Middle East Press On: Pro-Hamas chants, coexistence debate, luxurious desert, Israel's hasbara, informational warfare, Gaza, Caracas, Maduro, Rebuilding Gaza, Ceasefire, Tehran's strategy, Israeli fire, New Age Islam's Selection, 12 January 2026
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
12 January 2026
Democrats denouncing pro-Hamas chants was the bare minimum acceptable
Israel cannot negotiate with enemies who seek its destruction
Israel can no longer avoid the coexistence debate
Celebrating life at Israel’s luxurious desert retreat
What’s in a name? A lot: Why Israel must reframe hasbara as informational warfare
From Gaza to Caracas: Trump’s Maduro abduction signals a new era of lawless power
Rebuilding Gaza begins with people, not concrete
The chaos that calculates: Unveiling Tehran’s strategy of “managed ambiguity” against Israel
Israeli fire kills 2 Palestinians, injures others across Gaza despite ceasefire
At least 4 killed as Israeli forces strike Gaza by air and sea, despite ceasefire
Fourth Palestinian baby freezes to death in Gaza since November
Israel’s ban on NGOs operating in Gaza will be devastating
--------
Democrats denouncing pro-Hamas chants was the bare minimum acceptable
By JPOST EDITORIAL
JANUARY 12, 2026
Condemning antisemitism and blatant support for Hamas should be a societal norm, not a notable event that needs to make headlines or be celebrated. Prominent Democrat politicians shouldn’t need certain acts to be so egregious, indefensible, and morally unambiguous to speak up for the Jews, but that appears to be where US politics is at the moment.
On late Thursday night, the Palestinian Assembly for Liberation (PAL-Awda) protested outside an Israeli real estate event in a local synagogue in New York. Videos from the protest circulated on social media, showing protesters holding Palestinian flags and signs, wearing keffiyehs, and chanting.
The group made it clear how it feels regarding the legitimacy of Hamas as an armed resistance group in wars against Israel. “Say it loud, say it clear, we support Hamas here,” the protesters could be seen chanting.
Traditionally, Democratic Party politicians have tried and failed to walk this fine line of protecting free speech and legitimate criticism of Israel while also disavowing genuine support for terror.
Many critics of Israel argue (disingenuously) that slogans like “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” and “Globalize the intifada” are nothing more than calls to resistance of an illegitimate military occupation, without any subtext of calls for terrorism or genocidal actions against Jews.
So, when these protesters left no room for doubt by saying they believe that Hamas is a legitimate group and that its actions are justified, an opportunity presented itself for Democrats to take the moral high ground. And they did.
Newly elected New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who, on his first day in office, had cancelled an executive order that New York City adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism, said, “Chants in support of a terrorist organization have no place in our city. We will continue to ensure New Yorkers’ safety entering and exiting houses of worship, as well as the constitutional right to protest.”
Prominent Democratic figures, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, New York Attorney-General Letitia James, and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, hopped on the bandwagon the next morning, condemning the chants hours apart from each other, while emphasizing Hamas’s status as a terrorist organization.
AOC condemns pro-Hamas chants
On Saturday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also posted on X/Twitter, condemning the chants, stating that “marching into a predominantly Jewish neighbourhood and leading with a chant saying ‘We support Hamas’ is a disgusting and antisemitic thing to do.”
Generally, these figures tend to be very careful with any condemnation of pro-Palestinian protesters so as not to anger much of their voter base, and there also isn’t usually such a massive showing of condemnation from so many Democrats in a very short amount of time.
It raises the question: What internal dialogue is going on in the Democratic Party?
The rapidity suggests that memos could have made the rounds, suggesting that Democrats take the easy layup of condemning support for Hamas.
However, there could also be a deeper internal dialogue within the Democratic Party about addressing antisemitism more seriously.
Midterms are coming up soon in the United States, and condemning support for a literal terrorist organization is an easy political win to score with minimal effort.
Or at least, it should be an easy win.
Every Democrat who made one of these posts received severe backlash from both anti-Israel and pro-Israel accounts.
On the one hand, they were “stifling legitimate and moral Palestinian resistance against the occupation,” and on the other hand, they had no right to comment on “a hostile antisemitic environment that they helped cultivate,” users commented.
The Jerusalem Post believes that condemning Hamas and its supporters is always the correct and moral thing to do, regardless of who is saying it. That being said, the fact that these politicians received such backlash from people who agree with their statements highlights the problem.
Standing up against antisemitism needs to be done all the time, not just when it is convenient. Condemning support for a genocidal terror organization needs to be a reflex, not a political strategy that’s deemed acceptable and then sent out in a memo.
The Democrats who made these statements did the right thing in this instance, but it was also the bare minimum.
Heading into the new year, let’s hope cases such as this, where hate is called out and condemned, become the basic human reaction, rather than a miracle that deserves its own headlines.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-883027
---------
Israel cannot negotiate with enemies who seek its destruction
By ALIZA PILICHOWSKI
JANUARY 11, 2026
I am regularly appalled by Israel’s critics and friends’ constant criticism of the “settler violence” they claim comes from our communities, while they remain silent about endless Palestinian terrorism, attacks, and violence directed at our children and residents. It seems that they are either unaware of the frequency of daily Palestinian violence or choose to accept and excuse it, while exaggerating the scale and scope of Jewish violence. The Palestinians who surround our communities are committed to our destruction, yet we are told by the world to negotiate and compromise for peace with the Palestinians.
How do you negotiate peace with a neighbour who dreams not of coexistence, but of your erasure?
True peace requires mutual desire, but Palestinian popular opinion and leadership prioritize Israel’s destruction over statehood. From Israel’s declaration of independence to the Oslo Accords to repeated offers of compromise for peace, Israel has demonstrated its desire for peace with the Palestinians. Contrast Israel’s commitment to peace with the Palestinian rejectionist and intransigence that have characterized their responses to Israeli offers and international efforts to mediate an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israel faces an impossible task of making peace with an enemy that shows no interest in peace.
Israel’s peace deals with Egypt and Jordan, and its normalization agreements under the Abraham Accords, show that the Jewish state will continue to work toward the hope of peace. Israel has always understood that peace with Arab and Muslim countries is directed by leadership rather than by popular opinion on the Arab street. Jerusalem is willing to ignore Palestinian public opinion if the Palestinian leadership shows genuine interest in peace.
The latest results of polls on Palestinian public sentiment toward Israel from the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research are discouraging, if not depressing. Some 59% of Palestinians in Judea and Samaria/the West Bank thought Hamas’s decision to launch the October 7 attack was the right decision. An overwhelming majority (87%) said Palestinians did not commit atrocities during those attacks.
Majority of Palestinians believe the two-state solution is unfeasible
Only 40% of Palestinians support the two-state solution – the preferred outcome of the Palestinian negotiated position. Some 64% believe that the two-state solution is no longer practical. Another 68% believe that the chances for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel in the next five years are slim or non-existent.
When Palestinians were presented with three ways to end the Israeli occupation and establish an independent Palestinian state, and were asked to choose the most effective one, 41% chose armed struggle; 33% chose negotiations; and 20% chose popular, peaceful resistance. These results indicate a stronger preference for resistance – whether violent or peaceful – over negotiations for peace.
Palestinian rejectionist of peace is not reflected only in polls. In 1947, the United Nations’ partition plan called for a two-state solution with the peaceful establishment of independent Jewish and Arab states. The Arabs of Palestine rejected the offer. Palestinians followed the rejection of the partition plan with 45 years of terrorism directed at Israel and Jews around the world. In 1993, Palestinians appeared to turn toward peace with the Oslo Accords, only to dash the world’s hopes with the second, violent intifada. In 2008, they rejected the overly generous compromise offer of Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert.
Ignoring the reality of Palestinian intransigence and obsession with violence is naïve. Israel cannot “make peace” unilaterally. We yearn for quiet borders, towns and communities, but wishing does not rewrite Palestinian hearts hardened by hatred. Yet history shows that even hostile publics can yield to peace – under the right leadership.
In 1979, Egyptian public opinion was overwhelmingly anti-Israel. Fuelled by decades of hatred, war, and propaganda, Egyptians called for the same destruction of Israel that Palestinians hear from today. Yet Egyptian president Anwar Sadat had a bold vision that led him to visit Jerusalem, speak to the Knesset, and push for peace despite his people’s objections. Sadat’s leadership overcame public resistance, leading to a cold but enduring peace. As Israelis, we remember the hope Sadat ignited – a reminder that one courageous voice can redirect a nation’s path.
Similar anti-Israel sentiment and rhetoric were expressed by an overwhelming majority of Jordanians in 1994, when Jordan signed a peace deal with Israel. Yet King Hussein’s strategic choice for peace, driven by economic benefits and security considerations, prevailed.
In both cases, leaders prioritized peace over populism, even while failing to foster gradual shifts in public attitudes.
Palestinian leaders such as Arafat, Abbas and Haniyeh have instead exploited hatred for power, rejecting offers and inciting violence. The gap between Israelis and Palestinians lies not only in public attitudes, but in leaders who direct their people toward war and hate rather than harmony and coexistence.
From Yasser Arafat wearing a pistol into the United Nations General Assembly while disingenuously declaring, “Today I have come bearing an olive branch and a freedom fighter’s gun,” to the Palestinian “pay-to-slay” program that incentivizes terrorism by Palestinians as young as teenagers and as old as senior citizens, Palestinian leadership has shown more interest in destroying Israel than in making peace with it, perpetuating a culture of victimhood and vengeance.
Israel cannot force peace on unwilling Palestinians dedicated to its destruction. Every failed attempt at peace raises – and then dashes – hopes in the region. Dashed hope is often followed by a rise in violence. Naïve peace efforts risk Israeli security without any realistic expectation of reciprocity. Change must come from the Palestinian side, especially through a shift in leadership attitudes.
True peace remains elusive not because Israel lacks the will – as evidenced by repeated offers, withdrawals, and successful treaties with Arab neighbours – but because Palestinian society and leadership continue to cling to rejectionist, the glorification of violence, and dreams of Israel’s destruction. Recent polls confirm this entrenched mindset; a majority still views Hamas’s October 7 attack as correct and prioritizes armed struggle over negotiation.
Until Palestinians fundamentally shift toward coexistence rather than erasure, and elect leaders committed to peace, genuine reconciliation will remain an unattainable hope, perpetuating suffering on both sides.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-882748
-------
Israel can no longer avoid the coexistence debate
By COOKIE SCHWAEBER-ISSAN
JANUARY 11, 2026
After immigrating to Israel in the early 90s, I became well-acquainted with a very polite young Arab man who washed my car at a local Mevasseret Zion gas station. Some months later, when I stopped seeing him. I inquired why.
I was told that due to problems in the territories, these workers were not being permitted into Israel, even if they were not among those causing the problem. Knowing that this was his only source of income, I was saddened.
Like most Israelis, I had genuine respect for Arab Israelis whenever I encountered them and witnessed the same attitude everywhere I went. Consequently, we had no doubt that living together was possible.
Regrettably, not all Palestinians living beyond the Green Line have held those same sentiments.
If an outbreak of violent aggression occurs, closure is instituted. While that may seem unfair to the innocent who simply want to make a living, everyone ends up being punished for the sins of others.
Many liberal minded kibbutz members advocated for Gazans
This was the reason why many liberal-minded kibbutz members, living near the border, advocated for Gazans to have a more equitable life. What they failed to understand was that Hamas terrorists, unlike Arab-Israelis, were not interested in a peaceful coexistence or overcoming their hatred of Jews.
That was evidenced by what took place at kibbutz communities when members, who had devoted themselves to helping Gazans, were slaughtered, mutilated, and barbarically tortured, solely because of their ethnicity.
It was further internalized as rocket attacks, over the course of two years, fell on both Jewish and Arab neighbourhoods.
This is the important backdrop that needed to be referenced in order to best relate to two recent Jerusalem Post articles on the subject of Arab society. The first, which appeared on January 6, 2026, entitled “Why defunding Arab society undermines Israel’s public safety, addresses the very serious problem of crime and violence in Arab society.
Citing a troubling pattern that has developed over recent months, within this segment of the Israeli population, writer Ilan Amit referred to the “budgetary constraints and security priorities” enacted by the government, negatively impacting the programs of “social, educational and preventive investments” he sees as “essential for long-term stability, equality and public safety.”
Calling them “the backbone which strengthens Arab society, reducing disparities,” helping to lessen the crime, Amit notes that funds for these programs were, instead, diverted towards security, policing, and intelligence operations – measures to reduce violent crime.
It is this shift that has Amit concerned, that rather than investing in this community, Israel is more focused on a preventative strategy.
Clearly, these are two different perspectives, with one focusing on embracing Arab-Israelis, while the other prioritizes safety for the Jewish Israeli majority. Amit, just as many kibbutz members, sees this as an unfair collective punishment.
The second article, entitled “The emperor has no clothes and the Israeli centre follows behind,” also appeared on the same day. It discusses the role of Arabs in Israeli society, citing that Ze’ev Jabotinsky strongly believed that Arab citizens should have full equality with rights as well as play a role in the Israeli government, ideals also supported by the Zionist camp of his day.
Writer, Yoav Ende, therefore, finds it distressing that, today, there are “those calling for a Zionist alliance free of Arabs,” something he believes to be a “profound distortion of Zionism.”
Considering Arabs as “an inseparable part of our society, in the workplace, academia, medicine and education, Ende argues that “if we expect loyalty to the state from them, we must provide them with a sense of belonging rather than cause them to feel excluded.”
It’s hard not to find merit in the position of both writers, who are making the case for a more unified and safer Israeli society by sending an unequivocal message to Israeli Arabs that they are accepted and respected by their Jewish counterparts.
It’s also fair to say that while probably the vast majority of Jewish Israelis do feel warmly towards their Arab neighbours, despite the events of October 7, given the ongoing incidents of crime in their community, it’s legitimate to ask, “How can we coexist with a segment of Arab-Israelis, if they can’t coexist with their own kind?
Just over the past week, a father and son were murdered in Nazareth, and another man was murdered in Kfar Qara.
This is not an anomaly. This past year saw a whopping 252 murders within Arab society, making it a bloody year in that community. But as Yoav Ende pointed out, “this is not ‘their problem’ but all of ours. Violence in Arab society is violence in Israeli society.” Of course, he is correct!
In spite of this dark picture, violence, as a way of life, is not the case with all Arab-Israelis. We largely coexist warmly, patronizing their shops, eating in their restaurants, and living amongst them without fear or suspicion.
Unfortunately, this is a glimpse of Israeli society, which is not widely portrayed abroad to a people who are invested in an “either/or” citizenry. Unfortunately, they see a skewed viewpoint of what it entails to excise a brutal enemy from our midst, who is already thinking of the next massacre.
While it might be tempting for the government to look upon Israeli Arabs as not being worthy of an equal footing with Jewish citizens, the powerful message of peaceful coexistence, comprised of a very mixed population, is one that can go a long way towards gaining the world’s respect and admiration.
The question is how committed all of us are to that goal. Jewish Israelis must support Arab-Israelis who value their life in the Jewish homeland. Together, we must exemplify the possibility of mutual respect and regard, demanding the same from the perpetrators of violence within the Arab-Israeli community, who are making life intolerable for each side.
Otherwise, we will undermine the cause of living peaceably as one people, in spite of our ethnic and religious differences. It’s the best defense against a two-state solution, which also doesn’t guarantee peace, especially when it is sorely lacking in the hearts of many.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-882727
------
Celebrating life at Israel’s luxurious desert retreat
By BRIAN BLUM
JANUARY 11, 2026
‘Are you celebrating anything special?” Eran, our driver at the Six Senses Shaharut resort in the Arava desert, asked as he loaded our luggage onto one of the electric golf carts that are ubiquitous at this luxury property set in the middle of nowhere.
For some reason, I tried to answer him in Hebrew. “Ani kimat lo po,” I said, which literally means “I’m almost not here.” In my Hebrew haste, I had left out the verb, the grammatical tense, and any meaningful context.
“You mean, you almost had to cancel?” Eran asked, confused.
“No,” I replied, this time mercifully in English. “What I mean is, I almost died. Because of cancer. But a miracle cure knocked out the cancer, so we’ve come to Shaharut to celebrate being alive.”
Eran’s face broke into an ear-to-ear smile. “Walla,” he crooned, using an Arabic expression-turned-Israeli-slang that’s best translated as “Wow!”
We had driven the four-and-a-half hours from Jerusalem to what is undoubtedly Israel’s ritziest getaway hotel property, with its 60 rooms set on a hilltop between deep wadis and high cliffs. (Guests fancier than us sometimes helicopter in.)
My wife, Jody, and I had been following the origins of Israel’s first Six Senses property. We had been keen to visit when the resort finally opened in 2021 after COVID delays, but it always seemed too expensive. We needed an excuse, something to make such an extravagance like this worthwhile. Now we had one.
Six Senses is a high-end chain owned by the IHG hotel group. There are 27 Six Senses resorts around the world, from Saudi Arabia to Bhutan, Thailand to Ibiza, all emphasizing wellness and sustainable luxury. More are being built.
Ronny Douek brings Six Senses to Israel
Israeli businessman Ronny Douek had the idea of bringing the Six Senses sensibility to Israel. Douek is a well-known social entrepreneur whose nonprofit ventures include Zionism 2000, founded following the assassination of prime minister Yitzhak Rabin. He served as the chairman of the Israel Anti-Drug Authority, and in 2025 he received the Israel Prize for Lifetime Achievement.
His socially oriented background might explain in part one way that Shaharut is different than other Six Senses properties around the world: Much of the staff are recently released IDF soldiers participating in a program called Meudefet, a job board that offers six months of employment in minimum wage jobs to applicants who don’t have much job history, supplemented by a substantial grant from the National Insurance Institute.
While the younger cohort gives the resort an Israeli casual vibe, the staff received ample training and made sure we had whatever we needed.
To build Six Senses Shaharut, Douek envisioned a hotel with almost no visible footprint. The rooms and suites are set back and below the gravel walkways that stretch along the top of the desert landscape. The look, Douek has said, was to recreate the feel of a reclaimed Nabatean village – well, one that cost a reported $100 million in design and construction.
You rarely see anyone walking around; guests are in their rooms, at the two heated pools (one outdoor, one freshwater indoor), or at Midian, Shaharut’s chef restaurant. You can call reception and order a golf cart to take you to morning yoga or a massage appointment. Your personal car is tucked away in a private parking lot hidden from the rest of the property.
Another pleasure of the resort is highlighted at night. With just subtle lighting along the paths, there is virtually no light pollution, and the stars shine as brightly as if you were camping somewhere far from civilization along the Israel Trail.
Indeed, Six Senses Shaharut is so isolated that, although we could see the lights from Eilat at night, what might be a 20-minute drive as the crow flies requires an hour and ten minutes circumventing the aforementioned wadis to get there.
That led us to a decision that’s not our usual travel style: We never left the property. No hiking. No exploring nearby Timna National Park. After a sumptuous breakfast, with the usual cheese, lox, eggs, pancakes, and pastries (plus the surprising addition of three types of mini smoothies), we spent our days at the extra-large jacuzzi or heating up in the Turkish hamam.
This “review” is a tad different than most you’ll read, as we were not guests of the hotel. While I have little negative to report, I was slightly disappointed by the chef’s restaurant. Not about the food – it was excellent – but my portion of lamb chop was so huge, I left with quite the tummy ache. Asking for a doggie bag didn’t seem to fit the resort’s style.
A second restaurant, the more casual Jamilla bar, featured street-food offerings, which were good but wouldn’t have been out of place in Jerusalem’s Mahaneh Yehuda market.
But I feel guilty quibbling even a little. We weren’t there to overindulge on meat. We were there to celebrate life, and by staying put and relaxing we took full advantage of the introspection.
There is a variety of rooms available – all with heavy teakwood doors and large bathtubs big enough for two. The rooms are designed with calming pastels and local artwork. Some rooms have panoramic desert views; others have private pools.
The resort is located near two hippie encampments: the moshav of Shaharut just down the road, where some of the employees live; and Kibbutz Neot Semedar, which offers tours of its artists’ complex (festooned around a natural desert cooling system shaped like a giant phallus) and the kibbutz’s organic winery. The eponymous Semedar wine, made with 22 herbs and spices (thinking of you, Colonel Sanders), was so good, we had to buy a bottle.
Shaharut was clearly a splurge, but it felt entirely appropriate to mark, like Harry Potter’s lightning scar, my new status as a real-life “boy who lived,” one who successfully fought off the Voldemort in his blood. ■
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-882680
--------
What’s in a name? A lot: Why Israel must reframe hasbara as informational warfare
By JEFFREY KAHN
JANUARY 11, 2026
On January 3, 2026, US President Donald Trump held a press conference that had the world glued to its screens. The news was shockingly historic, and global audiences were eager to hear every detail. Yet surrounded by Marco Rubio, Pete Hegseth, and Gen. Dan Cane, how many viewers paid close attention to how the president introduced Hegseth – not as Secretary of Defense, but as Secretary of War?
The rebranding of the Department of Defense had been announced months earlier, in September 2025. As a result, it was widely dismissed as old news – and therefore unimportant. That assumption could not have been more mistaken. In that moment, the administration demonstrated the power of rebranding not merely to reflect intent, but to guide it. More importantly, it signalled that this was not simply a change in name, but a change in ethos, posture, and interdepartmental operational readiness.
The rationale reportedly offered for restoring the title Department of War – and for Secretary Hegseth’s use of the title Secretary of War – cantered on symbolism, mission framing, and strategic clarity. There are few arenas in which clarity of mission, coordination, and intent matter more than national security.
In a post-October 7 world, Israel cannot afford a communications doctrine conceived for a gentler era. Words, narratives, and information have not only been weaponized against Israel and world Jewry; they now travel at the speed of light. As we learn more about how far back the planning for October 7 extended, and how carefully it was coordinated – not only among Israel’s enemies, but also among actors presenting themselves as “neutral” – the scope of the failure becomes clearer.
While attention has understandably focused on the monstrous massacres and the abduction of more than 250 hostages, as well as on the unprecedented war now waged against Israel from seven different fronts, an eighth front has been dangerously ignored and underestimated: the psychological and information warfare campaign directed at Israel and Jews worldwide. If Israel’s image and the security of world Jewry were properly understood as national security issues, this information war might have been identified early enough to prevent it from metastasizing.
How early this campaign was devised, by whom, how it was funded, and how its true scope went undetected remain urgent questions. One conclusion, however, is already unavoidable: the physical attack, horrific as it was, does not pose the same long-term strategic danger as the global information campaign that preceded it – and, more importantly, followed it and continues to this day.
Why hasbara must be reframed
Reframing hasbara (public diplomacy) as information warfare is no longer a theoretical exercise. It is a strategic necessity required to confront an existential threat to Israel and world Jewry.
In the aftermath of October 7, the geopolitical landscape confronting both Israel and the global Jewish community has fundamentally shifted. The significance of recent antisemitic attacks, including last month’s mass-casualty Hanukkah attack in Bondi Beach, Sydney, still appears insufficiently understood. We remain inadequately prepared to defend the basic right to live as Jews, or to sustain a sovereign Jewish state.
Much as President Harry Truman’s decision to rename the Department of War as the Department of Defense reflected a new post-World War II global reality and strategic mindset, Israel must now undertake its own reframing. Hasbara, meaning “explanation,” belonged to a different era. Today, the information domain is a battlefield capable of determining the fate of millions of Israelis and Jews worldwide.
This is not a matter of semantics, but of strategic alignment. Truman understood that naming shapes posture, posture shapes strategy, and strategy shapes outcomes. President Trump demonstrated a similar understanding when he proposed restoring the name Department of War. Israel must now communicate – to itself and to the world – that it fully understands the nature of the conflict it faces.
After October 7, we no longer inhabit the same political or psychological terrain. Across the United States, Europe, and Australia, antisemitic violence and harassment have surged to levels unseen in decades. The forthcoming film October 8 documents how, within hours of the massacre, crowds on Western campuses and city streets publicly glorified the murder of Jews.
This was not spontaneous. It was fueled by coordinated messaging networks, foreign-funded organizations, and a digital ecosystem primed for psychological manipulation. After the Holocaust – and now after October 7 – we must finally acknowledge that words can kill, often more efficiently than weapons. Narratives shape alliances, dissolve support, and influence decisions that determine whether Israel receives vital arms, diplomatic protection, and strategic legitimacy.
Historically, Israel has shown its willingness to confront threats to Jews wherever they arise, from tracking down Adolf Eichmann to neutralizing existential military dangers. Yet when facing the coordinated surge of anti-Israel agitation and antisemitism, Israel’s posture has been fragmented, under-resourced, and strategically outdated. We defend our borders with cutting-edge systems, but defend our narrative with obsolete tools and assumptions.
Consider the consequences. Even the most advanced aircraft, such as the F-35, become strategically meaningless if political pressure – amplified by hostile information campaigns – prevents maintenance, repair, or resupply. Iron Dome interceptors are useless if shipments are delayed by legislators influenced by narrative warfare unfolding online and on university campuses.
Losing the information battle can yield the same result as losing a conventional one: undefended skies, exposed civilians, and soldiers forced to fight without what they need to prevail.
This is not hypothetical. Political shifts in major Western cities, including the rise of openly anti-Israel local governments, already reflect the power of coordinated digital agitation. Decisions once grounded in bipartisan security doctrine are increasingly shaped by viral narratives.
Reframing Hasbara as information warfare is therefore not an act of aggression: It is an act of precision. Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Russia, and Qatar all maintain formal information operations structures. Israel remains the only actor still calling this battlefield “explaining.”
Renaming and restructuring Israel’s national communications doctrine is not symbolic – it is strategic. Assigning responsibility for this challenge to traditional public or digital diplomacy frameworks risks repeating past failures. What is required is the integration of intelligence, operational planning, and strategic communications under a war-time doctrine.
Ironically, the IDF failed in its defensive mission on October 7 until devastating damage had been done. Yet when the same military and intelligence institutions shifted fully to war footing, they achieved results that will be studied for decades.
In a world where narratives shape policy and policy shapes survival, adapting Israel’s communications doctrine to information warfare is not optional. It is the existential imperative of our time.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-883000
-------
From Gaza to Caracas: Trump’s Maduro abduction signals a new era of lawless power
January 11, 2026
By Jasim Al-Azzawi
The abduction of Nicolás Maduro is part of a larger pattern. It belongs to the same doctrine that flattened Gaza under the language of “self-defence” and threatened Iran with “locked and loaded” retaliation while bypassing diplomacy and international law. In each case, Washington has used force not as a last resort but as a sharp instrument of statecraft, corroding the norms it once claimed to uphold. From Gaza’s ruins to Tehran’s anxieties and now Caracas’s violation, the message is unmistakable: sovereignty is conditional, law is optional, and power is the ultimate decider, echoing the famous phrase of the Florentine Niccolo Machiavelli: “A prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise.” This is not containment. It is a contagion designed to restructure the Middle East and the Global South in ways the United States can no longer control.
The world recoiled in horror not because Donald Trump seized Nicolás Maduro, but because the United States kidnapped a sitting head of state. This was not law enforcement. It was a flagrant display of imperial power that shreds the last remaining threads of an international order based on sovereignty and the rule of law. The avalanche of global condemnation gathering force across Latin America, Africa, and much of the Global South reflects a more profound truth. This act cannot be justified under any moral, legal, or strategic framework.
To dress the operation up as a “war on drugs” is a grotesque lie. Washington knows Venezuela is not the primary source of the narcotics devastating American communities. Mexico holds that distinction. Venezuela may be a transit point, but it is not the engine of the crisis. The drug narrative functions as a fig leaf, a familiar pretext used whenever the United States decides to impose its will by force. It is the same feeble justification that accompanied interventions from Panama to Honduras, from Iraq to Afghanistan.
The capture of Maduro marks a dangerous escalation: the extraction of a foreign leader under the banner of domestic prosecution. Even Washington’s refusal to recognize Maduro as Venezuela’s legitimate president does not grant it the right to violate another country’s territorial integrity. The UN Charter is unambiguous. The use of force against a sovereign state is illegal except in self-defence or with Security Council authorization. Neither condition exists here.
Legal scholars have been blunt. The operation violates Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and risks constituting a crime of aggression. By normalizing regime change through force, the United States invites other powers to follow suit. Washington can abduct leaders it dislikes; why should Beijing, Moscow, or Ankara restrain themselves? The erosion of norms does not stop at one border.
In the US, the constitutional damage is equally severe. Congress alone has the authority to declare war, yet Trump launched what is effectively a regime-change operation without congressional authorization. This is executive overreach of the most dangerous kind, hollowing out the separation of powers and turning military force into a presidential tool of convenience. It is not a strength. It is recklessness.
Trump styles himself as the “President of Peace,” boasting that he ended eight wars. Yet his actions tell a different story. Venezuela is now destabilized, its region inflamed, its sovereignty trampled. The Southern Hemisphere has taken note. For countries long scarred by American interventions, this episode confirms their worst suspicions: that US rhetoric about democracy masks a hunger for control.
The economic implications are impossible to ignore. Venezuela holds the world’s largest proven oil reserves. Within days of Maduro’s capture, US officials were already discussing Venezuela’s oil future on global markets. This is the Monroe Doctrine reborn in its crudest form: this hemisphere is ours, and we will take what we want.
History offers no comfort here. Vietnam consumed fifteen years and millions of lives. Iraq shattered an entire region and birthed endless war. Panama and Honduras left scars that never healed. Each intervention was justified as necessary, temporary, and righteous. Each ended in strategic failure and moral disgrace.
The ghosts of the Bay of Pigs in Cuba linger. That humiliating fiasco taught the world that American power, when untethered from reality, defeats itself. Today, as Trump eyes Greenland and toys with fantasies that would fracture NATO, the same hubris is on display. The difference is that now the damage spreads faster and wider.
International reaction has been swift. Emergency sessions at the United Nations exposed Washington’s isolation. Allies wavered. Adversaries smiled. As Napoleon once advised, “When your enemy is making mistakes, let him continue”. In Beijing, Moscow, and beyond, leaders are laughing as the United States dismantles its own credibility.
The legal process ahead only deepens the peril. Maduro’s trial, if it proceeds, will inevitably raise questions of head-of-state immunity and jurisdiction. A ruling ordering his release would not merely embarrass Trump; it would detonate his presidency. Trump himself seems to sense this fragility, publicly warning that failure in the upcoming elections could lead to his impeachment. The strongman façade cracks easily when power depends on impunity.
What remains is the damage to America’s standing. This operation tells the world that US law is selective, its principles negotiable, its commitments disposable. It confirms that might has replaced right, and that international law applies only to the weak. Trump, obviously, has not read Dwight D. Eisenhower’s prophetic warning: “A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both.”
Trump’s kidnapping of Maduro will not be remembered as a victory against crime. It will be remembered as a sad chapter when the United States abandoned even the pretence of moral leadership and dismissed the warning of the first American president, George Washington, against “foreign entanglement.” It accelerated the decline of an empire already drowning in debt, addicted to foreign adventures, and blind to the cost of its own arrogance.
The tragedy is not only Venezuela’s. It is America’s. An empire that kidnaps leaders in the name of justice has already lost the very thing it claims to defend.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260111-from-gaza-to-caracas-trumps-maduro-abduction-signals-a-new-era-of-lawless-power/
--------
Rebuilding Gaza begins with people, not concrete
D AOUD KUTTAB
January 11, 2026
As international debates once again turn to Gaza’s reconstruction, a growing number of planners, scholars and practitioners are warning that merely rebuilding homes and infrastructure will not heal communities shattered by decades of conflict. “Gaza: A Vision of Hope,” a new report by the Anthedon initiative, argues that Gaza’s recovery must begin not with cement and master plans, but with people, memory and social cohesion.
The report, released in late December, was developed in partnership with Heritopolis and the Metropolis network under UN-Habitat’s University Network Initiative. It offers a fundamentally different framework for postwar recovery. It frames Gaza’s devastation not only as a humanitarian emergency but as the cumulative outcome of political fragmentation, prolonged siege and repeated cycles of destruction that have eroded both the physical city and its social fabric.
Rather than proposing a conventional reconstruction blueprint, the report challenges donor-driven models that prioritize speed, scale and visibility over long-term resilience. “Technical rebuilding detached from human context risks reproducing fragmentation and vulnerability,” the authors argue. Roads, housing blocks and utilities may be restored, but without addressing trauma, displacement and the loss of collective identity, Gaza remains deeply fragile.
Francesco Bandarin, special adviser to the director-general of the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property and a former director of the UNESCO World Heritage Center, argues that “the scale of destruction in Gaza represents one of the greatest reconstruction challenges in modern human history — in terms of physical damage, financial needs and the complexity of operating under ongoing military control.”
He added: “Large-scale reconstruction plans for Gaza are simply not feasible in the absence of a political peace process. With Israel’s direct occupation of more than 60 percent of the Gaza Strip, comprehensive urban planning, major infrastructure projects and long-term economic investments are structurally blocked.”
Bandarin concluded that rebuilding Gaza will not succeed without a credible peace framework supported by key regional actors, particularly Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, alongside genuine international guarantees.
A similar sentiment is reflected in the words of Rami Nasrallah, the founder of the International Peace and Cooperation Centre. Nasrallah believes that reconstruction is estimated to require more than $100 billion, yet there is no international commitment to mobilize such resources. “Beyond emergency humanitarian assistance, donors remain reluctant amid deep uncertainty over the future of Gaza and the broader Palestinian landscape, including the West Bank and East Jerusalem.”
He emphasized that “communities in Gaza cannot and will not wait for donors, political agreements or large-scale interventions that may never materialize.” Notably, he observed that “recovery is already happening on the ground. Palestinians are rebuilding shelters, markets and learning spaces using local and recycled materials, responding creatively to the severe shortage of construction supplies and equipment.”
The Jerusalem-based professor pointed out that “locally driven reconstruction is not merely about survival. It is strengthening collective problem-solving, social cohesion and resilience — proving that even in the face of widespread destruction and siege, communities are reclaiming their future.”
At the heart of the vision is the understanding that recovery is fundamentally a social and cultural process. The Anthedon initiative places collective memory at the centre of rebuilding — not as nostalgia for a lost past but as a means of reconnecting communities with their shared identity and sense of belonging. Historic neighbourhoods, markets, mosques, schools and public spaces are described as anchors of everyday life that once sustained social ties and resilience. Their restoration, the report suggests, is essential to rebuilding trust and civic life alongside physical infrastructure.
Participation is another cornerstone of the proposed approach. The report insists that Gazans, particularly youth, women, community activists, local authorities and professional groups, must be the primary actors shaping their own recovery. Externally imposed master plans and megaprojects often overlook local realities and exclude those most affected by the destruction. Instead, it calls for a grassroots-driven process that brings together local government, civil society, academic institutions and traditional community structures to co-design neighbourhoods, revive livelihoods and rebuild institutions.
This participatory model links reconstruction directly to civic renewal. Schools, community centres, cultural venues and public spaces are envisioned not only as sites of service provision but as places for healing, remembrance and the restoration of social bonds. In a context marked by profound trauma and loss, the report argues that psychological and social recovery must be addressed with the same urgency as physical damage.
Heritage preservation plays a central role in this vision. Archaeological sites, historic districts and traditional architecture are not treated as luxuries to be addressed later but as drivers of social cohesion and economic regeneration. By protecting and reactivating cultural heritage, the report suggests, Gaza can generate livelihoods, strengthen local identity and reinforce continuity in the face of repeated rupture.
Beyond the Strip itself, “Gaza: A Vision of Hope” situates recovery within a broader regional and political framework. It reaffirms Gaza’s place within a future Palestinian state and recalls its historical role as a Mediterranean hub of trade and exchange. Long-term stability, the report argues, depends on reconnecting Gaza with the West Bank and integrating it into wider regional networks involving Egypt, Jordan, Israel and beyond — through shared infrastructure, environmental cooperation and economic partnerships.
Yet the authors stress that regional integration cannot be imposed from above. Trust-building must begin locally, through inclusive governance and community empowerment. Only then can broader cooperation contribute to peace and shared prosperity, rather than deepen dependency or inequality.
Perhaps the report’s most pointed message is directed at the international community. It calls on donors and institutions to rethink their role, requiring a shift from control to partnership and from short-term projects to long-term capacity building. True recovery, it argues, cannot be imported. It must grow from within Gaza’s own society, supported by international solidarity rather than dictated by it.
Ultimately, “Gaza: A Vision of Hope” offers a sobering yet hopeful lesson: cities do not recover simply by rebuilding structures. They recover by restoring dignity, belonging and agency. Gaza’s reconstruction, the report concludes, must be a process of reconnection, between people and place, memory and future, if it is to lead not only to survival but to resilience and peace.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2628987
--------
The chaos that calculates: Unveiling Tehran’s strategy of “managed ambiguity” against Israel
January 10, 2026
By Mahdi Motlagh
In the post-war strategic landscape of the Middle East, silence constitutes the most deceptive variable. While the balance of power appears to have shifted, security circles in Tel Aviv grapple with a reality far more complex than headlines suggest. Israeli strategists seemingly agree on one unwritten consensus: the “Iran issue” has not ended; it has simply transformed. Yet, in a twist of irony that defines modern asymmetric warfare, an internal phenomenon in Iran – namely the persistence of scattered, low-intensity protests – has unexpectedly become a deterrent against aggressive foreign actions.
Western capitals predominantly view the regime as teetering on the brink. However, a closer reading of recent assessments by the Israeli intelligence community suggests a more cynical reality: the state of “neither complete stability nor immediate collapse” inside Iran effectively places Tehran in a security “gray zone.” By imposing a computational hesitation on Israel, this managed anarchy gifts the Islamic Republic the most vital strategic resource: time.
To understand why internal unrest works in favour of Tehran’s “politics of time,” one must first reread the logic of the threat from Tel Aviv’s perspective. Strategic memos published by the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) regarding the 2025 outlook explicitly define Israel’s red line as preventing Iran from returning to the status quo ante. INSS analysts emphasise that the current diplomatic deadlock represents the most dangerous scenario for Israel, as Iran could use the shadow of non-agreement and reduced oversight to rebuild its damaged infrastructure.
Classical military logic dictates that the response to such a looming threat should be a pre-emptive strike or, at the very least, maximum military pressure to prevent the adversary from restoring deterrence. But the internal Iranian variable disrupts these calculations. INSS analytical documents regarding regime stability indicate that although the system’s legitimacy has declined, the hard power structure – specifically the IRGC core and the Basij – maintains its integrity. This assessment marginalises the option of “regime change from the outside” in Israel’s security doctrine, shifting the strategy instead toward attractional weakening. But attractional weakening requires time, and time is precisely what the dynamics of internal protests provide.
It may seem counterintuitive, but senior Israeli analysts believe that the current situation on the streets of Tehran creates a psychological defensive shield against foreign attack. Ron Ben-Yishai, a prominent military analyst writing for Ynet, points out that although discontent exists, these protests still lack unified leadership and the capacity for immediate toppling. Ben-Yishai and his peers note that the Israeli intelligence community deeply fears the “rally ’round the flag” effect. Historical experience from the eight-year Iran-Iraq War shows that a large-scale foreign attack holds high potential to incite nationalist sentiments. As The National Interest warns, a military strike could reverse the dynamics of protests; instead of deepening the rift, it would give the government the excuse to suppress any dissenting voice as a “fifth column” with justifiable violence.
Therefore, decision-makers in Tel Aviv face a strategic dilemma: if they attack, they might unintentionally help the regime resolve its internal crisis through the “securitisation” of the atmosphere. If they do not attack, Iran uses this breathing room to rebuild. The persistence of scattered protests keeps this hesitation alive and makes the political-social cost of any military action unpredictable for Israel.
Crucially, however, this strategy conceals a more potent, hidden objective beyond mere survival. By maintaining a controlled level of chaos, Tehran has effectively transferred the burden of “passivity” from itself to Tel Aviv. Israel, previously in a state of absolute alertness and initiative, has descended into strategic confusion. This disorientation does not merely delay an Israeli attack; it potentially opens the window for Tehran to seize the initiative.
The intensifying rhetoric from Iranian officials, who consistently attribute domestic unrest to Mossad’s machinations, serves a dual strategic purpose. Domestically, it delegitimises the protests; but internationally, it constructs a discursive legitimacy for a pre-emptive or retaliatory strike against Israel. By framing the unrest as an act of external aggression, Tehran lays the groundwork to justify a direct or indirect blow against Israel as a measure of “national defence.” While initiating conventional war has rarely been Iran’s modus operandi, this shift from a defensive crouch to an unpredictable offensive posture – fuelled by the very ambiguity Israel hoped to exploit – marks a critical turning point. The confusion in Tel Aviv implies that the initiative has quietly slipped away from the Israelis, leaving them reactive to a game Tehran is now orchestrating.
INSS policy documents recommend that Israel focus on a hybrid strategy involving restrictive agreements and credible military threats. But implementing this strategy proves difficult in the shadow of Iran’s internal unrest. When a country remains embroiled in internal tension that leads to neither collapse nor stability, foreign actors – including the US and Europe – show less inclination to conduct major military operations. They prefer to “wait and see,” and this state of suspension is exactly what Tehran desires.
According to INSS analyses regarding regional influence, Iran currently adjusts its strategy based on asymmetric reconstruction. With the relative weakening of proxy forces, Tehran focuses on increasing the quantity and precision of its missile arsenal and maintaining the nuclear threshold. Low-intensity protests focus media and intelligence attention on the streets, whilst in the underlying layers, Iranian technicians repair supply lines and develop centrifuges under this political cover. As reports regarding Iran-Russia nuclear cooperation note, Iran exploits this time to solidify strategic partnerships, a task that would prove impossible under conditions of total war.
A review of strategic texts produced in Tel Aviv and Washington leads to the conclusion that Iran’s internal protests have become a time-generating variable in the confrontation equation with Israel. Israel seeks to degrade Iran’s capacities but fears the unintended consequences of military action.
Tehran, understanding this paradox, utilises this “gray space” not only to rebuild but to reverse the psychological momentum of the conflict. Thus, scattered and continuous protests have effectively turned war from a certainty into a probable but high-risk scenario. In the world of strategy, every day that war is postponed marks a winning day for the side that needs to rebuild. As long as this fog of ambiguity prevails, Israel remains suspended in confusion, and the clock in Tehran ticks in favour of the establishment.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260110-the-chaos-that-calculates-unveiling-tehrans-strategy-of-managed-ambiguity-against-israel/
-----
Israeli fire kills 2 Palestinians, injures others across Gaza despite ceasefire
January 10, 2026
Israeli forces killed two Palestinians and wounded several others on Saturday in separate attacks across the Gaza Strip, in the latest violations of a ceasefire agreement in effect since Oct. 10, 2025.
Medical sources told Anadolu a Palestinian identified as Mohammed Khaled Mohammed al-Qahwaji, 38, was killed after an Israeli drone struck him in the Bani Suheila area of Khan Younis in southern Gaza.
In a separate incident, another Palestinian, identified as Alaa Mahmoud al-Harazin, 26, was shot dead by Israeli fire east of Gaza City, according to medical officials.
Several other Palestinians were injured when an Israeli airstrike targeted an area near the entrance of the Maghazi refugee camp in central Gaza, medical sources and witnesses said.
Witnesses added that all the locations targeted by Israeli forces were areas from which the army had withdrawn under the ceasefire agreement.
The Israeli army has killed more than 71,000 people, most of them women and children, and injured over 171,000 others in a brutal offensive since October 2023 that has left the Gaza Strip in ruins.
Despite a ceasefire that began last Oct. 10, the Israeli army has continued its attacks, killing 425 Palestinians and wounding 1,189 others, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260110-israeli-fire-kills-2-palestinians-injures-others-across-gaza-despite-ceasefire/
-----
At least 4 killed as Israeli forces strike Gaza by air and sea, despite ceasefire
January 11, 2026
Israeli forces killed at least four Palestinians on Sunday in airstrikes and gunfire in the Gaza Strip, in fresh violations of a ceasefire agreement in effect since October, medical sources told Anadolu.
The sources said the bodies of two Palestinians arrived at Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis after they were targeted by an Israeli drone strike in the Bani Suheila area east of the southern city, Anadolu reports.
Anadolu correspondent, citing eyewitnesses, said the two were killed in areas still under Israeli military occupation, despite the ceasefire arrangement.
In Gaza City, Israeli forces shot and killed a Palestinian in an area they had previously withdrawn from under the ceasefire agreement in the Tuffah neighbourhood, medical sources said.
In central Gaza, another Palestinian was killed, and four others were wounded after an Israeli drone fired a missile at a group of workers east of the Maghazi refugee camp, according to medical officials.
Earlier Sunday, Israeli forces carried out airstrikes, artillery shelling, and naval fire across multiple areas of the Gaza Strip, in continued violations of the ceasefire deal.
Israeli warplanes launched an airstrike southwest of the southern city of Rafah, while another aerial attack targeted area east of the Bureij refugee camp in central Gaza, witnesses said.
Israeli artillery also shelled eastern parts of Gaza City, including the Tuffah and Zeitoun neighbourhoods, accompanied by gunfire from military vehicles positioned nearby, they added.
In northern Gaza, Israeli aircraft carried out airstrikes and demolition operations targeting buildings east of Jabalia and Beit Lahia, alongside artillery fire, according to local sources.
Israeli naval vessels also fired several shells toward coastal areas in northern Gaza, locations from which Israeli forces had withdrawn under the truce, witnesses added.
The Israeli army has killed more than 71,000 people, most of them women and children, and injured over 171,000 others in a brutal offensive since October 2023 that has left the Gaza Strip in ruins.
Despite the ceasefire, Israeli attacks have continued, killing 442 Palestinians and injuring over 1,200 others, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260111-at-least-4-killed-as-israeli-forces-strike-gaza-by-air-and-sea-despite-ceasefire/
-----
Fourth Palestinian baby freezes to death in Gaza since November
By Mohammad Mansour
11 Jan 2026
In the bitter cold of a Gaza winter, two-month-old Mohammed Abu Harbid has become the latest victim of Israel’s genocidal war that has stripped Palestinians of shelter, warmth and survival.
Zaher al-Wahidi, director of health information at the Ministry of Health, told Al Jazeera the infant died from severe hypothermia at al-Rantisi Children’s Hospital.
His death brings the number of children who have frozen to death in the enclave since November 2025 to four, and 12 since the start of the genocidal war in October 2023.
As severe depression brings torrential rain and freezing winds to the coastal enclave, thousands of displaced families are facing a catastrophic humanitarian emergency, with the most vulnerable paying the highest price.
At al-Awda Hospital in the Nuseirat refugee camp, a newly opened neonatal ward is fighting a losing battle to keep premature babies alive.
The ward, established in early 2026 to meet soaring demand, receives about 17 infants daily. But Ahmed Abu Shaira, a medical staff member, says they are operating with one hand tied behind their back.
“We face many dilemmas, including a scarcity of medical equipment,” Abu Shaira told Al Jazeera Mubasher correspondent Talal al-Arouqi. “Some incubators come to us without batteries … the occupation forces the entry of incubators without batteries.”
This is a death sentence in a facility plagued by chronic power outages. During Al Jazeera’s visit, the electricity cut out more than five times in less than an hour.
“We try to reach a certain temperature for the child, but every time we do, the power cuts,” Abu Shaira explained. Without the internal batteries that Israeli restrictions have banned, the incubators go cold the instant the generator fails.
“We are now receiving babies born before 37 weeks … due to early labour caused by the mothers’ poor health,” Abu Shaira added. “These babies are prone to hypothermia … which can lead to death.”
Outside the hospitals, the situation is equally dire. In western Gaza City, the Kafarna family’s struggle for survival is measured in sleepless nights spent holding up their tent against the wind.
“When we hear the word ‘depression’, we start shaking … it’s like the horrors of doomsday,” the father told Al Jazeera Mubasher’s Ayman al-Hissi, standing inside a tent with balding fabric that offers little protection from the elements.
“I stood all night holding this pole, and my wife and daughters leaned against the wooden beams to brace against the wind,” the father recounted. “We took turns holding the tent … water was coming in from above and below.”
The mother, exhausted and surrounded by sick children, described their shelter as a “piece of cloth” that hides them from view but protects them from nothing.
“I wish they would bring us a ‘dome tent’ to protect us from the cold and rain,” Waad told Al Jazeera. “We [nearly] drowned last night … I wish I could go back to school.”
Her mother recalled a terrifying moment when Waad fell ill at night. “She was vomiting from her mouth and nose, and I couldn’t even find a light to see her … I didn’t know how to help her.”
As the winter conditions worsen, the family’s plea is simple yet desperate: “We appeal to anyone with a conscience … send us caravans, send us tents … anything to cover us from the cold.”
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/1/11/fourth-palestinian-baby-freezes-to-death-in-gaza-since-november
------
Israel’s ban on NGOs operating in Gaza will be devastating
By Yousef M Aljamal
11 Jan 2026
I work for the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), a Quaker organisation that has been present in Gaza for more than 77 years. AFSC began its work in 1948 when the United Nations asked it to organise relief efforts for Palestinian refugees who had been expelled from their land by Zionist forces.
For two years, AFSC’s Gaza staff helped set up and run 10 refugee camps in al-Faluja, Bureij, Deir el-Balah, Gaza City, Jabalia, Maghazi, Nuseirat, Khan Younis and Rafah. They worked to provide food, shelter and sanitation as well as setting up educational programmes for children.
In the decades that followed, AFSC’s programmes have provided support for agricultural development, kindergartens, midwife training, humanitarian aid and trauma healing. Since the start of Israel’s genocide in 2023, AFSC staff members in Gaza have provided more than a million meals, food parcels, fresh vegetables, hygiene kits and other essential supplies.
Now, for the first time since 1948, AFSC along with dozens of other international organisations is threatened with a ban from the Israeli government that puts lifesaving humanitarian work in jeopardy. This would have a devastating effect on the people of Gaza. And it cannot come at a worse time.
The mass killing in Gaza has not stopped. Despite a ceasefire, Israeli forces are carrying out ongoing raids, air strikes and large-scale demolitions across Gaza. Since the ceasefire began on October 10, these attacks have killed more than 420 Palestinians and injured more than 1,150.
And it is not just the bombs. Floods in Gaza have destroyed tens of thousands of tents while badly damaged homes continue to collapse on residents. The absence of medicines and proper healthcare is killing people as well; about 600 kidney disease patients have died as a result of lack of treatment.
These actions have reinforced a longstanding Israeli policy aimed at depopulating Gaza and annexing the land. Israel’s prohibitively restrictive new registration policies and efforts to prohibit or limit international aid are part of this effort. Silencing independent humanitarian voices and dismantling humanitarian infrastructure serve to create conditions on the ground that make life in Gaza impossible. Gaza cannot recover or thrive without comprehensive reconstruction that restores its health system, education sector and critical infrastructure.
Just two weeks before the ceasefire began, an Israeli air strike struck my family home, killing nine of my immediate relatives, including two of my siblings, their spouses and their children.
When I spoke to surviving family members shortly afterwards, they told me the “responsibility is light now” – a phrase they used to express that the number of people to care for is less now.
Since that phone call, I have not stopped thinking about what responsibility truly means. For me, it did not become lighter. It grew heavier. Nine children were left orphaned. With each life taken from my family, the weight of responsibility only increased – the responsibility to remember, to care for those left behind and to bear witness to what has been done.
But this responsibility is not mine alone. It belongs to every nation, institution and individual who has sat idly by while Gaza burns – and especially those nations who have sent the bombs that continue to kill and destroy.
I first learned about the history of AFSC from my friend Ahmad Alhaaj, who benefitted from its work when he was a young refugee in 1948.
Ahmad passed away in Gaza City in January 2024. It is heart-breaking that he lived his entire life as a refugee, recounting stories of Israel’s 1948 massacres, only to spend his final days enduring a genocide. He died under siege and bombardment, ultimately losing his life because essential medicines were unavailable.
The story of Ahmad in Gaza in 2024 is tragically similar to his story in 1948. Then, he was 16 years old, a barefoot refugee following evacuation orders to Gaza from his village of al-Sawafir. What changed were the years; what did not was the condition of dispossession, displacement and abandonment.
But Ahmad’s story is not just about displacement. Ahmad’s story is a story of love – love for his village. He lived his entire life in Gaza as a refugee in a rented house, refusing to own a home so he would never forget his village or the house his parents were forced to leave behind. For Ahmad, ownership elsewhere risked erasing memory; remaining a renter was an act of fidelity.
This same love has been embodied by many Palestinians who chose Gaza, even under fire. It is a devotion to place that defies siege, displacement and death. Ahmad’s love reminds me of the dedication of my mentor and friend Refaat Alareer, who became Gaza’s great storyteller, giving voice to its people and its pain. On December 6, 2023, Israel killed Refaat along with his brother, sister and nephews in a targeted strike on his apartment.
His poem If I Must Die has become a testament to this love and to an enduring hope – a message that has travelled beyond Gaza and transformed into a global story. Born of siege and resistance, the poem carries Gaza’s humanity to the world, insisting on life, memory and dignity even in the face of death.
In 1948, the Greater Gaza District was home to 34 villages. One of them was Ahmad’s. For our grandparents, Gaza was understood as something far larger than the narrow strip it later became. Their sense of place was expansive, rooted in villages, fields and continuous geography.
Our parents, however, witnessed Gaza steadily shrink. What had once been one of the largest districts in historic Palestine was reduced in 1948 to roughly 555sq km (215sq miles). It later shrank further, to about 365sq km (140sq miles) after Israel established a so-called demilitarised zone – land that was eventually annexed at the direct expense of Gaza’s people.
Today, Israel occupies more than half of Gaza. It has imposed what is known as the “yellow line”, which functions as a new de facto border that continues to expand, annexing new territory. Palestinians who cross it are executed. Even Fadi and Jumaa, ages 8 and 10, were not spared. Gaza is not just besieged; it is being physically erased, metre by metre, generation by generation.
The Gaza we love goes beyond lines and borders. Although the majority of Palestinians in Gaza are refugees from towns that today lie inside Israel, Gaza is the place we call home.
Today, Gaza has liberated the imaginations and consciences of people across the world. It transcends geography and the artificial lines drawn on maps – yellow or green.
Israel can ban international organisations and journalists, arrest our medical workers and bomb our poets. It can destroy lives and homes and cause suffering beyond measure. But it cannot ban our struggle for justice or our innate human desire to help one another survive. Despite the many obstacles and challenges we face, our work to support people in Gaza and across the occupied Palestinian territory will continue.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2026/1/11/israels-ban-on-ngos-operating-in-gaza-will-be-devastating
-----
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism