Dozens of small civilian boats carrying activists, parliamentarians, doctors, and trade unionists have already set sail from some European port, while others are preparing to depart in an effort to deliver humanitarian supplies to Gaza.
In July 2025, an international maritime initiative was launched: the Global Sumud Flotilla, made up of four major coalitions: the Global Campaign to Return to Palestine, the Freedom Flotilla Coalition, the Maghreb Sumud Convoy, and the Southeast Asian Nusantara Sumud Initiative.
More than 39 national delegations have confirmed their participation, making it the largest popular maritime effort in solidarity with Gaza since the Mavi Marmara in 2010 ( The Mavi Marmara, was a Turkish ship that was part of the Freedom Flotilla, was raided by the Israeli army in 2010, during which ten activists were killed).
This year, two of the Freedom Flotilla’s flagship boats, the Handala and the Madleen, which attempted to sail to break Gaza’s blockade, were attacked by drones and stormed by Israeli forces. Passengers were beaten, abducted, and deported.
According to international maritime law, civilian vessels carrying humanitarian aid in international waters are protected under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Furthermore, Israel has maintained a land, air, and sea blockade on Gaza since 2007, constituting a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention:

• Humanitarian Assistance (Art. 59): if the civilian population lacks sufficient resources, the occupying power must allow and facilitate the entry of aid from impartial organizations.
• Prohibition of Transfers and Deportations (Art. 49): both the forced displacement of the occupied population and the settlement of the occupier’s citizens are considered war crimes.
• Protection of Women and Children (Art. 76): minors must be given special protection, and women safeguarded against all forms of violence.
• Individual Criminal Responsibility: serious violations of the Convention—such as deliberate killings, torture, deportations, and unjustified denial of aid—constitute “grave breaches” and are prosecutable as war crimes before national or international courts, including the International Criminal Court (ICC).
  None of these protections has ever been guaranteed to the Palestinian people.
  In addition, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) guarantees freedom of navigation in international waters. By seizing the Freedom Flotilla boats outside its territorial jurisdiction, Israel has committed an act tantamount to international piracy, which should be condemned as an unlawful international act, a violation of the freedom of the seas, or a war crime or act of aggression.
  Instead of engaging through diplomacy or respecting humanitarian principles, Israel has resorted to force, treating peaceful civilian missions as military threats.
  The Global Sumud Flotilla today represents the convergence of struggles across continents. Together, these networks have transformed a flotilla of boats into a people-led humanitarian corridor. Part of the mission has already set sail from Spain and Italy, with a second departure from Tunisia scheduled for September 4, with over 50 boats expected.
  The pressing concern is that Israel will continue to attack peaceful ships in international waters, abduct activists, and suppress humanitarian efforts, while Western governments may keep looking the other way.
  But ordinary people—from Greek and Italian dockworkers refusing to load weapons for Israel, to Tunisian unions welcoming the flotilla missions, to students and parliamentarians raising their voices—are building a counter-power.
  Unfortunately in the 2011 during the mission Freedom Flotilla II, Greek authorities, partly under direct or indirect Israeli pressure, prevented ships from leaving Greek ports. Other boats that had already departed were intercepted and forced back to shore by armed coast guard intervention.
  Also in 2024, the Freedom Flotilla mission was delayed because Israel exerted diplomatic pressure that triggered additional inspections. The United States, United Kingdom, and Germany reportedly pressured Turkey to prevent the fleet’s departure. Organizers also reported that, under Israeli pressure, some ship insurers withdrew their services, creating significant bureaucratic obstacles.
  Israel’s strategy has been to enforce a preventive blockade, structured mainly through diplomatic and administrative pressures on departure states or companies involved, rather than through direct military interventions at ports. These practices have often prevented or distorted humanitarian missions even before the ships reached open sea.
  Today, the ports involved in the Global Sumud Flotilla mission are in Italy, Tunisia, Spain, and Greece. It remains to be seen how these countries will respond to pressure from Israel and the United States.
• Italy has historically been allied with Israel and the U.S., yet it also hosts strong pro-Palestine activism. It is unlikely that Rome will openly block departures from Sicilian ports, as this would certainly trigger a political scandal and popular unrest. More likely, under U.S.-Israeli pressure, Italy may increase administrative checks (harbormaster, customs, safety regulations) to slow or obstruct navigation. Politically, the government could “wash its hands” of the matter, framing it as a private initiative without official endorsement.
• Tunisia has shown strong popular and institutional support for the Palestinian cause, especially after October 7, 2023. It is unlikely Tunis will yield to Israeli/U.S. pressure. Instead, it will likely openly encourage the ships’ departure, using it as a domestic and international political message, potentially even providing diplomatic cover for the vessels.
• Spain, under the Sánchez government and progressive municipalities like Barcelona, is among the most critical of Israel in Europe. The flotilla’s departure from Barcelona has been presented as a political act of protest against the blockade, without giving in to Israeli or American pressure.
• Greece presents a more delicate case. In 2011, under strong Israeli and U.S. pressure, Athens blocked the Freedom Flotilla II in its ports. The Papandreou government at the time sought to strengthen ties with Israel and the U.S., but the decision sparked massive internal protests. Today, Greek public opinion is strongly supportive of the Palestinian cause, more so than in many other European countries. The recent incident where a cruise ship carrying 1,600 Israelis was denied disembarkation highlights rising anti-Israeli protests. Tensions in Cyprus (Greek side), where Israeli companies have purchased land and developed gated compounds almost inaccessible to non-Israelis, have further fueled distrust and resentment. Thus, while today’s Greek government does not wish to break with the U.S. and Israel, it must reckon with internal sensitivities or risk public uprisings.
  The Global Sumud Flotilla clearly marks a new phase to build a transnational infrastructure of resistance.
  In Arabic Sumud means Steadfastness, Resistance, Tenacity, which reflects both Palestinian resilience and the determination of peoples worldwide to act where European governments have already failed—remaining silent when the victims are Palestinians and their supporters.
   

Normalization with Israel does not represent a neutral choice, but a political and ideological decision that hides serious dangers for Lebanon and its national unity.

The Danger of the Zionist Project for Lebanon

From its inception, the Zionist project has not been limited to promoting the creation of a “Jewish state” in Palestine; it has also sought expansion into Lebanon. Israeli attacks against the “Land of the Cedars” date back even before the founding of the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1964. Various reports have documented plans to annex territories in southern Lebanon and destabilize its borders through the creation of “agricultural settlements.” In this context, attacks on border villages, infrastructure, and farms in the south must be understood as aimed at driving the local population into exile or submission.

Moreover, Israel works to undermine internal stability by fueling sectarian divisions, promoting sabotage, and carrying out assassinations intended to trigger civil conflicts. A telling example is the speech given last year by the Israeli Prime Minister, in which he addressed the Lebanese not as a single people, but as Christians, Sunnis, Shiites, and Druze—never once mentioning the word “Lebanese.” The aim is clear: to fragment national identity and reduce citizens to opposing religious communities. This is the same strategy applied in Palestine, transformed into a confessional colony-state granting full rights only to followers of a single religion.

This vision of identity seeks to disintegrate Lebanese society into small, rival confessional entities—impoverished, weak, and devoid of sovereignty—easily manipulated, against which wars can be waged and resources plundered.

The Danger of the Zionist Project for Christians

It is no coincidence that Israel has supported “Christian“ just as it has backed “Sunni,” “Druze,” and “Kurdish” groups and governments in Syria, or “Shiite” organizations in Azerbaijan and elsewhere. Unfortunately, in Syria, the Jolani regime continues to perpetrate massacres against Alawites and Druze, causing the fragmentation of the country into rival entities, deliberately supported by Israel to keep them in the future under the control of the Zionist entity.

As the late Patriarch Sfeir, Maronite (Patriarch of Antioch* and of all the East from 1986 to 2011), stated: “Israel cannot accept peace in Lebanon because democracy is contrary to its ideology.”

Although Lebanon has been considered a homeland for Christians for centuries, occupation and political and military pressures have driven many to emigrate. The exodus of Palestinian Christians is the clearest proof. Despite Israeli propaganda claiming that Zionism protects Christians, the Churches of Palestine have repeatedly addressed the international community, denouncing the occupation and its aggressive policies.

Exposure to Loss of Sovereignty

It is essential to reflect on the genocidal mindset applied in Gaza: nothing prevents the same logic from being applied in Lebanon one day for strategic purposes. There are many lessons to be learned from Gaza, but capitulating to a genocidal enemy only exposes the country to loss of sovereignty, looting, forced displacement, and even the risk of extermination when the occupier’s interests demand it.

Some argue that normalization could open economic opportunities, citing the Gulf countries as examples. But the reality is different: those countries do not share borders with Palestine and therefore do not face Israeli territorial ambitions, even though threats such as those directed at Qatar show that diplomatic relations do not guarantee security.

If Lebanon or Syria were to fall under Zionist control, there would be no prosperity—only repression and impoverishment.

The Way Forward

Opposing the Zionist project does not necessarily mean waging war or siding with Iran. Rather, it means that the Lebanese people must work to strengthen their internal unity.

It is necessary to develop a theological discourse against occupation, as part of a broader discourse against all forms of injustice, internal or external—a message rooted in the Gospel that emphasizes human brotherhood and its values: freedom, sharing the earth’s goods, and justice. Occupation deprives people of freedom, plunders resources, and prevents a dignified life.

Those who care about protecting their country and its people must base their national belonging on the principle of citizenship, not on confessional communities. Only in this way can a single homeland be built that guarantees rights and dignity for all, regardless of religion. Accepting the Zionist project means accepting division and decline; opposing it means defending the present and future of one’s country.

*Antioch (today the Turkish city of Antakya, in southern Turkey near the Syrian border) was for centuries one of the most important cities in the Hellenistic world and later in the Roman Empire, earning the nickname “Rome of the East.” It is also a key site in Christian history: according to the Acts of the Apostles, it was here that the followers of Jesus were first called “Christians.”

Photo of the article: St. George Melkite Catholic Church, that was destroyed by Israeli airstrike, in the town of Dardghaya in southern Lebanon,

A new report published by Adalah, a Palestinian-Israeli NGO that provides legal advocacy for the rights of the Arab-Palestinian minority in Israel, documents how Israel is intensifying efforts to consolidate permanent control over the West Bank through sweeping legal and institutional changes.

The 87-page analysis denounces how the Netanyahu government is constructing a complex legal architecture aimed at further depriving Palestinians of their right to self-determination.
While international attention is – rightly – focused on Gaza, the report emphasizes that the West Bank has been undergoing unprecedented structural transformations since the current government took office in December 2022.

Israel is actively changing the legal status of large portions of the West Bank, particularly Area C, which accounts for over 60% of the territory and remains under full Israeli military control. In this area, a growing number of Palestinians are experiencing forced displacement, driven by settler violence and new legislative policies. The Israeli government is exploiting legal mechanisms to entrench a discriminatory land regime and reinforce territorial and racial segregation.

In the years following Israel’s occupation of the West Bank (which began in 1967), new settlement construction was justified on military security grounds.
But since 1981, Israel has gradually shifted the governance of Israeli settlers from military to civilian control, justifying settlement expansion on the basis of:

• the natural growth of the Jewish population,
• economic development,
• the presence of historic or religious ties to the land, particularly in biblical areas such as Hebron or Bet El.

This shift legitimized permanent territorial expansion and drastically increased settlement activity. In recent years, structural reforms have handed even more power to pro-settler officials in the West Bank, under the direct authority of Bezalel Smotrich, Israel’s Minister of Finance and de facto Minister of Defense for the Occupied Territories.

These reforms have institutionalized the existence of two parallel legal regimes:

• a military regime governing Palestinian villages,
• a civilian Israeli regime in Jewish settlements, where Israeli domestic law applies.

It’s important to note that applying Israeli civil law in occupied Palestinian territories constitutes a violation of international law and is widely seen as a form of de facto annexation.

Israel’s designation of “state land” in the West Bank has become the primary legal mechanism for the expropriation of Palestinian land since the late 1970s.
Between 1998 and 2016, around 21.000 dunams (2.100 hectares) were declared state land. But from February to December 2024 alone, Israel designated over 24.200 dunams (2.400 hectares) — more than in the previous 18 years combined.
This represents a historic acceleration in land seizure.

All of this aligns with the Israeli government’s stated vision: that the Jewish people have an exclusive and inalienable right to the entirety of the Land of Israel, and its declared goal of expanding settlements throughout what it calls “Judea and Samaria” – i.e., the entire occupied West Bank.

The erasure of the Palestinian people from their towns, neighborhoods, and lands is further enabled by an increasingly radicalized Israeli public opinion, and by the paralysis of the international community.

While France, Spain, and Ireland have pledged to recognize the State of Palestine, Italy under Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has taken a strongly pro-Israel stance, arguing that “now is not the right time.”
The premier – a self-declared Christian and mother – stated that recognizing Palestine today would send the “wrong signal” to Israel, especially “in a time of war.”

But what war exactly?
The war in Gaza, where women and children are dying of hunger and bombs every single day?
Meanwhile, in the West Bank, where there is no Hamas and therefore no active war, settlers regularly attack Palestinian villages, often with the support or protection of the Israeli military. They burn homes, seize land, displace entire communities, and even target churches and kill Christian civilians.

True, Israel has claimed that bombing a Christian place of worship was a “mistake”.
But the doubt is more than legitimate, as even Vatican Secretary of State Pietro Parolin has pointed out.
Is that all?
Of course not.

The truth is that more and more people are taking a firm stand against Israel’s actions, demanding an end to the systematic violations of international law against the Palestinian people:
military occupation, colonization, apartheid, collective punishment, forced displacement, and daily repression affecting millions of civilians in Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem.

More and more of us are saying:“We are all Francesca Albanese.”

Because the truth can no longer – and must no longer – be silenced.

Last week, UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese made headlines across the world for exposing the dozens of companies that she says have profited from Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Albanese’s UN report, “From Economy of Occupation to Economy of Genocide”goes beyond just the typical weapons-manufacturing culprits, and calls out financial institutions, educational institutions, and Big Tech companies. In response, the US Mission to the UN renewed its calls for the UN secretary-general to condemn Albanese and remove her as special rapporteur for human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

 The occupation and genocide are highly lucrative for corporations. These include not only the usual arms and ‘defence’ big businesses but also the report shows  that the Palestinian territories Israel occupies have functioned as Big Tech’s ideal laboratory and testing ground. No country, for instance, has given as much access to a population’s biometric data as Israel has given to IBM. Since 7th October 2023, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet and Palantir have been expanding their cloud capital services at a breathtaking pace. Face recognition software, target selection algorithms and automated execution systems are being tested in real time, with much less ethical constraints than in the case of experiments on laboratory rats.

Here is the complete list of 48 companies (*) named in the June 2025 United Nations report by Francesca Albanese, “From Economy of Occupation to Economy of Genocide” (A/HRC/59/23), involved in directly or indirectly supporting Israel’s occupation and military operations in the occupied Palestinian territory.

They are grouped by sector for clarity:

Defense & Weapons Manufacturers

These companies supply arms, military technology, and logistics to the Israeli military:

Lockheed Martin

Elbit Systems

Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI)

Rafael Advanced Defense Systems

BAE Systems

Boeing

General Dynamics

Leonardo S.p.A. (Italy)

FANUC Corporation (Japan)

 Surveillance, Artificial Intelligence & Technology

Involved in biometric surveillance, cloud computing, AI targeting systems (e.g., Lavender), and intelligence services:

Microsoft

Alphabet Inc. (Google)

Amazon

IBM

Palantir Technologies

 Construction, Machinery & Infrastructure

Linked to home demolitions, illegal settlements, and occupation infrastructure:

Caterpillar Inc.

Volvo Group

HD Hyundai (Hyundai Construction Equipment)

Heidelberg Materials AG (via Hanson Israel)

Construcciones y Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles (CAF)

Rada Electronic Industries (owned by Leonardo)

 Energy & Extractive Industries

Linked to energy production and resource extraction benefiting military operations and settlements:

Chevron

BP

Glencore

Drummond Company

Petrobras

 Agritech & Water

Involved in agricultural or water infrastructure that supports settlements or discriminatory systems:

Netafim (via Orbia)

Bright Dairy & Food Co. (via ownership in Tnuva)

Mekorot (Israeli national water company)

 Finance, Investment & Insurance

These banks and funds are accused of investing in or financing arms companies and settlement-linked businesses:

Bank of America

Citigroup

Wells Fargo

JPMorgan Chase

BNP Paribas

Barclays

Deutsche Bank

Goldman Sachs

BlackRock

Vanguard

PIMCO

Allianz

AXA

Norwegian Government Pension Fund (GPFG)

Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (CDPQ)

Logistics, Real Estate & Tourism

Supporting physical infrastructure, settlement logistics, and tourism normalization:

A.P. Moller – Maersk

Atlas Air

Airbnb

Booking.com

Keller Williams Realty

Carrefour

Academia & Research

These academic institutions are reported to be involved in developing dual-use or military AI/robotics with Israel:

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

Technical University of Munich (TUM)

University of Edinburgh

The following is a list of economists who have expressed strong support for Francesca Albanese, praising her “Report” as a fundamental contribution to understanding the economic policy of the Israeli apartheid state, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, and now their genocide, highlighting the support of multinational corporations in sustaining the apartheid regime, facilitating the ongoing genocide, and criticizing the calls for Albanese’s removal made by the US and Israeli governments, describing them as an attempt to cover up international responsibilities:

Yanis Varoufakis, former Greek finance minister

Thomas Piketty, author of ‘Capital in the Twenty-First Century’

Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of ‘The Black Swan’

Michael Hudson, president of the Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends (ISLET)

Guy Standing, professorial research associate, SOAS University of London

Jayati Ghosh, professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst

Giuseppe Mastruzzo, director of the International University College of Turin (IUC)

Jomo Kwame Sundaram, research advisor at Khazanah Research Institute

Robert H. Wade, professor of Political Economy and Development at London School of Economics and Political Science

Christopher Cramer, professor of the Political Economy of Development at SOAS University of London

Nidhi Srinivas, associate professor of management at Milano School of Policy, Management, and Environment

We should all appreciate Albanese’s commendable courage in denouncing the injustices and countless human rights violations perpetrated against the Palestinian population, a necessary step to end the genocide and dismantle the global system that made it possible.

(*) Source: UN Human Rights Council report

https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/sessions-regular/session59/advance-version/a-hrc-59-23-aev.pdf

Today in Cyprus, the so-called “golden visa” is granted to non-EU citizens who invest at least € 300.000 in real estate or company shares.

In this regard, the Secretary General of AKEL (Progressive Party of Working People, the largest opposition party in Cyprus) has warned that Israelis are buying land in Cyprus illegally and without permits.
“Israelis are creating ghettos, establishing schools and synagogues; a targeted and organized acquisition of key economic centers and vast areas of land in Larnaca, Limassol, and Paphos, where gated communities are being formed, part of a strategic plan to acquire economic hubs and sensitive zones near critical infrastructure such as military installations, ports, and tourist areas.”

Large Israeli companies have acquired extensive coastal lots. Projects such as Horizon Tower by S.L. Investment, which includes four towers with about 600 apartments, commercial centers, pools, spas, and green areas, and AQUA Residences, a € 40 million project by Solvin Ltd, involve the construction of two towers of 15–20 stories with spa, gym, and swimming pool, 155 parking spaces and 114 apartments. These developments reflect a real urban transformation, largely inaccessible to anyone who is not an Israeli citizen.

One local interviewee stated:
“The local population is well aware of this phenomenon. If you go to Larnaca, Limassol, or Paphos, people will tell you about specific areas where this is happening, but the authorities ignore it. It is essential to protect our land and ensure that Cyprus remains forever in the hands of the Cypriots.”

Between 2021 and January 2025, 1.406 property purchases by Israelis were registered in Larnaca, of which 481 include title deeds.

The Cypriot daily Politis reported that the number of Zionist Jews in the country has reached 15.000, and that the Chabad group is actively operating in the area.
According to Politis, Chabad manages six houses, a synagogue, a kindergarten, a mikveh (a Jewish ritual bath), a kosher certification center, a cemetery, and summer activity centers. It plays a significant role in the cultural and religious reconversion of secular or non-practicing Jews.

Chabad (an acronym in Hebrew encompassing three words: Wisdom, Understanding, and Knowledge) is described in the article as an extremist Zionist organization that strictly follows Jewish law (halakhah), denies the existence of Palestinians, promotes their expulsion from occupied Palestine, and opposes any agreement that would grant Palestinians any part of the land.

This would appear to indicate that Israel is consolidating a stable, strategic, and structured presence in Cyprus, almost treating it as a territorial, logistical, and cultural extension close to its borders.

As the AKEL Secretary says: “Israel is preparing it’s own backyard in Cyprus.”

– Photo of the article: AQUA Residences project –

Now, as Israel’s new war against Iran shows being stopped, the country, after initially declaring that its main objective was to hinder the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program, openly expressed its ambition to bring down the regime of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. However, the Iranian regime has not collapsed as hoped, and the Supreme Leader remains in power, defying all expectations.

According to reports by the Wall Street Journal, seems there was a flow of “light weapons suitable for urban warfare” possibly entering Iran from Azerbaijan borders. Israeli Mossad agents have allegedly smuggled hundreds of explosive-laden quadcopter drone parts into the country, hidden in suitcases, trucks, and containers. This would have been part of a strategy that would try to “triggering a civil war and internally dividing Iran.” Actually a shift in Israel’s approach, that tries to weaken the enemy from within by exploiting internal instability to achieve objectives it has not been able to reach on the battlefield.

The notion that the Iranian opposition, with Israeli support, could seize this moment to overthrow the regime and free the country from the ayatollahs’ grip is, according to Professor Lior Sternfeld, a modern Iranian history scholar at Penn State University, a true illusion. It stems from a distorted perception of the real political weight of the Iranian opposition in exile. “In Israel, the loudest voices are those of Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the late Shah and heir to the Iranian throne in exile (widely seen as a lazy man in his sixties), and his supporters,” says Sternfeld. “These are people without any real credibility or influence in Iran.”

This narrative is mainly spread in ‘Tehrangeles,’ a nickname for an area of Los Angeles with a large community of Iranian exiles, on the margins of the current U.S. administration, it seems to constitute the only voice the Israelis are listening to.

The official Israeli narrative about Iran, that the regime is a fragile coalition of tribes ready to collapse, is absurd to anyone with even a basic understanding of Iranian history. This kind of delusional thinking is dominant among the Iranian diaspora, still haunted by the events of the 1979 revolution.

While some Iranians may quietly celebrate Israeli strikes and the exposure of regime officials, this sentiment has no meaningful popular support. “We’re against this attack… yes, we definitely hate the mullahs, but the REAL enemy now is Israel.”

Just as the 1979 revolution came from outside with Khomeini, today a counter-revolution is imagined as coming from outside with Pahlavi with the potential Israeli support. But the truth is that there is currently no organized opposition capable of confronting Iran’s power structures without causing complete chaos, something that Iranians desperately want to avoid. Moreover, the regime enjoys a strong base that extends well beyond its security apparatus.

For many progressive Iranians, even a repressive Islamic Republic is preferable to chaos or the rise of ISIS-style anarchy, as seen in Iraq’s past.

Iran has long been viewed as a rational regime, but now, feeling betrayed by the United States and targeted by Israel — especially after attacks on civilian areas in Tehran — it faces a shaken national sense of security.

And if, in order to ensure its survival, Iran’s leadership were to view a nuclear bomb as the only way to protect itself from the nuclear power that attacked it — who could truly blame them?

Iranian citizens are now issuing a clear demand to the Ayatollah’s regime: “Show us you can defend our homeland.”

The United States, especially under President Trump, sent a clear message: a retreat from its historic role as the dominant power in the Gulf region. The reinforcement of the “America First” doctrine signaled Washington’s intent to step back, leaving Gulf states to fend more for themselves. Yet, in this strategic vision, the U.S. failed to account for a key actor: Israel.

Following the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu overturned Israel’s traditional military doctrine. What was once characterized by targeted and periodic operations has become a disruptive, maximalist, and ideologically rigid approach.
Although a decisive victory in Gaza remains elusive, Israel has succeeded in halting Hezbollah and compromising its command structure. Buoyed by these tactical gains, Netanyahu has raised the stakes, launching deep strikes even within Iran.

His goal is not solely military. It is also to prevent a negotiated nuclear deal between Washington and Tehran and to push for regime change in Iran.
By igniting a high-stakes crisis, Netanyahu has not only reasserted his geopolitical relevance but has also sought to draw Trump toward a destabilizing conflict, killing off any chance of a nuclear deal before it could materialize, while reshaping the regional landscape to suit Israel’s interests. He has also leveraged Israel’s technological, military, and intelligence superiority to impose his conditions on U.S. Middle East policy.

Netanyahu, a longtime proponent of American neoconservatism and an advocate of U.S. military interventions in Iraq and Iran since the 1980s, is not pursuing inclusive regional stability. His aim is to unilaterally reshape the Middle East. His strategy toward Iran revolves around the progressive attrition of the regime, using targeted attacks to hollow out its political and military infrastructure.

The potential assassination of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei could mark the end of a long-contested religious dictatorship, but at what cost?

Without a charismatic leader and a unified vision, Iran risks becoming an uncontrollable state.
History teaches us the many failures of regime change,whether in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, or Syria. The American model, based on military force, alliances with local elites, or support for rebels,has repeatedly failed to deliver stability, democracy, or order. More often, it has empowered enemies, created power vacuums exploited by jihadists, and worsened the U.S.’s image in the region.

Therefore, eliminating Iran’s Supreme Leader without a clear strategy and the capacity to build something lasting could push the Islamic Republic toward a military dictatorship dominated by the IRGC, much like what happened with the president Morsi together with the Muslim brothers in Egypt.
This would bring further instability, create new havens for jihadists, and fuel more terrorist attacks against the West. In such a scenario, Israel would retreat behind fortified barriers in Jordan and Iraq, while the Gulf states would inherit chronic instability.

Netanyahu is steering Israel toward a form of Jewish fundamentalism that is increasingly isolationist, belligerent, and indifferent to the interests of its Arab neighbors,not to mention the Palestinians, now suffering under an occupation that is been turned into a genocide.

The bitterest irony is that by trying to dismantle the Iranian state without building anything in its place, Israel, backed by the tacit support of the United States, may end up making Iran even more dangerous and ungovernable.
Welcome, America First!

The Israeli offensive dubbed “Rising Lion”, launched against Iran during the night between June 12 and 13, risks plunging the entire Middle East into a new, large-scale war.
The surprise attack targeted strategic nuclear facilities, including those in Natanz and Tabriz, as well as residential areas in the capital, Tehran. The toll is tragic: 79 dead and over 350 wounded.

According to the Iranian news agency, among the victims were high-ranking military officials and prominent physics scholars, killed in targeted strikes. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared triumphant in his subsequent statements.

Iran’s response came swiftly. Overnight Iranian attacks against Israel killed at least eight people and around 200 people were injured.”Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei promised “severe punishment” and the impression now is that the Jewish state wants to bring the showdown of the Iranian Supreme Leader.

It is difficult to imagine that an operation of such magnitude could have been launched by Israel without prior consent,or at least knowledge,on the part of Washington. According to several sources, Donald Trump was allegedly informed in advance, as also suggested by the recent evacuation of non-essential U.S. military and diplomatic personnel from bases in Iraq. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether the United States actually authorized the attack, or if Israel acted independently a scenario that seems rather unlikely.

The escalation comes at a particularly delicate moment: in fact, this week will take place the sixth round of U.S.-Iran nuclear talks, in Oman, but following the attacks, Iranian authorities canceled their participation in the Muscat summit. Even the Sultanate of Oman, usually cautious in international declarations, firmly condemned the Israeli action, calling it “a dangerous and reckless escalation that violates the principles of international law.”

Harsh condemnations have also come from other regional players like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Turkey,all of whom denounced the attack as an irresponsible act of aggression and warned of the risk that the current Israeli government, led by an increasingly radicalized Netanyahu, could trigger a full-scale regional conflict.

Israel, often described as “the only democracy in the Middle East,” is increasingly confirming its role as an aggressor state,responsible for a long trail of death and destruction in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and now Iran. It is ever more widely perceived as the main enemy of peace and regional stability, while President Trump seems no longer able to restrain it.

The apocalyptic scenes of the assault on humanitarian aid being distributed in Gaza, in the Tal as-Sultan area, did not result in a tragedy—instead, they functioned exactly as planned. The starving people of Gaza were forced to wait for hours under the scorching sun, caged in narrow corridors between metal fences to receive a meager can of food.

With this “initiative,” the U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) had promised something revolutionary: aid free from Hamas corruption, from United Nations bureaucracy, and from the chaos of “uncivilized” Palestinian society. Instead, it orchestrated calculated cruelty, dehumanizing and humiliating desperate human beings, exhausted by hunger, disease, and psychological violence against defenseless civilians herded into lanes bordered by metal fences as if they were livestock.

The “aid distribution centers” in Gaza are the concentration camps of our time—designed, as history sadly reminds us, not to help people live, but to manage, control, and contain unwanted populations.

The cans being distributed barely contained enough calories to prevent immediate death: a calculated cruelty, designed to keep the population in a state of permanent emergency, forever dependent on the mercy of their so-called “benefactors.”

As proof of what I’ve stated, Jake Wood, Executive Director of the GHF, resigned a few days before the failure of the Tal as-Sultan operation, stating in his resignation letter that he “no longer believed the foundation could adhere to the principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence.”

How can an initiative meant to help an occupied and besieged population be considered neutral when it is coordinated with and directly dependent on the occupying armed forces that have caused the ongoing famine?

A report from the United Nations General Assembly warned that famine and disease are killing more people than bombs and bullets, and that over 40.000 aid trucks would be needed to meaningfully address the current crisis.

But the instrumentalization of humanitarian aid as a mechanism of control did not begin on October 7th. Palestinians have lived under this lie of “aid” for 76 years—since the Nakba turned them from a self-sufficient people into a people forced to beg for a piece of bread.

Before 1948, Palestine exported citrus fruits, olives and olive oil, almonds, eggs, wheat, barley, salt, dates, soap, ceramics, copper and glass. Palestinians were not wealthy, but they were self-sufficient.

The Nakba did not only displace 750.000 Palestinians; it also triggered a transformation from self-sufficiency to dependency. Since 1950, farmers began lining up for UNRWA rations,a planned strategy to undermine Palestinian independence and replace it with a permanent need for charity; charity that can be revoked or conditioned, but never justice, never freedom.

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is the tragic embodiment of this system of “colonial humanitarianism”, aid delivered by private contractors, coordinated with occupation forces, and distributed in militarized zones.

What Palestinians truly need is real humanitarian aid—aid that offers not only a few calories, but also a chance at a future. But the truth is, real humanitarian aid would dismantle the siege, return the land to the Palestinians, and bring war criminals to justice. What happened in Rafah was not a failure of aid—it was a system designed to dehumanize, control a people, prevent the creation of a Palestinian state, and ensure the expansion of new settlements in the West Bank.

In this regard, just a few days ago, the Israeli government announced the creation of 22 new settlements in the occupied West Bank, including the legalization of already-built outposts. This represents the largest annexation operation of occupied territories in decades, encompassing areas deep within the West Bank.

The main goal of the Israeli government is to “promote” the annexation of occupied territories and the expansion of settlements, rather than the pursuit of peace.

Just recently, the Finance Minister of the government Bezalel Smotrich expressed satisfaction with the new settlements, stating that “the next step is sovereignty,” adding that “we are not taking foreign land, but the inheritance of our ancestors.”

Most Israeli ministers would like to formally declare the annexation of the West Bank. “They believe this moment will never come again, that this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and they don’t want to miss it.”

Today more than ever, the international community must recognize that the liberation of the Palestinian people is the only path to lasting peace and the full acknowledgment of their dignity and right to freedom.

Across Europe, a growing wave of criticism is being directed at Israel’s conduct in the Gaza Strip. A significant signal came with the European Commission’s decision to begin reviewing the EU-Israel Association Agreement, a move supported even by countries traditionally reluctant to criticize Israel.

Even Germany, historically aligned with Tel Aviv, has shown an unprecedented shift in tone. Chancellor Friedrich Merz declared that he “no longer understands the actions of the Israeli army in Gaza or their objective,” adding that “inflicting such devastating harm on the civilian population, as has increasingly been the case, can no longer be justified as a fight against Hamas terrorism.”

Meanwhile, from Madrid, Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares, has called for an arms embargo on the Jewish State: “The last thing the Middle East needs right now is more weapons,” he said during the Madrid+ summit, which brought together representatives from Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Morocco, and Brazil to discuss a ceasefire and a two-state solution.

Since October 7, 2023, and with the ongoing war in Gaza, some European nations have already halted arms supplies or suspended export licenses to Israel. However, pressure must be applied to the three countries responsible for nearly all of Israel’s arms supply: the United States, Germany, and Italy.

The United States is by far Israel’s largest and most consistent arms supplier, accounting for approximately two-thirds of Israel’s military imports between 2020 and 2024. These include aircraft, armored vehicles, and precision-guided bombs, as well as a multi-year agreement to provide $3.8 billion in aid through 2028. Given the deep cultural and political ties between the two countries, it is highly unlikely that the U.S. will reduce its support. Recent efforts led by independent Senator Bernie Sanders to block billions in military aid to Israel were rejected by the U.S. Senate in April 2025. Germany is Israel’s second-largest supplier. The Berlin–Tel Aviv partnership is also unlikely to be disrupted.

Then there is Italy, which contributes just under 1% of Israel’s arms supply, despite being legally obligated not to. According to Article 1 of Law No. 185/1990, Italy is prohibited from exporting weapons or their components to countries involved in armed conflict or suffering from severe internal instability. Although the Italian government has expressed criticism of Tel Aviv’s actions, and the Defense Minister Crosetto remarked that “the legitimate and sacred war against Hamas has limits, and Netanyahu has exceeded them”, reports show that Rome continued supplying weapons to Israel after the conflict began.

In 2024, the country of “La Dolce Vita” exported €5.2 million worth of weapons and ammunition to Tel Aviv, down from €12.3 million in 2023 and €16.8 million in 2022, still significant figures. The issue is likely to ignite political debate in Italy in the coming days, as several legal scholars have launched an initiative urging the government not to renew the Memorandum of Understanding with Israel on military and defense cooperation, which is set to renew automatically on June 8, 2025.

This agreement, signed in 2003 and largely shrouded in military secrecy, makes it impossible to know the full details of military exchanges between Italy and the government of Tel Aviv. Its tacit renewal would signal continued Italian support for Israel’s war machinery, which has devastated Gaza, causing over 60.000 Palestinian deaths in the past two years alone,including 18.000 children.

Despite growing criticism from allied nations, the Netanyahu government has not toned down its rhetoric; on the contrary, it has escalated its diplomatic confrontation with Europe. Ahead of the upcoming UN conference on the two-state solution,organized by France and Saudi Arabia and scheduled for early June in New York,Israel’s Minister of Strategic Affairs and Mossad chief Ron Dermer wrote in Haaretz:
“If you recognize the Palestinian State, Israel will respond by annexing the West Bank.”

Similarly, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar warned the United Kingdom that “Unilateral actions against Israel will be met with unilateral actions by Israel.” Stances from Israel? I’d call them threats instead.

Meanwhile, rumors have been circulating for days that French President Emmanuel Macron may formally propose recognition of a Palestinian state during the New York summit. “The very existence of the Palestinian State can no longer be delayed, it must become a reality,” said French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot.

Recently, more than one friend has asked me why I pay so much attention to the Palestinian issue.
“As a international reporter focused on human rights, why do you concentrate so much on this?” someone asked me.
The answer, I believe, is simple.

Palestine is a clear symbol of all the values the West claims to defend: freedom, justice, universal human rights. And it is precisely in Palestine where these values are being most blatantly betrayed.

Certainly, Palestine does not matter more than other global crises,those in Ukraine, Myanmar, Kashmir, or the Democratic Republic of Congo, but it carries a unique significance because it is Western democracies themselves that help sustain the oppression, supplying weapons, political legitimacy, and diplomatic cover.

When we speak out for freedom of expression, for international law, for human dignity, for the right to water, food, and healthcare, we are also speaking of Palestine, and when we condemn attacks on hospitals, schools, and civilian infrastructure; when we oppose forced displacement, home demolitions, and the use of starvation as a weapon, we are still speaking of Palestine.

The response of the so-called democratic, civilized West,of the West that claims to defend human rights,has so far been marked by ambiguity, silence, and hypocrisy.

Time is up.
ENOUGH. Truly enough!!!
It is time to shout it, loud and clear.