Connect with us

Middle East

Israel sees Türkiye as competitor rather than enemy, diplomat says

Published

on

Israel does not view Türkiye as an “enemy” but increasingly assesses it as a “competitor”.

A senior Israeli diplomat expressed this view to Ynet on Wednesday against the backdrop of mounting tensions over Syria, Turkish naval activities in the Mediterranean, and the economic, legal, and diplomatic measures Ankara has taken against Israel.

The official stated:

“Türkiye is not an enemy state, but it is certainly a competitor. Türkiye has taken steps against us in the economic, legal, and diplomatic spheres.”

The official noted that Azerbaijan, which maintains close relations with both Israel and Türkiye, had previously served at times as a conduit for conveying messages between the two countries, but that such contacts are steadily diminishing.

“I would say that this has been happening less recently,” the Israeli official said.

Responding to questions regarding reports of increased Turkish naval activity near areas where the Israeli navy operates in the Mediterranean and tensions between the two sides, the official downplayed the likelihood of a military confrontation.

“I do not think the Turks want to open fire, nor do we,” the official said.

The senior Israeli official also addressed his country’s increasingly strained relations with Europe. The official maintained that Tel Aviv has spent the past year and a half fighting against attempts to undermine the Association Agreement, which provides a framework for comprehensive economic and trade relations between Israel and the EU.

The official noted that efforts to move against the agreement, including at the recent meeting of EU ministers, failed due to Israel’s intensive diplomatic activity and the support of friendly European governments.

The official said:

“All attempts failed as a result of intensive efforts and a bloc of friendly countries with close personal ties to foreign ministers and heads of state who opposed the measures other countries sought to advance.”

The official pointed to the recent attempt to draft a joint EU statement criticising Israel’s E1 settlement construction plan in the West Bank.

The official stated that two countries blocked the statement, forcing EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas to issue a statement in her own name rather than on behalf of all member states.

According to media reports, these two countries were Czechia and Slovenia.

“There are double-digit numbers of countries in the European Union standing by Israel during a difficult period,” the Israeli said.

The official also rejected criticism that construction in the E1 corridor between Jerusalem and the Maale Adumim settlement in the West Bank is aimed at preventing a future Palestinian state.

The official described this claim as “ridiculous”, even though Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, a leading proponent of the project, has explicitly stated that preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state is one of the project’s goals.

The E1 project has faced international opposition for years on the grounds that construction activities there could disrupt territorial contiguity between Palestinian areas in the north and south of the West Bank and impede the prospect of establishing a viable Palestinian state.

“I say to European foreign ministers that the argument regarding a Palestinian state is ridiculous,” the official said, arguing that the Palestinian state recognised by certain European nations would geographically already be divided between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, adding:

“What is expected? Are we supposed to accept this imposition and say that we no longer have the right to settle the Land of Israel? Since 1967, every government without exception, including left-wing governments, has built settlements in Judea and Samaria.”

Judea and Samaria is the biblical term Israel uses for the West Bank.

The official described linking Jerusalem to Maale Adumim as an “Israeli consensus” and noted that the E1 project dates back to the government of former prime minister Yitzhak Rabin.

However, the proposal was first introduced before Rabin returned to office in 1990. Although the Rabin government initially supported construction work in the area, the plan was subsequently frozen as the Israeli-Palestinian peace process progressed.

Middle East

US warns Gulf allies of possible Iran strikes after midterms

Published

on

The US administration has notified several Gulf allies that it could launch a short but intensive military campaign against Iran immediately following the congressional midterm elections on 3 November. Washington urged regional states to prepare for this contingency.

According to a Wall Street Journal report citing sources with direct knowledge of the discussions, the warning did not specify which countries were briefed. Meanwhile, military activity on the ground has accelerated alongside these disclosures.

The US military has deployed a Patriot air defence battery from Texas to the Middle East, while beginning to pull its personnel back from exposed bases within range of Iranian ballistic missiles and drones to more secure positions. These moves reinforce indications that the US and Israel are preparing for a direct, wide-scale confrontation with Tehran.

The White House declined to comment on sensitive military plans whose existence has not been officially confirmed. An official statement emphasized, however, that President Donald Trump keeps all options on the table to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

The New York Times reported last week that US and Israeli armed forces have stepped up joint military drills based on a short but intensive operational scenario. Potential targets identified by the newspaper include Iran’s nuclear facilities, critical energy infrastructure, and production centres for missiles and armed unmanned aerial vehicles.

The same report noted that while seen as an unlikely outcome, Trump could approve the operation before the end of October, though he might also opt against authorizing any military action. In recent months, Trump has repeatedly suspended decisions to re-enter active hostilities at the last moment.

The current active conflict between the two nations was triggered on 28 February by a joint US-Israeli strike on Iranian targets. Trump explained the primary rationale for the operation as ensuring that Tehran can under no circumstances attain a nuclear weapon.

These military actions follow the 12-day war fought in June 2025. During that air campaign, Washington directly targeted and struck Iran’s primary nuclear installations at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi outlined the latest situation on the ground during an address to the UN Security Council. Grossi stated that the agency has found no evidence indicating that Tehran is repairing or rebuilding from scratch the nuclear infrastructure damaged in the 2025 and 2026 strikes.

Criticizing the continued exclusion of monitors, Grossi urged Iran to grant international inspectors immediate access to all its nuclear sites, including damaged locations. Since the US bombardment in June 2025, the IAEA has been unable to independently verify the current status of Tehran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium.

According to official agency records, Iran held 440.9 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60% purity prior to the June 2025 war. In nuclear physics, 60% enrichment is technically regarded as exceptionally close to the roughly 90% threshold required for weapons grade.

Following the bombings, Tehran barred international inspectors from entering the struck facilities. Because of this restriction, the regulatory body cannot ascertain how much of this critical stockpile remains intact or where it is currently stored.

Mounting military costs fuel domestic political pressure

President Trump maintains that the June 2025 air strikes demolished Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Nevertheless, the prolonged military operations have destabilized economic conditions, and soaring domestic fuel prices in particular are placing the governing Republican Party under severe political strain ahead of the midterms.

Trump has pushed back against criticism over rising energy costs, arguing that absorbing higher prices at the pump is necessary to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear arms.

Pentagon budget records reviewed by Reuters indicate that total US military spending on the Iran conflict has surpassed $47 billion. This figure stands 25% above official estimates released by defence officials in July.

The largest portion of total expenditures, $29 billion, was allocated to replenishing depleted munitions stocks, while $6 billion went toward replacing worn military hardware. It remains unclear whether repair bills for US bases damaged by retaliatory Iranian missile and kamikaze drone strikes are included in this official $47 billion sum.

Continue Reading

Middle East

US military operations against Iran reach $47 billion

Published

on

The total cost of US military operations against Iran has reached $47 billion.

According to a report by the American newspaper The Hill, citing an assessment by US Central Command (CENTCOM), the operation’s budget grew by more than $3 billion in the past month alone.

A detailed breakdown of the spending appears in a document prepared by the command. The largest share of the budget is accounted for by munitions shipments, totalling $29 billion.

Additional expenses arising directly from conducting the military operation stand at approximately $12 billion, whilst replacing lost military equipment and gear requires $6.1 billion.

Funding allocated to support military personnel deployed to the region, air transport, communications, and transport operations within the operational theatre is calculated at $7.6 billion.

Moreover, this overall total does not include the expenditure required to repair and rebuild US military bases in the Middle East.

According to information reported by The Hill, US President Donald Trump is weighing the possibility of launching fresh strikes against Iran following the country’s midterm elections.

Trump had previously described the military operation against Iran as one of the best decisions of his presidency.

Congress steps in as budget deficit deepens

The bill for the operation climbed swiftly in a short period. In a statement on 22 July, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced that the cost of the Iran campaign had reached $37.5 billion.

Hegseth noted that the figure covered both expenses already incurred and projected spending through the end of the fiscal year on 30 September.

A day before Hegseth’s statement, The Washington Post reported that the Pentagon was facing a severe cash crunch due to the war with Iran.

The newspaper reported that the White House had requested an emergency supplemental appropriation of $67 billion from Congress to cover military expenses, warning that the military would be forced to cut other spending items if the request were rejected.

Following these developments, the House of Representatives approved a $1.15 trillion defence budget.

The relevant resolution includes allocating $73 billion in additional funding to the Pentagon and intelligence agencies, primarily to cover the costs of the war being waged with Iran.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Over 3,000 Palestinians displaced as Israel’s Hebron siege hits day 5

Published

on

The Israeli army’s siege of the city of Hebron in the occupied West Bank has entered its fifth day. More than 3,000 Palestinians have been forced to flee their homes as raids, house demolitions, and forced evictions continue across the city.

According to data shared by Hebron Municipality on 26 October, the number of displaced people has reached 3,189. More than 200 of them are infants.

Municipal authorities announced that roughly half of the total displaced population consists of children and youths under the age of 18.

Palestinian officials in the besieged city declared a state of emergency and established an urgent crisis desk.

Rami Khamis, a member of the crisis desk, highlighted civic solidarity in remarks to Al Jazeera, saying local residents and benefactors who refused to let their fellow citizens stay in temporary shelters opened their homes to displaced families.

A Palestinian forced to abandon his home in haste recounted his ordeal to Al Jazeera on 26 October.

Explaining that they fled with only the clothes on their backs, the resident said their savings, household goods, and official documents were left behind. After placing his family in a relatively safe place, he attempted to return to salvage their belongings, but could not reach the house because the area was no longer safe.

The siege began immediately after an attack on 23 October in which two Israeli soldiers were killed. The two Palestinians who carried out the assault were killed at the scene by Israeli forces.

Citing this incident, the Israeli army blockaded the city and launched wide-ranging operations. The British newspaper The Guardian described the measures carried out in Hebron as “collective punishment”.

Hamas official Mahmoud Mardawi also condemned both the siege in Hebron and the military incursions spreading across the occupied West Bank in a statement on 26 October.

Emphasising that these steps constitute collective punishment, Mardawi warned that escalating tensions on the ground could lead to grave consequences.

Mardawi further argued that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government are using these attacks for propaganda and electoral calculations, stating that military pressure will not break Palestinian resilience and that calculations regarding annexation and mass expulsion will fail to achieve their goal.

Operation rift in Israeli leadership

As the blockade entered its fifth day, a divergence of opinion emerged between Israel’s military brass and the government.

According to a report in the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu clashed over the future of the operation.

Zamir argued that the military campaign on the ground had delivered whatever benefit it could provide and that it was now time to bring it to an end.

Military officials said tangible gains achieved throughout the operation remained limited, indicating that whether to sustain the current push required reassessment.

Indeed, the newspaper reported that Israeli forces managed to seize only a limited number of weapons in the city, failing to uncover any unusual arsenals or major arms caches.

However, Chief of Staff Zamir’s proposal to end the operation was rejected. Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Defence Minister dismissed the recommendation and decided to continue the offensive.

At least 70 Palestinians have been detained in Hebron since the siege and operations began. The Israeli army is also continuing extensive demolition activities targeting civilian homes across the city.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey