Middle East Press On: Türkiye, US, Palestinian, Hamas, Israel, Lebanon, EU: New Age Islam's Selection, 1 March 2025
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
1 March 2025
Growing Threat Of US Isolationism Is A Danger To The US-Israel Alliance
Why A Palestinian State Is A Security Risk Israel Cannot Afford
Don’t Hand Hamas A Posthumous Victory By Stopping To Celebrate Life
Israel Must Turn Grief From Bibas Murder Into Purpose And Strength
The BBC’s Surrender To Pro-Israel Lobbying: A History Of Censorship And Bias
Israel Is On The Verge Of Going To War With International Judicial Bodies
The Crucial Role Of The Palestinian People In Resisting Displacement
Saudi Support Vital If Lebanon Is To Rise Again
Turkiye Sits On The Fence Amid US-EU Split
-----
Growing Threat Of Us Isolationism Is A Danger To The Us-Israel Alliance
By Adam Milstein
March 1, 2025
Throughout history, political movements, even those not initially antisemitic, have often seen their most radical factions steer them toward antisemitism.
In recent years, segments of the American left have embraced militant Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, Critical Race Theory (CRT), Marxist ideologies, and policies that exacerbate societal divisions.
This shift has, at times, fostered antisemitic sentiments as observed in rhetoric from certain college campuses, organizations, such as the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), Jewish Voice for Peace, national unions, civil rights groups, and members of the “Squad.”
For instance, a recent report from StopAntisemitism revealed that 72% of Jewish college students in the United States feel unwelcome, with over half having faced antisemitism.
The Republican Party has successfully positioned itself against many of these divisive issues, recognizing their danger to the American way of life and the direct opposition to liberal US values. The new administration has already made strides in addressing these social challenges and affirmed itself as a strong ally of the Jewish people and the State of Israel.
However, the GOP has a blind spot for a Trojan horse gaining momentum within its ranks: a faction of “America First” isolationists who promote policies that, if unchecked, could threaten both America’s global standing and its allies, particularly Israel.
Defining themselves sometimes as “restrainers,” these figures advocate a philosophy of strengthening domestic affairs by rallying against most types of foreign aid and limiting military engagement abroad. While a measure of restraint in foreign policy is healthy, taken to an extreme, it risks weakening America’s global leadership and its commitment to strategic allies. The Jewish community must recognize this emerging threat and its potential to undermine the US-Israel alliance.
The United States cannot afford to completely retreat from the world stage without severe consequences for its own and global security.
History has shown that when America stands back, adversaries quickly fill the vacuum – whether in the Middle East, Europe, Asia, or Latin America. A disengaged America emboldens hostile regimes, undermines global stability, and endangers our interests and allies.
Turning away from Israel, as advocated by the America First isolationists, would send a dangerous message to other US allies: America is no longer a reliable partner.
The isolationist sentiment echoes past missteps, such as the US’s reluctance to confront the growing threats of Nazi Germany in the 1930s. If the US pulls back now, nations that rely on American support may be forced to seek alliances elsewhere, including with adversaries like China, Russia, and Iran.
Isolationism on the far Right
The ideology of some within the America First isolationist movement mirrors that of the anti-military Left. They are skeptical of military spending, distrustful of allies, and uncomfortable with America’s role as a global leader. This shift is evident in the rhetoric of high-profile figures.
• Tucker Carlson, a leading voice of the movement, has criticized US support for Israel, portraying it as an unnecessary entanglement. He has also downplayed Iran’s threat and questioned whether defending Israel aligns with American interests.
• Key Defense Department officials are stocking critical policy positions with personnel who advocate for dramatically reducing America’s military footprint abroad. Some have dismissed Iran’s missile attacks on Israel as “moderate responses” and opposed US action against Iranian proxies, such as the Houthis in Yemen.
• Certain senior State Department advisers have made troubling comments about Israel, with one arguing that the Jewish state’s “victimhood narrative” is unsustainable and another prioritizing opposition to the so-called deep state over threats from Iran, China, and Russia.
• Nick Fuentes and the Groypers comprise an openly antisemitic faction gaining traction among far Right activists, spreading conspiracy theories about Jewish influence in American politics while aligning with America First isolationists on disengaging from Israel.
US support for Israel matters
The US-Israel alliance is not just about shared values; it’s about strategic security. As former US secretary of state Alexander Haig once described, Israel is “the largest American aircraft carrier in the world that cannot be sunk.” It serves as America’s frontline defense in the Middle East, protecting US interests without requiring American soldiers.
Iran is a uniquely dangerous malevolent global actor. Its nuclear ambitions, sponsorship of terrorism (through Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis), and attacks on US forces would only increase if America disengaged from the region.
The US is a direct beneficiary of Israel’s intelligence, technology, and military innovation. Projects, such as the Iron Dome and David’s Sling have saved the US billions in defense costs, while safeguarding American lives.
As the only democracy in the Middle East, Israel upholds the very freedoms America claims to champion. Simply put, Israel is America’s most reliable and important ally in the Middle East.
Extremes within your camp
Overreliance on the Left led to a failure in recognizing the rise of antisemitism within progressive circles. Today, we risk making a similar mistake with the isolationist elements in the America First movement. Extremist voices, regardless of where they originate, never serve our society.
The rise of America First isolationists is a dangerous trend. If left unchecked, it could unravel decades of US-Israel cooperation and weaken the US’s standing in the world. Americans who value our role as global leader must recognize this threat and act decisively against it.
A strong, engaged US is essential for global stability. We must push back against isolationist rhetoric and demand continued bipartisan support for Israel.
Israel’s security is not just a Jewish issue. It is a core American strategic interest.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-844090
-----
Why A Palestinian State Is A Security Risk Israel Cannot Afford
By David Ben-Basat
February 28, 2025
The demand for Palestinian statehood remains one of the most debated and complex issues in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
For decades, the international community has argued over whether a Palestinian state would bring peace and stability or pose a serious security threat to Israel.
Some see it as a fundamental right, while others argue that the conflict is not just about borders but about ideology and religion, making statehood an inadequate solution.
Supporters of a Palestinian state argue that all people have the right to self-determination, and Palestinians are no exception. They believe a two-state solution, backed by many global leaders, would allow Israel and Palestine to coexist peacefully as sovereign nations.
Governments and organizations, including the European Union, Russia, China, and the United Nations, have endorsed this idea. The UN has already granted Palestinians non-member observer status, signaling international recognition of their aspirations.
Advocates claim a Palestinian state would reduce dependence on foreign aid, improve governance, and decrease the motivation for terrorism.
Many Israelis also once supported this vision, believing that granting Palestinians statehood would remove grievances that fuel violence and create a stable, self-sustaining entity. However, history has shown that each step toward Palestinian independence has led to increased instability.
Hopes for a “New Middle East” after the Oslo Accords in the 1990s quickly turned into waves of terror. Suicide bombings, bus explosions, and mass killings shattered expectations of peace. The First and Second Intifadas resulted in thousands of deaths on both sides.
In 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza. Rather than fostering peace, the disengagement led to Hamas’ takeover and the transformation of Gaza into a base for rocket attacks against Israel. Today, Hamas prioritizes weapons and warfare over infrastructure and governance, using international aid to strengthen its military capabilities rather than improve civilian life.
Polling among Palestinians, even after the October 7 attacks, shows strong support for Hamas and its violent tactics.
A Birzeit University survey found that nearly 90% of Palestinians would vote for Hamas in new elections. Similar surveys indicate that most Palestinians do not accept Israel’s right to exist, raising doubts about whether a Palestinian state would genuinely seek peace.
The 2006 Palestinian legislative elections resulted in 80% of elected officials being Hamas members. No further elections have been held since. After Hamas’ victory, the group violently seized Gaza, executing Fatah members and forcing others to flee. This internal strife suggests a Palestinian state would likely be plagued by division, instability, and extremist control.
A Palestinian state in the West Bank would pose an immediate and severe security threat to Israel. While the Palestinian Authority, controlled by Fatah, claims to accept Israel’s existence, Hamas openly calls for its destruction.
The threat of Hamas gaining control
If Hamas were to gain control of the West Bank, Israel’s key cities, including Tel Aviv, as well as Ben-Gurion Airport – would be within direct rocket range.
Israel’s narrow geography makes such a scenario particularly dangerous. These borders would be difficult, if not impossible, to defend.
Tzipi Livni, who led past negotiations with PA President Mahmoud Abbas, admitted after their last meeting that “There is no one to talk to.” Abbas’ repeated failures to unite Palestinian factions further highlight the challenges of establishing a stable state.
Supporters of Palestinian statehood often overlook the deep ideological nature of the conflict.
Islamist groups view all of Israel as Muslim-owned (waqf) land and refuse to accept any compromise. This is not just about territorial disputes – it is a fundamental rejection of Israel’s right to exist.
Israel has made multiple peace offers, all of which were rejected. Even generous proposals – including the 2020 Trump peace plan, which offered a Palestinian state on 70% of the West Bank with $50 billion in economic aid – were dismissed outright.
Therefore, during his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump reversed his stance, saying, “The two-state solution is going to be very, very difficult, and I’m not sure it can work anymore.” His change in position reflects a broader shift in global attitudes. As Palestinian violence continues, more world leaders recognize that statehood may not bring peace but rather embolden extremists.
A FEBRUARY poll by Direct Polls found that 71% of Israelis oppose Palestinian statehood, citing the October 7 attacks as a key factor.
Over half also reject a peace deal with Saudi Arabia if it includes a Palestinian state.
Trump's proposal
Meanwhile, President Trump’s proposal for voluntary migration from Gaza has 80% support among Israelis.Hamas leaders have made their stance clear: They will never accept Israel’s existence. Their calls for Israel’s destruction and the October 7 massacre they carried out demonstrate that they have no interest in coexistence.
Abbas’ promise to stop payments to terrorists lasted only a few days before he reinstated them under a different name. Recently, he reaffirmed his support for “martyrs” and prisoners, declaring, “Even if we have just one cent left, it will go to them.”
The PA continues to glorify terrorists in school curricula and public statements. The recent discovery of West Bank-based terror cells plotting attacks on Israeli civilians serves as yet another reminder of the dangers that would come with Palestinian statehood.
The events of October 7 marked the end of the Palestinian statehood dream. Even Abbas understands this reality. Israeli politicians who continue to advocate for a Palestinian state must face the facts.
Palestinian textbooks remain filled with incitement, and terror attacks from the West Bank persist. The notion of peace with Hamas is an illusion. Every attempt to promote Palestinian independence has resulted in more violence, not less.
A Palestinian state is not the solution – it is a security risk Israel cannot afford to take.
Until Palestinian leadership fundamentally changes and renounces terrorism, the chances of a Palestinian state remain close to zero.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-844094
-----
Don’t Hand Hamas A Posthumous Victory By Stopping To Celebrate Life
By Jonathan Lieberman
March 1, 2025
I have spent the last two weeks in Perth, Western Australia, celebrating the bar mitzvah of my second grandson.
It was an intensely emotional and joyful experience, made even more significant because my entire family, en masse, uprooted themselves and flew to the other side of the world to share in this momentous occasion.
The beauty of our togetherness, the unity of generations coming together in song, prayer, and festivity, was a showcase of the resilience of our people and the deep, unbreakable bonds of family.
And yet, there was a massive elephant in the room – a dark, suffocating presence that clouded our happiness. Just days before the celebration, the bodies of the Bibas children, tiny Kfir and his older brother Ariel, were returned home together with that of Oded Lifschitz (HY”D) after they had been brutally taken from this world. The babies’ mother, Shiri, was “found” and returned a day later.
The horror of their fate, the unspeakable suffering they endured, loomed over us like a storm. The images of their tiny coffins, paraded as grotesque trophies by Hamas in a sickening propaganda display, were burned into our minds, haunting the very air we breathed.
Trembling with emotion
During the celebration, the synagogue’s rabbi – who is also the father of the bar mitzvah boy – stood before the congregation, his voice trembling with emotion. He spoke of his indescribable fortune to stand here and witness his son stepping into Jewish adulthood, to celebrate his journey, to see him grow.
And then, he reminded us all of another father – a father who had two sons of his own, sons who will never have the chance to stand on a bimah, to chant from the Torah, to become men in the eyes of their community.
That father will never see them mature, never embrace them in pride and joy. His sons are gone, their lives stolen, their futures erased in an act of unspeakable cruelty.
THE EMOTION in the room was overwhelming. The weight of this tragic juxtaposition pressed down on all of us. You could feel it in the air, in the way people held their breath, in the way hands clenched into fists of silent anguish.
There was hardly a dry eye in the synagogue. Many of the congregation wore yellow badges, the symbol of solidarity with the hostages still held captive, a small but significant gesture of defiance against the darkness that threatens to consume us.
Among those present was Pastor Mark Leach, co-founder of “Never Again Is Now,” a movement across Australia dedicated to making antisemitism unthinkable. A devout Anglican, a leader of faith, a man of principle, he stood before us in unwavering solidarity.
The rabbi introduced him as “not probably, but definitely the foremost supporter of Jews and protester against antisemitism.” Pastor Leach offered a short but deeply heartfelt blessing to the community, reaffirming his resolute commitment to our people, to justice, to truth. His words were a balm to our wounded hearts, a reminder that even in our darkest hours, we are not alone.
Also in the congregation was an extraordinary figure – Rabbi Dr. Shalom Coleman, a former rabbi of this very community. At 106 years young, he still drives, still prays daily, still teaches Torah with the sharpness of a man half his age. His blessing upon my grandson and our entire family was something beyond words.
To witness a man who has seen more than a century of Jewish history, who has endured the tides of time with steadfast faith, who has watched generations rise and fall, was nothing short of awe-inspiring. His presence alone was a testament to the endurance of our people, a living, breathing symbol of survival.
THE STARK contrast of emotions – our gratitude for the privilege of celebrating this milestone, versus the gut-wrenching sorrow and fury at the unfathomable cruelty of our enemies – was almost too much to bear.
It left us all grappling with a question that feels impossible to answer: How do we continue with our lives, with our joys and celebrations, when such unbearable grief and injustice persist?
This very question was examined deeply by psychologists and scholars in the aftermath of the Holocaust. How did survivors, many of whom had lost their entire families, find the strength to rebuild, to marry, to bring new life into the world, to dance at weddings, to sing at bar mitzvahs?
Research shows that celebration was not a betrayal of their pain, but rather an act of defiance. Survivors reported that the very act of rejoicing – of lighting Shabbat candles, of making kiddush, of dancing – was an assertion of life in the face of death.
It was a means of reclaiming what had been stolen, a declaration that the Jewish spirit could not be extinguished.
There are haunting yet powerful accounts of Jews celebrating even in the ghettos and concentration camps. In the Lodz Ghetto, despite the starvation and despair, families still attempted to mark bar mitzvahs in secret, whispering blessings over scraps of bread when challah was an impossible dream.
In Auschwitz, there are testimonies of prisoners singing fragments of Jewish songs, muttered under their breath as they marched to forced labor. Some even recount how, on rare occasions, a clandestine wedding would be performed – a quiet act of love in the heart of hell.
These moments of celebration, however small, were acts of resistance. They were declarations that even in the face of annihilation, we would not surrender our humanity.
We must keep celebrating
THE LESSON we must take from this is clear: If we cease to celebrate, if we allow the horrors of our enemies to rob us of our joy, then they have won an immeasurable victory.
Celebration is not a denial of pain; it is a response to it. It is how we tell the world – and ourselves – that we endure. That we will not be broken. That we will raise our children, and we will teach them Torah – and we will rejoice in their milestones, even as we grieve.
But while we celebrate, we must also remember. We must carry the pain of the lost, and we must never allow their names to fade into oblivion. And, sad to say, we must never forgive.
Forgiveness is reserved for those who seek it with genuine remorse, for those who repent, for those who atone. There is no atonement for what was done to the Bibas children, no redemption for the monsters who paraded their deaths as propaganda.
We celebrate because we must. We grieve because we cannot do otherwise. And we fight – by living, by remembering, by never letting go of our past, and by never ceasing to build our future.
To paraphrase philosopher Emil Fackenheim, we will not hand Hamas a posthumous victory.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-844084
----
Israel Must Turn Grief From Bibas Murder Into Purpose And Strength
By Nadav Weil
February 28, 2025
An infant, a toddler, and a mother were brutally murdered. The father was left alive, a calculated act of cruelty designed to inflict unbearable psychological torment.
We already know the menacing monstrous nature of Hamas. This should come as no surprise. But do not diminish their actions by calling them animals.
They are human beings who have chosen the depths of darkness. We will defeat them not by becoming like them, but by remaining who we are. It is by embodying light that we will cast out the darkness.
I see people write, “The world watches blindly.” But let us be precise: the world is vast. There are those who remain oblivious to what is happening in Israel. There are those who know and remain indifferent because it does not touch their immediate reality. And there are those – failed international institutions, cynical politicians, manipulative voices – who gaslight, distort, and indeed, ignore our suffering. Our enemies are numerous, cunning, and relentless. But we will endure, as we always have.
I see others proclaim, “We will never forgive, we will never forget.” But where does that lead us? To fight fire with fire is to risk consuming ourselves in the flames. Our history reminds us of this truth; Masada, where zealots chose death over surrender. These were moments of defiance, but they were also lessons written in ash and ruin.
Strength is not merely in the sword but in the endurance of our people who, time and again, have turned destruction into rebirth.
History has shown us this over and over. Whether in cycles of vengeance between feuding nations or within divided societies, unprocessed grief and anger often lead to prolonged suffering.
The weight of past conflicts, from the endless bloodshed of vendettas to the ruin of civilizations that could not escape their cycles of retribution, reminds us that true strength lies in acceptance and transformation. So how do we resist Hamas, a force of destruction?
How do we resist Hamas, a force of destruction?
One answer lies in the earth. The earth is both a giver and a taker of life. When scorched by fire, it does not remain barren; it transforms.
The ashes of devastation become the soil of renewal. So, too, must we take our suffering and use it as a force of transformation – not to spread more pain, but to rebuild, to grow, to create life from loss.
Just as the scorched forests of the Carmel regrow after devastation, or as kibbutzim were built from the barren land, we have always found a way to turn destruction into renewal. Our grief must be the seed of our future, not the weight that holds us in the past.
Finding balance in agonizing times
These are agonizing times. Our wounds are raw, constantly reopened before they can heal. The grief is suffocating, the rage overwhelming. It is tempting to lash out, to let pain beget pain.
But we must find balance within ourselves. Hamas will not be remembered. Our pain will not be remembered. In time, all things fade into history’s oblivion.
Yet, here and now, in this fleeting moment, we have a choice. Just as the sun continues to rise after even the longest night, or as a river carves its way through stone with persistence, we can also find resilience in what remains. We must be stars in the night sky: the darker the night the brighter we will shine.
Our strength has never been in numbers or weapons alone, but in the spirit that refuses to be extinguished. We can care for one another. We can tend to our anger, our sorrow, our suffocating grief. We can acknowledge our frustration with the world as it is.
And then, we can choose to turn this darkness into light. By doing so, we ensure that the names of Kfir, Ariel, Shiri, and all we have lost are not merely remembered but honored in the most meaningful way: by affirming life and our commitment as Jews to be a light unto the nations of the world.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-844080
------
The BBC’s Surrender To Pro-Israel Lobbying: A History Of Censorship And Bias
By Nasim Ahmed
February 28, 2025
The latest capitulation by the BBC due to pressure from Israeli flunkies is an ideal time to review the history of the broadcaster’s surrender over the years. The removal of Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone from BBC iPlayer after pressure from pro-Israel groups fits into a long pattern of the broadcast cooperation caving in whenever it is faced with sustained lobbying from groups determined to control how Israel is portrayed in the media.
The BBC is anything but independent when it comes to covering Israel and Palestine. A recent investigation by Owen Jones, based on interviews with 13 current and former BBC journalists, reveals how senior figures skew coverage in Israel’s favour, ignore internal complaints, and suppress reports on Israeli atrocities. Journalists describe an environment where management routinely dismisses concerns about bias, with one calling the racism “more overt than ever.” The report details how the BBC downplays Israeli war crimes, erases historical context and systematically devalues Palestinian lives.
Jones’ investigation adds weight to the long history of pro-Israel lobbying influencing the BBC’s editorial decisions, a history meticulously documented by Ilan Pappé in Lobbying for Zionism on Both Sides of the Atlantic. Pappé provides a comprehensive account of how Zionist lobbying has shaped political and media discourse since the 19th century, with the BBC’s repeated submission to pro-Israel pressure serving as just one example of how lobbying efforts have shaped Britain’s institutions in the 21st century
One of the earliest and most blatant examples of BBC capitulation came in 2009, when it refused to air a humanitarian appeal for Gaza during Israel’s bombardment. The Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) had put together an appeal to raise funds for Palestinians subjected to Israeli brutality, but the BBC rejected it, citing concerns about impartiality. The real reason was pressure from pro-Israel groups, who viewed any humanitarian aid to Gaza as a threat to Israel’s global image. It was an absurd decision and condemned as such. The BBC regularly covers humanitarian disasters, whether they are earthquakes, wars, or refugee crises. But in this case, it sided with lobbyists who insisted that Palestinians should not receive the same coverage as other victims of conflict.
In 2014, during another major Israeli assault on Gaza, BBC journalists faced internal censorship and external pressure. Reporters such as Jeremy Bowen and Jon Donnison found their coverage softened, with language adjusted to downplay the impact of Israeli air strikes. The BBC’s coverage disproportionately highlighted Hamas rockets while failing to give equal weight to the far greater destruction and casualties caused by Israel’s bombardment. This was not an accident. As Pappé explains, the BBC’s editorial team was under enormous pressure from Israel lobby groups, with the constant threat of complaints, legal action and political consequences hanging over its coverage. Under this pressure, the BBC’s editorial team systematically adjusted its reporting to avoid framing Israel as the aggressor, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
The BBC has also been forced to retract or revise reports about Israeli settler violence. In multiple instances, headlines that initially suggested Israel was responsible for violent attacks were changed after pressure from pro-Israel advocacy groups. Pappé highlights how pro-Israel organisations work to ensure that language describing Israeli aggression is softened or entirely removed. In some cases, entire reports were taken down or significantly altered to reflect a more neutral or Israeli-favourable perspective.
In 2015, the BBC adjusted its reporting on Palestinian journalist Muhammad Al-Qeq, who was arrested by Israeli forces and subjected to administrative detention without charge. The BBC initially framed his case in neutral terms, highlighting concerns from human rights organisations about the lack of due process. But after pressure from pro-Israel lobbyists, the coverage shifted, subtly reinforcing Israeli claims that Al-Qeq had ties to militant groups, despite no formal charges or evidence. This pattern of quietly adjusting language and emphasis is a recurring tactic, allowing the BBC to avoid outright retractions while still reshaping the narrative to satisfy the Zionist lobby.
The BBC’s handling of the 2021 Sheikh Jarrah protests was another moment that exposed its willingness to alter its coverage under pressure. When Israeli occupation forces forcibly removed Palestinian families from their homes in occupied East Jerusalem, the BBC framed it as a simple property dispute rather than a case of ethnic cleansing. This was the result of direct pressure from pro-Israel organisations such as UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) and the Board of Deputies, who consistently work behind the scenes to ensure that BBC language is adjusted to serve Israel’s interests. The words used in reporting are not just semantics; they define the entire narrative. By calling the expulsions a property dispute, the BBC stripped away the political reality of occupation and turned a clear case of forced displacement into a legal technicality.
The BBC’s failure to properly report on the killing of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in 2022 further illustrated this problem. Abu Akleh, a respected Al Jazeera journalist, was shot by Israeli occupation forces while covering an Israeli military raid into the occupied West Bank. Multiple independent investigations, including by the UN and forensic analysts, concluded that she was deliberately targeted. Yet the BBC’s initial coverage hesitated to attribute blame, using vague language like “died during a clash” rather than stating outright that Israeli forces had killed her. The hesitation to hold Israel accountable was a result of the same pressures that have shaped its coverage for years.
The extent of this influence cannot be overstated. The BBC has long struggled with accusations of bias, but its repeated deference to pro-Israel groups shows that the issue is not impartiality but submission. It is clear that pro-Israel organisations have built an effective system of pressuring newsrooms, with the BBC being one of their key targets. The tactic is simple — mobilise a flood of complaints, apply political pressure and threaten reputational damage until the BBC bends to their will. This is why any content critical of Israel is subject to intense scrutiny, while Israeli narratives pass through without question.
What has happened to Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone is just the latest example of how easily the BBC can be pushed into line. The reality is that the broadcaster is terrified of being accused of anti-Israel bias. It has seen what happens to journalists and institutions that fail to conform. The smear campaigns, the threats to funding and the pressure from politicians all create an atmosphere in which the safest option is to avoid controversy altogether. And when it comes to Israel, that means ensuring that any reporting remains within the narrow limits set by its most vocal defenders.
For decades, the BBC has played along with this game. It has suppressed stories, rewritten headlines and adjusted its language to avoid confrontation. There is no reason to believe this will change unless it is forced to. The broader media landscape is shifting, with alternative platforms and independent journalism challenging the monopoly of state-backed broadcasters. If the BBC continues down this path, it risks making itself irrelevant. It can either stand by its journalists and commit to honest reporting, or it can continue being a tool for those who want to control the narrative. The decision is ultimately its own, but the public is watching.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20250228-the-bbcs-surrender-to-pro-israel-lobbying-a-history-of-censorship-and-bias/
------
Israel Is On The Verge Of Going To War With International Judicial Bodies
By Aziz Mustafa
February 28, 2025
Arrest warrants issued by international legal institutions continue to have serious repercussions on the Israeli occupation, as they represent another step in the global legal campaign against it. These courts may soon issue arrest warrants against more senior officials in the occupation army, which, if enacted, would be part of the broader legal actions opposing the occupation, including criminal complaints filed in various countries against its officers and soldiers for violations of international law.
While the United States, particularly under the newly re-elected President, Donald Trump, is making extensive efforts to thwart these international legal actions, the prevailing Israeli perception is that it will not be long before the effects of this legal war are felt as strongly as the battles in Gaza during the last war. This is due to the grave historical accusation now being directed at Israel; that it carried out a genocide against Palestinians.
Israel’s concern stems from the fact that international courts can inflict significant damage on the occupation and can create major difficulties for officials facing arrest warrants. These courts were established to act against individuals, not states, and they prosecute suspects accused of severe violations of international law, such as war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. They have the authority to issue arrest warrants against those suspected of violating the laws of war, compelling more than 120 countries that are signatories to the Rome Statute to enforce these warrants.
Arrest warrants issued by international judicial bodies pose a significant restriction on the movement of occupation leaders worldwide. If they set foot in countries such as Canada, Australia, Britain, Germany, or the Czech Republic, they could face arrest and be transferred to international courts that have detention centres in various capitals. This scenario was evident during the visit of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Washington when he was forced to alter his flight route to avoid landing in a capital that had declared its commitment to executing the arrest warrant against him.
It is important to note that the personal threat to the freedom of these few officials is merely the tip of the iceberg in terms of the damage that the occupation state will suffer due to these arrest warrants. One of the indirect consequences could be that, just as international courts have previously issued arrest warrants against high-ranking officials in countries like Russia, Libya and the Central African Republic, the inclusion of Israel in this group would cause it to be classified among pariah states.
The issuance of arrest warrants against occupation officials would also lead to a cessation of cooperation with Israeli scientists and the freezing of arms sales where the occupation would suffer substantial losses. Consequently, the damage is expected to extend further, increasing the likelihood of criminal lawsuits being filed against Israelis involved in aggression against Palestinians in Gaza. This would expose many Israelis to prosecution in various countries, not just high-ranking officials.
Israelis fully understand that even after the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC), many countries have retained the authority to prosecute individuals accused of serious violations of international criminal law under the principle of “universal jurisdiction”. According to this principle, any country in the world that receives a suspect accused of severe violations of international law has the right to prosecute them, even if the violations were committed in foreign nations. Among other things, universal jurisdiction can be exercised against those suspected of violating the laws of war. Until now, however, the application of this principle against Israelis has been relatively limited.
If the ICC demonstrates a willingness to prosecute Israelis by issuing arrest warrants, it would indicate a loss of confidence in Israel’s own investigative system, prompting other countries to follow suit. As a result, judicial systems in various European nations may struggle to withstand public pressure, potentially leading to a significant increase in cases filed against Israelis. Senior officers in the Israeli occupation army, as well as those holding dual nationality in high-ranking government positions, could face legal prosecution. The issuance of ICC arrest warrants is also influenced by the prevailing anti-occupation sentiment around the world.
This legal analysis underscores that if widespread international prosecution and boycotts against Israelis materialise, Israel will be forced to shift from theoretical discussions to practical realities. Many Israelis could find themselves in serious legal predicaments that could disrupt their lives, signalling the failure of US diplomatic and professional efforts at the ICC. Under a far-right Israeli government that despises diplomacy, this could result in the collapse of the coalition, or another war on Gaza to distract from the legal cases which are knocking on Israel’s door.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20250228-israel-is-on-the-verge-of-going-to-war-with-international-judicial-bodies/
---------
The Crucial Role Of The Palestinian People In Resisting Displacement
By Majed Al-Zeer
February 28, 2025
For 77 years since the Nakba, the Palestinian people have played a leading role in confronting various attempts aimed at erasing their cause and resolving the conflict by bypassing their rights.
These attempts have included displacement projects, alternative homelands, resettlement schemes and the annulment of the right of return.
The Palestinian cause would not have remained alive and prominent on the global political stage without the convergence of several crucial factors.
Chief among them is the Palestinian people’s own efforts, reinforced by solidarity movements advocating Palestinian rights at the Arab, Islamic and international levels — both officially and popularly.
To counter this, there has been a sustained conspiratorial effort aimed at supporting and reinforcing Israel’s project while ensuring its cohesion.
This effort has also contributed to strengthening its aggression and keeping the fundamental aspects of the Palestinian cause alive and ongoing.
Among all these factors, the most crucial remains the Palestinian struggle, marked by the people’s unwavering refusal to relinquish their rights, their resistance — through all possible means — against liquidation projects, and their tireless efforts to reclaim their usurped land and assert their presence in shaping the overall trajectory of the cause.
A defining feature of the Palestinian struggle has been the interchangeability of resistance roles among the people.
Their presence, dispersion and distribution between homeland and exile have transformed the plight of displacement into a genuine source of strength.
History records that the organised liberation movement took shape after the Nakba with the establishment of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) in the heart of the Palestinian diaspora.
The PLO played a crucial role in mobilising various forms of resistance, unifying the Palestinian liberation struggle within a single national framework.
Over time, the resistance movement shifted significantly to the Palestinian homeland, where it made a profound impact.
It broke through into the global arena, presenting the Palestinian cause in a new light — most notably through the First and Second Intifadas.
The heroic resilience of the people of Gaza stands as another testament, as they have withstood 15 wars and relentless aggression by Israel. The latest assault — an ongoing genocide and ethnic cleansing campaign — has persisted for 15 consecutive months.
This struggle extends across all Palestinian territories, including the resistance in the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem, where the people continue to stand against settlement expansion and settler violence.
Completing this picture is the role played by Palestinians within the 1948 territories, reinforcing the unity of land, people and destiny.
We place former US President Donald Trump’s renewed calls for the displacement of Palestinians in Gaza within the broader historical and political context.
Once again, a powerful Western political figure is attempting to test his luck in forcibly uprooting the Palestinian people, reinforcing the Israeli project, and granting it further legitimacy — all in clear violation of international laws, established norms and the basic principles of justice and fairness in conflict resolution.
Despite the grave dangers posed by Trump’s proposal, particularly for the people of Gaza, who have already borne an immense cost under Israel’s machinery of war, destruction and ethnic cleansing, this development paradoxically presents a unique opportunity for the Palestinian cause.
Trump’s plan underscores the absurdity of disregarding the Palestinian will, dismissing even the most basic principles of human dignity and engagement.
Moreover, the proposed displacement project directly threatens Egypt and Jordan, as it would have profound structural and geopolitical ramifications for both nations.
Ironically, by bringing this issue to the forefront at this critical moment, Trump’s proposal has strengthened the Palestinian position against forced displacement and reinforced the global defence of their rightful claim to their homeland.
The Palestinian people are no longer alone in confronting Donald Trump’s policies; rather, nations across the global geopolitical map now find themselves directly impacted and compelled to oppose US policies and halt its arbitrary measures.
This is especially true given the grave national security threats these policies pose to the very fabric of many nations.
Beyond that, the US has even resorted to imposing sanctions on international institutions, such as the International Criminal Court (ICC), further fuelling global resistance against Trump’s actions — particularly his displacement plan.
A clear reflection of this emerging international opposition is German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s strong condemnation of Trump’s proposal, calling it a “horrific scandal.”
Scholz’s description is strikingly accurate. Trump’s policies not only undermine US-led peace initiatives in the Middle East from his first term — such as the normalisation agreements between the occupation state and Arab countries through the Abraham Accords — but also render them virtually meaningless.
The forced displacement plan, coupled with the outright rejection of Palestinian statehood, has all but shattered any prospects for these so-called peace projects, leaving them in total disarray.
Furthermore, timing is another crucial factor. For over a year and a half, the Palestinian cause has dominated global discourse, achieving strategic gains by shaping worldwide awareness of the injustice suffered by the Palestinian people.
The Palestinian narrative of truth and legitimacy has clearly outshined the Israeli narrative of falsehood, as the world is no longer deceived by propaganda and false claims.
The international community has witnessed the atrocities committed in Gaza, leading to a sustained and transnational solidarity movement that transcends borders and continents.
The crimes committed by Israel in Gaza over the past 15 months remain undeniably present before us. Even the most pessimistic observers could not have imagined such a scale of systematic killing and destruction carried out openly before the eyes of the world.
The Israeli war machine has inflicted unprecedented devastation upon the Palestinian people in Gaza.
At this critical juncture, the Palestinian people — its leadership, factions, and all sectors of society whether institutions or individuals — play a fundamental and decisive role in leading the resistance against the displacement plan.
As the primary target of this project, Palestinians must stand at the forefront of confronting it. This, however, does not diminish the vital strategic role of Arab nations, particularly Egypt and Jordan, as well as key regional powers like Saudi Arabia and Muslim-majority countries such as Turkiye.
What strengthens the collective opposition to the displacement plan is the resilience of the Palestinian stance itself.
It is imperative that every segment of Palestinian society — both inside and outside the homeland — fulfills its role in this struggle. The people of Gaza have already shouldered more than their share in defending the Palestinian cause, demonstrating extraordinary resilience in the face of relentless aggression.
This places an even greater responsibility on those with broader access and resources, namely the Palestinians in the diaspora, who are spread across over 100 countries across six continents.
Their role must mirror the steadfastness of Palestinians inside their homeland, as well as their direct resistance against the occupation and its plans.
Throughout the aggression against Gaza, Palestinians’ efforts have been diverse and impactful, but as the threats to Palestinian rights escalate — aiming to erase them altogether — there is an urgent need for structured and coordinated strategies to ensure that the Palestinian voice is heard.
At this critical moment, action is urgently required on two fronts: The first is the steadfastness of Gaza’s people in the face of displacement plans, ensuring they do not feel abandoned to their fate — especially by their Palestinian brothers and sisters around the world, who share in their suffering after enduring immense destruction. The second is to launch a direct solidarity initiative — a twinning and kinship programme between Palestinian families in the diaspora and families in Gaza, designed to be sustainable and ongoing.
This initiative would be coordinated with official entities in Gaza to ensure that no family is left without support. The goal is to establish direct and unmediated connections, fostering a bond akin to familial ties, where support is provided just as one would care for a brother or close relative.
This comprehensive relief effort would guarantee both immediate humanitarian aid and, equally importantly, psychological and moral support, reinforcing the resilience of those enduring the crisis.
Equally important, and with the same level of urgency, is the need for political, grassroots, media and legal action through engagement with local decision-makers — utilising every legal avenue available — to ensure they receive a clear and unequivocal message: the Palestinian people, wherever they are, categorically reject any attempts to undermine their rights.
Among the essential steps required is the organisation of international conferences that explicitly denounce these displacement projects.
This is particularly crucial for institutions worldwide that have played a structuring role in organising the Palestinian diaspora over the past decades, whether in the Americas, Europe, or beyond — including initiatives like the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad. Time is of the essence and swift action is critical.
Additionally, it is imperative that Palestinian grassroots organisations take the lead in mobilising Arab and global civil society, urging them to organise visible and legal demonstrations of opposition to displacement schemes — ensuring that all actions remain within the bounds of local and international laws.
In conclusion, despite the grave dangers looming and the immense suffering endured by the Palestinian people in Gaza, the West Bank and beyond, the historical trajectory of the Palestinian cause has produced present realities that point toward an inevitable future — one in which Palestine will be liberated and Palestinian refugees will return to the homes and cities from which they were forcibly displaced in 1948.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20250228-the-crucial-role-of-the-palestinian-people-in-resisting-displacement/
---------
Saudi Support Vital If Lebanon Is To Rise Again
Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib
February 28, 2025
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun is due to visit Saudi Arabia on Monday. As did Ahmad Al-Sharaa, the new president of Syria, Aoun is making the Kingdom his first foreign destination to send a message and make a show of commitment: Lebanon is back in the Arab fold.
Just as Syria was under Iran’s influence during Bashar Assad’s rule, Lebanon experienced the same through Hezbollah. Now, both countries are back to their natural environment.
The Lebanese have high expectations from Saudi Arabia. After the civil war, Lebanon was able to rise due to the Kingdom’s help. Riyadh offered political, diplomatic and financial assistance to the war-torn country. However, this role slowly started to decrease following the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005, with the role of Iran starting to increase. Hezbollah’s grip on power was a gateway for Iranian influence. This led one Iranian official to say that Beirut was one of four Arab capitals controlled by Tehran.
However, this Iranian influence did not bring with it any stability or growth. When Lebanon was under Iranian control, there was no effort put into state-building and no room for economic prosperity. Iran spread its influence through chaos rather than stability. A strong state would have been a deterrent to its influence. Hence, state institutions were weakened, while the clientelist network of politicians was strengthened. Lebanon became a rogue state where the black economy was the main source of funds in the country. It became a center for money laundering and drug production and trafficking.
This is supposed to change as Iran’s influence dwindles. In the ministerial declaration that constitutes the government’s work plan for the coming period, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam stated that Lebanon must “neutralize” its involvement in any “axis conflicts.” He was referring to the Iranian axis. Also, when an Iranian delegation visited Lebanon to attend Sunday’s funeral of Hasan Nasrallah, it met with the president. Aoun told them that Lebanon cannot be a battleground for other people’s wars. Lebanon is clearly detaching itself from the Iranian axis. The country is returning to the Arab fold. However, what does that mean?
The president and the prime minister have both made promises — to the Lebanese people, to Arab states and to the international community. They promised the Lebanese reforms and a prosperous economy. They also promised to disarm all militias. This means they will disarm Hezbollah. While they promised the disarmament of the militias, they also vowed to liberate the country from the Israeli occupation. They also assured the Lebanese that the reconstruction of the south would take place.
The president’s visit to Saudi Arabia comes in the wake of the ministerial declaration and parliament’s confirmation of Salam’s Cabinet. Aoun should head to Riyadh with a working plan. He should also have specific demands. Neither Aoun nor Salam will be able to execute what they stated in their addresses unless Lebanon gets support from outside, particularly Saudi Arabia.
Lebanon cannot get Israel to withdraw on its own. The most it can do is to file a complaint with the UN Security Council. However, this is unlikely to create any pressure on Israel or drive it to leave the country. The Lebanese army is no match for the Israeli army. Also, Lebanon has no real leverage on the US or Europe. The leverage that Lebanon had before was related to the fact it hosted 1.5 million Syrian refugees and Europe did not want them to cross the Mediterranean and reach its shores. Now, because the war has ended, the Syrian refugees can go back to Syria.
The Trump administration will not pressure Israel to fully withdraw from Lebanon. Lebanon relies on pressure from friendly states that want the country to be stable. Hence, the crucial role of Saudi Arabia, given its weight on the global stage. This would not be the first time that Saudi Arabia had saved Lebanon from Israeli claws. In 1982, the Kingdom was key in brokering a ceasefire and pushing Israel to withdraw from Beirut. Lebanon relies on Saudi diplomatic and political support. And a full Israeli withdrawal is essential if the country is to be stable.
In order to have stability, Lebanon also needs security guarantees. Israel should not be able to invade Lebanese airspace as it pleases and hit targets wherever it wants. Sustained stability is a prerequisite for reconstruction. While in Riyadh, the Lebanese president will definitely ask for funds for reconstruction. The reconstruction of the south is essential for the state to co-opt the Shiite community and preserve civil peace.
However, Saudi Arabia no longer offers a blank check. Even if Lebanon is no longer under Iranian tutelage, the Saudi leadership is not ready to offer cash that will go down the drain of corruption. Any aid will be conditional on a set of structural reforms. This not only means confronting Hezbollah but also the entire political class that has governed the country for the last 30 years. Here, the current government will have to take some bold steps that could involve risks.
Despite the apparent endorsement of the new government by the political establishment, in view of the vote of confidence of the Cabinet, a clash could occur if the political class’s privileges are targeted. However, this clash might be the surgical intervention needed to save the failing state. Again, the Aoun-Salam leadership cannot take such a bold step unless it has the endorsement of a strong player. Again, Lebanon has no one to turn to but Saudi Arabia. Lebanon will present many requests to Saudi Arabia, but in order to get any of them the new leadership has to prove it can deliver.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2591977
--------
Turkiye Sits On The Fence Amid US-EU Split
Dr. Sinem Cengiz
February 28, 2025
On the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the UN General Assembly this week convened a special session that witnessed a major diplomatic split between Washington and its Western allies. The split highlighted the shifting alliances within transatlantic relations under President Donald Trump amid the emergence of new geopolitical blocs.
While UNGA resolutions are not legally binding, they are seen as a reflection of global sentiment. That is why the outcome of the European-backed Ukraine vote was particularly striking. The US confronted its traditionally close European allies and opposed a resolution that called out Moscow’s aggression.
The vote followed direct talks between US and Russian officials, which excluded Ukraine, and coincided with Trump’s meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron in Washington. The split over the Ukraine vote was seen as the biggest divide between Western powers at the UN since the 2003 Iraq War, and possibly even more critical.
In the case of the Iraq War, Western powers, particularly the US and EU countries such as France and Germany, were deeply divided over the decision to invade. This division was a major moment of friction among the Western allies, but ultimately it was a policy disagreement centered on a specific issue — whether to go to war in Iraq. The split over Ukraine is more than just a policy disagreement, it signals a fundamental paradigm shift within the Western alliance.
Trump’s return has brought with it challenges for both Turkiye and the EU. In Trump’s first term, the US and Europe found themselves on different sides of international issues, from the Middle East peace process to the Iran nuclear deal. The first Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal and its trade disputes with Brussels dealt a severe blow to EU-US relations. At its worst point, European officials even questioned, “With friends like that (Trump), who needs enemies?” Today, similar concerns are being voiced in European capitals, with growing uncertainty about what lies ahead.
Increasing anti-Americanism on Europe’s streets due to Trump’s policies also have parallels in Turkiye. Among the most pressing issues between Ankara and Washington is America’s support for the Syrian Democratic Forces, which are dominated by the Kurdish YPG, an offshoot of the PKK — a US and EU-designated terrorist group that Turkiye has been fighting for the last four decades. On the other side, Turkiye and the EU still have issues waiting to be resolved and most of these are structural in nature.
The policies of the Trump administration are now increasingly posing risks to the mutual interests of Turkiye and Europe. This has made the latter realize that collective action is needed for dealing with the US. Thus, the EU’s stance not only indicates that Turkiye and Europe are politically and economically interdependent, but it also shows that Ankara and Brussels can put their bilateral issues aside in the face of a common threat.
Here, the well-known theory of “balance of threat” comes to mind. This theory, first proposed by Stephen M. Walt in the 1980s, says states’ alliance behavior is determined by the threat they perceive from other states. Both Turkiye and the EU have the sense that they are aboard the same ship, facing common challenges and having to cope with American waves together.
Coming back to the Ukraine vote, despite the US’ opposition, the resolution was adopted. Ninety-three countries voted in favour, 18 against and 65 abstained, with 17 countries choosing not to participate. This breakdown is significant, as it shows a clear division in the global balance of power, with the majority standing against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
But when comparing this vote to a similar one held in February 2023, it is clear there has been a shift. In 2023, 141 countries voted in favor of condemning Russia’s invasion, with the US leading that bloc. The difference in voting patterns of the US highlights the broader changes taking place, which have led to the growing US-EU split when it comes to their approach to Russia.
Ankara has aligned with European capitals in condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, voting in favor of both UNGA resolutions. However, throughout this war, Turkiye has played a crucial balancing role between Moscow and the West, bolstered by the close personal diplomacy between the Turkish and Russian leaders. The vote at the UN clearly shows that Ankara aligns more closely with the EU than the US. Turkiye’s position signals a significant shift in its foreign policy approach to the transatlantic alliance.
Turkiye is of importance to the visions of both the US and the EU in the region. For Washington, Turkiye has been a critical strategic ally and a “model” partner since the Cold War, having the second-largest army within NATO after the US. For Europe, Turkiye is an integral part of the continent’s security framework and a candidate for membership since the inception of the European bloc.
Historically, Turkiye’s ties with the US and the EU have not proceeded along parallel paths, but they were intimately linked. However, this dynamic has shifted, with the growing rifts between the US and the EU leaving Ankara with strong incentives to sit on the fence for at least the next four years. The coming years will be critical for Ankara as it navigates its position between the competing interests of the US and the EU.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2591975
----
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