Israeli war chief vows continued strikes on Lebanon as part of ‘conditional’ truce
The Cradle | June 4, 2026
Israeli War Minister Israel Katz vowed on 4 June that Tel Aviv will continue attacking Lebanon and that any truce is conditional on Hezbollah’s withdrawal from the south Litani area, after Beirut announced its acceptance of a framework allowing continued attacks on its country.
The war chief’s comments coincided with continued airstrikes on south Lebanon.
“Any ceasefire in Lebanon remains conditional on the prior removal of Hezbollah elements from the area south of the Litani River,” Katz’s statement read.
He emphasized that Israel “will not” withdraw its troops from south Lebanon, including from the Beaufort Castle, and said residents of the south “will not return at this stage.”
Katz said the Israeli army will remain in what he described as a “security zone” in Lebanon up to the ‘Yellow Line’ area or so-called ‘Forward Defense Line.’
He also claimed that the reality “imposed” by Israel in Lebanon will lead to an agreement that achieves security for the residents of the north “for the first time in 50 years.”
The war minister also stated that, with US backing, Israel reserves the right to carry out strikes, including in Beirut, in response to any rocket fire toward Israeli settlements.
His comments coincided with continued Israeli strikes on south Lebanon.
Israel’s Channel 12 reported that the Israeli army is continuing its operations in Lebanon and has not received any new instructions despite the announced ceasefire understandings.
A series of drone strikes was reported across southern Lebanon on Thursday morning.
An Israeli drone strike targeted a vehicle between the towns of Kfarwa and Zefta. Additional strikes were reported at the Kfar Rumman roundabout near the Al-Aytam station and the Nejda Hospital Road.
Drone strikes also targeted a vehicle near the Nmairiyeh junction, as well as the towns of Shhour and Bastat.
Hezbollah resistance fighters remain present across the areas of south Lebanon that Israel has occupied. Hezbollah said on Thursday that its fighters targeted Israeli troops at the Beaufort Castle at around midnight, and later announced rocket attacks on forces in Qantara and Al-Bayyada.
While speaking to journalists on Thursday, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said that Wednesday’s negotiations were extremely difficult and resumed only after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio intervened, following their suspension by delegation head Simon Karam.
He added that he is awaiting responses from all concerned parties and compliance guarantees, and that implementation could begin within 24 hours of final approval.
Aoun warned that the agreement that has been reached represents the “last” opportunity.
On Wednesday, a new round of US-hosted direct talks between Lebanon and Israel – a violation of Lebanese law – concluded.
After the talks, the US, Israel, and Lebanon announced that they reached an agreement on the implementation of a conditional ceasefire.
According to the joint statement, the arrangement is “contingent” on a complete halt to Hezbollah fire and the withdrawal of all Hezbollah operatives from the area south of the Litani River.
The agreement calls for the creation of “pilot zones” in southern Lebanon where the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) would exercise exclusive control, excluding all non-state actors. The parties said these measures are intended to pave the way toward a broader security and political agreement between Lebanon and Israel.
The statement also outlined plans for continued direct negotiations under US sponsorship, including discussions on a security framework focused on strengthening Lebanese state control, preventing the re-emergence of “armed groups,” and advancing a comprehensive “peace and security” agreement between Israel and Lebanon.
The next round of talks is scheduled for the week of 22 June.
The three governments also condemned Iran’s regional activities, while Israel reiterated that its security requires the disarmament of Hezbollah and the dismantlement of its infrastructure across Lebanon.
Lebanon, for its part, pledged to strengthen the LAF with US support and reaffirmed its commitment to state “sovereignty” and the implementation of the cessation of hostilities.
The statement contains no explicit Israeli commitment to halt attacks on Lebanon. Instead, the proposed ceasefire is conditioned on a complete cessation of Hezbollah fire and the withdrawal of Hezbollah operatives from south of the Litani River.
The arrangement effectively requires Hezbollah to withdraw under continued Israeli fire.
The Lebanese resistance has repeatedly vowed that it will not return to the November 2024 deal or any agreement allowing Israel to attack at will and maintain an occupation in Lebanon. It has yet to officially comment on the deal announced by the US, Lebanon, and Israel.
Hours after reiterating ‘ceasefire’, ‘Israel’ targets car in S.Lebanon
Al Mayadeen | June 4, 2026
An Israeli drone strike targeted a vehicle on the Nmeiriyeh road in the Nabatieh district, injuring three people, Al Mayadeen’s correspondent in southern Lebanon reported early Thursday.
