Middle East Press On: Hamas, Israel, Trump, Gaza, Antisemitism, Syria: New Age Islam's Selection, 9 April 2025
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
9 April 2025
Trump's Friendship with Israel Is a Double-Edged Sword
Did Hamas Just Protest Itself? The Gaza Uprising That Feels Like a Setup
Trump Admin. Confronts Antisemitism and DEI
Shin Bet Politicization Dangerous to Israel's Security, Rights of Israelis
Why Trump’s Focus On Syria, Turkey Matters for Israel
Israel’s War On Gaza Poised for Dangerous New Phase
Quiet Tensions Threatening Israeli-Egyptian Cold Peace
-----
Trump's Friendship with Israel Is a Double-Edged Sword
By Jpost Editorial
April 9, 2025
US President Donald Trump opened up his comments to the press with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office on Monday by patting himself on the back for his friendship toward Israel.
In a statement that many Israelis would agree with, he said, “We are a friend of Israel, as you know. I would say that I am by far the best president that Israel has ever even thought of seeing.”
Trump said Israel is in a very difficult neighbourhood and added, “We are helping them, and, likewise, they have been helping us very much.” That acknowledgment of reciprocity – too often overlooked – is welcome.
When it was Netanyahu’s turn to speak, he, too, opened by praising the president’s friendship: “You have been a remarkable friend of the State of Israel; you stand by us, you are standing with us, you are a great, great champion of our lives.”
Shortly thereafter, Trump announced that the US would begin negotiations with Iran on Saturday over its nuclear program. That announcement raised the question: “Is this how Israel’s greatest friend behaves?”
Netanyahu heard of the negotiations and, aside from a quick glance at his aides, neither protested nor expressed concern.
Both the announcement and the prime minister’s silence reveal how different the US-Israel relationship is today compared to the Obama years, the last time a US president directly engaged with the Iranians.
This was not the first time Netanyahu sat in the Oval Office and listened to a US president speak of talks with Iran. In September 2013, Netanyahu was there when then-president Barack Obama, following a meeting with the prime minister, revealed that the US and Iran had already been negotiating for five months. Those talks were held without Israel’s knowledge.
That secrecy marks a key difference. Obama kept Israel in the dark, and those talks ultimately led to the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal signed against Israel’s wishes and despite its deep misgivings.
In contrast, Trump announced to Israel his intention to negotiate with Iran before the talks began, thereby allowing Israel some input. That is a significant shift and helps explain Netanyahu’s muted public reaction.
There were no anonymous “senior sources” this time briefing journalists that engaging with Iran now would let Tehran off the hook precisely when it is at its weakest militarily in years and when the capabilities of its proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Syria, and Iraqi militias) have been severely degraded.
No one was shouting that this was a moment for increasing pressure, not for diplomacy. “Senior officials” were not warning that Iran would exploit the talks to stall until reaching a nuclear point of no return or until it rebuilt the air defenses Israel wiped out last year.
Why wasn't anyone making these arguments to Trump?
Neither Netanyahu nor anyone around him was making these arguments. Why not? Because Trump, through numerous actions since taking office in January, has proven himself a stalwart supporter.
But that support comes with a cost. In this case, the price is a loss of some autonomy. Given everything Trump has done for Israel, it is now politically unthinkable for Jerusalem to say “no” to this president.
Had Obama or former president Joe Biden announced direct talks with Iran, Netanyahu and his allies would have slammed the move. But not with Trump – a reminder that even the warmest friendships come with strings attached. In this case, that string is an inability to object.
Compounding the situation is that unlike during much of the Obama years when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, or both and served as a counterweight to Democratic control of the presidency, today, Republicans hold both the White House and Congress. Netanyahu cannot go around the president’s back to allies in Congress to try and overturn any of Trump’s policies as he did with Obama because Republicans control both the presidency and the legislature.
A new reality was on display in the Oval Office on Monday: unreserved friendship from the president for Israel but a friendship that comes at the cost of a degree of independence.
Under Obama, Netanyahu pushed back – publicly, loudly, repeatedly. Under Trump, that pushback is gone, and that silence is telling. There are tremendous benefits to having a strongly supportive president in Washington. But those benefits come with a price: less room to dissent and less space for Israel to assert its own redlines when they diverge from Washington’s.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-849389
-----
Did Hamas Just Protest Itself? The Gaza Uprising That Feels Like A Setup
By Amine Ayoub
April 9, 2025
Last month, the world was stunned by images coming out of northern Gaza. In Beit Lahiya, hundreds of Palestinians took to the streets in the largest protest against Hamas since the war with Israel began. Videos circulating on social media showed young men marching boldly, chanting, “Out, out, out – Hamas out!” amid the rubble of their broken city. Some held signs, others megaphones. But all of them carried a powerful message: Hamas must go.
Then came the crackdown. Masked gunmen, believed to be Hamas fighters, descended on the crowds. Some held rifles, others batons. Protesters were beaten, chased, and arrested. It looked like a rare moment of resistance – ordinary people rising up against the rulers who have dominated Gaza with an iron fist since 2007.
But this spectacle, for all its raw emotion and viral momentum, raises a deeper and far more disturbing question: What if this wasn’t an organic uprising at all? What if it was something far more calculated? What if this protest – this act of apparent defiance – was a show? A performance directed by Hamas itself?
It wouldn’t be the first time. Hamas, like other totalitarian movements, is a master of manipulation. From martyr posters and press releases to staged funerals and photos of children in rubble, Hamas has long known how to choreograph suffering for strategic effect.
They understand the optics of pain, the power of Western sympathy, and the way social media can transform local outrage into global outrage. They know that a viral clip of a civilian shouting against Hamas is just as useful – sometimes more useful – than a clip of them blaming Israel.
So why not let a protest happen? Why not allow a carefully monitored flashpoint to erupt, just long enough to generate headlines and sow confusion? Why not let the world see a Hamas crackdown – brief, violent, emotional – and then move swiftly to suppress it, claiming foreign interference and “suspicious political agendas”?
In doing so, Hamas achieves the impossible: They appear both embattled and in control. They pose as victims of internal dissent, while remaining the unchallenged rulers of Gaza. The protesters get painted as traitors or Zionist collaborators.
Meanwhile, the international media begins to talk about Palestinian anger “against all sides,” as if Hamas were just one actor in a chaotic landscape, not the very regime responsible for decades of repression, mismanagement, and war.
Nothing happens in Gaza without Hamas's knowledge
This is not to say that the anger in Gaza isn’t real. It is. It has been simmering for years. Civilians are exhausted, displaced, starving. Entire neighbourhoods have vanished. And in that desperation, some have found the courage to speak out.
But the reality of Hamas’s control over Gaza cannot be overstated. Nothing happens there without their knowledge. Spontaneous protests in the middle of a war zone, under the watchful eye of a paranoid regime? That is not how Gaza works. Not unless Hamas allows it – or engineers it.
We’ve seen the playbook before. In Iran, the regime has staged counter protests to justify crackdowns. In Syria, Bashar al-Assad’s regime planted “protesters” to smoke out dissidents. In Russia, fake opposition is routinely used to confuse and control. Hamas has learned from these regimes.
It is no coincidence that as international scrutiny intensifies and pressure mounts over the failure to extend a ceasefire, Hamas suddenly becomes the target of public ire – just enough to distract, just enough to muddy the narrative, just enough to blame Israel or the West for everything falling apart.
And then there’s the digital theatre. Many of the protest videos were circulated by accounts known to oppose Hamas – but how much of that opposition is real, and how much is staged? In an information war, what seems authentic is often artificial.
The protester with the microphone, the chants calling for Hamas to step down, the Facebook posts accusing the group of turning citizens into numbers – it all reads as powerful, until you realize it may be part of a script. A performance staged not for the people of Gaza, but for an international audience already struggling to make sense of an increasingly complex conflict.
If anything, this protest tells us less about Hamas’s weakness and more about its adaptability. This is not the behaviour of a regime on the brink. It is the behavior of a regime that knows exactly how far it can go – how to allow just enough anger to vent before sealing the pressure valve shut.
The message sent to the people of Gaza was clear: We are still watching. And the message sent to the world was even more chilling: We control the narrative, even when it turns against us.
In the end, the voices of the protesters – however genuine – have been swallowed up by a broader, more cynical machine. Their pain is real, but it’s being packaged and sold by the very group they were trying to resist. In Gaza, dissent is not crushed in secret anymore. It is weaponized, staged, and televised. The revolution may not be televised, but the illusion of one absolutely is.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-849324
------
Trump Admin. Confronts Antisemitism and DEI
By Gregory Lyakhov
April 9, 2025
The Trump administration’s decision to pull federal funding from public schools that enforce diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies isn’t an attack on equality. It’s a direct response to a system that, while cloaked in the language of justice, has become one of the most dangerous forces for antisemitism in American education.
DEI began with noble intentions – to uplift the marginalized and build spaces where everyone feels seen. But over time, it hardened into a rigid ideology, one obsessed with race-based binaries: the oppressors and the oppressed, the privileged and the victimized. And in this warped framework, Jews are labelled the oppressors, stripped of historical context, and flattened into beneficiaries of success.
My parents didn’t flee the Soviet Union because they were powerful. They escaped a regime that forbade them from speaking Hebrew, wearing Jewish symbols, and practicing their faith. My great-grandparents didn’t survive the Holocaust because they were privileged. They survived because they ran. So when DEI advocates lump Jews into the “white” category, they erase a history of trauma, exile, and genocide that continues to shape Jewish life today.
In 2023, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) reported a 360% spike in antisemitic incidents on college campuses. And yet, most DEI offices have either ignored this rise or, worse, excused it. Under DEI, Jews are “too successful” to be victims, and Zionism – the belief in Jewish self-determination – is cast as colonialism rather than survival.
We’ve watched DEI mutate into an ideology that doesn’t just exclude Jews; it actively targets them. On campuses across the United States, DEI administrators have hosted anti-Israel panels with no opposing voices, stood by as Jewish students were harassed, and failed to act when posters of kidnapped Israeli children were torn down.
At Stanford, the DEI office backed events calling Israel an apartheid state. At UC Berkeley, law students proposed bylaws banning Zionist speakers. Some Jewish professors have even been pushed out of the institutions they taught at for defending Israel’s right to exist.
These aren’t isolated events. They reflect a deeper rot.
DEI culture tolerates antisemitism
DEI programs have created a culture in which antisemitism, disguised as anti-Zionism, is tolerated. “Zionist” is now a slur on many campuses, a term hurled at Jewish students who support the only Jewish state in the world. When Jewish students speak up, they’re shouted down; when they seek help, they’re ignored.
This is what makes US President Donald Trump’s stance so significant.
For decades, antisemitism was only taken seriously when it came from the far Right. Today, however, it thrives in faculty lounges, student unions, and DEI offices. While other politicians tiptoe around that reality, Trump is calling it out and taking action.
The Left says that pulling funding from programs that define Jewish identity as privilege and treat Jewish safety as expendable is extreme. But what’s truly extreme is using taxpayer dollars to fund them at all. What’s extreme is allowing universities to spend millions on DEI administrators who ignore the harassment of Jewish students while obsessing over imaginary microaggressions.
Since the Hamas mega-atrocities of October 7, 2023, there have been over 10,000 anti-Semitic incidents in the US – the highest number ever recorded by the ADL. In New York City, Orthodox Jews accounted for more than half of all hate crime victims in religious bias cases. This isn’t history; it’s happening right now. Yet, DEI programs remain silent or are even complicit.
Some will say Jews aren’t oppressed anymore. Yes, many Jews thrive today. We lead businesses, sit in Congress, and help shape culture. But success doesn’t erase bigotry. And it certainly doesn’t justify silence when our communities are threatened. If DEI can’t recognize antisemitism when it comes wrapped in progressive language, then DEI is no longer a tool for justice; it’s a weapon for exclusion.
The truth is, diversity that excludes Jews isn’t diversity. Equity that ranks pain on a political scale isn’t equity. And inclusion that silences Jewish voices isn’t inclusion, it’s discrimination.
Trump’s decision signals a long-overdue shift.
He’s refusing to let DEI hide behind good intentions while fueling hate. He’s acknowledging what so many Jewish students, teachers, and families already know: DEI, in its current form, is not just flawed, it’s dangerous. And unlike the last administration, which elevated DEI into federal policy, Trump is doing what others won’t – defending Jewish Americans against an ideology that claims to be their ally but acts like their enemy.
It takes real courage to confront antisemitism not just when it wears a swastika, but when it wears a name tag that says “equity officer.” For Jews across America, Trump’s move is more than a policy shift, it’s a recognition of our reality. And for those of us who know the cost of silence, that matters.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-849344
---
Shin Bet Politicization Dangerous to Israel's Security, Rights of Israelis
By Eran Shamir-Borer, Amichai Cohen
April 8, 2025
Israel faces immense security threats, both external and internal, more significant than those faced by perhaps any other democratic state. To address its internal security threats, Israel established a strong domestic security agency—the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency)—which holds extensive investigative, surveillance, and intelligence-gathering powers.
For instance, the Shin Bet is authorized to remotely infiltrate computers and covertly search them for information. It also collects vast amounts of communication metadata. The enormous accumulation of this data, combined with the Shin Bet’s advanced technological capabilities, gives the organization access to a wealth of information about every Israeli citizen.
During the COVID-19 crisis, for example, it became evident that the Shin Bet could track the location of any Israeli citizen via their mobile phone, and identify the people with whom they had been in proximity.
The Shin Bet also has broad powers and statutory authority in the field of investigations. It may prevent a suspect under investigation from meeting with their attorney, extend detention before a court hearing, and hold hearings on detention extensions without the suspect's presence. Additionally, the Shin Bet has authority over the security clearance of public officials and civil servants.
These considerable powers granted to a secretive organization demand the establishment of appropriate oversight mechanisms to ensure that they are used solely for their intended purposes and to prevent misuse against individuals or communities in Israel.
Internal oversight mechanisms are critical
Due to the secretive nature of the organization and its operations, standard oversight mechanisms—such as the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, the courts, civil society, and the press—are not always effective. The Shin Bet’s internal oversight mechanisms are, therefore, critical: these include the Shin Bet Comptroller, its legal advisor, and, crucially, the organizational culture and ethos instilled by the head of the Shin Bet.
The Shin Bet underwent a major organizational reform following scandals exposed in the 1980s, replacing a culture of deception and abuse of powers with an internalization of the importance of restraint and rule of law in a democratic society. This current perspective, for example, has led the Shin Bet to hesitate in using its intrusive capabilities, intended for national security purposes, to combat organized crime in the Arab society.
The agency’s extensive powers create significant temptation for the minister responsible for it—the Prime Minister—to direct the Shin Bet chief to use those powers against political opponents or to suppress individuals and groups perceived as oppositional to the government.
In recent days, former Shin Bet chief Yoram Cohen alleged that Prime Minister Netanyahu requested the Shin Bet to use its capabilities and powers against his political opponents (these allegations have been denied, at least in part, by the Prime Minister).
To protect the Shin Bet from political interference, the Shin Bet Law includes a special provision stating: “The Service shall operate in a mamlachti manner; no task shall be imposed on the Service for the purpose of advancing party-political interests.” (Mamlachti refers to the Israeli concept of civic duty, prioritizing national above sectorial or political interests).
Shin Bet Law restricts partisan action
This provision—which has no parallel in other laws for Israeli government agencies—not only prohibits the Shin Bet from acting in a partisan manner but also restricts political leaders from directing the agency to do so. In effect, the Knesset intended to provide the Shin Bet chief and the organization with protection from political interference and to empower the Shin Bet chief to refuse to comply with any “political” orders from the Prime Minister.
This unique authority creates an inherent potential tension between the Prime Minister and the head of the Shin Bet. While the Shin Bet chief is obligated to implement government policy, he is not required to follow a directive from the Prime Minister if he deems it political and contrary to the mamlachti principle enshrined in law.
The head of the Shin Bet is not a personal appointment of the prime minister and does not serve “at his pleasure.” It is, of course, important that a professional trust-based working relationship exists between them. However, the Shin Bet chief has a degree of independence from any prime minister. This independence is further reinforced by the fixed five-year term of the Shin Bet chief, which is deliberately longer than the parliamentary term and is independent of a change in the prime minister or government.
True, the government has the authority to shorten the term and dismiss the Shin Bet chief, but this power should clearly be used sparingly and only for professional reasons and subject to the rules of administrative law. Otherwise, every time the Shin Bet chief resists the prime minister’s political demands, the latter could simply dismiss him—thereby hollowing out the obligation of acting in a manner that is mamlachti.
The importance of a Shin Bet independent from political intervention cannot be overstated. It is what ensures that the Shin Bet does not become a draconian political tool against opposition forces, akin to the “secret police” of dictatorships. This independence from politicization also enables the Shin Bet to recruit the best of Israeli's citizens into its ranks, regardless of their political views. If perceived as a political organization, many would refuse to join it, and growing public distrust might impact its effectiveness.
