Middle East Press on: Middle East Cease-Fire Agreement, Israel, Turkiye, Syria, Trump, Netanyahu, Saudi Arabia, and Lebanon: New Age Islam's Selection, 3 February 2025
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
02 Feb, 2025
Is Middle East Cease-Fire Agreement 2025 A Gift Bag For Israel?
Türkiye’s Vision for East Med: The Proposed Delimitation Agreement with Syria
Recognizing Historical Promise to Kurds Secures Strategic Future for Israel
Netanyahu's Visit to White House Is a Turning Point for Middle East
A Strike or Deal? Trump Will Have His Way Regarding Iran's Nuclear Program
Saudi Arabia’s View of Lebanon’s Political Process
--------
Is Middle East Cease-Fire Agreement 2025 A Gift Bag For Israel?
By Syed Sharfuddin
Feb 03, 2025
On Jan. 15, 2025, the world reacted with joy and scepticism to the announcement by Qatar’s Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani that a Gaza cease-fire and prisoner swap deal between Israel and the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement represented by Hamas had been finally agreed effective from Jan. 19, 2025, one day before the swearing-in of U.S. President Donald Trump as the 47th President of the U.S.
The deal resulted from the joint mediation efforts of Qatar, Egypt and the United States, with a major push from President Trump’s Middle East Envoy Steve Witkoff. He had worked meticulously with the then Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and the outgoing U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Biden’s Envoy on the Middle East, Jack Lew, since November 2024 and effectively used President Trump’s threat to the parties that “all hell will break loose if a cease-fire was not reached before the inauguration day.”
On the face of it, the warning was meant for Hamas to take the negotiations seriously, but in fact, it was addressed to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as well, who had blocked two previous cease-fire deals that Hamas had accepted, first in December 2023, two months after the Oct. 7, 2023 attack, and then in May 2024 which the former U.S. President Joe Biden's administration had proposed to the joint mediators. The outgoing Biden dismissed Trump’s threat as “a joke” but took credit for it as the deal was reached four days before Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20, 2025. Israel’s earlier refusal to accept the May 2024 cease-fire agreement was one of the many reasons for the defeat of Kamala Harris in the November 2024 Presidential election, as many Arab and Muslim Americans in the marginal seven States punished the Democratic candidate by denying her their vote and opting for the Republican and other Presidential candidates.
What does Trump want?
While many observers are giving credit to Trump for the cease-fire agreement, he is neither interested in sustaining the cease-fire nor concerned about Israel’s post-cease-fire attacks on the Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied West Bank. If anything, he would like to see all the Palestinians in Gaza resettled in other Arab countries to allow U.S. construction companies to come to Gaza as Israel’s reoccupied territory. Trump’s only interest in stopping the war is to demonstrate to the world, as well as to the Arab and Israeli leaders, that the hostages have come back to their homes safely and that his power as the president of the greatest country in the world should not be questioned. President Trump knows the real estate value of the coastal belt of Gaza and the potential it holds for turning the strip’s long beachfront into a priceless tourist haven. Steve Witkoff is a billionaire real estate investor and developer. If Trump has an interest in Gaza, it is for the sole reason that a destroyed Gaza has the potential to become a multi-billion-dollar real estate empire for U.S. investors on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. Last year, Trump’s Jewish son-in-law, Jared Kushner, said that Israel should level up an area in the Negev desert and transfer the Palestinians living in Gaza to this new location.
While the January 2025 agreement stated that it was based on President Biden’s proposal of May 31, 2024, it did not mention that it included elements that were discussed earlier and presented by the mediators in December 2023, which Israel rejected, together with the U.S., at the U.N. Security Council’s aborted resolution on the Israel-Gaza war. This information would not have come to light had it not been for the Prime Minister of Qatar’s interview with Sky News U.K., the day after the two parties finally agreed to a cease-fire deal on Jan. 15, 2025.
In December 2023, the Netanyahu and Biden governments were united on the policy of exterminating Hamas from Gaza following the October 2023 attack by Hamas inside the Israeli-occupied territory and taking Israeli civilians, including foreign tourists and military personnel hostages. Israel launched a massive air and ground incursion in Gaza in hot pursuit and caused the death of thousands of Gazan civilians, mostly women and children and destroyed homes and civil institutions intending to remove Hamas from the Middle East equation. Despite the fact that Hamas’ top leadership, together with the top leaders of its main backer Hezbollah, was wiped off in the 15-month-long war, Israel and the U.S. were unable to achieve their combined objective of eliminating the last living Hamas fighter from Gaza.
After 55,000 Palestinians died and the whole of Gaza was raised to the ground, there is a realization that it is not possible to erase the presence of Hamas in Gaza. Israel also failed to get its hostages released from Hamas custody using brute force and lost its own soldiers in Gaza, some of whom became POWs. It also failed to find a replacement for Hamas to govern Gaza and oversee the security of the Gaza Strip after the Israeli troops’ withdrawal. The alternate policy now at work is to strengthen the build-up of more settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories and bring them to a level where they can effectively change the demography of Palestine and make the local Arab population a minority in their own homeland.
Stages of cease-fire
The cease-fire agreement has three related and interconnected stages, of which only the first stage is agreed. The joint mediators will try to achieve a final consensus through indirect talks between the parties to implement the exchange of hostages and prisoners and the withdrawal of Israeli troops. Trump’s scepticism about the cease-fire makes their task difficult to reach a consensus on the remaining two stages. He has expressed no concern about the violent attacks of Israeli settlers on the Palestinians in the West Bank. He also wants the Palestinians to leave Gaza and immigrate to Jordan, Egypt and other countries. This is quite the opposite of what he desires his legacy to be in the Middle east and the rest of the world, namely, to be a peacemaker and a unifier.
The cease-fire agreement does not guarantee that it will result in a permanent cease-fire between Hamas and Israel. It also does not require Hamas to recognize Israel, nor does it make Israel recognize the right of Palestinians to have a sovereign independent state sharing borders with Israel. It is too early to say whether the cease-fire will hold after all Israeli hostages and captives have been released by Hamas or will fall apart, giving way to another wave of violence in Gaza and the West Bank.
What is planned for Palestine?
Trump has at least fulfilled the promise he made to his Arab voters of ending the war in Gaza. He has also fulfilled the pledge to his Jewish supporters that he will bring the hostages back home without any harm or delay. But he remains a staunch supporter of Israel. In his first term as president, he moved the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and set in motion the process of other diplomatic missions doing the same.
At the end of his first term in 2020, President Trump got Israel and the Arab states of Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to sign the Abraham Accords, which recognize the importance of cooperation, dialogue and friendly relations among states to pursue a vision of peace, security and prosperity in the Middle East. President Trump also witnessed these agreements as a facilitator of his strategic diplomatic initiative for the Middle East. Subsequently, two other states, Morocco and Sudan, signed these accords in December 2020.
In his second term, President Trump is expected to persuade Saudi Arabia to sign a bilateral treaty with Israel in several areas of cooperation, including the establishment of diplomatic relations with Israel. Any agreement will need to recognize the commitment of the signatory states to continue their efforts to achieve a just, comprehensive, realistic and enduring solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Yet, it is not expected to be preconditioned by starting peace talks between the two parties and their international guarantors to arrive at a two-state solution. If Saudi Arabia assents to join the Abraham Accords, it may have a snowball effect on other Arab and Islamic governments that are interested in maintaining good relations with the U.S.
Trump is not opposed to stopping the government of Netanyahu from pursuing the goal of greater Israel. At the start of his second term, he reversed many policies of the Biden Administration relating to other countries except those about Israel. His Administration stopped U.S. aid to all recipient countries pending a review of their relationship with the U.S., except Israel and Türkiye. Trump lifted the sanctions placed by the Biden Administration on the far-right Jewish settlers in the occupied territories. He also did not express any concern about the continued IDF attacks on Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank since Jan. 15, 2025. On the contrary, he expressed doubt that the cease-fire would last long.