According to Al Mayadeen’s correspondent, an Israeli airstrike targeted the towns of Deir al-Zahrani and Shoukin in the Nabatieh region. Israeli warplanes also targeted al-Mansouri in Tyre.
Another Israeli drone strike hit the Nabatieh–Kfar Reman road, and another targeted a roundabout in the town of Kfar Tebnit.
In Tyre, Al Mayadeen’s correspondent reported that an Israeli drone carried out a strike on the town of Shhour, alongside artillery shelling that targeted the towns of Hanine and Mansouri. Israeli occupation forces also carried out a large-scale detonation on the outskirts of the town of Zawtar al-Sharqiyah.
Two airstrikes targeted the towns of Shaqra and Burj Qalawiyah in southern Lebanon overnight as well.
Meanwhile, Israeli reconnaissance drones continue hovering over the coastal road in the Tyre area, the entirety of South Lebanon, reaching the capital, Beirut, and its southern suburbs.
US-Israeli-Lebanese statement reiterates ‘ceasefire’
The attacks come after the US State Department released a joint statement by the United States, the Lebanese government, and “Israel” outlining the outcome of US-mediated negotiations aimed at implementing a ceasefire in Lebanon. The agreement stipulates a “complete cessation of fire by Hezbollah” and the withdrawal of all its fighters from areas south of the Litani River.
Under the framework, the two sides also agreed to swiftly establish so-called “model zones” in which the Lebanese Army would exercise exclusive authority, with all non-state actors excluded from those areas.
The US State Department said the measures could facilitate progress toward “a comprehensive agreement for peace and security,” adding that all parties reaffirmed that the future of relations between Lebanon and “Israel” should be determined by their respective governments through US mediation rather than any parallel track.
The latest strike comes amid continued Israeli attacks across Lebanon despite the ceasefire announced by Washington in April. Since then, the Israeli occupation has carried out hundreds of airstrikes and attacks targeting civilians, towns, and areas in southern Lebanon, while the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon, continued to respond with operations against occupation forces and settlements in support of Lebanon and its people.
What is the Resistance’s position?
Speaking to Al Mayadeen, Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah affirmed on Monday the Resistance’s support for a comprehensive ceasefire across all Lebanese territory, noting that only a full ceasefire would be accepted by the Resistance, as a prelude to the withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from all Lebanese soil.
Fadlallah said that there was an attempt by the US Secretary of State on Sunday to promote a new deterrence equation, “the Southern Suburb for the North,” without a commitment to a comprehensive ceasefire, reiterating that this proposal was rejected. He noted that a development also occurred in light of the Iranian position regarding intervention.
He warned that Lebanon is facing a treacherous enemy, stressing that what matters is reaching what serves the country’s interests and safeguarding its sovereignty, and that they will not accept a return to what existed before March 2.
US says Lebanon, Israel reach new ceasefire deal, Hezbollah vows resistance, rejects disarmament
Press TV – June 4, 2026
The United States says Lebanon and Israel have agreed to implement a new ceasefire following Washington-mediated talks in the US capital, as Hezbollah stresses that neither Washington nor Tel Aviv has any authority to dictate the future of the Lebanese resistance movement.
Lebanon and Israel on Wednesday agreed to move forward with a ceasefire aimed at ending months of hostilities, the US State Department announced in a joint statement issued after US-led negotiations in Washington.
The agreement requires a “complete cessation” of fire by Hezbollah and the evacuation of all of the movement’s “operatives from the South Litani Sector.”
Hezbollah has not been a party to the talks and contends it will not abide by any agreement that would undermine Lebanese sovereignty and benefit the Israeli regime.
The agreement announced by the US also includes the establishment of “pilot zones” in southern Lebanon where the Lebanese army “will take exclusive control of the territory to the exclusion of all non-state actors.”
“Israel and Lebanon reaffirmed that they have no hostile intent toward one another and committed to continuing direct negotiations to build confidence, resolve all outstanding issues, and work toward a comprehensive agreement” between the two sides, it further read.
The latest understanding emerged despite continued violence on the ground, including Israeli attacks that reportedly killed at least nine people in southern Lebanon on Wednesday and cross-border operations claimed by Hezbollah.
The ceasefire effort follows several rounds of direct talks between Lebanese and Israeli officials, who do not maintain formal diplomatic relations.
Earlier this week, Iran warned that Israel’s military offensive in Lebanon could jeopardize ongoing talks with Washington.
Trump acknowledged growing frustration with the Israeli regime’s actions, claiming he had intervened to prevent an imminent Israeli strike on Beirut and had spoken with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hezbollah representatives who agreed that “all shooting will stop.”
Trump also confirmed reports that he had called Netanyahu “crazy,” explaining that he was “a little bit perturbed” by Israeli attacks on Lebanon that were undermining US diplomatic efforts.
Separately on Wednesday, Mahmoud Qomati, deputy head of Hezbollah’s Political Council, stressed that the resistance would neither retreat nor surrender its arms.
“The resistance continues and will prevail,” he told Al Jazeera.
“All US and Israeli efforts will fail. The confrontation continues, and the resistance against Israeli aggression remains steadfast,” he added.
Rejecting foreign demands regarding Hezbollah’s military capabilities, Qomati emphasized that “the United States and Israel have no right to speak about the weapons of the resistance, because this is an internal Lebanese matter on which we agree.”
Pointing to Hezbollah’s long history, the movement’s official also stressed, “We have been fighting for 50 years and are not among those who have weakened the Lebanese state. No one can force the Lebanese resistance to disarm.”
Qomati also noted that previous Lebanese governments had supported the resistance, unlike the current administration, emphasizing that while Iran supports Hezbollah as a resistance movement, “we are not a pawn in the hands of any country.”
Trump’s call to Bibi probably didn’t happen
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | June 4, 2026
Donald Trump’s explosive telephone call to Benjamin Netanyahu has taken the internet by storm. But can we really believe it’s true?
Can we believe what we have just witnessed with the explosive telephone conversation between Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu? According to Washington insiders who provide no concrete evidence of the call, Trump exploded with rage over the telephone with Bibi shortly after Iran pulled out entirely from the so-called peace talks – after Israel continued its bombing and illegal invasion of Lebanon.
Indeed, it was reported that Israel had actually cancelled air strikes on Lebanon at the request of Trump, as he tries to bring Iran back to the negotiating table – or so the British pro-Israel broadsheet The Telegraph presents it.
According to The Telegraph, the U.S. president phoned Benjamin Netanyahu on the evening of June 1st after Iran walked away from peace talks and said it would return only if Israel ceased its attacks on Lebanon and Gaza.
Apparently, the call was so heated that a number of swear words were used by Trump, followed by threats – indicating, if we are to believe the call took place, that Trump is really desperate to get out of the Iran war, a war he started because he was talked into it by Israel’s intelligence chiefs.
One U.S. official told Axios that Mr Trump told Mr Netanyahu that following through on his plans to bomb Lebanon would further isolate Israel on the global stage, adding that he thought Netanyahu was “crazy”. Two sources went further and recalled how Trump claimed that he had helped keep the Israeli prime minister out of jail – a reference to Mr Netanyahu’s ongoing graft trial.
Summarising the U.S. president’s remarks, a Washington official said: “You’re f—ing crazy. You’d be in prison if it weren’t for me. I’m saving your a–. Everybody hates you now. Everybody hates Israel because of this.”
A second source briefed on the call said Trump was “p—-” and at one point yelled at Mr Netanyahu: “What the f— are you doing?”
Yet was any of what was reported the truth? Given that the outlets reporting on the call are Zionist, it begs the question: why would they report on something which is so damaging to the Israeli prime minister and hardly paints Trump in a good light either?
One answer might be that the whole call was staged and leaked to the press in a bid to regain the confidence of the Iranians, who lack motivation to move forward in the talks as they trust nothing that comes from the American side. Another possibility is that Western consumers of media are being prepared for a huge false flag attack, and the architects of such a plan believe that reasserting Trump over Netanyahu is a good move. Of course, a third scenario is that it really did happen, and it was a tactic for Trump to leak the essence of the call to the press in a desperate bid to claw back some credibility, given that he is looking so foolish and very much under the thumb of Netanyahu. In this last scenario, it doesn’t necessarily ring true that the dog and its tail have been restored to their correct positions, in terms of who tells whom what to do on the foreign stage.
However, we cannot ignore the fact that Israel has stopped bombing Lebanon for the moment, which would indicate that Trump is trying his best to get a deal with Iran. Lebanon for the time being seems to be playing a pivotal role in the entire Iran war, although it is likely that most of the information Trump is being given is tailored to what he wants to hear, rather than the truth. In the Oval Office, he announced that no ships are getting through the blockade when, on the same day, 24 ships got through escorted by the Iranians – as well as announcing that nearly all of Iran’s missile production had been taken out (which couldn’t be further from the truth). Given the amount of lies and fantasies being produced on Trump’s side, it’s not hard to not take the Bibi telephone call seriously. The only real test of whether Trump is really calling the shots now is whether Israel will continue to disrupt any deals that he tries to put together. Whether the call was genuine or not is less important than what those who presented it to the press are attempting to pull off: a recalibration of the working relationship between the U.S. and Israel.
For the moment, the internet has gone into overdrive with the creativity you might expect, even animating the call itself with AI. While it is true that Trump in many ways has saved Netanyahu, for the moment, from being netted by the judiciary on corruption charges, it seems far-fetched that Trump would tell him everyone hates him. If only that were true. If you struggle to doubt the authenticity of the call, then simply ask yourself: if Trump were to call Bibi and give him a real piece of his mind, how would you fantasize that call might go?
Iran moved to change the US-Iran equation yesterday
By Trita Parsi | June 3, 2026
Over the past eight or so days, the US has targeted Iranian vessels as well as targets on the Iranian mainland. This included non-Iranian oil vessels. In essence, this was the US seeking to escalate the blockade of the blockade.
At first, Iran’s response was proportional. The US could tolerate that response.
In fact, it was beneficial to the US to continue the exchange of blows but keep them relatively limited, as it would slowly but surely erode Iran’s deterrence without imposing intolerable costs on the US.
But yesterday, Iran moved to change that equation.
After the US struck a Botswana-flagged tanker as part of Trump’s blockade, the Iranians counter-escalated disproportionally.
Tehran struck Kuwait International Airport as well as a US base in Kuwait, Ali Al-Salem.
It struck the 5th Fleet facilities in Bahrain. (Full extent of damage unknown.)
It struck Jordan. (Full extent of damage unknown.)
It struck northern Iraq. (Full extent of damage unknown.)
It struck the UAE. (Full extent of damage unknown.)
It struck the Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar. (Full extent of damage unknown.)
It was a demonstration – and reminder – that Tehran retains escalation dominance.
Whereas the US is comfortable with either a possible deal or a low-level exchange of fire, but not a return to full-scale war, Tehran is comfortable with a possible deal or a full-scale war, but not with a low-level exchange of fire that erodes Iran’s deterrence and allows for Trump’s “blockade of the blockade” to become effective.
The area where both can actually be comfortable is some sort of a deal. Reaching it, however, is a different story.
From Evo Morales to Rodrigo Paz: Bolivia’s Dramatic Shift Toward Israel
Israel finds another South American country to prey on
José Niño Unfiltered | June 3, 2026
Bolivia is experiencing its deepest political and economic crisis in four decades, and the responses from Washington and Jerusalem have been striking in their similarity. Since early May 2026, a massive wave of protests led by Indigenous communities, miners, peasant unions, transport workers, teachers, and supporters of former leftist president Evo Morales has swept the country. Dozens of roadblocks have shut down highways, cutting off food, fuel, and medical supplies to cities. Protesters are demanding the resignation of President Rodrigo Paz, a center-right figure who took office on November 8, 2025, ending nearly 20 years of rule by the left-wing Movement for Socialism.
The protesters’ core grievances include fuel shortages, year-on-year inflation exceeding 20 percent at the time Paz took office, austerity cuts including the elimination of state fuel subsidies under Supreme Decree 5503—which practically doubled the consumer cost of fuel overnight—and a land classification law, Law 1720, seen as threatening Indigenous land rights by making farmland eligible for seizure as loan collateral. Although the government repealed Law 1720 on May 13, protests have continued to spread, with demands expanding to include wage increases, labor reform, and Paz’s resignation
The Paz government came to power on a platform of re-aligning Bolivia with the United States and Western financial institutions. Within weeks of taking office, Paz met with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and signed a deal restoring Bolivia’s full diplomatic relations with Israel, which had been severed in 2023 under the prior MAS government to protest the war in Gaza. He also secured a $3.1 billion loan from a Latin American development bank, invited the DEA back into Bolivia, and joined Trump’s “Shield of the Americas” security coalition alongside Argentina, El Salvador, and a dozen other right-leaning governments.
When the protests erupted in mid-May, both the United States and Israel issued statements that journalist Max Blumenthal flagged for their remarkable similarity. Blumenthal, editor at The Grayzone, tweeted that “The US and Israel have released strikingly similar statements on Bolivia. It’s almost like they’re one single consolidated regime mobilized in defense of global oligarchy, and against indigenous resistance.”
The Israel Foreign Ministry posted on May 17 that “The State of Israel expresses its support and solidarity with the government and people of Bolivia, as well as with President @Rodrigo_PazP, who was legitimately and democratically elected. We are following with concern the humanitarian situation caused by the riots and road blockades, which have led to shortages of food and essential supplies for the population. Israel supports the efforts of the Bolivian government to promote dialogue and preserve democratic stability in the country.”
