Pages

▼

Wednesday, August 19, 2026

08/18 Links Pt1: Israel confirms striking Syrian air base, saying Turkey was planning to deploy forces; The hostages held by Hamas at Al-Shifa Hospital; Palestinians would rather be permanent victims than have their own state

From Ian:

Gerald Posner: Genocide for Dummies
There is a question the statistics above cannot answer on their own, and almost nobody thinks to ask it: who, exactly, is Israel at war with?

Genocide requires intent to destroy a protected group as such — national, ethnic, racial, religious. Not a government or army or a political movement. That is why the Khmer Rouge, who killed a quarter of Cambodia, were convicted of genocide only as to the Cham and the Vietnamese. So, the threshold question in Gaza is whether the belligerent Israel is fighting is Hamas or the Palestinian people. Most of Israel’s own conduct supports the former inference.

Start with the most obvious fact, which is so obvious that it disappears. Israel negotiates with Hamas—repeatedly, publicly, through Qatari and Egyptian mediators—over ceasefires and hostage exchanges and the return of bodies. There is a ceasefire in force as I write this. Nobody negotiates a truce with a people it intends to erase, because the point of erasure is that there will be no one left to negotiate with. The Wehrmacht did not broker prisoner exchanges with the Jews of Warsaw. The Interahamwe did not sign agreements with the Tutsi. In every case on the recognized list, the perpetrator’s relationship with the victim group was total and one-directional. Here it is bilateral, mediated, and ongoing.

Second, South Africa, which brought the genocide case against Israel before the ICJ in December 2023, identifies “Palestinians” in Gaza as a substantial part of the broader Palestinian national, racial and ethnic group that extends far beyond Gaza. Roughly two million Arab citizens live inside Israel, vote in its elections, sit in its parliament, and have served on its Supreme Court. Some three million Palestinians live in the West Bank. If the intent were to destroy Palestinians as such, one might expect the campaign to reach the group wherever it is found. That is what happened in the actual genocides: the Nazis pursued Jews across a continent, into countries they did not govern; the Hutu Power militias hunted Tutsi from one prefecture to the next.

The Genocide Convention says, “in whole or in part,” and tribunals have held that a geographically limited portion of a group can qualify — Srebrenica was one town. The absence of any campaign against Palestinians in Haifa or Nazareth therefore does not by itself defeat the charge. It does, however, make the claim considerably harder. Why would a state supposedly bent on destroying a people be content to concentrate its military actions only where Hamas governed and attacked from? Under the ICJ’s test, that alternative cannot simply be wished away.

Third, some Palestinians in Gaza publicly make the distinction themselves. In March 2025, hundreds took to the streets of Beit Lahia and Deir al-Balah in the largest anti-Hamas demonstrations since the war began. One protester told CNN that he was oppressed by both the occupation army and Hamas, and that Hamas launched October 7 while Gazans paid the price. Reporting through 2024 and 2025 documented widening anger at a movement that fought from tunnels while civilians absorbed the response.

Those protests do not tell us what all Gazans think, and the victims’ perceptions do not determine the perpetrator’s intent. They establish something narrower: some Gazans distinguish Hamas from Israel’s war against Hamas even while condemning Israel’s occupation and attacks. That distinction is consistent with the alternative inference that Israel’s object was to defeat Hamas, not to destroy Palestinians as such.

The ICC warrants against Netanyahu and his then–defense minister Yoav Gallant allege that Israel’s conduct during the offensive constituted war crimes and crimes against humanity, including starvation as a method of warfare, murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts. But assuming for the sake of argument that what is alleged in the ICC warrants was correct, look at what they do not say. The prosecutor assessed the same evidence everyone else has examined, before the same court that would have to sustain the charge, and he did not charge genocide. He is far from anyone’s idea of an Israeli apologist, and yet he had the option.

This is the distinction the chant of genocide obliterates. There is an enormous legal and moral difference between a state that fights a war brutally, and one that sets out to eliminate a people. The first describes a great many wars, including wars fought by countries whose citizens are now doing the chanting. The second describes a small handful of adjudicated cases in the modern era, aand Gaza does not fit their pattern.

The Battle of Mosul in 2016 and 2017 produced devastation — a city largely destroyed, thousands of civilians killed, an enemy entrenched in residential blocks — and no serious legal analysis called it genocide. The difference was not the destruction. It was the enemy.

Fighting Hamas in Gaza kills Palestinians. That is a fact, and I am not going to soften it with a euphemism. But killing Palestinians while fighting Hamas and killing Palestinians in order to destroy Palestinians are different acts with different names, and the entire architecture of international criminal law rests on keeping them apart.
British Historian: "Hamas Must Be Dismantled"
The historian Simon Sebag Montefiore says, "The October 7 Hamas attacks against Israel...changed everything. It was years in the planning that did what it was meant to do, which was to put the Palestinian issue at the center of the world, unleash the ideology of anti-Zionism in Western universities, and nix the Saudis normalizing agreements with Israel. The only thing it hasn't succeeded in is helping the Palestinian people."

The speed and intensity of anti-Israel sentiment that has spread like wildfire through Britain took Montefiore "by surprise." "There's nowhere better to live now than Britain or America or France than at any other point in the last 10,000 years. Yet that unprecedented comfort, liberalism and freedom have permitted the hothouse of exciting but intolerant radicalisms such as 'de-colonialization,' anti-Americanism,' 'anti-Westernism,' 'Third-World-ism'...particularly in many cultural, academic and media institutions in this country."

"People absolutely have the freedom to preach the destruction of the liberal democracies that protect them. I'm not in favor of banning or cancelling anybody unless they're encouraging killing. But a lot of the people on the pro-Palestinian marches in this country, for example, were doing just that....They were also filled with extreme ideologues, who were backing Iran, and who were backing Hamas."

While Montefiore has long been a champion of a Palestinian state, he says Britain's "recognition of a Palestinian state, for instance, was a [virtue-signaling] absurdity that achieved nothing. Instead, it revealed Britain's impotence in the Middle East and it rewarded a genocidal organization that is much more nihilistic than humanitarian....Hamas must be dismantled."
The hostages held by Hamas at Al-Shifa Hospital
In the final months of 2023, the eyes of the global public were firmly fixed on Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza. As international media heavyweights—including The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal—reported extensively on the military operations, the medical crisis, and the conflicting claims of the warring parties, a profound systemic flaw characterized the coverage.

The mainstream international reporting largely followed the official narratives of the information war. While The Wall Street Journal detailed how Israel released footage attempting to prove the site was used by militants, The New York Times focused on official video releases showing tunnel infrastructure under the besieged hospital, and The Washington Post published deep open-source analyses on the military claims, these major outlets remained confined within a narrow framework: they focused primarily on macro-level military infrastructure, tunnel claims, and institutional statements.

What was missing from virtually all major Western reports during those critical weeks was the forensic reality of the micro-level visual material generated by the actors themselves. While major newsrooms analyzed satellite coordinates and official releases, they overlooked or omitted the immediate, local choreography happening at the gates and in the courtyards of the hospital—including the unhindered movement of local participants documenting the aftermath of the October 7 events.

This investigation closes that gap. It does not offer a general overview of wartime politics; rather, it provides a forensic, image-by-image reconstruction of the path taken by the hostages and their captors. By combining geolocation, frame-by-frame video analysis, and contemporaneous field communications, this dossier challenges the uncritical or restricted framing accepted by major global news outlets in late 2023—providing the definitive record that was missing when the story broke.
Remains of Yehuda Katz, IDF soldier who went missing in 1982 battle, returned to Israel
The remains of Israeli soldier Sgt. First Class Yehuda Katz, who went missing in the First Lebanon War’s battle of Sultan Yacoub in 1982, were returned to Israel on Tuesday, the military announced, with Israeli leaders hailing the country’s commitment to bring back every missing or fallen soldier.

The battle, 44 years ago, was a skirmish between the Israel Defense Forces and the Syrian army in Lebanon’s Beqaa Valley. It claimed the lives of 21 Israeli servicemen and injured more than 30.

Katz, a tank soldier, went missing during the battle, along with Sgt. First Class Zachary Baumel and Sgt. First Class Zvi Feldman.

Baumel’s remains were recovered with Russian assistance and returned to Israel in 2019, and Feldman’s remains were recovered by Mossad agents in May 2025.

In a statement, the Israel Defense Forces said that in a special operation led by the Military Intelligence Directorate, in coordination with the Mossad spy agency, Katz’s bones were located and brought to Israel for burial. No details were given on where they were found.

The operation was based on intelligence obtained in recent months, according to the military. The IDF added that the finding was made possible due to a “series of intelligence and operational activities that continued for more than four decades, since he fell in battle.”

Earlier on Tuesday, the IDF said that personal findings belonging to Katz were brought back to Israel during the operation and given to his family for inspection. Meanwhile, Katz’s bones were taken for identification and confirmed on Tuesday evening to belong to the slain soldier.

The military said Katz’s family was updated over the years regarding the ongoing efforts to locate his remains and return them to Israel. “Upon completion of the mission, the family was informed of the return of their loved one. Unfortunately, Yehuda’s parents, Sarah and Yosef Katz, did not live to receive the news,” the army said.

In a statement, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir said, “The return of Yehuda Katz, the last fallen soldier from the Battle of Sultan Yacoub, is a significant moment for the IDF and for the State of Israel.”

“Decades have passed, but our duty toward our fallen has not changed. We will leave none of our people behind,” Zamir added.

The military chief later spoke with Katz’s family, which he told, “After 44 years, the Battle of Sultan Yacoub has come to an end.”

“All those missing from the battle have been returned to Israel. This is a special day for me, both as chief of the general staff and as a soldier of the Armored Corps,” Zamir was quoted as saying. “From the day I enlisted in the Armored Corps, I was raised on the legacy of that battle and on the moral commitment to bring all of our missing home. An entire nation stands united with you and shares in your emotion today.”


David Harris: Too many Palestinians would rather be permanent victims than have their own state
And on it goes. One lost opportunity after another. Children quickly learn that words like “do-over” and “second chance” do not always apply in real life. How many more missed opportunities must pass before the Palestinian “no” finally becomes a genuine, rather than tactical, “yes”?

History may seem boring, distracting, or irrelevant to some. Slogans, memes, and chants might feel more energising and emotionally satisfying.

But the inescapable truth is this: too many Palestinian leaders have perpetuated a politics of victimhood, fostered dependence on international aid, promoted educational curricula and media messages that demonise Jews and glorify “martyrdom”, and rejected repeated opportunities for meaningful compromise in pursuit of the fantasy of Israel’s disappearance.

That approach has led nowhere – and it never will. Israel is not going anywhere. It would be far wiser for responsible international leaders and bodies to stop decades of indulging, coddling, and subsidising this dysfunctional behaviour.

Rather, they should raise the bar and insist on the emergence of Palestinian leaders committed to educating for compromise, preparing their people for coexistence, and choosing responsible nation-building over perpetual conflict.
Poll: Decline in Palestinian Support for Hamas
Only 20% of Palestinians say that Hamas emerged victorious from the war in Gaza, according to a poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in the West Bank and Gaza on August 5-8, 2026.

In Oct. 2025, 39% said that Hamas had emerged victorious. In the West Bank, 21% now say that Hamas emerged victorious, compared with 48% ten months ago.

If legislative elections were held, Fatah would receive 32%, followed by Hamas with 29%. Ten months ago, 44% said they would vote for Hamas, 30% for Fatah.

This means Hamas has lost more than ten points in ten months. In the West Bank, Hamas support fell from 40% to 25%. In Gaza, Hamas support fell from 49% to 34%.

27% support the armed struggle as the best means of achieving Palestinian goals, compared with 40% in Oct. 2025.

Support in Gaza for the armed struggle declined from 34% to 21%, while support in the West Bank declined from 43% to 32%.

In the recent war between the U.S. and Iran, 45% say that they were with Iran, while 12% say that they were against Iran.

44% support and 50% oppose the two-state solution.

65% believe that the Palestinian Authority has become a burden on the Palestinian people.
Israelis No Longer Accept Diplomatic Deals that Leave the Enemy Standing
Israelis today doubt the ability of diplomatic agreements to prevent Hamas from rearming and rebuilding its military strength.

The true test is what happens on the ground. Since Oct. 7, the Israeli public perceives any arrangement that does not guarantee a fundamental change in the security reality as a threat to the achievements of the war.

Diplomatic deals are seen as nothing more than a lifeline for the enemy's survival, temporary arrangements that allow Hamas and Hizbullah to rebuild their fighting forces in preparation for the next confrontation with Israel.

The continuation of the war effort against Hamas and Hizbullah entails significant costs. However, Israel may have to pay higher costs if the enemy is left standing strong.
Iran's Secret Plan to Escalate the War
After President Trump signed a memorandum of understanding with Iran in mid-June, Iran's leaders moved to give the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps more control of the country's regular army, expanded domestic counterintelligence operations, and ramped up production of missiles and drones. Iran attacked ships to tighten its grip on the Strait of Hormuz and expanded the battlefield to the Red Sea.

Arab intelligence officials intercepted communications between Iran and its militia allies in Yemen and Iraq to get their forces ready to widen the war and raise the costs for the U.S. The Revolutionary Guard used the calm created by the memorandum of understanding to lay the groundwork with allied militias to step up attacks if needed, sending advisers to Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon to discuss the plans.

The Revolutionary Guard supervised deployments of missiles, naval weapons and drone launchers to positions overlooking the Red Sea. It also provided Yemeni militants with intelligence, target lists including Saudi ports and energy facilities, and advice on sheltering from Saudi retaliation. The Revolutionary Guard threatened Gulf states that it would destroy their energy facilities if the U.S. were to hit similar sites in Iran, sending detailed lists of targets to its Arab counterparts.

"We took full advantage of the ceasefire period," Revolutionary Guard spokesman Brig.-Gen. Hossein Mohebbi told Tasnim news agency in July. "We enhanced our capabilities, accelerated our missile production rate and improved missile accuracy."
The Folly of Negotiating with Islamists
Imagine that after Sept. 11, American leaders had proposed negotiating with al-Qaeda rather than destroying it.

The discussion would not have centered on dismantling its terrorist infrastructure, but on what concessions the West should make to persuade Osama bin Laden to stop attacking it.

The idea is absurd. No serious American leader suggested bargaining with al-Qaeda or ISIS to moderate their ambitions.

The U.S. hunted down and killed bin Laden and his comrades, and helped uproot ISIS and destroy its caliphate.

The lesson was clear: Movements committed to religious conquest and perpetual jihad cannot be appeased. They must be defeated.

This lesson has been forgotten by those who believe that America can appease Iran and that sanctions relief can moderate its behavior.

Iran's rulers view themselves as leaders of a revolutionary Islamic movement whose mission extends well beyond Iran's borders.

What separates them from al-Qaeda is not ambition. It is capacity: territory, an industrial base, oil revenue, embassies, a seat at the UN, and a nuclear program.
Foreign Policy Magazine Becomes Mouthpiece for Qatar, Spouting Anti-Israel Views and Denouncing US Iran Policy: Publication Has Financial Ties to Gulf State
Foreign Policy, the influential Washington-based publication, has financial ties to the State of Qatar, according to a Washington Free Beacon review. Doha's patronage raises red flags about the magazine's coverage of issues like the Iran war, Israel's operations in Gaza, and other areas where Qatar is using its vast wealth to influence American foreign policy.

Foreign Policy, which calls itself "the global magazine of news and ideas," touts itself as an official partner of the Doha Forum—an annual conference founded by the State of Qatar—for which Foreign Policy produces podcasts and events. The Doha Forum is organized each year by Qatar's Ministry of Foreign Affairs "under the patronage" of its emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. Under that umbrella, Foreign Policy partners with it on two "Doha Debates" podcasts—Global Reboot and Counterpoint—and helped organize a January 2026 "high-level panel discussion" held on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos. The event, Qatar's state news agency said, was held as "a preparatory step toward the Doha Forum 2026, scheduled to be held in December in Qatar."

Amid this partnership, Foreign Policy magazine has published a noticeable number of breathless pieces that adopt Qatar's virulently anti-Israel views and also its objection to the U.S. war with Iran. Foreign Policy pieces have accused Israel of "genocide" and criticized President Donald Trump's "reckless war" against Iran. In other cases, the publication has lambasted Trump for triggering "a Middle East nuclear arms race" by inking a technology pact with Saudi Arabia—with which Qatar's relations are strained—and argued that Trump's Gaza peace plan is being stymied by Israel, rather than Hamas, whose leaders live openly in Qatar.

Foreign Policy has also paid Twitter to promote some of these articles, including a July piece that fawned over the foreign policy prowess of Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the founder of the far-left "squad" and fierce opponent of Israel and the American military campaign against Iran.

"FP spoke with 25 current and former advisors, progressive activists, and think tank experts in Ocasio-Cortez's orbit to map out her views on the Middle East, Latin America, and the world after Trump," the publication wrote in a July 17 X post that FP paid to "boost," or push into users' feeds (the post was marked as a paid advertisement). A July 30th post also marked as a paid advertisement declared, "If Trump continues to believe Iran will simply surrender to U.S. power, he will fail." Yet another from this month promoted a book purporting, as Foreign Policy put it, to detail "the architecture of Israel's genocide in Gaza" and its "systematic destruction" of it "street by street, farm by farm, and hospital by hospital."

Foreign Policy's paid social media promotion of its Qatar-friendly articles, combined with its financial ties to Qatar's lavishly funded influence operation, raises questions of how deeply the Qataris have penetrated the venerable magazine, or the type of influence Qatar may be peddling inside the publication, which was founded in 1970 and now owned by the Graham family, who famously used to own the Washington Post before selling it to Jeff Bezos. Foreign Policy is one of two publications controlled by Graham Holdings (the other is the liberal blog Slate) in a holding company made up of an eclectic list of companies ranging from the Kaplan education company to local TV stations, treated lumber, and car dealerships.
Trump admin sanctions ICC president, senior trial lawyer
The Trump administration imposed sanctions on Tuesday against the president of the International Criminal Court and a senior trial lawyer, escalating its campaign against the Hague-based tribunal over its investigations of Israeli and U.S. officials.

ICC president Tomoko Akane of Japan and Abdoulaye Seye of Senegal were designated for sanctions because they “have directly engaged in efforts by the ICC to investigate, arrest, detain or prosecute officials whose government has not consented to ICC jurisdiction,” U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated.

“The International Criminal Court is a corrupt and fatally politicized supranational court that has maliciously abused its authority and exceeded its mandate,” Rubio said. “We will not tolerate its assault on state sovereignty.”

The Trump administration has vowed to dismantle the court, which issued arrest warrants in 2024 for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes in the Gaza Strip. Israel and the United States are not parties to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC, though the court maintains that it has jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed in Palestinian territories.

The tribunal has also investigated alleged crimes by U.S. personnel in Afghanistan, prompting longstanding opposition from Washington.

The United States previously sanctioned ICC judges and prosecutors, including officials involved in the court’s cases concerning Israel. The latest designations add to Washington’s growing pressure campaign against the tribunal.

“Our whole-of-government campaign to dismantle the threat posed by the ICC to national sovereignty will be sweeping, and we expect more countries to join our campaign by ending their funding and participation in this politicized and unaccountable court,” Rubio said. “The ICC’s ability to target American nationals and those of other non-States Parties must end.”


An ‘insane’ job: Election heats up for next UN secretary-general
Mike Waltz, U.S. ambassador to the U.N., told lawmakers last month the U.S. is seeking a candidate who is focused on reform and cutting redundant agencies or positions and who will combat criticisms that the body is overly anti-Israel and antisemitic.

That likely disqualifies former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet in the eyes of some members. In 2021, Israel rejected a U.N. resolution pushed by Bachelet, in her role as U.N. human rights commissioner, to investigate Israel for war crimes committed during an 11-day war with Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

UN Watch, a nongovernmental organization describing itself as combating anti-Israel prejudice, antisemitism and racism at the United Nations, urged the Security Council to reject Bachelet’s bid, criticizing her for refusing to call out dictators and failing to condemn antisemitism during her human rights tenure.

Chile withdrew its nomination of support for her after the domestic election of a more right-wing government.

During a Senate hearing in April, Waltz said he agreed with a group of Republican lawmakers that has urged the U.S. to use its veto power to block Bachelet’s candidacy.

“I share your concerns, and I am sure I am safe in speaking for the Secretary [of State Marco Rubio]. He shares your concerns,” he said.

In the last straw poll, Bachelet received six “encourage,” five “discourage” and four “no opinions.”

Still, Costa Rica’s Grynspan, the daughter of Jewish refugees from World War II, is not necessarily a shoo-in for the role. The Times of Israel highlighted her time as head of the U.N.’s Conference on Trade and Development, which produced reports critical of Israel’s policies toward Palestinians.


US weighs scaling back Middle East military presence after months of Iranian attacks
The US is considering scaling back its military presence in the Middle East as a result of the war with Iran, The Washington Post reported Tuesday, citing several officials familiar with the matter.

The Pentagon's policy office is leading the current evaluations, one source told the newspaper, adding that the Joint Staff and US Central Command (CENTCOM) are also taking part.

The issue is expected to cause a rift between hawkish members of the administration who tend to favor more intervention and the dovish, non-interventionist camp, The Washington Post cited another source as saying.

CENTCOM chief Adm. Brad Cooper has been involved in the discussions, one source said, adding that he supports discussing the relocation of Gulf troops westward. US bases were, in some cases, evacuated before Feb. strikes

The Persian Gulf is one of the major arenas in which the Pentagon is looking at making cuts, the report cited two sources as saying. In some cases, it, the US is considering not rebuilding bases damaged by Iran during the recent fighting.

Many of these bases were evacuated in February before the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran, a person familiar with the details told the newspaper, saying that the bases were considered vulnerable to drone and missile attacks.

"Iran thinks we are in the traditional places," they said.
Israel confirms striking Syrian air base, saying Turkey was planning to deploy forces
Israel confirmed late Tuesday that it was behind overnight airstrikes against a Syrian military airport, where it claimed Turkey was planning to deploy forces.

“Israel and Syria agreed to a status quo in security matters, which Syria was on the verge of breaching by permitting Turkish troops to deploy at an airbase near Aleppo,” said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office in an English-language statement.

The Prime Minister’s Office said Israel “repeatedly warned Syria that such a deployment would pose a threat to Israel’s security.”

“Syria chose to ignore these warnings,” Netanyahu’s office said, adding that Israel “will not tolerate threats to its security, and would welcome a return to the status quo.”

In response, Ankara decried “the frivolous allegations put forward by the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office,” according to a Turkish government statement quoted by the Anadolu state news agency, saying they “aim to legitimize Israel’s unlawful airstrikes targeting Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

An unnamed Turkish official also denied to Axios that Ankara was seeking to establish a military presence at the Abu Duhur air base in Idlib province.

“There was no Turkish presence at the airbase. Israel is inventing pretexts to bomb neighboring countries and destabilize the region,” the official asserted.

Deconfliction mechanism
The attack marked extraordinary defiance by Israel of the United States, which has sought to support Syria’s new government led by a former jihadist allied with Turkey. US special envoy for Syria Tom Barrack criticized the strikes as an “unnecessary escalation that does not advance regional stability.”

An Israeli security source cited by the Kan public broadcaster said Israel had intelligence it shared with the US on Turkish efforts to deploy troops at the base, and that the strikes were only carried out after attempts to dialogue with Syria failed. The report did not specify how the US responded to the Israeli intelligence.

Barrack, a business friend of US President Donald Trump who is also ambassador to Turkey, later said the United States was working to establish a deconfliction mechanism among Israel, Turkey and Syria.

According to Barrack, Turkey was not warned about the Israeli strikes, “and consequently observed the aircraft heading north toward its territory and therefore could have reasonably prepared its own response,” referring to possible Turkish military reaction.

“Thankfully, calm heads were able to prevent the situation from deteriorating further,” Barrack told Reuters in a phone interview. US Ambassador to Turkey and Special Envoy to Syria Tom Barrack speaks in a panel during the Antalya Diplomacy Forum, in Antalya, southern Turkey, Friday, April 17, 2026. (AP/Riza Ozel)

Turkey, which has NATO’s second-largest army and signed a mutual defense pact this month with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, has become one of Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s main allies.

Ankara has been training Syria’s army, helping it rebuild state institutions and infrastructure and providing military and diplomatic support.

Israel’s strikes on the Syrian airbase “reflected a perception — whether accurate or misplaced — that Türkiye might in the near future increase its presence at that base,” Barrack said, using the Turkish name for Turkey.
IAEA finds ‘tons’ of nuclear material in Syria; Damascus: We’ll keep it for ‘peaceful’ energy use
The head of the UN’s nuclear watchdog said Tuesday that its inspectors had found several tons of nuclear material in Syria, at a site which the authorities said they reported to the agency last month.

Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), praised Damascus’s “courageous decision” to report the undisclosed site, which dates to the Assad era, and said the material would be put under “international safeguards.”

“We are talking about a few tons of nuclear material that could be put to bad use,” he said.

Speaking at a joint press conference with Grossi, however, Syria’s Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani indicated that the material would be used toward a peaceful nuclear energy program.

“On July 17, we sent an official letter to the agency, in which we declared of our own free will the presence of nuclear materials at an undeclared site within the legacy left by the former regime,” said Shaibani.

He said that “technical assessments” indicate that “these materials do not pose a risk,” adding that they “will remain in Syrian national custody and subject to the agency’s safeguards system.”

Shaibani asserted Syria’s “sovereign and legal right” to pursue a peaceful nuclear program, and said Syria had the right to use nuclear energy “for civilian and peaceful purposes.”

Grossi, meanwhile, said, “this material will be accounted for, will be put within the international safeguards system.”
PM, Kushner clashed over continued Israeli strikes on Oct. 7 terrorists — officials
The main dispute during Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s meeting on Monday with US special envoy Jared Kushner was over the premier’s insistence that Israel continue carrying out strikes on Hamas operatives who allegedly took part in the terror group’s October 7 onslaught, an official present at the sit-down told The Times of Israel.

Earlier this month, Israel acknowledged having established a special operation to hunt down and kill every single Palestinian terrorist involved in the October 7, 2023, invasion and atrocities.

The mission has resulted in countless apparent violations of the ceasefire that Israel and Hamas inked in October 2025, but the US-controlled Board of Peace has not adamantly objected, as the Israel Defense Forces in most cases has claimed those targeted posed an imminent threat to troops.

For months, the Board of Peace prioritized coaxing Hamas to accept its disarmament proposal, which it finally did on July 30.

Once in place, the plan envisions both sides immediately halting all military operations, though Netanyahu has come out against the proposal and raised that specific issue during his meeting with Kushner, according to the official present.

While Kushner assured Netanyahu that he would not oppose Israeli strikes against those who genuinely pose an “imminent threat,” US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior aide told the premier that the rationale should not be widely interpreted, the official said.

To the frustration of the Board of Peace delegation, Netanyahu insisted the strikes against participants in the October 7 attack would continue, according to the official, who added that no agreement was reached on the matter.
Israel, U.S. Agree Hamas Weapons Will Go to U.S.-Led International Stabilization Force for Destruction, Not to Palestinian Government
Israel and the U.S. have reached an understanding that, during the initial stage of Hamas's disarmament, its weapons will be handed over to the International Stabilization Force (ISF), headed by U.S. Maj.-Gen. Jasper Jeffers, for destruction, rather than to the proposed National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG).

At a meeting on Monday between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and senior officials from the Board of Peace, including senior Trump adviser Jared Kushner, which was also attended by senior Israeli security officials, the sides reached a series of understandings regarding the proposed Gaza framework and the steps to be implemented.

The arrangement is intended to provide a verifiable mechanism to prevent Hamas's weapons from being transferred to another Palestinian authority without first being destroyed. The talks also produced an understanding that Hamas must immediately begin demonstrating its commitment to the disarmament process. Hamas must begin handing over weapons now rather than wait for all other elements of the ceasefire framework to be completed.
US charges 17 Iranians in cyber campaign targeting universities, including Israeli schools
The U.S. Department of Justice charged 17 Iranians in a sweeping cyber-theft campaign accused of stealing academic research and intellectual property from hundreds of universities worldwide, including institutions in Israel.

A 14-count superseding indictment unsealed in Manhattan federal court charges members of the Iran-based Mabna Institute, which prosecutors say conducted cyber intrusions on behalf of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and other Iranian government and university clients.

Nine of the 17 defendants were previously charged in the original 2018 indictment. Tuesday’s indictment adds eight defendants and describes additional cyberattacks against American and international institutions.

The hacking campaign began in about 2013 and continued through at least December 2017, according to the indictment. The defendants allegedly targeted more than 100,000 professor accounts worldwide and compromised about 8,000 accounts at 144 U.S. universities and 178 universities abroad.

The hackers allegedly stole at least 31.5 terabytes of academic data and intellectual property, including journals, theses, dissertations and electronic books. The material covered fields including science and technology, engineering, medicine, social sciences and other professional disciplines.

U.S. universities spent more than $3.4 billion to obtain and access the data and intellectual property targeted in the campaign, according to the Justice Department.

The operation also targeted the private sector and government agencies. The defendants allegedly compromised employee email accounts at at least 42 U.S. companies, 11 foreign companies and five U.S. federal and state agencies, as well as organizations including the United Nations and the U.N. Children’s Fund.
UAE cuts off trade with Iran after ballistic-missile attack
The United Arab Emirates announced that it was cutting off trade with Iran on Tuesday after the Islamic Republic fired two ballistic missiles at the country in Iran’s first attack against the UAE in months.

The UAE’s Ministry of Defense said that the pair of missiles were targeting maritime shipping and fell into the sea without causing damage. An earlier statement said the missiles were detected by the country’s air defenses and that one had fallen within UAE territorial waters.

The attempted strike prompted air defense alerts for residents in Dubai and the neighboring emirate of Sharjah.

Hours after the attack, Afra Al Hameli, director of the UAE foreign ministry’s strategic communications department, said that the country was cutting its economic ties with Iran.

“In light of regional escalations that undermine regional and international peace and security, all trade, commercial exchanges, and financial transactions with Iran have been halted until further notice,” Al Hameli said.

Despite their regional rivalry, the UAE has long been one of Iran’s top trading partners and UAE-based entities attempting to use the country as a haven for Iranian assets are frequently targeted by U.S. sanctions.

Since the United States and Israel launched the war against Iran in February, the UAE has been the target of more Iranian missile and drone attacks than any other country in the region

As of early April, the UAE said that it had intercepted nearly 3,000 Iranian missiles and drones, but there have not been any successful strikes on the country since a May 4 attack damaged an industrial petroleum complex in Fujairah, a port on the Gulf of Oman with a critical oil pipeline that bypasses the contested Strait of Hormuz.

The attack comes as the United States and Iran remain deadlocked over the status of the conflict.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday that Iran has used the time since the signing of a ceasefire memorandum in mid-June to prepare for an escalating conflict and has ramped up missile and drone production. On Monday, the 60-day deadline described in the memorandum of understanding to reach a final ceasefire deal expired, with neither side suggesting that the conflict was nearing a conclusion.
Pilot Zones in Southern Lebanon Are Not Sufficient
The pilot zones in Southern Lebanon were intended to serve as a practical test of the Lebanese state's ability and willingness, through the Lebanese Armed Forces, to implement the understandings with Israel: to prevent Hizbullah's return and thwart the rehabilitation of its infrastructure.

However, developments in Zoutar al-Gharbiyeh, the first pilot zone, point to the opposite trend. Under cover of the Lebanese Army's presence, Hizbullah apparatuses are returning to the village and re-establishing a civilian foothold there, which could serve as the foundation for renewed military entrenchment.

At the end of July, operatives from Hizbullah's Islamic Health Organization were seen operating in Zoutar al-Gharbiyeh, including recovering the bodies of dead Hizbullah members, while accompanied by the Lebanese Army. The organization does not belong to the Lebanese state. During the war, its ambulances were used to transport Hizbullah operatives and weapons, while its medical facilities were used for military-terrorist purposes, including as assembly points and command posts.

It was joined on July 29 by the "Help One Another" association (Wa Ta'awanu), another civilian arm affiliated with Hizbullah, to "assist the return of residents." It provides food and meals, maps the needs of the population, and participates in rehabilitation and cleanup activities in cooperation with the Lebanese Army.

This is precisely the sphere in which Hizbullah has operated for years. Through health, welfare, education, construction and financial institutions, Hizbullah creates dependence among the population on the services it provides and establishes a civilian support structure that also facilitates its military activity.

This highlights the central problem with the pilot-zone model: Dismantling weapons and military infrastructure is not sufficient if, at the same time, Hizbullah's civilian apparatuses are allowed to return to the area. These mechanisms constitute the social, economic and logistical infrastructure upon which Hizbullah is able to rebuild itself.

The pilot zone of Zoutar al-Gharbiyeh was supposed to demonstrate that the Lebanese Army was capable of replacing Hizbullah as both the sovereign authority and the provider of services on the ground. Yet the emerging picture is the opposite. Hizbullah's apparatuses are operating alongside the Lebanese Army and under its protection. The failure of the pilot zones began on the day Hizbullah's civilian apparatuses returned.


IDF says it hit meeting of elite Hamas commanders near Gaza port; six reported dead
The Israel Defense Forces on Tuesday struck what it said was a meeting of Hamas commanders and elite operatives in Gaza City, in an attack that the Hamas-run civil defense agency killed six and wounded 14.

The military said the strike, near the city’s port, targeted commanders and members of Hamas’s Nukhba Force, which led the October 7, 2023, invasion of Israel that started the war in Gaza.

One of the terrorists targeted on Tuesday had himself invaded Israel during the onslaught, according to the IDF.

The military said the targets included a Nukhba company commander, three platoon commanders and several other terror operatives who were planning attacks against Israeli troops operating in the Strip.

The results of the strike would be released once they were verified, the IDF said.

Mahmoud Bassal, a spokesperson for Gaza’s civil defense agency, which operates under Hamas authority, told AFP that at least six were killed, “including a child, and a large number were wounded, as a result of an Israeli raid on tents of displaced people in Gaza port.” The bodies of Palestinians killed in an Israeli army strike on the Gaza port are brought to Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, August 18, 2026. (AP Photo/Jehad Alshrafi)

Shifa Hospital in Gaza City said it had received five bodies and 13 injured, one of whom died later in the evening.

Eyewitness Mohammed Alghoul told AFP: “Israeli warplanes fired two missiles at the ‘Sweet and Bitter’ cafe on the fishermen’s port west of Gaza City.”

Hamas issued a statement condemning the strike, saying it exemplified Israel’s “blatant disregard for all calls for a ceasefire issued by mediators and guarantor states, including President Trump’s call yesterday,” apparently referring to comments the US leader made during a Fox News interview that Israel should not be striking in Gaza right now, and that Hamas was “giving up their guns.”

Hamas said on Tuesday it remained committed to the US-backed Gaza disarmament deal, a day after a source told The Times of Israel that the Board of Peace is considering abandoning its original framework, which would have seen the terror group disarming in phases, in favor of an all-at-once process supported by Israel.





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