Middle East Press On: Abraham Accords, Masood, European, Palestine, Immigration: New Age Islam's Selection, 16 September 2025
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
16 September 2025
European Leaders Must Call Time On Israel’s Aggression
Five Years On, Abraham Accords Still Reshape Israel’s Future
FloodGate Podcast of Ramzy Baroud and Abdulla Moaswes: Six Takeaways from Masood Khan on Kashmir and Palestine
Israel’s Challenge With Senior Citizens: Preparing For The Next Wave Of Immigration
Paraguay’s Fluctuating Positions On Palestine: Between Interests And Justice
Israel Is Reshaping West Bank While No One Is Watching
------
European Leaders Must Call Time On Israel’s Aggression
Chris Doyle
September 15, 2025
What does “sovereignty” mean in 2025? If you go back 25 years, to the turn of the century, the norm of respecting the sovereignty of other states, at least from invasion or bombing, was, if not cast iron, pretty robust. The world had united to ensure the liberation of Kuwait in 1991.
The last five years have offered an entirely different vista, with attacks on sovereign states increasing. Think of the Russian invasion of Ukraine back in 2014, including the occupation of Crimea, and then the crescendo of the invasion of the rest of Ukraine in February 2022.
This is the backdrop to the failed Israeli bombing of the Hamas negotiating team in Doha last week. It was not a one-off. There was no imminent threat to Israel. This has become a trend. Israel has bombed seven states in two years — Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Yemen, Tunisia and Qatar. It has hit five regional capitals. Many wonder who is next in line.
Israel has historical form, having carried out assassinations all over the world, not least after the 1972 attack on Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympic Games. But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ratcheted up the brazen aggression, contemptuously ignoring global protestations. His ministers have not ruled out strikes elsewhere.
Qatar has every right to be furious, but also to expect solid backing from its partners. It hosted the Hamas leadership after it left Syria at the request of the US and with the agreement of the Israeli government, not least to prevent the group falling even further into the arms of Iran. Netanyahu used Qatari finance to help keep the Gazan economy afloat and a few steps away from a catastrophic humanitarian crisis. Qatar has played a vital role in trying to broker a ceasefire deal, which Netanyahu has now bombed into oblivion.
The US is in a pickle, caught between the conflicting positions of two of its Middle Eastern partners. It is the major sponsor of the Israeli government but is embarrassed at its aggression on a state that the US sees as an ally — and which hosts the largest American military base in the region. It is not just Qatar but every nation that feels it is part of the US security umbrella that will be watching how the Trump administration handles this.
But what about Europe? Much will be expected from the major European powers. Yes, the UK, France and Germany condemned the attacks, albeit they called for “restraint” from the parties, as if that was all Israel had to do. They have been more critical of Israel than in the past, but will they step up and take genuine action? The UK has a historic relationship with Qatar, which achieved its independence from London in 1971.
Yes, the British government was pretty quick to criticize the Israeli attack, but was the language of the same ilk as that used following the Russian drone incursion on Poland the same week? At the UN Security Council, the permanent British representative spoke of “an egregious violation of Polish and NATO airspace by Russian drones.” Prime Minister Keir Starmer called the Israeli strike a violation of Qatar’s sovereignty and risked “further escalation across the region.” Where was the commitment, as with Ukraine, to protect Qatar’s borders? He spoke to the Qatari emir but did not, for example, see fit to cancel his ill-judged meeting with Israeli President Isaac Herzog in Downing Street.
States like Qatar, along with others in the region such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE, will not be impressed with security guarantees from the US or Europe if Israel gets the exclusive right to be an aggressor.
Note how many leaders from other areas of the world, such as Pakistan, Indonesia and Rwanda, are going to Doha in solidarity. European leaders should be showing similar levels of solidarity.
Imagine if Qatar decided to respond in kind against Israel. How would the European leaders respond if Qatar struck Israeli military targets? Would they say it was an understandable response to Israeli aggression?
