“Today, the United States faces a legitimacy crisis not only in the Middle East but also in Latin America and East Asia,” Ali Akbar Velayati, Khamenei’s adviser on international affairs, told Iran’s state media in an interview published on Tuesday.

Newsweek has contacted the U.S. State Department for comment.

Why It Matters
Iran has condemned increased U.S. military activities near Venezuela. U.S. President Donald Trump has escalated the U.S. military’s counter-narcotics posture in the southern Caribbean region, carrying out multiple strikes on vessels alleged to be trafficking drugs from Venezuelan waters. The strikes have fanned concerns in Caracas about regime-change intentions disguised as anti-drug operations.

Iran, a principal challenger to U.S. influence in the East—alongside powers such as China and Russia—has long positioned itself as part of an emerging multipolar order countering Washington’s dominance. Velayati echoed this view, describing what he called a global transition “from a unipolar to a multipolar and just order,” driven by growing coordination among Eastern powers seeking to counter U.S. unilateralism.

What To Know
In a detailed interview with the Islamic Republic News Agency, Velayati highlighted Russia and China as examples of countries countering U.S. unilateralism, citing Moscow’s resurgence under President Vladimir Putin and Beijing’s rapid economic growth and strategic independence.

“The strategic alliance of China and Russia within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS clearly signals the emergence of a new Eastern pole standing against the unilateral policies of the United States,” he said.

Expand article logo Continue reading

BRICS, a group of 10 major emerging economies, formed in 2009 to promote economic cooperation, political coordination and development among its members. The group’s founding members were Brazil, Russia, India and China. South Africa joined in 2010, while the remaining five members—Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates and Indonesia—joined in the past two years.

Velayati also positioned Iran as a central actor in the Middle East, part of a broader “resistance front” that, together with these emerging powers, is shaping a multipolar order to challenge Washington’s global dominance.

The U.S.’s calls for Hezbollah’s disarmament, aimed at reducing Tehran’s influence in Lebanon and curbing the group’s military capabilities, are countered by Iran’s continued political and military support for the organization. Trump, who brokered the Abraham Accords, seeks to push more Arab countries toward normalization agreements with Israel, the U.S.’s key ally. The American president views Iran as a major obstacle to those efforts.

Tensions between Iran and the U.S. remain high over the nuclear issue, with Washington conducting targeted strikes in June amid concerns about Tehran’s program.

What People Are Saying
Ali Akbar Velayati, the adviser for international affairs to Iran’s supreme leader, told the Islamic Republic News Agency in Persian on Tuesday: “The U.S. seeks to expand its influence from South America to the North Pole and simultaneously aims to control strategic areas such as the Panama Canal, Venezuela, Chile, and Bolivia.”

U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters at the White House on November 7: “Iran has been asking if the sanctions could be lifted. Iran has got very heavy U.S. sanctions and it makes it really hard for them to do what they’d like to be able to do. And I’m open to hearing that, and we’ll see what happens, but I would be open to it.”

Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, speaking in Tehran last week, said: “Only if the United States completely cuts its backing for the Zionist regime, removes its military bases from the region, and ceases interfering in its affairs, their request for cooperation with Iran, not in the near future but much later, could be examined.”

What Happens Next
Iran is likely to strengthen economic and political alliances with Russia, China and regional partners to counter what it perceives as U.S. unilateralism.

Sharaa cited Israel’s “occupation” of the Golan Heights as a reason Syria would not enter such talks.

“I believe that this situation in Syria is different from the situation of the countries that went on with the Abrahamic agreement,” Sharaa told Fox’s Gillian Turner. “Syria has borders with Israel, and Israel has occupied the Golan Heights since 1967. We are not going to enter into a negotiation directly right now.”

Sharaa’s answer came after Gillian noted that “Trump would like Syria to join the Abraham Accords.” She then asked whether Sharaa agreed with the accords’ “foundational principle,” which is that Israel had “the right to exist as a sovereign Jewish state.”

While Sharaa stated that Syria would not enter talks to join the accords at this time, he floated the possibility that “maybe the United States administration, with President Trump, will help us reach this kind of negotiation.”

Sharaa’s nom de guerre while active in terror organizations, including al-Qaeda and Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, was “al-Jolani,” honoring his parents, who were residents of the Golan Heights until 1967, when they fled due to the Six-Day War. Sharaa was born in Saudi Arabia.

Israel-Syria agreement to be achieved before year's end, Syrian official believes
His interview with Fox followed a historic meeting between the Syrian president and Trump at the White House. The event was the first such visit by a Syrian leader. Israel and Syria are expected to come to several security and military agreements by the end of 2025, a Syrian official told Agence France-Presse in September.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also confirmed that negotiations are underway on September 24.

The United States is preparing to establish a military presence at an airbase in Damascus to help enable a security pact that Washington is brokering between Syria and Israel, six sources familiar with the matter told Reuters last week.

The US plans for the presence in the Syrian capital, which have not previously been reported, would be a sign of Syria’s strategic realignment with the US following the fall last year of longtime leader Bashar al-Assad, an ally of Iran.

The base sits at the gateway to parts of southern Syria that are expected to make up a demilitarized zone as part of a non-aggression pact between Israel and Syria mediated by the Trump administration.

Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad Hassan al-Shaibani warned that, in his view, Israel is “pursuing expansionist projects, exploiting recent changes in Syria, and destabilizing the region,” during an interview with state-run Al Ekhbariyah TV in October.

“Israel wanted to impose a new reality and an expansionist project, exploiting the change that took place in Syria,” he said.

He also affirmed his view that Israel’s actions are reinforcing Syria’s instability.

His comments came amid the clashes in southern Syria between Bedouin and Druze populations, with Israel assisting the Druze with military strikes.

The US Department of the Treasury removed al-Sharaa, a former fighter linked to al-Qaeda, from the Specially Designated Global Terrorist list on Friday. The United Nations Security Council also removed al-Sharaa from a largely symbolic sanctions list on Thursday.

The official removal of al-Sharaa from the list is the latest move meant to remove potential barriers to Syria’s pursuit of economic and political integration after years of devastating civil war and former leader Bashar al-Assad’s removal from power in December 2024.

Washington and the UN also removed Anas Hasan Khattab, a former fighter linked to al-Qaeda but now serving as Syria’s interior minister, from the list.

“With the adoption of this text, the council is sending a strong political signal that recognises Syria is in a new era since Assad and his associates were toppled in December 2024,” Mike Waltz, the US ambassador to the UN, said in his statement after the UNSC vote on Thursday.

The US president is expected to host al-Sharaa, who, as a former fighter, once battled US troops in Iraq, at the White House on November 10, the first Syrian president to make the trip.

Trump met al-Sharaa for the first time in May during a summit in Saudi Arabia, where he announced an end to some US sanctions on Syria put in place during the Assad regime that some analysts said would have made it difficult for the country to rebuild its economy.

The US Congress has said it is working to repeal additional sanctions on Syria that remain in place, with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee welcoming the removal of UN sanctions and saying it was time to “bring the Syrian economy into the 21st century”.

Turkey’s relations with Israel collapsed during the Gaza war, and it has been a harsh critic of Jerusalem, but it also served as a key mediator of the tenuous three-week-old ceasefire. Now, it is pushing for Muslim nations to bring their influence to bear on the reconstruction and future governance of the embattled Strip.

“Our principle is that Palestinians should govern the Palestinians and ensure their own security. The international community should support this in the best possible way — diplomatically, institutionally, and economically,” Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said after the talks.

“Nobody wants to see a new system of tutelage emerge,” he told a news conference, using a term meaning foreign supremacy over a territory.

Brokered by US President Donald Trump, the October 10 ceasefire — which halted two years of war sparked by the Hamas-led October 7, 2023, attack — has been tested by Hamas attacks on Israeli soldiers and fresh Israeli strikes.

The talks also involved top diplomats from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Pakistan, and Indonesia.

All of them were called to a meeting with Trump in September on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly, just days before he unveiled his plan to end the Gaza war. Trump has credited their support with helping build momentum for his peace proposal.

“We’ve now reached an extremely critical stage: We do not want the genocide in Gaza to resume,” Fidan added, saying all seven nations supported plans for the Palestinians to take control of Gaza’s security and governance. Israel adamantly rejects the accusation that it has committed genocide in Gaza.

Fidan, who held talks at the weekend with a Hamas delegation led by its chief negotiator Khalil al-Hayya, said the terror group was “ready to hand Gaza to a committee of Palestinians.”

The future makeup of Gaza’s government has been a sticking point in the talks about the enclave. Israel has insisted that neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority play a part in running Gaza after the war, but Muslim countries have favored a postwar role for the PA, which currently governs daily life in Palestinian population centers in the West Bank.

Trump’s peace plan calls for a “technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee” to run Gaza under the supervision of an international body chaired by Trump called the “Board of Peace.” The plan says the PA can assume control of the territory after undergoing reforms, but does not lay out a timeline.

The territory is now split between a region controlled by the IDF in the east and one effectively run by Hamas in the west. The peace plan calls for Hamas to disarm, which Trump has repeatedly demanded, but which the terror group has not agreed to do.

Fidan expressed hope that long-running reconciliation efforts between Hamas and the PA “will bear fruit as soon as possible,” saying inter-Palestinian unity would “strengthen Palestine’s representation in the international community.” Multiple previous attempts at PA-Hamas unity have failed.

Earlier, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has praised Hamas, said the group was “determined to adhere to the (truce) agreement” and urged Muslim states to play “a leading role” in Gaza’s recovery.

“We believe the reconstruction plan prepared by the Arab League and the OIC [Organization of Islamic Cooperation] should be implemented immediately,” he said of the plan unveiled in March.

Regarding security in the Strip, Fidan said it was crucial that the planned International Stabilization Force, which will oversee the Gaza ceasefire under Trump’s plan, have a “mandate defined by a UN Security Council resolution and a framework for legitimacy.”

Washington is currently working with Arab and international partners to decide on the composition of the force, with Turkey hoping to play a role. Israel has long viewed Turkey’s diplomatic overtures with suspicion over Ankara’s close ties with Hamas, and adamantly opposes its joining the force.

A Turkish disaster relief team, sent to help efforts to recover the remains of those trapped under the rubble — including deceased Israeli hostages kidnapped in the October 7 attack and held by Hamas — has been stuck at the border because of Israel’s refusal to let them in, according to Ankara.

Azerbaijan is said to have expressed interest in participating in the ISF, and Indonesia has offered to do so.

“The countries we’ve spoken with say they will decide whether to send troops based on … the ISF’s mandate and authority,” Fidan said. “First, a general consensus needs to be reached on a draft, then it needs to be approved by the members of the Security Council.

“And it needs to be free from vetoes by any of the permanent [UNSC] members,” he added, referring to the US, a permanent Security Council member, which frequently vetoes resolutions in alignment with Israel.

The post Turkey, Muslim allies demand Palestinian self-rule in Gaza following Istanbul summit appeared first on The Times of Israel.

In the occupied West Bank, Israeli soldiers and settlers continue to attack the Palestinian people and their property with impunity. They have killed more than 1,000 Palestinians, including 213 children, since October 7, 2023. Just on October 16, Israeli soldiers shot dead a nine-year-old child while he was playing football with friends.

A ceasefire clearly will not stop the killing as long as Israel receives political, military and logistical support from the West to continue its occupation and colonisation of Palestine. Two years of street protests throughout the world have sought to pressure governments to reverse their position on Israel, but they have failed to achieve significant change.

Large-scale labour mobilisation may be the answer. Labour unions, particularly in Europe, are uniquely positioned to play a central role in undermining their governments’ support for Israel. Given the active trade between Israel and European countries and the logistical significance of European ports, workers in many sectors could make a difference by organising for Palestine.

Why labour action is a powerful tool
Over the past two years, millions of people have marched across Europe, yet governments have largely ignored calls to end all support for Israel. Even the Irish government, despite its vocal support for Palestinian rights, engages in large-scale trade with Israel. Ireland was Israel’s third largest importer in 2024.

Public marches often serve as a pressure valve, channelling dissent and lowering pressure on governments to change policy. Industrial action, however, is different. Workers drive the economy. When they refuse to carry out their duties, the consequences can be politically and economically costly.

Unlike protest marches, strikes and industrial actions can paralyse supply chains, raise production costs and force concessions. Unions have the organisational experience to escalate actions strategically – from localised slowdowns to national-scale strikes – turning economic disruptions into political pressure.

In liberal democracies, unions remain the most effective instrument through which people can force governments to act. And there is plenty of evidence of that in recent history.

For example, labour unions in Western countries played an active role in challenging the apartheid regime in South Africa. The Irish anti-apartheid strike at Dunnes Stores in July 1984 when workers refused to handle South African goods in protest against apartheid became a landmark in the history of workers’ struggles. Similarly, in November 1984, San Francisco dockworkers took a stand by refusing to unload cargo from South Africa.

These and other instances of solidarity action by workers expanded the momentum of the anti-apartheid movement in the West, which ultimately led to governments officially imposing sanctions on the apartheid regime.

Disrupting EU-Israel trade
The European Union is Israel’s largest trading partner, accounting for 32 percent of Israel’s total trade in goods in 2024. The EU supplies 34.2 percent of Israel’s imports and receives 28.8 percent of its exports. Much of Israel’s military supplies and logistics come from EU countries. Disrupting this supply chain could directly undermine Israel’s war machine.

Ports are critical chokepoints in this chain because they control the flow of goods. Selective industrial action at ports halting shipments to or from Israel would have a significant impact. Israeli goods represent just 0.8 percent of the EU’s total trade, so such actions would hit Israel hard while minimally affecting EU economies.

Moreover, disrupting EU ports would ripple beyond Europe. Much of Israel’s trade with the United States, its top trading partner with $55bn in trade in goods and services in 2024, passes through major European ports. Blocking transshipments or increasing cargo costs by forcing ships to avoid EU hubs could increase steeply the cost of Israeli logistics.

Trade unions can also take action by refusing to handle goods produced in Israeli settlements within occupied Palestinian territory. Or they can go further and refuse to deal with any products destined for or coming from Israel. This would make engaging in trade with Israel quite costly for small- and medium-sized European businesses and corporations.

In doing so, trade unions would be upholding international law and acting in accordance with established human rights principles.

Given the wide scope industrial protest action can have, solidarity movements should seek to ally with labour unions across Europe. Solidarity groups can focus on mobilising public support, promoting consumer boycotts and educating communities about Palestine’s history and Israel’s actions. These activities sustain legitimacy, widen the support base and keep the Palestinian struggle in public consciousness.

Meanwhile, unions can take direct action at production sites and ports, halting the flow of goods to Israel.

The alliance of solidarity movements and unions would shift the struggle from symbolic protest to material confrontation with the systems sustaining Israel’s war. In September, Italian activists and workers demonstrated just how effective such combined action can be when they launched a national strike for Gaza.

Converging interests in labour and human rights
Israel’s war and colonisation of Palestine rely on close relations with corporations, particularly in Europe and North America. Many of these corporations are also major employers in these places, exploiting workers, driving down wages and lobbying for labour deregulation while profiting from occupation and war. They lobby governments to support Israel and buy weapons and technologies tested on Palestinians to use for surveillance and repression on their own people.

This creates common ground for solidarity movements and labour unions to unite against shared oppressors. By disrupting Israel’s supply chain, unions can not only weaken its war effort but also hold corporations accountable for prioritising profits over human lives – whether Palestinian or European.

Such convergence of effort between the solidarity movement and labour unions is crucial, especially now that Israel has switched to low-level killing and starvation under the guise of a ceasefire to placate global outrage.

We have already seen this pattern of continued genocidal violence in previously reached agreements, which underscores why symbolic gestures and diplomatic promises are not enough to stop the genocide in Gaza. Only tangible coordinated action can break Israel’s war machine.

Labour unions in Europe have the power to do just that by disrupting Israel’s economic lifeline through strategic industrial action. By targeting supply chains that fuel the war, unions can pressure complicit corporations and force governments to abandon empty rhetoric. Symbolic protests and chants against the war won’t stop Israel from killing Palestinian children. Workers must unite, take a stand and end the colonial violence in Palestine.

Fidan noted that the countries considering troop deployment to Gaza, as part of a deal brokered by US President Donald Trump, are keen to first understand the parameters of the proposed force.

"The countries would like to see a UN Security Council resolution that establishes the force, defines the mission's terms and grants it legitimacy," Fidan told reporters during a news conference in Istanbul, after meeting with the foreign ministers of Indonesia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, as well as representatives from the UAE and Qatar.

Several US officials in recent weeks have said that Turkey is being considered as one of the countries that could deploy troops to Gaza, an idea that the Israeli government strongly opposes.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said over the weekend that Ankara is ready to do whatever is necessary to maintain the ceasefire in Gaza, including sending troops if required.

Whether these countries will send troops to Gaza will depend on the definition and scope of the mission," Fidan added. "What are the mission's powers?"

A senior Turkish official told Middle East Eye last month that Ankara wanted clarity on the rules of engagement and how the force would protect itself if it came under attack.

Fidan acknowledged that countries might find it difficult to participate if the mission's mandate contradicts their principles.

"We are ready to shoulder the burden for peace and to make any necessary sacrifice," Fidan said. "However, it is important for Turkey to examine the resulting documents and framework to ensure they are consistent with our principles. Our diplomatic efforts on this matter are ongoing."

It remains unclear how the Israeli leadership might be persuaded to accept such a deployment.

Benjamin Netanyahu's government has reportedly been exploring the possibility of Azerbaijani troops participating instead of Turkish forces.

Meanwhile, Steve Bannon, a former senior official in the first Trump administration who is believed to remain close to the president, said last month that the White House had appointed Erdogan as "head of security" in Gaza, adding that Netanyahu would need to speak directly with Trump to seek a change in that decision.

Tensions between Turkey and Israel have escalated since Israel's genocide in Gaza began in October 2023.

Relations deteriorated further last year after Turkey imposed a trade embargo on Israeli businesses and joined a case against the Israeli government at the International Court of Justice accusing it of genocide.

The poll found that 67 percent of respondents think the US is the main decision-maker when it comes to Israel’s policy and IDF actions in the Strip.

Just 24% said Israel is the one calling the shots, while 9% were unsure.

The survey also asked whether Israel has effectively become a “client state” of the US, a notion both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and senior American officials — including US Vice President JD Vance while visiting Israel — have rejected. On Sunday, Netanyahu insisted that Israel remains a “sovereign state,” describing its ties with Washington as a “partnership” rather than dependency.

Still, nearly seven in ten respondents (69%) agreed with the characterization, including 23% who said they “strongly agree,” while only 25% disagreed.

Beyond the US-Israel power dynamic, the poll conducted with the Midgam Institute also painted a picture of a public deeply divided on key political and social issues.

A slim majority of Israelis (51%) said they support revoking voting rights for citizens who do not perform military or national service, with 32% saying they “strongly support” the idea. Forty-two percent opposed it.

Opposition voters showed overwhelming backing for the proposal (68%), while coalition supporters were more evenly split, with nearly half (49%) opposing it.

On the contentious ultra-Orthodox draft issue, 40% said Likud MK Boaz Bismuth’s proposed conscription bill is intended mainly to bring Haredi parties back into the governing coalition, compared to 28% who believe the aim is genuinely to draft ultra-Orthodox men into the IDF.

Among coalition voters, 37% said they believe in the bill’s stated purpose; among opposition voters, 60% viewed it as a political maneuver.

The survey’s findings came amid escalating tensions over military draft exemptions for the ultra-Orthodox community. On Thursday, some 200,000 Haredi men jammed the entrance to Jerusalem for what organizers called a “million man” protest against conscription.

The rally followed a recent crackdown on ultra-Orthodox draft evasion, during which more than 870 apparently Haredi men have been arrested — a small fraction, roughly 7%, of the 6,975 officially classified as draft dodgers in recent months.

A majority of respondents to the Channel 12 poll (53%) said they would not vote for a party that supports legislation allowing Haredim to avoid military service, compared to just 24% who said they would.

The sentiment was especially pronounced among opposition voters, with 81% saying they would refuse to back any party promoting such an exemption.

Marking three decades since the assassination of then-prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, 67% of Israelis told pollsters they fear the country could see another political murder.

Concern levels were consistent across political lines, hovering around 70% among both right-wing and center-left voters.

Asked to reflect on Rabin’s legacy, 51% said they view his contribution to the state as positive, while 28% described it as negative. One-third (33%) said Israel would be in better shape today had he not been killed; 22% said the opposite.

Finally, the poll addressed reports about the possible appointment of Yair Netanyahu, the prime minister’s son, who has a history of inflammatory comments, to a senior post in the World Zionist Organization.

Three-quarters of respondents (75%) said such an appointment would be inappropriate, including 61% who called it “completely inappropriate.” Even among coalition voters, 58% opposed the idea.

The post Two-thirds of Israelis believe US now calls the shots on IDF operations in Gaza – poll appeared first on The Times of Israel.

Responding to news of the vote, US President Donald Trump said simply, Israel is “not going to do anything with the West Bank”.

Meanwhile, his vice president, JD Vance, who was in Israel to safeguard the ceasefire that the US brokered for Gaza earlier this month, went further, describing the vote as “weird” and adding, “I personally take some insult to it.”

The occupied West Bank, along with East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, has been under Israeli military occupation since 1967. Since then, Israeli settlements have continued to be built, despite being illegal under international law, and, in the case of settlement outposts, under Israeli law as well.

There are currently about 700,000 Israeli settlers living in 250 illegal settlements on Palestinian land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem combined. About half a million of these are in the West Bank.

While annexation of the West Bank has long been a goal for many members of Israel’s right wing, it is not yet the official position of the Israeli government – and this new bill has yet to be made law.

For Zionists, annexing the West Bank officially would be a key step towards restoring what they see as the biblical land of Greater Israel, which encompasses all the occupied Palestinian territories as well as parts of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt. For others, it is a means of seizing Palestinian land cheaply and preventing any future Palestinian statehood.

In July, the Knesset passed a symbolic motion in favour of “applying Israeli sovereignty to Judea, Samaria and the Jordan Valley” – the Israeli names for the occupied West Bank. While the motion carried no legal weight, a month later, Israel announced the creation of a new settlement, “E1“, linking occupied East Jerusalem to the expanding Maale Adumim settlement in the occupied West Bank.

What were the recent Israeli bills about?
The Knesset voted on two separate bills on Tuesday: one to legally annex the Maale Adumim settlement and another to apply Israeli sovereignty to all illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.

Introducing the second bill, its sponsor, far-right Member of Knesset (MK) Avi Maoz of the one-man Noam party, framed the move in biblical terms. “The Holy One, blessed be He, gave the people of Israel the Land of Israel,” Maoz told the Knesset. “Settlement in the Land of Israel is the redemption and national revival … after two thousand years of exile.”

How did the votes go?
Both bills passed their preliminary readings. The bill to annex Maale Adumim, sponsored by opposition leader Avigdor Lieberman, passed 32–9. The broader sovereignty bill passed narrowly, 25–24.

According to Israeli media, almost all lawmakers from Netanyahu’s Likud party boycotted the votes, with only one MK voting in support.

Who supported and opposed the bills?
In line with the US administration, some of whose most senior figures are currently in Israel to shore up the ceasefire agreement they brokered in early October, Netanyahu and Likud opposed both bills.

While Netanyahu has previously paid lip service to the notion of a “Greater Israel”, his party dismissed the votes as “another provocation by the opposition aimed at damaging our relations with the United States”.

US President Donald Trump has stated that he will prevent the annexation of the West Bank, cutting off US support for Israel if necessary to ensure it does not go ahead.

Anticipating suggestions that Netanyahu’s government has handed too much authority to the US, it said in a statement: “True sovereignty will be achieved not through a showy law for the record, but through proper work on the ground.”

Just one Likud MK, Yuli Edelstein, voted in favour – a move that has now cost him his seat on the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.

However, some of Netanyahu’s coalition partners backed the measures, notably Religious Zionist Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.

In a post on X, Smotrich wrote: “Mr Prime Minister, the Knesset has spoken. The people have spoken. The time has come to apply full sovereignty over all the territories of Judea and Samaria – the inheritance of our forefathers – and to promote peace agreements in exchange for peace with our neighbours, from a position of strength.”

Also supporting the bill to annex Maale Adumim were opposition figureheads Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid, two figures who are regularly portrayed as liberal or moderate in the European media.

Does the timing of this matter?
For Netanyahu, Likud and their American guests, it’s awkward.

On Thursday, Israel’s media reported the news that the army would be required to gain clearance from the US before launching any new strikes on Gaza. A day earlier, Time published an interview with Trump in which he stated that he had instructed the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he would not be allowed to annex the occupied West Bank.

Netanyahu has pushed back against suggestions that Israel has become a US “client state”.

Netanyahu has nevertheless gone to pains to accommodate his US visitors, including US Vice President JD Vance – who called the Knesset bills “a very stupid political stunt” – Secretary of State Marco Rubio, presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner and special envoy Steve Witkoff.

All have been dispatched to Israel to shore up the ceasefire that the president has invested much of his political capital in and that, according to reports in The New York Times, US officials suspect that Netanyahu is looking for an excuse to break.

As Vice President Vance clarified at a news conference, they were there to oversee the fragile cease-fire deal in Gaza and not to “monitor a toddler”.

What happens with the bills next?
The bills will now be referred to the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee for further consideration and must pass three additional readings before they can become law.

However, given the hard US line on halting further Israeli aggression, Netanyahu is very unlikely to allow either bill to advance further, a view echoed by much of the Israeli media.

So, are these votes at all significant?
As long as Netanyahu, his governing coalition and Washington oppose the bills, neither is expected to become law. However, in the broader context of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory since 1967, the votes mark another step in the gradual encroachment of Israeli control over Palestinian territory.

The decade following the 1967 war saw rapid settlement expansion, followed by the annexation of East Jerusalem in 1980. The 1993 Oslo Accords fragmented Palestinian land, while the 2005 Gaza disengagement – pitched as a liberal reform – tightened Israeli control elsewhere.

Subsequent years saw continued settlement growth and the 2018 Nation-State Law, which codified Israelis’ exclusive right to self-determination – all pointing towards the de facto annexation of occupied Palestinian territory.

The Gaza Tribunal will hold its final session from 23-26 October 2025 at Istanbul University.

Our initiative was inspired by an earlier civil society effort during the Vietnam War, when leading public intellectuals Bertrand Russell and Jean-Paul Sartre established the Russell Tribunal, which held hearings in 1966 and 1967.

Its mission was to report on the international crimes of the United States and to legitimise growing anti-war sentiment in the West.

The underlying premise was that when the state system fails to uphold international law or to ensure accountability for grave crimes that affect global peace and security, people possess a residual authority and responsibility to act.

In the half-century since, many similar tribunals have emerged around the world. Their shared purpose is to speak truth to power and legitimise solidarity initiatives that seek to mount pressure on governments and institutions to take action.

Such people's tribunals are also intended to encourage civil society activism, such as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement launched by Palestinian NGOs in 2005.

Unlike national or international courts, people's tribunals do not claim legal authority.

They are overtly partisan, driven by moral conscience rather than formal procedure. They provide a platform for survivor testimony and expert analysis, with the aim of mobilising global activism in pursuit of justice.

Their focus extends beyond legal culpability to encompass broader moral and political responsibility. The tribunal embodies these principles through its Jury of Conscience – individuals of diverse backgrounds and nationalities who share a commitment to moral integrity and to exposing the Palestinian ordeal in Gaza.

Seeking truth
In certain respects, the tribunal's work resembles that of United Nations truth-seeking mechanisms, such as the reports of the special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories. These have persuasively documented evidence of genocidal intent by Israel and its complicit allies.

Yet unlike the tribunal, UN rapporteurs operate as neutral experts, professionally bound to follow evidence wherever it leads.

In an unprecedented act of retaliation, the current UN special rapporteur, Francesca Albanese, was personally sanctioned by the US government, denied entry to the country despite her credentials and had her American assets frozen.

This punitive response to UN truth-telling underscores the need for independent civil society efforts to expose the reality of human suffering caused by Israel's unlawful and immoral policies.

From its inception, the tribunal has pledged complete independence from government interference, with no active politicians or officials involved in its work.

It is against this background that some may argue that recent developments, particularly US President Donald Trump's much-publicised diplomacy and the resulting fragile ceasefire in Gaza, render the tribunal redundant.

They may see the tribunal as an unhelpful distraction from the supposed work of peacebuilding, or from the UN's paralysis in the face of two years of genocide in an occupied territory where it bears a special institutional responsibility.

The reality, however, is that such developments make the tribunal more essential than ever. When governments and international institutions abandon justice, it falls to ordinary people to uphold it.

Illusions of peace
The attention devoted in recent days to the so-called Trump ultimatum to Hamas, whose acceptance led to the return of all Israeli hostages within 72 hours, reflected the coercive nature of the process.

Hamas was told to comply or face a US-backed Israeli resumption of the genocide that Trump, in his fiery language, forecast as the "opening of the gates of hell".

Hamas dutifully delivered all of the living hostages and as many of the remains of the dead as it managed to recover. In response, Israel released nearly 2,000 Palestinians imprisoned without charge since 7 October 2023 – effectively hostages themselves.

This prisoner exchange produced a ceasefire in Gaza, accompanied by celebrations in Israel limited to the return of the hostages, and in Gaza, expressing joy about the ceasefire, the release of detained Palestinians, and the partial withdrawal of Israeli forces.

At the same time, there were many flaws in the arrangements when viewed from a Palestinian perspective.

The proposed transition to a peaceful future, outlined in the 20-point plan and boasted about by Trump in grandiose terms, seems at best premature and, more likely, never to be realised.

Recent statements and behaviour by Israel's leaders and public appear as determined as ever to pursue a dehumanising and punitive approach towards the still unwelcome Palestinian presence in Gaza and the West Bank.

Israeli ceasefire violations in the first few days resulted in at least 10 Palestinian deaths and the blocking of half of the agreed humanitarian deliveries to a population that is starving, disease-ridden, lacking potable water, and deprived of health services and medicines.

The Palestinian population, stunned and devastated by two years of genocide that deliberately destroyed health and sanitation facilities as well as more than 90 percent of residential structures, continues to suffer under catastrophic conditions.

To live without bombs, even temporarily, is surely a blessing. Yet to exist in primitive tent communities without toilets or kitchens, amid rubble containing the missing bodies of friends, neighbours and relatives, should be regarded as a slowdown of the genocidal assault but hardly its end – or even its replacement by a post-genocide phase resembling the pre-7 October 2023 apartheid-style occupation.

A broken process
In this atmosphere, it remains imperative to expose Israel's harsh policies and practices that continue to impose emergency, dehumanising conditions and vulnerabilities upon the entrapped population of Gaza.

Israel is reported to have given material support to anti-Hamas clans and gangs to aggravate the grave conditions that persist.

While the ceasefire and the prospect of a peaceful future may be welcomed, it is notable that the positive results were achieved through reliance on an unlawful ultimatum threatening intensified violence.

Beyond this, the entire process was guided by and weighted in favour of Israel and the United States – the two states most closely identified with the perpetration of two years of unremitting genocide.

In effect, the political actors guilty of genocide were rewarded by being entrusted with controlling the peace process for their own benefit.

This is a perversion of justice. Imagine the outrage if surviving Nazi leaders had been authorised to preside over the post-World War Two peace process.

The 'legitimacy war'
The tribunal does not claim historic importance, but its relevance remains undiminished. It exists to validate the charge of genocide and to reaffirm the Palestinian struggle for self-determination and statehood.

Both dimensions of the present Gaza reality are airbrushed out of existence by the self-congratulatory bombast of Trump's diplomacy.

Those who perpetrated genocide have so far not only evaded any kind of formal accountability for their crimes but have also benefited, except to the extent that Israel is now experiencing eroded legitimacy as a sovereign state and is widely viewed as a pariah.

This dynamic of delegitimation has occurred despite the international community's complete failure to apply standards of accountability in the form of reparations or a reconciliation process that exchanges acknowledgement of past crimes for amnesty.

That others, rather than the perpetrators and their enablers, are expected to bear the costs of Gaza's reconstruction is an assault on the very notion of moral and legal responsibility.

What the tribunal seeks to achieve is the sharpening of a populist tool that constructs an accurate archive and narrative of past and present.

Its assessments contribute to the relevance of voices of conscience in civil society – a form of symbolic politics that influences questions of legitimacy.

In this respect, the side that won the "legitimacy war" for control of moral and legal discourse generally determined the political outcome of the anti-colonial struggles of the last half-century, despite being militarily inferior.

These are lessons the US should have learned in Vietnam, and Israel in its long encounter with the Palestinian people.

Although the future is highly uncertain, there is little doubt that, as of now, the Palestinians have won the legitimacy war – an outcome that will be certified by the proceedings of the Gaza Tribunal.

In their struggle against Zionist settler colonialism, Palestinians have achieved a notable symbolic victory since 7 October 2023, and Israel a corresponding defeat.

To record and document this outcome in Gaza is, by itself, enough to justify holding the Gaza Tribunal's final session in the days ahead.

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

“Numerous of our NOW GREAT ALLIES in the Middle East, and areas surrounding the Middle East, have explicitly and strongly, with great enthusiasm, informed me that they would welcome the opportunity, at my request, to go into GAZA with a heavy force and ‘straighten our Hamas’ if Hamas continues to act badly, in violation of their agreement with us,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Tuesday.

Trump did not specify which countries offered to go into Gaza, but he did single out Indonesia for its assistance in the region.

“I would like to thank the great and powerful country of Indonesia, and its wonderful leader, for all of the help they have shown and given to the Middle East, and to the USA,” Trump said.

Jakarta and other governments have offered to send peacekeeping troops to restore security and stability in Gaza, but no country has said that it would be willing to clash directly with Hamas.

“The love and spirit for the Middle East has not been seen like this in a thousand years! It is a beautiful thing to behold! I told these countries, and Israel, ‘NOT YET!’ There is still hope that Hamas will do what is right,” the US president said.

“If they do not, an end to Hamas will be FAST, FURIOUS, & BRUTAL!”

Israel has killed nearly 100 Palestinians since the ceasefire took effect on October 10.

Trump often issues similar threats to Hamas. But it is not clear what the US or any other force can do to strong-arm the Palestinian group that Israel has not.

Over the past two years, Israel has killed most of Hamas’s political and military leaders, while also killing more than 68,000 other Palestinians, levelling Gaza to the ground, and imposing famine on the territory in a campaign that leading rights groups and United Nations investigators say is a genocide.

Shaky ceasefire
Trump had been hailing the ceasefire, which his administration helped broker, as a historic turning point to bring peace to the region.

But from the outset of the truce, Israel has been killing Palestinians it claims were approaching areas under control of the Israeli military, which are not clearly marked.

Moreover, Israel has continued to restrict aid to Gaza despite commitments in the deal to allow a surge in humanitarian assistance to the territory.

According to the Gaza Government Media Office, Israel has only allowed the entry of 986 aid trucks into the enclave since the start of the ceasefire, a fraction of the expected 6,600 trucks, at a rate of 600 daily.

On Sunday, the agreement was pushed to the brink when Israel launched a wave of air strikes that killed dozens of Palestinians and fully suspended the entry of aid to Gaza after two Israeli soldiers were killed in Rafah.

Israel blamed Hamas for killing the troops, but the Palestinian group denied any involvement, underscoring that the incident took place in an area under Israeli control.

Some US media outlets reported that the Israeli soldiers were killed after they drove over an unexploded ordnance.

Besides the day-to-day issues threatening the truce, question marks continue to hang over the long-term future of Gaza, including how the territory will be governed.

Trump has stressed that Hamas must disarm, but the Palestinian group has linked giving up its weapons to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

On Sunday, Trump told Fox News that there is no hard timeline for Hamas disarmament.

Later that day, his vice president, JD Vance, who is currently visiting Israel, suggested that an international force needs to deploy to Gaza and establish “security infrastructure” before Hamas disarms.

Vance optimistic about ceasefire
Speaking to reporters in Israel later on Tuesday, Vance expressed optimism about the future of the ceasefire, saying that the bursts of violence were not unexpected.

“We are doing very well. We’re in a very good place. We’re going to have to keep working on it, but I think we have the team to do exactly that,” he said.

Vance reiterated that Hamas must disarm, but he acknowledged that the process will take time.

Asked about efforts to return the bodies of slain Israeli captives, an issue that Israel has cited to justify blocking aid to Gaza, the US vice president highlighted the difficulty in reaching the remains amid the widespread destruction.

“This is not going to happen overnight,” he said. “Some of the hostages are buried under thousands of pounds of rubble. Some of the hostages no one even knows where they are.”

While the bodies of around 15 Israelis remain in Gaza, thousands of Palestinians have gone missing throughout the war, many presumed dead and buried under the rubble.

Israel has returned the bodies of at least 135 Palestinian captives to Gaza, with many showing signs of torture and execution, according to health officials in the territory.

On Tuesday, Vance announced the opening of the Civilian Military Co-operation Centre (CMCC), a US-led base in Israel that will facilitate reconstruction and aid delivery to Gaza.

Brad Cooper, the commander of the Middle East-based Central Command of the US military, said there are 200 American troops serving at the centre.

“This facility will be the hub for the delivery of everything that goes into Gaza as we look to the future,” he told reporters.

The US military had said that American soldiers would not be on the ground inside Gaza.