Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The UAE’s War on Muslims: From Sudan to the Gaza Genocide

By Robert Inlakesh | The Palestine Chronicle | October 30, 2025

While the United Arab Emirates advertises itself as both a peacemaker and opponent of so-called “Islamic radicalism”, it is currently involved in genocide in both Gaza and Sudan. Connecting these dots is key to understanding the overarching goals of the regime.

The United Arab Emirates has created its image in the world as an innovator, a builder, and a peacemaker, a carefully calibrated illusion as artificial as the buildings that mesmerize onlookers in Dubai. But behind the architecture and lavish outer shell is a rotten core that continues to aid in the erosion of the surrounding region.

While claiming to oppose “radical Islam” and paying talentless influencers to attack groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, they foster extremist ideologies and back ISIS-linked militant groups to carry out their regional ambitions.

For all of the critiques that can be offered of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and of Qatar, they are nothing like the orientalist depictions of them that are spread far and wide through Emirati propaganda.

The reason why the UAE attacks the ideology belonging to groups that are either linked to or part of the Muslim Brotherhood has nothing to do with their religious motivations and everything to do with the Emirati opposition to their political agenda.

For them, they fear any politically engaged Islamic movement that is capable of successfully leading a country and organizing democratic institutions, because they are a dictatorship fully beholden to their Western handlers, including Israel.

The reason why the Islamic element of such movements threatens them the most is that it is popular and the religion that the majority of the region adheres to in some shape or form.

If any Islamic anti-imperialist movement proves successful and leads a democratic process, then this could threaten their rule. So, they seek to undermine, infiltrate, and destroy these movements wherever they rear their heads, including inside the Gaza Strip.

Hamas, or the Islamic Resistance Movement, was an outgrowth of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Its origins begin in the 1970s and the formation of the social/civil-society movement known as the Mujamma al-Islamiyya in the Gaza Strip, at the time colloquially referred to as the Muslim Brotherhood, as it represented Palestine’s wing of the movement.

Therefore, the success and popularity of Hamas, as part of what is viewed by the Emiratis as a wider body of Islamic political movements, is interpreted as a threat to its rule in the region.

As a means of dismantling the prospects of Democratic oriented Islamic political leaderships, the UAE has engaged in military confrontations and intense propaganda campaigns. On the propaganda front, they are joined by other Gulf leaderships who have their own agendas, also and not only fund direct anti-Hamas or anti-Muslim Brotherhood propaganda, but also fuel religious division.

One of the most powerful means of divisive propaganda is directly targeting Muslims themselves, in particular the Sunni Muslim majority of the region. While they certainly push sectarian rhetoric against the Shia too, they seek to pacify the Sunni population, deter them from engaging in anti-imperialist and anti-occupation struggles, or redirect their anger at fellow Muslims.

They do this through pushing divisions between mainstream Sunni schools of thought and employing their Madkhali propagandists to deter action against the so-called Muslim rulers. Without going too deep into the Madkhalis, as with each group of Muslims, there is always nuance; they are a group of Salafist Muslims who adhere to the dictates of their rulers and sometimes will even justify actions taken by those rulers that are prohibited in Islam.

The primary goal here is to fund and fuel division across the Muslim world, channeling hatred and creating debates around any issue that can distract from what Israel, the United States, and their allies are doing to the region. Another major tactic employed here is to Takfir (declare a disbeliever) or undermine any Muslim group that sides with the likes of Iran, Hezbollah, Ansarallah, or any other Shia groups.

Again, none of this opposition has anything to do with any substance that may be behind said arguments they make; these are well-funded propaganda campaigns designed for political purposes to undermine resistance to imperialism, occupation, and genocide. This is where we can begin looking at Gaza and then Sudan.

The UAE professes to oppose so-called “Islamic radicalism”, yet it now stands accused of providing support to the ISIS-linked gangs operating in the Israeli-occupied portion of the Gaza Strip. Not only has the UAE been accused of directly coordinating with these militia groups – composed of hardline Salafists who have links to ISIS and al-Qaeda, drug traffickers and murderers – but there is even evidence of these death squad members driving around in vehicles with registered UAE license plates.

In opposition to Hamas, the UAE is more than happy to back Israeli proxy collaborator groups that contain ISIS and Al-Qaeda minded elements within them.

Going back to the sorts of divisive propaganda that is encouraged by the Emiratis, a leading member of the Israel-backed so-called “Popular Forces” militia in Gaza, Ghassan Duhine, has openly cited ISIS Fatwas declaring Hamas apostates as a justification for killing them. ISIS officially declared war on Hamas back in 2018.

Meanwhile, the UAE has long been backing the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Sudan, the group currently accused of committing genocide, and which has re-entered the headlines after it captured Al-Fasher and other areas in North Darfur, resulting in the murder of around 527 people, including civilians who were butchered while sheltering in refugee camps.

RSF leader, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti), has long collaborated with the Emiratis, and it was even previously pointed out that his official Facebook page was controlled out of the UAE.

Without getting into all of the complexities of the Sudanese civil war, Hemedti is a warlord who has long maintained power over the majority of Sudan’s Gold Mines, slaughtering anyone who dares to get in his way.

His forces have also been accused by the UN and prominent rights groups of committing widespread mass sexual violence, including horrific forms of rape.

Hemedti was additionally supplied with battle-changing technologies through his Israeli Mossad contacts, and despite there being documented rights violations on both the Sudanese Army and RSF sides of the war, there is no doubt that Hemedti’s forces have the most blood on their hands and carry out the most horrific crimes seen in the conflict.

The UAE is not just one of many actors involved in Sudan; it is the primary supporter of the RSF. According to a scoop published by The Guardian this Tuesday, British weapons sold to the United Arab Emirates were even discovered to have been used by the RSF to carry out its genocide.

Despite the United States declaring the horrors in Sudan as a genocide, during the Biden administration, no action has been taken against the UAE for its role in fueling the war. Similarly, the UAE has been involved in countless crimes committed throughout the Horn of Africa and in North Africa too, backing a whole range of extremist militant groups who stand accused of indiscriminately targeting civilians.

Although it is also hidden from the Western corporate media, the UAE even used members of the Sudanese RSF to fight on its behalf as proxy forces against Ansarallah in Yemen, where they were accused of playing a role in what many declared a genocide. Keep in mind that nearly 400,000 people in Yemen were killed due to the inhuman blockade and war of aggression, led by both the UAE and Saudi Arabia.

The Emiratis push propaganda about the Sudanese Military being “Islamists”, accusing them of being part of the Muslim Brotherhood and then linking them to all sorts of other organizations. Ansarallah in Yemen is also branded as “Islamists”, but in their case are accused of being “Iranian proxies”. In essence, this line of propaganda is the typical Israeli-style Hasbara argument for committing egregious war crimes.

Throughout the Gaza genocide, the UAE was one of the only nations that continued its routine flights to Ben Gurion airport and transported materials to aid the Israelis. The Emiratis also turned Dubai into an Israeli safe haven, where soldiers implicated in genocide can go to party, engage in activities like consuming narcotics or hiring escorts, and live in luxury.

The UAE did not lift a finger to force the Israelis to let aid into Gaza, as they blocked all humanitarian aid trucks entering for around three months earlier this year, but will then point to the trickles of aid that they do supply as proof they are helping the people. In their defense, they argue that they were key in achieving a ceasefire, for which there is no evidence, just like there was no evidence that they stopped West Bank annexation when normalized ties with Israel.

Viewing the Emiratis as operating on their own whims, blaming them solely for the actions they commit, is incorrect. These are rulers installed by the West, who work for the West and are simply used as pawns to do the bidding of their masters. If any of their leaders stand up to the crimes that the UAE is inflicting, they will be assassinated and replaced with other members of the ruling bloodline who choose to play ball. They are hostages, posing as rulers and playing their part in the dismantlement of the surrounding region.

October 30, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Saudi Arabia’s path to normalization with Israel threatens a regional rupture

By Fouad Ibrahim | The Cradle | October 24, 2025

On 17 October, US President Donald Trump told Fox News, “I hope to see Saudi Arabia go in, and I hope to see others go in. I think when Saudi Arabia goes in, everybody goes in.” The statement was calculated to reignite Washington’s normalization push and reassert Riyadh’s place at the heart of the US-Israeli regional alliance plan.

Trump is determined to complete the regional realignment he initiated in 2020 with the signing of the Abraham Accords. Including Saudi Arabia would crown his foreign policy legacy and fundamentally alter the Arab political order. But the costs may be steeper than the gains.

The 2023 near-deal that faltered

In the months preceding Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, US-mediated talks between Riyadh and Tel Aviv were approaching a breakthrough. The kingdom sought US security guarantees, access to advanced weapons systems, and backing for its civilian nuclear ambitions. The Israeli side, eager for regional legitimacy, saw in Riyadh a historic opportunity.

But Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on 7 October 2023, and Tel Aviv’s ensuing carpet-bombing of Gaza, derailed the entire process. Saudi officials were forced to retreat in the face of overwhelming public outrage across the Muslim world.

Trump’s renewed confidence, however, suggests the framework forged before the war was never truly discarded. It has merely been shelved, pending a more favorable political climate.

Saudi Arabia is not just another Arab state. Its symbolic weight derives from a rare trifecta: custodianship of Islam’s two holiest sites, vast oil wealth and economic clout, and considerable political leadership of the Arab and Islamic mainstream.

If the kingdom normalizes ties with Tel Aviv, a domino effect across Arab and Muslim nations could follow. For Israel, this would be the ultimate regional prize. For Washington, it would cement an American-led bloc from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, aimed squarely at containing both Iran and China.

What could drive normalization forward?

Despite the political fallout from Gaza, several factors continue to draw Riyadh toward normalization. Both Saudi Arabia and Israel view Iran and the Axis of Resistance as their primary regional adversaries.

This strategic alignment has not been fully undone by the 2023 China-brokered thaw between Tehran and Riyadh. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 plan to diversify its economy sees potential in Israeli sectors like defense technology and cybersecurity.

Trump’s preference for transactional diplomacy means a grand bargain offering defense pacts, nuclear cooperation, or substantial investment flows could appeal to Saudi ambitions. And within the kingdom, a younger, globally attuned population may be less ideologically opposed to normalization – if it is presented as part of a broader modernization drive.

However, polls conducted by the Washington Institute before and after 7 October 2023 show a different inclination. Surveys in December indicated that a majority of Saudis oppose normalizing ties with Israel.

Strategic and moral hazards

Normalization is not without peril. On the contrary, its very success could destabilize the region.

Any Saudi–Israeli deal that sidelines Palestinian rights would be seen as a betrayal of the kingdom’s religious mandate and leadership role. The devastation in Gaza has reignited pan-Islamic solidarity, and any Saudi alignment with Tel Aviv while Palestinians endure siege and bombardment could shatter the kingdom’s legitimacy in the wider Muslim world.

The Axis of Resistance – particularly Iran, Hezbollah, and Ansarallah – would seize on the normalization to portray it as an alliance of apostates and occupiers, fueling more intense and frequent confrontations. By committing to a volatile US-Israeli partnership, Riyadh risks entanglement in wider conflicts, undermining its strategic autonomy and exposing itself to blowback it cannot control.

The security dimension: A trilateral axis

If normalization ushers in a US–Israel–Saudi security architecture, the implications for West Asia would be profound. Tel Aviv would contribute intelligence and military prowess, Washington would provide oversight and guarantees, and Riyadh would bankroll the venture.

But this alliance would be read in Tehran as yet another encirclement strategy, prompting the Islamic Republic to accelerate its missile and nuclear capabilities. The region could slide into an arms race that undermines development, drains budgets, and magnifies the risks of miscalculation.

Moreover, such a pivot could unravel Saudi Arabia’s recent diplomatic gains – including its rapprochement with Iran, Iraq, and Oman-mediated talks with the Sanaa government in Yemen – and alienate its Eurasian partners like China and Russia. The net result could be diminished regional influence and increased dependence on the west.

Domestically, too, the kingdom would face challenges. Clerical critics and nationalist voices could depict normalization as ideological surrender. The government would find itself more reliant on US and Israeli backing to suppress dissent, exacerbating its internal vulnerabilities.

In this sense, the very security guarantees sought through the trilateral axis could paradoxically generate new forms of insecurity – both internal and regional – making the kingdom’s stability increasingly contingent on external actors and volatile power dynamics.

Economic integration

Economic incentives are central to the normalization pitch. Saudi–Israeli integration could unlock massive investment flows and tech partnerships in fields ranging from Artificial Intelligence (AI) to renewables.

Yet this alignment risks reinforcing structural dependencies. Israeli firms, backed by western capital and technological superiority, would dominate the value chains. The Saudi economy could shift from oil dependency to digital subordination.

Further, such a move could sour ties with China, currently Riyadh’s largest trading partner. Over-alignment with the US–Israel axis might jeopardize the kingdom’s multi-vector strategy and reduce its diplomatic room to maneuver.

Even the promise of modernization may ring hollow if perceived as elite enrichment at public expense. The economic corridor could become a tool of inequality, modernizing infrastructure while leaving social contracts untouched.

Economic integration can bring regional prosperity if fair and balanced, but without safeguards, it risks reinforcing dependency and fueling conflicts.

Surveillance state: Normalization’s dark underbelly

One of the least discussed aspects of normalization is cyber collaboration. Israel’s role as a global surveillance hub and Saudi Arabia’s deep pockets could converge to create a formidable digital control grid.

Such a system – integrating spyware, predictive policing, and AI surveillance – would strengthen the US-led intelligence grid across West Asia, enhancing early-warning systems, missile defense coordination, and digital containment of the Axis of Resistance.

It could also extend the reach of western intelligence into theaters such as Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, and the Red Sea. In practical terms, the alliance could evolve into a regional integrated military and intelligence system encompassing command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance – underpinned by joint data centers, AI-driven threat analysis, and shared satellite networks.

However, this integration would carry profound ethical and political implications. The same tools designed to deter external threats could easily be repurposed for internal control. By combining Israeli-developed spyware, predictive policing algorithms, and US-supplied surveillance hardware, the Saudi government would vastly expand its capacity to monitor dissent, pre-empt protests, and neutralize political opposition.

The normalization process could thus serve as a legitimizing cover for what might become the most sophisticated surveillance apparatus in the Arab world.

Regionally, a Saudi–Israeli cyber partnership would alarm neighboring states, particularly Iran and Qatar, which would perceive it as a threat to their own sovereignty and national security. The likely response would be the acceleration of rival cyber alliances, possibly involving Russia, China, or Turkiye – ushering in a new digital Cold War in the Persian Gulf.

In the long term, the fusion of surveillance technology and political authority poses a deeper civilizational question: Can the Arab world’s quest for security coexist with the preservation of freedom and privacy? If the digital frontier becomes another instrument of domination, the promised “technological peace” may end up securing governments, not peoples – turning the dream of innovation into the architecture of control.

Riyadh’s choices: Three possible trajectories

The Saudi leadership now faces three broad options. First, conditional normalization, where recognition of Israel is tied to measurable progress on Palestinian statehood and sovereignty. Given Tel Aviv’s accelerated settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank, this appears increasingly unrealistic.

Second, incremental engagement (soft normalization), involving quiet cooperation below the threshold of formal recognition that gradually lays the groundwork for future deals.

Third, strategic hedging, in which Riyadh continues to balance between US pressure and regional diplomacy, keeping normalization in reserve as a bargaining chip.

Between realpolitik and regional rupture

Trump’s statement has reignited the debate over the kingdom’s path forward. The immediate gains of normalization – security assurances, economic incentives, and prestige – are tempting. But the long-term consequences could be corrosive.

To join the Abraham Accords while Gaza remains in rubble will irreparably damage Saudi Arabia’s credibility as a leader of the Islamic world. It could sever the kingdom from the Arab street, provoke resistance retaliation, and entrench a neocolonial security order.

Unless normalization is tied to justice for Palestine, it will be remembered not as peace, but as betrayal.

October 25, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran security chief backs Saudi-Hezbollah rapprochement from Beirut

The Cradle | September 27, 2025

Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Larijani, stated on 27 September that Hezbollah is a “bulwark” against Israeli aggression, rapprochement with Saudi Arabia is to be welcomed, and that the Lebanese people do not need the US as a “guardian.”

Larijani made the statements after arriving in the Lebanese capital on Saturday to attend the anniversary ceremony of the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

During a press conference following his meeting with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri in Ain al-Tineh, Larijani said Hezbollah “represents a solid barrier against the Israeli entity,” one year after Israel’s devastating war that killed 4,047 Lebanese, including fighters and civilians.

Despite Israel’s air superiority, Hezbollah fighters were able to prevent the invading Israeli forces from moving deep into Lebanese territory.

However, Israeli troops managed to occupy five points on Lebanese territory near the border that they continue to hold.

Since the end of the war, Israel has carried out thousands of airstrikes, including a drone strike on a family traveling by car as they reached their home in Tyre in southern Lebanon earlier this week.

The strike killed Shadi Charara, a car dealer, and three of his daughters. His wife and one of his daughters survived the strike. A man riding a motorcycle nearby was also killed.

“The resistance represents a significant asset for the Islamic nation,” Larijani stated, while praising Nasrallah for recognizing the danger posed by Israel decades ago and developing plans to confront it.

Larijani pointed out that Iran wants countries in the region to cooperate with each other in the face of the Israeli threat, despite previous disagreements. “They must put these aside and make cooperation the basis of their relations.”

As a result, he praised Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem’s efforts to improve relations with Saudi Arabia.

“Saudi Arabia is a sister country to us, and there are ongoing consultations between us. Today is a day of cooperation in confronting a single enemy,” Larijani stressed.

Regarding the deep US influence in the country, Larijani stated that, “The Lebanese people are rational and do not need a guardian, nor do they need the Americans to appoint themselves as their guardians.”

He also addressed US Special Envoy Tom Barrack’s assertion that the US is arming the Lebanese army not to fight against Israel, but to fight Hezbollah.

Larijani said that Barrack is “stirring up discord, sowing division, and causing problems within the country and among its citizens, while the approach adopted by Iran is based on Lebanese officials addressing their internal issues through consensus.”

Regarding Israeli threats, he stressed that Iran is prepared for another war with Israel, but warned that it would be “stupidity” for Israel to launch such a war and that Iran’s response would be severe.

In June, Israel launched an unprovoked war against Iran, killing at least 935 people and targeting the Islamic Republic’s air defense and nuclear sites. Iran responded by hitting Israel with barrages of ballistic missiles and drone strikes.

After meeting with Speaker Berri, Larijani then headed to the Government Palace, where he met with Prime Minister Nawaf Salam.

The two reviewed the latest developments in the region and bilateral relations between the two countries.

Salam emphasized that Lebanese-Iranian relations “must be based on mutual respect for each party’s sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs.”

September 28, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Saudi-Pakistan defense pact: Reshaping security architecture in West and South Asia

By Mohammad Molaei | Press TV | September 27, 2025

In the intricate web of West Asian and South Asian geopolitics, where alliances often hinge on the precarious balance of power, energy dependencies, and ideological affinities, the signing of the strategic defense pact between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia marks a pivotal evolution.

This pact represents a calculated maneuver to fortify the alignment of defenses between the two Muslim-majority countries amid waning US commitments. Drawing from operational analyses of similar pacts, like the US-Japan security treaty or the erstwhile CENTO framework, this agreement integrates conventional military interoperability with implicit extended deterrence, potentially altering the calculus of regional power projection.

At its core, the agreement formalizes a mutual defense commitment, stipulating that an armed attack on either party constitutes an assault on both, triggering joint responses under Article 51 of the UN Charter for collective self-defense.

This language echoes NATO’s Article 5 but is tailored to the Persian Gulf’s hybrid threats, encompassing not just conventional invasions but also proxy warfare, cyber intrusions, and ballistic missile salvos. The pact builds on a 1982 protocol that already facilitated Pakistani troop deployments to Saudi Arabia—historically involving up to 20,000 personnel in advisory and training roles—but elevates it to a comprehensive framework for integrated operations.

Militarily, the agreement spans a spectrum of cooperation modalities. Joint exercises will intensify, drawing from existing bilateral drills like the Al-Samsam series, which have honed mechanized infantry maneuvers and anti-tank warfare using platforms such as Pakistan’s Al-Khalid main battle tanks (MBTs) and Saudi M1A2 Abrams variants.

Technology transfers are a cornerstone. Pakistan, with its robust defense-industrial base—including the production of JF-17 Thunder multirole fighters co-developed with China—will share expertise in low-cost unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) like the Burraq, equipped with laser-guided munitions for precision strikes.

In return, Saudi Arabia’s petrodollar-fueled arsenal offers access to advanced air defense systems, such as the THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) interceptors, potentially integrating with Pakistan’s HQ-9/P (export variant of China’s FD-2000) to create layered anti-ballistic missile shields.

Arms procurement and co-production feature prominently, with provisions for joint ventures in missile technology—leveraging Pakistan’s Shaheen-III intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) with a 2,750 km reach—and electronic warfare (EW) suites.

Intelligence sharing via secure datalinks will enhance situational awareness, focusing on various threats. Logistically, the pact enables forward basing: Pakistani Special Forces could embed with Saudi Rapid Intervention Forces for counterterrorism operations, while shared maintenance facilities for F-15SA Eagles and AH-64E Apache helicopters streamline sustainment in prolonged conflicts.

This blueprint for operational synergy mirrors how the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (PGCC) integrates air assets under Peninsula Shield Force, but with Pakistan’s battle-hardened infantry adding asymmetric depth.

Saudi Arabia’s pursuit of this pact stems from a pragmatic recalibration of its security posture, driven by the kingdom’s Vision 2030 imperatives to reduce oil dependency. Riyadh views Pakistan as a Muslim-majority regional powerhouse with a professional army of over 650,000 active personnel, battle-tested in counterinsurgency campaigns against the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and capable of rapid deployment via C-130J Super Hercules transports.

The kingdom’s goals are multifaceted: first, to hedge against US retrenchment, as evidenced by Washington’s equivocal responses to the 2019 Abqaiq attacks, which exposed vulnerabilities in Saudi Patriot PAC-3 batteries despite their 90 percent intercept rates against subsonic threats.

Second, the pact bolsters deterrence against Iran’s symmetrical arsenal, including medium-range ballistic missiles and tactical ballistic missiles, which have ranges covering the Arabian Peninsula. By aligning with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia gains indirect access to a nuclear-capable partner, complementing its own nascent uranium enrichment program under IAEA safeguards.

Economically, it secures preferential access to Pakistani manpower—over 2 million expatriates already remit billions annually—while channeling investments into Pakistan’s defense sector, such as upgrading the Heavy Industries Taxila (HIT) for co-producing Al-Zarrar tanks.

A critical flashpoint is whether the pact extends Pakistan’s nuclear umbrella to Saudi Arabia. Pakistan possesses an estimated 170 warheads, deliverable via Ghauri MRBMs (1,500 km range) or Ra’ad ALCMs (air-launched cruise missiles) from F-16C/D platforms, adhering to a “minimum credible deterrence” doctrine focused on India but adaptable to West Asian contingencies.

The agreement’s text maintains strategic ambiguity—no explicit mention of nuclear sharing—but statements from Pakistani government officials suggest availability “if needed,” implying extended deterrence similar to US commitments to NATO allies.

Analyses indicate this isn’t a formal nuclear-sharing arrangement like NATO’s B61 gravity bombs in Europe; rather, it’s a de facto assurance where Pakistani assets could be forward-deployed in extremis, perhaps via submarine-launched Babur-3 SLCMs from Agosta 90B-class boats.

Saudi funding has historically supported Pakistan’s program, per declassified US cables, but proliferation risks loom under the NPT, which Pakistan hasn’t signed. The pact stops short of a binding nuclear clause to avoid IAEA scrutiny, opting instead for “all necessary means” language that preserves deniability.

The pact’s ramifications cascade across the region, amplifying fault lines and complicating the Persian Gulf’s A2/AD dynamics. For the broader West Asia, it fortifies a new bloc, potentially integrating with the UAE’s Edge Group UAVs or Bahrain’s naval patrols under the Combined Maritime Forces (CMF). This could escalate proxy conflicts in Yemen, where Saudi-led coalitions already employ Pakistani advisors, or in Syria, straining Russian-mediated de-escalation zones.

However, the agreement does not pose any threat to the Islamic Republic, given Pakistan’s role as Iran’s most important security partner, underscored by recent bilateral agreements on border security, counterterrorism, and economic cooperation, including efforts to combat smuggling and joint patrols.

Iran has welcomed the pact as a step toward “comprehensive cooperation among Muslim nations,” reflecting shared interests in regional stability through frameworks like the SCO.

Islamabad’s clarification that the agreement is “defensive and not aimed at third countries” is reassuring, preserving economic lifelines like the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline (delayed but vital for Pakistan’s energy security). Joint border patrols under the 2019 MoU persist, though the pact might divert Pakistani resources—e.g., diverting FC (Frontier Corps) units from anti-smuggling ops to Persian Gulf deployments.

Open-source indicators reveal keen interest from several nations in acceding to this framework, potentially evolving it into a multilateral shield. The UAE, with its Mirage 2000-9 fleet and ambitions for a “Persian Gulf NATO,” tops the list—Abu Dhabi’s prior defense MoUs with Pakistan (including pilot training) align seamlessly, and sources suggest imminent talks for integration.

Qatar, despite Al Udeid’s US basing, eyes the pact for diversified deterrence post-2022 blockade scars, with indications of exploratory discussions. Egypt emerges as a likely candidate: Cairo’s Sisi administration seeks Saudi funding for its T-90MS MBTs and could contribute expeditionary forces, as noted in geopolitical analyses.

Bahrain and Jordan, already in Saudi-led coalitions, have expressed interest via diplomatic channels, bolstering maritime interdiction in the Strait of Hormuz. Even Oman, traditionally neutral, monitors developments for selective engagement in counter-piracy ops.

Mohammad Molaei is a Tehran-based military affairs analyst.

September 27, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

West’s grip slips with Saudi–Pakistan security deal

Riyadh’s pact with Islamabad redraws alliances, weakens Indian leverage, and hints at a new Muslim deterrence framework beyond western control.

By F.M. Shakil | The Cradle | September 23, 2025

On 17 September, Riyadh rolled out the rare royal purple carpet for Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif – an honor previously reserved for global power players like US President Donald Trump.

Accompanying him on the trip was Pakistan’s Army Chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir. His presence highlighted that Riyadh values its defense pact with a nuclear power that, despite economic challenges, remains militarily strong.

Nuclear umbrella over Riyadh

The centerpiece of their visit was the signing of a “Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement” (SMDA), which declares that an attack on either country will be considered an attack on both.

Described by a senior Saudi official to Reuters as covering “all military means,” the pact has triggered speculation that it includes a nuclear umbrella, which would be a game-changing development in the military balance of West Asia.

With 81 percent of Pakistan’s weapon imports coming from China, the agreement implicitly aligns Saudi Arabia with the Chinese military-industrial orbit, whether by design or default. The kingdom has long been reliant on US arms, training, and security guarantees.

The pact was signed just two days after an extraordinary joint session between the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) was called, following the 9 September Israeli airstrikes on Qatar – a major non-NATO ally and Gulf neighbor – with no substantial response from Washington, reinforcing perceptions that western security commitments are both selective and expendable.

Mushahid Hussain Syed, a former information minister and chairman of Pakistan’s Senate Defense Committee, tells The Cradle that the US has pivoted away from Arab allies toward Tel Aviv, leaving the region disillusioned and increasingly leaning toward alternatives.

“The strategy of ‘Greater Israel,’ spearheaded by Netanyahu, has involved military actions against five more Muslim nations. Pakistan’s recent triumph against India has demonstrated its capacity to contest Israel’s significant ally, India, and establish itself as a strategic alternative for Gulf nations.”

Toward an Islamic NATO?

Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani recently called for an Islamic military alliance, akin to NATO, in response to Israel’s airstrike on Doha. His proposal echoed Egypt’s earlier attempt to revive a joint Arab defense force under the 1950 treaty – an initiative blocked by Qatar and the UAE, reportedly under US pressure.

A similar proposal has also come from Islamabad when Pakistan’s Defense Minister, Khawaja Asif, urged Muslim countries to band together in a NATO-like military alliance in light of the Israeli aggression in Doha.

During an appearance on Geo TV last week, Asif drove home the point that a united Muslim military front is essential to tackle common security issues and fend off outside dangers. Asif invoked the wider role of the west in instigating instability in West Asia, emphasizing the intricate network of US support for Al-Qaeda and the CIA’s covert actions that led to Osama bin Laden’s relocation to Sudan or the regime change war in Syria.

Is nuclear deterrence a part of the Pact?

The nuclear dimension of the Riyadh–Islamabad pact remains opaque, but highly significant. While no official statement from either side confirms the presence of a nuclear component, Asif hinted that Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities could be shared with Saudi Arabia as part of the agreement.

Syed, however, clarifies to The Cradle that Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine is India-centric and that its deterrence posture is South Asia-specific and does not extend to the Persian Gulf.

“A novel security framework for the region appears to be taking shape, focusing on Global South nations such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, whereas the Indo-Israeli Axis, previously supported by the US, now finds itself significantly diminished.”

The defense agreement between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, he says, represents a notable achievement for Pakistan, establishing it as a pivotal entity within the geopolitical framework of West Asia, particularly among Muslim countries.

“The agreement is shaped by three significant elements: the perceived neglect of Arab allies by the United States, Israel’s proactive maneuvers in areas such as Iran, Qatar, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen, and Pakistan’s recent triumph over India in May.”

New Delhi, Tel Aviv on alert

Foreign media and analysts are already warning that the pact may have unintended consequences for India and Israel, despite claims that it targets neither. Others predict that this pact is really about Riyadh’s ambitions to counter Iran and Yemen’s Ansarallah-led government in the region.

Dr Abdul Rauf Iqbal, a senior research scholar at the Institute for Strategic Studies, Research and Analysis (ISSRA) at Islamabad’s National Defence University (NDU), tells The Cradle that New Delhi views the pact with unease as it formalizes Saudi–Pakistani security ties that could entangle Riyadh in South Asian rivalries, especially the India–Pakistan border tensions over Jammu and Kashmir:

“It represents a setback for Prime Minister Modi’s foreign policy, potentially leading to Saudi involvement in a prospective Indo–Pak conflict. Furthermore, future Saudi investments in Pakistan’s Gwadar port and economic corridors would challenge India’s regional influence and initiatives such as the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC).”

He adds that Saudi Arabia’s pivot toward Pakistan reflects a broader alignment of Muslim powers and could push Tel Aviv to recalibrate its war on Gaza. It also pressures Tel Aviv by placing Pakistan – a vocal opponent of Israeli expansionism – into West Asian affairs.

“This agreement is not meant to counterbalance Iran’s regional influence, but rather to promote the Saudi Iranian reconciliation, as Pakistan maintains friendly relations with both nations. By formalizing ties with nuclear-armed Pakistan, Riyadh secures a credible deterrent as US security guarantees weaken. While western think tanks view it as an effort to contain Iran, the Arab world emphasizes it as strengthening Gulf deterrence independently of Washington.”

Indian concerns also stem from fears that the pact’s NATO-style clause could complicate ongoing operations like Sindoor, which remains active in a limited capacity following the skirmish between the two nuclear powers in May, especially given that the Gulf states’ swift mediation to resolve the crisis reflects their own interests with India and makes any military action against it unlikely.

Secondly, India is strategically analyzing Pakistan’s nuclear capability, which could see a boost if Saudi Arabia, having no such capacity, begins channeling funds to share Pakistan’s nuclear assets.

A post-western Gulf order?

While Tel Aviv and New Delhi remain publicly silent, both capitals are undoubtedly scrutinizing the fallout. Israel’s failed assassination attempt on Hamas leaders in Qatar, and India’s pressure campaign along the Line of Control, suggest that the axis is nervous about the consequences of a Saudi–Pakistani alliance. Israeli media downplayed the Saudi–Pakistan defense deal, seeing it as a show of force after Riyadh failed to influence Trump or West Asian policy.

As Syed notes, “The traditional ‘Oil for Security’ framework, which once defined US relations with the Middle East [West Asia], now serves as a remnant of a bygone era. As Saudi economic power increasingly reinforces China’s backing of Pakistan, India may feel vulnerable and isolated.”

Mark Kinra, an Indian geopolitical analyst with a focus on Pakistan and Balochistan, tells The Cradle that this development holds particular significance for India. New Delhi, he argues, has sustained robust economic and diplomatic ties with Saudi Arabia for many years, and the influx of Saudi investments in India continues to expand:

“India will be meticulously observing the progression of this agreement, particularly given that its specific terms are not publicly available. Any alteration in the regional security equilibrium may influence India’s strategic assessments, energy security, and diplomatic relations.”

As Washington’s selective security guarantees falter and Israel escalates unchecked, Persian Gulf states like Saudi Arabia are looking eastward for credible deterrents and strategic autonomy.

By aligning with nuclear-armed Pakistan, Riyadh is asserting greater independence from the western military order. It also signals the emergence of a multipolar Persian Gulf security architecture –one increasingly shaped by Global South coordination, not western diktats.

September 23, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mohammad Marandi: Iran KILLS IAEA Deal — Cairo Agreement Wiped Out After SnapBack!

Dialogue Works | September 21, 2025

September 22, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Video | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump scrambles to contain fallout from Israeli crime spree with meeting in New York

MEMO | September 22, 2025

President Donald Trump is set to host a high-level meeting with a select group of Arab and Muslim leaders on Tuesday in New York to discuss the ongoing Israeli genocide in Gaza. The summit, to be held on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, comes as Western governments declared their recognition of the State of Palestine and amid growing international condemnation of Israel’s war crimes.

Two Arab officials confirmed to Axios that leaders from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Egypt, Jordan and Turkey have been invited to the closed-door meeting, which will take place at 2:30pm Eastern Time.

The summit is expected to precede Trump’s meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, scheduled for 29 September at the White House. Sources familiar with the preparations said Arab leaders will call on Trump to pressure Netanyahu to end the assault on Gaza and to abandon plans to annex the illegally occupied West Bank.

Washington’s agenda reportedly includes a proposal for Arab and Muslim countries to contribute to a post-war stabilisation plan in Gaza, including potential troop deployments to replace the Israeli occupation forces. However, such proposals are expected to meet resistance unless a political framework guaranteeing Palestinian sovereignty is agreed.

Trump is also expected to hold a second meeting on Tuesday with leaders of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), including Oman, Bahrain and Kuwait, to address broader regional concerns including Israel’s escalation in the region.

The unprovoked attack on Doha two weeks ago by Israel was met was global condemnation. Qatar reportedly demanded an apology before the resumption of negotiations.

Israel’s strike triggered an emergency summit of Arab and Muslim countries in Doha, and was swiftly followed by a new Saudi-Pakistani security pact—widely interpreted as a response to growing doubts about Washington’s reliability as a security guarantor in the Gulf.

Israeli intransigence is also threatening to unravel the hallmark foreign policy initiative of Trump’s previous presidency: the so-called Abrahm Accords. The UAE has reportedly warned that any annexation of the West Bank could lead to the collapse of the agreement which saw a number of Arab states normalise ties with the occupation state. The White House has not issued an official statement in response to the reports.

September 22, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Pakistan expands nuclear umbrella to cover Saudi Arabia

MEMO | September 22, 2025

A source close to the Saudi government said on Sunday that Pakistan’s nuclear umbrella will now extend to Saudi Arabia, just days after the two allies signed a surprise joint defence agreement.

The source revealed that the agreement had been in the works for several years, and added that Saudi Arabia expects India — Pakistan’s long-standing rival — to understand the Kingdom’s security needs.

When asked whether the agreement meant that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons could be used to defend Saudi Arabia, Saudi writer and analyst Ali Shihabi, who is close to the royal court, confirmed: “Yes, that is correct.”

Shihabi added that nuclear protection is an integral part of the agreement, noting that Pakistan understands Saudi Arabia had effectively financed and supported its nuclear programme during times of international sanctions.

He also said he believed India would understand Saudi Arabia’s security requirements, describing current relations between Riyadh and New Delhi as “excellent.”

According to media reports, Pakistan’s Defence Minister, Khawaja Muhammad Asif, told a local radio station that the country’s nuclear programme would be available to Saudi Arabia if needed, following the signing of the defence pact.

September 22, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Pakistan says ‘door open’ for more Arab states to join mutual-defense pact

The Cradle | September 20, 2025

Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khawaja Asif said on 18 September that “the doors are not closed” for other Arab states to join the new defense pact signed with Saudi Arabia.

Asif emphasized that there was no clause preventing Pakistan from extending similar arrangements to other nations.

The agreement was signed in Riyadh by Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) during Sharif’s day-long visit, and declares that aggression against one country will be considered aggression against both.

A joint statement said the deal “reflects the shared commitment of both nations to enhance their security and to achieve security and peace in the region and the world.”

Asif also confirmed that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is included within the framework of the pact, describing it as a joint shield that leaves “no doubt” either side would respond if attacked.

“What we have, our capabilities, will absolutely be available under this pact,” Asif told Pakistani broadcaster Geo News.

He stressed that Pakistan had always placed its nuclear facilities under inspection and had “never committed any violation.”

“This agreement will not be a hegemonic arrangement but a defensive arrangement,” Asif emphasized.

“We don’t have any plans to conquer territory or attack anyone. But our fundamental right can’t be denied to us and we exercised that yesterday,” he added.

The minister drew comparisons with NATO, saying Muslim states had the same right to collective defense. “I think it is a fundamental right of the countries and people here, particularly the Muslim population, to together defend their region, countries, and nations.”

Pakistan has long stationed troops and air force units in Saudi Arabia, training Saudi forces and providing advisory support.

“I think that relationship has been more defined now and that understanding has been given the form of a defense agreement,” Asif explained.

Pakistani External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said India would assess the implications for its national security, adding that the government remained committed to “ensuring comprehensive national security in all domains.”

Asif also tied the pact to Pakistan’s longstanding role in protecting Islamic holy sites in the kingdom, describing it as a “sacred duty.”

September 20, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Qatar After the Airstrikes: Assessing Viable Responses to Israeli Aggression

By Abbas Hashemite – New Eastern Outlook – September 16, 2025

Since the Israeli attack on Doha, the Arab world has been looking for a collective response. However, the Arab states have limited viable options available due to their over-reliance on the US.

Israel’s Attack on Doha: A Dangerous New Precedent in the Gulf

The Israeli attack on Qatar last week astonished the whole world. Doha has long been seen as a mediator, as it played a constructive role in establishing peace between different conflicting parties, including the United States and the Taliban. It was also playing a mediatory role between Hamas and Israel. Hamas leadership was present in Doha to discuss the peace proposal presented by the Trump administration. However, the Israeli government conducted airstrikes in Doha on the building in which the Hamas leadership was present. Although the Hamas leadership survived the attack, these airstrikes raised serious concerns about the sovereignty and security of the Gulf States.

The Gulf countries have largely been reliant on the US alliance for their security. The latter supplies most of the arms and weapons to these countries. However, the US air defense system did not intercept any Israeli missiles during the recent strikes in Doha, implying that the US security guarantees to the Gulf States are selective and are only motivated to counter threats emanating from Iran. Moreover, this demonstrates that the US green-lighted the Netanyahu administration to conduct these criminal strikes in an affluent neighborhood in Doha.

Although the Trump administration has denied all the claims about the US support to the Israeli government in these strikes, and it has condemned this move in the United Nations, the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, is on a two-day visit to Israel to ensure continued US support to the Zionist state. This further demonstrates that the United States prioritizes Israel over its Arab allies, and all its airbases in the Gulf countries are actually to protect Israel against the regional threats.

Limited Military Options and Growing Frustration

Qatar’s Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani described the Israeli attacks on Hamas leadership in Doha as “state terrorism that is being exerted by someone like Netanyahu.” He further stated, “I think that we have reached a decisive moment. There should be retaliation from the whole region in the face of those barbaric actions that only [reflect] one thing: It reflects the barbarism of this person that is leading the region, unfortunately, to a point where we cannot address any situation, and we cannot repair anything, and we cannot work within the frameworks of international laws. He just violates all those international laws.”

A strong response by Qatar and Arab states is mandatory to ensure their sovereignty and security in the future. However, given the Arab states’ overreliance on the US security guarantees and arms, they are left with very few options to retaliate against Israel. A military response to Israel is impossible for the Gulf States, as they do not possess enough military capabilities. Moreover, the US would never allow them to collectively attack Israel. Therefore, a collective military response could lead to internal security threats due to the presence of the US airbases in these countries.

Strategic Realignment: From US Dependence to Eastern Alliances

The Gulf States, however, could push Israel towards regional diplomatic isolation. The UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan established diplomatic relations with Israel in 2020, following the Abraham Accords, which were mediated by the United States. The UAE summoned the Israeli diplomat to denounce these airstrikes in Doha. Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the President of the UAE, visited Qatar within 24 hours of the attack to discuss the situation. The UAE and other Arab states could limit or downgrade their diplomatic relations with Israel in retaliation for these attacks.

Qatar has already lobbied for a unanimous UN statement condemning the illegal Israeli attack in Doha. It will also host an Arab-Islamic summit in Doha to coordinate a collective response to Israeli attacks. Leaders from almost all the Islamic countries, including KSA, Pakistan, Turkey, and Iran, are expected to attend this extraordinary summit. Moreover, the Gulf States could also join the International Court of Justice’s cases against Israel, further building pressure on the Zionist state to halt its genocide and occupation in Palestine.

Gulf States, especially Qatar, the UAE, the KSA, and Kuwait, hold significant economic leverage over Israel due to their energy resources. They could use their economic leverage to impose trade and economic sanctions on Israel by boycotting companies that have stakes in the Israeli economy. Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE pledged a collective investment of $3 trillion in the US economy during Trump’s last visit to the region. The intention behind this investment was to strengthen relations with the United States. However, the recent failure of the US to protect Qatar from Israeli attack could result in the Gulf nations’ quest for new global allies.

Over the past few years, the world has witnessed unprecedented economic growth in Russia and China. In 2023, China brokered a peace deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia to normalize their bilateral diplomatic relations. Russia, on its part, has emerged as a strong military and diplomatic power on the global stage. The two new superpowers of the world are already aligned with the Palestine policy of the Muslim world. Moreover, they possess unmatchable military power. The recent US failure to protect Qatar from Israeli attacks has provided the Arab states with a new direction to expand their diplomatic and strategic ties. They could engage with Russia and China to strengthen their defense sector and expand their diplomatic clout. This would not only prove detrimental for Israel but would also hurt the US regional and global interests.

Аbbas Hashemite – is a political observer and research analyst for regional and global geopolitical issues. He is currently working as an independent researcher and journalist

September 16, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The myth of Israel’s isolation: the reality of Arab collaboration with Zionism

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 15, 2025

The narrative construction of Zionism fundamentally depends on two premises: historical victimization and alleged regional isolation. Both are rhetorical weapons designed to justify Israel’s systematic brutality against Palestinians and other native populations of the Middle East. But neither of these narratives holds up under even a minimally honest analysis of the region’s current geopolitical reality. The myth of the “tiny State of Israel surrounded by enemies” is one of the greatest fabrications of contemporary Western propaganda.

The idea that Israel is a solitary bastion in a sea of Arab hostility is, today, completely baseless. With few exceptions, countries in the region not only tolerate Israel but actively collaborate with the Zionist regime — including militarily and diplomatically. The supposed regional resistance has evaporated in recent decades, giving way to a policy of normalization and, in many cases, direct submission to Israeli interests.

The most emblematic case is Syria. The fall of Assad became an obsession for the West, enabled by Islamist militias with logistical and military support from the West, Israel, and the Gulf petro-monarchies. After Al-Qaeda’s victory, the terrorist regime almost immediately engaged in negotiations with Israel, despite ongoing Zionist bombings of Syrian territory. Today, the so-called “Free Syria” is functionally an ally of Israel. Fragmented and destabilized, the country has lost its national capacity for resistance.

In Lebanon, the scenario is equally ambiguous. Despite Hezbollah’s firmly anti-Israeli stance, the Lebanese government follows a path of conciliation with Tel Aviv. The recent ceasefire agreement, signed without Hezbollah’s consent, makes it clear that the Lebanese elites prioritize accommodation with Israel over national sovereignty. Government pressure for Hezbollah’s disarmament is another indicator of veiled collaboration.

Even the Palestinian Authority — supposedly the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in the West Bank — has acted as a silent partner of the Zionist regime. Its role is increasingly that of a submissive mediator, suppressing popular resistance and ensuring the stability of illegal Israeli settlements. Local authorities in the West Bank seem entirely incapable of challenging the colonial status quo, abandoning any real project of liberation.

Jordan, with its puppet monarchy, is another blatant example of collaboration. While official rhetoric often speaks of “justice for Palestinians,” in practice Amman functions as a key piece in the architecture of regional containment, facilitating Israeli intelligence and surveillance operations. The Jordanian monarchy is essentially an extension of Anglo-American policy in the region and, by extension, an objective ally of Tel Aviv.

In the Gulf, the situation is even more obvious. The United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar maintain close relations with Israel, both economically and militarily — even if many of them do not formally recognize the Zionist entity. As Brazilian analyst Rodolfo Laterza correctly observed, the effectiveness of Israel’s air defense is not due solely to systems like the Iron Dome, but to a regionally integrated infrastructure supported by Gulf monarchies. These countries not only allow American military presence and overflights but also share intelligence and threat tracking — giving Israel a significant strategic advantage.

Israel’s recent bombing of Qatar reignited talk of a possible “Arab awakening,” but until concrete developments occur, such “Arab solidarity” remains fiction and empty rhetoric. The Gulf regimes — utterly dependent on Western military support and fearful of internal destabilization — are among Zionism’s most useful agents in the Middle East. This is combined with the region’s typical strategic ambiguity, where governments believe they can maintain multiple alignments simultaneously without paying the price.

In the end, the only full-fledged state actor opposing Israel is Iran — which, ironically, is not even Arab. Isolated, blockaded, demonized, Iran continues to take a confrontational stance toward Israeli apartheid and remains the main supporter of resistance movements like Hezbollah and Hamas. Alongside war-torn and divided Yemen, it is the only state actor on the board that openly challenges Israel’s expansionist agenda.

Tel Aviv’s propaganda, amplified by the Western media, insists on portraying Israel as a victim. But the truth is that Zionism has co-opted and bought off nearly all its neighbors. The so-called “Israeli isolation” is a fiction — a lie repeated endlessly to justify the unjustifiable: the continuation of a colonial, supremacist, and genocidal project.

September 15, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Iraqi PM Calls For Islamic Military Alliance Against Israel

Sputnik – 14.09.2025

Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani urged Arab and Muslim nations to form a joint security force in response to Israel’s recent strikes in Gaza and Qatar.

He said Tuesday’s Israeli attack on Doha, which killed Hamas members and a Qatari officer, was a “shocking breach of international law” and a threat to regional security.

Sudani stressed that the Islamic world has “numerous levers” to deter Israel, warning that aggression “will not stop at Qatar.”

His remarks came ahead of the Arab-Islamic emergency summit in Doha on Sept 15–16, amid Israeli strikes on Qatar, where leaders are expected to discuss activating the long-proposed joint Arab military force.

Iranian Supreme National Security Council chairman Ali Larijani has also called on Islamic nations to create a “joint operations room” against Israel.

Egypt, meanwhile, is pushing for a NATO-style Arab military force for rapid defense in case of attacks, with Cairo seeking regional backing for the plan ahead of the summit.

The Israeli strike on Doha hit a residential compound where Hamas politburo members were meeting to discuss a US proposal to end the Gaza war, which has already claimed more than 64,800 Palestinian lives since October 2023.

September 14, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »