Pages

▼

Wednesday, June 03, 2026

06/02 Links Pt1: Israel is fighting for its survival in Lebanon; If It’s Genocide, Why Can It Wait Until 2029?; Iran targets Kuwait and Bahrain as US strikes island in Hormuz

From Ian:

Michael Doran: This Is How the Iran War Ends
In the optimistic scenario, both stages of the plan come to fruition. An extendable MOU is signed in the coming days, reopening the Strait of Hormuz under international monitoring, easing immediate military tensions and allowing oil to flow normally through the Gulf. Iran receives limited, reversible economic relief. Economic desperation proves decisive. The IRGC concludes that partial accommodation is preferable to prolonged isolation and the risk of renewed American strikes. Serious negotiations follow on the nuclear file. Iran makes meaningful concessions on removing the “nuclear dust.”

The odds of this happening are slim. All available information suggests that the men now running Iran are less flexible than even Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was. But the odds are not zero. The senior administration official told me that the Iranian regime is “fractured and broken.” The current emergency footing allows the IRGC to avoid responsibility for the mess it has made. Some administration officials hope the MOU will bring the regime to “the point at which they have to govern this broken country,” intensifying domestic pressure over inflation, corruption, and stagnation.

At the same time, officials remain clear-eyed that the IRGC may continue to ride roughshod over the Iranian people and refuse to budge on the nuclear program. Under those conditions, regional alignment against Tehran would deepen further.

In the pessimistic scenario, the first-stage MOU moves forward and the Strait of Hormuz reopens, but the second-stage negotiations over the nuclear remnants quickly bog down. Delay, mistrust, and tactical maneuvering place the negotiations on a road to nowhere, consistent with the pattern of all previous U.S.-Iran nuclear talks.

Even in this outcome, the United States would still achieve a significant strategic gain. The more relevant historical comparison is the post-1991 containment of Saddam Hussein. A weakened, sanctioned regime remained in prolonged friction with a U.S.-led coalition that retained escalation dominance and overwhelming military superiority. The military campaign would give way to a prolonged contest of pressure, deterrence, and attrition. But Iran now is substantially poorer, more isolated, and further from a nuclear breakout than before the war began. The U.S. and Israel will maintain close monitoring of any remaining nuclear activity and ballistic missile production, ready to react to any alarming developments.

The pessimistic scenario is not the administration’s goal but remains, in my view, the more likely outcome. Republican hawks will have far more influence over this process if they work within the president’s framework rather than reflexively opposing it.

Trump has already demonstrated, through action rather than rhetoric, that he is not Barack Obama. He introduced into these negotiations the element most absent from the Obama years: a credible and demonstrated willingness to use overwhelming military force against the Iranian regime.

His allies, therefore, will strengthen their position by holding the administration to its own calibrated “no dust, no dollars” standard. Three demands immediately come to the fore.

First, significant sanctions relief or direct economic benefits for Tehran must come only in exchange for concrete, verifiable concessions, not merely for participating in a diplomatic process. The administration’s leverage derives from economic pressure backed by military dominance. Dealing away that leverage prematurely would indeed repeat a core error of the Obama approach.

Second, the administration must detach Hezbollah and Lebanon from the nuclear negotiations. Tehran will seek to transform every regional file into a bargaining chip in order to preserve and legitimize its network of proxies. Washington gains nothing by reinforcing the link between the Iranian nuclear file and Hezbollah’s position inside Lebanon.

Third, the military threat must remain visible and credible throughout the negotiations. Tehran entered these talks only after suffering severe military and economic blows. The regime’s negotiating position will harden immediately if it concludes that diplomacy has neutralized the possibility of renewed force. Escalation dominance, not goodwill, remains the foundation of American leverage.

In the coming phase of the conflict, time favors the side that maintains pressure. By emphasizing leverage, verification, and long-term containment rather than maximalist demands for unconditional victory, supporters of the administration can strengthen the president’s hand while preserving the strategic gains achieved by the war.
Iran Embraces a Forever War
One reason why Iran won't make real peace is that it has concluded that conflict is preferable to diplomacy. The war, after all, seems to be helping Tehran increase its international power. By striking Arab states that host American bases, Iran has succeeded in driving a wedge between U.S. officials and their Persian Gulf partners, who desperately want a lasting settlement. By closing the Strait of Hormuz, it has forced countries around the planet to acknowledge its power and negotiate over the fate of their ships.

The Islamic Republic's strategy, then, is not merely to survive and outlast the U.S. It is not even really trying to resolve its disputes with Washington. Instead, it wants to fundamentally alter how Tehran is dealt with by the U.S., its allies, and the wider world. It aspires to be a pole in a multipolar order, and it believes the war is helping it achieve that goal.

The Islamic Republic has quickly gained leverage. Arab countries, fearing economic calamity, have pushed the U.S. to seek peace. Asian countries, in desperate need of Persian Gulf oil and gas, have pleaded with Iran to offer their ships safe passage.

Even European leaders have struck a more accommodating tone. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz - who previously praised Israel for doing "our dirty work" against Iran - has stated that Tehran has "humiliated" Washington. Multiple European officials have opened channels with their Iranian counterparts. Norway's deputy foreign minister even visited Tehran.

The Islamic Republic also sees the war as helpful because, in its view, the conflict will force Washington to reconsider its assumption that Tehran is weak. Iran has concluded that neither Israel nor the U.S. can defeat it on the battlefield. Prolonging the war, then, is a way to prove that Washington's earlier assessment - that Iran's military was hollowed out and that the regime was on the brink - was wrong. In fact, they believe that compromise will only imperil Iran further.

The Islamic Republic's leadership is using negotiations as a tool for managing warfare. It engages in talks mostly to demonstrate to other states that it is serious about diplomacy, thereby lowering international pressure, and it does so to control the tempo of conflict. It refuses, however, to make offerings that would diminish its leverage or signal vulnerability. The regime believes that confrontation strengthens its hand. It is happy to withstand economic pain if it can control the Strait of Hormuz.
Hamas Fears a U.S.-Iran Agreement Could Leave Gaza Facing Israel Alone
Senior Hamas officials are increasingly concerned about Israel's new policy of gradually eroding the "yellow line" separating Israel and Hamas in Gaza and expanding its campaign of targeted killings of senior military operatives, allegedly with American backing.

They also express concern over the prospect that any future U.S.-Iran agreement will exclude Gaza entirely, leaving it vulnerable to Israeli actions. This could let Israel use its full military power in Gaza without fear of triggering broader escalation.

Senior Israeli security officials say Hamas's main concern is that a U.S.-Iran agreement would relieve Israel of many strategic pressures.

If tensions with Iran subside, Israel could devote substantially greater resources to the campaign in Gaza, intensifying military operations to try to achieve a more decisive outcome against Hamas.


Jake Wallis Simons: Israel is fighting for its survival in Lebanon
At the beginning of the Iran campaign, much was made of the supposedly different war aims held by Washington and Jerusalem. To a large extent, this was mischief caused by speculators who lusted after an allied humiliation more than the defeat of the world’s worst regime. In Lebanon, however, we now see the interests of the two partners beginning to diverge as Trump becomes increasingly desperate for a deal with Tehran, while Netanyahu’s priority remains what it has always been: survival.

His own political survival, perhaps – but more fundamentally, the survival of his people. This is something that is difficult to convey to audiences living in the ‘comfort democracies’, where we have known nothing but first-world problems since the moment we first drew breath. That luxury allows us to stand tall without fear of sniper fire and wag our fingers without cost.

Has Yvette Cooper ever had to go to bed in fear of air raids during the night? Or worrying that her children will be murdered by jihadis stationed just a few miles away? No, the greatest tribulation she has suffered is being married to Ed Balls. This is the reason why, for a true sense of morality, we must cast our eyes to those beleaguered democracies and their allies who know what it means to face tyranny.

The Iranian people and the Ukrainians, for example, are both staunch supporters of Israel. Somaliland, which faces a jihadi-dominated enemy to the south in the form of Somalia, is also a close friend of the Jewish State. Even Finland, which is on the frontlines with Russia, is more pro-Israel than its Nordic neighbours, and a similar story can be told about Greece, which lives in the shadow of an increasingly Islamist, neo-Ottoman Turkey.

Perhaps Trump is not entirely correct about every country in the world hating Israel. My hope – if you can call it a hope – is that when the dogs of war come barking at the doors of western Europe, our priorities will be forcibly revised, we will be cured of our luxury Israelophobia and a stronger alliance with the Jewish State will seem wise.

In the meantime, Israel fights in Lebanon alone. Which is a great shame, as for Hezbollah to be rooted out once and for all, politically as well as militarily, input from the international community will one day be vital. Much of this is our fault, in other words. It’s our fault.
If It’s Genocide, Why Can It Wait Until 2029?The Contradiction of Urgency
Genocide is humanity’s worst crime. The word evokes some of history’s darkest chapters: the Holocaust, Rwanda, Cambodia, and Srebrenica. It describes not only mass death, but the deliberate attempt to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Because of the enormity of the crime, accusations of genocide have traditionally carried extraordinary weight. If a genocide is taking place, urgency is not optional. Every day matters.

That is why the latest development in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel is so revealing. In seeking a lengthy extension to submit its reply, South Africa has unintentionally clarified what it tried to obscure. If it truly believed Israel was committing genocide, delay would be intolerable. Yet the state that has spent two years insisting a genocide is underway has now agreed to a timetable that could push further proceedings well into the next decade. The message is difficult to ignore: There is no emergency because there is no genocide.

For more than two years, much of the world has been told that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. The accusation has been repeated by activists, politicians, academics, journalists, and international organizations with extraordinary certainty. In many circles, the debate is considered over. The verdict has already been delivered. The only remaining question, we are told, is why the rest of the world has not yet caught up.

Yet more than two years after South Africa launched its case at the International Court of Justice, it has requested and received an additional eighteen months to submit its next round of arguments. If this truly were the clear-cut genocide so many have claimed, one might reasonably ask: why can the genocide wait?

And if the evidence is so overwhelming, why does the case require more time to prove its argument? This is the contradiction at the heart of the genocide accusation. On social media, in university lecture halls, and across much of the international press, genocide is presented as obvious. In court, however, proving that claim appears impossible. Genocide Requires Intent

That should not surprise us. The legal question was never whether Gaza has suffered. It has. Nor was the question whether civilians have died or whether buildings have been destroyed. All of those realities exist without genocide. The legal question has always been whether Israel is intentionally seeking the destruction of the Palestinian people as a people.

After more than two years of war, the evidence does not merely fail to establish genocidal intent. It points in the opposite direction. Israel’s critics frequently point to casualty figures, military operations, and inflammatory statements by individual politicians, but they have failed to demonstrate a state policy aimed at the destruction of the Palestinian people. Israel has repeatedly warned civilians to evacuate combat zones, contacted Palestinians directly through calls, texts, voice recordings, and leaflets, and established evacuation routes and humanitarian corridors.

John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point’s Modern War Institute, has argued that these measures contributed to a combatant-to-civilian casualty ratio of roughly 1:1 to 1:1.5, which he describes as historically low for modern urban warfare. While the precise figures remain disputed, such actions are difficult to reconcile with the claim that Israel’s objective is the destruction of the Palestinian people. Devastation is not genocide. The Genocide Convention requires proof of intent to destroy a people, and after more than two years of scrutiny, that evidence has not emerged because it does not exist.

This is why the accusation has relied on rhetoric rather than evidence. Genocide has become less a legal claim than a political weapon. Once deployed, the word carries enormous emotional and moral force. It transforms a complex conflict into a simple story of perpetrators and victims. But serious allegations require more than slogans.

If genocide is occurring, there should be mountains of evidence. If the case is as straightforward as activists claim, there should be no need for years of additional argument before the world’s highest court. If the facts are as clear as we have repeatedly been told, the legal process should be confirming an obvious reality rather than continuing to wrestle with a deeply contested accusation.

Instead, the opposite appears to be true. The longer the proceedings continue, the more apparent it becomes that the certainty surrounding the allegation has always exceeded the strength of the evidence behind it.
Omer Bartov: What Went Wrong?
The “Peace Trap”: Why Israeli Attitudes Hardened
Bartov laments that “Israeli reluctance to make territorial concessions has increasingly hardened” since the 1990s, without ever mentioning what might have caused that hardening. As Yuval Bloomberg compellingly demonstrates in his Hebrew book, The Oslo Trap, the Oslo “Peace Process” led to the intensification of Palestinian terror against Israelis, while Yasser Arafat refused to condemn the attacks and played footsie with Hamas.14 In 2000-2001, Yasser Arafat walked away from an offer for a demilitarised Palestinian state on 92 percent of Judea and Samaria and 100 percent of the Gaza Strip and launched the Second Intifada.15

This one-sidedness is characteristic of Bartov’s entire historical analysis. He calls for the need to study the “Nakba” as the twin catastrophe of the Holocaust. Israel’s supposed expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs during its founding is one of the country’s original sins, motivated by its racist Zionist ideology. Social scientist Ahmed Albaba commented on the term Nakba: ‘The term Nakba first appeared during the 1948 war. In Arab-Palestinian discourse, it serves as an instrument of power in the battle of narratives and the struggle for interpretive authority — that is, for the meaning and interpretation of the war and its consequences.”

Bartov attempts to show that Israel’s Jewish character is fatally at odds with democracy. He writes that “in one of its least sincere and most revealing paragraphs, the Declaration [of Independence] makes an appeal… to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions,” even while the Nakba rages on. Of course, Israel’s war of Independence, both in its 1947 Civil War and 1948 inter-state phase, was launched by five Arab States. The Palestinian Arabs and the Arab states rejected the UN’s Partition Plan, believing Jewish statehood to be a grave injustice. The first casualties following the Partition Vote were Jewish – on 30 November 1947, an Arab band attacked a Jewish bus near Kfar Syrkin, killing five; the attack was followed by another attack on a bus coming from Hadera, killing two; later that morning, Arab snipers fired from Jaffa to southern Tel Aviv, killing one. On 2 December 1947, an Arab mob emerged from Jerusalem’s Old City, attacking and setting fire to Jewish shops and passerbys at Mamilla Street. The mob was led by Arab High Committee officials.

As Benny Morris explains, “by the end of March 1948 most of the wealthy and middleclass families had fled Jaffa, Haifa, and Jerusalem, and most Arab rural communities had evacuated the heavily Jewish Coastal Plain; a few had also left the Upper Jordan Valley. Most were propelled by fear of being caught up, and harmed, in the fighting; some may have feared life under Jewish rule. It is probable that most thought of a short, temporary displacement with a return within weeks or months, on the coattails of victorious Arab armies or international diktats.” Haifa’s Mayor Levy literally pleaded with the city’s Arabs not to leave. Within ten days of Haifa’s surrender, almost all of Haifa’s Arabs left to Acre, Beirut, Nazareth or Nablus. When the war ended, Israel’s leaders had little desire to allow Arab refugees to return as they were seen as having instigated the conflict.

Bartov has a long chapter in which he argues that had Israel adopted a constitution in the 1950s, its democratic character may have triumphed over its Jewish exclusivism. Bartov, though, never demonstrates precisely where Israel’s Jewishness violates democracy. Ironically, his main example is the 2000 Ka’adan case, in which the Supreme Court struck down discriminatory land policies.

Conclusion: Academic Malpractice Dressed-up as Moral Warning
Ultimately, critics view Bartov’s analysis as a significant academic failing, in which rigorous empirical assessment is sacrificed for ideological purity. By systematically stripping Palestinians of their agency and reducing a complex existential conflict to a one-sided morality play, he becomes a political activist whose conclusions are seen as ahistorical. His “Holocaust Inversion” and “genocide narrative” do not merely offer intellectual ammunition to those seeking Israel’s destruction; they are argued to betray the very history he claims to protect. In Bartov’s world, facts such as the 700 tunnels in Rafah or the rejection of peace offers are treated as inconvenient, easily exorcised to maintain a narrative that casts the Jewish state as a singular moral failure. This persistent focus reveals far more about the author’s own lens than about the reality of the Middle East.


Fetterman calls Platner ‘ghoul’ for ‘cheering on Hamas’
Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) hammered fellow Democrat and Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner as a “ghoul” and “Nazi sympathizer” on Tuesday in the latest example of the Pennsylvanian’s willingness to break with some members of his party over Israel.

Speaking at the American Jewish Committee’s annual global forum in Washington alongside Sen. Dave McCormick (R-Pa.), Fetterman cited Platner, a former U.S. Marine who recently covered up an SS skull-and-crossbones tattoo that he says he got while drinking on leave in Croatia, as an example of Democrats who have gained prominence from opposing the Jewish state.

“We’re old enough to remember that if somebody had a Nazi tattoo, they’re a Nazi sympathizer,” Fetterman said. “But now that’s OK. People will defend that, or they’ll just kind of explain that away.”

In recent days, Platner, who polls suggest could unseat Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) in a key race for control of the Senate, has also been the subject of media reports about sexual messages that he sent to as many as a dozen women after his marriage in 2023. Primary elections in Maine are on June 9.

Fetterman pointed to Platner’s history of controversial comments as evidence of his unsuitability for office.

“This is the guy that was absolutely cheering Hamas. There was a video that Hamas put online where they go and beat and torture IDF soldiers, and he said, ‘I dig it,’” Fetterman said, referring to comments that Platner posted on social media in reply to a video of a Hamas attack in 2014.

“What kind of ghoul lurks on the internet back in 2014 celebrating that kind of barbarity?” the senator said. “Well, that’s the kind of guy that would have that kind of tattoo.”


Comedy Cellar USA: The Kristof/Ben-Ephraim Tapes
3 hours of interviews concerning the Nicholas Kristof Article, "The Silence That Meets the Rape of Palestinians."

Also included are interviews with experts, Dr. Daniel Mills, and James W. Crosby.

There has been a clamoring for this interview. I had wanted to edit it into a proper package, but alas, the material has grown so voluminous that a data dump is the only thing I have time for.




UN Watch: U.N.'s Francesca Albanese “humiliated” by return of U.S. sanctions
NEWS: The sanctions are back on. Francesca Albanese: “The impact of the U.S. sanctions is severe. It equates to a civil death. I cannot make or receive payments. I cannot have a bank account. Not just in the US — everywhere. It's absolutely embarrassing and humiliating!”


Rubio: Iran sanctions relief only for nuclear concessions, not for reopening Hormuz
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday that the U.S. is not offering Iran any sanctions relief in exchange for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, and that sanctions relief would only be on the table if the Islamic Republic made concessions related to its nuclear program.

The secretary of state described the diplomatic talks as two-phased: The current phase is focused on getting Iran to agree to reopen the strait and to commit to enter further negotiations on disposing its highly enriched uranium and on “severe and long-term limitations and/or cancelation of enrichment.” In exchange, the U.S. would lift its blockade of Iranian ports.

“For example, they have to commit to say, ‘We will dispose of the enriched uranium.’ And the question now is what are the mechanisms by which we can dispose of it,” Rubio said.

The second phase would entail technical discussions on Iran’s nuclear program and fissile material, in exchange for potential U.S. sanctions relief, and could take months to work through.

“Any sanctions relief is condition-based, which means it has to be in return for the reason why the sanctions are put in place in the first place, which is their nuclear program,” Rubio said. “If they agree to give up [nuclear activities], there will be sanctions relief associated with their commitment and their compliance.”

He said that if Iran complies with U.S. demands including giving up nuclear enrichment and disposing of its enriched uranium, “that’s the place where the frozen assets could be discussed. The more they give, the more they would get.”

But he acknowledged that granting Iran access to additional funds would raise other challenges, including using such funding to support terrorist activities.

Rubio said later during a Tuesday afternoon hearing with the House Appropriations Committee that “if money is going to fund the proxies, it won’t be returned to them,” emphasizing that “there are specific sanctions that are in place related directly to the nuclear program” that could be removed as part of talks.


Israeli defense minister again threatens to strike Beirut in response to Hezbollah launches
Israel held off on major strikes in Beirut at the request of the United States on Monday, but will attack the Lebanese capital if Hezbollah continues firing at the Jewish state, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said Tuesday.

“There will no longer be a situation in which Beirut remains quiet while Israeli communities are under attack,” Katz declared in remarks the Defense Export Conference, according to a readout shared by his office.

“Yesterday, the prime minister and I, together with the Israel Defense Forces, led a move to establish the equation that Dahiyeh in Beirut will be treated the same as Israel’s northern communities,” he said, referencing the Lebanese capital’s suburb where Iranian-backed Hezbollah maintains a large presence.

Katz said Jerusalem’s stance was reflected in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s phone call with U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday night.

“The IDF Spokesperson published an evacuation warning to Dahiyeh’s residents ahead of possible strikes, should attacks on Israeli communities continue,” he noted. “The immediate result was the evacuation of hundreds of thousands of residents from the district—600,000 out of 950,000 by last night—putting significant pressure on Hezbollah and the Lebanese government.”

Katz said the Trump administration “endorsed the principle” set out by Jerusalem and warned the Lebanese government and other parties that the IDF could respond in Beirut.

“If attacks on the communities cease, or if attacks continue and we strike Dahiyeh in Beirut, then this equation will have been established,” he reiterated.
At UN Security Council, envoys blame Hezbollah for Lebanon violence, pan Israeli response
United Nations Assistant Secretary-General Martha Pobee told an emergency meeting of the Security Council on Monday that Israel’s push into Lebanon violates Lebanon’s territorial integrity and the 2006 council resolution requiring Israel to withdraw south of the UN-drawn border with Lebanon.

Pobee also accused Hezbollah of violating the resolution, which requires the terror group to disarm, and said the ultimate objective is “a durable, permanent ceasefire adhered to by all sides.”

“The situation in Lebanon is deeply alarming,” Pobee said in a statement about the meeting on the UN website.

France had called for the meeting, citing the escalating violence in Lebanon, its foreign ministry said in a statement.

“It is Hezbollah, supported by Iran, that bears responsibility for the outbreak of hostilities,” France said at the meeting.

While recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself, the French representative said that the scale of Israel’s operations in Lebanon cannot be justified and is a “major strategic mistake.”

US Ambassador Mike Waltz said de-escalation and peace will come quickly “if Hezbollah immediately ceases its attacks, as apparently it’s promised, and the government of Lebanon asserts its full sovereignty, rebuilds, and brings its people home,” a reference to a ceasefire announced Monday by US President Donald Trump, though of unclear circumstances and commitment by both sides.

Lebanon’s UN Ambassador Ahmad Arafa accused Israel of “capitalizing, as usual, on a tense regional climate” and engaging in a “systematic campaign of destruction” that in many instances “amount to war crimes.”

Arafa said that if Israel commits to a ceasefire, “the state pledges that, once this is achieved, it alone will be held accountable and answerable for any subsequent violations.”


Israel had ‘no choice’ but to drive deeper into Lebanese territory, its UN envoy says, as Security Council pushes ceasefire
Danny Danon, Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, said on Monday that the Jewish state had “no choice” but to defend against Hezbollah attacks, as the U.N. Security Council urged de-escalation on both sides to avoid the conflict spiraling further.

The Israeli envoy spoke at an emergency session, which France called after Israeli troops pushed deeper into Lebanese territory to try to thwart Hezbollah, the Iran-backed terror proxy that controls the southern part of the country.

Hezbollah has expanded its rocket, drone and missile attacks into Israel, as Jerusalem negotiates with the government in Beirut over a disarmament of Hezbollah and a longer-term peace between the two countries.

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday that Israel and Hezbollah agreed not to attack each other further and that Israeli troops would not march on to Beirut.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that he told Trump that Israel would strike Hezbollah targets in Beirut if the terror group’s attacks continue. On Sunday, Israeli forces moved deeper into southern Lebanon, capturing Beaufort Castle, which housed Israeli army headquarters from 1982 to 2000 during the long-running war between the two nations.

Hezbollah joined Iran in early March in Tehran’s war with the United States and Israel. Despite pledges by the Lebanese government, it appears unable or unwilling to disarm Hezbollah.

Israel “did not wake up one morning and decide to enter Lebanon,” Danon told the council. It “had no choice,” as Hezbollah has increased its fire on Israel’s northern communities despite a ceasefire in place, Danon said.


US says Iranian missile attacks on Kuwait and Bahrain failed, confirms striking Qeshm Island
Two Iranian missiles fired at Kuwait fell short or broke apart en route, and three missiles launched at Bahrain were intercepted by US and Bahrain forces, the US military says.

US Central Command adds that Iran launched ballistic missiles toward regional neighbors but all failed to hit targets, and that US forces conducted strikes on Qeshm Island in response to attempted attacks by Iran and defeated multiple Iranian ballistic missiles and drones on Tuesday.

“No US personnel were harmed. CENTCOM forces remain vigilant and ready to defend against unwarranted Iranian aggression during the ongoing ceasefire,” says a statement from Central Command.


IAEA offers UAE support after recent ‘carefully targeted’ drone attack on nuclear plant
The International Atomic Energy Agency is offering the United Arab Emirates technical as well as moral support, IAEA chief Rafael Grossi said on Tuesday after a visit to the site of a nuclear power plant that came under a “carefully targeted” drone attack last month.

Grossi said Emirati authorities had reacted very quickly to the attack at the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant by shutting down a reactor because of the loss of external power.

The $20 billion Barakah nuclear power plant is the only nuclear power plant in the Arab world and can provide a quarter of the energy needs of the UAE. It came under a drone attack last month that the Gulf country said was launched from Iraq.

The drone that penetrated the UAE’s defenses hit an electric generator outside the inner perimeter of the plant, according to Emirati officials. It was one of three drones that were targeting the plant and only two were intercepted, according to the UAE’s defense ministry.


Israel allocates $350 million for special military tribunal to try Oct. 7 terrorists
The government on Tuesday allocated one billion shekels ($351 million) to the Defense Ministry and the Israel Defense Forces to fund the trials of the Palestinian terrorists who committed the October 7, 2023, massacre.

The decision came after the Knesset passed legislation last month to establish a special military tribunal to try those accused of participating in the atrocities.

The budgets, which will be allocated over the course of 2026 to 2029, will be used to establish the necessary physical infrastructure for implementing the law, including premises for the court, the prosecution and an IDF command center.

The funds will also be used to employ the necessary personnel for the trials, as well as for building maintenance, computer systems, broadcast services, and other requirements.

“The State of Israel will bring to justice the perpetrators of the most brutal massacre committed against the Jewish people since the Holocaust, and will send a clear and unequivocal message to all our enemies: whoever slaughters, murders, rapes and kidnaps Israeli citizens will pay the full price,” said Defense Minister Israel Katz.

The hefty sum allocated Tuesday is about half the reported Finance Ministry estimate, of around NIS 2 billion ($689 million), of the cost of implementing the bill passed earlier this month. According to Hebrew media, the Defense Ministry estimated the initiative would cost far more – roughly NIS 5 billion ($1.72 billion).

Under the law, the special tribunal will be able to charge the assailants with all relevant crimes, including genocide under the terms of Israel’s 1950 Law for the Prevention of Genocide. Trials will be open to the public and broadcast on a website set up for that purpose.

Those convicted of genocide charges will be liable for the death penalty.

Additionally, the legislation stipulates that anyone who is suspected, charged, or convicted of October 7 crimes cannot be released through prisoner release agreements.
Israel to indict Hamas terrorist who held IDF soldier’s body
Israel Police and the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) said on Tuesday that prosecutors intend to indict a Hamas terrorist who held the remains of an Israeli soldier for nearly a decade.

Authorities identified the terrorist as Ibrahim Hilo, a member of Hamas’s Shati Battalion, who was arrested in a covert operation as part of efforts to recover the body of Staff Sgt. Oron Shaul, who was killed in battle in Gaza’s Shuja’iyya neighborhood on July 20, 2014, during Operation Protective Edge, and his body seized by Hamas.

According to investigators, Hilo held Shaul’s remains in a civilian building in Gaza City. The body was recovered in January 2025 during a joint Shin Bet and Israeli military intelligence operation, shortly before a ceasefire took effect, and returned to Israel for burial.

Police said a prosecutor’s declaration was filed in Beersheba District Court after sufficient evidence was compiled, and that Hilo faces serious security-related charges.


Israeli forces kill 5 terrorists in Gaza
Israeli forces over the past several days killed five terrorists in the Gaza Strip who were planning imminent attacks on troops, the Israel Defense Forces said on Tuesday.

Those eliminated included members of the Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist organizations, among them a Nukhba unit commander and operatives involved in preparing explosives and carrying out sniper attacks, according to the military.

The IDF said two additional Hamas terrorists were targeted while planting explosive devices.

The military said it used precise munitions and aerial surveillance to minimize civilian harm.

Israeli troops under the Southern Command remain deployed in accordance with the ceasefire agreement and will continue operations to remove immediate threats, the statement said.


Alon Ohel rejoices as IDF kills Hamas terrorist who took him and friends hostage on Oct. 7
A Hamas terrorist who abducted four Israeli hostages during one of the most brutal incidents of the October 7, 2023, onslaught was killed in a Monday airstrike, the military announced Tuesday, sparking celebrations from one of his former captives.

According to the IDF, Youssef Ayesh Awad Ramadan, a deputy commander of a Nukhba Force cell, invaded Israel on October 7 and took part in the abduction of Hersh Goldberg-Polin, Alon Ohel, Eliya Cohen and Or Levy from a roadside bomb shelter near the Gaza border community of Re’im.

The strike targeting Ramadan on Monday was to “remove a threat” to troops, the statement said.

The IDF added that during the war and recently, Ramadan advanced attacks on Israeli troops and citizens, “and therefore posed an immediate threat to our forces operating in the Gaza Strip.”

In April, the IDF announced that another Hamas terrorist who abducted those four hostages from Re’im was also killed, alongside several other Hamas operatives.

Ohel, Cohen, and Levy were released from Hamas captivity in hostage-ceasefire deals with the terror group in 2025, while Goldberg-Polin was murdered in captivity, and his body was recovered by the IDF in August 2024.

Reacting to the announcement, Ohel thanked the IDF for their “incredible work” in killing his former captor, adding “Until the last terrorist.”


Commentary Podcast: The Ceasefire War
FDD's Jonathan Schanzer is back to discuss a litany of bad news: a disputed report on an aggressive phone call between president Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu over Israel's planned offensive on Beirut, the regional obstacles to a resolution in Iran, and the multi-pronged approach necessary to achieve it. Plus, the California primary vote, and John recommends Obsession.


UKLFI Charitable Trust: David Collier examines media claims that Israel targets medics in the Lebanon
Claims that Israel is deliberately targeting paramedics, ambulances and medical workers in Lebanon have featured prominently in international media coverage, with allegations of "double tap" strikes widely reported by outlets including Sky News and others.

In this interview, investigative journalist David Collier critically examines those claims, discusses Hezbollah's use of civilian infrastructure and explains why context matters when assessing reports emerging from conflict zones.

He also explores the overlap between media narratives, propaganda, social media amplification and the challenges journalists face when reporting from areas controlled by armed terrorist groups.

Chapters:
00:00 Introduction
01:39 Hezbollah, ambulances and medical infrastructure
03:36 Alleged links between medical workers and Hezbollah
07:08 Media coverage and missing context
09:57 The "double tap" allegation examined
14:55 Propaganda, social media and modern conflict reporting


Matti Friedman: As Israel plays king of the castle in Lebanon, what's its endgame?
Welcome to What Matters Now, a weekly podcast exploring key issues currently shaping Israel and the Jewish World, with host Amanda Borschel-Dan speaking with author and journalist Matti Friedman.

On May 31, 2026, President Isaac Herzog attended the memorial ceremony for the fallen soldiers of the First Lebanon War (Operation 'Peace for the Galilee'), held at Mount Herzl in Jerusalem. On the same day, the IDF announced that Israel had captured the historic Beaufort Castle and the surrounding strategic ridge as it pushed deeper into Lebanon.

This week, we call upon Friedman to delve into the cultural resonance of this Crusader fort for Israelis. He shares his perspective on the site based upon his personal experiences as a soldier before the IDF pullout from the security zone in 2000, which he recounted in his book, "Pumpkin Flowers."

After Friedman gives us the historical background to understand the conflict, we discuss the catch-22 Israel is again sucked into in southern Lebanon.

And so, this week, we ask Matti Friedman, what matters now.


Ryan McBeth: No, the U.S. Military Is Not Being “Merged” With Israel
A claim is spreading online that Section 224 of the National Defense Authorization Act would secretly “integrate” the U.S. and Israeli militaries.

That is not what the text says.

In this video, I break down what Section 224 actually does, why military coordination is not the same thing as annexation, and why the U.S. already coordinates with allies on technology, air defense, communications, and command-and-control systems.

We’ll talk about NATO standardization, THAAD, Israeli air defense, Trophy APS, Spike NLOS, and why modern militaries need to be able to shoot, move, and communicate in the same battlespace.

Coordination is not a conspiracy. It is what professional militaries do.


British couple held in Iran lose appeal against 10-year prison sentence
A British couple held in Iran have lost their appeal against a 10-year prison sentence, their family said on Tuesday, adding that the pair were not allowed to attend the hearing and had little information about the proceedings.

Craig and Lindsay Foreman were sentenced to 10 years in a Tehran prison last year after Iran charged them with espionage, which they deny.

The family said the appeal was conducted without their knowledge and the couple had been asked to sign documents in Farsi that they could not read.

“They were not permitted to attend their own appeal hearing,” Lindsay Foreman’s son, Joe Bennett, said in a statement, adding that the family did not know whether the couple had received a proper account of the case presented for them.

Iran’s Judiciary did not immediately respond to a call for comment from Reuters.

Britain’s foreign ministry said: “We are disappointed by the appeal decision and will continue working to ensure that Craig and Lindsay are returned safely to the UK.”

Bennett said the case had now been referred to Iran’s Supreme Court but that the process and timeline remained unclear, adding that the couple was effectively without legal representation.

He also said the pair were on hunger strike in protest.




Australian Jewish Association: The ABC insults Australian Jews all over again by giving Grace Tame her own podcast
When I first heard that the ABC had hired Grace Tame to host a new podcast called 'Autistic AF', I assumed it was a joke. I simply could not believe that Australia's public broadcaster could be so tone-deaf.

Tame has done important and courageous things in her life, but the ABC is doing a disservice both to the autistic community and to the Australian public.

The broadcaster must have known that Tame's recent inflammatory political activism will inevitably overshadow the subject she is supposed to be discussing.

Instead of a national conversation about autism, the focus will be on Grace Tame's controversies.

The first episode of the podcast explores how Tame has been labelled "divisive" and "difficult".

Let's examine some of the recent conduct that earned her those labels.

Not long after the Bondi attack, Tame led a public chant of "From Gadigal to Gaza, globalise the Intifada."

The Intifada was a period marked by sustained terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians, including stabbings, shootings and suicide bombings that claimed more than 1,000 lives.

Among the victims was 15-year-old Australian girl Malki Roth, who was murdered in a suicide bombing in Jerusalem.

The backlash from across the political spectrum was swift and covered extensively by the ABC.

NSW Labor Premier Chris Minns described the comments as "terrible".

Federal Opposition Leader Angus Taylor said, "Globalise the intifada is a call for violence, let's be clear."
Sky News Australia: ABC’s ‘terrible error of judgement’ in selecting Grace Tame for new podcast
Shadow Home Affairs Minister Jonathon Duniam claims the ABC has made a “terrible error of judgement” in selecting Grace Tame for a new podcast.


Grace Tame's new ABC podcast 'actually problematic', Charlie Pickering says, months after ‘globalise the intifada’ controversy
An ABC star has labelled former Australian of the Year Grace Tame's new podcast with the public broadcaster "problematic".

Ms Tame premiered a new podcast with the ABC on Tuesday, months after she came under fire for her involvement in a pro-Palestine protest where she led a “globalise the intifada” chant.

ABC star Charlie Pickering, host of The Weekly, told political YouTuber Avi Yemini he thought the move was "problematic".

"I do actually think it's problematic, that's my personal opinion," he said beside an Iranian rally.

"As a Jewish Australian there is a complete misunderstanding of a lot of the words that are said and what the true meanings of them are.

"And a lot of people are using words and phrases that have meaning well beyond what they think they do."

He said some people on "protest bandwagons" were ignorant to the true meanings of some protest slogans.

Mr Pickering clarified he was not talking about the particular pro-Palestine protest or Grace Tame.

Ms Tame's new taxpayer-funded series, Autistic AF with Grace Tame, is published as part of the broadcaster’s We Need To Talk collection.





Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

Reclaiming the Covenant on America's 250th (May 2026)

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

    

 

 

at