European actors have to call time on Israel’s aggression and introduce effective sanctions. This also means toughening its position toward Washington. It means showing allies that security guarantees count.
All this should have happened even before the genocide in Gaza. The Israeli leadership has been pampered as it engages in state terrorism. If Europe is to be taken seriously in the Middle East, it must harden its posture. Otherwise, it will be viewed as a continent in political decline, unwilling to make the tough, responsible calls. It expected the rest of the world to push back against Russia’s aggression against Europe via Ukraine. The rest of the world is now expecting Europe to push back hard against Israeli aggression in the Middle East. The attack on Qatar should be the tipping point.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2615392
------
Five Years On, Abraham Accords Still Reshape Israel’s Future
By Jpost Editorial
September 16, 2025
Five years ago, Israel stepped into a new Middle East. This week marks the fifth anniversary of the signing of the Abraham Accords – still one of the most significant breakthroughs in Middle Eastern diplomacy in decades.
By normalizing relations between Israel and several Arab states – initially the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, and later Morocco and Sudan – the accords reconfigured regional politics, offered Israel new economic and security opportunities, and reframed the narrative of Arab-Israel relations.
While challenges remain, particularly as conflict with the Palestinians continues to shape regional perceptions, the Abraham Accords represent a milestone with lasting implications for Israel’s future.
For decades, the Jewish state’s diplomatic presence in the Arab and Muslim world was minimal, mainly limited to covert or unofficial ties. The prevailing assumption after the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative was that normalization could only follow a comprehensive peace deal with the Palestinians.
The Abraham Accords shattered that paradigm. Instead of waiting for an elusive two-state solution, Arab states pursued direct relations with Israel based on mutual interests – geopolitical, economic, and technological.
For Israel, this was more than symbolic. It meant formal acceptance in a region where its legitimacy had long been questioned. Arab embassies in Tel Aviv and Israeli embassies in Abu Dhabi and Manama sent a clear signal: The Jewish state was no longer isolated.
Even if other regional powers such as Saudi Arabia remained cautious, the precedent has been set. The “taboo” of normalizing ties with Israel without first resolving the Palestinian issue has been broken, giving Israel a seat at the tables of regional cooperation.
The Abraham Accords were forged within the context of shared anxieties regarding Iran. Both Israel and the Gulf states view Tehran as a destabilizing force, citing its nuclear program and its sponsorship of proxy groups in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. By aligning more openly with its Gulf partners, Israel is strengthening its strategic depth. Intelligence sharing, military exercises, and defense procurement are already being discussed and, in some cases, implemented.
This cooperation expands Israel’s deterrence capabilities. For decades, Israel has prided itself on defending itself alone; now, it is building a loose but real coalition of regional actors with converging interests.
This enhances Israel’s hand both in dealing with Iran and in engaging the US, whose security commitments in the region remain critical. Washington played an indispensable role in brokering the accords, and America’s support ensures that these new alliances are anchored in a broader strategic framework.
Equally important are the economic dividends. The Gulf states, particularly the UAE, bring immense capital, investment potential, and global reach. Israel contributes significantly to technological innovation in various fields, including cybersecurity, water management, agriculture, healthcare, and renewable energy.
Since 2020, trade between Israel and the UAE has skyrocketed, surpassing $3 billion annually within just a few years. Direct flights have linked Tel Aviv to Dubai and Abu Dhabi, opening the door for tourism, business, and cultural exchange.
Abraham Accords change Arab's perception of Israel
The Abraham Accords also reshaped Israel’s place in the Arab imagination. For a long period of time, Arab discourse cast Israel exclusively as an occupier and adversary. By contrast, the accords have highlighted areas of partnership, particularly innovation, security, trade, and even cultural dialogue.
Moving forward, the Abraham Accords could serve as a springboard for further normalization. Speculation about Saudi Arabia continues, and while Riyadh has not yet joined, it has allowed incremental steps, such as granting overflight rights to Israeli airlines.
A breakthrough with Saudi Arabia – the guardian of Islam’s holiest sites – would constitute a seismic shift, placing Israel firmly within the Arab mainstream.
Even short of that, the accords strengthen Israel’s regional legitimacy, diversify its partnerships, and deepen its integration into the Middle East and beyond. They also send a message to Israelis: Normalization with Arab neighbors is possible; it is not simply a far-fetched utopian dream. This psychological shift may, over time, make peace feel less distant and more achievable.
The Abraham Accords matter for Israel because they represent a diplomatic, strategic, and economic leap forward. They prove that Israel can transcend isolation, forge new alliances, and participate in shaping a more cooperative Middle East.
In a region defined by cycles of war and distrust, that achievement is both historic and fragile, and it offers Israel not just a foundation but a test of whether it can transform normalization into long-lasting regional peace.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-867567
-------
FloodGate Podcast of Ramzy Baroud and Abdulla Moaswes: Six Takeaways from Masood Khan on Kashmir and Palestine
By Romana Rubeo
September 15, 2025
In this powerful episode of The FloodGate, Ramzy Baroud and Abdulla Moaswes sit down with His Excellency Masood Khan, former President of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, for a timely and unapologetic conversation on Palestinian resistance, Kashmiri self-determination, and the colonial entanglements linking the two.
Over the course of the interview, Khan, who is also the former Ambassador of Pakistan to the United States, China, and the United Nations, offered a candid and uncompromising perspective on history, solidarity, and the failures of the international order.
Here are six takeaways from that conversation.
Kashmir’s Historical Struggle
The Kashmir story begins in 1947, when the British partitioned India and Pakistan and left the fate of princely states unresolved. Jammu and Kashmir, ruled by a Hindu Maharaja despite its Muslim majority, became the stage of immediate rebellion.
Khan recalled how ordinary people, not outside armies, resisted both the Maharaja’s rule and India’s attempt to coerce accession.
“In 1947 this territory called Jammu and Kashmir was ruled by a Maharaja… he preferred accession to India but the population rebelled because they wanted to join Pakistan,” Khan explained.
This framing challenges the dominant Indian narrative that Kashmir was legally and willingly integrated. Instead, Khan situated Azad Kashmir’s existence as the direct outcome of a popular uprising, born in defiance of both autocracy and colonial coercion. Severed Ties, Shared Wounds
Khan described Azad Kashmir and Indian-occupied Kashmir as “one organism… dissected forcibly by India.”
The depth of that dissection is best understood in the long shadow of violence. He pointed to the massacres of Muslims in Jammu in late 1947 as a foundational trauma.
The human connections across the Line of Control persisted for decades despite division. Families visited one another, and trade moved across the border. Yet in 2019, India’s unilateral revocation of Kashmir’s limited autonomy ended even those fragile lifelines.
“Both these links were severed in August 2019 because of India’s reoccupation of the territory,” Khan said. What remains are fragments — mediated through social media or print publications — and the enduring aspiration of Kashmiris “to reconnect and to continue to communicate with each other.”
Kashmir and Palestine: Parallel Trajectories
Throughout the interview, Khan returned to the parallels between Kashmir and Palestine. Both struggles reached the United Nations in 1948. Both produced resolutions affirming the right of self-determination. Both remain unimplemented due to obstruction by the occupying powers.
“Both these issues, Palestine and Kashmir, were referred to the Security Council in 1948… both sets of resolutions have not been implemented because of the adamant attitude of India and Israel,” he said.
He drew further connections: Palestinians face mass killings in Gaza today, while Kashmiris endured their own ‘Nakba’ beginning in 1947 and continuing with mass disappearances and massacres.
Both are subject to demographic engineering — Israeli settlements in Palestinian lands mirrored by India’s policy of issuing domicile certificates to Hindus to alter Kashmir’s Muslim-majority character.
And yet, a crucial difference remains, according to Khan: Palestine has global recognition and observer status at the UN, while Kashmiris “do not have, for instance, representation at the United Nations or… the kind of support that Palestine enjoys in the European Union.”
Competing Aspirations, Enduring Unity
The political aspirations of Kashmiris are complex and often fractured. Khan did not shy away from acknowledging this. Some demand accession to Pakistan, others call for full independence.
India, he noted, exploits this diversity by branding calls for independence as treason internally, while simultaneously encouraging such rhetoric in Azad Kashmir to weaken pro-Pakistan forces.
“Despite all the atrocities committed against them, there is a significant pro-Pakistan component in the Valley of Kashmir. If they didn’t have that aspiration, the issue of Kashmir would have been wrapped up long ago,” he said.
He invoked figures like Yasin Malik, who once argued that a plebiscite should be held first, after which Kashmiris themselves could decide between independence, accession to Pakistan, or accession to India.
And he recalled Syed Ali Shah Geelani, whose uncompromising slogan — “We are Pakistanis… Pakistan is ours” — still resonates among many. For Khan, these differences do not erase the fundamental unity of a people long denied the right to decide their own fate.
India, Israel, and the Colonial Playbook
Khan devoted significant time to highlighting what he sees as a deepening convergence between India and Israel. The two countries, he argued, collaborate on strategy, arms, and intelligence in their shared attempts to suppress resistance.
This cooperation, in Khan’s view, goes beyond military hardware. It reflects a shared colonial playbook: demographic engineering, repression of dissent, and the framing of indigenous resistance as terrorism.
International Order on Trial
Perhaps Khan’s most sobering reflections concerned the failures of the international system.
He contrasted Palestine’s constant presence on the global agenda with Kashmir’s relegation to the background, blaming Pakistan’s decision at times to “bilateralize” the issue with India.
But he also widened the lens: both struggles expose the hollowness of the global system itself.
For Khan, this is more than a political question; it is a civilizational one. The massacres in Palestine and the repression in Kashmir are not only human tragedies but indictments of the very structures that claim to safeguard human rights.
“Where is humanity going?” he asked, leaving the audience with a question that underscores both urgency and despair.
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/floodgate-podcast-six-takeaways-from-masood-khan-on-kashmir-and-palestine/
------
Israel’s Challenge With Senior Citizens: Preparing For The Next Wave Of Immigration
By Tomer Rozenberg
September 16, 2025
Israel stands on the threshold of a new and significant wave of immigration. Global instability, rising antisemitism, and a renewed sense of Jewish identity are driving thousands of families to consider building their future in Israel.
Policymakers and business leaders are already discussing the implications for housing, employment, and infrastructure. Yet one critical dimension remains largely overlooked: the integration of senior citizens.
For every young family that arrives, there are often parents or grandparents who make the journey with them. These older immigrants carry with them not only memories, traditions, and resilience but also unique needs that Israeli society must be prepared to meet.
Quality of life
The success of their absorption will influence not only their own quality of life but also the well-being of their families and the cohesion of the communities that welcome them.
While immigration debates often highlight students, professionals, and entrepreneurs, the elderly are an inseparable part of the picture. In many Western countries, Jewish communities facing growing insecurity are composed of a disproportionately older population.
This means that a meaningful share of newcomers to Israel will be in their 60s, 70s, or beyond. For them, the challenges of learning a new language, navigating bureaucracy, and adapting to a different healthcare system are amplified. Without careful planning, their integration risks becoming a silent failure.
The needs of senior immigrants go far beyond medical services. Of course, ensuring access to doctors, medications, and specialists is crucial. Yet, equally important is the sense of belonging. Older immigrants often struggle with social isolation, especially when separated from established networks abroad.
Community life, cultural adaptation, and opportunities for engagement become essential components of their successful absorption. A society that fails to address these needs risks leaving behind those who have contributed a lifetime to Jewish life elsewhere.
Supporting senior immigrants is not merely a moral imperative but also an economic necessity.
Integration is key
Older adults who integrate well place less strain on healthcare systems, contribute through volunteering, and often provide essential childcare support for younger families.
By contrast, neglecting their integration can lead to higher long-term costs in social services, not to mention the emotional toll on families who must balance work and caregiving without adequate support.
Furthermore, how Israel treats its elderly newcomers will shape the global perception of the country’s readiness to absorb future waves of immigration. A reputation for compassion, efficiency, and inclusiveness will strengthen Israel’s role as a safe and welcoming home for Jews worldwide.
Not an afterthought
The coming years offer Israel a rare opportunity: to prepare not just for the numbers but for the diversity of the population that will arrive.
Policymakers, municipalities, healthcare providers, and community organizations must collaborate to design strategies that ensure senior immigrants are not an afterthought.
This means developing tailored language programs, expanding culturally sensitive healthcare services, and creating avenues for older adults to participate meaningfully in community life.
If Israel rises to this challenge, the absorption of senior citizens will not be a burden but a source of strength, binding generations together and reaffirming the country’s role as a true homeland for all Jews, at every stage of life.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-867534
----
Paraguay’s Fluctuating Positions On Palestine: Between Interests And Justice
by Dr Rassem Bisharat
September 15, 2025
The influence of nations is not always determined by size or population, but by their ability to take decisions that resonate internationally. Paraguay, a small state in South America with about seven million inhabitants, has unexpectedly found itself entangled in Middle East politics. Over the past decade, it has oscillated between recognising Palestine in 2011, moving its embassy to Jerusalem, later reversing the decision, and then reinstating it in 2024.
This inconsistency stems from shifting governments, partisan struggles, pressure from the United States and Israel, and economic concerns related to energy and trade. Meanwhile, Paraguay’s Palestinian community, though limited in numbers and resources, continues to advocate for positions more aligned with international law and Palestinian rights.
Historical background and recent developments
Paraguay has a history shaped by major conflicts, most notably the War of the Triple Alliance in the 19th century, which left deep scars on its national memory. Today, it faces a different challenge: building diplomatic weight beyond its size while avoiding costly misalignment. Its 2011 recognition of Palestine on the 1967 borders was a bold step, part of a broader Latin American wave, yet it never developed into consistent policy. The 2018 embassy move to Jerusalem, followed by reversal, and then re-establishment in 2024, underscored this oscillation.
The fluctuation peaked on 12 September 2025, when Paraguay voted against a UN General Assembly resolution endorsing the New York Declaration on implementing the two-state solution. The vote highlighted the vulnerability of Paraguay’s symbolic commitments when confronted with domestic political shifts and the pressure of powerful allies.
Roots of oscillation: Domestic politics and external pressures
Paraguay’s foreign policy is closely tied to changes in government. President Horacio Cartes (2013–2018) deepened alignment with Washington and Tel Aviv by moving the embassy to Jerusalem. His successor, Mario Abdo Benítez, reversed the decision, seeking balance, while Santiago Peña, elected in 2023, restored it once again. This back-and-forth reflects how partisan competition translates directly into foreign policy shifts.
External pressures also weigh heavily. The United States leverages aid and alliances, while Israel offers lucrative security and economic cooperation, binding Paraguay closer to Washington’s orbit. This explains why a country that recognised Palestine can simultaneously vote against pro-Palestinian UN resolutions.
The Palestinian community in Paraguay: Limited but symbolic
Compared to Chile or Brazil, Paraguay’s Palestinian diaspora is small, but its significance is symbolic. Arriving in migration waves since the mid-20th century, Palestinians brought cultural and social traditions that remain visible. This history provides a foundation for a collective identity, even if their resources remain limited.
Today, their activities focus on cultural and humanitarian advocacy — social media campaigns, cultural events, and fundraising. While such initiatives raise awareness, they cannot alone counterbalance official policies shaped by international alliances. Still, the diaspora represents an essential bridge for maintaining Palestine as part of Paraguay’s national conversation.
Trade as a diplomatic lever
Trade is another dimension shaping Paraguay’s foreign policy. While commerce with Arab countries is modest compared to Brazil, it includes important sectors: cosmetics and essential oils from the UAE, petroleum and glass from Algeria, clothing from Jordan, and plastics from Tunisia. These links provide Arab states with potential leverage in encouraging more balanced Paraguayan positions.
The real pivot, however, is Brazil. The Itaipu Dam, providing nearly all Paraguay’s electricity and powering much of Brazil, is the clearest example of interdependence. Brazil is also Paraguay’s top trade partner and the main buyer of its agricultural exports. This structural dependency makes Paraguayan foreign policy sensitive to Brazil’s stance.
If Brasília promotes a discourse defending Palestinian rights, Paraguay faces pressure to avoid outright opposition, even if it does not fully align. Brazil, without coercion, can nudge Paraguay toward neutrality or abstention in international votes through a combination of economic incentives, regional coordination, and diplomatic signaling.
Recommendations
Strengthening solidarity with Palestine in Paraguay requires more than lobbying in New York. It is equally about reshaping narratives within Paraguayan society and leveraging regional alliances.
Narrative-building: Developing bilingual (Spanish–Arabic) media that documents the stories of Palestinian families in Paraguay could weave Palestine into the country’s collective memory. This cultural rooting elevates the issue from a foreign concern to part of Paraguay’s own national identity.
Civil society partnerships: Universities, unions, and churches can host cultural and humanitarian events that highlight justice and human rights, reframing Palestine as an ethical cause rather than a distant political debate.
Smart political pressure: Instead of expecting Paraguay to shift dramatically, efforts should aim to move its UN position from voting against Palestine to at least abstaining. Though symbolic, abstention reduces diplomatic harm and signals room for flexibility.
Regional engagement: Partnerships with Brazil and Argentina within Mercosur provide opportunities to encourage Paraguay toward moderation. If its key partners adopt stronger pro-Palestinian tones, Paraguay will feel pressured to align, or at least soften its opposition.
Humanitarian diplomacy: Initiatives such as medical and food aid convoys under Paraguayan banners can create an emotional connection with Palestine, challenging the dominance of pro-Israel narratives.
Conclusion
Paraguay’s experience reveals the struggle of small states to reconcile principle with interest. Its 2011 recognition of Palestine was bold but inconsistent, as later shown by its shifting embassy decisions and its 2025 UN vote against the two-state solution. These contradictions highlight how external pressures and internal politics create fragile commitments.
Yet opportunities for influence remain. The Palestinian diaspora, though small, sustains cultural advocacy; Arab states can leverage economic ties; and Brazil, through structural interdependence, can quietly steer Paraguay toward moderation. Civil society and regional alliances further amplify these efforts, showing that the struggle is not only in diplomatic halls but also in shaping public narratives.
In short, Paraguay can shift from a wavering state to a steady and more reliable voice in supporting justice and the rights of the Palestinian people, if these elements are combined with wisdom and continuity.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20250915-paraguays-fluctuating-positions-on-palestine-between-interests-and-justice/
-------
Israel Is Reshaping West Bank While No One Is Watching
Ghassan Khatib
September 15, 2025
Since Oct. 7, 2023, international attention has understandably centered on Israel’s devastating war on Gaza. The details of the genocide are horrific and call for intervention. But away from the cameras and headlines, Israel has launched a parallel offensive — less visible but still transformative — across the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Under the cover of war, Israel is accelerating a long-standing agenda of de facto annexation, systematically reshaping Palestinian life and geography without international consequences.
As it is bombing Gaza, Israel has permitted settler violence and land seizures, while intensifying its movement restrictions and economic suffocation in the West Bank. This is not coincidental or reactive. Rather, it appears to be a calculated effort to exploit the global focus on Gaza to advance long-standing maximalist objectives.
This became even more clear at the end of August with the approval of the E1 settlement plan. This is a key bloc of construction that will fill the last open areas of the West Bank, foreclosing contiguity between northern and southern Palestinian communities and sealing the fate of the failed Palestinian state.
In the months following the start of the war, Israel approved the largest land confiscation in the West Bank since the Oslo Accords. Moreover, according to Peace Now, more than 60 Palestinian communities were displaced between 2022 and 2025, with settlers taking over 14 percent of the West Bank — more than 780 sq. km. Settlers establish outposts, funded with millions in state and other funds, which then become bases for attacks and harassment that make the lives of Palestinians — isolated in rural areas — impossible. Violent settler attacks, often backed or ignored by the army, have grown more brazen. Activists describe and document how settlers now burn tents, steal livestock and expel residents in broad daylight.
Israeli ministers are not hiding their intentions. Orit Strock, minister of settlements and a settler herself, called this period a “miracle” for settlement expansion. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said the goal is to remove the “danger” of a Palestinian state by extending Israeli sovereignty over all of “Judea and Samaria,” the Israeli name for the West Bank. The language is no longer about negotiation, it is about permanent control.
Alongside land grabs, Israel has sharply intensified the restrictions on Palestinian movement. The number of Israeli military checkpoints in the West Bank had reached 849 by early 2025, according to the UN. These barriers not only fragment Palestinian territories into isolated cantons, but also obstruct access to hospitals, schools and workplaces. The World Health Organization documented 791 attacks on Palestinian health infrastructure in the West Bank between October 2023 and May 2025.
Beyond humanitarian harm, these restrictions have a political aim: the cantonization of the West Bank. By isolating Palestinian cities and towns from one another, Israel is laying the groundwork for five disconnected “regional councils” for Palestinians — echoing Smotrich’s vision of a fragmented, self-administered Palestinian entity under overarching Israeli control. Meanwhile, settlers move freely under a separate legal and administrative system.
Israel’s post-Oct. 7 campaign includes a three-pronged economic assault: blocking Palestinian laborers from entering Israel, withholding Palestinian tax revenues, and cutting off West Bank markets from Palestinian citizens of Israel.
These measures have brought the Palestinian economy to its knees. Palestinian gross domestic product dropped 22 percent in the first year of war. More than 200,000 jobs vanished in Gaza and the West Bank. Israel’s withholding of tax revenues — amounting to more than $1.8 billion — has crippled the Palestinian Authority’s ability to pay salaries. The result is a hollowing out of Palestinian institutions without directly dismantling them, sidestepping any diplomatic backlash.
More recently, attacks on humanitarian organizations and civil society have been unfolding, with legislation coming into effect that allows Tel Aviv to “de-register” groups that are “hostile” to Israel (a description so general as to be meaningless), while requiring them to provide the personal details of all their Palestinian staff. The move has put at risk the operations of more than two dozen international organizations, which are another source of funding and support for Palestinian civil society.
Even Palestinian citizens of Israel, whose annual spending in the West Bank once exceeded $800 million, have been barred from shopping or studying there. The aim of this is not just economic. A leading Palestinian business figure put it bluntly: “The clearest objective is to indirectly destroy Palestinian institutions, particularly the Palestinian Authority.”
While Israel advances a one-state reality of control and domination, the international community continues to echo slogans about a two-state solution. Belgium, France, the UK, Canada, Australia and Malta have all said they will join 147 other countries in recognizing the state of Palestine at the UN General Assembly this month. This recognition is politically significant, but if it remains merely rhetorical without accountability, it could make that vision merely a statement. A February poll in Israel showed that 68 percent of Israelis support annexing the West Bank and 71 percent oppose a Palestinian state. These are not fringe views — they are mainstream.
If the current trajectory continues, Israel’s long-standing policy of “creating facts on the ground” will solidify into permanent apartheid. Just as the genocide in Gaza will have long-term regional and international implications, the quieter, bureaucratic and structural war on the West Bank is entrenching irreversible realities. Israel seems to be taking advantage of the horrific offensive in Gaza to pursue its agenda of liquidating the Palestinian cause. The longer this goes on without international consequences, the greater its chances of success.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2615393
-------
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