In any future confrontation between the two sides, Trump may even encourage Israel to reoccupy Gaza and force the Palestinians to resettle in neighbouring Arab states. By pushing for the cease-fire and taking credit for ending the war in Gaza, he may have given a gift bag to Israel to leave Gaza now but annex all occupied territories of the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and make these the official borders of Israel together in pursuit of the joint U.S.-Israel Strategic Agenda for the Middle East.
https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/op-ed/is-middle-east-cease-fire-agreement-2025-a-gift-bag-for-israel
--------
Türkiye’s Vision for East Med: The Proposed Delimitation Agreement with Syria
By Hüseyin Işiksal
Feb 03, 2025
Following the collapse of Bashar Assad’s Baath regime in Syria, the necessity to establish an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) agreement between Türkiye and Syria became one of the key issues of the political agenda. Such an agreement could be instrumental in further cooperation on trade, communication, energy and defence, which is needed most for Syria, which is "under construction."
The proposed maritime demarcation agreement which was modelled after the Turkish-Libyan agreement in 2019, would enable both countries for gas and oil exploration in the Eastern Mediterranean. In this respect, Syria will greatly benefit from Türkiye’s technology, infrastructure and experience. Therefore, the implementation of this agreement will not remain restricted by a delimitation. It will have ramifications in other areas, including restoring Syria’s collapsed infrastructure.
Türkiye’s focus on direct negotiations, as in the case of Syria, ensures faster and more effective results for mutual benefit. In other words, Türkiye provides a model of how cooperation in the region can be satisfied not just by words but by actions. This proposed agreement could open the way for other bilateral agreements between Türkiye and Egypt, Lebanon and Palestine to fulfil the shared interests based on regional realities. In the long term, such bilateral agreements could offer much more than just sorting out the current disputes.
Not following international law
This initiative alarmed Greece and the Greek Cypriot administration (GCA), which distorted the interpretation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Despite its limited population, land, military and economic power, Greece follows an expansionist policy in the Eastern Mediterranean by using its’ islands. According to international law, although the mainlands are considered the basis of delimitations and maritime jurisdiction, the areas of the islands are limited to the territorial waters. Greece wants to discard this fundamental principle for its expansionist objectives.
In contrast, Turkish legal arguments in the Eastern Mediterranean are based upon strong and well-founded principles of international law, including the domination of land, proportionality, economic activity, demographic situation and non-encroachment/non-closure.
Greece and GCA also try to exclude Türkiye, the country with the longest shore in the Eastern Mediterranean, from the regional energy equilibrium through initiatives such as the Euro-Med Forum. These nebulous tactics are also designed to legitimize the defunct state of the so-called Republic of Cyprus, which collapsed in 1963 and is represented only by Greek Cypriots. However, the maritime jurisdiction area limitations in the Eastern Mediterranean, which has the status of a semi-enclosed sea according to international law, should only be determined by agreements based on the principle of “equitability” between all relevant countries. In other words, the problems should be settled in a way that considers the rights and interests of all parties without marginalizing any country in the region.
Greece and GCA's arbitrary policies and unilateral actions at the expense of underestimation of Türkiye’s power and importance in the region lead to extensive legal, economic and political crises in the region. The Eastern Mediterranean Sea is surrounded by Greece, Türkiye, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Egypt, Libya, the “Republic of Cyprus” and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). The TRNC is a de facto state recognized by Türkiye. There is a TRNC reality on land, at sea and in the air. According to international law, Turkish Cypriots are people who are entitled to the right of self-determination, and the TRNC has a legitimate structure that meets all the related criteria for statehood.
On the other hand, Palestine is a U.N. observer state recognized by 146 U.N. member states. Therefore, both the TRNC and the state of Palestine are de facto legal entities that have rights in the Eastern Mediterranean. By ignoring these factual realities on the ground, a sustainable solution to the maritime jurisdiction areas in the Eastern Mediterranean is not possible.
Secondly, the Greek side’s expansionist policies endanger not only the continental shelf, EEZ, airspace, strategic defence depth and energy strategy of Türkiye but also the interests of the other shareholders, including Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and Libya. This is due to the hijacked state of Greek Cypriot's maximalist claims over EEZ that shrink, Lebanon, Egypt and Libya’s EEZ by a significant degree. If all these coastal states take Türkiye’s strong legal arguments in the Eastern Mediterranean into account, they would benefit from the new outcome.
Greek blockade to energy route
The war in Ukraine and the Middle East threatens not only the region but the entire international system. These and similar developments cause political and economic instability and endanger the secure transfer of energy resources to Europe. Therefore, regional energy initiatives and diversification are vital for the economic stability of the countries in the Eastern Mediterranean. However, having said this, attempting to deter East Med’s regional economic potential by the Greek sides also clashes with the energy objectives of the European Union. As the EU seeks to reduce its reliance on Russian gas, the reserves in the Eastern Mediterranean offer a critical alternative for Europe’s energy diversification.
In this respect, as put forward by almost all the experts on the issue, the safest and most profitable way for hydrocarbon resources in the Eastern Mediterranean to reach the European market is to transport these sources via Türkiye. The most feasible routes to Europe are the already existing pipelines passing via Türkiye including the Turkish Stream, Nabucco Western, The Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP) and The Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan (BTC), which would maximize the energy efficiency of the hydrocarbon supplies. Therefore, by disrupting the flow of the hydrocarbons to Europe from this most viable route, Greek sides undermine regional cooperation and weaken the ability, reliability, and prospects of the EU to be a regional power.
In response to Greek confrontational tactics and outdated narratives, Türkiye put a broader vision for the region, as evidenced by the proposed maritime demarcation agreement with Syria. Türkiye is implementing a comprehensive strategy that integrates regional partnerships and investments in energy, which is key to stability in the Eastern Mediterranean. Accordingly, Türkiye’s policy, which is based upon direct negotiation and mutual agreements, is the most effective way of solving the contested issues in this volatile region. The critical question at the heart of the issue is when the other regional countries will be ready for direct negotiation and bilateral agreements for multidimensional cooperation, economic prosperity and stability in the Eastern Mediterranean.
https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/op-ed/turkiyes-vision-for-east-med-the-proposed-delimitation-agreement-with-syria
---------
Recognizing Historical Promise to Kurds Secures Strategic Future for Israel
By Mem Husedin
February 3, 2025
Ibn Khaldun famously said, “Geography is destiny.” Geography shapes the decisions of statesmen and generals.
This principle is exemplified by the importance of the Golan Heights and Mount Hermon. Israel cannot allow its enemies to control the Golan Heights; hence, it is compelled to control or annex them. From Israel’s perspective, these areas are strategic defence positions; in enemy hands, they become strategic threats.
Kurdistan’s significance for Israel must be understood from a similar strategic viewpoint. Under current considerations, Kurdistan is where Iran’s logistical access to its proxies can be disrupted. From this vantage point, one observes the direct land corridor extending through Iraq and Syria to Israel’s borders.
If the Kurds were supported to form their own agency in the north of Syria and Iraq and the bordering region between the two and granted control of lands from the Turkish borders of Iraq and Syria down south to where the borders of Iraq, Syria, and Jordan meet, their influence could be justified for Israel’s security. However, while this addresses the Iranian/Shia threat, it does not mitigate the other, larger threat: Turkey.
In a previous article, I delved into the history of Turkish racism and its evolution from the hierarchical structure of the Ottoman Empire’s Sharia-based system. Under that system, Muslims were superior; this notion was rebranded as “Turks” with the establishment of the Turkish Republic. In the Ottoman era, Muslims coexisted with non-Muslims (the dhimmis), but in the modern Turkish Republic, the Turkish identity was constructed to claim the land exclusively for Muslims identifying as Turks. This ideology has resulted in the nonrecognition of Kurdish identity and systemic racism against them.
If one adds to this Islamist President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s irredentist policies in the Eastern Mediterranean, Turkey poses a direct threat to Israel.
Erdogan enjoys strong domestic support, but the real issue lies in his and his AK Party’s almost total control over the revised republic. His grip on the state leaves little room for democratic opposition. Secure at home, his regime continues to expand its borders, adding northern and western Syria to the already occupied northern Cyprus.
