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.
Hamas rejects US allegations of Gaza aid centre attack
MEMO | July 7, 2025
The Government Media Office in Gaza has officially rejected claims by the US State Department alleging that the Palestinian resistance carried out a “bomb attack” targeting American personnel at aid distribution centres operated by the so-called “Gaza Humanitarian Foundation – GHF”.
In a statement issued on Sunday, the office said the accusations were entirely baseless and part of a clear attempt to justify the continued killing and starvation of Palestinian civilians in Gaza. It added that the claims reflect full alignment with the Israeli military narrative, which aims to legitimise war crimes by using fabricated security pretexts to justify excessive force against civilians.
The statement described GHF not as a humanitarian organisation, but as a security and intelligence front supported by both Israel and the United States.
The media office held the foundation responsible for the deaths of 751 civilians, injuries to 4,931 others, and the disappearance of 39 people. These casualties, it said, resulted from the chaos and danger surrounding the aid distribution centres established by the foundation in exposed and unsafe areas.
The statement stressed that the US State Department’s narrative seeks to whitewash the image of an organisation involved in war crimes. It also pointed out that over 130 international humanitarian organisations refuse to cooperate with GHF, viewing it as a cover for Israeli military objectives.
Details of Qatari negotiations framework for Gaza ceasefire revealed
Al Mayadeen | July 6, 2025
Qatari mediators put forward a negotiation framework to secure a lasting ceasefire deal between the Palestinian Resistance in Gaza and the Israeli occupation.
The Qatari proposal outlined the ceasefire’s terms and phases of implementation, though officials clarified that the published document was unofficial.
The proposed agreement calls for a 60-day ceasefire that would temporarily halt all military operations by both sides and includes a guarantee from US President Donald Trump that “Israel” will adhere to the truce throughout the agreed-upon period.
A complete halt to Israeli offensive operations in Gaza
The Qatari proposal states that all Israeli offensive military operations in Gaza will cease when the agreement takes effect, with the occupation’s aerial activities (both military and reconnaissance) halting daily for 10 to 12 hours during prisoner exchange days.
Additionally, the proposed terms outline “Israel’s” military redeployment in Gaza, specifying that on Day 1 after releasing 8 living Israeli captives, occupation forces will withdraw from northern areas and the Netzarim corridor to positions defined in previous agreement maps, with minor mutually agreed adjustments to be finalized later.
On day seven, following the release of 5 Israeli bodies, the occupation forces will redeploy in southern areas to positions previously agreed upon in the same past agreement maps, with minor adjustments to be finalized later.
Phased captive exchange
The proposed deal includes a prisoner exchange provision under which 10 living Israeli captives and 18 bodies from the previously agreed list of 58 would be released according to a phased schedule, with releases taking place on days 1, 7, 30, 50, and 60 following the ceasefire’s implementation.
The agreement outlines a specific release schedule, with 8 living Israeli captives to be released on the first day, 5 bodies to be returned on day 7, another 5 bodies on day 30, 2 living prisoners on day 50, and finally 8 bodies to be released on day 60 of the ceasefire period.
The proposal stipulates that “Israel” will simultaneously release Palestinian prisoners through a prearranged mechanism in exchange for both living Israeli captives and remains, with the process conducted discreetly without public displays or ceremonial events.
Ten days after the ceasefire takes effect, Hamas will provide complete documentation, including proof of life, medical reports, or death certificates, for all remaining Israeli captives. In return, “Israel” will provide complete records of Palestinians detained in Gaza since October 7, 2023, along with the number of deceased Gazans held in Israeli custody.
The Qatari proposal notes that Hamas is committed to ensuring the health, safety, and security of the captives throughout the ceasefire period.
A framework for negotiation
Moreover, Qatar supports continuing negotiations to establish the necessary arrangements for reaching a permanent ceasefire within 60 days while stipulating that upon reaching such an agreement, all remaining Israeli captives (both living and deceased) from “Israel’s” list of 58 individuals would be released. The proposal states that the temporary ceasefire may be extended if permanent ceasefire terms aren’t finalized in the given period.
The proposal affirms that negotiations mediated and guaranteed by international parties will begin on the first day to work out terms for a permanent ceasefire.
The negotiations will cover several key areas, including the terms for releasing all remaining Israeli captives in exchange for an agreed number of Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, the issues surrounding Israeli troop redeployment and withdrawal, along long-term security arrangements in Gaza. Additionally, the talks will cover post-war governance and reconstruction plans for Gaza that either party may propose, and announce a permanent ceasefire.
Support and guarantees
The document points out that Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani is “serious about both parties’ commitment to the ceasefire agreement, and insists that the negotiations during the temporary ceasefire period, if successfully concluded through an agreement between the two sides, should lead to a permanent resolution of the conflict.”
Mediators, the United States, Egypt, and Qatar, will ensure the ceasefire holds throughout the 60 days and will guarantee that serious discussions take place regarding arrangements for a permanent ceasefire.
The mediators will also ensure negotiations continue seriously for an extended period until both parties reach an agreement and maintain all measures outlined in this framework.
US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff will arrive in the region to finalize the agreement and will lead the negotiations. Meanwhile, Trump announces a ceasefire, and the document states that the United States and President Trump are committed to working toward ensuring that fair negotiations continue until a final agreement is reached.
Humanitarian aid on the agenda
Regarding humanitarian aid, the proposal stipulates that assistance will be delivered to Gaza immediately upon Hamas’ acceptance of the ceasefire agreement, specifying that the delivery mechanism will align with the provisions outlined in the January 19th agreement.
The aid package covers rebuilding water, power, and sewage systems, restoring hospitals and bakeries, providing equipment for rubble clearance, and reopening the Rafah crossing for travelers, patients, and trade.
The Qatari proposal emphasized that humanitarian aid would be distributed to Gaza’s population through the United Nations and its agencies, along with the Palestinian Red Crescent.
Qatari-backed Gaza ceasefire proposal: What does it include?
Al Mayadeen | July 3, 2025
Baruch Yadid and Amichai Stein, analysts at the Israeli outlet i24NEWS, have revealed the terms of a proposed ceasefire agreement brokered by Qatar, aimed at stopping the Israeli war on Gaza.
According to the report, the proposal is essentially a modified version of the earlier Witkoff Plan. “Israel”, the United States, and intermediary nations are now awaiting Hamas’ response after “Israel” reportedly conditionally agreed to the outline.
This approval reportedly followed a meeting between Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer and Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff.
Multiple sources confirmed that “Israel” has agreed, with certain conditions, to resume negotiations on ending the war even after the 60-day ceasefire period. A source further stated that the Trump administration made it clear the ceasefire would be extended beyond 60 days if talks were deemed serious.
During this time, the US President would commit to ensuring the continuity of the ceasefire. However, the report notes that “Israel” has not pledged to end the war, but rather to engage in dialogue aimed at ending it. Regarding the scope of Israeli withdrawal during the ceasefire, two sources indicated that negotiations are still ongoing over the scale of the withdrawal and the future deployment of Israeli forces.
The plan includes the release of 10 captives held by Hamas, eight on the first day and two on the 50th day, as well as the return of 18 bodies. In return, a two-month ceasefire would be implemented, during which negotiations would be held to reach a permanent end to the war, with each side presenting its demands.
Captive exchange, withdrawal schedule
The release schedule for captives and bodies is as follows:
- Day 1: Release of 8 live captives
- Day 7: Return of 5 bodies
- Day 30: Return of 5 additional bodies
- Day 50: Release of 2 live captives
- Day 60: Return of 8 additional bodies
Humanitarian aid will flow immediately upon Hamas’ acceptance of the proposal, in line with the January 9 agreement, with sufficient quantities and oversight from the UN and the Red Crescent.
On day one, following the release of the eight captives, “Israel” is expected to begin withdrawal from northern Gaza according to pre-agreed maps. By day 7, after the return of five bodies, withdrawal from southern Gaza is to commence. Additionally, technical teams will work on delineating withdrawal boundaries in swift follow-up negotiations.
Long-term negotiations
Phase five of the agreement initiates negotiations for a permanent ceasefire, beginning on day one of the truce. On Day two, arrangements will be launched across four key areas:
- Criteria for exchanging remaining prisoners
- Declaration of a permanent ceasefire
- Long-term security arrangements in Gaza
- Commitment to international guarantees
The United States, under the Trump administration, has pledged to guarantee the ceasefire for the full two months and potentially beyond, should serious negotiations continue. There will be no official ceremonies or public displays during prisoner exchanges.
Information sharing on prisoners, captives
On day 10, Hamas will provide full information (proof of life, medical records, or confirmation of death) for all remaining captives. In return, “Israel” will share comprehensive data on Palestinian prisoners detained since October 7, 2023.
Mediators, including Qatar, Egypt, and the United States, will be responsible for ensuring the negotiations progress sincerely. Should the talks require more time, the ceasefire may be extended according to agreed-upon protocols.
If a final agreement is achieved, the remaining captives will be released.
US President Donald Trump is expected to announce the agreement, with the United States reaffirming its commitment to fostering good-faith negotiations. Also, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff is expected to lead the dialogue aimed at bringing the war to a conclusion.
Hamas says mediation efforts ongoing
On another note, the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas confirmed on Wednesday that mediators are exerting intense efforts to bridge gaps between negotiating parties and lay the groundwork for a potential framework agreement to end the ongoing war on Gaza.
In an official statement, Hamas said it was approaching the current phase of talks with a high sense of responsibility, holding national consultations to evaluate the proposals received from mediators.
The movement emphasized that its primary objective in these discussions is to achieve a deal that guarantees a complete end to Israeli aggression, ensures the withdrawal of the occupation forces, and enables the urgent delivery of humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip.
Israel’s war on Iran is not about nuclear weapons
It is, and has always been, about regime change and breaking the Axis of Resistance
By Robert Inlakesh | RT | June 19, 2025
The claim that has been adopted by the United States, Israel and its European partners, that the attack on Iran was a “pre-emptive” attempt to stop Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons, is demonstrably false. It holds about as much weight as the allegations against Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in 2003 and this war of aggression is just as illegal.
For the best part of four decades, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been claiming that Iran is on the verge of acquiring a nuclear weapon. Yet, every single attempt to strike a deal which would bring more monitoring and restrictions to Iran’s nuclear program has been systematically dismantled by Israel and its powerful lobbying groups in Western capitals.
In order to properly assess Israel’s attack on Iran, we have to establish the facts in this case. The Israeli leadership claim to have launched a pre-emptive strike, but have presented no evidence to support their allegations that Iran was on the verge of acquiring a nuclear weapon. Simply stating this does not serve as proof, it is a claim, similar to how the US told the world Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.
Back in March, the US Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard testified before a Senate Intelligence Committee that the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.”
On top of this, Iran was actively participating in indirect negotiations with the US to reach a new version of the 2015 Nuclear Deal. Donald Trump announced Washington would unilaterally withdraw from the agreement in 2018, instead pursuing a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign at the behest of Israel.
Despite the claims of Netanyahu and Trump that Iran was violating the Nuclear Deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a report which stated Iran was in full compliance with the deal at the time.
If you trace back every conversation with neo-conservatives, Israeli war hawks and Washington-based think tanks, their opposition to the Obama-era Nuclear Deal always ends up spiraling into the issues of Iran’s ballistic missile program and its support for regional non-State actors.
Israeli officials frequently make claims about Iran producing a nuclear weapon in “years”, “months” or even “weeks,” this has become almost second nature. Yet their main issue has always been with Iran’s support for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, who strive for the creation of a Palestinian State.
Proof of all this is simple. Israel, by itself, cannot destroy Iran’s vast nuclear program. It is not clear the US can destroy it either, even if it enters the war. An example of the US’ ineffectiveness at penetrating Iranian-style bunkers, built into mountainous ranges, as many of Iran’s nuclear facilities are, was demonstrated through the American failure to destroy missile storage bases in Yemen with its bunker-buster munitions, which were dropped from B-2 bombers.
Almost immediately after launching his war on Iran, Netanyahu sent out a message in English to the Iranian people, urging them to overthrow their government in an attempt to trigger civil unrest. The Israeli prime minister has since all but announced that regime change is his true intention, claiming that the operation “may lead” to regime change.
Israel’s own intelligence community and military elites have also expressed their view that their air force alone is not capable of destroying the Iranian nuclear program. So why then launch this war, if it is not possible to achieve the supposed reason it was “pre-emptively” launched?
There are two possible explanations:
The first is that the Israeli prime minister has launched this assault on Iran as a final showdown in his “seven front war,” with which he hopes to conclude the regional conflict through a deadly exchange that will ultimately inflict damage on both sides.
In this scenario, the desired outcome would be to conclude the war with the claim that Netanyahu has succeeded at destroying or has significantly degraded Iran’s nuclear program. He would also throw in claims, like we already see him making, that huge numbers of Iranian missiles and drones were eliminated. This would also make the opening Israeli strike, which killed senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders and nuclear scientists, make sense. It would all be the perfect blend of propaganda to sell a victory narrative.
On the other hand, the assumption would be that Tehran would also claim victory. Then both sides are able to show the results to their people and tensions cool down for a while. If you are to read what the Washington-based think-tanks are saying about this, most notably The Heritage Foundation, they speak about the ability to contain the war.
The second explanation, which could be an added bonus that the Israelis and US are hoping could come as a result of their efforts, is that this is a full-scale regime change war that is designed to rope in the US.
Israel’s military prestige was greatly damaged in the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, and since that time there has been no victory achieved over any enemy. Hamas is still operating in Gaza and is said to have just as many fighters as when the war began, Hezbollah was dealt significant blows but is still very much alive, while Yemen’s Ansarallah has only increased its strength. This is an all round stunning defeat of the Israeli military and an embarrassment to the US.
As is well known, Iran is the regional power that backs all of what is called the Axis of Resistance. Without it, groups like Hezbollah and Hamas would be significantly degraded. Evidently, armed resistance to Israeli occupation will never end as long as occupied people exist and live under oppressive rule, but destroying Iran would be devastating for the regional alliance against Israel.
The big question however, is whether regime change is even possible. There is a serious question mark here and it seems much more likely that this will end up on a slippery slope to nuclear war instead.
What makes the Israeli-US claim that this war is somehow pre-emptive, for which there is no proof at all, all the more ridiculous of a notion, is that if anything, Iran may now actually rush to acquire a nuclear weapon for defensive purposes. If they can’t even trust the Israelis not to bomb them with US backing, while negotiations were supposed to be happening, then how can a deal ever be negotiated?
Even in the event that the US joins and deals a major blow to the Iranian nuclear program, it doesn’t mean that Iran will simply abandon the program altogether. Instead, Tehran could simply end up rebuilding and acquiring the bomb years later. Another outcome of this war could end up being Israeli regime change, which also appears as if it could now be on the table.
Robert Inlakesh is a political analyst, journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in London, UK. He has reported from and lived in the Palestinian territories and currently works with Quds News. Director of ‘Steal of the Century: Trump’s Palestine-Israel Catastrophe’.
The rise of Abu Shabab: Mapping the Gaza militia armed by Israel
By Muhammad Shehada | The New Arab | June 10, 2025
A political earthquake hit Israel last week when former Defence Minister Avigdor Liberman revealed that “the Israeli government is giving weapons to a group of criminals and felons, identified with Islamic State [in Gaza], at the direction of the prime minister”.
Netanyahu has since admitted that Israel had been “running” proxy militias in Gaza, but tried to put a positive spin on it, claiming that such a move aims to challenge Hamas’s rule.
But branding these gangs as potential rivals to Hamas masks the very goal of why Israel created them in the first place. Around 300 untrained thieves, drug dealers, criminals, and convicted murderers cannot overpower Hamas’s estimated 30,000 militants.
Their actual role has more to do with advancing Israel’s genocide, starvation, and ethnic cleansing in Gaza while creating plausible deniability.
Furthermore, recent evidence indicates that Israel may have been collaborating with some of these Islamic State-linked elements even before 7 October.
Abu Shabab: A front for an Israeli proxy?
The most prominent gang leader in Gaza is Yasser Abu Shabab. His name first appeared in August 2024 on Hamas-linked social media groups as the figure responsible for looting the vast majority of humanitarian aid and reselling it on the black market for astronomical prices.
A senior security source told The New Arab that Abu Shabab’s gang had been active for months before then.
Local authorities knew Abu Shabab well. He was serving a long sentence in prison for the possession of large quantities of drugs, according to three knowledgeable sources. He was one of many inmates who escaped under the cover of Israel’s war on Gaza in October 2023.
Some other inmates were released on parole when Israel began bombing government facilities. Israeli newspapers like Maariv and Yediot Ahronot confirmed Abu Shabab’s criminal history through people close to him, and even added that he had links to the Islamic State (IS) through smuggling drugs from Sinai into Gaza.
Police in Gaza were perplexed when he emerged as a top gang leader. The security source told The New Arab that Abu Shabab is 35 years old, thin, weak, short (around 150cm in height), uncharismatic, illiterate, has strabismus in one eye, and has never received military training.
To them, he didn’t seem like someone with the leadership skills necessary to form a group of 300 armed militants, steal truckloads of aid, and store it under the radar.
Local authorities quickly decided that Abu Shabab was merely a front for an Israeli astroturfing campaign to maintain its policy of starvation in Gaza after the international community pressured Netanyahu to ease his total siege and allow a trickle of aid into the enclave.
What made this clear, according to them, is how Israeli drones bombed emergency committee volunteers or police officers every time they came close to thwarting a looting attempt by that gang in particular.
By late September 2024, Abu Shabab was talked about in Gaza as an Israeli-backed collaborator, not just a gang leader. That is when Hamas militants attempted to ambush him, firing around 90 bullets at a vehicle they thought belonged to Abu Shabab.
The vehicle, however, was identical to the one used by Islam Hijazi, the program officer of a US charity called Heal Palestine. She was tragically killed in the incident.
Two months later, Abu Shabab received widespread media attention after he burned a fuel truck and completely shut down the route used by aid convoys to retaliate against another Hamas ambush that killed his brother Fathi and 21 other members of his gang.
Soon after, the Washington Post revealed that the UN had named Abu Shabab in an internal memo as the main figure behind aid looting under “passive or active IDF protection”. This left little room for doubt that Abu Shabab’s gang was a tool for Israel to maintain starvation while externalising blame.
Mapping gang leaders: IS, ex-PA intel officers, and murderers
Abu Shabab’s deputy is thought to be Ghassan al-Dahini, 38, reportedly a former lieutenant in the Palestinian Authority (PA). Dahini is the one running the gang’s operations on the ground and actively trying to recruit new members, along with Saddam Abu Zakkar, per local authorities. His Facebook profile displays Israeli hostage emojis.
Another senior Palestinian security source told The New Arab that Dahini was a member of the “Army of Islam”, the extremist group responsible for kidnapping journalist Alan Johnston in 2007.
The group pledged allegiance to IS in 2015. Ghassan’s brother, Mohammed, died in prison after he was detained on drug-related offences, and Ghassan himself was imprisoned twice in March 2020 and November 2022, per the source. He added that “the Army of Islam relied on Dahini for the Sinai smuggling routes”.
On Sunday, Dahini posted a video of himself in military gear in Eastern Rafah close to Israel’s perimeter fence. He was standing next to a white pickup truck with a UAE license plate from Sharjah and firing a brand-new Serbian Zastava rifle.
Another prominent gang leader in Rafah is Shadi Soufi, a convicted murderer who was awaiting a death sentence before 7 October for killing a Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) leader. Like Yasser, he also escaped prison during the war and was named by humanitarian organisations as responsible for looting aid under Israeli protection in Rafah.
Soufi, al-Dahini, and Abu Shabab are from the same Bedouin Tarabin clan that stretches across Rafah, Israel’s Negev desert, Egypt’s Sinai, and Jordan. Abu Shabab’s family recently disowned him for collaborating with Israel and said they will go after him to hold him accountable.
Another prominent leader of the Abu Shabab gang is Essam Soliman Nabahin, 35, a convicted murderer and IS member. He was implicated in a series of bombings against Hamas in 2015 by extremist Salafist groups and escaped to Sinai to formally join IS’s ranks. He caught the attention of Egyptian media in 2017 after taking part in attacks against the Egyptian army.
Nabahin’s name resurfaced in June 2023 when the police raided a house in central Gaza where he was hiding. He killed a police officer and was convicted in a military court before his escape in the early days of the war.
Israel says Nabahin was previously “recorded launching rockets into Israel without coordination with Hamas”.
Local authorities in Gaza have long suspected that IS-linked individuals like Nabahin were being pushed by Israel’s Shin Bet to fire one or two primitive projectiles sporadically to give Israel a pretext to strike Gaza and bomb specific targets. Hence, the police detained those militants repeatedly.
A senior Palestinian security source told The New Arab that authorities in Gaza caught a collaborator in 2018 who directed such occasional rocket attacks to give Israel cover for military action in Gaza.
Other members of the gang include multiple known drug dealers and convicted murderers.
How is Israel helping them?
Israel’s government has admitted it provided weapons to these gangs, mostly rifles and other light weaponry, in addition to money and equipment. Footage posted by Abu Shabab’s gang showed them driving in white pickup trucks with machineguns on top that looked virtually identical to those of Hamas.
In addition, Israel provides these gangs with safe refuge in areas fully depopulated by the Israeli military, like Rafah, and declared “extermination zones”, where any Palestinian entering would be killed on the spot. They are also provided with logistical support, protection, and even access to Israeli territory.
A Palestinian journalist documented one case of a gang member crossing into Israel, which could explain how those gangs disappeared completely during the ceasefire last January.
On the ground, the Abu Shabab gang has established warehouses operated with forklifts where they store looted aid. They have also established a military complex, according to the UN, which said the Israeli army would force aid convoys to drive through the areas where the gangs had positioned their militants and put up checkpoints to loot trucks.
And where the Israeli military goes, so do the gangs. After Israel issued forcible expulsion orders for Khan Younis and raided the European hospital and its surrounding area, Abu Shabab moved into the ‘Jarghoun’ villa in that very same area, per security sources.
On Tuesday, Israeli news channel i24 reported that Israel had launched airstrikes to protect the gang after it was attacked by Hamas militants in southern Gaza. The strikes killed four Hamas members.
What role do the gangs play on Israel’s behalf?
The Israeli-backed gangs in Gaza have become an unofficial arm of the Israeli military. For instance, whenever Israel gets pressured to allow food into Gaza, it immediately unleashes the gangs to maintain their use of starvation as a weapon of war, while blaming it on Hamas.
Experts believe Israel is using starvation as a tool for genocide by imposing conditions on a group “calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”. Prolonged starvation inflicts permanent mental and physical damage, particularly on children.
Israel has also been using these gangs to orchestrate chaos and engineer societal collapse through attacks on markets, shops, private businesses, homes, warehouses, soup kitchens, and other places vital to maintaining the population’s survival.
For instance, in early May 2025, a gang attacked a communal kitchen in Gaza. As soon as volunteers arrived to stop the looting, Israel bombed it and killed six volunteers, which implies it was a coordinated attack.
The Israeli army also sends the gangs on reconnaissance and surveillance missions in dangerous areas. Last month, Hamas released footage of an ambush it carried out against armed men in Rafah whom it thought were undercover Israeli troops. They turned out to be Abu Shabab militants.
Israel also uses the gangs to infiltrate Palestinian society and gather intelligence, as well as to kidnap and interrogate Palestinians by luring them with the promise of food, as documented by Palestinian journalist Younis Tirawi.
Israel is using proxy gangs for the final phase of the war
The most concerning use of these gangs, however, is Israel’s recently announced plan to push Gazans into camps in Rafah on Egypt’s borders to depopulate and destroy “everything that remains” of the rest of the enclave. This is a precursor to Israel’s declared goal of the mass expulsion of Palestinians into Egypt and other countries.
The Abu Shabab gang recently announced establishing an encampment area in eastern Rafah near the Egyptian borders and is using the very aid they have been systematically looting to lure starved Gazans into moving there.
This announcement was preceded by a clear rebranding psyop, where the same gang responsible for looting aid suddenly and shamelessly declared itself as a new “security force” that aims to “protect aid from looting”. They have since emerged in brand-new military and police uniforms in the Israeli-designated buffer zone in Rafah, where no Palestinians are allowed to enter.
Remarkably, Israel has allowed these gang members to wear Palestinian flags and insignia on their uniforms, while at the same time refusing to let the Palestinian Authority’s staff at the Rafah border crossing wear any such symbols.
In other words, Israel is using these gangs as a front. The Israeli army knows that if it orders Gazans to come to camps in eastern Rafah, people will immediately know it’s a trap for mass expulsion. But if a uniformed Palestinian force with good PR on social media makes such a demand, some people might fall for the trap.
Israel has used this same proxy tactic in Lebanon against Palestinians in 1982, where the Israeli military bolstered the South Lebanon Army (SLA) and used it and other militias to commit the Sabra and Shatila massacre, which saw 3,500 Palestinians killed.
Those collaborators collapsed after the Israeli army’s withdrawal from Southern Lebanon, as their leaders surrendered or fled to Israel. The same fate awaits these new Israeli-backed gangs once the Gaza genocide comes to an end.
Muhammad Shehada is a Palestinian writer and analyst from Gaza and the EU Affairs Manager at Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor.
Follow him on Twitter: @muhammadshehad2
