Betrayed by western snapback: Iran dumps IAEA deal
Tehran’s attempt at diplomatic detente was met with an escalation by the US and the E3
By Fereshteh Sadeghi | The Cradle | November 25, 2025
Just hours before his visit to France to discuss Iran’s nuclear file, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned:
“International relations face unprecedented crises due to militant unilateralism. Repeated violations of international law – including ongoing conflicts in West Asia – reflect the backing of the United States and the tolerance of certain European states.”
This underscores Tehran’s defiant stance as it moves in its nuclear diplomacy. Just three months after Israeli-US airstrikes targeted Iranian nuclear sites, Tehran signed a significant security agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). It did not last long.
The so-called Cairo Agreement, signed in September and brokered by Egypt, was meant to defuse tensions. Yet that same month, the western-backed IAEA was warned against “any hostile action against Iran – including the reinstatement of cancelled UN Security Council resolutions” in which case the deal would become “null and void.”
Of note, Iran–IAEA relations had been deteriorating since June during the 12-day US-Israeli war on Iran. The IAEA and its director general, Rafael Grossi, refused to condemn the attacks on Iranian civilians and nuclear facilities, and the targeted assassinations of nuclear scientists and senior military officers.
The IAEA’s refusal to condemn the US-Israeli violations made Iranians furious. They accused Grossi of paving the ground for the strikes and being Israel’s footman. The Islamic Republic formally lodged a protest with the UN Secretary General and the Security Council against Grossi, arguing he breached the IAEA’s neutrality.
Resistance to western coercion
The Iranian parliament – or Majlis – raised the bar by ratifying legislation that suspended cooperation between Tehran and the international nuclear watchdog. The law was passed immediately after the war ended on 25 June.
It declared Grossi and his inspectors “persona non grata” and forbade them from travelling to Iran or visiting Iranian nuclear facilities. The law stipulated that the suspension will continue so long as the security and safety of Iranian nuclear installations and scientists have not been guaranteed.
Nevertheless, the Egyptian-mediated Cairo Agreement appeared to thaw the standoff, if temporarily. It was signed in the presence of Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi and Grossi, and ambiguously framed as a deal on “implementing the Safeguards Agreement.”
Few details were made public then; while the IAEA called it a deal on “practical modalities and implementation of the Safeguards Agreement”, the Iranian side insisted it was “a new regime of cooperation.”
State news agency, IRNA, elaborated, “the agency will not engage in monitoring activities provided Iran has not carried out environmental and nuclear safety measures at its bombed facilities.” IRNA referred to the Supreme National Security Council as the sole body that “could greenlight the IAEA monitoring missions inside Iran, case by case.”
Iran’s diplomatic maneuvering, including the deal with the IAEA, was obviously part of the broader strategy to prevent the UK, France, and Germany from activating the snapback mechanism, in the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany.
The European Troika (E3), who were clearly dissatisfied with the Cairo Agreement, reiterated “Tehran needs to allow inspections of sensitive sites and address its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.”
Snapback triggers collapse
A threat to terminate the Cairo Agreement actually came three days after it was clinched, when Iran’s Foreign Ministry warned that “launching the snapback mechanism would put the ongoing cooperation between Iran and the IAEA at risk.” Nevertheless, the UK, France, and Germany moved ahead with the snapback activation.
Araghchi’s first reaction noted that “in regards to the E3’s move, the Cairo agreement has lost its functionality.” Iranians had also vowed to halt cooperation with the IAEA. However, they did not fulfill that threat and collaborated in silence.
The IAEA inspectors visited some Iranian nuclear sites in early November. However, they were not given access to the US-bombed Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan facilities.
Even this tactical compliance failed to shield Tehran from a new IAEA censure. On 20 November, the agency’s Board of Governors passed a US-E3-backed resolution ignoring Iran’s cooperation and demanding immediate access to all affected sites and data.
It was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Iran condemned the move as “illegal, unjustifiable, irresponsible, and a stain on the image of its sponsors.”
Araghchi on his X account posted, “like the diplomacy which was assaulted by Israel and the US in June, the Cairo Agreement has been killed by the US and the E3.”
For the second time, Iran’s top diplomat announced the termination of the Cairo Agreement, “given that the E3 and the US seek escalation, they know full well that the official termination of the Cairo Agreement is the direct outcome of their provocations.”
Iran’s representative to the IAEA, Reza Nadjafi, told reporters that “If the US claims success in destroying Iran’s Natanz and Fordow facilities, then what is left for inspections?” and further warned, “any decision (by the IAEA) has its own consequences.”
Back to confrontation
By applying pressure through the IAEA, the E3 and the US seek to coerce Iran into opening the doors of its bombed nuclear sites to the IAEA inspectors, to hand over the 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 percent, which the US believes is still intact, and “to eliminate Iran’s ability to convert that fuel into a nuclear weapon.”
The collapse of the Cairo Agreement marks a return to the kind of standoff that defined US–Iran relations from 2005 to 2013, when Iran’s nuclear file was sent to the UN Security Council, and sanctions were imposed under Chapter VII.
Some skeptics believe US President Donald Trump’s administration would not only take Iran to the Security Council but would also cite the chapter in question, which sanctions the use of military force against any country deemed a threat to global peace.
While Iran signed the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in hopes of avoiding that scenario, the US’s unilateral withdrawal under Donald Trump’s first term in 2018 and the E3’s failure to meet their obligations rendered the agreement toothless.
June’s US-Israeli bombing campaign against Iranian nuclear infrastructure confirmed for Tehran that western powers have no intention of engaging in diplomacy in good faith.
Toward a new strategy
According to IRNA, which echoes the official line of the Iranian government, “Iran feels that the goodwill gestures it has shown towards the IAEA and the United States, have drawn further hostility. Therefore, maybe now it is the time to change course and revise its strategy and the rule of engagement with international bodies, including the IAEA.”
Some observers believe Iran’s first step to map out a new strategy is pursuing the policy of “nuclear ambiguity, remaining silent regarding the whereabouts of the stockpile of the highly-enriched uranium and quietly halting the implementation of the [Nuclear] Non-Proliferation Treaty, without officially admitting it.”
In the latest development, the chairman of the Parliament’s National Security Committee has vowed that “Iran will sturdily pursue its nuclear achievements.” Ibrahim Azizi has cautioned the US and Europe that “Iran has changed its behavior post June attacks and they’d better not try Iran’s patience.”
That posture is hardening. In September, over 70 Iranian lawmakers urged the Supreme National Security Council to reconsider Iran’s defense doctrine – including its long-standing religious prohibition on nuclear weapons.
They argue that the regional and international order has changed irreversibly since Israel and the US jointly bombed the Iranian nuclear facilities. While citing Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s 2010 fatwa banning nuclear weapons, they assert that in Shia jurisprudence, such rulings may evolve when conditions change – especially when the survival of the Islamic Republic is at stake.
Iran is also working to immunize itself against any escalation at the UN Security Council. Here, it banks on the veto power of Russia and China to neutralize any western effort to reimpose sanctions.
The collapse of the Cairo Agreement marks a turning point in Tehran’s nuclear diplomacy. It is a conclusion drawn from years of unmet commitments and military escalation that western multilateralism has exhausted its credibility.
Iranian FM Urges Global Pressure on Israel to Join Chemical Weapons Pact
Sputnik – 25.11.2025
Israel remains the sole obstacle to establishing a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and must be forced to join the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), Abbas Araghchi, Iranian foreign minister and head of the Iranian delegation to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), said on Tuesday.
The 30th session of the OPCW Conference of States Parties is underway in The Hague from November 24 to 28.
“The Israeli regime must be compelled to accede to the convention and to submit to full-scope inspections as a priority for the OPCW,” Araghchi said during the session.
Israel has not joined any disarmament treaties, including the CWC, and remains the “only obstacle” to creating a WMD-free zone in the region, the Iranian foreign minister said.
While WMDs are inherently dangerous and inhumane, their possession by “wanted criminals” responsible for “massacre and genocide over the past two years” poses a grave existential threat to humanity and the planet, he said.
Araghchi said that the CWC is the most successful disarmament treaty to date but warned that its effectiveness depends on full compliance by all states without exception.
Jewish Celebrities Blame Judaism for Gaza Holocaust
The CJ Werleman Show | November 21, 2025
/ cjwerleman A historic decline in sympathy for Israel in Britain, and an unprecedented rise in solidarity with Palestine in 2025
By Adnan Hmidan | MEMO | November 24, 2025
Public sentiment in Britain today is markedly different from what it was two years ago. A society that once observed developments in the Middle East from a comfortable distance is now expressing a clearer and more confident moral position on the genocide in Gaza. The scale of this shift can be considered one of the most significant transformations in British public attitudes towards Palestine in recent decades.
Figures published in the autumn of 2025 indicate that sympathy for Israel has fallen to approximately 12 percent, the lowest level recorded, while sympathy for Palestinians has risen to around 38 percent in some national polling. A majority of respondents also state that Israel’s actions in Gaza cannot be justified on either moral or legal grounds. However, these figures represent only the surface of a deeper transition taking place within British society.
The primary catalyst for this shift has not been political realignment, diplomatic pressure or changes within party leaderships, but rather the scale and visibility of the atrocities committed in Gaza. As the genocide expanded to include the targeting of hospitals, schools and refugee camps, alongside collective punishment and reports of widespread abuse in detention, traditional claims about self-defence lost credibility.
Unfiltered images circulated widely across British media and social platforms. Families killed in their homes, children pulled from the rubble and patients evacuated after power cuts became daily realities rather than distant headlines. For many, Palestine was no longer viewed as a remote political issue but as a profound human tragedy unfolding in real time. The collapse of official narratives in the face of visible evidence contributed further to this reassessment, reinforcing the understanding that what is taking place is not a symmetrical conflict but the systematic destruction of a besieged population.
Over the past two years, Britain has also witnessed an unprecedented wave of public mobilisation. London and other major cities saw some of the largest demonstrations in Western Europe, continuing week after week without subsiding. Solidarity evolved from street marches to university encampments, from civic spaces to trade unions and professional bodies, and eventually to parliamentary scrutiny concerning arms exports and the UK’s legal responsibilities.
Notably, this movement was not driven solely by Palestinians, Arabs or Muslims. Large numbers of students, academics, health workers, legal professionals, artists and members of the clergy took part. British Jewish groups opposing the genocide played an important role in challenging attempts to delegitimise or isolate the solidarity movement. Two years on, public mobilisation remains active despite increasingly restrictive protest regulations, indicating that this is not a temporary emotional response but a deeper shift in public conscience.
This evolving landscape has also reshaped how many Britons, particularly younger generations, understand the question of resistance. Public debate is no longer confined to simplistic binaries. There is growing recognition that resistance emerges from dispossession, blockade and the absence of any viable path to justice, rather than from ideological motivations alone.
Policy-makers in Britain are aware of these developments, even if official positions have not shifted dramatically. Pressure is visible in calls to suspend arms exports to Israel, demands for independent investigations into potential complicity and a noticeable shift in political language, especially within the Labour Party. The driving force behind this pressure has not been a change of government but the continuing reality of the genocide itself, which has made unconditional support for Israeli policies increasingly difficult to justify publicly.
The genocide in Gaza has reshaped how many people understand their place in the world. In Britain, solidarity with Palestine has become a reflection of moral responsibility rather than a peripheral political stance. Although the path ahead remains complex, the transformation witnessed over the past two years demonstrates that sustained exposure to reality can alter public attitudes in ways that once seemed unlikely.
The decline in sympathy for Israel marks not the conclusion of this shift, but its beginning. Palestine is no longer perceived as a distant or marginal issue, but as a central concern within British public consciousness — one that is unlikely to fade in the foreseeable future.
Settler attacks intensify as Palestinians face systematic displacement
Al Mayadeen | November 24, 2025
Abdullah Awad, speaking to the Financial Times, describes a reality Palestinians across the occupied West Bank know too well: armed Israeli settlers storming their land with the aim of driving them out. The attack on his family farm near Turmus Ayya, carried out by about 15 masked settlers, left his children screaming as the group smashed their home and equipment.
“The settlers had axelike sticks with nails attached. So, they intended to injure us badly or kill us. Thank God we were awake when they came, so we could move away a bit,” he said. The assault followed years of harassment, but Awad says the violence has intensified since the war on Gaza began: “There were many assaults. This was not the first, and won’t be the last . . . but since the start of the war [in Gaza], they have become more violent. The situation has changed.”
Escalating campaign of settler aggression
Across the West Bank, Palestinians are facing an orchestrated campaign to terrorize communities and seize land. Settlers have attacked farmers, burned property, and raided villages from the northern hills to the southern plains. Videos of settlers beating Palestinians, including one incident in which a masked settler clubbed a woman unconscious, reflect a growing sense of impunity.
Political analyst Ibrahim Dalalsha told FT the pattern is unmistakable, “The settlers are totally emboldened, and the attacks are spreading, in the north, centre and south [of the West Bank]… This time they are really going deep inside.”
Targeting the olive harvest, the backbone of Palestinian rural life
The olive harvest, which sustains thousands of Palestinian families, has become an annual target for settler groups seeking to disrupt livelihoods and claim new territory. This season, attacks have soared. Settlers have torched a mosque in Deir Istiya, burned cars and homes near Beit Lahm, and even stormed an industrial area close to Beit Lid.
According to UN OCHA figures, more than 260 settler assaults resulting in injuries or property destruction were recorded in October, the highest monthly total since monitoring began nearly two decades ago.
Israeli condemnations ring hollow as impunity deepens
Israeli leaders have issued belated statements condemning settler actions, but on the ground, Palestinians say nothing has changed. The army dismantled a single illegal outpost, an exception so rare it drew international attention, while settlers continue attacking communities without consequence.
The settlers who burned the Deir Istiya mosque left graffiti stating: “We’re not afraid of Avi Bluth.”
Their message was aimed at the Israeli general responsible for West Bank operations, a taunt conveying how little fear violent settlers have of the regime’s security forces.
Rights group Yesh Din reports that 94% of settler violence cases were closed without charges in the 18 years before the war on Gaza. Palestinian officials say the situation has only worsened, with the military frequently standing aside, or acting in coordination with settlers during attacks.
Dalalsha said, “In the past, when there were attacks, there were investigations. Palestinians viewed these as a sham. But at least there was a process. These days, we do not hear of anything.”
Forced displacement as policy
Settlement expansion, illegal under international law, has accelerated at a pace Palestinian rights groups describe as intentional and strategic. Reports indicate that since the start of the war on Gaza in 2023, 44 Palestinian communities have been forcibly pushed from their lands through settler assaults combined with military restrictions.
Yair Dvir of B’Tselem put it bluntly, “When you look at what is happening, there is an order to [the attacks] . . . It’s not just individuals and settlers. They are backed by the Israeli system. There is a very clear goal, which is to forcibly displace the Palestinians and force them into the big cities.”
Daily terror in towns under siege
In Sinjil, a town outside Ramallah, a newly built settler outpost has triggered relentless harassment for Palestinians. Mayor Moataz Tawafsha told the FT: “There is no day without an attack. They steal tractors, burn stuff that belongs to the farmers, prevent farmers from reaching their land. Every day. They never stop.”
Near Turmus Ayya, settlers have placed a metal cabin and tent on a Palestinian building left half-finished and raised an Israeli flag above it, a symbolic claim over land that locals have farmed for generations. The new presence has cut Palestinians off from hundreds of hectares of farmland, including thousands of olive trees.
The mayor, Lafi Adeeb Shalabi, says the aim is clear, “They are trying to destroy the history of Palestine . . . This land belonged to our families, to our great great-grandfathers,” he said. “And when we try to defend it, they say we are terrorists.”
A systematic drive to empty Palestinian land
Testimonies from across the West Bank point to a coordinated effort to dispossess Palestinian communities: settlers advancing deeper into Palestinian areas, soldiers restricting movement, homes and farms burned, and entire communities uprooted.
What was once seasonal harassment has evolved into a sustained campaign of displacement.
Dissecting the UN’s “Comprehensive Plan” for Gaza and the inevitable dead-end
By Jamal Kanj | MEMO | November 24, 2025
US policy documents on the Middle East do not reach the daylight before Israel is given the chance to filter them, and gut them. The latest UN Security Council (UNSC) 2803, Comprehensive Plan, is no exception. The Resolution perpetuates the same failed logic that has governed international diplomacy for decades. One in which Palestinian rights are conditioned, while Israeli obligations are delayed with no mechanism, timelines, or accountability for violating agreements.
Following two years of using food as a weapon of war and genocide, the UNSC adopted a US sponsored resolution, not to condemn weaponizing food, but to reward the perpetrator. The UNSC “Comprehensive Plan” for Gaza is anything but comprehensive. It is narrow, short on details, rich in contradictions, and utterly lacking any overarching purpose.
Take Paragraph 2 for instance. The Resolution “welcomes the establishment of the Board of Peace (BoP)” as a transitional international administration that will manage Gaza’s redevelopment “until such time as the Palestinian Authority has satisfactorily completed its reform program.”
In other words, the recognition of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people is contingent, sequenced, and time-bound: reform first, demonstrate worthiness, satisfy outside evaluators, and then—maybe—they can “securely and effectively take back control” of their land. Meanwhile, Israel’s commitments are, at best, deliberately vague, crafted with such ambiguity allowing varying interpretations, much like UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338, written purposefully in a nebulous language that enabled Israel to evade compliance for decades.
There is not one single concrete or enforceable requirement placed on Israel: none to halt its extrajudicial assassinations, military attacks, timeline to complete withdrawal, or stop the expansion of Jewish-only colonies established on the same land reserved for the supposed Palestinian “self-determination.”
The Resolution weakens Item 7 of “Trump’s 20-point Gaza peace plan” which had called for “full aid be immediately sent into the Gaza Strip.” The new Comprehensive Plan replaced “immediately” by expressing only “the importance of the full resumption of humanitarian aid.” Israel’s already inexplicit obligations are further watered down to mere “consultation” and “cooperation,” giving the occupying power wide latitude to dictate its own interpretations and evade any real accountability.
The distortion becomes even more evident in Paragraphs 3 through 8. These sections deepen the asymmetry: Israel, whose leaders are indicted war criminals, is elevated to a co-supervisor with veto power over every stage of Gaza’s future. In effect, this Resolution upends international law by granting war criminals the final word on Gaza’s fate.
Paragraph 3, which addresses humanitarian aid, orders stringent monitoring of aid distribution inside Gaza. At the same time, there are no unequivocal demands on Israel to fully open all crossings, or stop hindering humanitarian aid delivery. The limited aid must be policed in Gaza, but the state that used food as a weapon and starved the population, is not required to do anything differently.
In Paragraph 4, a foreign-controlled “operational entities” strips Palestinians of their political agency by placing them under a technocratic committee selected from abroad and subordinate to the misnomer BoP. Yet, there is nothing in the Resolution on the freedom of ingress and egress, no mention of opening the seaport or rebuilding the airport. Furthermore, there are no tangible punitive measures, if and when, Israel fails to adhere to the UNSC Resolution.
The funding structures in Paragraphs 5–6 absolve Israel of responsibility. Gaza’s reconstruction is handed to donors and the World Bank, financed through voluntary contributions. Israel, the power that destroyed Gaza, is not asked to contribute a dollar, let alone pay reparations or assume legal responsibility for murdering and injuring 241,000 Palestinians, destroying all the universities, 97% of schools, 94% of the hospitals and 92% of the residential homes.
The heart of the resolution’s inequity is found in Paragraph 7, which authorizes a foreign military force (ISF) tasked with enforcing Palestinian demilitarization. The Palestinian Resistance must disarm, surrender weapons, accept foreign security supervision, and undergo vetting. Israel’s withdrawal, however, takes place only “when conditions allow” and to be negotiated between its army and ISF, guarantors, and the United States. Palestinians are entirely excluded from determining the terms of the Israeli withdrawal from their own land.
Even more alarming, the resolution normalizes Israeli occupation “that will remain until Gaza is properly secure from any resurgent terror threat.” An open-ended clause granting Israel a permanent military footprint in and around Gaza while granting Israel alone the power to define and determine any so-called “resurgent threat.”
Finally, Paragraph 8, mandates that any extension of international presence in Gaza must be done “in full cooperation and coordination with Egypt and Israel.” Once again, Palestinians are excluded from determining their own future. It is all left for Israel since its consent is conditional on the “full cooperation.”
Taken together, these provisions expose the true nature of the so-called Comprehensive Plan: a political instrument designed to entrench, not end, the structural inequality of occupation. And less than 72 hours following the UNSC Resolution, Benjamin Netanyahu appointed Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, two Jewish racist ministers who openly called for the ethnic cleansing and building Jewish only colonies in Gaza, to be in charge of, or more likely to undermine, the second phase of Trump’s 20-point plan.
In short, the UNSC Comprehensive Plan whitewashes Israel’s genocide and ties the future of Palestinian self-determination to a checklist that Israel is neither bound to accept nor prevented from obstructing. A Plan that will lead to exactly where previous UN Resolutions, mainly 194, 242 and 338 had gone, to an inevitable dead-end.
Iran Dismisses US Dialogue Claims as “Not Credible”
Al-Manar | November 23, 2025
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei stated on Sunday that Washington’s professed willingness for dialogue lacks credibility, asserting that US claims are fundamentally inconsistent with its actions.
Speaking at a weekly press conference, Baqaei referenced recent remarks by the US president, stating that America has demonstrated in practice that it is not serious about negotiations.
The spokesman suggested that Washington either misunderstands the very concept of negotiation or approaches talks with a mindset that reduces them to dictation. He emphasized that such claims must be measured against the United States’ actual conduct.
Commenting on Tehran’s conditions for any potential talks with the US, Baqaei underscored that safeguarding Iran’s national interests remains the central and guiding principle.
“The other side has shown no genuine belief in negotiations,” he said, adding that as long as dialogue is treated as an imposition, the necessary conditions for genuine talks do not exist.
“What matters is that the US government has destroyed any basis for trust through its actions,” Baqaei stated. He cited the US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018 and subsequent “unfaithful” actions during the Biden administration, despite earlier progress.
He further argued that the US decision to accompany the Zionist regime in its military aggression against Iran this past June provided further proof of Washington’s lack of intent to reach a reasonable and fair solution.
Addressing other diplomatic matters, the spokesman firmly dismissed speculation that Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi’s upcoming trip to the Netherlands would involve negotiations with the three European countries (the E3). He clarified that the visit’s sole purpose is participation in a conference for the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
Baqaei conceded that consultations with other foreign ministers might occur on the sidelines in The Hague, but he explicitly labeled reports of negotiations with the European troika as untrue.
Mamdani raises ‘US funding’ of Israeli genocide in Gaza during Trump meeting
US President Donald Trump meets with New York Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani in the White House in Washington, DC, on November 21, 2025. (Photo by Jim WATSON / AFP)
Press TV – November 22, 2025
In a meeting with US President Donald Trump, the newly elected New York City mayor, Zohran Mamdani, raised the issue of US funding for the Israeli genocidal war on Gaza.
The meeting at the White House on Friday was the first in-person meeting for the political opposites, who have clashed over everything from immigration to economic policy.
The 34-year-old mayor told reporters that when he spoke to New Yorkers who supported both Trump and him, the two main reasons given were a desire to “end forever wars” and an “end to the taxpayer dollars we had funding violations of human rights.”
Answering a reporter’s question, the mayor-elect reiterated that Israel has been “committing genocide” in Gaza and his assertion that US taxpayers’ dollars are helping fund it.
Mamdani clarified that he had “spoken about the Israeli [regime] committing genocide and I’ve spoken about our government funding it.”
“I shared with the president in our meeting about the concern that many New Yorkers have about wanting their tax dollars to go toward the benefit of New Yorkers and their ability to afford basic dignity,” Mamdani said.
“There’s a desperate need not only for the following of human rights but also the following through on the promises we’ve made New Yorkers.”
“I appreciate all efforts toward peace,” he added. “We’re tired of seeing our tax dollars fund endless wars, and I also believe that we have to follow through on the international human rights, and I know that still today those are being violated, and that continues to be work that has to be done, no matter where we’re speaking of.”
Trump did not comment on the matter, beyond noting that he and Mamdani feel “very strongly about peace” in West Asia.
Trump also said that he and Mamdani did not discuss the latter’s pledge to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he came to the Big Apple.
Trump had previously called the incoming New York City mayor a “radical left lunatic,” a communist, and a “Jew hater.”
As Mamdani surged in the polls to victory, Trump, a Republican, issued threats to strip federal funding from the biggest US city.
The mayor-elect has regularly criticized a range of Trump’s policies, including plans to ramp up federal immigration enforcement efforts in New York City, where four in ten residents are foreign-born.
How a shamed Supreme Court Justice helped Israeli dual citizens in America
If Americans Knew | November 20, 2025
In 1967, Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas changed American tradition with his tie-breaking vote in favor of an Israeli national. The landmark decision allowed dual citizens to fight in a foreign army and even hold office in a foreign country.
Former Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization Services Leonel Castillo said that the special U.S.-Israel relationship was dangerous, and that it was dangerous because it was unknown to what extent it would go if Americans were allowed to fight in a the Israeli military.
According to the Washington Post, currently there are more than 23,380 Americans fighting in the Israeli military, instead of enlisting in the U.S. armed forces. Other sources reveal that only between 8,000 and 10,000 Jewish-Americans are enlisted in the American military.
Two notable bills regarding dual citizens are currently being pushed in Congress.
1. Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, who served in the Israeli military, has put forward the Protecting Americans who served in the IDF Act, which would offer the same benefits to Israeli soldiers as American soldiers. It’s also important to know that Mast was voted to lead the House Foreign Affairs panel in 2024. Mast has gone on record saying, “As the only member to serve with both the United States Army and the Israel Defense Forces, I will always stand with Israel.”
2. Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who is the only Republican lawmaker without an “AIPAC guy”, has put forward the Dual Citizen Disclosure Act, which would compel candidates and elected officials to disclose any dual citizenship they may have. “At a minimum, (elected officials) should disclose their citizenship in other countries and abstain from votes specifically benefiting those countries,” Massie said.
Washington Post : https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/…
The Times of Israel : https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/moder…
In 1995 Donald Neff exposed Fortas’ action to change a long-held American tradition on behalf of Israel: https://ifamericansknew.org/media/epi…
Supremacism as an inherent aspect of the Zionist ideology
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 21, 2025
A recent speech by Israeli Minister of Security Itamar Ben-Gvir clearly revealed the inherently supremacist character of Zionist ideology. Ahead of the UN Security Council vote on the implementation of the next phase of the U.S.-mediated Gaza peace plan, Ben-Gvir categorically stated that “the Palestinian people do not exist.” This statement is not merely a rhetorical provocation; it is an explicit expression of a worldview that denies the historical, cultural, and political existence of another nation based on ethnic and religious criteria.
Ben-Gvir, leader of the ultranationalist Otzma Yehudit party, argued that Palestinians are “an invention without any historical, archaeological, or factual basis.” In his view, the presence of Arabs in the region controlled by Israel does not constitute a legitimate nation and therefore does not deserve any political recognition or right to self-determination. More than denying the existence of a people, the minister asserts that the only “real” solution to the conflict would be to encourage voluntary emigration — a proposal that, in practice, amounts to the forced removal of an entire population.
What is evident in this speech is the crystallization of a supremacist logic: defining one’s own group as the exclusive holder of rights over the land, history, and political narrative, while the other group is dehumanized and reduced to a threat to be eliminated or marginalized. This perspective is not isolated. Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich recently reinforced the idea that a Palestinian state “will never be established,” demanding that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu communicate this unequivocally to the world.
These statements highlight a crucial point that many international analyses hesitate to address: Zionist ideology has an essentially supremacist and deeply racist core. The denial of Palestinian existence, the exclusion of the Arab population from the national narrative, and the promotion of forced emigration policies reflect a conception of the state based on the supremacy of one ethno-religious group over all other historical inhabitants of the region.
It is important to emphasize that this vision directly contrasts with international law and global consensus on the recognition of the Palestinian people. Currently, the State of Palestine is recognized by 157 countries, including four of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. Nevertheless, figures such as Ben-Gvir and Smotrich remain steadfast in defending policies that deny any possibility of Palestinian coexistence or self-determination.
Moreover, Ben-Gvir’s rhetoric does not emerge in a political vacuum: it is part of a broader project of exclusion and supremacy within Israel’s domestic context, but it also directly influences the country’s foreign policy, affecting international negotiations and peace plans. By treating Palestinians as nonexistent, the Israeli government positions itself against diplomatic solutions that respect equal rights, such as the widely endorsed two-state solution supported by multiple international actors.
The supremacist nature of Zionist ideology cannot be reduced to mere political differences or territorial disputes. It is a worldview that establishes racial and historical hierarchies, justifying the disregard for the rights of an entire people based on the supposed “superiority” of another. By delegitimizing Palestinian existence, Ben-Gvir exposes a logic of total exclusion that threatens not only regional stability but also universal principles of justice and national sovereignty.
