Israeli daily Haaretz said on Friday that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has driven Israel’s standing in the US to an “unprecedented low.”
“Anyone following the conduct of Israel and its relations with other countries, especially the United States, has for years warned of an unprecedented crisis in Israel’s strategic relations with its most important ally,” Haaretz said in an editorial. “It was clear that the damage caused by Benjamin Netanyahu and his government would bring relations with the United States to a new low.”
“He has ignored the many warnings regarding the damage he is causing to Israel-US relations,” the newspaper said.
The damage continued with his “blatant interference in American politics in favor of (President Donald) Trump and the Republican Party,” and that “Israel’s standing among Democrats collapsed.”
READ: Delegates walk out as Netanyahu defends Israel’s regional wars in UN address
The newspaper said, however, that the decline is no longer limited to Democrats. “In the past two years, the government of Netanyahu, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich has brought Israel’s standing in the GOP to a new nadir,” Haaretz wrote. “The war in Iran and the sharp rise in gas prices that followed, the violence against Palestinians by extremist settlers and the harm to Christian communities in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem have led even Israel’s most loyal supporters to express unprecedented criticism.”
US polls from recent months, the newspaper said, show a “sharp and unprecedented decline” in favorable attitudes toward Israel, especially among younger respondents, arguing that “No bombastic speech” by Netanyahu at the UN General Assembly can “paper over this bleak reality.”
It warned about the implications for ties between the two countries, saying: “Every Israeli needs to understand the extent to which Israel’s image has deteriorated in the eyes of the American public and the implications for the future of relations between the two countries.”
READ: Protesters outside UN’s New York headquarters demand Netanyahu face war crimes charges
mustafaU
Frankie Muniz had a vulnerable moment on social media Friday, revealing he’s hit rock bottom following the announcement of his split from wife Paige Price.
The “Malcolm in the Middle” star announced he and Price were calling it quits after seven years of marriage in July, and now the actor is revealing he’s experienced some painful introspection in recent weeks.
“The last 6 weeks of my life have been a nightmare I’m praying to wake up from,” he wrote on Instagram. “Everything felt heavy, unclear, and like it was falling apart at the same time. I wouldn’t wish this season on anyone.”
He continued that despite the painful experience, “the unexpected gift in the middle of it is that I’ve had nowhere to hide.”
The actor-turned-race car driver said he’s spent the last several weeks reflecting and can now see the areas of his life where he thinks he can improve.
“I want to become a better version of me. Not the polished version I show the world … the actual one,” he wrote.
“I read that sometimes hitting rock bottom is the thing that wakes you up. It forces the changes you needed to make all along so you can live the best life possible. That idea has been sitting with me. In five years I believe I’ll look back at this exact low point and feel grateful for it, because the high I’ll be standing on then only exists because I went through this.”
He told his followers that this period isn’t the end of the story, but the catalyst for change.
“It’s the part where I start doing the work … the uncomfortable, unglamorous, necessary work. I’m choosing to treat this season as the foundation, not the finish line.”
Shortly after Muniz’s post, Price posted an Instagram story with a message that some followers speculated may be a response to the actor’s admission.
“Life is all about perspective. If you ask the grass, the zebra is the monster and the lion is the protector,” Price wrote.
Muniz is best known for his titular starring role in the beloved Fox sitcom “Malcolm in the Middle,” which ran for seven seasons in the early aughts. In April, the series returned for a four-episode reunion arc on Hulu starring returning fan favorites Bryan Cranston as Hal, Jane Kaczmarek as Lois and a couple of Malcolm’s TV siblings.
In 2006, when “Malcolm in the Middle” wrapped, Muniz transitioned away from acting and pursued race car driving.
SUPERSTAR Ed Sheeran quietly donated £1.5million to aid in the Middle East ongoing conflict amid the fallout from Macklemore being removed from his Loop tour.
The four-time Grammy Award winner asked US stadium owner Robert Kraft to match his donation to bring aid to the region.
Rather than publicize the generous move himself, Ed’s donation has come to light after Macklemore publicly challenged Robert to match his own £750,000 ($1 million) donation to Palestinian organizations.
Taking to Instagram, Robert wrote: “Earlier today, before Macklemore challenged me to match his donation, Ed called me and asked me to commit $2 million to match his donation to aid in the region to fight this humanitarian crisis.
“Ed now plans to reach out to other venue owners and our goal is to continue to work together to build bridges.”
Ed’s huge donation comes after 15 years of supporting countless charities around the globe.
He teamed up with Médecins Sans Frontières across both his Mathematics and Divide tours to help raise money for some of the world’s most conflict-torn states.
The charity provides humanitarian medical care—focusing on projects in conflict zones and in countries affected by endemic diseases.
The fallout comes after Robert Kraft took the unprecedented move to ban Ed’s support act Macklemore from performing at his Gillette Stadium near Boston.
The rapper had used previous support slots to call for a “Free Palestine” on stage and flashed up images of Gaza.
As well as referring to the war as “genocide,” Macklemore also dedicated a song to pro-Palestinian protesters.
Macklemore took to social media to slam the move, prompting a global backlash.
In his statement on Tuesday, Ed, who has tried to keep out of politics all his career, said: “I am appalled by the conflict between Israel and Palestine.
“The suffering and pain caused on both sides is a human tragedy. There are too many wars across the world causing immeasurable pain, none of which should be tolerated.”
He added: “Macklemore coming off tour was the promoter’s decision, it was not mine. I would never let down the fans who had made plans, nor would I abandon the touring crew and the other support acts and musicians who rely on me for work and to make a living.”
TORONTO — Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is heading to Europe in the middle of a trade war with President Trump, seeking a deeper relationship with the European Union that could give Canadians greater freedom to work and study there.
Canada will seek an arrangement that would allow Canadians to live and work in Europe without visas as part of a strategic partnership, according to a senior Canadian official familiar with the discussions.
The official said Ottawa is not seeking to replicate the arrangements Norway or Switzerland have with the EU and did not propose “associate membership,” a term used in a recent report. Canada instead wants a partnership tailored to its priorities, with investment at its core.
Roughly 70% of Canadian exports go to the United States. Europe is central to Carney’s effort to reduce that dependence.
Carney has ruled out EU membership, saying Canada instead wants “a unique security and economic alliance” with the bloc. He said formal discussions will begin next month.
Economics is only part of the push, Carney said Tuesday. “The core of this, yes, there is an economic component, but it is about greater sovereignty,” he said.
Canadian government officials have consulted provinces and labor groups but have not settled on what form the relationship should take. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the talks publicly.
Carney will attend European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s State of the Union address Wednesday as a guest of honor before addressing the European Parliament on Thursday.
Carney cautioned against expecting a major announcement in Europe, saying the “real deepening discussions” will begin at the Canada-EU summit in Montreal in late October.
The trip puts him back on the European stage as relations with Washington reel from tariffs, threats and personal attacks since trade talks collapsed.
Carney said Tuesday that economic integration, once viewed largely as an asset, is increasingly “being used as a weapon by certain countries,” making it more important for Canada to deepen ties with trusted partners. He is also carrying to Europe a message that has won praise there but that European governments have been reluctant to follow in dealing with the United States: Middle powers should resist economic coercion and be willing to walk away from a bad deal.
Carney’s Davos speech on middle powers in January drew a personal rebuke from Trump, and another forceful defense could raise the temperature again.
Canada has retaliated against U.S. tariffs and rejected terms Carney says would weaken its sovereignty. Europe, by contrast, shelved retaliation and accepted a deal leaving most EU exports to the U.S. facing tariffs of up to 15%.
That choice is striking given the EU’s economic weight as the world’s largest trading bloc.
At Davos in January, Carney urged middle powers to band together rather than bow to great powers. When countries negotiate alone with a hegemon, he said, “we negotiate from weakness. We accept what is offered.”
“This is not sovereignty,” Carney said. “It is the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination.”
In a European Parliament debate in March, French lawmaker Chloe Ridel said Carney had “said out loud what many Europeans think quietly,” while German lawmaker Tobias Cremer urged Europe to “show the same courage as the Canadians have done in this moment of rupture.”
Tobias Gehrke of the European Council on Foreign Relations said Europe accepted economic pain in hopes of preserving U.S. support for NATO and Ukraine, but gained neither firm security commitments nor stable ties with Washington.
“European governments will be watching closely to see whether retaliation creates leverage or simply produces more escalation and an increasing bill,” Gehrke said.
Canadian Finance Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne rejected the idea that Canada’s push toward Europe is simply an effort to gain leverage over Washington, saying Ottawa intends to keep working with the United States even as it builds stronger partnerships elsewhere.
“It’s always about us,” Champagne told the Associated Press. “We will still do things with the United States.”
But Champagne also said the geopolitical landscape has fundamentally shifted. “The world has changed and America has changed,” he said. “And I think the world has taken notice.”
Carney’s trip follows his global investment summit in Toronto, part of a broader push to attract international capital and reduce dependence on the United States.
Canada and the EU already cooperate on trade, defense, energy, technology and critical minerals. Bilateral trade reached about $147 billion in 2025, making the EU Canada’s second-largest trading partner.
Underscoring the push for closer ties, the European Parliament said Monday that it will open an office in Ottawa, its 10th outside the EU, with a regional mandate extending to the Arctic.
“At a time when the world is becoming more unpredictable, like-minded partners need to work even more closely together,” European Parliament President Roberta Metsola said.
Canada this year became the first non-European country to join the EU’s $173-billion SAFE defense program, giving Canadian companies access to joint procurement.
Ian Lesser of the German Marshall Fund in Brussels said Trump’s tariffs and policies toward the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and his stated intention to acquire Greenland for the U.S. have accelerated efforts by Canada and Europe to diversify their economic and security ties.
“The sheer unpredictability emanating from Washington has given history a shove,” Lesser said. He said many in Brussels still prefer to accommodate Washington or “wait and see” whether November’s midterm elections produce a Congress able to constrain Trump.
Carney will also travel to Britain to meet Prime Minister Andy Burnham for the first time. Both men are supporters of Everton soccer club and are expected to meet at the team’s League Cup match against Wolverhampton on Wednesday.
Gillies writes for the Associated Press. AP reporter Sam McNeil in Brussels contributed to this report.
The People’s Republic of China achieved a historic and unprecedented participation in the second edition of the El Alamein International Aerospace Exhibition (EIAS 2026), which was held at El Alamein International Airport from September 8 to 10, 2026. The Chinese participation came just days after the conclusion of the joint Egyptian-Chinese air force exercises Eagles of Civilization 2026. The significance of this Chinese military presence lay in the display of a fully integrated and realistic combat air system, not merely models. In this context, the Egyptian researcher will attempt to divide the significance of China’s participation in the El Alamein Air Show into several key areas, including:
– First: China’s prominent participation in the El Alamein International Air and Space Show in Egypt as a strategic shift in the regional arms market
Here, China’s extensive participation in the El Alamein International Air and Space Show constitutes a significant strategic shift in the regional arms market. Beijing has moved beyond the traditional approach of selling individual military components to present itself as a supplier of comprehensive and integrated air combat systems, competing with Western and American powers in the Middle East and Africa. China’s participation in the El Alamein International Air and Space Exhibition focused on several strategic axes to promote and analyze the concept of a full-suite solution. This was achieved by emphasizing that China does not simply sell aircraft but rather offers a comprehensive defense solution, encompassing attack fighters, logistics support aircraft, aerial refueling, and command and control systems, known as C4ISR.
The People’s Liberation Army of China sought to highlight China’s military and defense role and promote the Chinese model as a ready-made competitive alternative. This was done by showcasing the competitive advantages of Chinese defense industries, such as the absence of complex political conditions, rapid delivery, and comprehensive technology transfer to Middle Eastern and African markets. Furthermore, the focus was on the geopolitical depth, linking the Chinese presence in El Alamein to Beijing’s broader vision of strengthening security and economic partnerships with countries in the region.
Stay ahead of the geopolitical week.
MD Briefing delivers expert analysis across five global fronts — the Indo-Pacific, energy, geoeconomics, European security, and the Middle East — every Monday morning. Free.
– Second: Showcasing the most prominent Chinese aircraft platforms participating for the first time outside of China at the El Alamein exhibition
As for the most prominent Chinese aircraft platforms participating for the first time outside of China, for the first time in its history, the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) showcased four of its latest operational aircraft models at an air show outside of China. The most prominent of these were
– The Chinese J-16 multirole fighter (J-16)
This air superiority and heavy ground attack fighter garnered widespread international attention.
– The Chinese YY-20A aerial refueling tanker (YY-20A)
This Chinese heavy transport aircraft provides refueling to extend the operational range of fighter jets.
– The Chinese KJ-500 airborne early warning and control aircraft (KJ-500)
This represents an airborne command and control system.
– The Chinese Z-20K military helicopter (Z-20K)
This is a multi-role helicopter designed for search and rescue and tactical operations.
Regarding the Chinese weapons and drones on display at the El Alamein International Air and Space Exhibition, the AVIC (Aerospace Industries of China) showcased its advanced defense capabilities in the outdoor exhibition area through:
– A demonstration of the Chinese Wing Loong-10B stealth drone (Wing Loong-10B):
This is a high-altitude, long-range unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) designed for reconnaissance and precision strikes.
– A demonstration of Chinese smart munitions and missiles:
The Chinese drone was displayed surrounded by advanced air-to-air missiles, such as the PL-108 & PL-12AE. In addition to a demonstration of the Chinese anti-radar and anti-radiation missile (YJ-9ER1).
– Third: The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) showcased its capabilities through a technical display (capability integration), dividing its export-available air systems into functional groups for attack, others for support and refueling, and a third group for command and control, during China’s extensive participation in the El Alamein Air Show in Egypt.
In this context, the PLA sought to leverage China’s extensive participation in the El Alamein Air Show in Egypt as a new and strategic launchpad for China in North Africa. This included showcasing the size of the Chinese pavilion and the equipment on display, such as aerobatic aircraft and unmanned combat aerobatics. The Chinese Ministry of Defense emphasized the technical aspects of this capability integration display, highlighting the division of its export-available air systems into functional groups for attack, others for support and refueling, and a third group for command and control. As follows:
■ The offensive functional groups were represented by a display of China’s modern fighter jets and attack drones, such as the Wing Loong family.
■ As for the support and refueling functional groups, China’s strategic transport and aerial refueling aircraft, such as the Y-20, were showcased.
■ The third functional group focused on (command and control), with China displaying its early warning aircraft and airborne command centers.
– Fourth: Analyzing and understanding the strategic dimensions of China’s participation in the El Alamein International Air and Space Exhibition, aimed at attracting more interest in the Chinese aerospace sector and promoting widespread military sales of Chinese military, defense, and armament equipment
Thus, we can analyze and understand the strategic dimensions of China’s participation in the El Alamein International Air and Space Exhibition, which aimed to attract more interest in the Chinese aerospace sector and promote widespread military sales of Chinese military, defense, and armament equipment. Therefore, we find that the extensive Chinese presence at the El Alamein International Air and Space Exhibition constitutes a genuine breakthrough. Beijing did not aim to promote individual pieces but rather to demonstrate its ability to provide a comprehensive and integrated air combat system, encompassing attack, support, refueling, and command, as a competitive alternative in the Middle Eastern and African markets.
Analyzing the economic and strategic dimensions of China’s extensive participation in the El Alamein exhibition, we observe the extent to which the Chinese People’s Liberation Army focused on achieving broad military exposure for its participation during the exhibition. This included showcasing how these Chinese defense, military, and air systems can reduce operating costs for purchasing countries while ensuring their independence in defense decision-making, without imposing political conditions or prior operational restrictions, unlike many Western and American systems.
US President Donald Trump suggested Thursday that the war with Iran could end before the Nov. 3 midterm elections, a day after predicting it would conclude immediately afterward.
“I don’t know that they’re gonna be able to hold out. But it’ll get settled after the elections. Or maybe sooner,” Trump reportedly told broadcaster NewsNation over the phone, referring to mounting US economic pressure on Iran.
Trump also denied reports that Iran’s latest retaliatory strikes on a US base in Jordan damaged US aircraft in the region. “Nope… None whatsoever. No damage. No nothing.”
On Wednesday, Trump had said the war would “end immediately” after the midterms.
“I think the war will end immediately after the election because they can’t hold out any longer,” he told reporters ahead of a trip to Dallas, Texas.
READ: Permanent 5 members clash in UN Security Council over Iran sanctions snapback
His comments contrast with a Wall Street Journal report hours later that senior White House advisers have privately warned the conflict could continue through the remainder of his term.
The war, now in its seventh month, has killed 18 US servicemembers and raised concerns over military resources and disruptions to global energy markets.
US gasoline prices averaged $4.22 a gallon Wednesday, up from $4.01 a month earlier and $3.19 a year ago, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA).
Trump has repeatedly expressed a desire for a quick resolution while supporting a broader economic campaign against Tehran.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has described the strategy, dubbed “Operation Economic Outcast,” as an alternative to major combat operations.
READ: Israeli defense minister renews threat to strike Iran’s energy facilities
People can take advantage of this ‘free’ booking trick to make sure they get their chosen seats ‘for free’(Image: Getty Images)
Ryanair passengers flying abroad to escape the UK weather might want to consider a ‘trick’ to help them be assigned ‘better’ seats without paying extra. The trick, as explained by ITV This Morning’s money-saving specialist Jordon Cox, does involve a little bit of luck, but it could pay off by saving customers up to £38 per person.
On Ryanair, the cost of choosing a specific seat varies based on the route, travel dates, and when you buy. Based on the airline’s published fees table, passengers can expect to pay between £3 and £30 when booking in advance, with fees as high as £38 per seat when booking at the airport desk.
Customers can avoid any cost entirely by accepting a random seat allocation from the airline. However, you leave it up to chance what part of the plane your seats will be in.
These random seats are picked and assigned at the exact moment you complete your online check-in, which is open up to 24 hours before the flight’s scheduled departure time. The airline’s automated system selects the seats, and customers have no say in where they end up if they choose this route.
Ryanair’s algorithm is notorious for assigning middle seats first to these free-allocation passengers, as reported by The Telegraph, and is said to hold back window and aisle seats. Many people will argue that middle seats are not the best place on a plane because they offer the least space when both seats on either side are occupied.
ITV This Morning’s money-saving specialist Jordon Cox claims online that travellers might be able to take advantage of a workaround to avoid being put in a middle seat. In a post on Instagram, he suggests that one method ‘tricks the system’ into giving you the exact seat you want at no extra cost.
He said: “On the day that you’re checking in (I recommend about five to six hours before your flight), go into seat selection and see what seats are still available. A lot of these will be middle seats.
“Go to a separate tab and make a new booking for the flight you’re on. Put in some bogus names, then select each person a ‘seat’ in the places you DON’T want to sit. Because you’ve selected all those seats, and they’re in ‘someone else’s’ basket – for a short time, you can’t be sat there.
“That’s your cue to go back to your actual booking, and check-in with ‘random’ seat selection. You’ll be placed in one of the remaining seats – hopefully the only ones left are the aisle and the window.”
Reddit users claim that the sweet spot for securing the ‘best seats’ is not long before your flight takes off. By this time, the early check-in passengers have already been forced into specific parts of the plane, reducing the pool of available seats for those still unassigned.
In certain circumstances, Ryanair will likely randomly offer passengers an extra-legroom seat for free, but only under very specific conditions. However, because Ryanair never leaves a flight intentionally unbalanced and cannot leave critical seats empty, they will release them into the free pool at the absolute last minute.
If the only empty spots left on the aircraft are the premium legroom seats (like the emergency exit rows), the algorithm is forced to give them to you for free because it has nowhere else to put you and safety laws state that the emergency exit rows (Rows 1, 16, and 17) cannot be completely empty during takeoff and landing.
At the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in Bishkek this week, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian received precisely the kind of political support he had hoped for. The SCO condemned the military attacks against Iran, described them as violations of international law and the UN Charter, reaffirmed Iranian sovereignty and territorial integrity, and called for the conflict to be resolved through political and diplomatic means.
But the organisation did not offer to defend Iran. That distinction between political solidarity and collective defence is important. It tells us something not only about the Iranian experience with the SCO, but about the international order that is emerging around it.
For years, discussions about multipolarity have often suggested that the US-led international system would gradually be challenged by an alternative bloc centred around China, Russia and organisations such as BRICS and the SCO. From the perspective of middle powers, joining both institutions seemed to fit neatly into this transformation. Integration into non-Western organisations was supposed to make them less vulnerable to Western isolation and pressure.
The US-Israeli war on Iran has made clear that none of these alternative relationships can produce a security guarantee comparable to those provided by formal military alliances. The lesson is not that multipolarity has failed middle powers. It is that the emerging multipolar order may work differently from what many expected.
Rather than replacing one alliance system with another, it is producing an increasingly dense network of overlapping partnerships in which states gain diplomatic and economic options without necessarily acquiring new security guarantees.
For middle powers, this may be one of the defining characteristics of the emerging order: more room for manoeuvre, but less certainty about who will stand beside them when their security is threatened.
Turkiye provides a particularly revealing example. It has been a member of NATO for more than seven decades and remains embedded in the Western security architecture. Yet Ankara has increasingly demonstrated that alliance membership does not require automatic political alignment with Washington. Turkiye has maintained relations with Russia despite the war in Ukraine, expanded its engagement with China and participated in the SCO as a dialogue partner. At the same time, its differences with the US and Israel over the future regional order in the Middle East have become increasingly visible.
This does not mean Turkiye is abandoning NATO or moving into a Chinese- or Russian-led bloc. Quite the opposite. Ankara’s strategy depends precisely on avoiding such a binary choice. Its NATO membership provides security benefits that the SCO could not replicate. Its relationships with Russia, China, Iran, the Gulf states and other regional actors, meanwhile, expand its diplomatic and economic options.
Brazil represents another good example. Unlike Turkiye, Brazil is not bound to the US through a formal military alliance. But it has traditionally operated within a US-dominated hemisphere where Washington has expected considerable political alignment from regional governments.
Brazil’s refusal to join the US-led Americas Counter-Cartel Coalition (ACCC), together with its positions on the Iran war and other recent international crises, reflects its reluctance to accept that regional proximity should translate into automatic strategic alignment.
Yet Brazil is not simply switching sides. Its participation in BRICS, its extensive economic relationship with China and its calls for reform of the international system coexist with important political and economic relations with the US and Europe. Brasília’s objective is not to exchange dependence on Washington for dependence on Beijing, but to preserve the ability to cooperate with both, and disagree with either.
This may be one of the most consequential opportunities that multipolarity offers middle powers. The rise of alternative centres of economic and political influence reduces the cost of saying no. For decades, weaker states often confronted a difficult choice when facing pressure from a dominant power: comply, resist and risk isolation, or seek protection from a rival bloc.
The proliferation of partners and institutions complicates that calculation. A government that disagrees with Washington may deepen relations with Beijing without becoming a Chinese ally. A state dependent on China economically may strengthen security ties with the US without fully aligning with Washington. Membership in BRICS does not prevent cooperation with Western institutions, just as membership in a US-led security framework does not necessarily preclude engagement with China or Russia.
India has made this logic almost an organising principle of its foreign policy. New Delhi participates in the Quad with the US, Japan and Australia while simultaneously belonging to both BRICS and the SCO. At Bishkek, India supported the SCO declaration defending Iranian sovereignty while Prime Minister Narendra Modi also stressed to Pezeshkian the importance of preserving freedom of navigation and commerce through the Strait of Hormuz.
The Gulf Cooperation Council member states are pursuing their own version of this diversification. Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, for example, continue to depend heavily on their relationships with the US for security, while simultaneously expanding economic and diplomatic ties with China, India and other Asian powers and participating in new regional and international arrangements.
None appears eager to replace Washington with Beijing. They want relationships with both. This suggests that the most significant consequence of multipolarity for middle and smaller powers may not be the emergence of a new bloc to which they can attach themselves. It may be the declining necessity of attaching themselves exclusively to any bloc at all.
But greater autonomy comes with a cost. The same flexible arrangements that allow states to avoid choosing sides also provide fewer guarantees when crises become existential. BRICS does not have an Article 5. Neither does the SCO, which explicitly defines itself as a non-military organisation.
Strategic partnerships can provide weapons, investment, diplomatic backing and political support without obligating partners to go to war for one another.
The emerging international system is therefore unlikely to resemble a simple transition from a US-led order to a Chinese-led one, or even a confrontation between two clearly defined blocs. The older alliance system is not disappearing.
NATO remains central to European and Turkish security, while US security relationships remain indispensable across much of Asia and the Gulf. What is emerging alongside it is another layer, a more fluid landscape of overlapping institutions, selective partnerships and transactional relationships.
Multipolarity, in other words, may not require states to choose a new camp. That gives middle and smaller powers greater agency. But it also places greater responsibility for their own security upon them. The world they are entering may offer more partners, more bargaining power and more freedom to say no. What it may offer less frequently is certainty about who will say yes when they ask for protection.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
Last week, a prominent Saudi Sheikh, Mohammed Al-Issa, visited the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland to commemorate the 75th anniversary of its liberation, which signalled the end of the Nazi Holocaust. Although dozens of Muslim scholars have visited the site, where about one million Jews were killed during World War Two, according to the Auschwitz Memorial Centre’s press office, Al-Issa is the most senior Muslim religious leader to do so.
Visiting Auschwitz is not a problem for a Muslim; Islam orders Muslims to reject unjustified killing of any human being, no matter what their faith is. Al-Issa is a senior ally of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MBS), who apparently cares little for the sanctity of human life, though, and the visit to Auschwitz has very definite political connotations beyond any Islamic context.
By sending Al-Issa to the camp, Bin Salman wanted to show his support for Israel, which exploits the Holocaust for geopolitical colonial purposes. “The Israeli government decided that it alone was permitted to mark the 75th anniversary of the Allied liberation of Auschwitz [in modern day Poland] in 1945,” wrote journalist Richard Silverstein recently when he commented on the gathering of world leaders in Jerusalem for Benjamin Netanyahu’s Holocaust event.
READ: Next up, a Saudi embassy in Jerusalem
Bin Salman uses Al Issa for such purposes, as if to demonstrate his own Zionist credentials. For example, the head of the Makkah-based Muslim World League is leading rapprochement efforts with Evangelical Christians who are, in the US at least, firm Zionists in their backing for the state of Israel. Al-Issa has called for a Muslim-Christian-Jewish interfaith delegation to travel to Jerusalem in what would, in effect, be a Zionist troika.
Zionism is not a religion, and there are many non-Jewish Zionists who desire or support the establishment of a Jewish state in occupied Palestine. The definition of Zionism does not mention the religion of its supporters, and Israeli writer Sheri Oz, is just one author who insists that non-Jews can be Zionists.
![Mohammad Bin Salman and Netanyahu - Cartoon [Tasnimnews.com/Wikipedia]](https://i0.wp.com/www.middleeastmonitor.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/2017_11-29-Mohammad-Bin-Salman-and-NetanyahuCaricature_of_Mohammad_Bin_Salman_03.jpg?w=1200&ssl=1)
Mohammad Bin Salman and Netanyahu – Cartoon [Tasnimnews.com/Wikipedia]
We should not be shocked, therefore, to see a Zionist Muslim leader in these trying times. It is reasonable to say that Bin Salman’s grandfather and father were Zionists, as close friends of Zionist leaders. Logic suggests that Bin Salman comes from a Zionist dynasty.
This has been evident from his close relationship with Zionists and positive approaches to the Israeli occupation and establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, calling it “[the Jews’] ancestral homeland”. This means that he has no issue with the ethnic cleansing of almost 800,000 Palestinians in 1948, during which thousands were killed and their homes demolished in order to establish the Zionist state of Israel.
“The ‘Jewish state’ claim is how Zionism has tried to mask its intrinsic Apartheid, under the veil of a supposed ‘self-determination of the Jewish people’,” wrote Israeli blogger Jonathan Ofir in Mondoweiss in 2018, “and for the Palestinians it has meant their dispossession.”
As the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Bin Salman has imprisoned dozens of Palestinians, including representatives of Hamas. In doing so he is serving Israel’s interests. Moreover, he has blamed the Palestinians for not making peace with the occupation state. Bin Salman “excoriated the Palestinians for missing key opportunities,” wrote Danial Benjamin in Moment magazine. He pointed out that the prince’s father, King Salman, has played the role of counterweight by saying that Saudi Arabia “permanently stands by Palestine and its people’s right to an independent state with occupied East Jerusalem as its capital.”
UN expert: Saudi crown prince behind hack on Amazon CEO
Israeli journalist Barak Ravid of Israel’s Channel 13 News reported Bin Salman as saying: “In the last several decades the Palestinian leadership has missed one opportunity after the other and rejected all the peace proposals it was given. It is about time the Palestinians take the proposals and agree to come to the negotiations table or shut up and stop complaining.” This is reminiscent of the words of the late Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban, one of the Zionist founders of Israel, that the Palestinians “never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”
Bin Salman’s Zionism is also very clear in his bold support for US President Donald Trump’s deal of the century, which achieves Zionist goals in Palestine at the expense of Palestinian rights. He participated in the Bahrain conference, the forum where the economic side of the US deal was announced, where he gave “cover to several other Arab countries to attend the event and infuriated the Palestinians.”
![U.S. President Donald Trump looks over at Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammad bin Salman al-Saud as they line up for the family photo during the opening day of Argentina G20 Leaders' Summit 2018 at Costa Salguero on 30 November 2018 in Buenos Aires, Argentina. [Daniel Jayo/Getty Images]](https://i0.wp.com/www.middleeastmonitor.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/2018-12-3_trump-and-bin-salmanbin-salman-g20-trump.jpg?w=1200&ssl=1)
US President Donald Trump looks over at Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammad bin Salman al-Saud as they line up for the family photo during the opening day of Argentina G20 Leaders’ Summit 2018 at Costa Salguero on 30 November 2018 in Buenos Aires, Argentina [Daniel Jayo/Getty Images]
While discussing the issue of the current Saudi support for Israeli policies and practices in Palestine with a credible Palestinian official last week, he told me that the Palestinians had contacted the Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro to ask him not to relocate his country’s embassy to Jerusalem. “The Saudis have been putting pressure on us in order to relocate our embassy to Jerusalem,” replied the Brazilian leader. What more evidence of Mohammad Bin Salman’s Zionism do we need?
The founder of Friends of Zion Museum is American Evangelical Christian Mike Evans. He said, after visiting a number of the Gulf States, that, “The leaders [there] are more pro-Israel than a lot of Jews.” This was a specific reference to Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince, and his counterpart in the UAE, Mohammed Bin Zayed.
“All versions of Zionism lead to the same reactionary end of unbridled expansionism and continued settler colonial genocide of [the] Palestinian people,” Israeli-American writer and photographer Yoav Litvin wrote for Al Jazeera. We may well see an Israeli Embassy opened in Riyadh in the near future, and a Saudi Embassy in Tel Aviv or, more likely, Jerusalem. Is Mohammad Bin Salman a Zionist? There’s no doubt about it.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
George Orwell’s dystopian foresight could easily find new expressions in the ongoing Israeli wars of genocide in Gaza and Lebanon. Much like “war is peace”, the Biden administration and the European Union have contributed to creating phrases such as “aggression is self-defence,” “murder is collateral damage”, “safe areas are death traps” and “humanitarian aid is a starvation diet.”
After enduring a full year of Israeli terror, extreme torment and military occupation, fear never conquered Gazans. Despite the complete Israeli blockade – abetted with the help of the Egyptian regime – and the stark imbalance in military power, Gaza’s collective resistance, by all means necessary, remained steadfast and resilient.
Notwithstanding the above, Benjamin Netanyahu has not succeeded in achieving any of his declared objectives. For instance, less than seven per cent of the freed Israeli captives were recovered by force. Perhaps because the Israeli prime minister’s undeclared Zionist objectives, such as land grabs in the West Bank under the shadow of the Gaza genocide, took precedence over pursuing a proven venue for the release of Israeli prisoners.
Netanyahu’s war success can be only measured by Israel’s scale of vengeance, as the toll of the murdered and injured has reached 150,000. Gaza has been turned into a living hell. A war that pervasively and systematically diminished Gaza’s economic capacity, following an 18-year blockade that crippled the economy and forced upon it an ever-increasing sense of dependency.
Yet, Israel failed to bring any part of Gaza into submission. As a result, several Israeli generals, led by former national security adviser Israeli Maj-General Giora Eiland, contrived a new approach, the “General’s Plan”, to ethnically cleanse northern Gaza.
The General’s Plan is not exclusively a military strategy but rather an orchestrated noncombatant action, euphemistically termed to mask its true intention: genocide and ethnic cleansing through starvation. It calls first for the complete isolation of northern Gaza from the rest of the Gaza Strip. Second: compartmentalise northern Gaza into separate quarters and declare each section a war zone, forcing civilians to leave or become legitimate military targets.
The initial phase, which began in early October, blocked aid trucks from reaching the north and then segregated the Jabalia camp from its surroundings. In other words, genocide by attrition, one quarter at a time, in a slow motion.
READ: Israel is playing even more dirty to force people out of Jabalia
As part of the General’s Starvation Plan, Israel bombed the only UN distribution center in Jabalia camp on Monday, murdering ten civilians queuing to receive food aid. Since last October, around 400,000 civilians remain in northern Gaza out of the original 1.2 million. Many refuse to evacuate despite the unbearable conditions. They know from historical experience that evacuation is an Israeli alias for ethnic cleansing. Once they leave, they may never return, as happened in 1948. They also saw what happened to those who evacuated, many were killed as they “moved south”, while others were murdered in the Israeli death traps, otherwise known as designated “safe areas.”
The Biden administration has been whitewashing Israeli use of starvation as a method of warfare since 9 October, 2023 when the Israeli minister of war declared “no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed.” However, on Tuesday, a little over a year after the minister’s declaration, the American secretaries of state and defence sent Israeli officials a letter giving them another grace period of 30 days to allow food aid into north Gaza or risk a restriction of US military assistance to Israel.
The new warning feels like a classic case of a déjà vu. In April 2024, the Biden administration issued a similar warning to Israel ahead of a report that was being prepared by American officials examining Israel’s violation of the Leahy Law, particularly subsection 6201(a). The law stipulates that the US should not provide assistance to any country that “prohibits or otherwise restricts, directly or indirectly, the transport or delivery of United States humanitarian assistance.”
Following that warning, US government agencies and officials concluded that Israel was blocking American humanitarian aid to Gaza. The US Agency for International Development (USAID) notified the State Department of Israel’s “arbitrary denial, restriction and impediments” of American aid to Gaza residents. In addition, the State Department’s refugee bureau issued a similar opinion stating that “facts on the ground indicate US humanitarian assistance is being restricted.”
Even after those palpable reports from the two US agencies, the Israeli Sayanim and American Secretary of State, told Congress on 10 May that Israel does not restrict “the transport or delivery of US humanitarian assistance” in Gaza.
Empowered by Washington, the General’s Starvation Plan aims to block the delivery of medical aid, food, fuel and water to the besieged quarter, currently Jabalia camp where more than 20,000 people live. This is part of what appears to be a gradual genocide, while creating the illusion of allowing aid trucks into the northern area, as the US ambassador informed the UN Security Council on Wednesday.
The entry of aid trucks does not guarantee the delivery of food to the starving population. It means that Israel retains complete control over what section is fed and who is left to starve. It also confirms that American officials continue to be Israel’s willing enablers to carry on with its General’s Starvation Plan in a systematic and phased mini-genocide.
READ: UN: 345,000 Palestinians in Gaza face ‘catastrophic’ hunger levels this winter
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
Under heavy escort, the USS Abraham Lincoln transited the Strait of Malacca and Singapore Strait over the weekend, en route to Thailand for a highly publicized and much-needed liberty port call. Guided-missile cruiser USS Robert Smalls led the three-ship column, with guided-missile destroyer USS Frank E. Petersen Jr. following astern of the supercarrier as she entered the South China Sea. Multiple Thai officials have confirmed the upcoming port visit since it was first reported by USA Today last week, with the flattop expected to pull into port at Laem Chabang in the coming days. Meanwhile, America’s other two deployed carrier groups are in the Middle East enforcing the ongoing blockade as the U.S. and Iran exchange fire for the first time since July.
Here’s TWZ’s weekly carrier tracker monitoring America’s flattop fleet, including deployed Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) and Amphibious Ready Groups (ARG), using publicly available open-source information. Check out last week’s report here.
Abraham Lincoln flipped her Automatic Identification System (AIS) transponder on ahead of the transit, broadcasting the flattop’s position publicly for the first time since January 28, 2026, when the CSG made the transit in the opposite direction prior to Operation Epic Fury. Lincoln has now been deployed for 285 days without a liberty call, but that streak is set to end this week.
For friends and family, we anticipate an arrival back home in late September or early October, depending on how long the crew stays in Thailand and whether any other stops are made along the way. When all is said and done, Abraham Lincoln’s deployment will likely become the second-longest in the modern carrier era behind the historic 326 days logged by the USS Gerald R. Ford earlier this year.
While the composition of the Abraham Lincoln CSG has shifted over the nine-plus-month deployment, Frank E. Petersen Jr., a Flight IIA Technology Insertion (TI) Arleigh Burke class destroyer and one of the newest in the fleet, embarked the commander of Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) throughout the six months of almost nonstop combat operations against Iran. The IAMD commander is responsible for coordinating the detection, response, and interception of inbound aerial threats, and Petersen Jr. is equipped with the world’s foremost integrated naval combat system – the Aegis Combat System Baseline 9 – which delivers quick reaction times, concentrated and networked firepower, and advanced electronic countermeasure capabilities for anti-air warfare.
The unannounced addition of Ticonderoga class cruiser USS Robert Smalls, which has historically served as the IAMD commander for the carriers forward-deployed out of Yokosuka, Japan, adds 122 Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells packed with missiles for protection and firepower. The rationale for the additional Tico cruiser, an iconic class that will be completely retired over the coming years without a comparable replacement, is unclear. TWZ has not received an on-the-record response from the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) or U.S. Naval Forces Central Command (NAVCENT) public affairs explaining the redirection.
Robert Smalls was part of the George Washington CSG as recently as August 18, making the northwest-bound Malacca Strait transit with the strike group the week prior, before peeling off to escort the Abraham Lincoln back through.
Ahead of publication on Tuesday, CENTCOM announced a fresh round of strikes against targets in Iran that began at noon Eastern Time. “The strikes follow recent attempted attacks by the IRGC against commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and against American service members deployed to the region,” the command posted in a statement on social media.
George Washington, which is currently accompanied by a single destroyer, USS Shoup, relieved the Abraham Lincoln in the Middle East earlier this month. Other U.S. 5th Fleet ships are reportedly moving in and out of the CSG, but the situation is fluid and TWZ cannot confirm the current, complete composition of the group. It’s unknown which warship, if any, is currently serving as IAMD commander for the CSG, which chopped into the CENTCOM area of responsibility (AOR) on or around August 19.
Also operating in the Middle East, the four-ship George H.W. Bush CSG is underway at an undisclosed location in the Arabian Sea. Alongside USS George H.W. Bush is Tico cruiser USS Princeton, the IAMD commander, and two Burke destroyers, USS Ross and USS Donald Cook.
The carriers are enforcing the ongoing blockade of Iran – and presumably participating in the latest round of airstrikes – although they are both officially on station to “support maritime security and stability in the Middle East,” according to DVIDS, the military’s content-sharing platform. CENTCOM forces have redirected 84 commercial vessels, disabled three using kinetic force, and boarded another two since the blockade resumed, as of September 1.
Over the weekend, the United States and Iran traded blows for the first time in over a month. CENTCOM opened the tit-for-tat exchange on Sunday by targeting rocket systems on Larak Island, located in the Strait of Hormuz on the Iranian side of the northern corridor, that are fitted to launch naval mines, after the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was observed making preparations to fire into the contested waterway.
“I can confirm that earlier today U.S. forces struck two Iranian launchers on Larak Island,” Navy Capt. Tim Hawkins, CENTCOM’s spokesman, told TWZ. “Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps forces were observed preparing to launch rockets with sea mines into the Strait of Hormuz,” he added. The IRGC retaliated by launching a salvo of ballistic missiles at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base, a Jordanian installation the U.S. military operates from. Jordan’s military said it successfully intercepted eight missiles.
The preemptive strikes to prevent Iran from deploying additional mines came just days after CENTCOM commander Adm. Brad Cooper said U.S. forces “successfully cleared” Iranian sea mines from international shipping lanes in the Strait of Hormuz. Commercial traffic through the strait is slowly recovering but still well below pre-war levels.
On the other side of the world, in the United States, three carriers are active: two are underway training while one is in homeport getting ready for an upcoming deployment. USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, which left Norfolk on August 21, transited south in the Atlantic Ocean and was last operating approximately 70 nautical miles off the coast of Florida, well into East Coast Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS) and Training Command (TRACOM) Carrier Qualifications (CQ). After departing San Diego on August 10, USS Carl Vinson was spotted on satellite imagery off the California coast by ship-tracker MT Anderson, in the process of completing Tailored Ship’s Training Availability (TSTA) and Final Evaluation Period (FEP) training.
USS Theodore Roosevelt, the next carrier slated to deploy from the continental U.S., is pierside at Naval Air Station North Island in San Diego, based on commercial satellite imagery. Speculation is rampant about where Theodore Roosevelt will deploy, but as the Navy has told us many times, “we do not discuss future operations or timelines.”
The balance of America’s carriers (excluding USS Nimitz, which will begin deactivation in 2027) is either in maintenance or scheduled to begin an availability in the future.
The next flattop that will re-enter service, USS Ronald Reagan, is expected to finish a roughly 17-month Docking Planned Incremental Availability (DPIA) soon. “The docking planned incremental availability for Ronald Reagan is on track for its scheduled completion at the end of August 2026,” Catherine Norton, the Public Affairs Officer (PAO) for Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility, told Stars and Stripes earlier this month. However, the ship has not gotten underway as of publication, even though yesterday was the end of the month, and it appears the DPIA will stretch into September. TWZ reached out to Puget Sound’s PAO but has not received a response yet. For the latest status of the other three carriers in current or upcoming maintenance, marked in red on the map above, check out our recent deep-dive here.
Overall carrier force posture is unchanged compared to our previous report on August 24. Three U.S. carriers are deployed (although one is on the tail end of her deployment and heading home to San Diego), one is preparing to deploy in the near term, two are working up in various states of readiness, four are in maintenance, and another, the USS Nimitz, is being used primarily for training before deactivating next year. One amphibious ready group is deployed, one is forward-deployed and at homeport, four are working up or in port, and three are in maintenance.
Note: Positions are general approximations. Non-deployed LHA/LHD amphibious warships are not shown.
Contact the author: ian.ellis-jones@recurrent.io
Syria has suffered its worst bloodshed since Bashar Al-Assad was ousted in December, with more than 1,000 people reported killed in violence that has swept the coastal region of the country since Thursday. The violence has pitted the Islamist-led government’s security forces against fighters from Assad’s Alawite minority.
The dead include hundreds of Alawite civilians, whom the a British-based organisation that reports on the conflict, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, reported were killed in reprisals after attacks on security forces.
What has driven the violence; how has interim President Ahmed Al-Sharaa reacted; and what have world powers said?
The violence began to spiral on Thursday, when the authorities said that their forces in the coastal region came under attack from fighters aligned with the ousted Assad regime. The interim government poured reinforcements into the area, which is heavily populated by Alawites, to crush what it described as a deadly, well-planned and premeditated assault by remnants of the previous regime.
As government reinforcements deployed, mosques in regions loyal to the new administration began calling on people to wage jihad, or holy struggle, in support of security forces.
By Friday afternoon, reports began emerging of scores of civilians being killed in sectarian reprisals in Alawite towns and villages. As of Sunday evening, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said that 973 civilians were killed in reprisal attacks carried out by government forces or fighters aligned with them. More than 250 Alawite fighters were killed and more than 230 members of government security forces were also killed, it added. Reuters has not been able to independently verify the tolls.
READ: Children among hundreds of civilians killed in renewed fighting in Syria, says NGO
The Alawites are the second-largest religious group in Syria after Sunni Muslims. Their faith is an offshoot of Shia Islam. The Assad regime recruited heavily from the Alawite community for its army and security apparatus, which was notorious for its brutality during more than five decades of the family’s rule.
This put many Alawites on the front lines of the civil war that erupted out of protests against Assad’s rule in 2011. The conflict took on a sectarian dimension as Sunni Muslim rebel groups sought to topple the Assad government which was backed by Shia Iran, Lebanon’s Shia Hezbollah movement and others.
Al-Sharaa led the most powerful Sunni group fighting Assad. Known as the Nusra Front, the group was part of Al-Qaeda until he severed ties with the jihadist network in 2016 and renamed his organisation. In a 2015 interview with Al Jazeera, Al-Sharaa described the Alawites as part of a sect that “moved outside the religion of God and of Islam” and urged them to renounce Assad and change their beliefs to remain safe.
Since Assad was ousted, the interim president has pledged to run Syria in an inclusive way. But while he has publicly engaged Kurds, Christians and Druze, there have been no declared meetings between him and senior Alawite figures. Many Alawites say that they suffered like other Syrians under the rule of Assad and his father, both of whom came from the sect.
Prior to Thursday’s escalation, Alawite activists had reported violence and attacks on their community following Assad’s ouster, particularly in rural Homs and Latakia.
In a speech on Sunday, Al-Sharaa said that remnants of the Assad government, supported by external parties, were seeking to create strife and drag Syria back into civil war with the aim of dividing it. He promised to form a fact-finding committee and said its findings would be made public, vowing to bring to account anyone involved “in the bloodshed of civilians” or mistreating them.
He has also announced the formation of a committee aimed at preserving civil peace, which would be tasked with communicating with the people on the coast and providing them with the support they needed to guarantee their protection.
The violence has prompted international alarm.
The United States, which imposes sanctions on Damascus, urged the Syrian authorities to hold accountable the “radical Islamist terrorists” [sic] that had killed people in Syria and said it stood with Syria’s religious and ethnic minorities.
Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz said on social media that atrocities committed against the Alawites showed that Al-Sharaa had revealed his “true face” as a jihadist.
However, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, allies of Damascus, both signalled their backing for the interim administration as violence was escalating last week. Riyadh condemned “crimes being undertaken by outlaw groups” in Syria and their targeting of security forces.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, whose country has forces on the ground in north-west Syria, has urged calm and said unnamed foreign elements were partly to blame.
Iran, which backed Assad through the war, has warned that the violence in Syria could cause regional instability.
READ: Israel urges Europe to stop ‘granting legitimacy’ to Syria’s interim authorities
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
At the start of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, the Israeli government made no secret of its intention to forcibly transfer Palestinians from the enclave and urged the international community to support its plans for what it called ‘resettlement’.
“Europe has a long history of assisting refugees fleeing conflicts,” Danny Danon and Ram Ben Barak wrote in 2023 in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal. Describing participation in forced transfer as “a moral imperative”, Danon and Ben Barak suggested that countries accept as much as 10,000 people each to “alleviate the crisis”.
Had the suggestion been accepted by enough countries, Israel would have been granted its current greatest wish – to ethnically cleanse Gaza in full complicity with the international community. As things stand, the international community refused the Israel suggestion on grounds of breaking international law, while getting on board with Israel committing genocide. The real reason behind the stance, however, was that governments would rather witness large-scale massacres of Palestinians from a distance than accept refugees.
US President Donald Trump is now promoting Israel’s strategy. “You’re talking about probably a million and half people, and we just clean out that whole thing. You know, over the centuries it’s had many, many conflicts, that site. And I don’t know, something has to happen,” Trump said during a 20-minute meeting with reporters on Air Force One.
OPINION: Israel’s use of domicide to further its colonial endeavours
“It’s literally a demolition site right now. Almost everything is demolished and people are dying there,” Trump added, in his usual vague rhetoric. “So I’d rather get involved with some of the Arab nations and build housing at a different location where they can maybe live in peace for a change.”
Trump raised the idea with Jordan’s King Abdullah II and Egypt’s President Abdel Fatah Al-Sisi. Gaza was deemed “interesting” – for real investment purposes, of course. One must not forget Jared Kushner’s plans for Gaza – beachfront properties. And, while the Biden administration dragged its feet on forced displacement, the genocide happened under its watch and with full collaboration. Which means that the previous administration paved the way for Trump to echo what Israel insisted upon since the start of the genocide – Palestinians are slated for displacement, one way or another.
Israeli Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich, stated he will be working “to prepare an operational plan and ensure the realisation of President Trump’s vision.” But it’s best to call it the Israel vision, even if Trump is the President promoting forced transfer as a humanitarian necessity. The Israeli vision is colonial, fits in with genocide and the concept of Zionism’s Greater Israel. Real estate investments facilitate the Zionist concept. And what better way to promote rebuilding Gaza, even if for Palestinians, rebuilding Gaza means the total opposite?
As Palestinians return to their homes, Trump’s suggestion of forced transfer should be considered incitement to ethnic cleansing. The world is obliged to heed what is happening right after the ceasefire and the gradual return of Palestinian refugees to Gaza. Palestinians want to remain – it is their right – and that is all that matters.
OPINION: Could the head of the world’s highest court be a judge with Zionist tendencies?
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
Aug. 31 (UPI) — Oil prices surged early Monday after fighting flared in the U.S.-Iran conflict for the first time in four weeks since U.S. President Donald Trump announced a “pause” in U.S. military strikes on Aug. 1.
The contract for the benchmark Brent crude for November delivery jumped by 3.4% to $91.09 a barrel and the October contract for American crude saw a similar-sized increase to $86.22 after U.S. forces hit rocket launchers on Larak Island in the Hormuz Strait on Sunday night and Iran’s military retaliated, targeting American bases in Jordan.
The hikes were driven by the renewed hostilities stoking fears ongoing supply disruption caused by a drastic curtailment of tankers traffic transiting the Strait of Hormuz would be made worse and persist for longer, according to experts.
“Supply risk will persist and oil inventories will continue to deplete in the coming weeks and months. The Iranian crisis has likely changed the security status quo in the Middle East,” said PVM Oil Associates’ London-based analyst Tamas Varga.
Investment bank Goldman Sachs, the impact of destructive attacks on refining capacity was responsible for upward pressure on margins.
“Rising strikes on refineries in the Middle East and Russia have further constrained already-stretched global refining capacity, pushing refined products margins to new highs,” the bank said in a note.
Prices at the pump in the United States on Monday remained broadly flat from the previous day, with the average price of a gallon of regular unleaded up 0.2 cents at 4.08 a gallon, and diesel down by a little over 0.3 cents at $5.60 a gallon, according to the American Automobile Association.
The developments came as the United States’ Strategic Petroleum Reserve has fallen to its lowest level since 1982.
President Trump said Sunday he would restock it with oil from his Venezuela deal giving the United States secure a stake in more than 65 billion barrels of oil despite the fact it could to produce take many years to before the agreements yields any significant volumes because the oil is reserves, as yet to be drilled.
The price of oil has seesawed over the past two weeks after rising in response to Trump’s Aug. 19 threat to wage a “crushing economic operation” against Iran that his officials said would cause the regime to collapse, and then retreating again in the hours before the mainly-sanctions package of measures were unveiled on Aug. 24.
The upcoming official visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping to Egypt, scheduled for August 30 to September 3, 2026, coincides with the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit. The visit will address economic and technological cooperation, as well as regional and international issues, and marks the 70th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Egypt and China. The visit aims to strengthen the comprehensive strategic partnership between the two countries and expand Beijing’s economic and political influence in the Middle East amidst escalating regional and international tensions, while also bolstering China’s role in the Global South.
As an Egyptian academic specializing in Chinese politics and the policies of the ruling Communist Party of China, I can analyze and summarize the significance of President Xi Jinping’s visit to Cairo and his meeting with his Egyptian counterpart, President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, and its importance to China’s influence in the Middle East and the Global South through the following points:
– First: What does China hope to achieve with Xi Jinping’s visit to Egypt at this particular time?
This visit of President Xi Jinping to Cairo (the first by a Chinese president to Cairo in nearly a decade) coincides with the 70th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries. It carries several key objectives, including political and international dimensions related to Chinese coordination with Egypt on Middle Eastern issues. The visit comes at a sensitive time, as the region is experiencing tensions linked to the conflict between Iran and the United States and its repercussions on maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz and global energy markets. Beijing also seeks to strengthen its strategic balance and reaffirm its diplomatic presence as an international power that supports diplomatic solutions and cooperates with pivotal countries like Egypt to achieve stability. This follows President Xi Jinping’s participation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit. President Xi Jinping’s visit to Cairo also carries several economic and trade dimensions, such as expanding the economic partnership and capitalizing on the significant increase in trade between the two countries to deepen cooperation. Furthermore, China will support infrastructure and energy projects in Egypt by boosting Chinese investments in Cairo, including renewable energy sectors such as wind turbine manufacturing plants, transportation deals, and electric trains, in addition to extending currency swap agreements between the two central banks.
Stay ahead of the geopolitical week.
MD Briefing delivers expert analysis across five global fronts — the Indo-Pacific, energy, geoeconomics, European security, and the Middle East — every Monday morning. Free.
The visit also aims to discuss the technological and artificial intelligence file in China’s relations with Cairo, particularly major technological offers, most notably the offer from the Chinese company Huawei to build data and artificial intelligence centers in Egypt. This project is viewed with apprehension by intelligence, military, political, and strategic circles in Washington, which are attempting to offer Cairo alternatives from major American technology companies such as Microsoft, Nvidia, and AMD.
– Second: Does the visit carry political messages that extend beyond bilateral relations, especially regarding the Middle East and Africa?
Yes, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit carries major strategic political messages that transcend the framework of bilateral cooperation. It aims to reshape the international order and build a multipolar world, starting with the Global South. The visit also carries messages that go beyond bilateral relations, pushing for a Global South leadership role. Beijing seeks to garner African and Arab support to assert its position as a major power, offering an alternative to Western and American competition and influence. China also aims to promote multilateralism by urging countries in the region to adopt common positions that support international stability and security, moving away from the unilateral polarization of the United States. Furthermore, President Xi Jinping’s visit signals China’s desire to secure its economic interests. Chinese actions are focused on ensuring the security of maritime routes and the stability of energy and trade markets within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative. Here, President Xi’s visit to Cairo coincides with the launch of the second iteration of the massive joint air exercises, Eagles of Civilization, in August 2026 at Egyptian air bases. These exercises, which follow the first iteration in May 2025, will involve advanced fighter jets from both sides. This sends political and strategic messages to Washington and Tel Aviv about the new military partnership between Egypt and China, the diversification of arms sources, and the independence of Egyptian military and political decision-making in diversifying its partnerships.
Furthermore, the Chinese president’s visit to Cairo carries support for Egypt’s regional role in the Middle East and Africa, reaffirming the pivotal role of Egypt. Choosing Egypt as a starting point reflects Beijing’s understanding of its geopolitical importance as a key link between the Arab world and the African continent and its commitment to addressing regional repercussions. China is also demonstrating its readiness to cooperate with its African and Arab partners to contain the economic crises resulting from conflicts in the Middle East. In addition to China’s anticipated plan to expand alliances by strengthening the integration of Chinese development projects with major economic blocs such as BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, this visit also aims to coordinate common positions on de-escalation and maintaining peace and security in the Middle East and to discuss regional conflicts, particularly in the wake of the Gaza and Iran wars.
– Third: What economic files could witness new agreements or steps between Cairo and Beijing?
Economic relations between Cairo and Beijing are increasingly moving towards signing new agreements and taking new steps focused on strengthening joint investments and supporting financial stability. The most prominent joint economic and investment files between Egypt and China are based on supporting financial partnership and currency diversification. This involves renewing and strengthening local currency swap agreements between the Central Bank of Egypt and its Chinese counterpart to facilitate trade and support monetary stability, independent of international currencies. Economic cooperation and currency swaps will be among the top economic priorities of the visit through monitoring the surge in trade and extending the local currency swap agreement to enhance economic partnership within the BRICS framework.
Furthermore, there is a shared Chinese-Egyptian desire to localize industry and technology in Cairo by attracting substantial Chinese investments in electric vehicle manufacturing, new and renewable energy sectors, and advanced technology industries. With the expansion of Chinese projects in the Suez Canal Economic Zone, through the expansion of Chinese industrial and logistical projects within the Suez Canal Corridor, a major value-added production base is being established. China is also supporting Egypt in achieving food security and agricultural development by preparing joint Egyptian-Chinese alliances targeting large-scale agricultural land reclamation projects to enhance food security. This is happening concurrently with Chinese support for infrastructure and smart cities in Egypt through cooperation in urban development projects and modern smart cities.
– Fourth: Can China strengthen Egypt’s role as a key hub for its projects in the Middle East and Africa?
Yes, China is already strengthening Egypt’s role as a key and central hub for its strategic projects in the Middle East and Africa. The pillars of Chinese strategic cooperation with Egypt are based on China’s projects and investments within the Belt and Road Initiative. China considers Egypt a strategic gateway and a vital corridor for the maritime and land Silk Road, given the Suez Canal’s role as a global trade artery. With the diversification of Chinese partnerships and investments in the Suez Canal Economic Zone, given the concentration of major industrial projects by Chinese companies in the zone, such as the China-Egypt Economic and Trade Cooperation Zone (TEDA). China aims to access African markets through Egypt. Chinese companies utilize Egyptian land and ports as a joint manufacturing base and a launchpad for exporting products and services to markets across Africa and the Middle East. China also seeks to achieve developmental and security integration with Egypt, aligning its five-year development plans with Egypt’s Vision 2030. This is further evidenced by the development of joint military cooperation and air exercises between Egypt and China, such as the Eagles of Civilization exercises between the Egyptian and Chinese air forces, the first iteration of which took place in May 2025 and the second in August 2026.
Beijing also seeks to disseminate artificial intelligence and innovation technologies through Egypt to the African continent, the Middle East, and the Global South. Especially since Egypt hosts a number of Chinese companies across various sectors, particularly technology, such as Huawei, Xiaomi, Oppo, ZTE, Midea, and Haier. Furthermore, a $300 million investment fund has been established with Tsinghua University in China, focusing on artificial intelligence and semiconductor design.
– Fifth: To what extent can the Egyptian-Chinese partnership affect the balance of American influence in the region?
The Egyptian-Chinese partnership significantly impacts American influence in the Middle East by diversifying China’s economic and political alliances in the region. However, it does not eliminate the strategic alliances between the United States and several countries in the region, particularly the Gulf states. The partnership between Egypt and China is based on the economic and financial dimension, including major Chinese investments in Egypt. China is pouring billions of dollars into infrastructure projects and the Suez Canal region. China also supports Egypt’s bid to join the BRICS group, led by China and Russia, to reduce its dependence on the dollar and the Western and American financial system. Furthermore, China is keen to closely integrate its Belt and Road Initiative projects with the Egyptian economy. The partnership between Egypt and China also rests on the diplomatic and strategic dimension as well as the diversification of alliances. Egypt pursues a balanced foreign policy that is not limited to a single ally. Here, the partnership with China grants Egypt greater freedom of movement and a wider margin to maneuver, free from American political conditions and pressures, particularly in the areas of armament and military deals. This creates a delicate balance for Egypt, as it refuses to fully align itself with one power against another, maintaining its security partnership with Washington alongside its relationship with Beijing.
In this context, Beijing does not view Egypt merely as an economic partner, but rather as a strategic gateway and a pivotal pillar of its geopolitical influence in the Middle East and Africa, countering American penetration. This approach stems from China’s desire to fill the political and military vacuums resulting from the decline or fluctuation of the Western and American presence in the region. To this end, China leverages Cairo’s historical and political weight as a platform to expand its diplomatic influence and build partnerships with other countries in Africa and the Arab world. China’s support for Egypt’s membership in the BRICS bloc has provided Beijing with a strong regional ally, bolstering its vision for reshaping the global financial system into a multipolar order in the face of the United States’ unilateral hegemony in the region. This is especially significant given that Egypt represents a crucial land and sea crossroads for China’s Belt and Road Initiative via the Maritime Silk Road, considering the strategic and vital importance of the Suez Canal.
– Sixth: Does Beijing want Egypt merely as an economic partner, or does it see it as a strategic gateway for its influence in the Middle East and Africa?
Beijing views Egypt as a major strategic gateway for its influence, not just an ordinary economic partner. The relationship combines commercial interests with broad geopolitical ties. The economic dimension is based on the importance of the Suez Canal. China considers the Suez Canal a key artery for its trade with Europe and the rest of the world, and it is investing heavily to connect Egyptian ports and roads to its major commercial projects related to its Belt and Road Initiative. In addition to China’s role as a major logistics hub in the Suez Canal Economic Zone, numerous Chinese companies have established factories there to export goods. This is further compounded by Egypt’s strategic and political importance, as well as its sensitive geographical location, which is crucial to China’s interests. Egypt’s position at the crossroads of Africa, Asia, and Europe serves China’s regional influence. This coincided with China’s support for Egypt’s formal accession to the BRICS group, a move fully backed by China to bolster both countries’ political and economic weight globally.
Beijing also focuses on the growing security and military dimension of its relationship with Cairo to secure investments and international maritime routes. Chinese ambitions extend beyond simply selling goods; it seeks a greater role in protecting its interests and citizens by strengthening military cooperation with Cairo and diversifying defense partnerships with countries in the Middle East, Africa, and the Global South through Egypt. Beijing sees the growing military cooperation and arms sales to Egypt and the region as an opportunity to undermine Western and American military influence and to forge closer ties with the Egyptian army, one of the largest armies on the African continent. This is the true objective of China in transforming Egypt into a political and military hub that guarantees Beijing’s vital interests in the Middle East, Africa, and the Global South.
Accordingly, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Cairo comes at a time when Beijing seeks to strengthen its engagement in the Middle East and expand its relations with developing countries and the Global South, coinciding with escalating competition with the United States for economic and technological influence. Xi’s visit to Cairo also carries significance that transcends bilateral relations, given the ongoing repercussions of a potential US war with Iran and the instability in global energy markets. Therefore, China seeks to leverage Egypt’s pivotal role in achieving regional stability, mitigating crises, and protecting its interests in the Middle East and Africa.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Saturday urged US President Donald Trump to avoid creating turmoil, saying problems could be resolved through dialogue and implementation of a memorandum of understanding, Anadolu reports.
“If we proceed through dialogue and on the basis of the memorandum of understanding, we will resolve the problems and secure our rights,” Pezeshkian said in a ceremony in Tehran, as cited by Mehr News Agency.
“It is in the interest of the country, the region and the world that Trump does not create turmoil and that Israel does not cause insecurity and aggression,” he added.
Pezeshkian said Iran does not favor war but would respond firmly to any assaults.
“We do not like war, but we will stand with strength against aggression and defend ourselves,” he said, adding that no power could force a united nation determined to defend its territory to surrender.
He said Tehran was seeking to resolve problems through dialogue, but stressed that the Iranian people, officials and military commanders would “never surrender” in the face of threats and aggression.
The president also accused Israel of seeking to sow divisions among Muslim countries, saying greater unity among Islamic nations could thwart such efforts.
READ: Iran says it agreed with Oman on Hormuz passage route, links reopening to US commitments
Turning to domestic issues, Pezeshkian said maintaining industrial production during the coming winter was a “red line,” stressing that supplies of gas, electricity and water to production facilities should not be interrupted.
He said the government would manage consumption of water, electricity, gas and fuel and, if restrictions became necessary, would first impose them on government offices and public buildings rather than shift the burden onto the public.
Pezeshkian called on the public to cooperate with the government to maintain stability, saying Iran’s adversaries should not believe that pressure would force the country to surrender.
The US-Israeli war against Iran began on Feb. 28, with attacks targeting military, nuclear and infrastructure sites across the country. Iran responded with missile and drone strikes against Israel and US military facilities across the region.
Iran and the US reached a 14-point memorandum of understanding in June, mediated by Pakistan and Qatar, aimed at ending hostilities and opening a 60-day window for negotiations toward a broader agreement.
The memorandum also addressed the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and lifting of the US naval blockade, as well as sanctions and Iran’s frozen assets.
Tehran has maintained that further progress in talks depends on Washington fulfilling its commitments under the memorandum, while Iranian officials have said the Strait of Hormuz will not fully reopen until those obligations are implemented.
READ: Dialogue ‘only viable way out’ of US-Iran conflict, China says amid sanctions threats
The administration of former US President, Joe Biden, knowingly allowed Israel’s genocide in Gaza to continue long after it had lost any clear military objective, with senior officials in Washington privately admitting it amounted to “killing and destroying for the sake of killing and destroying”. This damning assessment, along with revelations of political manipulation, diplomatic cover-ups and sabotaged peace efforts, comes from a bombshell investigation aired by Israel’s Channel 13. Details of the investigation have been translated by Drop Site News and shared on X.
The Biden administration allowed Israel unprecedented leeway to carry out its military offensive, despite the enormous death and devastation it inflicted on Gaza. Former Israeli ambassador, Michael Herzog, made a startling admission about Biden’s support: “God did the State of Israel a favour that Biden was the president during this period. We fought [in Gaza] for over a year and the administration never came to us and said, ‘ceasefire now.’ It never did. And that’s not to be taken for granted.” His remarks encapsulated a broader sentiment that the White House gave Benjamin Netanyahu all the political space he needed to execute the military offensive, which has claimed the lives of more than 52,000 Palestinians, mainly women and children.
READ: ICC judges order prosecutor to keep arrest warrant requests confidential in Gaza probes
The investigation, which included interviews with nine current and former US officials, reveals a deeply troubling portrait of US complicity in Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Former national security aide, Ilan Goldenberg, stated that the war amounted to “killing and destroying for the sake of killing and destroying”, with no viable political alternative ever established. Despite the White House’s public messaging about restraining Israel, the internal consensus appeared to be that the administration had no intention of exerting real pressure on the Occupation state.
The Biden administration also shielded Israel from allegations of war crimes, prompting a major backlash from staffers in the State Department. Lawyer Stacy Gilbert, for example, resigned in protest after being excluded from a key report that falsely claimed Israel had not violated US arms laws. Gilbert described the report as “shocking in its mendacity”, pointing out that aid obstruction and settler attacks were well documented, yet ignored. Meanwhile, Washington continued to certify Israeli compliance with US law, ensuring the uninterrupted flow of weapons.
The investigation also revealed that Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, deliberately sabotaged hostage negotiations in order to prevent a ceasefire. US officials confirmed that Netanyahu tanked talks out of fear that a deal would compel him to halt the war.
Despite public backlash, Biden’s private approach remained deferential. Even after reportedly telling Netanyahu he was “full of shit” and hanging up mid-call, Biden ultimately maintained support. After briefly halting a shipment of 2,000-lb bombs due to concerns about their use in densely populated areas of Gaza, Netanyahu publicly accused Washington of broader arms delays. Biden, rather than escalating pressure, resumed the shipment process shortly thereafter.
The Channel 13 exposé further confirms that Biden’s reluctance to push Israel was deeply tied to a failed diplomatic initiative with Saudi Arabia. A landmark normalisation deal was in sight, but it required Israeli recognition of Palestinian statehood. These were flatly rejected by Netanyahu’s far-right coalition. Former US ambassador, Jack Lew, said he found Israel’s refusal “shocking”, while Amos Hochstein expressed disbelief that such a strategic opportunity was squandered. Sources confirmed that Netanyahu deliberately stalled negotiations in hopes that President Trump would return to office and claim the diplomatic win for himself.
These revelations lend significant weight to long-standing accusations that the Biden administration has not only provided diplomatic cover for Israel’s propaganda by repeating lies, but also actively enabled what many view as a campaign of ethnic cleansing. Critics note that Biden himself amplified false Israeli claims, such as the widely discredited allegations of Hamas beheading babies, rhetoric that helped to dehumanise a population in order to carry out genocide.
OPINION: Advisory opinions will not stop genocide
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