Abroad, in the Middle East and North and West Africa, Erdogan is allied with the Muslim Brotherhood but does not hesitate to align with groups like al-Qaeda – evident in his support for Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham – or even ISIS. During the siege of Kobani, where the Kurdish-Western alliance was forged, Turkey allowed ISIS fighters to use Turkish border areas to attack Kurdish fighters from behind.
With the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, Syria has become an open field for Turkish influence. Initially, Turkey exercised control over some northern territories directly or through mercenaries now called the Syrian National Army. Today, the only ongoing war in Syria is the Turkish-directed SNA’s attacks on Kurdish regions defended by the Syrian Democratic Forces.
Since the fall of Damascus, the SNA has captured territories like Tel Rifat in northwest Syria and Manbij. Once territory is under SNA control, Turkish occupation follows, complete with Turkish-appointed governors, Ankara-paid bureaucracies, Turkish postal systems, the Turkish lira as currency, and Turkey-managed curricula. This amounts to de facto annexation, though undeclared. Yet, Turkey’s ambitions extend further.
At the UN General Assembly in 2019, Erdogan shared a map showing Turkey’s desired control of all of northern Syria. The question then arises: What would Turkey do next?
Turkey’s actions and rhetoric must be considered together. The actions reveal an irredentist pursuit of former Ottoman territories, while the rhetoric declares a mission to “liberate al-Quds” (Jerusalem), with access to Damascus as the first milestone.
A Kurdish agency controlling lands from Iran to Israel would be a valuable asset for Israel’s defence. While the Shia axis led by Iran weakens, another axis – the Turkish axis – emerges, using similar anti-Israeli rhetoric to unite Sunni Arabs under the Turkish flag.
A straightforward solution
THE SOLUTION is straightforward: support the Kurds in defeating Turkish mercenaries across northern Syria, blocking Turkish access to Damascus and further south. Kurdish legitimacy on their lands is strong, and opposition to their agency would come only from Turkey – an obstacle that could be managed. The Kurds are increasingly pro-Israel and represent the right ally for balancing regional politics.
What do the Kurds gain from this? Everything, starting with the promises made in 1918 by US president Woodrow Wilson in his Fourteen Points. The 12th point stated:
“The Turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities now under Ottoman rule should be assured undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity for autonomous development. The Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.”
The 12th point is as valid today as it was in 1918, not only in the case of Kurds but also in the case of the Dardanelles, where Turkey’s refusal to grant free passage to NATO navies complicates support for Ukraine against Russia.
Recognizing the historical promise to the Kurds and ensuring the free passage of the Dardanelles are essential steps in addressing modern geopolitical challenges – and in securing a more stable and strategically advantageous future for Israel in the region.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-840350
---------
Netanyahu's Visit To White House Is A Turning Point For Middle East
By Bobby Rechnitz
February 3, 2025
With Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu becoming the first foreign leader invited to the White House following US President Donald Trump’s second inauguration, the significance is immediately clear.
This is not merely a diplomatic courtesy; it is a momentous gesture that is demonstrating a reset in ties between Israel and the United States, and, more crucially, could symbolize a new chapter in Middle East diplomacy.
Unlike his predecessor, Trump is showing that the real way diplomacy between two allies’ works is directly, honestly, and with a show of deep friendship.
This invitation, and the partnership it represents, mark a pivotal point in the history of the Middle East.
It is now clear to all that Iran and its proxies, chiefly Hamas, launched the October 7 massacre to derail the upcoming historic and paradigm-shifting normalization agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
This expansion of the Abraham Accords, the historic peace agreements that had already begun to reshape the region under the previous Trump administration, ushered in an era of cooperation, stability, and prosperity across the Middle East.
The Islamic Republic and its terrorist arms could not let that happen because it would have isolated its murderous rejectionist ideology and ensured the people of the region had a better future, free of its radical Islamist domination.
Thanks in large part to Netanyahu’s determined leadership, Iran has nonetheless still been severely weakened. Over the last 15 months, Hamas has been largely militarily defeated, Hezbollah was routed, and the Assad regime is no more. Moreover, Iran itself has been left largely undefended after successive Israeli air raids.
So, now is precisely the time to return to former plans to rewrite history and bring peace and prosperity to the region.
Thus, Netanyahu’s visit highlights the unwavering commitment of both Israel and the US to a shared vision of peace.
From the outset of Trump’s first term, his administration sought to address long-standing regional conflicts by challenging conventional paradigms and fostering direct engagement between Israel and its Arab neighbours.
The Abraham Accords, launched under this vision, broke through decades of hostility and division, culminating in historic normalization agreements between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco, which have withstood the test of time and war.
Netanyahu’s invitation to Washington is a natural progression of these diplomatic breakthroughs, signalling a continued dedication to expanding and solidifying these accords, and, with them, the promise of lasting peace in the Middle East.
The ramifications of Netanyahu’s visit go far beyond just the strengthening of ties between Israel and its Arab neighbours; they are deeply relevant to the broader geopolitical dynamics of the Middle East.
Most notably, this growing cooperation presents a united front in the face of Iran’s destabilizing influence. As Iran continues its pursuit of nuclear weapons and attempts to rebuild its proxy-driven bloody activities across the region, the strategic importance of isolating Tehran has never been more critical.
The Abraham Accords provide a powerful counterbalance to Iran’s ambitions, with Israel and its Arab partners now united in their efforts to curb Iranian expansionism and ensure the security of the region.
The message sent by Netanyahu’s visit is unmistakable: the US-Israel relationship is more important than ever, and the Abraham Accords are here to stay. The diplomatic momentum that Netanyahu’s visit signals will ensure all players in the region understand who is the “strong horse” that can help shape peace and prosperity.
In 2025, as Trump and Netanyahu meet once again, the world watches a region in transformation wracked by unnecessary conflicts brought on hopefully by the Islamic Republic’s final bloody scramble.
After Iran’s defeat, the Middle East should no longer be a place defined solely by conflict and violence.
It needs to become a place where peace is possible, prosperity is achievable, and security is becoming a shared priority. Netanyahu’s visit to Washington is not just a personal milestone for both leaders, it is a clear statement to the world that the future of the Middle East will be defined by cooperation, not conflict. And in this new era, Iran’s quest for regional dominance stands increasingly isolated and rejected.
With the Abraham Accords expectantly continuing to expand and strengthen, the Middle East is on the cusp of a new dawn, one characterized by peace, prosperity, and a united front against destabilizing and violent forces. And in the heart of this transformation stands the unshakable partnership between Israel and its allies, led by Prime Minister Netanyahu, working alongside President Trump to create a better future for all.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-840355
--------
A Strike or Deal? Trump Will Have His Way Regarding Iran's Nuclear Program
By Neville Teller
February 3, 2025
A significant topic of discussion at this year’s Davos meeting was Iran’s nuclear program.
The World Economic Forum, founded in 1971, is an international organization with its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. Its annual meeting in Davos brings together world leaders from business, politics, academia, and other sectors to discuss pressing global issues. The 2025 meeting took place from January 20 to 24.
On January 22, Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told reporters in Davos that Iran is “pressing the gas pedal” on its enrichment of uranium to near weapons grade. Previously, said Grossi, Iran was producing each month about 7 kg. of uranium enriched to 60%. “Now it’s above 30 kg., or more than that. So I think this is a clear indication of an acceleration.”
According to the IAEA, about 42 kg. of uranium enriched to 60%, if further enriched to 90%, is enough in principle for one nuclear bomb. Grossi said Iran currently had about 200 kg. of uranium enriched to up to 60%.
He said that although it would take time to install and bring online the extra uranium-enriching centrifuges necessary to produce weapons-grade material, nevertheless the acceleration was starting to happen.
Israel and Iran clashed during the conference. President Isaac Herzog was in Davos and, according to London-based Iran International, the independent Persian-language TV and news medium, he found himself early on in a slanging match with Javad Zarif, the Iran regime’s representative.
Iran International reported that on January 21, Herzog was asked by conference interviewer Fareed Zakaria what message he had to convey to Zarif. “I’m not sure he’s involved any longer in decision-making in the Iranian leadership,” said Herzog, “even if he has a title.”
Zarif, Iran’s vice president for strategic affairs, was outraged. The next day, participating in a roundtable discussion, he declared that Herzog is “a nobody in Israel.”
Herzog riposted with a public statement, which included: “Mr. Zarif, I suggest you look in the mirror.”
Zarif came back suggesting that the proof of Herzog’s lack of status was that the International Criminal Court had not included him in the arrest warrants it issued against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity. There the personal tit-for-tat appears to have ended.
However, during his main Davos speech, Herzog called Iran an “evil empire” that spends billions to finance its military allies.
“This is the strategic issue above everything,” he said. “Iran is repeatedly investing billions, at the expense of its citizens, to create a base for terrorism... They continue to rush towards the bomb, constantly planning terrorist attacks all over the world, including in our region – especially the Revolutionary Guards... There is a great danger as long as this regime in Iran remains in place and continues its efforts... We believe that there should be a clear message from world leaders to Iran: No more.”
The start of the Davos meeting coincided with Donald Trump’s inauguration as US president, and the implications of his return to power for the Iranian regime and its nuclear ambitions occupied many minds.
UN SECRETARY-GENERAL Antonio Guterres suggested Iran must take a first step towards improving relations with countries in the region and the US by making it clear it does not aim to develop nuclear weapons.
Since any such a statement emanating from the Iranian regime would be a downright falsehood, most of the new Trump administration was having none of it. The new Secretary of State Marco Rubio was quoted as saying, “I believe it is in our national security interest for the UN Security Council to snap back the sanctions that were suspended under the JCPOA [the nuclear deal master-minded by then-president Barack Obama in 2015 and rejected by Trump in his first term].”
Similarly, Trump’s choice for the new US ambassador to the UN, Elise Stefanik, said during her Senate confirmation hearing: “Pushing back on Iran is a top priority. It was a success during President Trump’s first term.”
The new US secretary of defence, Pete Hegseth, was sworn in after Davos had ended. In his letter of congratulations, Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz hinted at potential action against Iran in the “upcoming months.”
“Iran and its partners continue to threaten... regional and global stability,” wrote Katz. “I am confident that together we can succeed, creating long-term stability and a better future for the region.”
New information about Iran’s nuclear program was revealed on February 1 by the UK’s Daily Telegraph. The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) had passed on details of how the IRGC has been expanding its weapons program.
It revealed that two sites, camouflaged as communication satellite launch facilities, have been used to rush the production of nuclear warheads. They are both under the control of the regime’s nuclear weapons arm, the SPND (Organization for Advanced Defence Research).
At the first site, known as the Shahrud missile site, about 35 km. from a city of the same name, SPND and IRGC Aerospace Force experts have been working on producing a nuclear warhead capable of being fitted to a Ghaem-100, solid-fueled rocket with a range of 3,000 km.
Missiles with that range would allow Iran to launch nuclear strikes deep into Europe from its territory – as far as Greece. There have been at least three successful launches of the rocket, which the NCRI says “enhances the regime’s capability to deploy nuclear weapons.”
A second site, situated around 70 km. southeast of the city of Semnan, is being used to develop Simorgh missiles, a weapon based on the North Korean UNHA-1, an 18-meter tall rocket.
Significant portions of the site are underground to conceal the work from intelligence satellites capturing images of the area. The regime has been steadily expanding the site since around 2005.
The possibility of a direct attack on Iran
The Jerusalem Post’s senior military correspondent, Yonah Jeremy Bob, recently reported that some Israeli and US officials have been indicating that a direct attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities could be a viable possibility. Strategists believe that following Iran’s second missile onslaught on Israel, Israel’s counterattack on October 26 destroyed a significant proportion of Iran’s air defences, leaving its nuclear sites more vulnerable than they have ever been.
Trump, however, in a recent interview with the New York Post, refused to indicate whether he would support pre-emptive strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. What he was quite clear about was that the Islamic Republic “can’t have a nuclear weapon.” He was confident he could cut a deal with Iran that would stop it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Without exactly saying how, beyond specifying that “you have to verify times 10,” he said, “there are ways that you can make it absolutely certain.”
As ever, Trump will do it his way.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-840354
---------
Saudi Arabia’s View Of Lebanon’s Political Process
Hassan Al-Mustafa
February 02, 2025
When the then-commander of the Lebanese army, Joseph Aoun, visited Saudi Arabia last December and was received by Defence Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman, it was no ordinary visit. It was an indication that Riyadh had actively resumed a positive role regarding Lebanon’s security and stability — especially given the devastating Israeli war on Gaza and Lebanon. With its political and economic capabilities, Saudi Arabia engaged in diplomatic efforts to stop the war and support the affected Arab countries.
Later, in the lead-up to Aoun’s election as president of Lebanon in January, the Saudi presence on the Lebanese political scene was significant. The name of Prince Yazid bin Mohammed bin Fahd Al-Farhan, adviser to the Saudi foreign minister on Lebanese affairs, emerged. Meanwhile, all eyes were on Saudi Ambassador to Beirut Walid Bukhari during his attendance at the parliamentary session where Aoun was elected president.
Riyadh understands that there is a political vacuum in Lebanon and the Syrian Arab Republic, particularly as the so-called Axis of Resistance has seen its influence wane following the collapse of Bashar Assad’s regime and the heavy losses suffered by Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon. If no strong and active force works to organize and fill this vacuum with effective political engagement, it will negatively impact Middle Eastern security and stability. This could lead to chaos, the spread of armed militias and Israel’s continued killings, occupation and territorial expansion in the surrounding countries, through de facto policies.
Against this backdrop, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan visited the Lebanese capital on Jan. 23. He met with President Aoun, parliament speaker Nabih Berri, caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati and Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam. By meeting with all key figures in the Lebanese state, Prince Faisal signalled that Saudi Arabia maintains an equal distance from all components and supports national partnership based on the Lebanese constitution and the Taif Agreement.
In a brief statement, Prince Faisal deliberately conveyed positive but measured messages. He emphasized the Saudi leadership’s commitment to restoring Lebanon as a beacon in the region and a model of coexistence and prosperity. He praised President Aoun’s leadership and his inaugural speech, which set the right course. He stressed that “the Kingdom will stand by Lebanon and follow its new path step by step, working with its partners in this direction.”
The Saudi foreign minister revealed that “Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is open to proposals that will lead Lebanon toward a prosperous future,” adding that the Saudi leadership looks forward to an upcoming meeting with President Aoun to lay the foundations for bilateral cooperation. He stated: “Despite the shared challenges facing us in the region, the Kingdom is optimistic about Lebanon’s future in light of the reformist approach outlined in the president’s inaugural speech. Implementing these reforms will strengthen Lebanon’s credibility with its partners and pave the way for restoring its rightful place in the Arab and international spheres.”
The key themes in Prince Faisal’s remarks were “reforms” and the “inaugural speech.” Saudi Arabia is keen on seeing real change in Lebanon — politically, economically and in terms of security — through serious, actionable programs that revitalize the economy, develop state institutions and prevent security turmoil or political confrontations, both internally and with Arab nations.
After a 15-year absence, the Saudi visit presents an opportunity for Lebanon to capitalize on. If leveraged correctly, this support from Riyadh could serve as a prelude to broader Arab backing. Therefore, the policies of the soon-to-be-formed government and the cooperation of Lebanese parties and leaders with it will determine the extent of the Arab support for Beirut.
Several pressing issues need addressing, such as solidifying the ceasefire agreement and halting Israeli violations, ensuring the return of displaced persons, and reconstruction. While these are priorities, they depend on how Lebanese politicians address the country’s internal problems to establish genuine stability that fosters economic growth — free from financial corruption and sectarian quotas.
Lebanese internal dialogue, a clear roadmap for nationwide army deployment, exclusive state control over weapons, stopping drug trafficking, and preventing Lebanon from becoming a hub for groups and rhetoric inciting violence against Gulf States are all crucial matters. Additionally, Hezbollah’s future positioning — whether it remains aligned with regional axes as before or integrates into Lebanon’s domestic political process, while ceasing external support and training — remains a key issue.
Addressing these security and political files will help build trust and send a clear message that real change is happening, warranting support from Riyadh and other influential regional capitals.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2588782
---------
URL: https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/israel-turkiye-syria-trump-netanyahu-lebanon/d/134511