In summary, the recent statements of Israeli leaders reveal that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not merely a territorial or strategic dispute, but also a struggle against an ideology rooted in the denial of the other. Understanding ideological Zionism through the lens of supremacism is crucial for any serious analysis of the contemporary Middle East and demonstrates that, until the humanity and rights of the Palestinian people are recognized, the ongoing genocide in Gaza will not cease.
EU conference in Brussels links Gaza recovery funds to PA reforms
The Cradle | November 21, 2025
The EU held a donor conference in Brussels on 20 November to discuss reconstruction and post-war governance in the Gaza Strip, with several countries signing a reform-linked financial support package for the Palestinian Authority (PA).
Sixty delegations participated in the conference in Brussels. Four EU members states – Germany, Luxembourg, Slovenia, and Spain – signed commitments confirming €82 million ($95 million) in support for the PA, which was already previously pledged.
This came as part of the new €1.6 billion ($1.85 billion), EU multi-year program for Palestinian recovery, unveiled earlier this year. In total, €88 million ($101.4 million) was pledged this year. The contributions will be channeled through the Palestinian-European Socio-Economic Management and Assistance Mechanism (PEGASE).
The disbursement of the funds is dependent on specific reforms that the PA must carry out first.
No new pledges were made during the donor conference on Thursday.
“Our aim is to strengthen governance, build a more resilient economy, stabilize finances, improve services for the population, and create conditions for future effective governance across all territories,” said EU commissioner for the Mediterranean Dubravka Suica.
“Our financial support is linked to the PA reform agenda, which, of course, they committed to implement,” Suica added. “Switzerland, New Zealand, Norway, Turkiye, which are not members of the European Union, are looking forward to their pledges to use this mechanism … which is controlled and assures that money goes in the right place.”
Chief of the EU Ursula von der Leyen said the bloc was “committed to working towards a Palestinian state with a reformed, well-functioning Palestinian Authority at its core.”
A follow-up conference will be held in Egypt to secure more funding.
Three days ago, the UN passed a US-drafted resolution to approve the second phase of US President Donald Trump’s ceasefire plan.
The initiative includes deploying international forces to Gaza to disarm the resistance, and allows Israel to maintain a presence inside the strip until the disarmament is complete. Hamas and the other factions have outright rejected the resolution.
The Trump plan includes an eventual return of the PA to Gaza, conditional on reforms that must be carried out by Ramallah. However, Tel Aviv has not signed off on PA governance in the strip.
Ramallah has already begun carrying out reforms at the request of Washington, Arab states, and western countries, including last year, when it ended its policy of stipends to the families of Palestinian prisoners convicted for resistance operations or attacks against Israelis.
Tel Aviv and Washington have referred to this policy as “pay-to-slay.”
In September, the French and UK governments announced their recognition of a Palestinian state. According to a report by The Telegraph that month, London and Paris conditioned their recognition of Palestine on an “overhaul” of the Palestinian education system.
PA President Mahmoud Abbas is “under pressure to drive through reforms to the Palestinian school curriculum in an effort to placate Israeli concerns over anti-Semitism,” the report said, adding that other political reforms and elections are also on the list of demands.
Last month, the Times of Israel reported Abbas sacked his finance minister for continuing payments to the families of prisoners in defiance of Israeli and western demands.
The PA was formed in the aftermath of the 1993 Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). Abbas was elected as president in 2005, and has been in power since then despite the expiry of his term in 2009.
Despite years of deep security coordination between Ramallah and Tel Aviv, and the PA cracking down on West Bank resistance on behalf of Israel, the authority is facing an Israeli campaign of financial strangulation and is constantly accused of encouraging terrorism and antisemitism.
Russia, China upbraid anti-Iran IAEA resolution, urge West to drop threats
Press TV – November 21, 2025
Russia and China have, in the strongest terms, rebuked a recent anti-Iran resolution passed by the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), calling for the settlement of the Islamic Republic’s nuclear issue through dialogue and cooperation.
Drafted by France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States and approved 19–3 with 12 abstentions on Thursday, the resolution sought to pressure Tehran by demanding it “without delay” account for its enriched uranium stocks and facilities damaged in the June attacks by the United States and Israel.
Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova announced at a press conference in Moscow that Russia continues to firmly emphasize finding political and diplomatic solutions to the issue of Iran’s nuclear program.
Asked about a recent telephone conversation between the Russian and Iranian foreign ministers, during which the issue of Iran’s nuclear program and related talks were discussed, Zakharova was cited by TASS as saying that Moscow is consistently committed to actively seeking political and diplomatic solutions to the Iranian nuclear issue.
The spokeswoman added that Moscow has repeatedly warned about the dangers of “military actions” that threaten the stability and security of West Asia, underlining that any military attack on nuclear facilities, especially those under the monitoring of the IAEA, is “unacceptable.”
Zakharova also said the US aggression against Iran’s nuclear sites undermined the principles the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) — a treaty to which Iran has always been fully committed and which the IAEA has confirmed.
The Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman went on to say that despite the efforts on the part of some foreign actors to create chaos and trouble in Iranian society, Tehran still prefers the path of dialogue over war and believes that national interests can be secured based on equal dialogue and by taking into account mutual concerns.
She stressed that in order to resume the talks, Iran needs “serious guarantees” that its nuclear facilities will not be targeted by missile or air attacks again.
Zakharova further underlined that the West must put aside threats of sanctions and military threats and return to diplomacy with Iran.
IAEA urged to create ‘favorable conditions for cooperation’
Li Song, China’s permanent representative to the IAEA, told the Board of Governors on Thursday that pushing through a counterproductive resolution against Iran will “only make things worse,” stressing that the US, Israel, and key European states are fueling the ongoing crisis surrounding Tehran’s nuclear file.
“Countries that have recklessly resorted to the use of force and obsessively pursued confrontation and pressure are responsible for the current situation of the Iranian nuclear issue,” Li said.
The Chinese envoy stressed that Israel and the United States attacked Iranian nuclear facilities safeguarded by the IAEA in June, which led to a “fundamental change in the situation of the Iranian nuclear issue.”
“Such an act should be strongly condemned by the international community and the IAEA,” he said.
On the Cairo agreement reached between Iran and the IAEA in September, Li emphasized that the pact was “a positive development” and “an important opportunity” to fully revive safeguards cooperation.
He said the activation of the snapback mechanism by the UK, France, and Germany had “seriously undermined the good momentum of cooperation” between Tehran and the Agency.
Li added that the Iranian nuclear issue “can only be properly resolved” by respecting Iran’s legitimate NPT rights and ensuring the peaceful nature of its program through political, diplomatic, and safeguards mechanisms.
The envoy called on the BoG to “create favorable conditions for cooperation and dialogue” and to avoid “provoking confrontation.”
Featured Video
Russia and China quietly take over natural gas markets in Asia, with Qatar gone
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
Palantir CEO Calls for Draft to Fight the Empire’s Wars
Involuntary servitude is good for business
By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | April 20, 2026
In 2025, Alex Karp, the CEO of government and military tech contractor Palantir, published The New York Times best-seller, The Technological Republic: Hard Power, Soft Belief, and the Future of the West. The Wall Street Journal praised the book as a cri de coeur, a passionate appeal “that takes aim at the tech industry for abandoning its history of helping America and its allies,” while Wired praised the book as a “readable polemic that skewers Silicon Valley for insufficient patriotism.”
On April 18, 2026, Palantir posted twenty-two points to social media summarizing the book. In addition to taking Silicon Valley to task for insufficient patriotism, advocating a role for AI in forever war, and denouncing the “psychologization of modern politics,” the Palantir post on X declares: “National service should be a universal duty. We should, as a society, seriously consider moving away from an all-volunteer force and only fight the next war if everyone shares in the risk and the cost.”
National conscription, a form of involuntary servitude, and the wars it portends, is good for business, especially for corporations within the orbit of the Pentagon, the CIA, and the national security state. Palantir fits comfortably within this amalgamation. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Palantir CEO Calls for Draft to Fight the Empire’s Wars
- Iran War fallout: Russia and China quietly take over natural gas markets in Asia, with Qatar gone
- Hamas dismisses US-backed disarmament plan as ‘collective suicide’
- Israel’s war obsession and the urgency of Palestinian leverage
- Supply chains breaking: The hidden bottlenecks threatening to bring the global economy to a standstill
- Israel’s Expansion Means An Unraveling of Middle East Stability
- Why has Israel’s Security Doctrine begun targeting Turkey?
- US strikes vessel in Caribbean killing three, death toll reaches 180
- NATO’s Baltic Operation Aims to Curb Russian Cargo Traffic
- France’s New Nuclear Strategy to Weaken Security in Europe – Russian Foreign Ministry
- If Americans Knew
- Israel is (still) killing aid workers in Gaza
- Catholics finally splitting with Trump over Iran war and Israel
- Israel’s “Black Wednesday” Massacre Leaves Lebanese Families Giving DNA To ID Loved One’s Remains
- ‘I Felt I Was a Monster’: IDF Soldiers Talk About the ‘Moral Injury’ – and the Silence
- ‘I thought I might die’: A Palestinian mother’s account of Israeli detention
- Mom whose daughter was killed by Israeli bulldozer 23 years ago pleaded with Congress to finally stop funding
- Israeli soldier takes sledgehammer to Jesus statue in Lebanon – Daily Update
- Israel employs ‘Gaza tactics’ in Lebanon, destroying 1,000 homes per day – Daily Update
- Israel relegates another population to life in tents – Daily Update
- Senate again fails to block weapons to Israel
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: The Climate May Be 5 Times More Sensitive To Solar Forcing Than Commonly Assumed
- EV Industry Reached $70 Billion In Losses In 2024 Due To Delusional Green Ideologies
- Reality Check: Maldives Have Actually Grown In Size Or Remained Stable Over Recent Decades
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
- German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
- New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
Aletho News 