Middle East
Palestinian groups reject Trump’s Gaza plan as international reactions diverge
While Arab and Islamic countries praise Trump’s Gaza plan, officials in Gaza argue that Washington is trying to establish a “trusteeship administration” that would legitimize the Israeli occupation and deny Palestinians their fundamental rights.
Palestinian resistance groups in Gaza condemned the “peace plan” announced by US President Donald Trump alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, describing it as “vague” and stating that the text serves to prolong the genocide in Gaza.
“We will not accept any proposal that does not include our people’s right to self-determination and protection from massacres,” said Hamas leader Mahmoud Mardawi, describing Trump’s announcement as an “attempt to stifle the momentum and recognition the Palestinian state has gained in the international arena.”
According to Al Jazeera, Qatari and Egyptian mediators delivered the joint US-Israeli text to Hamas’s negotiating team during the night.
Ziyad al-Nakhalah, Secretary-General of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, also used harsh words for the proposal: “This is a US-Israeli agreement that fully reflects Israel’s position. It is a formula for the continuation of the assault on the Palestinian people. Israel wants to impose through the US what it could not achieve through war. Therefore, we see this announcement as a recipe for setting the region on fire.”
Ismail al-Thawabteh, Director of the Gaza Government Media Office, rejected Trump’s 20-point plan, stating that it does not offer a permanent solution; on the contrary, he said it aims to establish a trusteeship regime that would legitimize the Israeli occupation and disregard the rights of Palestinians.
“The only way to stop the genocide is for Israel to cease its attacks, lift the siege, end the systematic destruction, and guarantee the right of Palestinians to live freely and establish an independent state. Any proposal that envisions Gaza as a demilitarized security zone, devoid of sovereignty and under international administration, is unequivocally rejected by the Palestinian national conscience,” he stated.
Voices from the ground: “Unrealistic, risk of manipulation”
Ibrahim Judeh, located in the so-called humanitarian zone of al-Mawasi in southern Gaza, told AFP, “It’s clear the plan is unrealistic. The US and Israel have written a text with conditions they know Hamas will never accept. This means the continuation of war and suffering.”
Abu Mazen Nassar expressed similar concerns, saying the US-Israeli proposal could be a “trick” to force Palestinian resistance groups to release hostages without offering a guarantee of peace in return: “This is outright manipulation. What does it mean to hand over all detainees when there are no official guarantees for ending the war?”
“As a people, we will reject this mockery. Whatever Hamas decides now, it is already too late.”
Support from Arab and Muslim leaders
In contrast, the foreign ministries of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Qatar, and Egypt issued a joint statement praising Trump’s “sincere efforts” to end the genocide in Gaza.
The text stated, “The ministers affirm their readiness to work positively and constructively with the United States and the parties to ensure the finalization and implementation of the agreement, emphasizing that this should be done in a way that ensures peace, security, and stability for the peoples of the region.”
EU: The best opportunity
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen indicated a positive view of the plan presented by US President Donald Trump for a ceasefire in Gaza and stated that the EU is ready to contribute: “The conflict must end with the urgent delivery of humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza and the immediate release of all hostages. The two-state solution remains the only viable path to a Middle East where the Israeli and Palestinian peoples live side-by-side in peace and security, free from violence and terror.”
EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas argued that the plan offers the “best opportunity” to end the war.
Ramallah is cautiously pleased
The Palestinian Authority made a positive reference to the plan, reiterating its commitment to working with the US and its partners to reach a “comprehensive agreement that will pave the way for a just peace based on the two-state solution.”
A written statement from the Palestinian Presidency emphasized that Palestine believes the US President will find a path to peace. It expressed the will to work and engage constructively with the US, regional countries, and other partners to end the conflict in Gaza.
It was noted that any agreement concerning Gaza must include provisions for “preventing the annexation of land and the displacement of Palestinians, halting unilateral steps that violate international law, the complete withdrawal of Israel from Gaza, and the unification of territories and institutions in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, with the Gaza Strip under one roof.”
Furthermore, the statement stressed the need to end the occupation and pave the way for a just peace based on the two-state solution, which envisions an independent Palestinian State living side-by-side with Israel in peace, security, and good neighborly relations.
Middle East
Qatar and Saudi Arabia acquire hundreds of millions of dollars in Israeli defense technology, report says
Qatar and Saudi Arabia, two Gulf countries that do not maintain formal diplomatic relations with Israel, have purchased hundreds of millions of dollars in advanced Israeli-made defense technology for their military air forces, according to a report by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, citing documents and photographs. The investigation revealed that aircraft belonging to the Qatari royal family are protected by Israeli-manufactured missile defense systems.
According to the report, Israel has sold highly sophisticated military hardware to both Qatar and Saudi Arabia, including advanced missile defense mechanisms designed to protect the Qatari royal family, alongside critical components for modern fighter jets. Israel’s leading defense contractors, Elbit Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), have reportedly supplied missile defense systems and specialized military helmets for advanced F-15 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia and Qatar in transactions valued at hundreds of millions of shekels.
The defense trade has been conducted in strict secrecy, despite the fact that both Gulf monarchies declined to join the Abraham Accords—which normalized diplomatic relations between Tel Aviv and several Arab nations—and continue to maintain no formal diplomatic representation with Israel.
Israeli technology on the Qatari Emir’s aircraft
According to specific details disclosed by Haaretz, when the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, paid an official visit to Iran last year, his private jet was protected by an air defense system developed by Israel-based Elbit Systems. Photographs captured during the Emir’s landing in Algeria in March 2024 also showed the Elbit-manufactured defense system mounted beneath the aircraft’s fuselage.
The Qatari royal fleet comprises a total of 11 aircraft, including two Boeing 747s and one Airbus A340-500. The report states that all of these aircraft have been equipped with Elbit’s commercial C-MUSIC system, known in Israel as “Magen Rakia” (Sky Shield).
The C-MUSIC system is designed to immediately detect the launch of heat-seeking surface-to-air missiles targeting the aircraft. Upon detection, it emits a specialized infrared beam that disrupts the missile’s tracking capabilities and prevents it from locking on. The system is particularly effective at protecting aircraft against shoulder-fired missiles, also known as man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS).
The precise financial value of the air defense contract with Qatar has not been officially disclosed. However, based on comparable past contracts signed with European nations and NATO, the total cost of the shipment is estimated to exceed $200 million.
Israeli-made parts in F-15 fighter jets
The report further noted that Elbit and other Israeli defense firms have not only provided protection for the royal family’s fleet but have also manufactured critical components for the F-15 fighter jets purchased by Qatar from the US.
Contracts signed between the US Department of Defense (Pentagon) and aerospace manufacturer Boeing indicate that Israeli companies were awarded subcontracts valued between $150 million and $250 million to supply advanced parts and subsystems for the Qatari F-15 fleet. The entities receiving these subcontracting bids include Elbit’s US subsidiary, Elbit America, Cyclone, and Collins Elbit Vision Systems, which is a joint venture with global defense giant RTX.
Foremost among the equipment supplied by Israeli arms manufacturers to the Doha administration is the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS), an advanced helmet that projects vital flight and targeting data directly onto the pilot’s visor. Elbit has also reportedly supplied AN/AVS-9 night vision goggles for Qatari F-15 pilots.
Other Israel-based companies supplying equipment under Qatar’s F-15 modernization program include Israel Aerospace Industries, TAT Technologies, and Beth-El Industries.
Similar systems delivered to Saudi Arabia
US State Department documents and military archive photographs indicate that a similar shipment of equipment was delivered to Saudi Arabia.
According to the documents, the Riyadh administration received 462 advanced JHMCS combat helmets and an equal number of AN/AVS-9 night vision goggles manufactured by Israeli companies for integration into the F-15 fighter jets operated by the Royal Saudi Air Force.
Middle East
UNDP estimates $1.38 billion in building damage across southern Lebanon
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Lebanon’s National Council for Scientific Research have released a rapid assessment report on building damage in southern Lebanon.
According to Lebanon’s Al-Akhbar newspaper, the study relied on satellite imagery and geospatial artificial intelligence (GeoAI) technologies to assess externally visible damage to buildings along the southern border between October 23, 2025, and April 29, 2026.
The report found that a total of 11,095 buildings had been completely destroyed in the areas surveyed. Based on an assumed average apartment size of 150 square metres, these destroyed structures are estimated to correspond theoretically to 17,891 housing units.
The volume of debris generated in the region is estimated at 3,107,756 cubic metres.
In addition to the buildings that were completely destroyed, the assessment identified partial damage to 2,242 buildings and minor damage to 9,311 others.
At the housing-unit level, the report estimates that alongside the approximately 17,891 units that were completely destroyed, around 5,219 homes sustained partial damage and 18,282 suffered minor damage.
The report stressed that these housing figures are not based on direct field surveys but on mathematical modelling using average floor-space assumptions and therefore constitute theoretical estimates.
Preliminary cost of building damage estimated at $1.38 billion
The report calculated reconstruction costs using a standard benchmark value of $450 per square metre. On that basis, the total preliminary cost of building damage was estimated at $1.384 billion.
Geographically, Nabatieh Governorate accounted for the largest share of the damage, estimated at $1.053 billion, while losses in South Governorate were assessed at $331 million.
At the district level, preliminary costs were estimated at $688 million in Bint Jbeil, $333 million in Marjayoun, $315 million in Tyre, $32 million in Nabatieh district and $16 million in Sidon.
The report emphasised that these figures cover only external physical damage to buildings and do not represent the final cost of reconstruction or the total economic losses caused by the war.
In Bint Jbeil district, the highest levels of destruction were recorded in Aitaroun, where 1,658 buildings were destroyed, followed by Bint Jbeil city with 1,076, Ayta al-Shaab with 539, Beit Lif with 371, Yaroun with 242 and Ainata with 227.
In Marjayoun district, 969 destroyed buildings were recorded in Mais al-Jabal, 824 in Taybeh, 285 in Houla, 199 in Markaba, 184 in Blida and 174 in Deir Siryan.
In Nabatieh district, 71 buildings were destroyed in Yahmar al-Shaqif, 69 in Zoutar al-Sharqiya and 37 in Kfar Sir. In Tyre district, 370 buildings were completely destroyed in Burj al-Shamali, 216 in Naqoura, 162 in Abbassiyeh, 80 in Tyre city and 65 in al-Mansouri. In Sidon district, destruction was concentrated mainly in Zirariyeh, where 65 buildings were destroyed, and Arzi, where 62 buildings were levelled.
The report also outlined significant limitations that prevent the findings from being treated as a definitive final assessment.
The study did not cover entire administrative districts but was limited to areas where clear satellite imagery was available.
As a result, the area south of the Litani River constituted the main focus, while only limited data from areas north of the river were included. Some municipalities were fully surveyed, while only selected sections of others could be examined.
For example, all cadastral zones in Bint Jbeil district were surveyed. In Tyre district, 74 of 75 cadastral areas were fully covered, while one was only partially included.
In Marjayoun, 17 of 33 areas were fully surveyed and 21 partially covered. In Nabatieh, only four of 52 areas were fully analysed, while 15 were partially examined. In Sidon, none of the 77 areas underwent a complete survey, with only five areas partially included in the assessment.
The report listed several additional limitations:
Critical infrastructure damage, including roads, bridges, electricity networks, water systems and telecommunications facilities, was not assessed.
Damage to underground shelters, basements and non-visible interior sections of buildings could not be detected.
No clear distinction could be made between residential, commercial and industrial structures.
Buildings with minor damage were excluded from debris-volume and cost calculations.
Structural density, shadows and narrow streets introduced potential margins of error in satellite analysis.
No field visits or on-site inspections were conducted to verify the findings. The assessment was carried out entirely through desk-based analysis of satellite imagery.
Given the scale of destruction and confidence in the methodology employed, no on-site verification procedures were undertaken in cooperation with the Lebanese Armed Forces or the United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS).
UNDP said the findings should be regarded as preliminary planning data and that the scope of the assessment would be expanded as additional satellite imagery and field information become available.
Officials noted that once excluded categories and infrastructure losses are taken into account, the true cost of the destruction in southern Lebanon is likely to be significantly higher than the estimates contained in the report.
Middle East
Iran makes Lebanon ceasefire prerequisite for final agreement with US
Assessments that efforts to restrain Israel in Lebanon are being shaped less in Beirut or Tel Aviv than in closed-door talks between Iranian and American negotiators resurfaced ahead of negotiations in the Swiss town of Bürgenstock.
Unlike the current approach adopted by the Lebanese government, Iran continues to pursue a strategy of leveraging its influence on the ground to secure diplomatic gains.
The Lebanese government, meanwhile, remains committed to a separate negotiating track that critics say facilitates concessions to Israel at the negotiating table in Washington that could not be achieved on the battlefield.
US Vice President JD Vance, who arrived in Switzerland to participate in the latest round of talks, confirmed that efforts to make the ceasefire in Lebanon permanent would be among the negotiations’ top priorities.
According to CNN, citing a diplomatic source familiar with the matter, the US and Iranian delegations agreed to convene an emergency session on the situation in Lebanon as the first item of discussion, placing the issue at the top of the agenda.
US says it faces difficulties over Israeli withdrawal
According to diplomatic sources cited by Al-Akhbar newspaper, US officials informed the Iranian side that Washington had made intensive efforts to persuade the Israeli government to complete a full withdrawal from Lebanon but had encountered significant difficulties in the process.
US officials requested Iranian support in facilitating Hezbollah’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon as part of efforts to enable an Israeli pullout.
The Iranian delegation responded that Hezbollah was an internal Lebanese matter. While indicating that Tehran did not oppose an agreement by the Lebanese authorities on a timetable providing for a rapid Israeli withdrawal, the delegation outlined what it viewed as its own area of responsibility.
Iranian representatives said both Tehran and Washington had committed to implementing measures aimed at ending the war across the region, including in Lebanon, and argued that the United States should exert pressure on Israel not only to uphold a ceasefire but also to withdraw quickly.
Iran reiterates Lebanon condition for final agreement
An Iranian official also told CNN that ending the conflict in Lebanon was the most important item on the Iranian delegation’s agenda.
During the talks, Vice President Vance said Washington would continue working toward peace between Lebanon and Israel and expressed hope that the temporary ceasefire could be transformed into a permanent agreement capable of delivering long-term stability.
Speaking before the session, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said Tehran would not begin negotiations on a final agreement with Washington unless the war in Lebanon was halted, as stipulated in the US-Iran memorandum of understanding.
In a post on X, Baghaei wrote: “It is not possible to move to the negotiation stage for a final agreement unless these provisions are implemented, foremost among them the first clause, which calls for ending the war on all fronts, including Lebanon.”
Military and diplomatic developments ahead of the Bürgenstock talks threatened to undermine the understanding reached between the parties. Following Israeli attacks in Lebanon and what Iran described as an escalation of military tensions in violation of the US-Iran agreement, Tehran announced that it had closed the Strait of Hormuz to traffic.
In a statement, Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters said the closure of the strait was only the first step in a series of measures planned by Tehran. Iran’s Foreign Ministry subsequently announced the suspension of the Geneva negotiations with the United States.
Following those developments, reports indicated that Washington intervened and increased pressure on Israel, leading Israeli military commanders to issue definitive orders for a complete halt to military operations in southern Lebanon for the second time within 24 hours.
Israeli media reports said the decision was not taken solely on Tel Aviv’s own initiative and that military operations were curtailed as a result of intense US pressure following Iran’s move in the Strait of Hormuz.
-
Opinion2 weeks agoA voice rising from New Delhi: BRICS’s manifesto for a new world order
-
America2 weeks agoData leak exposes Peter Thiel’s secret ‘Dialog’ network of politicians, regulators, and tech elites
-
Middle East2 weeks agoMine clearing in Strait of Hormuz could delay shipping traffic for up to 50 days
-
Russia2 weeks agoPatrushev urges assertive Russian naval presence to counter NATO encirclement strategy
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoIran discloses 14-point draft US peace accord detailing sanctions relief, regional security measures
-
Asia2 weeks agoBank of Japan raises interest rate to 1% for first time since 1995
-
Europe2 weeks agoFormer Merkel advisor Erich Vad likens Ukraine conflict to Verdun, warns of European war risk
-
Russia2 weeks agoRussian regional budget deficits nearly double to 294 billion rubles in Q1
