Middle East Press On: Turkey's Strategic Patience in War, Iran, Children in Gaza, War on Iran, Cease-Fire, Gaza To Minab, Children Paying the Price of War, New Age Islam's Selection, 27 March 2026
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
27 March 2026
Outside fire: Türkiye’s strategic patience in an expanding war
Türkiye's economic resilience test: Duration, scope and new balances
Iran Is Not Denying Negotiations. It Is Designing Them
Torture and Physical Abuse of Children in Gaza Declared War Crimes
Beyond the Battlefield: New FloodGate Podcast Examines the War on Iran
‘A Simple Cease-Fire Isn’t Enough’ — UAE Publicly Calls for Decisive Outcome in Iran War
From Gaza to Minab, the Same Story — Children Paying the Price of War
------
Outside fire: Türkiye’s strategic patience in an expanding war
BY NEBI MIŞ
MAR 25, 2026
Türkiye was among the countries that foresaw the risk of regional and global fragilities, crises and conflicts deepening and becoming protracted. It was aware that wars and crises were not being resolved, but rather managed by major powers. It observed closely that the use of brute force and sanctions had become normalized as methods of punishment.
Having continuously faced interventionist policies directed at it since 2012, Türkiye, under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's leadership, followed more carefully the direction in which both global politics and international relations were evolving. It analyzed well the medium- and long-term objectives of developments such as the Arab Spring, the Color Revolutions and direct military interventions in neighboring countries, as well as the plans of the powers behind them.
In a sense, it experienced in the geographies of its immediate surroundings how these crises, conflicts and wars were evolving into a systemic crisis. Consequently, by paying real costs on the ground, it developed over the years a strong ability to read realities.
In recent years, particularly regarding the Middle East, Türkiye anticipated that Israel's goal of regional expansion was not based on any particular government or leader, but constituted a state policy. It stated openly that Israel would seek to draw Iran into conflict to further destabilize the region, and that it was waiting for the right opportunity. It issued its warnings to Iran on the importance of engaging in international diplomacy. In this regard, it adopted a friendly approach toward Iran to encourage diplomatic engagement.
Likewise, because Türkiye under Erdoğan's leadership anticipated that regional and global crises would continue to grow, it developed its state capacity. It prioritized the defense industry. A new initiative was launched aimed at increasing societal resilience, reducing vulnerabilities and consolidating the domestic front under the goal of a terrorism-free Türkiye and region. Society was informed about what was happening in our neighboring geography.
Türkiye broke the bloc formations that had emerged against it in the region and normalized relations. Memoranda of understanding were signed to strengthen economic and trade relations. Multi-layered diplomatic channels grounded in trust were established for use in times of crisis.
Ultimately, when the U.S. was pushed into war through Israel's provocation, pressure and entrapment, Türkiye already possessed a capacity for preparedness. Let me underscore this once more: Even if the ongoing war is halted through an agreement, Israel favors the continuation of a chronic cycle of war. By destabilizing the Middle East and driving it into chaos, it will continue its attacks in pursuit of theological objectives. Therefore, the regional and global system will first have to confront the Israel problem.
Following the outbreak of the U.S.-Israel-Iran war, Türkiye first strove to prevent the conflict from spreading and conducted active diplomacy. It foresaw that Iran's expansion of the war toward the Gulf countries would serve Israel's plan for a broader regional war. For this reason, it stated openly from the very outset that Iran was making a mistake in this regard. By also participating in meetings organized by Gulf countries, it sought to prevent the war from further targeting them. In fact, by drawing Gulf countries into the conflict, Iran also fell into Israel's regional war trap.
Second, Türkiye kept diplomatic channels open to remain outside the war. It acted with great caution against provocations. On the matter of missiles fired from Iran toward Türkiye, it acted prudently and strategically, while reserving its rights. For now, Türkiye is working toward a solution without becoming a party to the war.
Third, Türkiye is striving to be prepared for the risks and contingencies of Iran being dragged into chaos and the war becoming prolonged. Türkiye will be directly affected across numerous areas, including the economy, migration, energy, border security, the Eastern Mediterranean and the goal of a terrorism-free Türkiye.
The global and regional costs of the war are steadily increasing. The economic model that the Gulf has built over decades has suffered serious damage. At the same time, the security architecture that Gulf countries have maintained with the U.S. over many years has eroded.
It is not difficult to anticipate that Türkiye is also preparing for post-war realities. Just as it is making great efforts to minimize risks, it will also move to capitalize on the new opportunities that emerge.
In this context, it will deploy its capacity across different areas such as the establishment of a new security architecture in the Middle East, reconstruction, transportation, trade and security. As a new balancing actor, it will take a leading role in establishing security and stability. Türkiye remains outside the hot war. The policy pursued by Erdoğan and his team in response to developments is not emotional. It rests on a strategic perspective.
https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/columns/outside-fire-turkiyes-strategic-patience-in-an-expanding-war
-----
Türkiye's economic resilience test: Duration, scope and new balances
BY HARUN TÜRKER KARA
MAR 27, 2026
The war between the U.S., Israel and Iran launched on Feb. 28, 2026, created a systemic risk area. As the first month of the war approached at the end of March, the clearest message from financial markets was this: This crisis is no longer just a financial shock affecting countries' risk premiums, but a macroeconomic shock impacting supply and demand dynamics.
Understanding this phase does not require complex analyses at the first stages. Two critical variables determine the impact of the war: duration and scope. Looking at the current situation, it appears that the duration of the war is largely determined by the U.S., whereas Iran has the capacity to shape its geographical scope through regional expansionist measures. The U.S. aims to control costs by keeping the war within a limited time framework, while Iran aims to spread the impact regionally through various actions. Therefore, the real question is "How long will it last and how widespread will it be?"
It is clear at this point that the Strait of Hormuz has become a critical threshold for the global economy. This narrow passage, through which approximately 20 million barrels of oil pass daily, carries about 20% of the global oil trade. In fact, the issue is not just oil; petrochemical products, liquefied natural gas and critical intermediate goods for industry are also transported through this route. More importantly, alternative capacity that can replace this flow in the short term is quite limited. Therefore, a disruption in the Strait of Hormuz would mean a shift from cost-based pricing to scarcity pricing in energy markets. It is becoming increasingly clear that this situation will determine food and energy prices.
Indeed, the increases in oil prices observed in recent weeks are giving the first signals of this transition. While prices are expected to stabilize in the $85-$100 range in a short-term war scenario, if the conflict prolongs or there is a disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, the $120-$150 range is now a strong possibility. This situation means not only an increase in costs for energy-importing countries, but also a direct rewriting of macroeconomic balances.
From Türkiye's perspective, energy prices remain the most critical channel for external shocks. Central bank calculations show that every 10% sustained increase in oil prices adds approximately $2 billion annually to the current account balance. Such a scenario may result in the current account deficit as a percentage of national income climbing from around 2% to 3.5%. It should not be overlooked that this would not only change the numerator but also the denominator, meaning that growth would also decrease.
One other crucial parameter in terms of external balance is trade with the Gulf countries. These countries, according to TradeMap data, which account for approximately 5% of our foreign trade, are at the center of the war. The decrease in tourism revenues is also an inevitable consequence of the war. On the other hand, the fact that there is currently no significant domestic demand for foreign currency is a significant advantage in terms of external balance.
However, the impact of supply shocks, particularly in energy, is not limited to the external balance. As for internal balance, while the Turkish economy is at the most critical stage of its disinflation process, it is now facing strong inflationary pressure driven by costs. Increases in energy, food and logistics costs are rapidly being reflected in consumer prices via producer prices. Central bank estimates suggest that an energy shock of this magnitude could push annual inflation up by approximately 2.5%-3% points. It is also known that the “echelle mobile” system, which partially passes fuel price increases on to consumers, will impose a burden on the public sector.
More importantly, this effect is not a one-way process. Increases in energy and logistics costs are reflected in fertilizer prices via natural gas costs, and from there, with a delay of several months, in food prices. Governmental data of Türkiye says annual fertilizer consumption is 6-7 million tons. This shows that dependence on foreign sources and the fight against inflation may become a longer-term and more complex process. On the industrial front, the risks are less apparent now, but their impact is far greater. Products transported via the Strait of Hormuz are not limited to energy inputs; petrochemical products, essential raw materials for the plastics, textiles, automotive and packaging industries are also part of this route.
On the other hand, global financial conditions also play a significant role in this equation. Rising energy prices could push inflation higher in developed economies, leading central banks to delay interest rate cuts. This means global liquidity may remain tight. For developing countries like Türkiye, this creates pressure from two directions: On the one hand, the rising energy bill, and on the other, increasingly difficult external financing conditions. Gold prices are also affected by persistently high interest rates. Now, central banks are selling gold from their reserves to reduce the impact of financial volatility. This led to a decline in gold prices. All financial assets will remain highly volatile if the conflict continues.
Despite all these risks, some structural advantages of the Turkish economy are noteworthy. The fact that the total debt-to-GDP ratio is below 100%, the budget deficit hovers around 3%, and the banking system has a strong capital structure provides a significant buffer against external shocks. Today, the share of renewable energy in electricity production is approaching 50%, and the decrease in energy intensity has significantly increased Türkiye's capacity to absorb energy shocks compared to previous periods.
The current situation can be summarized with three alternative scenarios. If the war remains short-lived and limited, oil prices could stabilize in the $80-$90 range, and the Turkish economy could weather this period with limited damage. In a medium-term scenario, prices settling in the $100-$120 range would create more significant pressure on inflation and the current account deficit. In the worst-case scenario, if the war is prolonged and geographically expanded, oil prices rising above $120 could trigger a global stagflation risk. This could create serious problems for the Turkish economy, leading to below-potential growth. In conclusion, viewing today's developments solely as an energy crisis is incomplete. The duration and scope of the war are important. How these two variables unfold will also determine the direction of global growth, inflation and financial stability.
For Türkiye, this process is a turning point and an opportunity. Strengthening energy supply security, rapidly deploying domestic and renewable resources, diversifying supply chains and trade routes, and transitioning to value-added production in industry are critical policy areas of the period that began with the war. Global crises always generate risks. However, when managed correctly, they also offer an opportunity to gain a stronger position in new economic balances.
https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/op-ed/turkiyes-economic-resilience-test-duration-scope-and-new-balances
-------
Iran Is Not Denying Negotiations. It Is Designing Them
March 26, 2026
by Dr Mojtaba Touiserkani
On 26 March, the most revealing development in this war was not another missile barrage. It was the report that Pakistan had urged Washington to restrain Israel from killing Abbas Araqchi and Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf because, as a Pakistani source put it, “there is no one else to talk to” if they are gone. If that account is even broadly right, then the meaning of the moment is hard to miss. This is no longer a war with diplomacy running beside it. The struggle over how to end the war is already shaping how the war itself is being fought.
That is the frame much of the commentary still misses. Too much analysis remains stuck on a stale question: are there talks, or are there not? But that is no longer the most important issue. The real question is how an emerging endgame is already changing target selection, political language and diplomatic cover. Donald Trump is not moving cleanly from war to peace. He is trying to use the threat of a wider war to force a narrow, controlled de-escalation on terms favourable to Washington. Iran, for its part, is not giving a flat no. It is reviewing a proposal while constructing a reply designed to protect both deterrence and its regional position.
The grammar of deniable engagement
Tehran’s denials are not proof that diplomacy is absent. They are part of how diplomacy is being made politically survivable.
The method has a very specific grammar. Iran’s denials have been cast in the past tense: no negotiations have taken place, no dialogue has occurred. Not: we will not negotiate. Not: talks are forbidden. This is past-tense denial — a refusal worded so that it closes off yesterday without foreclosing tomorrow. If direct talks occur in the coming days, Tehran can still say, with narrow technical accuracy, that at the time of each denial no such talks had yet happened. That is not merely evasive language. It is how states buy room to move before they are ready to admit they are moving.
Trump himself has, in effect, described the same dual track, saying Iranian leaders want a deal badly but are afraid to say so publicly. He meant it as a taunt. It reads more usefully as an inadvertent account of structured ambiguity: private movement, public denial and political reasons on both sides for pretending the two do not coexist.
Iranian statecraft has used deniable channels before. The secret US-Iran contacts in Oman that opened the way to the 2013 interim nuclear agreement were kept out of public view until they could be politically defended. The lesson was not simply that secrecy works. It was that systems facing ideological and domestic constraints often need concealment first, explanation second and acknowledgement only at the end.
Washington is now bargaining over an end-state
What makes the current moment different from the war’s earlier phase is that the intermediary channel is no longer simply carrying signals. It is carrying content. Public reporting has linked the US proposal to Iran’s highly enriched uranium, enrichment activity, ballistic missiles, support for regional allies and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Karoline Leavitt later said parts of the public reporting were inaccurate, but she did not deny that a proposal existed or that indirect exchanges around it were continuing. That is enough to establish the central fact: Washington has shifted from attrition to bargaining over an end-state.
Trump’s five-day pause on strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure made that shift visible. The pause was never a ceasefire, and it was never meant to be read as one. Other parts of the campaign continued. That selectivity is precisely why it mattered. It signalled that Washington was holding back from one especially escalatory step while keeping the rest of its pressure intact. This was not restraint in any moral sense. It was coercive diplomacy: a warning that the war could become much more dangerous unless Tehran moved.
Tehran’s answer is not “no”. It is: “not on these terms”.
Iran’s initial response to the US proposal was described as “not positive”, but not as a final rejection. That distinction matters. A flat refusal closes the file. A negative first response keeps the argument open.
More importantly, Iran is not simply delaying. It is setting a price. Tehran has told intermediaries that any ceasefire must include Lebanon and bring Israeli operations against Hezbollah into the same framework. Iranian sources have also indicated a harder stance tied to guarantees against renewed attacks and conditions around Hormuz.
The substance of the Iranian reply is therefore not simple rejection. It is a counter-position: not on these terms, not with this scope and not if Lebanon is left outside the bargain.
That is also why Ghalibaf’s reported role makes sense. He is not part of the foreign ministry. He is not a career diplomat. He is not a serving commander. He is a heavyweight political figure with independent standing and obvious presidential ambitions. If he is being used in this channel, the choice is revealing. He is senior enough to be taken seriously, but not so institutionally exposed that any contact must immediately be framed as a formal executive negotiation. He is useful because he is deniable. His public rejection of talks does not disprove the channel. It helps preserve it.
Pakistan is not just a venue. It is political cover.
Islamabad matters less as a place than as a form of political cover. Pakistan is a Muslim-majority state, a nuclear power and one of the few countries still maintaining direct channels to both Washington and Tehran. Current reporting indicates that Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey are all mediating in different ways, while an Iranian embassy official in Islamabad has said Pakistan remains Tehran’s preferred venue if talks move forward. Pakistan matters because it offers a politically workable channel.
That same mediation has exposed a quieter fault line.
Israel has also insisted that its campaign against Hezbollah is separate and should continue. From Tehran’s point of view, any agreement that leaves Lebanon outside the frame is no agreement at all.
The threat of escalation is now part of the negotiation
None of this should be mistaken for an orderly peace process. Leavitt has warned that Trump will hit Iran harder if Tehran fails to accept that it has been “defeated militarily”. That was not idle rhetoric. It was the language of an administration trying to negotiate from the apex of force. Reports about more drastic Pentagon scenarios, including possible ground options, should be treated carefully because they remain contingency planning rather than announced policy. But the broader signal is unmistakable: Washington wants Tehran to believe the next round could be worse.
The likeliest outcome, at least for now, is not a grand bargain and probably not a full-scale ground war. It is something narrower, uglier and more deniable than either. Think of a limited de-escalation that no side will want to call a settlement: no immediate US strike on Iran’s energy backbone, some reduction in pressure around Hormuz, continued indirect messaging and perhaps a meeting or call that all parties insist was not really a negotiation. Washington would present that as pressure producing results. Tehran would present it as resistance forcing respect. Both would be telling partial truths.
That path is fragile. A major strike on energy infrastructure, a deadly maritime incident in Hormuz or a sharp deterioration in Lebanon could destroy it quickly. But the central point is already visible. The first draft of the endgame is not being written in communiqués. It is being written in selective pauses, in carefully worded denials, in counter-conditions attached to what is formally described as a refusal to engage and, perhaps most revealingly of all, in decisions about who must be kept alive long enough to talk.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260326-iran-is-not-denying-negotiations-it-is-designing-them/
------
Torture and Physical Abuse of Children in Gaza Declared War Crimes
March 27, 2026
By Thalif Deen
The ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which began in October 2023, has claimed the lives of more than 73,600 Palestinians and about 1,195 Israelis. But there are widespread charges accusing Israel of war crimes, genocide, torture, and the abuse of Palestinian detainees in Israeli jails.
But these crimes continue despite warnings and condemnations by international bodies—including the United Nations, the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the Human Rights Council—with none of them having the power of enforcement.
A question at the UN press briefing on March 24 highlighted a horrible crime unprecedented in any recent conflict.
Question: Multiple news outlets reported that Israeli soldiers tortured a one-year-old Palestinian child named Karim Abu Nasr in Gaza to pressure his father. The child reportedly suffered cigarette burns, marks, and nail wounds. Did you see this report?
UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric: I have seen the horrific description of that report, which clearly needs to be investigated, and reading the report itself is just horrific.
Dr. Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University, who taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies, told Inter Press Service the report about the one-year-old (often described as 18 months old) Karim Abu Nassar being tortured by Israeli soldiers in Gaza is being widely carried by pro-Palestinian and regional outlets and is attributed to a specific named journalist and Palestine TV.
Multiple outlets, however, including TRT World, Daily Sabah, Anadolu Agency syndication, and advocacy or solidarity networks, report a very similar narrative, said Dr. Ben-Meir.
The child, identified as Karim (or Jawad) Abu Nassar, was detained with his father near Al Maghazi in central Gaza. Palestine TV, citing a Gaza-based journalist, Osama al Kahlout, says Israeli soldiers tortured the child during the father’s interrogation, including extinguishing cigarettes on his leg, pricking him, and inserting a metal nail into his leg.
A medical report confirmed burn marks from cigarettes and puncture wounds from a nail. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) facilitated his release about 10 hours later, while the father remains detained, he said.
“Visual posts on social media show a toddler with bandaged or visibly injured legs, identified as Karim, which is consistent with the allegations of named local sources and official Palestinian media.”
Documented Torture and Ill Treatment of Palestinian Children
“There is substantial and mounting documentation that Israeli forces have systematically tortured, severely ill-treated, or disappeared Palestinian children, including in Gaza since 7 October 2023,” said Dr. Ben-Meir.
Meanwhile, the UN Secretary General’s report on children and armed conflict documents over 8,000 grave violations against children in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory, including verified cases of detention and ill treatment of Palestinian children by Israeli armed and security forces.
The same report notes 906 Palestinian children were detained in 2023, and that 84 children reported ill treatment during detention, along with reports of detention and sexual violence against children in Gaza.
Dr. Ramzy Baroud, Editor of Palestine Chronicle and former Managing Editor of the London-based Middle East Eye, told IPS “Dujarric is correct. This is horrific. In fact, it is beyond horrific. Equally frightening is that what has befallen this little boy, Karim, and his family is not an isolated incident but a repeated reality that has manifested itself in countless ways throughout the genocide.”
There are 21,000 ‘Karims’ who have been killed in the most brutal ways, he said. “Tens of thousands more have been wounded, maimed, or remain lifeless under the rubble of a fully destroyed Gaza.”
It is also horrific that those who tortured this one-year-old boy remain free to carry out further crimes. Those responsible for killing, torturing, and maiming Gaza’s children—and their parents—continue to face no accountability.
Equally disturbing, said Dr. Baroud, is that the United Nations, at best, can acknowledge the horror yet fails to stop it, rendering international law of no practical relevance to Palestinians.
“What use are words to those who have perished in the Israeli genocide of Gaza? What use are reports, discussions, investigations, and lamentations if the perpetrators are not held accountable?”
“I am familiar with the report, and as devastating as it is, it merely mirrors countless other accounts of children who have endured similar fates—and worse.”
Palestinians are demanding action. Without it, the horror will continue, no matter how many words are written or reports are produced to recognize it, declared Dr. Baroud.
Meanwhile, the UN’s special rapporteur on Palestine, Francesca Albanese, has called on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to pursue arrest warrants for three Israeli ministers she accuses of being responsible for “systematic torture” amounting to genocide.
In a new report presented to the UN Human Rights Council this week, Albanese names National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Defence Minister Israel Katz as the primary political figures involved in shaping policies that enabled the torture of Palestinians after 7 October 2023
Amplifying further, Dr. Ben-Meir pointed out that the Defense for Children International-Palestine (DCIP) in a 2025 report states that “Israeli forces killed, maimed, tortured, starved, abducted and displaced Palestinian children every single day in 2025″ and describes widespread torture and ill treatment of children at all stages of detention.
Gazan children were detained and transferred to facilities such as Sde Teiman, where they report being stripped, starved, beaten, confined in cages, subjected to electric shocks, beaten with sticks, and exposed to a “disco room” with deafening music and random assaults—acts that meet standard legal definitions of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, he said.
These accounts are based on multiple child testimonies and legal documentation and are presented as evidence of criminal conduct and war crimes.
“This report is also confirmed by Israeli soldiers who served in Gaza during the war, with whom I spoke.”
Use of children as human shields and related abuse
Peer-reviewed and legal analyses, said Dr. Ben-Meir, also document episodes where Israeli forces used Palestinian children as human shields, which is itself a war crime and frequently accompanied by physical and psychological abuse.
Such practices, given the threats and harm involved, qualify as torture under international law. Tragically, it is a longstanding pattern of abuse of Palestinians, with children among the victims, by Israeli forces.
How to Frame this as War Crimes
Under the Convention against Torture and the Rome Statute, intentionally inflicting severe physical or mental pain for purposes such as obtaining information or confessions, punishing, intimidating, or coercing, when carried out by state agents in an armed conflict, constitutes torture and a war crime and, when widespread or systematic, can be a crime against humanity.
The Sde Teiman practices—electric shocks, starvation, severe beatings, and sensory torture—clearly meet the same threshold at scale. Coupled with UN-verified patterns of child detention and ill treatment and documented use of children as human shields.
The Karim case, as reported, fits that definition almost perfectly: a state agent intentionally inflicts severe pain on a toddler in front of his father, specifically to force a confession, he said.
“The evidentiary picture strongly supports the argument that Israel has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity involving children,” declared Dr. Ben-Meir.
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/torture-and-physical-abuse-of-children-in-gaza-declared-war-crimes/
-----
Beyond the Battlefield: New FloodGate Podcast Examines the War on Iran
March 27, 2026
The latest episode of The FloodGate, the podcast of the Palestine Chronicle, explored how the war on Iran is evolving beyond direct military confrontation into a broader struggle over energy routes, economic pressure, and regional control.
The discussion, hosted by Romana Rubeo and featuring Ramzy Baroud and Robert Inlakesh, focused on the impact of strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure and Tehran’s response, particularly its position on the Strait of Hormuz, a key global oil chokepoint.
The episode also examined competing narratives surrounding the war, contrasting US claims of control and negotiation with Iran’s rejection of that framework and its assertion that the balance of power is shifting.
Speakers analyzed the conflict as it is being fought in practice, arguing that its implications extend beyond the battlefield to the future of US influence, Israeli strategy, and Iran’s regional role.
The full episode is available on YouTube.
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/beyond-the-battlefield-new-floodgate-podcast-examines-the-war-on-iran/
------
‘A Simple Cease-Fire Isn’t Enough’ — UAE Publicly Calls for Decisive Outcome in Iran War
March 26, 2026
UAE Position Emerges
As the Trump administration appears to be seeking a way out of the Iran war, two regional actors continue to push in the opposite direction: Israel and the United Arab Emirates.
While Israel’s position of continuing the war has been clear from the outset, the Emirati stance has until now remained less explicit, often reflected through reports, diplomatic signals and unnamed officials suggesting support for escalation.
That position is now publicly articulated in a detailed article by UAE Ambassador to the United States Yousef Al Otaiba, published in The Wall Street Journal on March 25, 2026, offering one of the clearest official statements to date on Abu Dhabi’s view of the war.
In his article, Al Otaiba rejects the idea of ending the conflict through negotiation alone, writing that “a simple cease-fire isn’t enough,” and calling instead for “a conclusive outcome that addresses Iran’s full range of threats.”
War Beyond Ceasefire
Al Otaiba frames the war as part of a broader, long-standing confrontation, arguing that recent developments confirm what he describes as decades of concern regarding Iran’s role in the region.
“The past 3½ weeks of war have confirmed what we have known for nearly 50 years,” he wrote, describing Iran’s revolution as “a threat to global security and economic stability.”
The ambassador’s argument centers on the idea that the war must go beyond temporary de-escalation. He explicitly lists the areas that, in his view, must be addressed through continued pressure: nuclear capabilities, missile programs, drone warfare, regional alliances and maritime activity.
This framing places the UAE firmly within a camp advocating for a prolonged confrontation rather than a negotiated pause, emphasizing outcomes rather than immediate cessation of hostilities.
Economic Stakes Highlighted
A key component of the UAE’s position is the economic dimension of the war, which Al Otaiba presents as central to the conflict.
“We can’t let Iran hold the U.S., the United Arab Emirates and the global economy hostage,” he wrote, linking military developments directly to global economic stability.
According to the ambassador, Iranian actions extend beyond direct military engagement to include attacks on critical infrastructure and disruption of supply chains. He pointed to strikes on airports, seaports and energy facilities, as well as interference with shipments essential for manufacturing and agriculture.
Particular emphasis was placed on the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic maritime corridor through which a significant portion of global energy supplies passes. Al Otaiba argued that reopening and securing this route is essential, calling for coordinated international action to ensure its stability.
Frontline And Targeting
Al Otaiba also presents the UAE as a central target of Iranian military activity, highlighting both the scale and intensity of attacks directed at the country.
“Iran has launched more than 2,180 missiles and drones at the Emirates,” he wrote, adding that this figure exceeds attacks on any other country during the current conflict.
Describing the UAE as being “on the front line of this conflict,” he emphasizes the country’s proximity and exposure. At the same time, he highlights its defensive capabilities, noting that more than 95% of incoming threats have been intercepted.
The ambassador also stresses that the UAE did not seek this confrontation, pointing to diplomatic efforts undertaken prior to the outbreak of war. According to his account, Emirati officials engaged with both Tehran and Washington in an attempt to prevent escalation and made clear that UAE territory would not be used for attacks on Iran.
Strategy And Continuation
Beyond immediate military developments, Al Otaiba outlines a broader strategic vision that combines continued pressure on Iran with long-term economic resilience.
He states that while some of Iran’s capabilities have been weakened, “more needs to be done” to address remaining threats, particularly in relation to missiles and drones.
At the same time, he signals readiness to participate in international initiatives aimed at securing maritime routes, especially the Strait of Hormuz, reinforcing the UAE’s role in efforts to stabilize global energy flows.
The ambassador also emphasizes the UAE’s economic strategy, highlighting ongoing investments in sectors such as artificial intelligence, renewable energy and tourism. He underscores the country’s deep economic ties with the United States, including a $1.4 trillion investment commitment.
Concluding his argument, Al Otaiba rejects approaches based on containment or delay, warning that postponing confrontation would only lead to future crises. While stating that the UAE seeks a stable relationship with Iran, he makes clear that such a relationship, in his view, depends on fundamental changes in Iran’s regional conduct.
The article marks a significant moment in the public articulation of the UAE’s position, placing it clearly among those advocating for a continuation of the war until broader strategic objectives are achieved.
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/a-simple-cease-fire-isnt-enough-uae-publicly-calls-for-decisive-outcome-in-iran-war/
-----
From Gaza to Minab, the Same Story — Children Paying the Price of War
March 26, 2026
By Ramzy Baroud
Those who had the misfortune of growing up in a war zone require no explanation. War is hell, it is true—but for children, it is something else entirely: a confusing, disorienting fate that defies comprehension.
There are children who live only briefly, experiencing whatever life manages to offer them: the love of parents, the camaraderie of siblings, the fragile joys and inevitable hardships of existence.
There are over 20,000 children in this category who have been killed in Gaza over the span of roughly two years, according to figures released by the Gaza Health Ministry and repeatedly cited by United Nations agencies. Some were born and killed within the same short timeframe.
Others remain buried beneath the rubble of the destroyed Strip. According to humanitarian and forensic experts cited by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), thousands of bodies are still missing under collapsed buildings, with recovery efforts hindered by the scale of destruction and lack of equipment. In some cases, extreme heat, fire, and the use of heavy explosive weaponry have rendered identification nearly impossible, meaning that many of these children may never be properly accounted for, let alone mourned at a grave.
These children will not have graves to be visited. And if they do, many will have no living parents left to pray for them. But we will always do.
And then, there are those who are wounded and maimed—tens of thousands of them. Visiting Amro, the wounded son of a relative who perished along with his entire family in Gaza, I witnessed one of the most heartbreaking sights one could possibly endure: the wounded and maimed children of Gaza in a Turkish hospital.
There were a few teenagers, many without limbs. Hospital staff had adorned them with the beloved Palestinian keffiyeh. Those who could flashed the victory sign, and those who had no arms raised what remained of their limbs, as if to tell every wandering visitor that they stand for something deep and unyielding, that their losses were not in vain.
But then there were the little ones, who experienced trauma without fully comprehending even the magnitude of their tragedy. They stared in confusion at everyone—the unfamiliar faces, the incomprehensible languages spoken around them, the empty walls.
My nephew kept speaking of his parents, who were meant to visit him any day. They were both gone, along with his only brother.
I was in kindergarten in a refugee camp in Gaza when I witnessed my first military raid. The target was our school. I still recall our teachers pushing back against soldiers as they forced their way into the building. I remember them being physically assaulted, screaming at us to run toward the orchard.
We began running while holding hands with one another. We were all wearing matching red outfits with stickers on our faces—none of us had any understanding of who these men were or why they were hurting the people who cared for us.
If the killing of children in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, and across the Middle East is normalized, then it will become just another accepted feature of war. And since “war is hell,” we will all move on, accepting that our children—anywhere in the world—now stand on the front lines of victimhood whenever it suits the calculations of war.
I have thought about this often in recent years—during the devastation in Gaza, the wars across the region, and the killing of students at a school in the Iranian city of Minab.
Minab is not just an Iranian tragedy; it is our collective loss. Evidence from international investigations indicates that the strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh school was not an accident, but the result of deliberate targeting within a broader military campaign.
Amnesty International concluded that the school building was directly struck with guided weapons. Investigations by major outlets, alongside US military sources, suggest the site had been placed on a target list despite being a functioning school. The result was devastating: children killed, families shattered, and yet another atrocity absorbed into the relentless rhythm of war.
The US administration may deny intent as often as it wishes. But we know that the killing of children is not incidental. It is evidenced in Gaza, where the scale alone defies any claim of accident. As UNICEF Executive Director Catherine Russell stated, “Gaza has become a graveyard for thousands of children.” That reality alone should end any debate.
I could pause here to tell you that all children are precious, that all lives are sacred, and that international law is unequivocal on this matter. I could invoke the Fourth Geneva Convention, which states that “protected persons (…) shall at all times be humanely treated,” and that violence against civilians is strictly prohibited.
Yes, I could do all of that. But I fear it would make little difference.
Everything we have said and done has failed Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and much of our region. International law, once seen as a shield, has become little more than a point of departure for conversations about its ineffectiveness and hypocrisy.
Speaking to Palestinians about international law often generates not reassurance, but frustration and anger. So I will spare you that, too.
Instead, I want to make a call to the world.
A call on behalf of Amro, and the many others from our family who were killed, and the thousands more who perished; a call on behalf of the frightened children of the Flowers Kindergarten in my old refugee camp in Gaza: please, do not allow them to normalize the killing of children.
Do not settle for indifference, or mere concern, or even moral outrage that is never followed by action.
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/from-gaza-to-minab-the-same-story-children-paying-the-price-of-war/
------
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