Two days later, the State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs tweeted that “In Bolivia, riots and blockades have created a humanitarian crisis, causing shortages of medicine, food and fuel. We condemn all actions aimed at destabilizing the democratically elected government of @Rodrigo_PazP and support it in its efforts to restore order for the peace, security, and stability of the Bolivian people.”
U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau called the protests a “coup d’état” and said “Make no mistake about it. This is a coup that’s being financed by this unholy alliance between politics and organized crime throughout the region.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that “the United States stands squarely in support of Bolivia’s legitimate constitutional government. We will not allow criminals and drug traffickers to overthrow democratically elected leaders in our hemisphere.”
The coordinated messaging reflects a deeper history between Bolivia and Israel that has oscillated dramatically over eight decades.
Bolivia’s relationship with Israel began on a supportive note. On November 29, 1947, Bolivia voted yes on UN General Assembly Resolution 181, the Partition Plan that paved the way for Israel’s declaration of statehood. Bolivia formally recognized Israeli sovereignty in 1949, and the two countries established diplomatic relations in 1950. This support was not accidental. Bolivia had served as a sanctuary for thousands of Jewish refugees fleeing Europe throughout the 1930s and 1940s. German-Jewish mine owner Maurice Hochschild used his relationship with Bolivian President Germán Busch to facilitate visas for German and Austrian Jewish refugees, and founded the Sociedad de Protección a los Inmigrantes Israelitas (SOPRO) to support refugee integration. An estimated 7,000 Jewish immigrants had settled in Bolivia by the end of 1942, per the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. The Jewish community established the Círculo Israelita de Bolivia in La Paz, which became the highest synagogue on earth at nearly 12,000 feet above sea level.
For the first five decades of their formal relationship, Bolivia and Israel maintained stable and cooperative ties. Israel’s development cooperation agency MASHAV, founded in 1958, extended its agricultural technology transfers, water management expertise, and capacity-building programs to countries across Latin America and Africa. A bilateral visa waiver established in 1972 allowed Israeli citizens to travel to Bolivia without a visa. Every year, some 20,000 IDF veterans discharged from compulsory military service headed to South America to decompress, and Bolivia—with its dramatic Andean landscapes, the Salar de Uyuni salt flats, the Amazon basin, and the Yungas jungle—became one of the most popular destinations on the circuit.
Everything changed with the election of Evo Morales in 2006. Morales, Bolivia’s first Indigenous president, built his foreign policy around a fierce anti-imperialist agenda that treated U.S. foreign policy and Israeli military actions as twin expressions of the same Jewish supremacist system of dominance engulfing most of the globe. He rapidly aligned Bolivia with the ALBA bloc, which included Cuba, Nicaragua, Ecuador, and Venezuela, with Iran as an outside partner.
The first direct rupture came on January 14, 2009, during Israel’s Operation Cast Lead. Morales announced Bolivia’s severing of diplomatic relations, calling Israel’s treatment of Palestinians “a genocide.” He demanded that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert face criminal charges and called for Israeli President Shimon Peres to be stripped of his Nobel Peace Prize.
The relationship deteriorated further during Israel’s 2014 Gaza War. Morales declared Israel a “terrorist state” and announced the cancellation of the 1972 visa waiver agreement. “We are declaring [Israel] a terrorist state,” Morales stated during a talk with a group of educators in the city of Cochabamba. Earlier that month, he had filed a request with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to prosecute Israel for crimes against humanity.
The Morales years also introduced a significant covert dimension to Bolivia’s estrangement from Israel. As Bolivia aligned with Iran, the country became what U.S. intelligence officials described as a “secondary node” for Iranian intelligence operations in the region. Morales’s disputed reelection in October 2019 triggered mass protests, and he resigned under pressure from the military on November 10, 2019, after Bolivia’s military commander publicly called on him to step down. The interim government led by Jeanine Áñez, who assumed the presidency on November 12, immediately began reversing Morales-era foreign policies. Within days, Foreign Minister Karen Longaric announced the expulsion of Venezuelan diplomatic staff and Bolivia’s withdrawal from ALBA, and the government joined the Lima Group. Bolivia severed ties with Cuba on January 24, 2020, becoming the only country in the Western Hemisphere without diplomatic relations with Havana. On November 27, 2019, just two weeks after Morales’s resignation, Bolivian Foreign Minister Karen Longaric announced the restoration of diplomatic relations with Israel.
Bolivia’s October 2020 elections brought the Movement for Socialism back to power under Luis Arce. The most provocative development of the Arce period came in July 2023 when Bolivia’s Defense Minister Edmundo Novillo traveled to Tehran and signed a security and defense memorandum of understanding with Iranian Defense Minister Mohammad Reza Ashtiani. The agreement included provisions for Iranian military drones to be deployed in Bolivia for ostensible border security and counternarcotics purposes.
Following Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel and the subsequent Israeli military campaign in Gaza, the Arce government moved quickly. On October 31, 2023, Bolivia became the first Latin American country to sever diplomatic relations with Israel over the latest Gaza war. Deputy Foreign Minister Freddy Mamani announced the decision “in repudiation and condemnation of the aggressive and disproportionate Israeli military offensive taking place in the Gaza Strip.” Israel’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Lior Haiat called the move “a surrender to terrorism and the Ayatollah regime in Iran.”
In October 2024, Bolivia filed a Declaration of Intervention at the International Court of Justice, joining South Africa’s case alleging Israeli genocide in Gaza. Bolivia’s October 2025 presidential election produced a watershed result. Rodrigo Paz won with more than 54 percent of the vote, the first time in 20 years that no MAS candidate won the presidency. Paz, son of a former Bolivian president and educated in the United States, campaigned under the slogan “Capitalism for all.” Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar signaled Israel’s desire to mend bilateral relations with Paz in the days following his election.
On December 10, 2025, Sa’ar and Bolivian Foreign Minister Fernando Aramayo signed a joint declaration in Washington restoring full diplomatic ties. Bolivia’s Foreign Ministry stated that “Bolivia and Israel fully restore their diplomatic relations and open a new stage of strategic cooperation.” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Paz directly on December 10, 2025. The two “agreed on the need to promote cooperation in various fields, with an emphasis on security, and to restore the vibrant tourism of many Israeli travelers” to Bolivia, per an Israeli government readout. Netanyahu personally invited Paz to visit Israel.
Israel’s most significant strategic interest in Bolivia is its lithium. Bolivia holds the world’s largest proven lithium reserves, an estimated 23 million metric tons representing approximately 20 percent of global reserves. Under Morales and Arce, Bolivia struck lithium deals primarily with China and Russia. Bolivia’s rapprochement with Israel places it within the orbit of the Isaac Accords, a framework modeled on the Abraham Accords and championed by Argentine President Javier Milei. The Genesis Prize Foundation celebrated Paz’s election as “a new opportunity for friendship and closer ties with Israel.” The unusually strong expression of solidarity with Paz’s government amid the May 2026 protests represents a level of public backing rarely extended to a foreign head of state.
As Bolivia is drawn into the web of the Isaac Accords, the pattern becomes unmistakable. Israel’s intervention in Bolivian politics is a calculated maneuver to secure lithium and dismantle indigenous resistance to naked forms of resource extraction. When we stop viewing Israel as just another nation and start recognizing it as an imperial entity, things become clearer. This is a transnational power structure that advances the interests of a Jewish supremacist elite at the expense of every nation in its path. Bolivia is simply the latest frontline in the expansion of this parasitic endeavor.
Iran rejects US assassination claim, says Washington trying to whitewash its own crimes against Iranians
Press TV – June 3, 2026
Iran has strongly rejected accusations by the US secretary of state that Tehran seeks to assassinate American officials, slamming Washington for attempting to portray itself as a victim while concealing own record of war crimes against the Iranian people.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei sharply rebuked allegations by Marco Rubio that Iran is allegedly plotting to assassinate American officials, denouncing the claims as another example of Washington’s efforts to distort reality and deflect attention from its own actions.
The Iranian official said the unfounded allegations reflected a mentality that projects its own conduct onto others.
“Everyone imagines others according to their own creed,” Baghaei wrote in a post on his X account on Wednesday, stressing, “Playing the victim cannot whitewash the savage war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity that you have committed against the Iranian nation.”
Baghaei responded to remarks that Rubio made during a congressional hearing, where the top US diplomat claimed that Iran was seeking to target American officials.
This came as a US-Israeli military coalition, during an unprovoked war of aggression against Iran that began on February 28, assassinated the Leader of the Islamic Revolution along with several senior officials and military commanders, while also killing thousands of people across the country.
FSB Blows Lid on Western Plot to Hack Russian Officials’ Phones — But Here’s the Shocker
Sputnik – 02.06.2026
Russia’s FSB has uncovered a foreign spy operation using malware implanted on the smartphones of high-ranking Russian officials. The goal? To extract data, eavesdrop on conversations, and covertly monitor the situation.
But here’s what the headlines won’t tell you.
How the US is weaponizing the global digital backbone — a threat to the entire world
Think of Fastly and Cloudflare. These aren’t basement startups. They are the largest CDN (content delivery network) providers and “security perimeter” operators on the planet. They serve half of the Fortune 500, EU and Asian government websites — including, for example, the official site of the British government, major EU institutions, and critical financial infrastructure spanning the world’s democratic nations.
In plain terms: they are the infrastructural spine of the internet. When you access a government service, a bank, or a news outlet in most of the Western world, your data almost certainly passes through their networks.
This brings up an uncomfortable question: if these companies permit US intelligence agencies to embed spyware code within their services, can anyone still trust American cloud technology?
Because this is not a hypothetical. The FSB’s revelation about malware on Russian officials’ smartphones is just one thread. The larger fabric is this: the US has spent years building legal frameworks — from the Patriot Act to the Cloud Act — that compel American tech companies to cooperate with intelligence agencies, often in secret. FISA warrants, National Security Letters, and classified directives turn cloud infrastructure into a surveillance platform.
Fastly and Cloudflare are not rogue actors. They are deeply integrated into the US national security apparatus. And if the backbone is compromised, every node connected to it becomes a potential target — whether in Moscow, Berlin, or New Delhi.
Is this merely one hack? Hardly. This is systemic betrayal — plain and simple.
The same digital spine that guards the West also feeds allies, neutral nations, and every global power. Break that trust — and the internet shatters. So, get ready for national clouds. Localized walls. Sovereign webs. Welcome to the fragmentation that the open internet promised would never happen.
So when Washington lectures the world about “rules-based order” in cyberspace, the rest of the world is now asking: whose rules? And who is watching the watchers?
Here’s the real takeaway: American tech’s reputation just took a devastating hit. The same internet giants that run global communications stand accused of spying — not on enemies, but on their own allies.
And when the internet’s backbone is no longer solid or trustworthy, the entire digital world turns into a battleground.
Do Palantir’s bosses have blood on their hands over the Starobelsk massacre?
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | June 2, 2026
The murder of 21 Russian students at a college dormitory on May 22 has yet to be fully understood in terms of the exact involvement of NATO states.
The university building in Starobelsk, Lugansk, was attacked in the early hours of the morning with 16 drones in three consecutive waves of assault. The targeting of the dormitory was deliberate. There were no Russian military installations in the vicinity.
NATO’s involvement in this act of terrorism is on multiple levels. Ukraine’s use of unmanned aerial vehicles has ramped up in recent months, in line with the massive financial support provided by the European Union in the form of a €90 billion loan, most of which is dedicated to boosting Ukraine’s drone arsenal, with European manufacturing companies working in partnership.
At another level, the Western corporate news media have largely ignored the Starobelsk atrocity and NATO’s involvement. The Western media have distorted the de facto war crime by highlighting implausible denials from the Ukrainian regime. In short, covering up.
At yet another level is the new and remarkable efficiency of Ukrainian-launched drones to evade Russian air defenses. Since the conflict in Ukraine escalated in 2022, NATO intelligence from satellite surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft has been supplying the Kiev regime with targeting data to attack Russian units.
But in recent months, NATO information flow and data analysis have taken a quantum leap regarding targeting range and lethality. Thus, the close partnership between Ukrainian and NATO drone manufacturing is amplified by the involvement of U.S.-based Palantir Technologies in operating systems.
Palantir was cofounded in 2003 by German-U.S. billionaire Peter Thiel. It has grown to become the “brains” behind operating weapon systems for the Pentagon, as well as the Israelis in their genocide in Gaza and Lebanon, and aggression towards Iran.
Palantir’s CEO Alex Karp visited Kiev on May 12, where he met with the regime leadership to firm up military partnerships for using Artificial Intelligence in attack drones. Karp was ecstatic about the global business opportunities accruing to Palantir by using the Ukraine war as a laboratory for developing technology.
He boasted that his company’s software was the “operating system” for Ukraine’s military deploying against Russia. Significantly, the Palantir boss remarked that the real-time learning and development of his company’s systems were giving Palantir a huge commercial advantage that could not be achieved in peacetime laboratories. In other words, the killing fields of Ukraine are plugging into Palantir’s profitability and global status as a company.
“It’s our software primitives or infrastructure and your people building things that are completely different from what we would have ever built on top of this,” Karp said in an interview with Ukrainian media.
“You’re doing it on the battlefield with a very small number of people and then showing the world how these things work.”
This strategic collaboration between the Kiev regime and Silicon Valley’s hottest company was also revealed in an exclusive report this week by CNN. The CNN report did not mention Palantir by name, but screenshots reposted clearly showed that the Ukrainian drone operators were using the company’s PRISMA software. As reported, the software allows the processing of vast amounts of aviation and radar data in seconds, which is then used to deploy drones that evade Russian air defense systems and hit deep inside Russia.
The success of Ukrainian-NATO drones to strike deep inside pre-war Russian territory has improved dramatically. The air strikes have reportedly damaged 24 out of a total of 33 of Russia’s top oil refineries. Last month alone, it was reported that six refineries were hit, as well as major fuel depots. The installations, such as at Saratov and Volgograd, are hundreds of kilometers inside Russia. The disruption in fuel supplies has necessitated the Kremlin’s imposition of rationing on public purchases.
Palantir’s data processing and AI are such that interception of Ukrainian drones by Russian air defenses is incorporated into the targeting programs, which permits subsequent drone waves to circumnavigate anti-aircraft systems. This feedback loop brings new challenges for defense systems.
The increase in EU and NATO drone funding and technology would account for the quantitative surge in attacks on Russian territory. The complicity of NATO states, primarily the Baltic states, in lending their territories as launch sites is also a factor. The NATO propaganda machine, too, plays a role in minimizing the civilian deaths and thereby blindsiding European and American public opposition to a dangerous provocation and escalation of war with Russia.
But the involvement of Palantir in increasing the kill machine is another crucial qualitative dimension in the escalation, whereby Ukrainian-NATO drones are evading Russian defenses and increasing their capability at hitting its deep interior and vital infrastructure.
The massacre at the Starobelsk college in Lugansk points to the systematic involvement of Palantir in executing such a deadly attack.
Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Nikolay Azarov (2010-14) expressed his astonishment at how 16 drones were able to penetrate Russian air defenses and hit the college in three waves. Azarov told Tass, the Russian news agency: “I think [NATO countries] are involved. Because, first, the drones that were sent flew right past all Russian air-defense systems, which means that someone guided them through. And you can only guide them if you have space reconnaissance data – it was a whole wave of 16 drones, and they passed by air-defense systems. It means they were guided through, solely thanks to the intervention of Western intelligence agencies. I think that, strictly speaking, they [NATO states] were behind this provocation,” he said.
Azarov did not mention Palantir per se. But the complex navigation ability of the NATO drones to thread through layers of Russian defense is the very kind of qualitative edge that the American software company is giving to the Ukrainian operators.
The other grave implication is that the extensive mapping of Russian targets, from oil refinery installations to fuel depots, suggests that the information supplied by the NATO “brains” has a detailed picture of what is being targeted. There is no way that the air strikes on a college dormitory could be confused with military installations that are not even present in the area.
That means Palantir and its multi-billionaire bosses like Alex Karp and Peter Thiel have blood on their hands, no matter how much they scrub their hands at their company’s newly opened office in Kiev.
In a perverse sidenote, Thiel, who was a friend of pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, has a personal interest in the topic of the Anti-Christ, traveling the globe delivering exclusive lectures to wealthy audiences about Armageddon and the end of times. It’s not clear what his exact views are on manifestations of the Anti-Christ. But the murder of teenage student girls sleeping in their beds should surely be relevant to his lectures.
US Eyes Spreading its Nuclear Footprint Deeper into Europe – Report
Sputnik – 02.06.2026
The US is weighing whether to expand NATO’s nuclear-sharing framework by inviting more alliance members to host American dual-capable aircraft—warplanes configured to deliver nukes, reports the Financial Times.
At present, the arrangement includes Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkiye and the UK.
Under its terms, the US retains full custody of the nuclear warheads, which are stored at select European bases, while allied air forces train for nuclear deterrence missions using aircraft such as the F-35, F-15, and Tornado.
The discussions are reportedly driven in part by a need to reassure European allies of Washington’s enduring commitment to NATO’s nuclear deterrent—even as the US scales back some conventional troop deployments on the continent and pushes allies to shoulder more defense responsibility.
The talks remain at an early, highly confidential stage, with no imminent decisions anticipated.
Nevertheless, nations on NATO’s eastern flank—notably Poland and several of Russia’s neighbors—have already signaled interest in a possible expansion of the nuclear-sharing deal.
Russia has repeatedly cautioned that any deployment of nuclear-capable assets close to its borders would be seen as a destabilizing factor, and a direct threat to its national security.
