How Darializa Avila Chevalier Is Different From Other Elected Progressives

By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | June 25, 2026
Among the Zohran Mamdani endorsed progressives to win primaries in New York, Darializa Avila Chevalier, who defeated 5-term Congressman Adriano Espaillat in NY congressional district 13, has faced the most backlash from mainstream media across the spectrum for old social media posts.
While I certainly don’t agree with her on every issue and disagree with some of the statements made in the tweets, they do show that on some important issues, she is different from other elected progressives within the Democratic Party.
In this article, I will showcase how on some important issues, Darializa Avila Chevalier seems more willing to take on the establishment than other elected democrats.
She Will Actually Withhold Her Vote For Establishment Democrats
One positive that came from Darializa Avila Chevalier’s old tweets is the fact that she- unlike other elected progressives- won’t sheepdog the left into voting for corporate democrats.
“Y’all really sitting here talking about how we HAVE to vote for one rapist over the other rapist,” Chevalier said about the 2020 election between Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
She similarly refused to vote for Biden in 2020 over his long history of supporting war crimes, writing, “I’ve voted in every election since I turned 18, but you’re out of your mind if you think I’m voting for a war criminal” in reference to Joe Biden.
She similarly wrote, “Y’all clearly don’t want my vote, so I guess y’all ain’t getting it” in reference to the establishment, pro-war Democratic Party in 2020.
If Darializa Avila Chevalier stays on this trend, it shows that she will not follow the “vote blue no matter who” mantra that other elected progressives have, and actually withhold support for corporate, pro-war, establishment democrats.
She’s Actually Anti-Zionist
Another positive about Darializa Avila Chevalier is that she’s an actual anti-Zionist, opposing the full occupation of Palestine and Zionism, instead of only opposing the Benjamin Netanyahu government, or sticking to two-state solution fantasies.
In response to a question about the Palestinian resistance, Chevalier correctly said, “The premise of that question, to me, ignores the 75 years of occupation that the Palestinian people have been subjected to and the conditions that folks were living under before this genocide began”.
She similarly has a long history of activism in support of Palestine and boycotting Israel. She “joined Students for Justice in Palestine in 2014 after a summer internship in the West Bank city of Nablus” and “co-founded Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), a campaign aimed at coercing the Ivy League school to cut financial ties with Israel”.
She has said , “I’m an anti-Zionist full stop”.
She has also been willing to criticize the liberal zionism of other elected progressives like Bernie Sanders and AOC, saying “I’m no fan of Bernie’s liberal Zionism to be clear” and was critical of “Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, for voting ‘present’ on Israeli military funding.”
She Opposed The Proxy War In Ukraine
Darializa Avila Chevalier also differentiates herself from other elected progressives by opposing the proxy war in Ukraine, correctly stating that it was provoked by the United States, and that the war was a racket for the military industrial complex.
In response to a question asking why the United States was involved in Ukraine, she correctly said, “Cause the Cold War ended, and we’ve been bullying Russia ever since. Also, war is lucrative for these sociopaths”.
More Interesting Than Your Average Democrat
Whether one agrees with Darializa Avila Chevalier’s politics or not, there is no doubt she seemingly is more bold than other elected progressives on important issues like opposing the corporate democratic party, opposing Zionism, and opposing all neocon policies, including things like the Ukraine proxy war.
Whether Darializa Avila Chevalier will stick to these positions or not is yet to be seen, but as of now, it seems she is a far more interesting and subversive politician than the average democrat or even average progressive democrat.
Israel Declares 464 Dunams in Sinjil as “State Land”
IMEMC | June 25, 2026
Israeli occupation authorities have declared 464.4 dunams of Palestinian land belonging to the town of Sinjil, north of Ramallah in the central occupied West Bank, as so-called “State Land,” paving the way for direct colonial expansion.
The Wall and Colonization Resistance Commission said Wednesday that the declaration reflects an escalation in Israeli policies aimed at consolidating colonial control over Palestinian territory.
The declaration targets the area where the illegal colonial outpost of Givat Haro’eh—renamed by Israeli authorities as Karmi Oz—was established in 1998.
On December 11, 2025, the Israeli government decided to retroactively legalize the outpost and convert it into a “recognized settlement.”
According to the Commission, the “State Land” declaration covers the entire area occupied by the outpost, which lies between the settlements of Shilo to the east and Ma’ale Levona to the west, on both sides of Route 60.
The move creates a continuous geographic link among parts of the expanding Shilo bloc, forming a new colonial corridor that connects the outpost to surrounding settlements and strengthens Israeli control over large areas of Palestinian land in the region.
The Commission said such declarations are a central tool of Israel’s colonialist project, used to dispossess Palestinians, reshape the geography of the occupied West Bank, and prepare the ground for further settlement expansion and de facto annexation.
Israel has used “State Land” declarations since the early 1980s as a primary mechanism to seize Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank.
Under this policy, vast areas—often privately owned or used by Palestinian communities for agriculture—are reclassified as state property based on Israeli interpretations of Ottoman land laws.
Once declared as “State Land,” these areas are allocated almost exclusively for Israeli settlements or infrastructure serving them.
Human rights organizations and United Nations bodies have repeatedly stated that such measures violate international law, which prohibits an occupying power from confiscating occupied land for the benefit of its own civilian population.
The Illusions of Western Virtue: Ursula von der Leyen and Europe’s Moral Bankruptcy

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | June 24, 2026
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has every right to condition European relations with any other country or bloc on respect for human rights. That, of course, would hold true if she genuinely cared about such values herself.
In response to the June 19 signing of the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran—intended to bring an end to a destructive war—von der Leyen declared that the European Union does not intend to lift its sanctions on Tehran.
Speaking on June 15, ahead of the G7 summit, she firmly conditioned any diplomatic thawing on domestic changes within the Islamic Republic.
“The principle of sanctions is that we need real change on the ground before we can think about lifting them,” she stated, adding: “As long as there is no behavioral change, you cannot lift the sanctions because of human rights violations.”
Viewed in isolation, the European position might appear principled, even commendable. In its broader geopolitical context, however, it exposes a staggering level of hypocrisy.
On that very same day, the European Union’s duplicity was laid bare. During a Foreign Affairs Council meeting in Luxembourg, Europe effectively refused to take a unified stand on imposing trade sanctions on Israel, despite its ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip and unchecked colonial violence and expansionist policies in the occupied West Bank.
The discussion itself would not have taken place had it not been for the persistent efforts of Spain and Ireland, which have repeatedly urged the bloc to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement over Israel’s flagrant violations of international law.
The initiative failed because the EU remains deeply divided, constrained by the requirement of unanimity on foreign policy and repeatedly blocked by pro-Israel governments.
While Europe continues to engage Israel—providing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his extremist coalition with desperately needed political and economic lifelines—the European public has increasingly moved in the opposite direction.
Recent polling across numerous countries has revealed growing opposition to Israel’s war and genocide in Gaza and increasing support for Palestinian rights. Across Europe, mass demonstrations, consumer boycotts, campus mobilizations, and divestment campaigns have reflected a widening gap between public opinion and official policy.
This reality appears entirely irrelevant to von der Leyen, who remains preoccupied with the human rights records of states viewed as Western adversaries. Such concern is not motivated by solidarity with victims, but by the desire to maintain political leverage that can be invoked when convenient and ignored when necessary.
Lest we forget, von der Leyen was among the first Western leaders to visit Israel following the events of October 7, arriving in Tel Aviv on October 13, 2023. Standing alongside Israeli leaders, she offered unconditional backing, declaring that “Europe stands with Israel.” She did so as Palestinians in Gaza were already being subjected to a devastating military assault that would soon claim tens of thousands of lives.
Although her rhetoric became somewhat more cautious as international legal institutions began investigating Israel for genocide and pursuing war crimes cases against its leaders, her fundamental political alignment never truly changed.
For anyone to believe that von der Leyen has suddenly discovered that human rights should occupy center stage in any responsible foreign policy is simply delusional. This is especially true given how restrained she remained, both in language and action, as the US-Israeli war on Iran expanded into a regional catastrophe that should never have been allowed to unfold.
None of that matters to von der Leyen, of course, since such immense human suffering does not neatly fit within her geopolitical priorities.
It is tempting to conclude that, for von der Leyen and many Western leaders, some human rights matter more than others. Yet even that assessment grants too much credibility to their position, because it assumes that human rights are the actual basis of policy. More often than not, they are merely invoked when politically convenient.
Even the Catholic Church appears to be moving away from this selective moral framework. Since his election in May 2025, Pope Leo XIV has repeatedly emphasized a vision of “just peace” over the traditional doctrine of “just war,” warning against the use of moral and religious language to legitimize military aggression. During his Palm Sunday homily earlier this 2026, he stressed that “God rejects the prayers of those who wage war,” a direct challenge to the normalization of violence by political leaders.
But von der Leyen cannot help herself. The instrumentalization of human rights has long been a staple of Western foreign policy, despite mounting evidence that such commitments are rarely applied consistently. In that sense, Europe appears increasingly bankrupt—not only morally, but politically as well.
The war involving Iran, the subsequent US-Iran agreement, and the major geopolitical shifts surrounding both unfolded largely without meaningful European involvement. Reduced to the role of spectator—or occasional cheerleader—the EU exerted little influence over events, underscoring its diminishing relevance in Middle Eastern and global affairs.
This helps explain why von der Leyen resorted to familiar rhetoric about human rights in Iran while remaining largely silent on Israel’s devastating actions in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and elsewhere in the region. With Europe’s influence steadily shrinking, moral posturing has become a substitute for meaningful diplomacy.
Will the EU continue along this path of growing irrelevance, or will it finally heed the views of its own citizens, challenge Israel’s impunity, and pursue a foreign policy genuinely independent of Washington? The answer may determine whether Europe can reclaim political relevance—or continue its slide into long-term decline.
AIPAC-backed candidates lose New York primaries as voters reject pro-genocide lobby
The Cradle | June 24, 2026
Progressive candidates in New York secured significant victories on 23 June, defeating pro-Israel incumbents in congressional primaries that marked a “huge hit” for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Brad Lander, a former city comptroller, unseated Rep. Dan Goldman in a contest defined by disagreements over Israel’s military actions. Lander, describing himself as a so-called “liberal Zionist,” rebukes Goldman for his refusal to label the Israeli assault on Gaza as a genocide or support measures blocking arms sales to Israel.
The progressive surge continued as democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier toppled Rep. Adriano Espaillat.
Her campaign focused on Espaillat’s acceptance of donations from the pro-Israel lobbying group, AIPAC.
Meanwhile, state lawmaker Claire Valdez is poised to replace retiring Rep. Nydia Velazquez after criticizing her opponent’s delay in using the term “genocide” and highlighting ties to AIPAC-affiliated groups.
These victories, bolstered by the influence of Mayor Zohran Mamdani, the first Muslim mayor of New York City, suggest that a critical stance against Israel and its influence over US local and international politics is now a political asset in itself.
Accepting AIPAC funds has increasingly become a litmus test for US voters weighing a candidate’s loyalty to the US over a foreign lobby.
Longtime strategist Jon Paul Lupo told POLITICO that voters opposing the Gaza war held a “massive political advantage” this cycle.
In his victory speech, Lander condemned the former US president Joe Biden’s “hug Bibi” strategy, calling it a “catastrophic mistake.” He stated, “I believe it made us complicit in genocide. Bombs we paid for killed more than 70,000 Palestinians – most of them women and children.”
Though AIPAC-funded candidates have found success elsewhere – such as when republican lawmaker Thomas Massie was defeated on 19 May by AIPAC-funded Ed Gallrein following the most expensive primary elections in history – US sentiment towards Israel has been on a sharp downturn since the genocide in Gaza was launched.
A poll by the Pew Research Center released in April reveals that 60 percent of US citizens now view Israel unfavorably, with “very unfavorable” sentiment nearly tripling since 2022.
A separate poll by Gallup in February found that, for the first time in US history, more US citizens sympathize with Palestinians (41 percent) than with Israelis (36 percent), a shift that occurred after years of witnessing Israeli war crimes and ongoing genocide in Gaza.
UN inquiry finds Israel ‘intentionally’ targeting Palestinian children in Gaza, occupied West Bank

The Cradle | June 23, 2026
A report issued by the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory on 23 June found that Israeli troops are deliberately targeting Palestinian children in Gaza and the occupied West Bank as a central element of their ethnic cleansing campaign.
“The evidence shows that Palestinian children have been deliberately targeted and killed by the Israeli security forces,” said Srinivasan Muralidhar, chair of the commission.
He added, “Even after the October 2025 ceasefire, children continue to be killed and seriously injured, with continued disregard by Israel for the ceasefire and for the protection owed to Palestinian children under international law.”
The independent commission noted that the systematic targeting of Palestinian children by Israeli forces has inflicted profound, irreversible devastation.
These deliberate atrocities are characterized by mass trauma, physical disability, starvation, and the deliberate destruction of healthcare, education, and maternity services, including the dismantling of orphanages.
Beyond the immediate violence, children face arbitrary detention, torture, and sexual violence, all of which are utilized to erode the foundational structure of Palestinian society.
This intergenerational assault aims to dismantle the demographic vitality of the Palestinian people, creating an “occupied psyche” that strips children of their safety, development, and hope for a future.
Doctors from various international backgrounds have provided detailed accounts of treating Palestinian children who were deliberately targeted by Israeli snipers, describing a “steady stream” of non-combatants with single, high-caliber gunshot wounds specifically to the head or chest.
The inquiry found that children accounted for roughly 30 percent of all those killed during the genocide in Gaza.
The figure, however, likely underestimates the actual toll, as thousands remain buried under an estimated 61 million tons of debris.
While the Gaza Health Ministry has officially recorded approximately 72,000 deaths, experts believe between 10,000 and 14,000 additional bodies are trapped beneath the ruins of homes, schools, and hospitals.
Independent research teams suggest the total death toll, when accounting for the indirect effects of infrastructure collapse, malnutrition, and disease, may exceed 600,000.
Recovery efforts in Gaza are being systematically obstructed by a blockade on essential heavy machinery and forensic supplies.
Evidence of explicit “shoot to kill” military directives suggests that the high civilian death toll is a result of calculated and indiscriminate lethal force.
Israeli soldiers have testified to receiving orders to kill any male encountered, regardless of age or whether the individual was armed, and in some instances shot while waving white flags and shirtless.
Citizens Around the World Demand Israel’s Expulsion From the United Nations
teleSUR | June 23, 2026
On Monday, several Chilean organizations delivered more than 80,000 signatures to the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, demanding Israel’s expulsion from the organization for war crimes committed in the Gaza Strip.
The collection was led by the Lawyers for Palestine association and the Sign for Palestine campaign, with collection points in various countries. The signatures were presented at the United Nations headquarters in Santiago, Chile.
“Israel is the country that most intentionally tramples on international law, resolutions, and the international order. Now they are taking that policy to Lebanon, where there are already more than 5,500 victims,” said Nelson Hadad, a member of Lawyers for Palestine.
Since October 7, 2023, when Israel launched its offensive against the Gaza Strip, more than 73,000 Gazans have been killed, including 20,000 children, according to the Gaza-based Health Ministry. Additionally, more than 1,020 deaths have been reported since the ceasefire came into effect in October 2025, due to attacks that violated the truce.
Paula Abugattas, a lawyer for the campaign, stated that “a large majority of countries in the UN General Assembly are aware of these violations against the Palestinian people, and there is widespread support” for Israel’s expulsion. Meanwhile, the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip is worsening due to Israel’s restrictions on the entry of international aid.
Gazans remain in precarious camps for internally displaced persons amid severe shortages of food, medicine, clean water, and sanitation, as well as infectious and chronic diseases, and trauma, which will continue to cause indirect deaths long after the Israeli violence in Gaza ends. The UN has warned that the situation remains critical.
Tom Fletcher, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, noted that 70% of the population needs shelter and essential services are on the verge of collapse. “UNICEF warns that water is not guaranteed for 1.1 billion children,” he emphasized, demanding an effective ceasefire.
IRAN WALKS OUT ON PEACE DEAL DUE TO TRUMP’S THREATS – w/ Prof. Seyed Mohammad Marandi
Mario Nawfal | June 21, 2026
Al-Jazeera demands punishment for Israeli officials following latest assassination of cameraman

The Cradle | June 21, 2026
Al-Jazeera Media Network condemned on 20 June Israel’s “deliberate killing” of one of its journalists in Gaza, Ahmad Washah, while calling on the international community to punish Israeli officials for this and other crimes against its media workers.
Ahmad Washah, a cameraman for Al-Jazeera Mubasher, was killed by an Israeli drone strike on a house in Al-Bureij refugee camp in central Gaza on Saturday.
He is the 12th Al-Jazeera media worker to be killed in Gaza since Israel began its genocide of Palestinians in October 2023.
The network called on “the international community and legal institutions to take urgent, practical measures to hold the Israeli officials involved in these appalling crimes accountable,” the statement added.
Washah’s brother, Mohammad, was killed in an Israeli strike just two months earlier, in April, also while working as a correspondent for Al-Jazeera Mubasher. Before Mohammed’s death, the brothers worked together as a team, with Ahmad filming for Mohammad.
“Together, they formed a media duo that documented the suffering of the Palestinian people and the unfolding events of the war,” Al-Jazeera stated.
After Mohammad’s death, Ahmad also took care of his late brother’s children.
On Saturday, the network denounced “the continuation of the crimes committed by the Israeli occupation forces against its correspondents and staff in Gaza.”
Al-Jazeera said it was determined to take all legal measures to prosecute the killers of its journalists. The Qatar-based channel stressed it will continue to cover Israel’s crimes against Palestinians in Gaza despite the Israeli army’s attempts to silence the voices of its correspondents in the enclave.
Israel has killed at least 262 journalists and media workers since the start of Israel’s genocide, according to the Gaza Government Media Office.
In August 2025, Israel killed Al-Jazeera journalist Anas al-Sharif and four of his colleagues in an airstrike in Gaza. Before his killing, Sharif became one of the most recognizable media voices from the front lines of northern Gaza.
In December 2023, his 90-year-old father was killed when an Israeli airstrike struck their family home in Jabalia. Sharif said the killing of his father came after Israeli officials threatened him by phone to cease his coverage.
Since October 2023, the ongoing war in Gaza has claimed the lives of countless other Palestinian journalists, including Al Jazeera staff members such as correspondent Ismail al-Ghoul, cameraman Samer Abu Daqqa, and correspondent Hossam Shabat, who were killed while reporting on the ground.
In May 2022, Israeli occupation forces shot dead another Al-Jazeera journalist, Shireen Abu Akleh, a US-Palestinian citizen, while she was covering an Israeli military operation in the West Bank city of Jenin.
Israel claimed she was killed by unintentional fire by its forces. However, multiple independent probes concluded that an Israeli military sniper killed her.
Israel has detained another 50 journalists since October 2023, holding them in detention facilities and prisons where torture and rape is common. Another three Palestinian journalists remain missing.
More than 420 journalists have been injured covering the genocide, which has killed 73,000 Palestinians by the most conservative estimates. Independent estimates reach into the hundreds of thousands of dead, in large part due to the direct effects of war.
Some of the wounded journalists have suffered serious injuries, leading to amputations and permanent disabilities.
Israel is waging the war in a bid to destroy Gaza and forcibly expel its roughly 2 million Palestinians. Israeli political and religious leaders wish to annex the strip to build Jewish settlements on the ruins of Palestinian cities and villages.
Iran Beat Back The Greater Israel Project
By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | June 18, 2026
Donald Trump has officially signed the memorandum of understanding with Iran in the Palace of Versailles in France, and Israel and its American lobbyists are having a meltdown.
This is because the war with Iran, according to Israel and its neoconservative allies in the U.S., was indeed to be the linchpin for the Greater Israel Project, and the final phase of the Clean Break plan drawn up by Israel and the Bush administration.
For context, professor Jeffery Sachs explained :
In 1996, Netanyahu and his American advisors devised a “Clean Break” strategy. They advocated that Israel would not withdraw from the Palestinian lands captured in the 1967 war in exchange for regional peace. Instead, Israel would reshape the Middle East to its liking. Crucially, the strategy envisioned the US as the main force to achieve these aims—waging wars in the region to dismantle governments opposed to Israel’s dominance over Palestine. The US was called upon to fight wars on Israel’s behalf.
The Clean Break strategy was effectively carried out by the US and Israel after 9/11. As NATO Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark revealed, soon after 9/11, the US planned to “attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—starting with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.”
The first of the wars, in early 2003, was to topple the Iraqi government. Plans for further wars were delayed as the US became mired in Iraq. Still, the US supported Sudan’s split in 2005, Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 2006, and Ethiopia’s incursion into Somalia that same year. In 2011, the Obama administration launched CIA operation Timber Sycamore against Syria and, with the UK and France, overthrew Libya’s government through a 2011 bombing campaign. Today, these countries lie in ruins, and many are now embroiled in civil wars.
Netanyahu was a cheerleader of these wars of choice–either in public or behind the scenes–together with his neocon allies in the U.S. Government including Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Victoria Nuland, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, and others.
As he explained, war with Iran was intended to be the final phase of this roadmap to Greater Israel. “In September 2023, Netanyahu presented at the UN General Assembly a map of the ‘New Middle East’ completely erasing a Palestinian state. In September 2024, he elaborated on this plan by showing two maps: one part of the Middle East a ‘blessing,’ and the other–including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran–a curse, as he advocated regime change in the latter countries. Israel’s war on Iran is the final move in a decades-old strategy. We are witnessing the culmination of decades of extremist Zionist manipulation of US foreign policy.”
The Zionists and Neo-Cons believed that by destroying Iran, it would cut off support to resistance groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Ansar Allah, destroy the axis of resistance and create an American/Israeli dominated Middle East, and Israeli expansion into Gaza, the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon.
Daniel Levy, former Israeli negotiator explaining why Benjamin Netanyahu so desperately wanted a U.S. war with Iran, explained, “Israel sees us in an era of what I would call a Pax Greater Israel. This is about how far Israel can extend its dominion, how much of a hard-power, dominant hegemon it can be in the region, seizing parts of Syria or of Lebanon, trying to finish an eradicationist approach to the Palestinians. And crucially, to do that, you have to weaken Iran militarily, to remove some kind of deterrent. You can only do that with the U.S., so you need to pull the U.S. into this war. If that means further accelerating American decline and even accelerating Israel’s loss of support in America, then it’s a price to pay. It’s kind of ‘use it or lose it,’ because those things are happening anyway.”
He added, “that’s what Netanyahu is trying to achieve, to achieve Greater Israel, domination in the region, including the weakening of the Gulf, which is intentional, at the expense of America bleeding further reputational, political, economic assets in this war”.
This was outright admitted by Lindsay Graham, the neoconservative South Carolina senator who was a key architect of the war, who reportedly “spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, coaching him on how to lobby the president for action” in Iran.
The real goal of the Iran war was laid out by Graham at the Zionist Tzedek conference, who said referring to war with Iran, “If we can pull this off, it would be the biggest change in the Mid East in a thousand years: Hamas, Hezbollah gone, the Houthis gone, the Iranian people an ally not an enemy, the Arab world moving towards Israel without fear, Saudi-Israel normalize, no more October the 7th”.
In other words, the Zionists and Neo-cons believed that if Iran was destroyed, it would therefore destroy Hamas, Hezbollah and Ansar Allah (Houthis) and pave the way for Arab states to normalise with Israel, isolating the Palestinians and paving the way for unopposed Israeli expansion.
But contrary to the hopes of Israel and its allies in the U.S. like Lindsay Graham, the U.S. did not “pull this off”, failing to destroy Iran or do regime change, eventually being forced to sign a deal after Iranian victory.
But for Israel and its American lobbyists, this is a nightmare; the lynchpin of their Greater Israel Project has now become a fantasy.
Along with pushing back the Greater Israel Project, Iran has successfully created a rift between Israel and its main patron, the United States.
Responding to reports that Israel was , angry with the Trump administration over signing the deal, Vice President JD Vance said, Trump was, “the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time” adding, “The problem for Israel is not Donald J. Trump and anybody in Israel who thinks their biggest problem is the President of the United States needs to wake up and smell the reality of the situation that the country is in”.
Trump similarly lashed out at Israel before signing the deal, saying, “If it weren’t for the United States of America, with me… Israel would not exist right now. Israel would have been blown off the face of the earth, one hundred percent — and every smart person in Israel knows that.”
Iran has forced the Trump administration to acknowledge that Israel’s plans are delusional, that it is despised by the world and that the only entity in the world propping it up is the Trump administration.
By forcing the U.S. to agree to the MOU, Iran not only defeated the plan to destroy Iran for Greater Israel, but for the first time, created an actual rift between a Trump administration desperate to end the losing war, and Israel, desperate to have their Greater Israel Project plan completed.
Israel’s censor silenced 5,700 reports in 2025

Israeli forces detain a photojournalist in Hebron, West Bank on October 3, 2024. [Wisam Hashlamoun – Anadolu Agency]
MEMO | June 18, 2026
Israel’s military censor blocked or altered more than 5,700 news reports in 2025, an average of 15 items per day, making it the second-highest year for media censorship in Israel since records began 15 years ago, according to new data published by +972 Magazine.
The figures, obtained through a freedom of information request submitted by +972 and the Movement for Freedom of Information, show that the censor demanded redactions in 4,974 news items in 2025, while completely barring 753 further items from publication. Both totals remain far above the previous annual average of around 2,300 redactions and 320 full bans recorded between 2011 and 2023. The year 2024, the height of Israel’s genocide on Gaza, still holds the record for the highest number of interventions.
The censor, a unit embedded within Israel’s Military Intelligence Directorate, received 17,176 article submissions from media outlets in 2025, compared to a pre-2024 annual average of just under 12,000. Israeli law requires media organisations to submit material touching on “security” issues for censor approval before publication, under emergency regulations enacted at the time of Israel’s founding that remain in force today.
According to +972, censorship was most intensive during Israel’s war with Iran. Police, municipal inspectors, and at times civilians enforced severe restrictions on reporting the locations of Iranian missile strikes on Israeli cities, with Arab and foreign journalists disproportionately subjected to obstruction in the field. Television studios regularly hosted a representative of the censorship authority to monitor live broadcasts in real time.
Media outlets are legally barred from informing their audiences that the censor interfered in a published article. The censor is also authorised to intervene retroactively, ordering the removal of articles published without prior approval as it did last year when it demanded the deletion of a column in Haaretz that disclosed the locations of Iranian missile strikes in Tel Aviv.
The censor holds sweeping powers of enforcement, including the authority to indict journalists and to fine, suspend, shut down, or file criminal charges against media organisations that fail to comply with its orders.
The data raises questions about the political direction of the censorship apparatus. The two men who led the censor over the past two years — Kobi Mandelblit, who served as chief censor until April 2025, and Netanel Kula, who replaced him — are both relatives of senior legal figures from Israel’s religious-Zionist movement.
Three months after Kula assumed the role, reports emerged that he had suppressed coverage of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s son purchasing an undisclosed property abroad. The story eventually reached the public through other channels.
The data also points to a striking double standard in enforcement. The far-right Channel 14, a broadcaster aligned with Israel’s ultranationalist camp, repeatedly published sensitive combat plans and military intelligence tools that security officials determined had caused “actual harm” to national security. Despite this, the channel was not penalised on any occasion.
“It is particularly important during times of emergency to receive reliable information about changes regarding the censor’s activities,” said Or Sadan, an attorney from the Movement for Freedom of Information. “Although there has been a slight decrease from last year, it is hard not to notice the alarming rise in the number of news reports being hidden from the public. Democracy is based on the transfer of information from the government to the public, and any infringement upon this is a direct infringement upon democracy.”
+972 notes that military censorship, while severe, is not the most acute form of press freedom violation committed by the Israeli military. Since 7 October 2023, more than 250 journalists have been killed across Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iran — some of them in strikes that investigators have concluded were direct and deliberate, including so-called “double-tap” attacks targeting rescue workers who arrived at the scene of a first strike.
When the Iran War is over: Why the West Bank may be Netanyahu’s next front
By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | June 17, 2026
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is facing perhaps the most precarious moment of his political career. He knows it. His allies know it. And his rivals—both within his coalition and across Israel’s political spectrum—are preparing to capitalize on his growing weakness.
Former Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon, who also served as deputy prime minister between 2007 and 2009, is among the latest Israeli political figures to join a growing chorus of criticism directed at Netanyahu.
“In the final result,” Ramon said in an interview with Radio Galey, cited by the Israeli outlet Srugim, “we did not win.” He then broke down that failure in blunt terms: “We did not win in Lebanon, we did not win in Iran, and we did not win against Hamas.”
Another prominent critic is former Israeli army chief Gadi Eisenkot, who joined Netanyahu’s emergency war government following the events of October 7, 2023, before resigning with Benny Gantz in June 2024.
Beyond accusing Netanyahu of failing to protect Israel on October 7, Eisenkot argues that the prime minister has effectively surrendered Israel’s political decision-making to US President Donald Trump, thereby strategically weakening Israel.
Ironically, Netanyahu’s coalition partners have often been even more opportunistic than the opposition.
Since the formation of the current coalition government on December 29, 2022—widely regarded as the most right-wing government in Israel’s history—figures such as National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich have repeatedly used Netanyahu’s political vulnerability to expand their own influence. Whenever Netanyahu needed political support to remain in power, they demanded concessions in return.
For Israel’s far-right extremists, Netanyahu’s inability to secure decisive strategic victories has often translated into opportunities to advance their own agendas. Every setback on the battlefield became an opening for greater settlement expansion, harsher measures against Palestinians, and deeper entrenchment of extremist policies.
Unable to deliver ‘victory’, Netanyahu turned perpetual war into a political strategy in its own right. The result has been a genocidal war in Gaza, widespread devastation in Lebanon, and a dangerous confrontation with Iran that has repeatedly brought the region to the brink of a wider catastrophe.
For a time, this formula proved politically sustainable. Netanyahu successfully enlisted unwavering US support to keep the fires of war burning.
At the same time, the failure of Europe and much of the international community to hold a wanted war criminal accountable provided him with the political space necessary to continue his bloody calculations.
Yet that formula may be nearing its limits. While this possibility may appear encouraging, it comes with a serious warning. If Netanyahu can no longer sustain the wars that have prolonged his political life for nearly three years, he may escalate where resistance is weakest: the occupied West Bank.
Regarding Iran, there is growing recognition that the current confrontation is unsustainable indefinitely and that some form of arrangement will eventually emerge. Likewise, regardless of whether Lebanon is formally included in any future agreement, Israel’s ambition of permanently occupying parts of Lebanese territory remains untenable.
Historically, when Israel fails to secure a strategic breakthrough on one front, it seeks compensation on another—typically where Palestinians are most vulnerable and where international scrutiny is weakest.
As Israeli elections approach, it is therefore reasonable to fear a further escalation of the genocide in Gaza, pushing both the death toll and the level of destruction to new heights. According to Gaza health authorities, nearly 1,000 Palestinians have been killed since the ceasefire agreement was announced in October, bringing the overall death toll of Israel’s genocide in Gaza to 73,000 Palestinians.
Though Israel’s war has already failed to break Palestinian steadfastness, the broader objective remains unchanged: the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza and the transformation of the Strip into a space that can no longer sustain Palestinian life.
The West Bank, however, presents a different challenge.
There, Israel faces a fragmented political landscape and a Palestinian Authority that refuses to develop an effective strategy for confronting accelerating Israeli violence, ethnic cleansing, home demolitions, land confiscation, and the relentless expansion of illegal settlements.
This vulnerability has enabled Israel to move from discussing annexation to implementing it in practice. The strategy rests on two interconnected pillars: extreme violence and displacement on the one hand, and rapid settlement expansion on the other.
According to an Oxfam International study published on June 12, Israel has killed 1,244 Palestinians, including 268 children, in the occupied West Bank since 2023—more than the total number killed during the previous seventeen years combined.
This bloodshed has been accompanied by large-scale displacement that has already uprooted nearly 46,000 Palestinians, many of them from refugee camps and vulnerable communities across the northern West Bank.
An Amnesty International report published on June 10 documented the full or partial displacement of at least 117 Palestinian Bedouin and herding communities between January 2023 and April 2026.
Expectedly, the violence, displacement, settlement expansion, and land seizures are not isolated developments but components of a coherent political project. In September 2025, Smotrich openly proposed the annexation of 82 percent of the occupied West Bank. What was once presented as a political vision is now steadily being translated into facts on the ground.
The era of Netanyahu may be nearing its end, but before this bloody political chapter closes, countless more Palestinians may be forced to bear the cost.
Arab and Muslim countries, along with their allies in the international community, must not wait for Israel to launch a much larger assault on the West Bank before responding.
The matter demands urgent attention and immediate action.
