Connect with us

Middle East

Behind the scenes of the Gaza bombings

Published

on

The Netanyahu government, criticized for losing its deterrence due to anti-government protests and the normalization process with Iran, aims with the bombing of Gaza to improve its “image” and revive its coalition on the verge of disintegration before the critical budget vote.

Tensions are escalating following Israel’s airstrikes targeting three leaders of the Islamic Jihad Movement. Rockets are being fired from Gaza in response to Israeli attacks. Truce talks have not yet yielded a positive result. why did the Israeli government launch these attacks, which have lasted for two days and bring the risk of all-out war?

On Tuesday, Israel killed three prominent leaders of the Al-Quds Brigades, the military wing of the Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip, along with their families. The Israeli military attacks on the Gaza Strip under blockade killed fifteen people, including children, and wounded 22 others. Islamic Jihad has threatened to target the Jewish settlement of Dotan in the occupied West Bank as retaliation for the assault. While the Israeli army continues attacking the Gaza Strip, Palestinian groups have been reacting to these attacks with rocket fire. The number of people killed in the Israeli attacks increased to 25, while 76 people were injured. In a statement made by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), it was stated that 333 of the 469 rockets launched from Gaza crossed into Israel and 107 of them fell short in the Gaza Strip. No information was shared about the remaining 29 rockets. It was reported that the air defense system intercepted 153 rockets, while some rockets hit settlements and caused material damage.

Targeted by Israeli attacks, the Islamic Jihad announced that if Israel continues to bomb houses in the region, retaliatory attacks will be organized in Tel Aviv and the interior of Israel. For its part, Hamas said that the rockets fired from the Gaza Strip into Israel were part of the resistance forces’ unified response to the Israeli attacks. In a written statement, Hamas spokesperson Abdullatif al-Qanoo said, “The joint attacks organized by the resistance forces are part of the process of responding to the massacre carried out by the occupation forces.” Emphasizing that Israel is responsible for the repercussions of its escalating attacks against the Palestinian people, Kanoo said that Israel will pay for its actions.

Why now?

The process that led Israel to these reckless attacks was triggered in early May. Following the death of Palestinian prisoner Khader Adnan on May 2 after 87 days of hunger strike in prison, more than 30 rockets targeting Israel were fired from the Gaza Strip. Israel retaliated by bombing Gaza. One Palestinian was killed and 5 Palestinians were injured in the attacks of Israeli warplanes. Immediately after the airstrikes, a truce was reached between Israel and armed groups in the Gaza Strip on May 3. Reached in one day, the ceasefire lit the criticism that “Israel has no deterrence” already existed in the country shaken by domestic political debates.

The argument that the nationwide protests over the Netanyahu-led government’s judicial reform emboldened Israel’s “enemies” was a critique that had been voiced since the anti-government protests began.

Moreover, Israel’s “sworn enemy” Iran’s normalization process with potential allies of Tel Aviv and the progress it has made in its nuclear program have set alarm bells ringing. Having been criticized for bringing the country to the brink of civil war as the “enemy” continued its advance, Netanyahu announced a ceasefire within 24 hours of the tension in early May, prompting criticism not only from the opposition but also from within the government and even from his own Likud party.

“In order to restore deterrence, we should have woken up this morning and heard how many terrorists were eliminated tonight in attacks,” Likud MP Danny Danon said on Twitter. Almog Cohen, a member of the far-right Israeli Jewish Power party, also posted on social media, “The excuses are over. Now is the time to strike hard at those who seek to harm us.” The Jewish Power Party, led by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, announced a boycott of the Israeli parliament sessions.

‘Israel’s deterrence capacity has eroded’

In an analysis published in early May, the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), which reflects the views of Israel’s military bureaucracy, stated that “These operations against Israel, coupled with a series of prior incidents, have combined to erode Israel’s deterrence capabilities vis-à-vis Hezbollah, which is working tirelessly to improve the rules of the game within the framework of the deterrence equation that has evolved in the aftermath of the Second Lebanon War.” The following as indicators of this erosion is listed:

  • Hezbollah’s claim that over the past two years, its activities have forced Israel to reduce its operations in Lebanese airspace
  • Hezbollah operatives expanding their presence at observation posts along the border with Israel
  • Clashes with Israeli forces along the border
  • The signing of the maritime border agreement between Israel and Lebanon in October 2022, which Nasrallah claimed was a victory for Hezbollah

The analysis noted that Hezbollah – like the other members of the axis – sees the internal Israeli dispute over the constitutional crisis and the widespread protests against the Israeli government, as an expression of Israel’s inherent weakness, and that “the false narrative that Nasrallah has spun, especially over the past 12 months and that has come to the fore in his speeches, is, it seems, the reason for the excessive daring that he has displayed during recent events.”

The analysis offered the following thoughts on what Israel should do: “In any case, recent events indicate that Israel’s deterrence vis-à-vis Hezbollah and its partners in the axis of resistance is eroding. Under these circumstances, Israel’s political leadership must launch a deep and thorough discussion with the security establishment in order to formulate a strategy for bolstering deterrence with Hezbollah, which is the vanguard of the broader axis, and which currently poses the greatest conventional threat to Israeli security. It appears that a military operation against Hezbollah is necessary to make it absolutely clear to the organization that it will be made to pay a heavy price for continued provocation and to prevent a situation in which terror attacks from Lebanon, including rocket fire by Hamas, become routine. Israel faces a complex challenge: how to bolster its deterrence against Hezbollah and Hamas, without escalating the situation and risking all-out war. Israel has the scope to operate, and it must select its preferred course of action and timing – and must ready itself for potential ramifications.”

A move to save the coalition

Criticism from the opposition about the erosion of deterrence is an important reason for these latest attacks, but more critical for Netanyahu is the intra-coalition dispute. In particular, the announcement by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir that he will boycott parliamentary sessions due to the ceasefire is extremely significant since Netanyahu has to get the 2023-2024 budget passed by the end of this month. If the budget is not ratified by May 29, the government will automatically fall and early elections will be called. Therefore, Ben-Gvir’s announcement to boycott the parliamentary sessions is not a trump card that Netanyahu can ignore. And Ben-Gvir is not the only coalition partner using the budget vote as leverage. United Torah Judaism is pushing the government to take steps to exempt Haredis from conscription until the end of this month. The widespread attacks on Gaza have ended Ben-Gvir’s boycott of the Knesset, while also causing other far-right coalition partners to soften their demands and rally around Netanyahu against the enemy. In sum, ahead of the crucial budget vote, Netanyahu has repaired the cracks in his coalition thanks to the Gaza attacks.

Zvi Bar’el, a columnist for the left-wing Haaretz newspaper, one of Israel’s long-established publications, makes this observation in an article: “The deaths in Gaza brought Israel’s coalition back to life.”

An editorial in the same newspaper made the same observation. “The Gaza assassinations were all about Israeli politics,” the editorial reads, “…the government was severely criticized by some of the public and many politicians for its ‘weak response,’ ‘disgraceful policy of containment’ and failure to crush the ‘terrorist infrastructure’ when it had a chance. A right-wing government that tends toward extremes was suddenly seen as wretched and spineless, weaker than the “leftist” government that preceded it. The one who was the fastest to understand how serious the damage was to the government’s image was one of its most senior figures, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir. He not only demanded that he be part of the security deliberations that he has not been invited to but also that the government act with more aggression to dispense with the awful policy of ‘restraint’ and strike the leaders of terror organizations.”

“Ben-Gvir was not content with using inflammatory rhetoric. He boycotted the cabinet and Knesset, threatening the coalition’s integrity and even risking the collapse of the government altogether, just as the Knesset vote on the budget is approaching. Ben-Gvir’s threats made it clear to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the last ‘round’ of fighting was in need of a correction. Accordingly, the Israel Defense Forces and the Shin Bet security service were asked to come up with some proposals, which resulted in a decision to assassinate three top Islamic Jihad officials.”

Hamas not a direct target

The fact that Israel has refrained from directly targeting Hamas reveals that it does not want an all-out war. Indeed, in his national address today, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu underscored the intensive attacks on Islamic Jihad targets in Gaza. However, he also said that the “military campaign is not over” and that they are continuing to attack Gaza vigorously. Netanyahu said that “new technological advances, operational skills and initiative have created a new balance” and that “they will choose when and where to attack the terrorists, and they have the priority to choose.”

Talks deadlocked

On the other hand, it was stated that the truce talks between Israel and Palestinian have stalled. According to AA, a Palestinian source close to the talks between Israeli and the Palestinian groups said that the Palestinian side asked Israel to stop its “assassination policy”, which Tel Aviv rejected. The source added that ceasefire talks continue through Egypt, Qatar and the United Nations (UN).

Middle East

France explores Syrian transit routes as alternative oil corridor to bypass Strait of Hormuz

Published

on

France is evaluating the creation of alternative energy routes through Syria to mitigate potential disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz following the resumption of hostilities between the United States and Iran. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot stated that Paris is working on new transit routes for the transport of Persian Gulf oil, with Syria emerging as a prominent option in this context.

“Among the initiatives we have pursued since the beginning of this crisis is the concept of preparing alternative routes, in order to avoid remaining dependent on blockages that could occur here or there,” Barrot said.

Barrot indicated that Syria, which has entered a process of reunification following the collapse of the Bashar al-Assad administration, could become a “new regional hub.” The French minister characterized the country as a strategic corridor that could transport Persian Gulf oil to the Mediterranean, thereby reducing the impact of potential shipping disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz.

Stating that France wishes to expand commercial and economic cooperation with the Damascus administration, Barrot expressed that they aim to establish a secure transit route for Gulf producing nations through this cooperation.

According to Barrot, implementing this plan requires a comprehensive assessment of existing infrastructure and the provision of necessary security guarantees. The French minister noted that these efforts are of critical importance for securing global energy markets.

Barrot’s remarks followed French President Emmanuel Macron’s visit to Damascus on Tuesday. During the visit, Macron met with Ahmed Shara, the former al-Qaeda leader who has declared himself President of Syria.

Patrick Pouyanné, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of TotalEnergies, was among the delegation accompanying Macron. Characterizing Syria as a country situated “at the crossroads of the Middle East,” Pouyanné said it could establish a vital energy link between Iraq and the Mediterranean.

In response to the potential closure of the Strait of Hormuz, Iraq has been shipping its oil via tankers through Syria for export since April.

More than 600,000 tons of fuel were exported through this route between April and June. Last month, Iraqi and Syrian officials discussed the reactivation of the Kirkuk-Baniyas oil pipeline and the establishment of energy transit mechanisms.

TotalEnergies has also signed a memorandum of understanding for an offshore exploration block in the Mediterranean. However, Pouyanné stated that beyond this, the company currently has no concrete projects under development.

Stating that security conditions in the country have not yet stabilized, Pouyanné said, “It is clear today that the security situation does not yet permit us to operate here. However, I believe coming here, to Damascus, is a positive initiative.”

Shortly after Pouyanné’s statements, two bombs reportedly exploded near the Four Seasons Hotel, where the French delegation was staying.

Stating that the Syrian administration must be given time to establish control over the country, Pouyanné said, “We must not demand too much,” adding, “We need to be a little patient.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

Senior US military officers ignored system alerts on obsolete targets, leading to strike on Iranian school

Published

on

Senior US military commanders approved strike lists despite automated system warnings indicating that intelligence on certain targets in Iran was years out of date and required revalidation, according to a CNN report citing three sources familiar with the decision-making process.

The warnings were bypassed to “speed things up” under intense pressure to rapidly designate targets during the opening days of the conflict. One of the targets approved by commanders under these conditions resulted in a strike on a school in Minab.

This military decision is directly linked to the February 28 strike on the Shajara Tayyiba School in Minab, which killed at least 168 children and 14 teachers. The heavy loss of life makes the strike one of the mass casualty events involving the highest number of civilian deaths in the recent history of the US military.

According to the sources, automated system warning messages indicating that the intelligence was obsolete were already integrated into the database used during the target development process. Within this system, a target could only be added to a strike list with the approval of a senior officer. Two sources stated that the decision by senior commanders to ignore these warnings directly contributed to the school being targeted “by mistake.”

Military officials reportedly realized within days of the strike on the school that the error stemmed from outdated information. Despite the passage of months, the Pentagon has not released its investigation report on the incident.

A White House official stated that the investigation remains ongoing, asserting, “As we have said before, the US does not target civilians.”

The Pentagon referred inquiries on the matter to US Central Command (CENTCOM), which declined to comment, citing the active investigation.

School and military facility were located within the same compound

The strike reportedly occurred while the US military was targeting an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) facility located near the Shajara Tayyiba School. Initial military investigative findings also pointed to this conclusion.

Satellite imagery reveals negligence in the target analysis process. Imagery from 2013 shows the school and the IRGC base located within the same compound, whereas imagery from 2016 clearly indicates that the school had been separated from the base by a fence and provided with a separate entrance.

In satellite imagery dated December 2025, dozens of children can be seen playing in the schoolyard.

The strike took place on the first day of operations following Donald Trump’s decision to launch military action, a period during which military officials and intelligence analysts worked under intense pressure to update thousands of targets.

Analysts were unable to update all records in the Pentagon database prior to the operation. As a result, records for multiple targets—including the IRGC facility adjacent to the elementary school—consisted of information that was more than 10 years old.

Due to the accelerated timeline, analysts prioritized updating “high-priority” records, which included moving targets with a high probability of being struck first and locations posing an immediate threat to US forces. Because fixed facilities were deemed a lower priority, the information for the facility near the school was not updated.

Disconnected databases and staffing shortages compounded the error

At the center of the investigation are two separate targeting databases used by the Pentagon. These are known as the Modernized Integrated Database (MIDB), which was built in the 1980s and relies on manual data entry, and the Mitigation and Analysis Reporting System (MARS), a new artificial intelligence-backed digital platform.

Both systems indicated that information needed to be updated before use. However, efforts to fully transition to the MARS system were reportedly years behind schedule, leaving official targeting data still dependent on the legacy MIDB system.

An intelligence analyst had previously noted changes on the ground in a separate digital tool, but because this tool was not connected to the official targeting database, the information did not reach commanders. How this disconnect influenced the targeting of the school is also being examined as part of the investigation.

Following the strike, Donald Trump suggested that Iran might be responsible for the incident, later asserting that responsibility might never be determined. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated that the strike would be thoroughly investigated, claiming that the US takes every possible measure to prevent civilian casualties.

However, due to cuts implemented early in Hegseth’s tenure, Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response (CHMR) teams within CENTCOM were reportedly facing severe staffing shortages.

Under the cuts made by Hegseth prior to the conflict with Iran, the 10-person civilian casualty specialist staff at CENTCOM was reduced to a single full-time employee.

Sources added that while the remaining staff did everything they could, they lacked adequate resources due to the budget and personnel cuts implemented by Hegseth.

Continue Reading

Middle East

US revokes Iran oil license and launches airstrikes following Strait of Hormuz tanker attacks

Published

on

The US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has revoked a general license that permitted commercial transactions involving Iranian oil.

According to a statement issued by the agency, the “General License X” regulation, which had been in effect since June 21, 2026, was fully rescinded as of July 7, 2026, and replaced by the newly introduced “General License X1” regulation.

The statement noted that a wind-down period lasting until July 17 has been granted to allow for the completion of transactions initiated prior to the revocation.

The Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs reacted strongly to the OFAC decision, declaring that Tehran will take all necessary measures to protect its national security and interests.

In a statement shared on the ministry’s official Telegram channel, Iran stated: “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iran decisively condemns the US Department of the Treasury’s decision to revoke the temporary suspension of sanctions on the sale of Iranian oil. This step is a flagrant violation of Article 10 of the memorandum of understanding concerning the cessation of military conflict.”

Following the decision, the US Armed Forces conducted a series of airstrikes targeting Iranian territory during the night of July 8. US officials maintained that the military operation was a response to Tehran’s actions in the region. Washington characterized Iran’s conduct as a violation of the ceasefire regime and a threat to the security of navigation in the region.

The Iranian state broadcaster, IRIB, reported that explosions occurred at various locations across the country. News sources noted that seven explosions were heard near the village of Taherui in the Sirik district, and six explosions were heard near the city of Qeshm.

Previously, US media outlets including The Wall Street Journal and Axios, citing US officials, had reported that despite the active ceasefire, forces of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had attacked oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz.

According to data shared by the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), a tanker off the coast of Oman was struck by an unidentified munition, causing a fire on board. It was reported that the incident resulted in no casualties, injuries, or environmental pollution.

The Wall Street Journal reported that one of the targeted vessels may have been the “Al Rekayyat,” a tanker owned by the Qatar-based shipping company Nakilat.

The vessel sustained damage to its engine room, though the crew was reported to be safe. Axios reported that while the attacked vessels sustained damage, no major destruction had occurred.

On June 18, 2026, the US and Iran had signed a memorandum of understanding that established a two-month ceasefire and envisioned the initiation of negotiations for a more comprehensive agreement.

Following the start of the ceasefire period, the US had also struck targets in Iran on June 27 and June 28, citing Iranian actions against commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.

Following those strikes, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had announced that operations would be launched against US facilities located in Arab countries.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey