Middle East Press on Israel, US, Tehran, Egypt, Jews, Hezbollah, Europe, Iran, Arab and Myanmar: New Age Islam's Selection, 01 November 2024
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
01 November 2024
The Us Election Will Determine Future of Israel’s Wars
Hold Off On the Celebrations, Tehran Has Planned For the Long Game against Israel
Egyptian Hatred amid Peace: A Machinery for Producing Hatred against Israeli Jews
Footage Of Late Muhammad Ali Praying Behind New Hezbollah Leader Resurfaces
Political Interests In The Age Of Genocide: Is Europe Abandoning Israel?
Continuing Arab Normalisation during Genocide, Serves It
The Catastrophic Implications of Israel’s Anti-Unrwa Laws
For Iran, This Is A Pivotal Us Presidential Election
Myanmar’s Youth Exodus Weakening the Military Regime
-----
The Us Election Will Determine Future of Israel’s Wars
By Yaakov Katz
November 1, 2024
Whatever happens on Tuesday and whoever wins the US election, expect Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to waste no time in leveraging the vote’s outcome to steer Israeli policy – to secure a deal for the hostages and to end the war in Lebanon.
If Donald Trump wins, Netanyahu will seize the opportunity to convince his coalition’s right-wing partners – particularly Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir – that concluding the conflict is essential to keep the incoming administration aligned with Israeli interests.
Netanyahu will argue that Trump has asked for the war to end by January 20, the date of his inauguration.
He might even hint at Trump’s support for future West Bank annexation as a possibility, asserting that ending the war now could pave the way to the realization of the Right’s dream.
Conversely, if Kamala Harris claims the White House, Netanyahu will play a different hand entirely, painting a darker picture of what a Democratic administration could bring.
He will tell his right-wing allies that failing to end the Gaza war before Harris takes office risks inviting an American crackdown on the settlements in the West Bank – potentially even worse than the hardline policies of Barack Obama.
He would remind them of Obama’s “not a single brick” instruction during their first meeting, an encounter that Netanyahu later described as an “ambush” and which pressured Israel into a 10-month settlement freeze.
This time, he’ll insist, the stakes could be even higher. Ending the war before January, Netanyahu will argue, will be necessary to avoid American measures that could go so far as to undermine the IDF’s ability to even prosecute the wars that Smotrich and Ben-Gvir will want to see continue.
As a result, the most pressing deadline right now is not the fate of the hostages but the fate of America and who will be the next president.
That is what is driving the sudden change on both fronts: Lebanon, where on Thursday both Israelis and Lebanese were hinting that a deal was imminent and Gaza, where a hostage deal – albeit small in scope – might also be just days away.
Two major factors at play
The shifting calculations with Lebanon rest on two key factors. First, the IDF has achieved its primary goal of restoring security to the North by demolishing Hezbollah infrastructure along the border and denying the group the ability to easily invade Israel.
Any further movement into Lebanese territory would risk prolonged conflict, heightened casualties, and a rapid exhaustion of resources.
Israeli military planners have long recognized that Lebanon presents a different challenge from Gaza and never intended to dismantle Hezbollah in its entirety.
Instead, the aim has always been to push Hezbollah forces north of the Litani River, far enough to minimize their threat to Israel’s North. If this objective can be accomplished now, there is little appetite to press deeper.
Meanwhile, the Gaza war, heading into its 14th month, also appears to be reaching an inflection point.
Hamas’s military capabilities have been severely degraded, and with Yahya Sinwar dead, Israel believes there is an opportunity to reach a hostage deal and a ceasefire.
A post-war framework is also starting to take shape between Israel, the United States, and the UAE, with defense contractors beginning to lay groundwork within Gaza, preparing for what is being termed the “day after” scenario.
Looming over all of this is the unpredictability of the American political transition. The period between the US election and the presidential inauguration has often proven volatile for Israeli-American relations.
During this time – when the outgoing president is free of political constraints and campaign commitments – Israel needs to be cautious.
It was during this transition period in 2016 that Obama allowed the UN Security Council to pass Resolution 2334, which condemned Israeli settlements and demanded their cessation.
While Israel saw the American abstention as a betrayal, there is concern now that President Joe Biden would allow a similar resolution to pass – perhaps this time even one that advocates for the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Such a resolution would be more likely if Trump wins. If Harris wins, Biden may hold back to avoid binding her administration’s hand.
The result of the US election stands to redefine Israel’s war options. Netanyahu might be adept at navigating such diplomatic challenges, but he knows that this period calls for caution.
While Israel has had strategic military gains in Gaza and Lebanon, with so much at stake, it needs to tread carefully to avoid getting ensnared in the crossfire of America’s political battleground.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-827068
--------
Hold Off On the Celebrations, Tehran Has Planned For the Long Game against Israel
November 1, 2024
The Israeli Air Force's attack on Iranian military targets significantly damaged Iran's ground-to-ground missile production capability and its air defense systems.
While Israel's attack can be considered successful and caused significant damage to Tehran, celebrations following the success of the Israeli attack are premature. As we have seen many times in the past, the perspective of most military correspondents, analysts, and retired generals is narrow and current, like looking through a keyhole without broader and deeper foresight into the future.
Consider some statements by retired generals, such as, "The war's step-by-step development has brought us closest to regional victory," or, "The message to Iran is clear: Israel's attack was preparation for a bigger blow."
Their thinking isn't coherent; they change direction like a weathervane with each new breeze. We should all remember that Iran still has about 3,000 ballistic missiles and rockets that can cause enormous damage to Israel's home front and population centers. More importantly, Israel's war, with US help, isn't just against Iran and its proxies but also against the axis of evil: Russia, China, and Iran, who have joined together to displace America from both its Middle East control and its economic assets and military bases, and of course against Israel, its close friend.
The Axis of evil has invested enormous resources to strengthen Iran. Hence, anyone who claims we are close to regional victory doesn't understand what they're talking about. To achieve regional victory would require defeating the axis of evil, and Israel has no such capability.
Moreover, not many years from today, we will see that the threat to Israel will increase tenfold, despite the success of Israel's attack on Iran. The number of ballistic missiles, rockets, and UAVs and the armament of Iran's terror armies and its proxies will increase greatly. The damage that the IDF did to missile bases and air defense in Iran will be repaired, and over the years, this will have no effect on Iran's continued strengthening with massive assistance from Russia and China.
For Israel to be able to confront future threats, it must go hand in hand with the US, European countries (NATO), and Arab countries willing to join it. It must be an axis that stands against the axis of evil of Russia, China, and Iran, meaning it must create a balance of terror where each side understands that if it strikes Israel or any other country in the alliance – it itself could be struck.
This can be compared to the balance of terror in the Cold War between the former Soviet Union and the US, where their mutual fears prevented the outbreak of World War III.
Israel needs its allies
Since Israel is the only democratic country in the Middle East, it needs to establish a strong military with the help of its allies (Israel doesn't have the resources to do this alone) and be the vanguard before the camp. For this, it needs to establish a missile corps whose effectiveness against enemy missile launchers is tens of times greater than aircraft; it must immediately work with the US to develop powerful lasers (the technology already exists in Israeli and US hands) with better effectiveness against ballistic missiles and enemy rockets. The advantage of the laser system is that the cost of intercepting enemy missiles and rockets is thousands of times cheaper than Arrow, David's Sling, and Iron Dome missiles.
We, therefore, need American help in deploying their missiles in Israel. Israel must also equip itself with tens of thousands of suicide drones and intelligence collection drones (with drones, Ukraine has amazed with its faithful and painful blows against the Russians both in defense and attack).
Israel needs to equip itself with multi-barrel anti-aircraft guns (‘Vulcan’), whose effectiveness against enemy drones is very high, and of course, it must increase its ground forces to the scope it had 20 years ago so it can fight in several land sectors simultaneously in a regional and multi-front war (due to drastic cuts to the ground forces in the last twenty years, it is unable to provide a response even in one combat sector, and therefore the other sectors are completely unprotected).
Two and a half years before the war broke out, I established five expert teams under the auspices of Reichman University and with the help of Professor Boaz Ganor, who currently serves as University President. The teams dealt with five main components of national security: security concept, ground forces' readiness for war, home front readiness for war, IDF readiness in defense and attack from enemy missiles, and rockets and drones, including the organizational culture in the IDF that needs to be put on the right path. To these, we added two appendices – logistics and maintenance capability in war and quality of career personnel. The problems, and more importantly, the solutions, are concentrated in an 80-page document titled ‘Recommendations for the Next Five Years and Israel's Preparation for War.’
The report was submitted and presented a year before the war to all decision-makers, including the prime minister, ministers, 12 National Security Council division heads, the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman, Defense Minister Gallant, and Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi.
Everyone received the report and its recommendations. Defense Minister Gallant and Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi incorporated the solutions we recommended as part of the Defense Ministry and military work plan. But to my great regret, throughout all the fighting that has continued for more than a year, and even though the Defense Minister and Chief of Staff decided to implement our recommendations in the report – nothing has been done.
There is mental and practical fixation, and the IDF is unprepared for future challenges.
In conclusion, what we need is not a large budget increase; instead, we must balance American economic and military aid of tens of billions of dollars between all the needs mentioned above, and not invest most of it only in aircraft, with the rest receiving scraps – as is done today.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-827103
---------
Egyptian Hatred amid Peace: A Machinery for Producing Hatred against Israeli Jews
By Mohamed Saad Khiralla
October 31, 2024
Egypt’s machinery for producing hatred against “Israeli Jews” operates tirelessly, around the clock, and in an extreme and furious manner, despite more than 45 years have passed since the peace treaty between the two countries signed in Washington on March 26, 1979.
I will provide four examples to prove my point with verified evidence. All the following excerpts are part of extended statements.
Al-Azhar Religious Institution
Al-Azhar is Egypt's official religious institution and is also described as the "citadel of moderate Islam worldwide." Its influence extends beyond Arab nations to many Muslim countries, which consider its views to be a binding reference. Although Al-Azhar is an institution of Sunni Islam, its statements regarding hostility toward Israel are nearly identical to the rhetoric of the Shi’ite clerics in Iran.
This is an excerpt from Al-Azhar’s statement commemorating the anniversary of the terrorist attack by Hamas militias against unarmed Israeli civilians in the Gaza border region on October 7, 2023:
“Al-Azhar deeply regrets the continued violence and destruction in Gaza for an entire year. It strongly condemns the ongoing terrorist aggression that continues to commit the worst forms of genocide and massacres, leaving thousands of martyrs and wounded, while the world watches in shameful silence and fails to take responsibility for this ongoing tragedy.”
In another paragraph, the institution writes, “The world must stand against this and understand that international silence and cowardice only serve to endorse, support, and encourage the occupier in committing more crimes and violations against the innocent, rightful people of Palestine.”
After the successful Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) operation that resulted in the death of terrorist leader Yahya Sinwar and two of his colleagues, Al-Azhar issued this statement: “Al-Azhar mourns the ‘martyrs of Palestinian resistance’ who fell at the hands of a criminal Zionist force, which has caused havoc, killing and destruction, and occupied our Arab land, all while an international community remains impotent [and as] silent as death, and international law is worth less than the ink used to write it.”
On October 18, a video was posted on Al-Azhar’s social media pages. It discussed Suhayb Ibn Sinan Al-Rumi, one of the early Muslims close to Muhammad who is also called "Abu Yahya," in an obvious comparison to Sinwar. The video was titled: “Blessed be the deal, Abu Yahya... and blessed be the deal of every martyr who defended his homeland and died for it.”
Al-Azhar's issues such official statements regularly throughout the year. Furthermore, its newspaper, Sawt Al-Azhar, directly supervised by Sheikh Ahmed Al-Tayeb, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, doesn’t stop at incendiary statements. It continues to publish caricatures mocking Jews, celebrating terrorist incidents from October 7, and portraying the terrorists as heroic resistance fighters.
Many entities affiliated with Al-Azhar promptly carry out the grand imam’s orders and policies. These entities, approximately 14 in number, contribute to the massive output of hatred through powerful means and with unrestricted support from other parties that favor institutionalized hatred as it currently exists.
Ministry of Education and Technical Education
In a disastrous media appearance that went unnoticed amid a flood of events, Mohamed Abdel Latif became Egypt’s Minister of Education and Technical Education on July 3, 2024. By virtue of his position, he directly oversees more than 25,657,000 students, according to the latest statistics from December 31, 2023 – a staggering number.
In that interview, he openly and proudly acknowledged the authoritarian military regime’s permanent approach and explained how “hatred is institutionalized and enmity is ingrained” in the minds and consciousness of millions of Egyptian students, directing these sentiments specifically against the State of Israel.
Certain Egyptian syndicates
About 55 professional and labor unions in Egypt hold similar sentiments. The following are excerpts from a statement by the Egyptian Bar Association mourning Sinwar.
“The Egyptian Bar Association, led by Mr. Abdel Halim Allam, President of the Bar Association and President of the Arab Lawyers Union, condemns the martyrdom of Palestinian leader Yahya Sinwar, head of the political bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement in Palestine (Hamas), who fell victim to treacherous hands while fighting the Zionist enemy.”
Allam’s stance may extend to other lawyers’ unions in Arab countries.
The General Medical Syndicate in Egypt also issued an official statement on October 16 titled "A Year of Destruction and Brutality: The Healthcare Sector in the Crossfire of Occupation," relying on Hamas figures regarding casualties, injuries, and the hospitals and health centers destroyed during the war.
In turn, the Egyptian Journalists Syndicate issued multiple statements containing severe insults directed at the State of Israel, which they refer to as the “Zionist enemy.” In all of these statements, they call for a “complete severing of relations and an end to all forms of ongoing normalization with the criminal Zionist enemy.”
President Abd el-Fattah el-Sisi
On Saturday, October 26, 2024, President Sisi issued a directive concerning Hajja Farhana, the oldest living resistance fighter who assisted Egyptian intelligence after 1967.
During a celebration by the Union of Arab Tribes and Egyptian Families commemorating the October War victory (in Egypt, the October War is considered a victory for the Egyptian army), he stated, “We must dedicate something in Sinai and in Egypt to honor Hajja Farhana. She is an exceptional woman and a model of the Egyptian Bedouin woman from Sinai who, in challenging times, gave so much for her country.” He said that a road and a neighborhood in Sinai should be named after her.
One can imagine the impact this has on the collective mindset of the Sinai community – in short, “The ideal model promoted by Egypt’s ruling regime is that of those who oppose the other.”
Sisi also expressed his gratitude to Hajja Farhana for her significant contributions, stating, “In Sinai, we will establish a neighborhood named after Hajja Farhana so that we will always remember the favor.”
When consider the role of state-owned media, officially controlled by Egyptian intelligence, and its significant contribution to the “hate and hostility toward Israel campaign,” which has been ongoing since the time of Abdel Nasser, we gain insight into the mindset we are entrenched in and what actions need to be taken (see the Magazine, “My longest 10 minutes” by Rami Mangoubi, June 1, 2007).
Is there any hope left for completely changing these conditions to achieve popular peace?
Yes – as Nelson Mandela said: “It always seems impossible until it’s done.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-827000
----------
Footage Of Late Muhammad Ali Praying Behind New Hezbollah Leader Resurfaces
October 31, 2024
By Omar Ahmed
Following Hezbollah’s announcement of the appointment of its new Secretary-General, Sheikh Naim Qassem, footage of the late legendary US boxer Muhammad Ali praying behind the Shia Muslim cleric back when he was the Lebanese resistance movement’s Deputy Secretary-General, has been making the rounds on social media, sparking memories of Ali’s visit to Beirut in 1985.
Qassem served in his previous role from 1991 under former leader Sayyed Abbas Al-Musawi, who was assassinated by Israel the following year. He was officially named the new Secretary-General almost a month after the assassination of Al-Musawi’s charismatic, long-time successor Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and just over a week after his own likely successor, Sayyed Hashem Safieddine, was killed in air strikes carried out by the occupation state on Beirut’s Dahieh neighbourhood.
In his first address in his new leadership role, Qassem, 71, spoke of the ongoing struggle against the Israeli offensive against the people of Lebanon and reiterated solidarity with the Palestinian resistance in Gaza.
“We will continue implementing the war plan outlined by Sayyed Nasrallah with the resistance leadership, and we will remain on the warpath within the defined political guidelines,” he said. “Supporting Gaza was imperative to confront the threat of Israel to the entire region through the gateway of Gaza, and Gaza’s people have the right to support, and everyone must stand by them.”
Solidarity with the Palestinian cause was something that resonated deeply with Muhammad Ali as well. He visited Beirut, including Dahieh, in 1985 as part of a humanitarian mission to negotiate the release of American and Saudi hostages, leveraging his global fame and influence to broker peace and show solidarity with those affected by the devastating Lebanese Civil War.
The three-time heavyweight champion of the world was deeply committed to social justice and often involved himself in political causes, including Palestinian solidarity and humanitarian advocacy, which motivated his visit to what was described at the time as the “most dangerous city on earth”.
In a previous visit to Beirut in 1974, as part of a Middle East tour, Ali said that, “The United States is the stronghold of Zionism and imperialism.” On his later trip, he stated, “I declare support for the Palestinian struggle to liberate their homeland and oust the Zionist invaders.”
The Beirut visit in February 1985 is included on the Muhammad Ali Centre’s website humanitarian timeline, where it states:
“Muhammad Ali negotiated the release of four US citizen-hostages and a Saudi Arabian hostage held by unknown captors in West Beirut, Lebanon, on behalf the Reagan administration. Hezbollah had announced its existence with a manifesto proclaiming its goal of the obliteration of Israel. While in Lebanon, Ali attended prayer at a mosque in Beirut.”
The mosque in question was the Imam Ali Reda Mosque, in Dahieh’s Bir Al-Abed area. Just a month later, a car bomb exploded outside the mosque, killing at least 45 people and injuring 175. The bombing was linked to the CIA. In a display of Muslim sectarian coexistence, Ali and his delegation joined the congregational prayer which included both Sunnis and Shias, led by a younger Sheikh Qassem.
However, Ali ultimately failed to secure the hostages release. At the time, the LA Times noted: “During his four-day stay in Beirut, Ali met with a few Shia Muslim clergymen and attended Muslim prayers. He made no contact with Lebanese government or Muslim militia leaders.” It added that, “He hoped that his influence as an American Muslim could win freedom for the five, believed to have been kidnaped by Shia Muslim radicals loyal to the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran.”
A condition for the hostages’ release was that Ali use his influence to help secure the freedom of several hundred Lebanese and Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli prisons. Ali kept his word and tried to do so, travelling to the occupation state four months later to advocate for their release.
Haaretz acknowledged that, “Ali even visited Israel, coming to ‘arrange for the freeing of the Muslim brothers imprisoned by Israel’ in 1985, when some 700 Lebanese Shi’ites were detained in the Atlit camp, against the background of the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon.
“Ali wanted to discuss the release of ‘all 700 brothers’ with the ‘very highest level in the country,’ but Israeli officials politely declined to enter the ring.”
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20241031-footage-of-late-muhammad-ali-praying-behind-new-hezbollah-leader-resurfaces/
---------
Political Interests In The Age Of Genocide: Is Europe Abandoning Israel?
October 31, 2024
By Anadolu Agency
On 14 October, Germany’s Foreign Minister, Annalena Baerbock, who continues to speak tirelessly against Russia and its war with Ukraine, went as far as providing a roundabout justification for the Israeli genocide in Gaza. “When Hamas terrorists hide behind people, behind schools … civilian places lose their protected status because terrorists abuse it,” Baerbock said in her address to the German parliament. Her logic is a carbon copy of that of Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and his extremist ministers.
The truth is that there is no credible proof that Palestinian fighters “hide behind civilians”, but there is an abundance of well-documented evidence that Israel uses civilians as human shields. This does not matter to the German government, which seemed unbothered by the fact that Israel is carrying out a genocide using, in part, German arms. Indeed, Germany is one of the countries that continues to supply Israel with weapons, despite the fact that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) are investigating Israel and Israeli leaders for genocide and extermination of the population of Gaza.
Unfortunately, but also unsurprisingly, Germany remains the biggest supporter of Israel within the European community. Germany, of course, is not alone. All western governments, led by Israel’s supreme benefactor, the United States, have, throughout the years and until now, continued to provide tangible and political support for Israel. They also do their utmost to shield Israel against any accountability, even though the genocide in Gaza continues to gain momentum, reaching the point of the systematic extermination of northern Gaza.
No common position on Israel in Europe
While countries like Spain and Ireland have taken advanced positions in criticism of Israel, others are still finding ways to delay any meaningful stance that could send a message to Tel Aviv that the world is fed up with its horrific crimes against the Palestinian people. Last May, Spain’s Labour Minister, who also serves the role of the deputy Prime Minister, Yolanda Diaz, dubbed Israeli crimes in Gaza a genocide, ending her statement with the declaration that “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”
This was followed on 6 June with Spain requesting to join South Africa’s case at the ICJ, accusing Israel of genocide. Other European countries have done the same, including Belgium and Ireland, demonstrating that European states still command a degree of independence in foreign policy and are able to behave ethically and in defiance of Washington or the collective position of Brussels. Aside from the models of Germany and Spain, there are those who are vying for a middle position and equal distance between those who are committing genocide and the victims of the genocide. This category includes France and Italy.
Both Paris and Rome were and, in fact, remain strong supporters of Israel and its “right to defend itself”, a right that they continue to bestow upon Tel Aviv despite its 57 years of Occupation of Palestine and even during the ongoing genocide. At the start of the Israeli war on Gaza, French President, Emmanuel Macron, and Italian Prime Minister, Giorgia Meloni rushed to offer limitless support to Netanyahu, again reaffirming Israel’s right to defend itself, thus approving the genocide of the Palestinian people. They also offered and delivered material, intelligence and political support to Israel in the ongoing war.
Israel started to get in the way of France and Italy
Due to the fact that the world’s public opinion turned against Israel, Netanyahu’s failure to achieve “total victory” in Gaza, and his desperate attempt to crush Hezbollah in Lebanon, both France and Italy have begun to question their blind support. For some European leaders, Israel has become a liability, and Netanyahu’s military adventurism is now infringing upon their own geopolitical claims in the Middle East.
The above assertion should explain Macron’s call on 6 October to halt arms deliveries to Israel. France continues to see Lebanon as a “French affair”, and an Israeli invasion of the country is a direct challenge to French influence. Meloni, on the other hand, while fully supportive of the Gaza genocide, found Israel’s targeting of the United Nations Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) a red line that must not be crossed, due to the fact that, according to the Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI), Italy is “the largest European contributor to UNIFIL’s forces.”
To speak about a fundamental shift in the European position regarding the Israeli crimes in Gaza and Lebanon would be, at best, premature and, at worst, a fallacy. However, a change is underway, led by Spain, Ireland, Norway, Belgium and others and, to some degree, felt in Paris as well.
Whether the slow shift among Israel’s Western supporters and protectors will become a permanent change in foreign policy is a question for future discussion. For now, even the most advanced European positions are failing to change the course of the war. Only the region’s own dynamics, the resilience and the resistance of the Palestinian and Lebanese peoples are capable of defeating Netanyahu’s strategy.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20241031-political-interests-in-the-age-of-genocide-is-europe-abandoning-israel/
---------
Continuing Arab Normalisation during Genocide, Serves It
October 31, 2024
By Nizar Sahli
Many countries around the world that have normalised relations with Israel have adopted positions on its crimes in Gaza, and on its policies inside the Occupied Territories, by expressing their rejection of the settlement policies, aggression and crimes of genocide in Gaza. From time to time, they call for imposing sanctions on ministers such as Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich and on the leaders of the settlements, considering them to represent the fascist line in the occupying state that is turning towards an apartheid system, destroying the idea of peace from its foundations. There are other countries that see the crimes of genocide and the policy of ethnic cleansing that Israel is adopting against the Palestinian people as an opportunity for them to express a punitive position against Israel by taking measures to sever relations with it, recall their ambassadors, stop supplying it with weapons, boycotting settlement goods, escalating its diplomatic tone by describing the Occupation’s actions as war crimes nd genocide, and by joining the lawsuit filed against Israel before the International Criminal Court.
Many regimes in the Arab world have been establishing “peace” and normalised relations with the occupying state for decades, some of which hopped on the normalisation bandwagon a few years ago, under the slogan of enhancing the chances of peace in the region, in a way that serves the aspirations of the Palestinian people. The reality of Israel’s relationship with the Arab world, or the normalising regimes and those allied with it, revealed an inferior Arab relationship in the form of a “friendship” with the Zionist mentality. The Arab use of normalisation had the deliberate goal of destroying the foundations on which inter-Arab relations are established and their relations with their central cause in Palestine and its consequences on the Arab world.
While normalised Arab regimes today use the pretext of common interests that unite them with the Occupier to establish peace, this pretext has been refuted by the owners of the cause themselves since the signing of the Oslo Accords, and until today. This is due to the Zionist mentality that maintains a narcissistic, arrogant, aggressive relationship with the Palestinians and with the Arabs, in general, to maintain a goal achieved by the crime of genocide in Gaza and growing aggression in Jerusalem and the West Bank.
Within this unique Arab case that is out of the ordinary due to the continuation of the relationship with an Occupier who commits crimes and massacres around the clock against their Palestinian brothers, falls the Arab relationship with the Zionist establishment, after a year and several weeks of its continuous crimes of genocide in Gaza, and their tendency towards continuing the relationship, rather than severing it. This is Arab “generosity” towards Israel that history will record in its pages of shame, as the crime of war and genocide committed by the Occupation does not anger the Arab official, nor does it disturb his relationship with the Occupier. There has not even been any tension in the relationship or a reprimand between friends, even if the balance of the relationship is always tilted in favour of the Occupier. This gives the Occupier the feeling that it will not be punished and, therefore, is not deterred from continuing its aggression and attacks. This opens the discussion about the nature of this normalisation and the relationship with the Occupier that leads to the official Arab acceptance of the Israeli reality.
At least for a year now, Arab politics has been confronting the aggression in a very painful and sad manner in the eyes of the Palestinian victims. The compassion and sympathy that the Zionist establishment receives from the Arab normalisation countries, in the form of food aid convoys, security coordination with them to continue its attacks, deter the Resistance and demonise it using the terrorism mould, has surpassed every shameful definition of normalisation and even went beyond Western hypocrisy in its empty talk about human rights.
The Arab ally of the Occupier is intentionally helpless, and paralysed by design and will, due to the defeat of a will that contradicts its helplessness and paralysis. The Arab ally of the Occupier has lost any political, security or moral value in its eyes and the eyes of their people who are watching under the destruction, oppression and cruelty taking place in Gaza. The Arab street is watching the positions of many countries towards the Occupation and its leaders and praises and rejoices over them. At the same time, it bitterly recalls the Arab positions and decisions made at the Riyadh Summit in November last year to break the siege on Gaza and provide it with humanitarian and health aid. The failure to implement them restored the balance of the Arab-Israeli relationship to an even heavier side in favour of the Occupation and its interests. Neither the normalised Arab countries have the ability to invest in what they promoted as being the reason for its alliance with the Occupier, nor do the rest of the Arab policies have any effectiveness on the Arab and international levels.
When the position against the crimes committed by the Occupation is expressed by Nicaragua, Scotland, Ireland, Chile, Colombia, Norway or Spain, the question is: Why is its effectiveness and resonance higher than any Arab position? When the French President, for example, told the Occupation’s Prime Minister that his country was established by an international resolution, the Zionist circles become angry with him, or when the UN Secretary-General expressed his position on the crimes of the Occupation. On the other hand, all these phrases disappear from the dictionary of Arab officials who meet with their Western counterparts, and they do not express such phrases to them, such as saying that any occupied nation has the right to resist its Occupier, that the deception, lies and crimes of the Zionist establishment are what aborted everything related to peace and the two-state solution or that anyone promoting the false and demonising Israeli narrative cannot do so in the Arab world, after experiencing the lies for more than seven decades.
We know why courage is absent from the Arab dictionary when it comes to the Americans, Westerners and Israelis. It is because there is a collective conviction among these people that regimes based on tyranny are illegitimate. There is no doubt that the positions that concern justice, humanity and the rights of the Palestinians are not translated on the ground in the Arab world with the courage to implement what the Arab official says. Therefore, Western and American visitors to the Arab region leave with a predetermined impression of the similarity of ideas with their Arab counterpart regarding loose terms about peace and security in the region and calling on all parties not to escalate. This is considered a win for the Zionist mentality, as it employs deceit in its official Arab relations in a manner that does not contradict the official Arab union with the Zionist narrative, after it constantly fails to market its narrative in the Arab street, and serves it in its genocide against Palestine.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20241031-continuing-arab-normalisation-during-genocide-serves-it/
---------
The Catastrophic Implications of Israel’s Anti-Unrwa Laws
Dr. Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg
October 31, 2024
On Monday evening, Israel’s Knesset approved two bills essentially barring the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East from operating in Israel and severely curtailing its activities in Gaza and the West Bank. The new measures are expected to come into force within 90 days.
The Knesset’s action was taken despite global appeals, including from the US and other friends of Israel, against this move. It is believed to be part of a larger plan to dismantle UNRWA and tighten the siege of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, deliberately increasing the suffering of the Palestinians in an attempt to force them to leave and to make the realization of a two-state solution more difficult.
If implemented, the new measures would have disastrous results for most of Gaza’s 2 million beleaguered residents, as UNRWA is their only lifeline — as it has been for the past 75 years, since the organization was established by the UN in 1949. It is the main provider of education and health services in the Strip. In addition to Gaza, UNRWA is responsible for Palestinian refugees in the West Bank and beyond. In 2023, about 6 million people were registered with the relief agency and eligible to receive its assistance.
The votes were shocking. One bill barring UNRWA from operating in Israeli territory was approved with 92 votes in favor and just 10 against, while the other — curtailing its activities in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank by banning state authorities from having any contact with the agency — passed by 87 votes to nine. According to UNRWA officials, it will be almost impossible for the agency to work in Gaza or the West Bank if Israel stops issuing entry permits to those territories or allowing coordination with its security forces. Since taking over the Gaza-Egypt border post and deploying its troops along the border in May, Israel controls all points of access to Gaza and the West Bank.
Israel has already de facto curtailed UNRWA’s activities in Gaza, where the population is facing starvation and dwindling supplies of medicines and vaccines. The new laws will make it worse.
Obstructing the work of UNRWA is a clear breach of the UN Charter. Member states have a duty to cooperate with the UN and its organs, especially those of a humanitarian, economic, social or cultural nature. Articles 1, 2, 55 and 56 of the charter, as well as many UN treaties and resolutions, make that duty unambiguous. There is a higher duty to refrain from obstructing their work. Failure to cooperate with UN agencies, let alone actively barring them from carrying out their duties, is thus a serious violation of the UN Charter. Chapter II makes membership of the UN itself conditional on respecting its charter.
UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini said in Riyadh on Wednesday that the bills were part of a larger effort by Israel to dismantle UNRWA, tighten the siege of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and make a two-state solution more difficult. Israel has made the dismantling of UNRWA an objective of the war, “in defiance of the General Assembly and Security Council resolutions and of the International Court of Justice, including with a plan to replace UNRWA in East Jerusalem with settlements,” Lazzarini said. He added that, in the past year, “at least 237 of our colleagues have been killed, many with their families,” and nearly “200 of our buildings have been damaged or destroyed, killing hundreds of displaced people seeking UN protection.”
Besides breaching the UN Charter, Israel’s action could trigger war crimes prosecutions, as it is likely that barring UNRWA from carrying out its duties will intensify the catastrophic conditions in Gaza, including starvation, with famine looming not far behind.
The US-based Human Rights Watch stated: “The Israeli government’s use of starvation as a weapon of war has proven deadly for children in Gaza.” It warned that children in Gaza have been dying from starvation-related complications. Doctors and families in Gaza have described children, as well as pregnant and breastfeeding mothers, suffering from severe malnutrition and dehydration, with hospitals ill-equipped to treat them.
The World Health Organization has also found “children dying of starvation” and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk said that Israel bore significant blame. He added that there was a “plausible” case that Israel was using starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza and that, if intent were to be proven, that would amount to a war crime.
International humanitarian law prohibits the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. This prohibition is clearly spelled out in the Geneva Conventions’ additional protocols and has become part of customary international law. In addition, Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court provides that intentionally starving civilians by “depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including willfully impeding relief supplies,” is a war crime.
At the core of the request for arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant made by the International Criminal Court’s prosecutor are allegations that the two were part of a plan to use “the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare” in Gaza.
Barring UNRWA from providing basic services will only add to the levels of starvation already observed in Gaza.
The international community should heed Lazzarini’s call for help by using “all the political, diplomatic and legal tools” to reject Israel’s attempts to dismantle UNRWA, sideline the UN and undermine multilateralism. This means that the bills need to be rescinded or their application put on hold. Secondly, he asked that UNRWA’s role is safeguarded “today and during the inevitably long and painful transition between a ceasefire and the day after.”
Late on Wednesday, the UN Security Council expressed “grave concern” over Israel’s new legislation and “strongly warned against any attempts to dismantle or diminish UNRWA’s operations and mandate, recognizing that any interruption or suspension of its work would have severe humanitarian consequences for millions of Palestinian refugees who depend on the agency’s services and also implications for the region.”
Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide said on Tuesday that Oslo was “initiating a UN resolution asking the International Court of Justice to clarify Israel’s legal obligations to ensure that aid reaches Palestinians,” adding that “UNRWA must survive. No country is above international law.”
There is a special obligation on Israel’s closest friends, such as the US, UK and Germany, to make sure that it rescinds the new legislation or suspends its implementation.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2577540
---------
For Iran, This Is A Pivotal Us Presidential Election
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh
October 31, 2024
Next week’s US presidential election holds immense significance, particularly for the Iranian government, whose strategic decisions and foreign policies are often shaped by the American leadership. The outcome of this election could either tighten or loosen the complex web of international sanctions, economic constraints and geopolitical dynamics that surround Iran.
For Tehran, it is not just another election taking place overseas but a decisive moment that could define its economic future, security posture and regional influence. Every shift in Washington’s power potentially realigns Iran’s ability to maneuver on the global stage and this election could very well set the course for the next crucial chapter in US-Iran relations, especially as tensions between Tehran and Israel have reached a critical point. This heightened volatility only amplifies the stakes of the US election, making it a pivotal moment for the region’s stability.
Historically, Iran has paid exceptionally close attention to US presidential elections, far more than it does to any other nation’s electoral process. The reason for this is deeply rooted in the intertwined political and economic fates of both countries since the establishment of the Islamic Republic in 1979. In the span of more than four decades, Iran has witnessed the policies of eight US presidents — each bringing varying degrees of pressure, confrontation or negotiation. While some, like Jimmy Carter, saw diplomatic bridges begin to crumble with the hostage crisis, others such as Barack Obama tried to restore ties through agreements like the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal. Now, with the upcoming election, the stakes are higher than ever. Iran’s future is, in many ways, intricately connected to the decision American voters will make on Nov. 5.
The policy divide between the two main candidates running for office, particularly regarding Iran, is vast and striking. On the one hand, Donald Trump, the Republican candidate, has consistently pushed for a return to the “maximum pressure” campaign that defined his first term. This strategy involved imposing harsh sanctions on Iran’s crucial energy sector, aiming to cripple the country’s economy and force its hand on issues like nuclear development and regional influence. Trump’s policy also targeted countries and corporations that violated US-imposed sanctions on Iran, isolating Tehran even further on the world stage. Under this approach, Iran’s already fragile economy would likely suffer immensely, creating a bleak outlook for its future.
On the other hand, Vice President Kamala Harris, as the Democratic presidential nominee, is expected to continue the Biden administration’s policies, which emphasize diplomacy over confrontation. The Biden administration has shown restraint, particularly in its dealings with Iran, seeking to rebuild diplomatic bridges, and Harris is likely to follow suit. When it comes to Iran’s nuclear program, Harris would probably push for a return to the JCPOA, the nuclear deal that Trump famously abandoned. A Harris administration would aim to bring Iran back into compliance with the nuclear agreement, potentially offering relief from sanctions in exchange for stricter oversight of its nuclear activities. This approach stands in stark contrast to Trump’s confrontational policies.
It is also important to point out that the timing of the upcoming US election is crucial, occurring at a moment when tensions between Iran and Israel have reached unprecedented heights. Over the last year, the two nations have edged closer to direct military confrontation, crossing numerous red lines along the way. Both Israeli and Iranian forces have engaged in retaliatory strikes, with the risk of full-scale war looming over the region. The stakes of this election are, therefore, even more significant, as the policies of the next US president could either fuel or quell this explosive situation. A return to Trump’s more aggressive stance might escalate the conflict, while a more diplomatic approach could create opportunities for de-escalation.
The current Biden-Harris administration has taken a more measured approach regarding the Iran-Israel conflict, attempting to prevent further escalation. For instance, the White House has urged caution when it comes to Israel’s military actions, especially in relation to Iran’s nuclear sites. The current administration seems to be focused on diplomacy as a key tool for resolving these issues, in contrast to the hawkish rhetoric of the Trump era. However, should Trump return to office, the chances of a more hard-line stance are high. He recently expressed support for Israel launching strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities, signaling that a second Trump administration would likely ramp up the pressure on Tehran, bringing the region closer to open conflict.
It is worth noting that the Iranian government has already endured four years of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” policy and the consequences were severe. Iran’s oil exports, once a major source of revenue, plummeted to record lows. The sanctions crippled the economy, causing the Iranian currency to lose much of its value, which in turn sparked inflation and widespread economic hardships. The government in Tehran struggled to manage these crises, as financial resources dwindled and social unrest grew. Trump’s economic warfare left deep scars on the Iranian economy and a return to such policies would likely exacerbate these challenges, leaving the Iranian government in an even more precarious position.
It is also critical to recall the unprecedented actions taken by the Trump administration, such as the targeted killing of Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran’s elite Quds Force. This move, which shocked the world, escalated tensions between the US and Iran to new heights. For the first time in recent memory, the two nations stood on the brink of war. The assassination was a stark reminder of the unpredictable nature of Trump’s foreign policy, which Iran has not forgotten. The specter of further such confrontations looms if Trump is reelected.
In conclusion, as the world watches the US presidential election, the Iranian government is more invested in the outcome than ever before. The stakes for Tehran are incredibly high, as the gap between the two candidates’ policies on Iran is vast. While one candidate may bring renewed pressure and confrontation, the other offers the possibility of diplomacy.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2577553
--------
Myanmar’s Youth Exodus Weakening the Military Regime
Dr. Azeem Ibrahim
October 31, 2024
In Myanmar today, a crisis of unprecedented scale is underway, and it is not only about military oppression, forced conscription or human rights abuses — it is about a mass exodus of young people who see no future in their homeland.
Driven by fear, a lack of opportunity and deepening poverty, Myanmar’s youth are fleeing across the borders into Thailand and Cambodia in staggering numbers. This drain of talent, resources and labor is eroding Myanmar’s societal and economic stability, forcing the military to conscript members of ethnic minorities, including Rohingya, in a desperate bid to fill the ranks in its dwindling army. While the junta may see this as a temporary fix, the longer-term impact could prove disastrous to its survival.
Young people have always been at the heart of any country’s labor force. They fuel economic growth, fill workplaces and drive societal progress. But in Myanmar, the opposite is happening; young people are leaving because they have no choice.
Since the February 2021 coup, Myanmar’s economy has spiraled downward, with international sanctions, severe inflation and a plummeting currency. Employment opportunities have dwindled as businesses shut down or relocate. According to recent estimates, more than 2 million people have been displaced internally and thousands of young people have risked their lives to escape to neighboring Thailand and Cambodia. The International Labour Organization reported that Myanmar’s labor force shrank by more than 8 percent in the first 12 months after the coup, a staggering blow that reflects not only lost workers but also the loss of a generation’s potential.
One immediate consequence of this brain drain is the Myanmar military’s increasingly coercive response. Struggling with worker shortages, the junta has resorted to the forced conscription of Rohingya and other minorities — groups already marginalized, oppressed and routinely subjected to discrimination. The military’s desperation is underscored by its recruitment of individuals it has historically oppressed.
Recent reports from rights organizations reveal an uptick in forced conscription from Rakhine State and other minority regions. Rohingya men, in particular, have been targeted, often with little regard for age, health or even willingness to serve. This strategy might shore up numbers for now, but it is a dangerous game, as it only deepens ethnic divisions and further alienates communities already resistant to the junta’s rule.
The exodus and forced conscription are also weakening Myanmar’s health, education and skilled labor sectors. With doctors, teachers, engineers and tech professionals leaving in droves, the already fragile infrastructure is deteriorating rapidly. Myanmar, once a Southeast Asian leader in terms of literacy and vocational skills, is experiencing a profound backslide. Hospitals and clinics lack staff, with many healthcare professionals now working in Thailand as migrant laborers, where they are often underpaid and overworked. Schools across Myanmar, especially in rural areas, have closed or are functioning at minimal capacity, leaving millions of children without education. The long-term effect is a country deprived of professionals essential for rebuilding the economy and society.
But beyond the economic and social fallout, the brain drain is profoundly political. Young people are fleeing not only because of economic hardship but because of a lack of hope and a rejection of military rule. These are the same people who, in 2020, helped elect the National League for Democracy with overwhelming support, only to see their democratic dreams crushed by the military. Every young person who leaves Myanmar represents a vote of no confidence in the junta, a rejection of its legitimacy and a signal that they see no role for themselves in the regime’s authoritarian vision. By depriving the country of its youth, the junta is undercutting its own legitimacy and future.
Furthermore, the flight of Myanmar’s youth to neighboring countries is straining regional relations. Thailand and Cambodia, already facing domestic issues related to unemployment and economic instability, are now host to tens of thousands of Myanmar refugees. This surge creates logistical, social and financial burdens on their respective governments. It also places pressure on these nations to take political stances on Myanmar’s internal affairs, as the humanitarian crisis increasingly spills across borders. And yet, Thailand and Cambodia have largely refrained from taking strong stances, reluctant to antagonize the Myanmar junta with which they share economic ties and complex political dynamics. However, the longer this exodus continues, the harder it will be for these countries to remain neutral.
In the longer term, the exodus and forced conscription highlight the growing unsustainability of Myanmar’s military regime. Dictatorships are notoriously bad at managing complex modern economies or fostering an environment where skilled professionals can thrive. Myanmar is no exception. By driving out its young people, Myanmar is losing the very human capital it needs to survive, let alone rebuild. And with each new conscripted soldier, the junta’s reliance on force over governance grows clearer — as does its fundamental weakness.
The international community must recognize that the exodus of Myanmar’s youth is not just a symptom but an indictment of the junta’s failed governance. Countries like Thailand and Cambodia, burdened with the influx, must engage more directly with international bodies to coordinate a humanitarian response and hold Myanmar’s rulers accountable. For Myanmar’s future to be secured, pressure must be brought to bear on the military regime to restore democracy, protect human rights and stop the forced conscription of its most vulnerable citizens. Only then can Myanmar begin to reclaim its future, one in which its young people can finally see a place for themselves in their homeland.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2577557
---------
URL: https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/tehran-egypt-hezbollah-myanmar-europe-arab/d/133597
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