Saudi Arabia’s militarization of Red Sea will not safeguard shipping in waterway: Yemen
Press TV – August 1, 2026
Saudi Arabia’s decision to build an international coalition and militarize the Red Sea will not protect its vessels in the waterway, says a prominent member of Yemen’s Supreme Political Council, warning that such move will mount regional tensions and complicate the security landscape.
Abdulaziz bin Habtour, in a statement issued on Friday, called the proposed Saudi maritime coalition a facade for persisting with the aggression and blockade against Yemen.
He stated that the Bab al-Mandab Strait continues to be accessible for international navigation, emphasizing that Yemen’s maritime measures target only Saudi vessels, calling them a reaction to the blockade placed on Yemen.
Bin Habtour said that earlier warnings to the US-led “Prosperity Guardian” coalition underscored that the Red Sea crisis couldn’t be resolved through military force, but by terminating Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza and removing the blockade.
He noted that removal of the Saudi blockade and cessation of the military campaign against Yemen, instead of militarizing the Bab al-Mandab Strait, is the sole method to ease regional tensions.
Reuters quoted people familiar with the deliberations that Saudi Arabia seeks to form an international coalition against Yemen in the Red Sea.
The coalition’s composition has not been finalized and discussions are ongoing with numerous countries, the sources were quoted as saying.
On July 20, the Sana’a government declared a maritime blockade against Saudi Arabia, stating that its authorities have enforced “an unjust and oppressive siege” on Yemen for almost 12 years, “looting our resources and enforcing a total blockade.”
Since then, the Yemeni Armed Forces said they have launched attacks on Saudi vessels in the Red Sea.
Saudi Arabia and its Arab allies launched the blockade on Yemen as part of a full-scale war since March 2015, with military, political, and logistical support from the United States and other Western states.
The war has killed tens of thousands of Yemenis, while consistently falling short of its main objective of restoring power to Yemen’s former Riyadh-friendly regime.
Following a fragile UN-brokered ceasefire in 2022, the United States, Britain, and the Israeli regime waged many rounds of aggression against Yemen. The attacks sought to cripple Sana’a’s capability to stage solidarity strikes against Israeli targets in response to Tel Aviv’s war of genocide on the Gaza Strip.
Lobbying for Zionism reviewed by David Miller
By David Miller | July 30, 2026
Did Zionism begin as a Christian project which was only later a Jewish movement?
This is what Ilan Pappé says in the book Lobbying for Zionism.
In my review of the book, I show this is wrong.
Here is an excerpt:
The contribution of the first section of the book is to unearth the hidden history of the Christian Zionist movement. This is a fascinating and useful account of the contribution of a certain fraction of practical British imperialism to the idea of the construction of a Jewish state in the historic territory of Palestine.
In the conclusion, Pappé mentions that ‘Christian fundamentalists, who, as I’ve shown, were the first Zionists in the modern era’. He also states that ‘Zionism began as a Christian project, and thus the early lobbyists were what we would call Christian Zionists today.’ He goes on to criticise Mearsheimer and Walt, saying they ‘described this Christian lobby as a junior partner in the overall lobbying effort in the USA. This appeared to be the case in 2007 — but the picture was very different nearly a decade later during the Trump era.’
But of course, the picture was not very different either during Trump’s first or second presidency. Christian Zionists do have greater numbers of foot soldiers than do Jewish Zionists, but they have only a handful of representatives at the top of the Trump power matrix (for example, Pence and Pompeo in the first period, and Hegseth and Huckabee in the second). As reporting in the Forward, or JFeed, shows, it is Jews that dominate in terms of power players and finance.
Pappé’s conclusion is predicated on his analysis at the start. The opening words of the book are: ‘Zionism began as an evangelical Christian concept and later an active project.’
The main progenitors of the idea were, according to Pappé, Lord Shaftesbury, Colonel Henry Churchill, and Sir George Gawler from the 1830s onward. Though Jewish Zionists of the time are mentioned, such as Sir Moses Montefiore, this all predates the moment when, as Pappé writes, ‘the first settlers arrived [in Palestine] on 6 July 1882’, a group of 14 Russian Jews who arrived at Jaffa Port.
But, as Pappé surely knows, Jewish settlement in Palestine long pre-dates 1882 (see below). Except for Montefiore, none of these figures are mentioned in Pappé’s index and Pappé does not mention Montefiore’s numerous visits to Palestine, or his role in financing Jewish settlement.
In the end, then, the book appears to be advancing a case which is not supported either by the known facts on Jewish settlement in Palestine or by empirically grounded research on the activities of the Zionist movement.
Read the full review via The Column, the new magazine from @ukcolumn .
UK charges over 1,500 people over signs opposing Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza
The Cradle | July 31, 2026
British authorities listed the cases of 1,579 people at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 30 July, holding cardboard signs opposing Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, according to the campaign group Defend Our Juries.
The group said the hearing had been pushed back to October, but that hundreds of defendants were never told, leaving them unsure whether they were required to appear, pointing to the confusion as evidence of a crisis the courts cannot absorb.
One court notice seen by Middle East Eye told the recipient they must attend on 30 July, then instructed them in the same letter not to come to court.
Defendants who arrived were handed a further letter addressed to whomever it may concern, adjourning all cases to 26 October.
The chaos came on the same day the Supreme Court ruled that Palestine Action can challenge its proscription.
Over 3,500 arrests have been made under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000 of people holding cardboard signs reading, “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action,” Defend Our Juries said.
Those cases are tried summarily and carry a maximum of six months in prison, and include senior citizens, faith leaders, and first-time protesters.
In the past two months, 96 people have filmed videos inviting support for Palestine Action, with many also declaring membership.
The declaration of membership exposes them to Sections 11 and 12 of the same act, which are heard before juries and carry sentences of up to 14 years.
Eight of those who filmed have been arrested, seven in dawn raids on people’s homes, with another 14 detained outside New Scotland Yard on 5 July.
Home Office figures cited by the group show 92 percent of terrorism arrests in the year to March 2026 were linked to alleged support for Palestine Action, with the average demographic profile of the suspect being a 59-year-old white British woman.
A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries said UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham had inherited the crisis, asking “does he really want to be seen locking up pensioners, priests and 84-year-old Reverend Sue Parfitt while people convicted of violent offenses are released early?”
On 15 June 2026, the Court of Appeal ruled the government’s classification of Palestine Action as a terrorist entity was lawful, overturning the February 2026 High Court judgment that had called it unlawful and disproportionate.
Islamic Jihad says reported deal between Palestinian factions, Israel ‘inaccurate’
MEMO | July 31, 2026
The Palestinian Islamic Jihad movement said Friday that the announced agreement between Palestinian factions and Israel was “inaccurate,” adding that it has reservations over the deal in its current form, Anadolu reports.
In a statement, the movement’s spokesperson said: “What has been announced regarding an agreement between the Palestinian factions and the enemy (Israel) is inaccurate, and we have reservations about it in its currently circulated form.”
The Palestinian group’s statement came after US President Donald Trump announced that an agreement had been reached for the complete disarmament of Hamas and other armed groups in Gaza, with Israeli forces set to withdraw in phases as the process moves forward.
Trump also credited Egypt, Qatar, and Turkiye for helping broker what he described as a “historic breakthrough,” saying the agreement would be implemented gradually, with an International Stabilization Force working alongside a new Palestinian police force to assume responsibility for security in Gaza.
Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza has killed more than 73,000 Palestinians and injured over 174,000 others, most of them women and children, while destroying about 90% of the enclave’s infrastructure.
The ceasefire was brokered under Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza, which is being overseen by the Board of Peace, which he chairs.
Despite the ceasefire, which took effect on Oct. 10, 2025, Israel has continued daily attacks across Gaza, killing 1,214 Palestinians and injuring 3,977 others, most of them women and children, while causing widespread destruction.
Ceuta crisis sparks online speculation over Israel’s role in pressuring Spain
MEMO | July 31, 2026
The emergency in Spain’s North African enclave of Ceuta has sparked an intense online debate over Israel’s possible role in efforts to punish Madrid over its outspoken support for Palestine.
The speculation intensified after social media users resurfaced articles published earlier this year by pro-Israel analysts who argued that Israel and the US should aid Morocco over its claim to Ceuta and Melilla as a means of pressuring Spain.
Israeli sources revealed that in March, Michael Rubin, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, called on Morocco to organise a new “Green March” into the Spanish enclaves. Writing for the US-based Middle East Forum, Rubin suggested that Moroccans approach Ceuta and Melilla with bulldozers, cross into the territories unarmed and raise the Moroccan flag. He framed the proposal as a response to what he portrayed as Spain’s anti-colonial hypocrisy.
A separate article published by the Israeli outlet Ynet in April recommend that Israel could use its influence in Washington to help Morocco “recover” Ceuta and Melilla. The author, Middle East Forum fellow Amine Ayoub, presented support for Rabat’s territorial claim as a means of punishing Spain for challenging US and Israeli policies.
Ayoub proposed three ways for Israel to apply pressure: direct diplomatic signals to support Morocco, lobbying through Washington and repeatedly accusing Spain of hypocrisy over its recognition of Palestine. He concluded that helping Morocco “recover” Ceuta and Melilla would “punish” a NATO member which had challenged US and Israeli policies.
These earlier proposals have fuelled online debate over the latest crisis. Commentator Bruno Maçães drew attention to the April article, noting that pro-Israel analysts had urged Israel to help Morocco take control of Ceuta as a way of punishing Spain for its support for Palestine.
Social media users also shared a 2019 tweet by Yair Netenyahu the son of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu. “If the situation in Ceuta is the result of the “anti-Israel Spanish Left” why was Yair Netanyahu calling for Arabs and Muslims to “free Ceuta” in 2019?” asked a popular commentator on X sharing Netanyahu’s tweet calling for Muslims to take over Ceuta.
“This entire charade was orchestrated by Zionists to teach Spain a lesson and set an example for other nations if they don’t get in line.”
Details also emerged of Israel’s top diplomat in Spain, Dana Erlich, denying in April that the Israeli government was considering supporting Morocco’s claims over Ceuta and Melilla. She maintained that the matter was not among the Netanyahu government’s priorities.
The resurfacing of the articles coincided with thousands of people crossing from Morocco by land and sea, overwhelming the enclave’s reception system and prompting Spain to deploy police and military reinforcements. At least 19 bodies were recovered from the water as Spanish and Moroccan forces moved to halt further crossings.
These suspicions also drew heavily on a May 2021 row, when around 8,000 people entered Ceuta after Moroccan border controls appeared to have been relaxed during a diplomatic dispute with Spain. Spain’s defence minister at the time accused Morocco of “blackmail”, while the influx was widely interpreted as retaliation for Madrid’s decision to provide medical treatment to Western Sahara’s Polisario Front leader, Brahim Ghali.
Morocco’s close military and intelligence relationship with Israel has added to the speculation. The two countries signed a defence agreement in 2021 covering intelligence cooperation, military procurement and defence industries. Israeli-made drones and other weapons have since become an increasingly important part of Morocco’s military modernisation.
Spain, meanwhile, has become one of Israel’s most vocal critics in Europe. Madrid recognised the State of Palestine in May 2024 and subsequently imposed an arms embargo on Israel, prohibited vessels carrying fuel for the Israeli military from using Spanish ports and barred aircraft transporting weapons to Israel from Spanish airspace. Israel denounced the measures as anti-Semitic, prompting Spain to recall its ambassador for consultations.
Was the Drone Attack on US LNG Tanker in Egypt a False Flag?
By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | July 31, 2026
Short answer… I think so.
On Wednesday July 29, 2026, at roughly 3:20 pm CET, a drone struck the Energos Winter — a Marshall Islands-flagged floating storage and regasification unit (FSRU) owned by US company New Fortress Energy — on its starboard side at Egypt’s Mediterranean port of Damietta, in the northern Nile Delta. The fire spread to a nearby Bermuda-flagged LNG carrier, the Gaslog Salem. Both crews were evacuated, the blaze was brought under control, and no injuries were reported. Both vessels were subsequently moved offshore for assessment; the Energos Winter was pulled off the quayside before the fire was fully out.
Egyptian harbor responders got on scene fast from both the land side and with fire and rescue tugs, which several accounts credit with preventing a much larger disaster — a fire spreading to the terminal infrastructure or fully involving either LNG hull would have been catastrophic. Egypt’s Petroleum Minister Karim Badawi traveled to the port personally to oversee the response.
CNBC and CNN framed this attack as part of a widening campaign on energy infrastructure, implicitly blaming Iran: Iran, the Houthis, and Iraqi militias have all broadened strikes, with Iraqi Iran-aligned militias launching drones at oil infrastructure in Riyadh and Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province this same week. The Damietta strike was viewed by many in the West as extending that campaign from Gulf oil into Mediterranean gas.
I think the attack at Damietta was an Israeli false flag that was intended to stir tensions between Cairo and Tehran. Iran inadvertently set the stage for such a narrative. Two days prior to the drone attack Iranian state TV ran a segment headlined about revenge against Ukraine, showing a multi-target map of European-energy-linked infrastructure, which included Damietta, marked with a pin, citing its LNG capacity (5.2M tons/yr) as a “gateway for gas exports to Europe” descriptor. Damietta was not the focus of the broadcast and was merely identified as one of several possible targets. Everything beyond that — i.e., that the map amounts to Iran claiming or committing the strike at Damietta — is inference layered on top. The critical point about the framing: the stated enemy was Ukraine, not the US or Egypt.
Many in the West were quick to point the finger of blame at Iran. Yet Egypt’s Minister of Information, in an interview with Al Arabiya, denied the Wall Street Journal’s claim that the Egyptian government considered Iran responsible for the drone attack on two ships in Damietta port.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Aragchi issued a statement insisting that it wasn’t Iran and that it was an Israeli false flag operation to try to drag Egypt into an anti Iranian coalition. I think Aragchi is correct.
Give credit to Mossad for monitoring Iranian media and taking advantage of the news broadcast to quickly create an incident that would cast the shadow of blame on Iran by virtue of the news broadcast that had listed Damietta as one of many possible targets for retaliation against Ukraine. It is very easy for an organization like Mossad to mount such a drone attack in two days… Guilt by association.
Video interviews
From Tehran to Riyadh: How Israel Draws the Red Lines America Can’t Cross

By Jamal Kanj | MEMO | July 30, 2026
Israel dragged America into another war, then sat back on the spectator bench and watched U.S. taxpayers foot the bill. Borrowed money burned into bombs. Billions more bled out at gas stations and in inflation, all to reopen a strait that was open before Donald was duped into fighting Benjamin’s war. Now Benjamin Netanyahu watches from a safe distance, gloating as missiles fly between the U.S. forces and Iran in a war he spent years pushing Washington to fight.
At home, flag-draped caskets of American soldiers arriving home from a war Israel instigated and American soldiers carried out. In Congress, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth stood before the Senate requesting more money to keep the war running.
Lawmakers asked to sign the check for a war they never voted to authorize, fought for aims Washington did not set, with no accounting of when — or how— it ends.
In occupied Palestine, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich tells a settler conference that “Israel has no interest in joining the campaign . . . a confined campaign between Iran and the United States, is the correct [situation] and best for us [Israel].” In layman language, let’s sit and watch Americans die and pay for our war.
Exhibit A: the U.S. military is depleting its own missile-defense stockpiles defending its bases across the region, while Israel hoards its interceptors in reserve. Israel isn’t spending down its stockpile. It’s waiting for the moment American stocks run dry and the Gulf states are left exposed. When that moment comes, Israeli interceptors will become prized leverage, offered to the UAE and the rest of the Gulf at a price.
Last Sunday on Fox News, Netanyahu outlined to America his goals for the war against Iran. A foreign prime minister, on American airwaves, essentially setting the terms and the finish line for an American war, fought by American pilots, funded by American taxpayers, and now apparently concluded at Israel’s discretion. Whatever Trump negotiates, whatever Washington decides, Netanyahu has already told America it doesn’t matter. He isn’t waiting to end the war on Israel’s terms. He’s informing it.
But it is not only America’s war policy that runs through Tel Aviv. It is diplomacy and commerce too. When Washington signed a civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia, and the deal was announced, ink dry, both governments on record. Within a day, President Trump reversed course, declaring the agreement was contingent on Saudi normalization with Israel.
Israeli officials do not even try to be diplomatic on how they run Washington policy. Before Trump added the new condition, Israel’s Culture and Sports Minister, Miki Zohar, told Army Radio that “Israel has been clear with the United States about its red lines.” Those are the words of a government that understands it holds a veto pen, set red lines, and where America listens.
Think about it, an Israeli minister speaks openly of red lines over an American commercial and strategic agreement with one of the world’s largest oil exporters, a country central to Gulf security architecture Washington has spent decades building. It did not matter that the Saudi deal serves American energy and strategic interests. It mattered only that Tel Aviv had not yet signed off.
The issue isn’t whether Israel tries to shape American war strategy, or whether its leaders draw red lines Washington isn’t allowed to cross. The real question is why American leaders, across the political spectrum, permit a strategically insignificant country to wield such extraordinary influence over the foreign policy of the world’s only superpower.
Israeli red lines prompted America’s Israel-first loyalists to abruptly discover the agreement was a nuclear proliferation threat. For decades, they have defended, excused, or ignored Israel’s undeclared nuclear arsenal. Yet the prospect of a Saudi civilian nuclear program suddenly provokes moral outrage. The issue was never stopping nuclear proliferation. It was about sequencing. They would be willing to kosher a Saudi civilian nuclear program the day after, not before, it recognizes Israel.
If Arab capitals want an American relationship that serves their own security and economic interests, they need to stop mistaking proximity for leverage. For years the strategy has been to buy access, funneling billions to powerful intermediaries like Jared Kushner, treating him as the private door into the Oval Office.
But Kushner is no neutral broker. He is an Israel-first advocate who built his post-White House fortune partly on Arab capital while shaping Middle East policy on Israel’s behalf and now uses his wealth to finance Jewish-only colonies built on stolen Palestinian land.
The United Arab Emirates lived this irony in hard numbers. Kushner sold Abu Dhabi on the Abraham Accords with a promise attached: normalize with Israel, and the most advanced American fighter jet in the world would follow, a $23 billion sale of fifty F-35s. The UAE delivered its half instantly, recognition, embassies, open skies. Washington delivered Israel every benefit of that deal. The jets never came. Years of “technical requirements,” stalled reviews, and quiet reversals later.
Trump wants to sell Saudi Arabia the promise of a commercial agreement, but deliver Israel an immediate recognition. The Arab cow gets milked for capital, investment, and diplomatic goodwill, and when the moment comes to deliver, the payoff is led instead to the Israeli altar. Every dollar spent courting Kushner, every concession made in good faith, has purchased not access but the illusion of it, never enough to collect on.
Arab regimes must understand that neither buying access to the president through Israel-first loyalists like Kushner, nor hosting the American bases that fight wars designed in and for Tel Aviv, will change U.S. policy — not while Israel holds the lobby power to dictate red lines American leaders dare not cross.