Above all, this independence guarantees that the Shin Bet’s primary focus remains its central mission: protecting Israel from its enemies. Protecting the Shin Bet’s independence from political intervention is critical to safeguarding Israel’s security and the rights of its citizens. If we do not protect it—the Shin Bet will not protect us.
Dr. Eran Shamir-Borer is Director of the Center for Security and Democracy at the Israel Democracy Institute.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-849395
-------
Why Trump’s Focus On Syria, Turkey Matters For Israel
By Seth J. Frantzman
April 8, 2025
During his meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday, US President Donald Trump was asked about Turkey’s role in Syria and the potential tensions between Israel and Turkey there. Trump made important comments about Turkey and Syria that may point to a path forward for Ankara and Jerusalem regarding issues relating to Damascus.
The US president said he has excellent relations with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, which was clear during Trump’s first term. During the first Trump administration’s term, Israel carried out airstrikes in Syria against Iran. This was called the war between the wars campaign in which Jerusalem tried to reduce Tehran’s role in Syria and its trafficking of arms to Hezbollah. At the time, Iranian-backed militias also threatened Israel from Syria.
However, things have changed since the fall of the Assad regime. Now, Israel is worried that Turkey’s ties with the new government in Damascus might end up replacing the Iranian threat with a potential Turkish one. The Turkey problem is much more complex, though, because it is a NATO member.
Trump’s positive comments about Erdogan and Ankara’s role in Syria also underscore how Washington is likely not on the same page with Jerusalem regarding tensions with Ankara.
Erdogan has been one of the leading critics of Israel over the last decade. He often slams Israel and even compares it to Nazi Germany. His country has hosted Hamas leaders and members, and it strongly backs the Palestinian cause.
Turkey's ties to Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood bad for Israel
Ankara’s leadership, the AK Party, is rooted in the same ideological underpinnings that are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, which grew out of the brotherhood’s influence in Gaza. As such, it is natural that Ankara sees Hamas in a relatively favorable light. This is not a positive development for Israel.
At this time, Turkey is still being cautious regarding Syria. Erdogan doesn’t seem to want a clash with Israel just yet. Jerusalem, by contrast, has been more aggressive in Syria and is laying down red lines about Ankara’s potential role. Airstrikes at the T-4 airbase near Palmyra, apparently aimed at preventing Turkey’s involvement there, are an example.
Trump, in his meeting with Netanyahu, was supportive of Turkey. He said he could work out a deal between Israel and Turkey if there are tensions in Syria. In Trump’s view, there are no problems between the US and Turkey.
The US president said he has told Netanyahu that the White House could work things out. “I hope that’s not going to be a problem,” Trump said. He also said he congratulated Turkey for its role in backing “surrogates” to take over Damascus after the fall of the Assad regime.
Trump also respects Erdogan for what he has done in Syria. “You’ve got to hand it to him.” He also told Netanyahu to be “reasonable” regarding requests about Syria.
This is an important policy move for Trump. He appears to be messaging support for Turkey and also a potential greater role for Ankara in Syria. This will concern Jerusalem.
However, Trump also indicated that he can help smooth over any future tensions. It remains to be seen how Turkey will move now that it may feel it has more backing from the White House.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-849360
------
Israel’s War On Gaza Poised for Dangerous New Phase
Yossi Mekelberg
April 08, 2025
Since Israel suddenly and unilaterally ended the ceasefire with Hamas in Gaza on March 18, more than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed there — and this tragic figure is constantly rising. Schools and medical centres have also not been spared by the bombardments and, as a consequence, the familiar scenes of displaced Palestinians, most of whom have already been displaced multiple times, have also returned.
Israel’s decision to go back to war, and with such intensity, raises the questions: why now and for what purpose? The answer to both has more to do with Israel’s domestic politics and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s unrelenting quest for survival in power than his country’s security or strategic interests.
From the outset of the ceasefire deal back in January, which was largely due to the encouragement of then-US President-elect Donald Trump, there were deep concerns that the three-phase agreement would not last beyond the first phase unless the mediators continued to pressurize the two sides. In Israel’s case, it was mainly Washington that could do the persuading.
Despite some setbacks and hiccups during the six weeks of the first phase, both sides fulfilled their main commitments, even if they did not always act in the spirit of defusing tensions and building trust. The fighting stopped, which saved many lives, humanitarian aid was allowed into Gaza, 33 of the Israeli and foreign hostages held in Gaza returned home in exchange for the release of nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners detained in Israeli jails, and many of the displaced in Gaza returned to what survived of their homes in the north of the Strip.
A successful conclusion of the first phase could not guarantee moving on to the second one, or even starting serious negotiations over it, without which the release of the remaining 59 hostages still in Gaza could not be guaranteed and the resumption of hostilities was just a matter of time.
On the Israeli side, there has never been a genuine yearning to end the war. In fact, the exact opposite is the case. Its government set as its top priority the complete elimination of Hamas before it would agree to end the war. And the fact that this Islamist Palestinian movement is still playing a part in Palestinian society and politics clearly demonstrates that this aim — set by the Israeli government after the deadly attack of Oct. 7, 2023 — is unrealistic. Moreover, should the remaining hostages be released by an agreement, this would also contradict the government’s claim that only military pressure could achieve such a result.
Hamas might well want an end to the war, but it also knows that this would not stop Israel from going after those who were involved in the Oct. 7 attack, and this time Hamas would lack the advantage of holding hostages. There are also signs of growing anger among Palestinians who consider the group to be as responsible as Israel for the current suffering. So, this might be the moment for Palestinian society to hold it to account, as is also the case with Israeli society with regard to its own government.
For a short while, the ceasefire held, despite the completion of the first phase without agreement on the second. Nevertheless, the fragility of the country’s domestic politics, together with Washington’s objectionable idea of emptying the Gaza Strip of its Palestinian residents, has emboldened the far right in Israel, including those in the governing coalition. They pressured Netanyahu to go back to war so they could realize their war crime fantasy of permanently occupying a Gaza without Palestinians and building Jewish settlements there. Meanwhile, Netanyahu’s cynicism in abusing his position to remain in power indefinitely reaches a new low with every passing week, as does his recklessness regarding human lives, whether Palestinian or Israeli.
Resuming the war has been a lifeline for the stability of Netanyahu’s governing coalition. When he initially agreed to the ceasefire deal, the religious ultranationalist faction in government, led by Itamar Ben-Gvir and the Otzma Yehudit party, left the government, leaving it with a razor-thin majority in the Knesset. Meanwhile, the religious ultranationalist party of Bezalel Smotrich, Religious Zionism, put Netanyahu on notice, only agreeing to stay in government on condition that the second phase never materializes.
By resuming the bombardment of Gaza, Netanyahu was immediately rewarded by the return of Otzma Yehudit to the government, while Religious Zionism’s threat was not tested. The great tragedy, of course, is that keeping Netanyahu in power and pulling all possible tricks to make a mockery of his corruption trial and of the rule of law generally resulted, in the first night of Israel’s return to war, in more than 400 Palestinians killed. The numbers have kept rising since, with a reported 322 children now killed.
If, by now, we are no longer shocked by Netanyahu and his coalition of right wingers’ complete disregard for Palestinian lives, most Israelis cannot get their head around his utter indifference to the lives of his own people, and in this case the hostages too. Netanyahu and his political partners are insulting the intelligence of the Israeli public and everyone else by claiming that military pressure will bring back the hostages.
If you want the truth, all you need to do is listen to Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz, who stated last week that Tel Aviv was looking for a major expansion of the military operation in Gaza in order to seize large areas of land that would be “incorporated into Israel’s security zones.” In his statement, Katz said the operation would also involve a “large-scale evacuation of Gaza’s population from combat zones.”
Unless there is an intervention, first and foremost by Washington, there is a real risk that the war in Gaza will enter a new phase in which Israel makes the lives of the residents there utterly impossible, believing that it can achieve the twin objectives of victory over Hamas and the expulsion of Palestinians. However, the most likely outcome of such an approach is a never-ending and costly war.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2596293
----
Quiet Tensions Threatening Israeli-Egyptian Cold Peace
Dr. Abdellatif El-Menawy
April 08, 2025
Since the signing of the Camp David Accords in 1978, peace between Egypt and Israel has resembled more of a strategic ceasefire than a warm partnership. However, the ongoing war in Gaza has exposed real fractures that are now pressing against the foundations of this long-standing peace.
Relations between Cairo and Tel Aviv have entered an unprecedented phase of strategic coldness, with behind-the-scenes accusations exchanged over treaty violations and Israeli claims that Egypt has been building a military infrastructure in Sinai that exceeds what the peace agreement permits. Behind these allegations lies a complex web of conflicting interests, pressures and national priorities.
Israel is demanding that Egypt dismantle the military infrastructure it has built in Sinai over the past decade, claiming it is a direct violation of the military annex of the Camp David treaty. Israeli sources say that Egypt has not only increased its troop presence but is also building infrastructure that includes airbases, fuel and ammunition depots, antitank fortifications and even tunnels under the Suez Canal. Cairo, on the other hand, insists that all of this has been done with prior coordination with Israel and solely for national security reasons.
But to understand this, one must first ask: why has Egypt increased its military presence in Sinai?
Over the past decade, Egypt has faced threats from multiple fronts. In the northeast (Sinai), its military waged an open war against terrorist organizations that relied on logistical support via tunnels from Gaza. In the west (Libya), state collapse allowed armed groups to smuggle large quantities of weapons across the border. In the south (Sudan), smuggling networks and terrorist activities have continued along the border. And again in the northeast, Egypt was forced to counter Hamas’ destabilizing efforts through an extensive tunnel network connecting Gaza and Sinai.
In response to these threats, Egypt rebuilt its military posture along all its borders. This included upgrading the Sidi Barrani airbase and establishing an advanced naval base near the Libyan border, in addition to boosting its presence in Sinai. These moves were not aimed at Israel, but rather at protecting Egyptian national security from multiple directions.
Militarily, Egypt’s capabilities have grown significantly during President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi’s tenure, especially in his second term. This includes Rafale fighter jets from France, submarines and frigates from Germany, naval systems from Italy, helicopter carriers from Russia and annual joint drills with European and American forces.
But more important than the size of Egypt’s arsenal is how it is used. Cairo frames these developments as tools to support its regional and diplomatic influence — not offensive assets. President El-Sisi has repeatedly reaffirmed Egypt’s full commitment to peace with Israel, most recently during last month’s Arab League summit, where he called the treaty a “model for transforming war into diplomatic partnership.”
Israeli concerns operate on two levels. Strategically, Israeli security hard-liners fear that permanent military infrastructure in Sinai may become a future threat if political conditions change. And politically and in the media sphere, many analysts believe that part of Israel’s escalation is designed for international audiences — to deflect attention from its alleged war crimes and mass displacement in Rafah. By focusing on Egypt, Israel can portray itself as a committed treaty partner, while shifting blame for violations onto Cairo.
Cairo has responded with measured political finesse, asserting that it has not violated the Camp David treaty. On the contrary, Egypt says it is Israel that has crossed the line, especially with its deployment of forces in the Philadelphi Corridor, which is a direct violation of the agreement. Egypt has also been sidelined as a ceasefire mediator and excluded from coordination regarding operations in southern Gaza.
Egypt understands that Israel is trying to distract it with secondary issues at a highly sensitive time. Cairo, meanwhile, is working to prevent the forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza and is active diplomatically to de-escalate the situation at the international level.
Could this tension spiral into a crisis that threatens peace?
So far, there has been no indication that either side intends to abandon the peace treaty. However, there are signs worth noting: Egypt has downgraded its diplomatic representation in Tel Aviv to charge d’affaires and official Egyptian statements criticizing Israeli actions in Gaza, the West Bank and Syria have increased significantly.
In short, no one wants the peace deal to collapse, but the growing tension could send the relationship into a cycle of mutual suspicion — especially if Israel continues to violate agreements while Egypt strengthens its defences, which it considers a sovereign right.
This is not an open crisis between Israel and Egypt, but is rather mutual pressure beneath the surface. Israel wants to limit Egypt’s defensive capacity east of the Suez Canal, while Cairo sees its national security as incompatible with a conditional peace. Both sides recognize the value of the peace agreement, but they are now testing its boundaries.
The real question now is not whether the peace will collapse, but whether it can survive without its rules being redefined. The months ahead will provide the answer, amid a raging war in Gaza, a rapidly shifting Middle East and alliances being quietly reshaped in the shadows.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2596291
---------
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/middle-east-press/hamas-israel-trump-gaza-antisemitism-syria/d/135096
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism