Israel

An Israeli attack on a Syrian airbase has been widely condemned.

The United States envoy warns the incident could have caused a direct confrontation with Turkish forces.

So why did Israel attack the base? And what are the implications?

Presenter: Anna Burns-Francis

Guests:

Murat Yesiltas – Director of Foreign Policy Studies at the Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research (SETA) think tank

Haid Haid – Consulting fellow with the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House

Michael Mulroy – Former US deputy assistant secretary of defence for the Middle East

Canada official condemns Israel’s ‘invasion’ of Lebanon, calls for sovereignty as aid pledged to the crisis-hit nation.

Canada’s secretary of state for international development, Randeep Sarai, visited Lebanon to announce new humanitarian aid, condemning what he called Israel’s “unlawful invasion” of Lebanon.

During his visit, Sarai stated that Beirut should govern its own space. He also announced new programmes Canada is launching to support Lebanese families affected by the conflict, raising its total assistance to Lebanon this year to more than $50m.

“Our commitment is long-term, and we’re there for Lebanon,” said Sarai, who visited shelters housing people displaced by the war and Syrian refugees during his visit.

Amid the escalation between Israel and Lebanon in March, Canada warned on March 25 that Lebanese sovereignty and territorial integrity “must not be violated” and strongly condemned plans by Israeli forces to occupy southern Lebanon.

As part of the US-mediated framework agreement signed in late June, “pilot zones” were designed to return small areas in southern Lebanon from Israeli forces to the Lebanese army.

In late July, the Lebanese Armed Forces accused Israel of obstructing its efforts to take over control of security in southern Lebanon.

The war has killed more than 4,000 people and has caused widespread destruction across Lebanon. The United Nations says that about 360,000 people are displaced as a result of the latest conflict.

Home to a large Lebanese diaspora, Canada has given Lebanon about $575m in assistance in the past 10 years, Sarai said.

Sarai also met Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, who promised to reinstate state authority across Lebanon and to implement reforms to fight corruption.

Israeli officials said they will not pull out of Lebanon until Hezbollah is disarmed.

A day after a suspected Israeli attack on the Abu al-Duhur airbase near Idlib, northwest Syria, US Ambassador to Turkiye Tom Barrack has suggested creating a “deconfliction mechanism” between Turkiye, Syria and Israel. Barrack called the original attack – which he, along with the Syrian government, blamed on Israel – an “unnecessary escalation”.

But despite the intervention from the US official, analysts believe the proposal may not be able to stop Israel, which has conducted regular attacks on Syria for years, and continues to occupy Syrian territory.

“It is difficult to have a deconfliction mechanism [when] only one party [is] causing conflict in the first place,” Samy Akil, a senior adviser with The Syria Report, told Al Jazeera.

Analysts and diplomatic sources say that Israel is the party holding back progress on talks and the easing of tensions with Syria, which is under a new government since the overthrow of former President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024. At the end of a more than decade-long war, Syria is now seeking better relations with the West.

“Israeli-Syrian talks are stagnating because the ball is in Israel’s court and they don’t see a need to prioritise talks with Damascus currently,” Akil said.

Turkiye and Israel trade verbal shots

Under the former al-Assad regime, Israel often attacked Iranian-aligned targets or interests in Syria – including the Iranian consulate in Damascus in April 2024 – but avoided directly attacking Syrian state targets.

That changed when al-Assad fled in the early hours of December 8, 2024. Israel attacked Syria’s military infrastructure around the country, aiming to cripple the new government’s military forces. It also threatened the post-Assad military with deploying forces south of Damascus.

And since the fall of al-Assad, Israel has also shifted focus from Iranian influence in Syria to Turkish influence in the country. The Turks backed a number of anti-Assad rebel groups, many Syrians in exile spent considerable time in Turkiye, and Ankara has sought to build strong ties with Damascus and Syria’s new President Ahmed al-Sharaa.

Analysts told Al Jazeera that Tuesday’s attack was in fact a message from Tel Aviv directed at the halls of power in Ankara.

On Tuesday evening, the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office issued a statement that seemed to confirm that suspicion, while it stopped short of claiming responsibility for the actual attack.

“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,” the statement said.

“Israel repeatedly warned Syria that such a deployment would pose a threat to Israel’s security. Syria chose to ignore these warnings.”

Turkiye has slammed the Israeli account of events.

“The untenable allegations put forward by the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office are intended to legitimise Israel’s unlawful airstrikes targeting Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” the Republic of Turkiye’s Directorate of Communications said.

It also accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of pursuing “expansionist and destabilising policies in the region ahead of the elections in Israel”.

Israeli provocations in Syria

Enter US Ambassador Barrack and the idea of a deconfliction mechanism. This would act as a channel of communication between the concerned actors – Syria, Turkiye and Israel. It would be facilitated by the US, and would aim to prevent military escalations.

The strategy appears to be similar to what the US is trying to build in Lebanon between Beirut and Tel Aviv. That deal is aimed at stopping Israeli attacks on Lebanon, disarming Hezbollah, and convincing Israel to withdraw troops from southern Lebanon. However, experts say these processes have yet to show results, largely because of Israel’s military superiority and the Netanyahu government’s willingness to undermine negotiations through unilateral military actions.

For its part, the Syrian government has shown a strong willingness to find a solution with Israel, even if it has emphasised that it is not willing to agree to full normalisation.

That is despite the Israeli landgrab of Syrian territory in the Golan Heights and Jabal al-Sheikh in December 2024, and the continued deployment of checkpoints that harass and at times kidnap Syrian citizens.

Early on Wednesday morning, Israeli troops reportedly conducted a raid on Quneitra in southwestern Syria and abducted two people.

Analysts say that for any deconfliction mechanism to work, all parties must be committed to working towards the goal.

“In other words, at what point does a deconfliction mechanism provide added value when any sort of Syrian military buildup 300 kilometres [186 miles] away from Israeli borders is perceived as a threat?” Akil said, adding that Syria’s small Soviet-era air force would not “seriously pose a threat to Israel”.

Netanyahu’s re-election escalation

Galip Dalay, a senior research fellow at Chatham House, told Al Jazeera that for any mechanism to work, the US would need to apply pressure on Netanyahu’s government.

Dalay said Netanyahu, who is running for re-election in October, is likely looking for an escalation with either Lebanon or Syria – or in Palestine – after US President Donald Trump pressured Israel to back down in the war on Iran.

But earlier in August, Netanyahu explicitly rejected the Gaza disarmament plan announced by Trump, forcing it to be altered – and did not receive any public pushback from the US.

“If the US puts proper pressure on Israel, they would listen,” Dalay said. “We saw this with Iran. It was the US who made the decision, and even though Netanyahu didn’t like it, they had to go along with the decision.”

Dalay added: “The question is not only about if there is a need for a deconfliction mechanism in Syria; it is to what extent the US is willing to make it credible and functional, and if the US is willing to put pressure on Israel.”

Israeli air strikes on Gaza kill 10 Palestinians, targeting police headquarters and a refugee camp in separate attacks.

Israeli strikes have killed at least 10 Palestinians in two separate attacks targeting a Gaza City police post and Nuseirat refugee camp in central Gaza.

Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, condemned what it called “a new war crime”.

On Wednesday, medical sources at al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City said they received nine Palestinian bodies following an attack on the municipal police headquarters in the centre of Gaza City. Another 15 people were wounded.

Al Jazeera’s Hani Mahmoud, reporting from Gaza City, said the bombardment occurred at a busy time near a park crowded with civilians, including children.

Victims of the Gaza City strike included a newly-appointed Gaza City police chief, the director of a women’s police force, and several officers.

Earlier in the day, a strike on Nuseirat refugee camp killed one Palestinian, medics said, increasing Wednesday’s death toll to at least 10.

The Israeli army claimed its air force struck two Hamas commanders in Nuseirat, and that it later struck a Hamas commander in the Tuffah area of Gaza City, without providing evidence of their affiliation.

In a statement, Hamas rejected Israel’s justification that the strike targeted “resistance leaders”, calling the claim “baseless and false allegations used to justify its aggression and cover up its deliberate targeting of civilian police and unarmed civilians”.

Hamas accused the Israeli government of “deliberately undermining these efforts and dangerously pushing towards reigniting the war of extermination against our people in the Gaza Strip”.

On Tuesday, Israeli strikes killed seven people – including a child – and wounded 14 others at a crowded cafe on Gaza City’s harbour. The city’s port has been turned into a displacement camp, according to Wafa news agency.

The Israeli military again claimed, without providing evidence, that it had targeted Hamas commanders in the enclave.

Diplomatic deadlock

Wednesday’s attacks occurred two days after US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and Middle East envoy Jared Kushner visited the region to push for a Trump-backed deal to end to Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Kushner’s meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed to break a diplomatic deadlock after Netanyahu rejected an agreement for Israel to withdraw from the Strip in exchange for Hamas disarming.

Following the meeting, Kushner reiterated “Israel’s right to defend itself”. He threatened that Hamas must disarm or the US would support Israel to “finish the job in the appropriate way”.

The Israeli Air Force (IAF) is repositioning one of its AH-64 Apache squadrons from Ramon Air Base in the Negev to Ramat David Air Base in northern Israel, bringing a portion of the service’s attack helicopter force significantly closer to the Lebanese and Syrian fronts. The AH-64 has been of central importance in recent IAF operations, and the shift makes the relatively small Apache fleet better positioned for rapid-response missions, including greater persistence over the northern battlefield.

The IAF announced today that 190 “Magic Touch” Squadron would be transferring its aircraft from Ramon to Ramat David, the northernmost IAF base. This would involve increased aircraft activity in the country’s skies, but that there was no security concern. The unit currently operates the older AH-64A, known locally as Peten (python), which the IAF began to receive in 1990.

The IAF began to establish an attack helicopter force in response to the lessons of the October 1973 Yom Kippur War, particularly the need to counter large-scale enemy armored formations. Over the following decades, its role evolved from that of a dedicated tank-hunting force into a precision-strike capability able to engage a much broader range of threats, including irregular and guerrilla forces operating among civilian populations.

In the past, the IAF attack helicopter force comprised three frontline squadrons: 160 “First Attack Helicopter” Squadron, operating the AH-1, was at Palmachim, near Tel Aviv, while Ramon hosted the “Magic Touch” Squadron and 113 “Hornet” Squadron operating the newer AH-64D Saraf (serpent), which arrived in 2005.

When it arrived in Israel, the AH-64D (sometimes designated AH-64D-I) was one of the most advanced attack helicopters in the world. It combined the mission system of the U.S. Army AH-64D Apache Longbow, including its mast-mounted AN/APG-78 Longbow radar, with Israeli avionics. Among these are a Rafael voice communications and data suite (RAVNET 300) and Elta 1891 satellite communications (with prominent bulbous antennas carried on the outer parts of the stub wings). The locally developed mission management system is the Elbit HELICOM suite which provides a real-time overview of the battlefield. Finally, the Elisra Seraph self-protection suite includes an SPS-65 missile warning receiver and an SPJ-40 radar jammer as well as Elbit Rokar countermeasures dispensers.

After the Saraf entered IAF service, the fleet was subsequently expanded through the conversion of older AH-64A airframes to a similar standard.

The AH-64A upgrade also added an optional under-fuselage avionics pod, something that you can read about in more detail here.

Located near Haifa, Ramat David Air Base is one of the most historic in Israel. It was formerly operated by the U.K. Royal Air Force and was involved in combat from the very beginning of Israeli independence. Flying a succession of different fighters and fighter-bombers, units operating from the base were active in every major conflict that followed, including the Sinai campaign, the June 1967 Six-Day War, and the October 1973 War, when its squadrons fought over the Syrian and Lebanese fronts. Due to its proximity to Lebanon, Ramat David has played a major role in different campaigns fought in that country, starting in 1982.

Before the arrival of the “Magic Touch” Squadron, Ramat David was primarily an F-16 hub, with three squadrons flying the F-16C/D. These units have played a central role in Israeli air operations on the northern front, including operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza.

As for Ramon Air Base in the south, its history dates back to the early 1980s, when it was established in the Negev as part of the reorganization of IAF infrastructure following the withdrawal from Sinai under the peace treaty with Egypt. Ramon has been home to fighters and attack jets, including F-16s and A-4s.

Since the 2000s, Ramon has been a principal base for some of the most advanced IAF combat aircraft. As well as the AH-64D, it is home to three of the four F-16I Sufa squadrons. It is also understood to be the home of the secretive Israeli drone, referred to as RA-01 and used for covert missions. You can read more about that here.

Moving an AH-64 squadron from Ramon to Ramat David reflects a shift in the IAF’s priorities toward the northern front. Ramat David places the helicopters significantly closer to Lebanon and Syria, reducing transit times and allowing more of their limited endurance to be spent over the battlefield. This is particularly valuable for rapid-response missions and close air support, where the Apache’s sensors and precision weapons can provide immediate support to ground forces.

As detailed in our deep dive on the IDF’s air defenses, Israeli AH-64s have also been extensively used in counter-drone operations. Their flexibility and ability to operate at low speeds make them well suited to engaging certain types of unmanned aircraft, while their Hellfire missiles can be employed in an unconventional air-to-air role for this mission. Bearing in mind the threat posed by drones launched from Lebanon and Syria, this factor may also have played into the relocation.

An IDF video purportedly showing an Israeli AH-64 intercepting an Iranian UAV that crossed into Israeli territory:

Iranian UAV Intercepted by an Israeli Helicopter

In fact, there is a historical precedent for the move. Ahead of the June 1982 Lebanon War, the “Magic Touch” Squadron was transferred from Ramon to Ramat David to reduce the distance to its principal operational theater along the Lebanese border. Once again, between 1990 and 1995, the same squadron again flew its MD500 Defenders from Ramat David.

The new relocation also disperses the IAF’s relatively small Apache fleet between its northern and southern fronts, improving readiness at the cost of concentrating fewer helicopters at Ramon. It is worth noting that, at the time of the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack, only four Israeli AH-64s were actually on standby across the entire country. Two of these were on so-called short standby for potential deployment to the northern border within minutes, with the other two on long standby for the same area, meaning they would take longer to get into action. In total, the IAF has a fleet of around 48 AH-64s of both versions.

As of now, Israeli forces are no longer involved in a full-scale ground offensive on the northern front. However, they maintain a very active forward-defense posture, still hold positions in southern Lebanon, and limited ground operations continue. So, too, do airtrikes against Hezbollah infrastructure.

Separately, Israel maintains positions in Syria, in the former UN buffer zone and parts of Quneitra and western Daraa, while continuing raids and airstrikes in southern Syria. Only today, Israel reportedly struck Syria’s Abu al-Duhur airbase in the northwest, reportedly damaging the runway and storage facilities.

Time will tell how the long-term IAF Apache force looks. In January of this year, the U.S. State Department approved a possible Foreign Military Sale to Israel of 30 of the latest AH-64E Apaches and related equipment for an estimated cost of $3.8 billion. Israel might not take up all of those aircraft, but the Apache is currently central to its future plans.

Even before October 7, the IAF had been pushing to acquire another 40 of the AH-64E versions, after apparently concluding that an earlier plan to bolster its attack fleet by replacing the older AH-64As with armed drones was not feasible. This is a notably interesting development at a time in which other AH-64 customers are rethinking the value of the attack helicopter in general, due to questions about their survivability on the modern battlefield.

The transfer of an AH-64 squadron to Ramat David underscores the IAF’s growing emphasis on the northern front and the Apache’s expanding role beyond traditional anti-armor missions. By positioning the helicopters closer to Lebanon and Syria, the move should improve their responsiveness and endurance over the battlefield while giving the IAF greater flexibility in addressing a wider range of emerging threats.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

US president says Iran should ‘put up the white flag of surrender’ as the two nations’ MoU expired on Monday.

Tehran, Iran – Iranian authorities have signalled they could shift to a more offensive approach to the war with the United States as a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Washington expires.

Brigadier General Yadollah Javani, head of the political bureau of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), told state television on Sunday night that his forces were ready to take whatever action is needed to defend the country.

Tensions between Iran and the US over control of the Strait of Hormuz have continued to rise despite a ceasefire being agreed between them in June. While the MoU effectively collapsed after fighting restarted last month, the agreement officially expires on Monday.

“The enemy started the war and our efforts have been defensive, although they might take on an offensive aspect,” said Javani.

He did not elaborate on what exactly the offensive measures could entail, but said opponents should expect “strategic surprises”.

IRGC spokesman Hossein Mohebbi last week identified US and regional allies’ infrastructure – such as energy networks, power plants and internet-connected systems – as potential targets, if the US hits Iran’s civilian infrastructure.

Hardline Iranian politicians and media outlets have discussed the idea of mounting a ground incursion against US interests in Bahrain and Kuwait if Washington invades Iran.

Analysts have raised questions over the feasibility of that and the risks involved, while there is no recent indication that the US is planning ground operations in Iran.

The Iranian emphasis on offensive deterrence against the US comes after Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, viewed as a hardliner, consolidated his power by appointing several IRGC old guard and confidants to key military and security positions last week.

Khamenei said Major General Ahmad Vahidi’s rise to commander-in-chief of the IRGC must represent a mix of “maximum deterrence” with readiness for “powerful offensive operations against the enemy”.

Vahidi said Khamenei’s leadership and the Iranian armed forces had managed to “bring to its knees the most heavily-armed army in world history” after the US and Israel launched strikes in Iran on February 28, starting fierce fighting between the two sides.

US President Donald Trump reiterated on Friday his claim that Iran was defeated in the war while facing a naval blockade acting as a “wall of steel”. He also said the Strait of Hormuz would “pretty soon” be declared US territory.

The White House later suggested that comment was a joke, but Iran’s army chief, Amir Hatami, reacted by setting a $30,000 reward for any man who kills or captures a US soldier, if they are involved in any ground operation on Iranian soil. Women would be given twice the reward if they managed such a feat, he added.

“Our hands are open in terms of reaching the aggressors and they will become more open through our initiatives,” Hatami said, referencing recent Iranian attacks on US forces in Jordan.

Mohsen Rezaee, who has the powerful position of secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, suggested that the Trump administration might have been considering ground operations on Iranian territory, but held off as a result of “half-baked plans”.

Rezaee said that the US Central Command had refrained from hitting Tehran or northern Iran during the two-week flareup in fighting in July, instead attacking about 50 cities in 15 provinces.

He believed that the purpose of the air raids was to prepare for a ground assault to take control of the Strait of Hormuz and potentially reach nuclear facilities in Isfahan, where highly-enriched uranium is suspected of being buried under the rubble of US strikes.

Bridges, roads, maritime control towers, radar and other coastal installations, and military facilities were struck to cut off logistical supplies to southern Iran, Rezaee noted.

“They had not calculated that to land troops for the Strait of Hormuz, it’s not doable with 40,000-50,000 soldiers, you must bring at least 100,000 people,” he said. “You must cross the Zagros Mountains and be able to pass the Fars province.”

Iranian media and commanders have reported in recent weeks that scenarios are in place to defend individual islands and coastal areas in southern Iran that the US military might consider seizing. They include the critical oil export terminals on Kharg Island.

Iranian territories around the Strait of Hormuz have been reinforced with rapid-response units.

Army spokesman Mohammad-Reza Akraminia said last week that the aim will be to prevent any foreign troops landing on Iranian territory.

“If the Americans enter one of our islands, we will certainly target them on our own islands, let alone on other countries’ soil,” he told state TV.

Authorities have also signalled they are ready for any unrest provoked by separatist groups near Iran’s western borders with Iraq and Turkiye, or in the east with Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The IRGC has reportedly bolstered defences and continued to launch missile and drone strikes against armed groups based in Iraqi Kurdistan.

Iran shrugs off expired MoU

Javani, the political chief of the IRGC, said in a separate interview on Monday that the Strait of Hormuz will only fully reopen when Washington implements commitments agreed under the MoU signed in June.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that a two-month window to halt fighting was not specifically mentioned in the MoU text. The ministry also dismissed that the expiration had any particular significance to the war with the US, or Tehran’s ongoing talks with Oman regarding Hormuz.

“It has been proven many times that the Islamic Republic of Iran is not a party to devise its policies under pressure, ultimatums and deadlines. We decide based on our evaluations of what guarantees national interests and security,” Baghaei told reporters during a briefing on Monday.

He said the talks with Oman have so far been delayed in producing an arrangement on the partial reopening of Hormuz due to legal and technical complexities, the multiple actors involved and “ill-wishing parties” seeking to spoil the process.

Parliament speaker and chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said during a speech on Sunday night that the MoU was a “document of pride and victory in the field of diplomacy”.

Ghalibaf insisted that the Islamic Republic had emerged “victorious”, both politically and militarily, from the war with the US and Israel.

“I don’t mean that we destroyed their armies, I mean that they attacked us while clearly and repeatedly citing nine objectives, but did not achieve any of these goals at any level. That was the biggest abject failure for the US and the Zionist regime,” he said.

Ghalibaf has not yet managed to convince the Iranian leadership to agree on a long-term diplomatic resolution with the US to end the war.

Israeli settler attacks in the occupied West Bank are trapping Palestinian families in their homes.

The violence is taking place as Israel’s far-right government faces elections in October.

Why are attacks by settlers intensifying? And what are the consequences?

Presenter: Imran Khan

Guests:

Ofer Cassif – member of the Knesset representing the Hadash-Ta’al political alliance

Mouin Rabbani – co-editor of the Jadaliyya online magazine and non-resident fellow at the Center for Conflict and Humanitarian Studies in Qatar

Ori Goldberg – Israeli political commentator

Palestinian politicians and analysts have warned against what they describe as an Israeli plan to illegally annex the occupied West Bank by implementing a series of decisions and actions under different pretexts.

Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz, on Friday, ordered the military to prepare a plan for transferring civilian law enforcement in the occupied West Bank to the Israeli police.

According to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the decision follows criticism over the army’s handling of Israeli settlers who besieged a Palestinian home in the village of Qusra.

Katz justified the shift, saying, “The army’s role is to combat Palestinian terrorism … and not chase hilltop youth.”

The Defence Ministry indicated the police would establish a dedicated force to handle these civilian matters.

However, Palestinian officials and a wide array of political experts warn this structural shift represents a dangerous acceleration of illegal annexation, apartheid, and ethnic cleansing.

Mustafa Barghouti, secretary-general of the Palestinian National Initiative, told Al Jazeera that the settlers are the “spearhead in the process of annexation and Judaisation”.

He drew direct historical parallels to the mass displacement of Palestinians, stating, “They repeat what the Zionist terror gangs did in 1948, like the Haganah and the Stern Gang.”

Barghouti warned that placing security in the hands of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and illegal Israeli settlements under Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich amounts to “handing over the West Bank to the settlers”.

He stressed that this is an open war on the population, adding, “The actual ruler in the West Bank is the known fascist terrorist Smotrich.”

De facto annexation

Analysts argue that replacing military occupation law with domestic civilian law fundamentally alters the legal reality of the territory. Mohanad Mustafa, an academic and researcher in Israeli affairs, told Al Jazeera that the decision legally erases the borders.

“The government is dealing with the West Bank not as an occupied territory,” Mustafa said. He explained that by transferring power to a civilian police force, “this means that the government has annexed the West Bank”.

He noted this move absolves the military of its obligations under international law, placing enforcement under Ben-Gvir.

Mustafa warned that Ben-Gvir, who previously oversaw the demolition of thousands of Arab homes in Israel, will now command the police to “support the settlers more and more and push them more and more towards deepening their repression and terrorism against the Palestinians”.

Palestinian leadership strongly condemned the mandate. Hussein al-Sheikh, secretary-general of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s executive committee, described the move as a blatant violation of international agreements and an attempt to “impose Israeli law and sovereignty over the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and to entrench the illegal annexation of Palestinian land”.

The Palestinian group Hamas echoed this sentiment, releasing a statement calling the order a “dangerous step on the path to imposing de facto annexation” that provides “cover and more protection for the escalating attacks and crimes of the settlers”.

Fascist militias

The Palestinian Authority has accused the Israeli government and its military of sponsoring settlers’ violence. Even Israeli members of parliament have accused the army of being complicit.

Analysts stress that relieving the military of its duties essentially deputises settler violence, turning them into an armed extension of the state.

Nihad Abu Ghosh, an expert in Israeli affairs, told Al Jazeera that there is no contradiction between the army and the settlers. He noted that the settlers have evolved into “fascist militia formations” that perform the state’s dirty work.

“These are fascist militia formations, and there are similar precedents in many countries that were ruled by fascism, whether in Spain, Italy, Germany, or even Chile,” Abu Ghosh said.

He added that these militias carry out roles that “require evading any discipline, rules, or laws” to achieve a “creeping, gradual annexation to make it a reality”.

Apartheid and displacement

The dual legal framework resulting from this shift has drawn sharp international and local criticism. Shadi al-Shurafa, a researcher in Israeli affairs, told Al Jazeera that the situation is a textbook definition of segregation.

“We are facing an application of an overt racist apartheid system in the West Bank,” al-Shurafa said, noting it involves one regime operating with two entirely different laws based on ethnicity.

He added that the ultimate goal of the current government is carrying out complete ethnic cleansing and trapping Palestinians in “isolated cantons and isolated Bantustans”.

Other experts argue that the move completely alters the international legal status of the territory, pushing the crisis into a new, more dangerous phase.

“The subject has bypassed the issue of annexation to a post-annexation phase and creating a reality where the Palestinian finds himself forced to think about migration,” said Adel Shadid, expert in Israeli affairs.

International complicity

Analysts also pointed to the role of the international community, particularly the United States, in enabling this systemic shift.

Shadid dismissed recent US condemnations of settler violence as mere theatre to “mislead global public opinion”.

He argued that the underlying project has full US backing, noting that “all that is happening now is an American-Israeli plan and there is harmony between the two right-wing administrations in Washington and here in Israel”.

Andrew Whitley, a former United Nations official and director of the Balfour Project, stressed that the planned transfer is “completely illegal” and urged immediate global intervention.

He told Al Jazeera that the “Palestinian state is disappearing before our eyes”, demanding that the international community move beyond rhetoric.

“We have to do much more than just wring our hands and complain that governments are not doing anything about this,” Whitley said, calling for concrete sanctions to halt the rapid erasure of the Palestinian presence.

Gaza City — Rabab Deifallah sits inside her tent, clutching a small, battered lighter. She presses it once, then again, trying to produce a spark strong enough to ignite a pile of wood inside a stove.

The mother of five has carefully looked after the lighter. Her son has repaired it several times since it became difficult to buy a new one after Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza began in October 2023.

Firewood has become essential for 46-year-old Rabab. She uses it to bake bread, heat water for her children, prepare food and make tea amid shortages of cooking gas and soaring fuel prices.

“Our whole daily life depends on fire,” Rabab told Al Jazeera. “But getting a fire started begins with a lighter and this small object has become one of the hardest things to find in Gaza.”

Before the war, lighters were so cheap and readily available that she remembers buying three for one shekel ($0.33). Today, a new lighter can cost between $27-33 and Rabab last spent $12 to repair her old lighter.

“Should I spend that amount on a lighter, or should I buy a bag of flour?” she asked.

Palestinians in Gaza would rather spend their limited money on food, so a single lighter is often passed around families in several tents.

Some days, Rabab cannot find a lighter at all, so her family has been forced to spend days eating cold food or waiting until a neighbour has a fire burning to borrow a spark.

She often sends a piece of cardboard to a neighbour to get a light off their fire and bring it home. Other times, if a neighbour is baking bread, she may ask to use their oven to prepare food for her family.

The lighter is now something she guards carefully, as it is, for her, the starting point for fire, food, bread and hot water.

A second struggle

Nearby, Hasnaa Mansour, 43, faces the same problem but from a different angle.

Displaced from Jabalia refugee camp, Hasnaa sits beside a clay oven she had treasured since her family’s financial situation deteriorated during the war.

Her husband previously worked as a tailor and the family lived relatively comfortably, but due to a lack of business, Hasnaa now bakes and sells food to help support their six children.

Hasnaa has repeatedly repaired her lighter because buying a new one is beyond her means.

But a shortage of cooking gas has made the problem even worse.

“With gas, all you need is a small spark to light it. But with the oven, I need a real fire,” she said.

“I’ve been sitting here since the morning and by 10 o’clock I still couldn’t light the oven. I sent my young daughter with a piece of cardboard to look for someone who had a fire burning, but she couldn’t find anyone.”

Restrictions and shortages

The lighter shortage comes amid Israel’s continued siege on Gaza.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) says restrictions on the movement of goods and closures of crossings have contributed to shortages and rising prices of essential supplies. OCHA also says items classified by Israeli authorities as “dual-use” face additional difficulties in obtaining approval to enter Gaza.

The Gaza Chamber of Commerce and Industry said in June that restrictions on crossings and the mechanisms for bringing commercial shipments into Gaza continued to limit the flow of goods.

It said that more than 30,000 trucks entered Gaza during the first five months of 2026, an average of no more than 191 trucks a day – still far below the territory’s daily pre-war needs.

In an earlier publication, the chamber of commerce documented the emergence of lighter-repair work during the war, saying lighters were among items prevented from entering Gaza.

That is why lighters are now so valuable and families spend relatively large amounts to fix them rather than buy a new one.

Sharing a single lighter

For Shadi Abu Shamlah, a displaced father living with his family at Al-Karmel School west of Gaza City, the shortage means sharing a lighter among tents.

“The whole school here… you wouldn’t find more than four lighters,” he said.

The few available lighters move from one tent to another as families try to cook, heat water or prepare hot drinks.

“The lighter today is the backbone of life. If you have a lighter in your tent, you’re okay. If you don’t have one, you’re stuck,” he said.

“The simplest things need fire. You want a cup of tea, you want to cook, you want to make milk for a child… you need fire.”

Abu Shamlah says his family sometimes goes to bed without dinner because they cannot light a fire.

Repairing lighters has also become difficult. He says a lighter flint can cost 25 to 30 shekels ($8–$10), while people have resorted to using gas from larger cylinders to refill lighters, sometimes causing burns.

Tamer Al-Shawish, who worked as a driver before the war, turned to fixing lighters to help provide for his family.

On a small stall near Al Karmel school camp, the 24-year-old father of two says his new profession was previously unheard of.

“The war has forced us into jobs and work we never knew before. I started repairing lighters so I could provide for my family’s needs,” he told Al Jazeera.

A new profession

“Before the war, no one needed to repair a lighter. They were cheap and available. When the gas ran out, we would throw it away and buy another one.”

“People come to repair the lighter because it is cheaper than buying a new one, especially with the high prices and shortages of basic goods,” Tamer said.

He salvages parts from damaged lighters to repair others.

“Even an old lighter has value now. We take parts from damaged lighters and use them to repair other lighters, so they last longer.”

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Aug. 14 (UPI) — Hezbollah leader Sheikh Naim Qassem lashed out at the Lebanese officials Friday for accepting the June 26 U.S.-brokered framework agreement with Israel and failing to secure any gains after seven rounds of negotiations.

He called for an end to “the humiliation” and urging the officials to reverse “the sinful mistake.”

Qassem said in a speech broadcast by Hezbollah-run Al Manar TV that the initial agreement, a conditional and phased process aimed at ending the state of war, amounted to “Israeli dictates” that gave Israel “everything it wants,” while the Lebanese authorities relinquished their sovereignty.

He called for “reversing the sinful, disgraceful and humiliating mistake,” which raises question marks about “what these officials are doing.”

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun decided to engage in direct talks with Israel in what he believed was the only viable path to ending the war, despite Hezbollah’s staunch opposition. Aoun was betting that U.S. President Donald Trump alone could pressure Israel to withdraw its troops and help Lebanon restore its sovereignty.

The war broke out when Hezbollah opened a support front for Gaza on Oct. 8, 2023, and resumed fighting in solidarity with Iran on March 2 this year, triggering a massive Israeli retaliation that significantly degraded the Iran-backed group and caused widespread destruction in southern Lebanon and other parts of the country.

Israel, which reduced some 70 border villages in southern Lebanon to rubble and rendered them uninhabitable while occupying a 6-mile “buffer zone,” insists that it will not withdraw its troops unless Hezbollah is completely disarmed.

The framework agreement, reached by Lebanese and Israeli negotiating teams under pressure from Washington, provides for a phased Israeli withdrawal from occupied parts of southern Lebanon to allow the Lebanese Army to “restore effective sovereign authority,” beginning with its deployment in two initial pilot zones.

The initial accord also addressed plans to disarm Hezbollah, Iran’s main proxy and once its most powerful regional non-state armed actor.

Despite the Lebanese Army’s deployment in the village of Zawtar al-Gharbieh — the first pilot zone in southern Lebanon — Israel continued to carry out strikes, destroy homes and demolish Hezbollah tunnels and military infrastructure.

Qassem pointed out that Israel would not have carried out “all this aggression and genocide without the Americans.”

Addressing Lebanese officials, he asked them to “name a single achievement from the seven rounds of negotiations. Israel got everything it wanted and everything it sought.”

He accused the officials of failing to withdraw from the negotiations with Israel, saying that what is happening “amounts to surrender, which we do not accept.”

Qassem credited Iran for progress, saying that the Iran-U.S. negotiations in Islamabad brought about the return of displaced people to southern Lebanon and a cease-fire that reduced the escalation, rather than the direct negotiations.

He said the war was “an existential war of aggression,” and that his group would “stand firm and defeat the Israeli project” and that those betting on surrender were “betting on a mirage.”

Israel kills 11 in deadliest attacks on Lebanon since June truce as Iran and Oman continue talks on Hormuz.