monitor

Last night, in one of the most dramatic elections in recent US history, Zahran Mamdani, a Muslim candidate of Indian African descent, achieved a landslide victory. This triumph came despite facing formidable opposition from the forces of Zionism, capitalism, and racialist religious supremacism, which mobilized significant resources in terms of money, muscle, and power against him.

The victory of Zahran Mamdani, the son of renowned intellectual Mahmood Mamdani and Film maker Mira Nair, as a Democratic candidate in New York mayoral elections is far more than a local electoral victory. It signals a deeper undercurrent—a growing rebellion against the entangled machinery of global capitalism, racialised securitisation, Zionist impunity, and Islamophobic silencing.

In the heart of New York, one of the most securitised and capital-rich spaces on the planet, Mamdani’s emergence stands as a critique of the global order. It is an insurgency within the very citadel of imperial liberalism. His campaign foregrounds anti-austerity politics, solidarity with Palestine, and the dismantling of carceral and corporate logics that have defined American life for decades. It is, in essence, a blow to what The Globalisation of World Politics calls “the disciplining power of capitalism.”

For years, the mere act of criticising Israel—even for its brutal siege of Gaza or its apartheid policies—has been enough to trigger political excommunication. The term “antisemite” has often been deployed not to combat real hate, but to securitize dissent. Any moral critique of Zionist settler colonialism was cast as existential threat and thus silenced. In Mamdani’s case, too, this familiar script was attempted: the labels of “Pro-Hamas,” “Antisemitic,” and “extremist” were hurled. But this time, it didn’t work.

READ: Zohran Mamdani elected New York City’s first Muslim mayor: AP projection

The people of New York—multi-ethnic, young, politically awakened—refused to accept this securitisation. The old rhetorical weapons no longer resonate. Zionism’s carefully curated moral immunity, built upon the tragic weight of the Holocaust, is eroding under the real-time horrors of a genocidal siege in Gaza. The shield of historical victimhood has cracked—not because the Holocaust is forgotten, but because it is being morally manipulated to justify colonial violence.

Even prominent Jewish scholars and intellectuals—such as Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, and Ilan Pappé—have long warned about this moral dissonance. Yet, governments have remained complicit. Streets across the West have mobilised in support of Palestine, but policies have not shifted. The disconnect between public sentiment and the actions of the power elite is glaring. The political representation of this street sympathy has been manipulated through manufactured consent and a false victimhood narrative propagated by large, conglomerate-controlled media outlets. Mamdani’s nomination suggests that the public may finally be finding a way to express their views through electoral channels, despite the entrenched media-industrial Zionist consensus.

Yet in India, the silence is deafening.

Despite Zahran’s cultural and familial linkages with India, the so-called liberal intelligentsia and the Hindutva right have found rare unity: in ignoring him. Why? Because he identifies unapologetically as a Muslim. Because he challenges Hindutva and Zionism with equal clarity. Because he doesn’t perform his identity for liberal comfort. While India was quick to celebrate Kamala Harris and Rishi Sunak—symbols of minority success within dominant systems—it refuses to acknowledge Mamdani, who represents defiance, not assimilation.

This is not just the prejudice of the right-wing. It reveals a deep Islamophobia embedded within India’s secular elite—those who pride themselves on defending the social fabric but look away when a Muslim victory doesn’t align with sanitized, capitalist liberalism. Mamdani is inconvenient. He is too political, too Muslim, too critical.

But he is also the embodiment of a long tradition. The son of Mahmood Mamdani—whose work deconstructs the legacies of colonial violence, racial statecraft, and the “good Muslim/bad Muslim” dichotomy—Zahran is the intellectual and political heir to global decolonial thought. His mother, Mira Nair, whose films have captured migration, racial tension, and identity, adds a cultural dimension to this lineage of resistance.

In a world that feels increasingly bleak, Mamdani’s nomination offers a rare moment of clarity: that cracks have begun to appear in the mirror of empire. The hegemon can still silence, still dominate—but not without resistance, and not without fracture. For those who dream of justice—not just electoral wins—Zahran Mamdani’s nomination is a reminder that history is not yet finished.

READ: Syria, the Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Sharaa’s manoeuvring

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

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]

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.”

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.

Today we’re taking a tour through the mythical Land of Election Fraud, where President Trump has built a palace of lies, imprisoning both truth and democracy.

I put it in fairy tale terms because the idea that American elections are corrupt should hold about as much credence as a magical beanstalk growing into the sky. Countless lawsuits and investigations have found no proof of these false claims.

But here we are — not only do many Americans erroneously believe that Trump won the 2020 election, but the chief water-carriers of that lie are now in powerful government positions.

Last week, the U.S. Department of Justice announced that it will send monitors to Los Angeles and other locations in California and New Jersey for next week’s balloting. Those who study voting and democracies warn that this could be a test run for how far Trump could go in attempting to impose his will on the 2026 midterms and perhaps the 2028 presidential election.

If you think that it is harmless coincidence that he’s stacked election deniers in key posts, or that once again California is the center of his attack on democratic norms, I have beans you may be interested in buying.

“The sending of the observers to the special election could very well be, and probably likely is, a precursor or practice run for 2026,” Mindy Romero told me. She’s an assistant professor and the founder of the Center for Inclusive Democracy at USC’s Sol Price School of Public Policy.

Like others I spoke with, Romero sees a larger context to the poll monitors that has the potential to end with voter suppression.

“The Trump administration is laying a foundation, and they’re being very open about it, very clear about it,” Romero said. “They are saying that they are anticipating there to be fraud and for the election to be rigged.”

Trump put it even more clearly in a social media post on Sunday.

“I hope the DOJ pursues this with as much ‘gusto’ as befitting the biggest SCANDAL in American history!,” he wrote. “If not, it will happen again, including the upcoming Midterms. … Watch how totally dishonest the California Prop Vote is!”

To understand where all this may be headed involves digging back into Golden State history. The conspiracy underpinning election fraud claims has deep roots in California’s Proposition 187 — the anti-immigrant measure that was passed by voters in 1994 but squashed by the courts.

The far right never got over the defeat. Anti-immigrant sentiment morphed into conspiracy theory, specifically that undocumented folks were voting in huge numbers, at the behest of Democrats.

This absolutely loony bit of racist paranoia spawned an “election integrity” movement that cloaked itself as patriotism and fairness, but at heart remained doused in fear-of-brown.

Calfornia Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said Monday he sees that Proposition 187 “playbook” at work today with “a targeting, unfortunately, of immigrants … because it creates fear in the eyes of some, in the minds of some, and it helps the Republican Party, MAGA and the Trump administration achieve their goals.”

Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids are just the flip side of the coin to his election fraud claims — both at heart a part of the white Christian nationalism that his administration is now openly embracing.

Let me just say here that all Americans want fair elections and many average folks involved in election integrity efforts simply want to ensure our one-person, one-vote system stays honest — regardless of race or anything else. No hate on them at all. It’s the funders and organizers of many voter witch-hunt efforts that draw my ire, because they exploit that reasonable wish for fairness for their own dark agenda.

And that agenda increasingly appears to be the end of free and fair elections, while maintaining the appearance of them — the classic authoritarian way of ruling with the seeming consent of the people. Remember, Russia still holds elections.

“To have real control, you want to rule with a velvet glove,” Romero said. “That velvet glove can come off, and the people know it can come off,” but mostly, you want them to comply because it feels like “just what has to be.”

So how exactly would we get from poll monitors, a reasonable and established norm, to something as dire as an election that is rigged, or that is so chaotic the average person doesn’t know the truth?

It starts with introducing doubt into the system, which Trump has done. To be fair, with Proposition 50, the Election Rigging Response Act, Democrats now fear rigged elections, too.

But Gowri Ramachandran, the director of elections and security in the Brennan Center for Justice’s Elections and Government Program, told me her “biggest fear” is that those election deniers whom Trump elevated to official roles “now have the platform of the federal government.”

For that reason, “information about elections [that] comes out of the federal government right now, I think everyone’s going to have to take it with a really big grain of salt,” she said.

So we come out of the California 2025 special election unable to trust the federal government’s take on it, with one year until the midterm elections that will determine whether or not Trump’s power remains unfettered.

Maybe everything turns out fine, but there’s a string of other maybes where it doesn’t.

Let’s say Trump tries to declare an end to mail-in ballots and early voting, both of which increase turnout for lower-income folks who don’t have time to line up. Trump tried that earlier this year, though courts blocked it.

What does the 2026 election look like if you have to line up in person to vote if you want to be sure it counts, with ICE potentially around the block rounding up citizens and noncitizens alike? And the government requiring that you have multiple forms of identification, all with matching names (take that, married women), and even military “guarding” the polls?

Kind of intimidating, huh?

But let’s say the election happens anyway. And let’s say Republicans lose enough congressional seats to put Democrats in control of the House. But let’s say the federal government claims there is so much fraud, it has to be investigated before any results can be considered official.

Private groups sue on both sides. Half the country believes Trump, half the country believes the secretaries of state, like California’s Shirley Weber, charged with managing the results.

In that chaos, the newly elected Democratic representatives head to Washington, D.C., to get to work, only to have House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) refuse to swear them in — no differently than he is currently doing with elected Arizona Rep. Adelita Grijalva, who has promised to vote to release the Epstein files if Johnson ever does his job.

Romero calls that scenario “not even … that big of a stretch.”

Congress comes to a halt, not enough members sworn in to function, which is just fine by Trump.

And voila! The vote is suppressed by confusion, chaos and the velvet glove, because of course it’s reasonable to want to know the truth before we move forward.

So monitor away. Watch the polls and watch the watchers, and protect the vote.

But don’t buy the beans.

Oct. 24 (UPI) — The U.S. Department of Justice announced Friday that it will monitor some polling sites in California and New Jersey “to ensure transparency.”

Both states are having elections on Nov. 4.

“Transparency at the polls translates into faith in the electoral process, and this Department of Justice is committed to upholding the highest standards of election integrity,” said Attorney General Pam Bondi in a press release. “We will commit the resources necessary to ensure the American people get the fair, free, and transparent elections they deserve.”

The California counties where the department plans to monitor the polls are: Kern, Riverside, Fresno, Orange and Los Angeles. It will also monitor polls in Passaic County, N.J.

While election monitoring is not unusual, the two states listed are Democratic strongholds.

The effort will be overseen by the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division and will be led by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon.

“The Department of Justice will do everything necessary to protect the votes of eligible American citizens, ensuring our elections are safe and secure,” Dhillon said in a statement. “Transparent election processes and election monitoring are critical tools for safeguarding our elections and ensuring public trust in the integrity of our elections.”

Civil Rights Division personnel will be available to take questions and complaints from the public on possible violations of federal voting rights laws, the release said.

The U.S. Department of Justice will monitor polling sites in five California counties as voters decide on Proposition 50 on Nov. 4, it said Friday, after being asked to do so by state GOP officials.

Monitoring, which is routinely conducted by the Justice Department, will occur across Southern California and in the Central Valley, in Fresno, Kern, Los Angeles, Orange and Riverside counties, the Justice Department said.

Proposition 50 — one of November’s most hotly-watched electoral issues, with national political implications — asks California voters whether the state should redraw its congressional districts to better favor Democrats. It is a response to President Trump’s pressure campaign on Texas and other red states to redraw their lines in favor of Republicans, and is considered a must-pass measure if Democrats hope to regain control of the House in next year’s midterms.

The Justice Department said its monitors would work to “ensure transparency, ballot security, and compliance with federal law,” including the Voting Rights Act, National Voter Registration Act, Help America Vote Act, Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, and the Civil Rights Act.

“Transparency at the polls translates into faith in the electoral process, and this Department of Justice is committed to upholding the highest standards of election integrity,” Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said. “We will commit the resources necessary to ensure the American people get the fair, free, and transparent elections they deserve.”

“Our democracy depends on free and fair elections,” said acting U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, the top federal prosecutor in the L.A. region, who will be helping to coordinate the monitoring effort. “We will work tirelessly to uphold and protect the integrity of the election process.”

The Justice Department also announced monitors will be stationed in Passaic County, N.J. That state is holding a consequential gubernatorial election.

While federal monitoring is routine, it has been viewed with heightened skepticism from both parties in recent years. When the Justice Department under President Biden announced monitoring in 86 jurisdictions across 27 states during last November’s presidential election, some Republican-led states balked and sought to block the effort.

Democrats have been highly skeptical of the Trump administration’s plans for monitoring elections, in part because of Trump’s relentless denial of past election losses — including his own to Biden in 2020 — and his appointment of fellow election deniers to high-ranking positions in his administration, including in the Justice Department.

Corrin Rankin, chair of the California Republican Party, had specifically asked the Justice Department to send monitors to the five counties in a letter to the Justice Department on Monday.

Rankin wrote that the party had “received reports of irregularities” in each of the counties during recent elections, which they feared could “undermine either the willingness of voters to participate in the election or their confidence in the announced results of the election” this November.

Rankin called Proposition 50 a “politically charged question,” and said it was “imperative to have robust voter participation and public confidence in the results regardless of the outcome.”

Matt Shupe, a spokesperson for the California GOP, declined to comment on the letter Friday.

California officials, including Secretary of State Shirley Weber and California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, have promised safe and fair elections and said their teams will also be out in the field enforcing California’s election laws in November.

“Our election laws provide the backbone for a free and fair election, and as California’s top law enforcement officer, I will do everything in my power to protect your right to vote,” Bonta recently said. “In the lead-up to the election and on Election Day, my office will be on call to provide assistance to the Secretary of State’s Office in enforcing California’s election laws, as needed, through a team of attorneys and administrative staff located across the state.”

Dean Logan, elections chief for Los Angeles County, said in a statement Friday that federal election monitors are welcome to view election activities and that the state has “clear laws and guidelines that support observation and prohibit election interference.”

“The presence of election observers is not unusual and is a standard practice across the country,” Logan said.

Logan didn’t directly address the California GOP’s specific statements about Los Angeles County, but said that the county regularly updates and verifies voter records in coordination with state and federal agencies and protects the integrity of the election process.

“Voters can have confidence their ballot is handled securely and counted accurately,” he said.

This article will be updated.

Oct. 24 (UPI) — Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that diplomats will help American military officers monitor the cease-fire in Israel and Gaza.

Rubio is visiting Israel as part of a series of visits by American officials that have been in Israel this week.

While touring the new Civil-Military Coordination Center in Kiryat Gat Friday, Rubio made the comments.

“There’s going to be ups and downs and twists and turns, but I think we have a lot of reason for healthy optimism about the progress that’s being made,” The New York Times reported that Rubio said.

Steven Fagin, ambassador to Yemen, will lead the effort at the center, the State Department said.

A reporter asked on Friday if Israel would need to apply for permission from the United States to resume fighting. “I wouldn’t phrase it that way,” Rubio responded, The Washington Post reported. “The bottom line is that there’s no nation on Earth that’s contributed more to help Israel and its security.”

Israelis have been increasingly alarmed at the United States’ presence in the cease-fire, wondering how much control America will have over Israel.

The United States is also committed to Israel’s long-term security, including ensuring that Hamas is demilitarized, Rubio said.

There is “no plan B,” he said. “It’s not just the United States. … Over two dozen countries signed onto this, including regional Arab countries … that there would be a demilitarized Gaza and that there would not be a Hamas with the capability to threaten Israel.”

On Thursday, a far-right faction in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, voted to annex the West Bank, drawing rebuke from President Donald Trump, Rubio and Vice President JD Vance.

Trump, in an interview with Time Magazine, said that he would not allow it.

“We don’t think it’s going to happen,” Trump said. “Because I gave my word to the Arab countries. Israel would lose all of its support from the United States if that happened.”

Earlier this week, Vance arrived in Israel with Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and investor Jared Kushner. They opened the CMCC in Israel, and Vance said the peace plan is “durable.”

Rubio said he plans to join Trump in Qatar to fly to Asia this weekend to attend leadership summits in Malaysia and South Korea, the Post reported. He said he also plans to visit Japan.

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]

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.”

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.

US President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the Palestinian resistance group, Hamas, took out “a couple of” gangs, without identifying which groups, Anadolu reports.

“They did take out a couple of gangs that were very bad, very, very bad gangs. And they did take them out, and they killed a number of gang members, and that didn’t bother me much, to be honest with you. That’s okay,” Trump told reporters at the White House, alongside Argentinian President Javier Milei. “It’s a couple of very bad gangs.”

His remarks came a day after Hamas and Israel carried out a hostage-prisoner swap that saw hundreds of Palestinian prisoners released from Israel’s notorious Ofer military prison and other prison facilities in the Negev Desert. All 20 living Israeli hostages were also released.

Earlier Tuesday, Trump announced the start of “phase two” of his Gaza ceasefire agreement, following the release of hostages under the first stage of the deal brokered by Türkiye, the US, Qatar and Egypt.

Phase two of the deal calls for the establishment of a new governing mechanism in Gaza, the formation of a multinational force and the disarmament of Hamas.

Trump said he spoke to Hamas and the group will disarm.

“They will disarm, and if they don’t disarm, we will disarm them — and it’ll happen quickly and, perhaps, violently, but they will disarm,” he added.

Freed from Israeli prison: I still cannot believe I am out after 24 years

The Palestinian Resistance Movement (Hamas) has expressed its deep condolences to the State of Qatar, its Emir, government, and people, following the deaths of three Qatari diplomats in a traffic accident near Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. The diplomats were part of Qatar’s delegation engaged in ongoing ceasefire negotiations related to the Israeli war in the Gaza Strip.

In a statement issued on Sunday, Hamas conveyed its “sincere condolences and solidarity with the sisterly State of Qatar,” praying for “God’s mercy” upon the deceased and a swift recovery for the injured.

“We ask God Almighty to bestow His mercy and forgiveness upon them, grant the injured a speedy recovery, and inspire their families and the brotherly Qatari people with patience and solace. To God we belong and to Him we shall return,” the movement said.

Hamas also affirmed its “absolute solidarity” with Qatar and its people, praying that the Gulf state be “protected from all harm and evil.”

According to Egyptian security sources, the accident occurred approximately 50 kilometres from Sharm El-Sheikh, when the diplomats’ vehicle was traveling to attend the anticipated announcement and signing of a Gaza ceasefire agreement.

The victims were identified as Abdullah bin Ghanem al-Khayarin, Hassan al-Jaber, and Saud bin Thamer Al Thani. Two others — Abdullah bin Issa al-Kuwari and Mohammed al-Buainain — were injured and remain in critical condition at a nearby hospital.

When Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto stood beside his Egyptian counterpart Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi at Al-Ittihadiya Palace in Cairo on Saturday, the joint declaration they signed marked more than a diplomatic formality; it signalled the rebirth of a transcontinental bond, anchored in history, redefined by pragmatism, and sharpened by today’s geopolitical realities.

Indonesia and Egypt have agreed to elevate their long-standing ties to a “strategic partnership”, setting a new tone for bilateral cooperation in sectors as wide-ranging as defence, education, trade, energy and cultural exchange. While this may read like a typical diplomatic communiqué, Prabowo’s visit and the deepening of ties with Cairo reflect a broader and more deliberate shift: Indonesia is seeking to diversify its global alliances, particularly in the Middle East, at a moment when traditional poles of power — Washington and Beijing — are both proving increasingly precarious partners.

Indonesia’s expanding outreach in the Middle East is no coincidence. Cairo is the third stop on Prabowo’s tour through the region, which includes high-level meetings in the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Qatar and Jordan. This multi-nation effort is part of Jakarta’s evolving strategy to forge a more independent and dynamic foreign policy, one that not only resists alignment with the world’s dominant powers, but also prioritises partnerships grounded in mutual benefit and shared values.

For Egypt, too, the move makes sense. In a world destabilised by trade wars, multipolar realignments and ongoing regional tensions, Cairo is increasingly looking eastward. Egypt’s active engagement with ASEAN — a bloc wherein Indonesia is the largest economy — underscores its ambitions to tap into the economic dynamism of South-East Asia, particularly in areas like trade, food security and digital infrastructure.

The economic logic is compelling.

Bilateral trade between Indonesia and Egypt reached $1.7 billion in 2024, making Egypt Indonesia’s top trading partner in North Africa. Indonesian exports — palm oil, coffee beans and coconut oil — flow steadily into Egyptian markets, while Egyptian companies have invested in nearly 100 projects in Indonesia, including major ventures in energy and infrastructure. Egypt sees Indonesia not just as a partner, but as a regional hub, a gateway to the ASEAN market and a conduit for broader Afro-Asian collaboration.

READ: Over 1,500 Israeli armoured corps troops demand end to Gaza war, return of hostages

But economics alone don’t define this partnership. A key pillar of this Cairo visit was a joint call to address one of the most urgent and morally pressing issues of our time: the war in Gaza.

Both nations are aligned vocally in their support for Palestine. Prabowo, whose administration is bound constitutionally to uphold the end of colonialism in all its forms, made it clear that Indonesia sees the plight of the Palestinian people not just as a regional tragedy, but also as a universal injustice. Al-Sisi, leading a country that shares a border with Gaza and has played a crucial role in mediation efforts, echoed the urgency of halting Israeli aggression and beginning immediate reconstruction.

The joint statement from the summit rejected the forced displacement of Palestinians, condemned illegal Israeli settlements and reaffirmed commitment to a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state. This alignment is more than rhetorical; it is strategic. As the United States continues to waver in its Middle East posture and China treads cautiously, Indonesia and Egypt see an opening to act, not as neutral observers, but as active proponents of peace grounded in regional legitimacy.

There is another dimension here that deserves attention: defence cooperation. While, traditionally, Indonesia has focused its military relationships on ASEAN allies and Western powers, its partnership with Egypt opens the door to a different kind of military diplomacy, one rooted in shared challenges and experiential learning. Egypt’s unique experience dealing with border tensions in Libya, Sudan and the occupied Palestinian territories offers valuable lessons for Indonesia as it recalibrates its security doctrines in a more unpredictable global landscape.

President Prabowo’s visit to the Egyptian Military Academy and his praise for the country’s training programmes were not just photo opportunities; they were symbolic gestures pointing toward future collaborations in defence education, joint training and possibly co-development of security technologies.

Cultural and educational exchange, too, are seeing renewed investment.

Egypt already hosts more than 15,000 Indonesian students, most notably at Al-Azhar University, a vital bridge in Islamic education and interfaith dialogue. The announcement that Egypt will expand its scholarship programme for Indonesians speaks to a soft power relationship that transcends politics; a commitment to building enduring people-to-people ties.

So why now? The answer lies in the shifting sands of geopolitics. As the world drifts toward a post-American and post-unipolar order, middle powers like Indonesia and Egypt are reasserting themselves, not as followers of global hegemons but as architects of their own regional futures.

For Indonesia, forging deeper ties with Cairo is not about choosing sides in the new Cold War between the US and China. It is about transcending that binary altogether; about carving a space where developing nations, through solidarity and strategic pragmatism, can assert agency on the world stage.

The strategic partnership between Indonesia and Egypt may not dominate global headlines. It could, though, offer a template for how nations of the Global South collaborate, not through dependency, but through dignity. And in a world sorely lacking in moral clarity, Jakarta and Cairo’s unified call for peace in Palestine may well be one of the few voices speaking with both principle and purpose.

Below the radar: Is the Trump-Netanyahu ‘unthinkable’ about to happen?

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

When Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto stood beside his Egyptian counterpart Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi at Al-Ittihadiya Palace in Cairo on Saturday, the joint declaration they signed marked more than a diplomatic formality; it signalled the rebirth of a transcontinental bond, anchored in history, redefined by pragmatism, and sharpened by today’s geopolitical realities.

Indonesia and Egypt have agreed to elevate their long-standing ties to a “strategic partnership”, setting a new tone for bilateral cooperation in sectors as wide-ranging as defence, education, trade, energy and cultural exchange. While this may read like a typical diplomatic communiqué, Prabowo’s visit and the deepening of ties with Cairo reflect a broader and more deliberate shift: Indonesia is seeking to diversify its global alliances, particularly in the Middle East, at a moment when traditional poles of power — Washington and Beijing — are both proving increasingly precarious partners.

Indonesia’s expanding outreach in the Middle East is no coincidence. Cairo is the third stop on Prabowo’s tour through the region, which includes high-level meetings in the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Qatar and Jordan. This multi-nation effort is part of Jakarta’s evolving strategy to forge a more independent and dynamic foreign policy, one that not only resists alignment with the world’s dominant powers, but also prioritises partnerships grounded in mutual benefit and shared values.

For Egypt, too, the move makes sense. In a world destabilised by trade wars, multipolar realignments and ongoing regional tensions, Cairo is increasingly looking eastward. Egypt’s active engagement with ASEAN — a bloc wherein Indonesia is the largest economy — underscores its ambitions to tap into the economic dynamism of South-East Asia, particularly in areas like trade, food security and digital infrastructure.

The economic logic is compelling.

Bilateral trade between Indonesia and Egypt reached $1.7 billion in 2024, making Egypt Indonesia’s top trading partner in North Africa. Indonesian exports — palm oil, coffee beans and coconut oil — flow steadily into Egyptian markets, while Egyptian companies have invested in nearly 100 projects in Indonesia, including major ventures in energy and infrastructure. Egypt sees Indonesia not just as a partner, but as a regional hub, a gateway to the ASEAN market and a conduit for broader Afro-Asian collaboration.

READ: Over 1,500 Israeli armoured corps troops demand end to Gaza war, return of hostages

But economics alone don’t define this partnership. A key pillar of this Cairo visit was a joint call to address one of the most urgent and morally pressing issues of our time: the war in Gaza.

Both nations are aligned vocally in their support for Palestine. Prabowo, whose administration is bound constitutionally to uphold the end of colonialism in all its forms, made it clear that Indonesia sees the plight of the Palestinian people not just as a regional tragedy, but also as a universal injustice. Al-Sisi, leading a country that shares a border with Gaza and has played a crucial role in mediation efforts, echoed the urgency of halting Israeli aggression and beginning immediate reconstruction.

The joint statement from the summit rejected the forced displacement of Palestinians, condemned illegal Israeli settlements and reaffirmed commitment to a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state. This alignment is more than rhetorical; it is strategic. As the United States continues to waver in its Middle East posture and China treads cautiously, Indonesia and Egypt see an opening to act, not as neutral observers, but as active proponents of peace grounded in regional legitimacy.

There is another dimension here that deserves attention: defence cooperation. While, traditionally, Indonesia has focused its military relationships on ASEAN allies and Western powers, its partnership with Egypt opens the door to a different kind of military diplomacy, one rooted in shared challenges and experiential learning. Egypt’s unique experience dealing with border tensions in Libya, Sudan and the occupied Palestinian territories offers valuable lessons for Indonesia as it recalibrates its security doctrines in a more unpredictable global landscape.

President Prabowo’s visit to the Egyptian Military Academy and his praise for the country’s training programmes were not just photo opportunities; they were symbolic gestures pointing toward future collaborations in defence education, joint training and possibly co-development of security technologies.

Cultural and educational exchange, too, are seeing renewed investment.

Egypt already hosts more than 15,000 Indonesian students, most notably at Al-Azhar University, a vital bridge in Islamic education and interfaith dialogue. The announcement that Egypt will expand its scholarship programme for Indonesians speaks to a soft power relationship that transcends politics; a commitment to building enduring people-to-people ties.

So why now? The answer lies in the shifting sands of geopolitics. As the world drifts toward a post-American and post-unipolar order, middle powers like Indonesia and Egypt are reasserting themselves, not as followers of global hegemons but as architects of their own regional futures.

For Indonesia, forging deeper ties with Cairo is not about choosing sides in the new Cold War between the US and China. It is about transcending that binary altogether; about carving a space where developing nations, through solidarity and strategic pragmatism, can assert agency on the world stage.

The strategic partnership between Indonesia and Egypt may not dominate global headlines. It could, though, offer a template for how nations of the Global South collaborate, not through dependency, but through dignity. And in a world sorely lacking in moral clarity, Jakarta and Cairo’s unified call for peace in Palestine may well be one of the few voices speaking with both principle and purpose.

Below the radar: Is the Trump-Netanyahu ‘unthinkable’ about to happen?

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.