and its destruction and displacement campaign in Gaza after its captives in the territory are released.
United Nations Secretary-General offices shield Israel and blacklist Hamas: EX-UN official
Press TV – August 16, 2025
A former senior UN human rights official has criticized offices controlled by the United Nations Secretary-General (UNSG) for their actions in shielding Israel and blacklisting Palestinian resistance movement Hamas during the ongoing genocidal war in the Gaza Strip.
Craig Mokhiber, former director of the New York Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said in a post on his X account on Saturday that the UNSG offices only report politically convenient issues rather than the reality of abuses committed in Gaza, which he said has led to a lack of accountability.
Mokhiber said there is a need for a more comprehensive and impartial approach to address human rights violations in the besieged Palestinian territory.
He further mentioned his longstanding criticism of the “politicized thematic offices under the UNSG”, while highlighting their reporting practices, which differ from the UN’s independent human rights rapporteurs.
The human rights lawyer went on to say that the failure to effectively address the Israeli regime’s actions in Palestine has highlighted the political corruption that exists within those offices, adding that they are often under pressure from powerful states, particularly in areas such as genocide, sexual violence, and children in conflict.
The former UN official further denounced as “shameful” a recent report issued by a UNSG-controlled office monitoring sexual violence in conflict for creating a new category called “on notice” to avoid blacklisting Israel, despite substantial evidence that exists to condemn the regime.
Conversely, the report has blacklisted Hamas, even though there is an acknowledged lack of evidence against the group, he said.
Mokhiber further slammed the double standard of the report for saying that a lack of access to Israel and areas in the Occupied Palestinian Territory had prevented the listing of Israel, while the same reason did not apply to Hamas.
He said these offices “do more harm than good” to the protection of human rights, adding that their dismantling has long been overdue.
Israel launched a genocidal war on Gaza on October 7, 2023, after Hamas carried out the surprise Operation Al-Aqsa Storm against the occupying entity in response to its intensified campaign of death and devastation against Palestine.
The regime’s bloody onslaught on Gaza has so far killed over 61,776 Palestinians, many of them women and children, while displacing the territory’s entire population of nearly two million people.
Preconditions, symbolic recognition and the ongoing erasure of Palestine
By Ramona Wadi | MEMO | August 12, 2025
September seems to be the month several Western countries have chosen to symbolically recognise the State of Palestine. The countdown to the hypothetical recognition, if it happens, will likely generate more attention than recognition itself. This is what Western diplomacy is all about, after all, when it comes to Palestine. The illusion of action.
Australia is one recent example. Almost two years since the start of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese surmised that “the war” has dragged on for far too long, and that it is time to recognise the State of Palestine, based upon “the commitments Australia has received from the Palestinian Authority.”
According to Australian media, the PA guaranteed that it would “recognise Israel’s right to exist, demilitarise and hold general elections,” as well as exclude Hamas from future governance. While Australia would not be the only country seeking such guarantees, the fact is that the PA is guaranteeing that recognising the State of Palestine will not move beyond symbolic recognition.
Not only is Israel fast encroaching upon what remains of Palestinian territory – the latest being the plans to occupy Gaza. The PA is giving guarantees that do not allow a state to emerge from symbolic recognition. Democratic elections do not ban electoral rivals, as the PA plans to do with Hamas. Neither should democratic elections include the elimination of opponents as happened with Nizar Banat in 2021. Recognising Israel is validating, normalising and accepting colonial plunder and the entire colonial enterprise, including genocide. Demilitarisation leaves a colonised population with no options for defence.
For Albanese, however, “This is an opportunity to deliver self-determination to the people of Palestine in a way that isolates Hamas, disarms it and drives it out of the region once and for all.” He added, “The international community is moving to establish a Palestinian state, and it is opposing actions which undermine the two-state solution.”
Albanese’s statements do not even sugarcoat the surface of the international community’s complicity in Israeli colonisation of Palestine and genocide in Gaza. Recognising the state of Palestine without a real emergence of a Palestinian state does not help to establish a Palestinian state. The international community has, for decades, approved of Israeli international law violations that undermined the two-state compromise, which has been declared obsolete several years back. What the move does is merely extend a life line to the defunct diplomacy which the international community adopted to force Palestinians into subjugation to colonisation, giving Israel time to plan its next steps and normalise the outcome. Nothing can save international diplomacy after the role it played in maintaining Israel’s genocide in Gaza, especially pathetic demonstrations of symbolic recognition of a state that cannot function as a state due to Israel’s colonial enterprise and the diplomatic support colonialism received from former colonial powers.
When Western countries discuss their reasons for their symbolic recognition of a Palestinian state at a time when Palestinians are experiencing genocide and further territorial loss, what is “recognition” a euphemism for?
The US wants Lebanon, Gaza and Iraq to disarm and will fail
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | August 7, 2025
The US Trump administration not only believes it can disarm Hezbollah, the PMU, and Hamas, but that they will all do so voluntarily. To add to this delusional approach, they continue to demonstrate that by abandoning their weapons, the people of the region will be subjected to endless instability.
Washington based think-tanks are pushing for the dismantlement of the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance through disarmament, the policy being clearly designed to isolate the Islamic Republic in order to also force it into capitulation. However, the approach to achieving this goal is so incredibly out of touch that it may achieve the very opposite results.
Using its Arab Regime allies, particularly the Gulf States, to apply pressure, US envoy Steve Witkoff has attempted to demand of Hamas that it fully disarm. This has been combined with calls from the Pentagon and Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, for Iraq to dismantle the Popular Mobilization Forces and prevent them from integrating fully within the fold of Baghdad’s security apparatus. Then we have the attempt to disarm Hezbollah in Lebanon, an effort led by US envoy Tom Barrack.
Starting with Gaza, the request in and of itself is simply not serious. The al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas would never simply disarm without any guarantees or processes to ensure the protection of the people of the Gaza Strip.
In fact, if we look at the resistance in its entirety in Gaza, they fight as one unit that is inseparable from the people’s popular will. Hamas is no longer just a political party, the al-Qassam Brigades armed wing of Hamas is now the resistance of a people suffering through a genocide.
Also, the Palestinian people have the example of the West Bank and what the situation looks like when the resistance is disarmed and abandons the struggle. When Israeli settlements expand, annexation orders are imposed, and ethnic cleansing begins, there will be nobody to even fight back.
The lessons taught to the Palestinian factions in Gaza were learnt in 1982. When the Israelis invaded Lebanon, killing around 20,000 Lebanese and Palestinians, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) eventually decided to hand over its weapons and its leadership to flee to Tunisia.
Almost immediately afterwards, a series of bloody civilian massacres took place against Palestinian refugees and the Shia Lebanese, killing thousands at a time when no considerable resistance force existed to fight back. Then, the Israelis occupied southern Lebanon.
Hezbollah was born in 1985 out of this experience, as an organic southern resistance which would eventually expel the occupiers in 2000. After the 2006 defeat inflicted on the Zionist regime, the Israelis dared not launch any major aggression against Lebanon for the best part of 17 years.
In the case of Iraq, the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) were formed in order to put down the Daesh insurgency and liberate the country from a wave of Takfiri death squads. It is a massive force today which exists as a protective mechanism that deters the return of such groups from the country.
Attempting to disband the PMU in Iraq is impossible by force and would lead to a civil war style situation, which could end up resulting in Iraqi groups securing even greater power and popular support inside of the country.
In the case of Lebanon, the fall of Syria’s former government and the way the US has so far handled the situation, has taught the diverse population valuable lessons. Even if the Lebanese leadership will work alongside the US in an attempt to seize Hezbollah’s weapons, it is clear to the populace that disarmament leaves Lebanon open to invasion from Syria and places the country at the will of the Zionist Entity.
If we look over to neighboring Syria, immediately upon the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, the Zionists invaded and have been attacking at will inside Syria ever since, with no resistance whatsoever. The new regime in Damascus even works alongside the Israelis as they steal more of its land, instead choosing to allow their allied militias to butcher minority communities throughout Syrian lands.
Everything we have seen occur across the region over the past 22 months, with the full support of the United States, teaches the Arab public that capitulation spells the end of their nations and leaves them vulnerable to endless abuses.
It appears, however, that officials and pro-war think-tanks in Washington are not capable of grasping what the reality on the ground truly looks like and how this could very quickly spiral out of control; and not in the US’ favor. None of these groups which form the Axis of Resistance are going to abandon their own people by simply handing over their weapons, especially given the overtly stated intentions of their enemies.
Hamas rules out giving up arms unless ‘independent, sovereign’ Palestinian state established
MEMO | August 2, 2025
The Palestinian resistance group Hamas said Saturday it will not give up its arms unless an “independent, fully sovereign” Palestinian state is established, Anadolu reports.
The statement came following reports by the Israeli daily Haaretz citing a recording attributed to US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff: “Hamas has said that they are prepared to be demilitarized.”
“We are very, very close to a solution to end this war,” Witkoff is also heard saying, according to Haaretz.
“Commenting on reports by some media outlets quoting US envoy Steve Witkoff as saying the movement expressed willingness to disarm, we reiterate that resistance and its weapons are a national and legitimate right as long as the occupation continues — a right recognized by international laws and conventions,” Hamas said in a statement on Telegram.
The group added that such rights “cannot be relinquished except with the full attainment of our national rights, foremost being the establishment of an independent, fully sovereign Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.”
Witkoff met families of Israeli hostages in Tel Aviv on Saturday, as hundreds rallied to demand a ceasefire deal that would secure their release from the Gaza Strip, Israel’s Haaretz newspaper reported.
Witkoff’s visit, his third to Hostage Square since the war began, came shortly after Palestinian groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad released footage showing two emaciated Israeli captives, Evyatar David and Rom Braslavski, prompting renewed outrage.
On Friday, Witkoff visited an aid center in southern Gaza operated by the controversial Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF).
Diplomatic merchandise: Exploiting the issue of Palestinian recognition
He said the aim was to give US President Donald Trump “a clear understanding of the humanitarian situation and help craft a plan to deliver food and medical aid to the people of Gaza.”
The visit comes amid mounting criticism of US-Israeli coordination in Gaza, particularly regarding the group’s distribution model, which Palestinians say serves as a tool for displacement under the guise of humanitarian relief as well as a “death trap” for many Palestinian aid seekers, with over 1,300 killed since May while waiting for relief supplies.
Hamas on Thursday denounced the visit as a “propaganda stunt” aimed at deflecting global outrage over what rights groups and UN officials have described as Israel’s systematic starvation campaign.
Since Oct. 7, 2023, at least 169 Palestinians, including 93 children, have died of hunger-related causes, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry.
Rejecting international calls for a ceasefire, the Israeli army has pursued a brutal offensive on Gaza since Oct. 7, 2023, killing more than 60,000 Palestinians, most of them women and children.
Last November, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former Defense 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.
Is Europe pushing for Palestinian statehood or Palestinian surrender?
By Malek al-Khoury | The Cradle | July 28, 2025
Since its inception in 1948, Israel has never operated within fixed borders. Expansion has always been its doctrine – not constrained by law, but propelled by force and endorsed by unwavering western support. Israel has refused to define its boundaries for almost eight decades because its very identity is rooted in a colonial ambition that has never truly ended.
From the Nakba (Catastrophe) to the Naksa (Setback), from territorial invasions to the annexation of Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank, the occupation state has continued to redraw its borders according to power, not legitimacy.
This expansionist project has only grown stronger with the rise of the messianic-nationalist current inside Israel, which sees full control over “Greater Israel” as a historical right that cannot be compromised.
Today, 77 years since the Nakba, Israel has advanced to full-throttle expansion mode – dispossessing Palestinians, destroying entire towns and villages, entrenching illegal Jewish settlements, and enforcing apartheid. Yet paradoxically, European states like France and the UK are preparing to recognize a “Palestinian state” precisely when Palestinian political geography is at its most fragmented, and when the Zionist project is at its most aggressive.
So what does this recognition actually mean? Is it a strategic achievement for Palestinians, or a diplomatic ruse that rebrands surrender as success?
A state without borders, a project without restraint
The 1917 Balfour Declaration marked the formal launch of a settler-colonial project in Palestine. What followed was not immigration but calculated dispossession – from British-facilitated land seizures and massacres, to the mass expulsions of the 1948 Nakba, which ethnically cleansed over 750,000 Palestinians.
This was not mere colonialism. It was ethnic replacement: Land was seized under imperial protection, then militarily conquered. This campaign never ended. It continued with the occupation of Gaza, Jerusalem, and the West Bank, and escalated after 1967. Israel’s goal has never been coexistence. It has always been Jewish supremacy.
The 1947 UN Partition Plan (Resolution 181) granted over 55 percent of historic Palestine to the Zionist movement, despite Jews owning just six percent of the land. The Zionist movement accepted this on paper to gain international legitimacy, then immediately violated its terms, occupying 78 percent of the territory by force.
To this day, the occupation state has not adopted a formal constitution, and the reason is that basing itself on the Partition Plan would have constrained its expansionist ambitions. The Zionist doctrine never recognized final borders, instead establishing a state with no official frontiers – because its ambitions stretch beyond Palestinian geography to include parts of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt.
The internal debate in Israel over declaring a “Jewish state” is not merely a legal argument, but an attempt to solidify an exclusionary and replacement-based identity – one that legally enshrines racial discrimination and denies Palestinians their status as an indigenous people.
Resistance realignment: 7 October and the Two-State shift
The earthquake triggered by Operation Al-Aqsa Flood shook not only Israel but also the political discourse of the Palestinian movement. Strikingly, Palestinian factions – including Hamas – have begun explicitly voicing support for the “Two-State Solution” after years of insisting on liberating historic Palestine in its entirety.
In an unprecedented statement, senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya said in May 2024:
“We are ready to engage positively with any serious initiative for a two-state solution, provided it entails a real Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital and without settlements.”
This tactical adaptation signals a significant shift. Key Palestinian actors are now openly considering a truncated state. Is this a reflection of changing power dynamics? Or an imposed realignment under regional and international duress?
Recognition as Leverage: France, Saudi Arabia, and normalization
Last week, in a post on X, French President Emmanuel Macron said:
“Consistent with its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognize the State of Palestine. I will make this solemn announcement before the United Nations General Assembly this coming September … We need an immediate ceasefire, the release of all hostages, and massive humanitarian aid for the people of Gaza. We must also ensure the demilitarization of Hamas, secure and rebuild Gaza. And finally, we must build the State of Palestine, guarantee its viability, and ensure that by accepting its demilitarization and fully recognizing Israel, it contributes to the security of all in the region. There is no alternative.”
France’s anticipated recognition of a Palestinian state in September is not driven by principle, but is a hard, cold geopolitical maneuver. It would appear that Paris is seeking closer ties with Riyadh, which has tethered normalization with Tel Aviv to progress on the Palestinian file. French recognition is thus a calculated signal to Saudi Arabia – not a gesture of solidarity with Palestinians.
In this equation, Palestine becomes currency. Its statehood is not affirmed as a right, but dangled as a precondition in normalization deals between Arab monarchies and the occupation state.
Strategic alignments: The Ankara–London Axis
With a third of MPs calling on British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to recognize Palestine, pressure is also piling on London.
In a statement, Starmer said:
“Alongside our closest allies, I am working on a pathway to peace in the region, focused on the practical solutions that will make a real difference to the lives of those that are suffering in this war. That pathway will set out the concrete steps needed to turn the ceasefire so desperately needed, into a lasting peace. Recognition of a Palestinian state has to be one of those steps. I am unequivocal about that.”
Britain, too, is not moving toward recognition out of moral clarity, but to reinforce its post-Brexit strategic axis with Turkiye. Ankara, a key trading partner of Israel and political backer of Hamas, views the recognition of Palestine as a tool to elevate its regional stature and energy leverage. For London, deepening ties with Turkiye promises economic and geopolitical dividends. The result is a converging Paris–Riyadh and Ankara–London recognition track.
Thus, two informal axes are forming: Paris–Riyadh and Ankara–London, both converging on the recognition of a Palestinian state. Yet neither axis approaches it from a principled belief in Palestinian rights, but rather through the lens of power, influence, and realpolitik.
The Palestinian state: Recognition without sovereignty
Even if every European country were to recognize Palestine, it would amount to little more than symbolism without enforcement. There would be no defined borders for the state, no control over its own territory, and no halt to the settlement expansion or annexation policies pursued by the occupation state.
Tel Aviv rejects the premise entirely. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that any future Palestinian state would be “a platform to destroy Israel,” and that sovereign security control must remain with Israel. He has repeatedly ruled out a return to the conditions that existed prior to 7 October.
The reality is that 68 percent of the West Bank, classified as Area C, remains under full Israeli control. More than 750,000 settlers are embedded across that territory, under the full protection of the occupation army. How can a state exist on occupied, fragmented land, under constant siege, and without sovereignty?
“I’ve just returned from a lecture tour around the world, and I can confidently say Israel’s global image and position are at their lowest point in history,” writes Israeli journalist Ben-Dror Yemini.
Yet despite this, Netanyahu’s far-right government is doubling down – pushing for full annexation of the occupied West Bank, eyeing new territorial footholds in Sinai, southern Syria, even Jordan, while maintaining military positions in south Lebanon.
Israel’s global brand may be eroding, but its strategic project is advancing.
If Israel is expanding and entrenching, while the Palestinian movement scales back demands and regional states normalize ties, what exactly has been achieved?
Resistance factions that once rejected Tel Aviv’s existence now propose statehood on its terms. European recognition comes with no teeth. Settlements grow. Displacement continues. This is not liberation. It is the burial of the dream under the guise of diplomacy.
The interim solution will become the final arrangement. The Palestinian “state” becomes a diplomatic euphemism – an empty structure praised in speeches, but denied on the ground.
Hamas denies operating camp in Aley, asserts Lebanese sovereignty
Al Mayadeen | July 28, 2025
Hamas has firmly denied claims circulating in the media that the Lebanese Army dismantled a Hamas armed training camp in Aley, Lebanon, and called on journalists to prioritize accuracy and professional integrity in their coverage.
In a statement, the Palestinian Resistance movement responded to reports circulated by some media outlets, newspapers, and websites claiming that “the Lebanese army dismantled an armed training camp in the Aley region belonging to Hamas.”
Hamas firmly denied having any armed training camp in the mentioned area or elsewhere in Lebanon, emphasizing that it has no intention of establishing such facilities in the first place.
The movement further emphasized its strong commitment to cooperation and coordination with the Lebanese state and its relevant authorities, as this contributes to maintaining civil peace and strengthening the fraternal Palestinian-Lebanese relationship. It also asserted respect for Lebanese sovereignty under all circumstances.
Hamas also called on all media outlets to adhere to accuracy and objectivity, ensuring that their reporting is guided by professional responsibility to avoid potentially severe repercussions that could further escalate tensions in Lebanon at the hands of the Israeli enemy.
Why Israel seeks a temporary Gaza truce to keep its genocide going
Behind the talk of calm, Tel Aviv is redrawing Gaza’s borders, displacing its population, and laying groundwork for permanent control, one truce at a time.
By Qassem Qassem | The Cradle | July 20, 2025
Twenty-one months into its brutal campaign against the Gaza Strip, Israel is again mulling a temporary ceasefire with the Palestinian resistance. Two brief truces have already collapsed into renewed bloodshed.
But is the genocidal war really coming to a close? This question looms over the proposed truce, raising doubts about whether Israel seeks an end, or simply a pause before its next assault.
This time, mediations led by Qatar and the US, with Egypt playing a minor role, are pushing for a 60-day cessation of hostilities. The deal hinges on a pledge from US President Donald Trump to extend the truce if talks progress.
Tel Aviv’s day-after plans for Gaza
These negotiations reflect a deeper shift in the occupation state’s security doctrine. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly declared his intention to reshape Gaza’s future beyond a temporary lull in fighting.
He insists on disarming the resistance, dismantling Hamas’s authority and control, and eliminating any future threat from the besieged enclave. In Tel Aviv’s vision for the “day after,” there is not even a role for the collaborative Palestinian Authority (PA) in the Strip.
At most, Israel may tolerate an occupation state-backed militia resembling the Yasser Abu Shabab group or deploy Arab security forces to support local merchants or clans in governing Gaza – until the PA is “reformed” to Washington’s satisfaction, with Israel maintaining overarching security and military control.
This plan dovetails with the long-standing aspiration of Israel’s far-right government to re-establish illegal settlements in northern Gaza. Netanyahu is lobbying his army to construct a “tent city” in Rafah to forcibly relocate 600,000 Palestinians, a blatant demographic engineering scheme.
The 60-day truce proposal includes a phased Israeli withdrawal from west to east, a halt to air raids, permission for food and humanitarian aid entry, and a prisoner exchange. Unlike previous ceasefires, Trump’s involvement is being marketed as a guarantee that the occupation forces will not resume attacks once the deadline expires – as they did immediately after the March truce.
Yet despite signs of possible relief for Gaza’s starving and besieged population, Israel still believes it has not achieved its core objective: dismantling Hamas. One unnamed Israeli official was recently quoted as saying: “The flexibility we’ve shown paves the way for an agreement, but Netanyahu clearly doesn’t intend to end the war.”
Any upcoming truce is thus likely a pause to prepare the battlefield for the next round. Still, renewed war could prove challenging given the limits of the occupation army and the deepening cracks in its society.
Reconstruction as leverage and the Morag corridor ploy
As part of ongoing pressure, anti-resistance forces are using Gaza’s reconstruction as leverage. Israel has floated a deceptive offer to allow Qatari and international funds into Gaza during the truce, which is an attempt to lure Hamas into believing the war is truly ending. This is, in reality, a calculated deception by Israel to manufacture the illusion of an approaching end to war and draw Hamas into a false sense of security.
According to a report on 10 July by Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, Israel has “tentatively agreed” to Qatari participation in rebuilding the Strip, provided it does not monopolize the process. Other states are expected to co-fund reconstruction to prevent funds from reaching Hamas, although Saudi Arabia and the UAE have made their commitment to Gaza’s reconstruction conditional on the war’s conclusion.
A major sticking point is Israel’s new “Morag Corridor,” carved between Khan Yunis and Rafah to replicate the Philadelphia Corridor separating Gaza from Egypt. Much like the Netzarim axis that once bisected the Strip, the Morag route is presented by Israel as vital for its security. Tel Aviv plans to use the corridor to isolate the Rafah tent city from northern Gaza—effectively creating a walled-off holding zone for displaced Palestinians.
Palestinian resistance factions have flatly rejected this scheme. Not only does it violate Palestinian sovereignty, but it would turn Gaza into a cluster of disconnected, besieged cantons, with Israel occupying nearly 40 percent of the territory.
On 14 July, Netanyahu’s government submitted a third withdrawal map to mediators. Leaks reveal that Israeli forces plan to remain in a 900-meter belt near Beit Hanoun and a 3.5-kilometer strip east of Rafah. In a post on X, Kan political correspondent Gili Cohen, citing sources familiar with the negotiations, said that Israel is now showing “flexibility” on broader withdrawals from Rafah and the Morag axis.
But Rafah remains the core obstacle to any deal. Israel insists on cramming 600,000 Palestinians into the southern city, either to push them into Egypt, where alarm over Israeli designs is mounting, or force them toward the sea. Tel Aviv and Washington are actively probing third countries to receive Gaza’s expelled population.
A tactical pause, not a peace plan
Netanyahu’s real goal is to secure strategic gains for the post-war phase. During his visit to Washington earlier this month, he sought a written US assurance that would allow Israel to resume its war, even under a formal ceasefire.
He plans to wield this assurance as political cover at home, particularly to placate extremist coalition partners like Itamar Ben Gvir (Jewish Power) and Bezalel Smotrich (Religious Zionism), who demand total war and Hamas’ annihilation.
Netanyahu’s envoy and strategic affairs minister Ron Dermer put it bluntly in a 14 July podcast interview with US columnist and political advisor Dan Senor:
“Right now, what we’re trying to do is get to a ceasefire … the minimum requirement is that the force responsible for the Oct. 7 attack is no more. They have lost control of Gaza due to their decision to act.”
According to Walla News, Netanyahu convinced Trump to delay the agreement by an additional week—bringing the timeline closer to the end of the Knesset’s summer session (late July). The paper noted that Trump is “tired of the war,” but Netanyahu managed to buy time, though what he offered in return remains unclear.
The proposed truce cannot be viewed in isolation from Israel’s broader strategy. Far from signaling the war’s end, it is a calculated intermission. Tel Aviv seeks to redraw Gaza’s demographic and security map, while Hamas focuses on regrouping and fortifying its battlefield presence.
Netanyahu’s recent moves prove that this is no pursuit of peace. What Israel wants is a lull long enough to dismantle Hamas’ political infrastructure, impose buffer zones, and reengineer the population through its “tent city” blueprint.
Palestinian affairs analyst Michael Milstein mocked Tel Aviv’s “day after” vision in a 13 July column in Yedioth Ahronoth, arguing that Gaza has become a constant testing ground for flimsy Israeli schemes that collapse shortly after being proposed. He described Israel’s latest military campaign as a “ferocious effort devoid of dramatic gains,” noting that its aggression in northern Gaza ahead of the last ceasefire produced no lasting achievements. These include past attempts to build isolated ‘bubbles’ of alternate governance in Gaza, and the so-called ‘Generals’ Plan,’ which failed to yield results even amid heavy attacks in the north. He pointed to the long record of failed experiments, from the village leagues in the West Bank, to the occupation’s backing of the Kataeb militias in Lebanon, to the eventual collapse of the South Lebanon Army. These models, he wrote, reflect a deeply flawed understanding of reality, rooted in the belief that brute military force can compel Hamas to disarm, surrender, or abandon Gaza entirely.
He noted two competing camps inside Israel: one that seeks phased withdrawal while postponing Hamas’ fate, and another pushing for full reoccupation based on the racist logic that “Arabs are only deterred by losing land” and that “settlements prevent terrorism.”
Rather than a moment of transition, this seems to be a continuation of Israel’s campaign by other means. So long as Tel Aviv avoids a political reckoning for its war on Gaza, every ceasefire will be a battlefield in disguise. Between a fleeting truce and a deepening occupation, Gaza stands today at a decisive crossroads — one where the illusion of peace masks a relentless colonial project.