Israeli army suicides rise again as two female soldiers die, bringing this year’s total to 16

MEMO | July 29, 2026
Two Israeli female soldiers died by suicide this week, bringing the number of serving Israeli soldiers who have taken their own lives since the start of the year to 16, amid growing concern over rising suicide rates in the military since the war in the Gaza Strip began.
Haaretz reported on Tuesday that a female soldier from the Bardelas Battalion, deployed along the Egypt-Israel border, died by suicide on Tuesday morning at a military base in southern Israel.
The newspaper said she was found injured at the base and taken to hospital, where she was later pronounced dead.
In a separate incident, Haaretz reported that a female soldier serving in Israeli military intelligence died by suicide on Sunday at the Glilot military base near Ramat Hasharon in central Israel. The report said she held a classified position.
According to Haaretz, the Israeli military has opened investigations through the Military Police into the circumstances surrounding both incidents.
Data compiled by the newspaper showed that the number of serving Israeli soldiers who have died by suicide since the beginning of this year has risen to 16.
The report added that at least nine other soldiers, including regular and reserve personnel who had taken part in the war, also took their own lives while off duty.
According to an earlier Haaretz report, 22 serving Israeli soldiers died by suicide in 2025, marking the highest annual figure recorded by the Israeli military in the past 15 years.
Israel rules out withdrawal from occupied Lebanon, wants ‘freedom of action’
Press TV – July 29, 2026
Israel has declared it will not agree to any “additional withdrawals” from Lebanon in the next round of negotiations with the Beirut government, while insisting on retaining “freedom of action” in areas transferred to the Lebanese Armed Forces.
Israel’s Channel 12 reported on Wednesday that Israeli officials conveyed the position to mediators involved in the Beirut-Tel Aviv talks ahead of the next round of negotiations, scheduled to take place in Rome on August 4.
There will be no withdrawal from the “security zone” Israel has established in south Lebanon, which includes dozens of occupied villages, the report said.
“The additional areas will not be on our side, in the defense lines that we have stabilized,” an Israeli official told the channel, claiming, “If the current pilot is successful and additional pilot areas are decided upon later, they will be beyond the Yellow Line. We will not allow further withdrawals of the area on our side. Until Hezbollah is disarmed in Lebanon – that is what was agreed upon.”
According to the report, the Israeli regime will instead insist on retaining “freedom of action” to re-enter areas recently handed over to the Lebanese Armed Forces.
The report came hours after heavy Israeli artillery shelling targeted Ali al-Taher Hill in southern Lebanon, where Israel’s Channel 12 reported that an Israeli D9 bulldozer was seen burning after it was “hit by an explosive Hezbollah drone.”
On June 26, Lebanon and Israel signed a controversial US-mediated framework agreement outlining a phased withdrawal of Israeli forces from all occupied Lebanese territories, beginning with a pilot model in two undisclosed zones.
The agreement sets no timetable for the withdrawal, making its completion contingent on the Lebanese Armed Forces assuming full security responsibility in evacuated areas and the disarmament of resistance groups, specifically Hezbollah.
Hezbollah rejected the agreement, saying the framework effectively legalizes the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon.
Lebanon’s Amal Movement also rejected the deal, arguing that most of its provisions undermine Lebanon’s national interests while serving those of the Israeli regime.
During a meeting with US President Donald Trump at the White House earlier this month, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun reiterated Beirut’s demand for the complete withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from Lebanese territory, saying the ceasefire agreement cannot be fully implemented as long as Israeli violations continue.
According to official Lebanese figures, Israeli aggression has killed at least 4,330 people, wounded 12,236 others, and displaced more than one million people across Lebanon since March 2.
Israel continues to occupy areas in southern Lebanon, including territories it has held for years as well as others it seized during the 2023-24 onslaught.



