Connect with us

MIDDLE EAST

‘Retaliation’ rift in Israel’s war cabinet

Published

on

It has been claimed that there is a split among members of the Israeli war cabinet over how and when to respond to the Iranian attack.

Information about the meeting of the Israeli war cabinet at the Defence Ministry building in Tel Aviv, where the response to Iran was discussed, has begun to leak to the press.

In talks that lasted more than three hours on Sunday afternoon, Israel’s five-member war cabinet failed to reach a decision on how to respond to Iran’s massive rocket and drone attack on Saturday night.

Israeli officials told Reuters that the war cabinet was in favour of retaliating against Iran, but was divided over the timing and scale of such a response.

The Israel Hayom newspaper quoted an Israeli official as saying that “there will be a response”, while NBC, citing an official source in the Prime Minister’s Office, reported that the response had not yet been decided and that the IDF had been asked to present its options.

Channel 12 reported that the meeting agreed on the need to respond to Iran, but disagreed on how and when to do so, without ignoring pressure from the United States and the international community.

It was learned that War Cabinet members Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot proposed an immediate response to the Iranian attack on 13 April, which was strongly opposed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defence Minister Yoav Gallant and IDF Chief Herzi Halevi, due to the difficulty of taking simultaneous action at a time when Iran is focused on intercepting incoming missiles and drones.

The war cabinet was divided into two factions, those who believed that retaliation should be “short, swift and an eye for an eye” and those who believed it should be “wait, plan well and respond strongly”.

The claim that ‘it was called off at the last moment’

The news on Israeli state television KAN claimed that after the phone call between Netanyahu and Biden, the Israeli government “gave up at the last minute on responding to Iran’s attacks”. It was reported that the war cabinet and the council of ministers had initially approved the immediate response to Iran by a simple majority, but this decision was changed after the meeting with the US president.

US President Joe Biden reportedly warned Netanyahu to “think carefully” before responding to Iran’s attacks.

‘The US will not participate in retaliation’

A senior US official briefed reporters on Biden’s call to Netanyahu.

According to AA, the official said Biden told Netanyahu that “the risk of escalation should be carefully considered and the issue should be approached strategically”. Israel has made it clear to the United States that it does not intend to escalate tensions with Iran, the official said, adding that when asked about the possibility of the United States supporting a possible Israeli retaliatory strike, the official said “they have no plans to do so”.

The White House also announced that the US administration would not support a possible Israeli counterstrike.

In a separate report, Channel 12, citing no sources, claimed that the US did not oppose an Israeli response, but told Israel that it should be informed and coordinated about such a response in advance.

‘Rafah attack postponed’ claim

On the other hand, it was claimed that Netanyahu had postponed the ground assault on Rafah, where displaced Palestinians in Gaza are sheltering.

A news report on Israeli state television KAN claimed that Netanyahu, who said last week that “the date is clear” for the ground assault on Rafah, had “postponed” it. The news report gave no information as to why or until when Netanyahu had postponed the ground assault on Rafah.

MIDDLE EAST

Katz’s statement on Hezbollah disarmament surprises even Halevi

Published

on

Israel’s new Defense Minister, Israel Katz, appointed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to replace the recently dismissed Yoav Gallant, has sparked surprise with a bold declaration regarding Israel’s stance on Hezbollah. Katz stated that one of Israel’s primary goals is to disarm Hezbollah, leaving Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi notably surprised.

As Israel advances into southern Lebanon, negotiations continue in Washington and Beirut over a possible resolution to the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. However, Katz emphasized that Israel would not halt its efforts until all military objectives are achieved.

“We will not cease fire, we will not ease pressure, and we will not support any agreement that does not fully achieve the goals of this war,” Katz declared during a visit to the Northern Command alongside Lieutenant General Herzi Halevi.

Katz outlined these objectives as: “disarming Hezbollah, pushing them beyond the Litani River, and ensuring the safe return of Israelis in northern areas to their homes.”

In the accompanying video, Halevi appeared visibly taken aback by Katz’s mention of disarming Hezbollah as an official objective, as this has not been publicly stated as a government directive.

Katz further stressed Israel’s right to “implement any agreement independently and to act decisively against any terrorist activity or organization.” He added, “We must continue to strike Hezbollah with full force.”

6 Israeli soldiers killed

Meanwhile, as Israel presses forward with its ground invasion of southern Lebanon, six more Israeli soldiers were killed in a clash with Hezbollah forces. This incident, one of the heaviest single-day casualties for Israel since the invasion’s onset, highlights the intensifying nature of the conflict.

According to a statement by the Israeli army, the soldiers, all from the 51st Battalion of the Golani Brigade, were killed in fire exchange with at least four Hezbollah fighters inside a building in a southern Lebanese village.

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

Sexual harassment investigation targeting ICC Chief amid controversial prosecution

Published

on

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has enlisted independent investigators to examine allegations of sexual harassment against Prosecutor Karim Khan.

The accusations against Khan surfaced as the ICC evaluated Khan’s request to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes in Gaza.

Finnish diplomat Päivi Kaukoranta, who leads the ICC’s oversight body, stated that an external investigation was initiated after reports surfaced that Khan had acted inappropriately toward a female colleague. Normally, such matters are managed by the court’s internal audit, but Khan personally requested that the Independent Supervisory Mechanism (ISM) oversee the case. Kaukoranta explained, “In light of the case’s unique circumstances, the ISM’s victim-centered approach, and the potential for conflicts of interest, the ISM agreed to the exceptional use of an external investigation.”

Khan denied the allegations, stating, “I have previously called for an investigation into this matter and welcome the opportunity to participate in this process.”

The investigation coincides with the ICC’s deliberation over Khan’s request to issue warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity related to Israel’s actions in Gaza.

While Khan’s move was supported internationally, it drew criticism from the Biden administration and U.S. Congress. The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed legislation that sanctions individuals affiliated with the ICC, including judges and their families, underscoring the U.S. policy of opposition to ICC jurisdiction over Israel.

Reports have also surfaced regarding Israel’s alleged threats toward ICC officials. In May, The Guardian revealed that Khan’s predecessor, Fatou Bensouda, was pressured in “a series of secret meetings” with Mossad chief Yossi Cohen, a close ally of Netanyahu. Cohen reportedly advised Bensouda to “drop the war crimes investigation,” allegedly warning her, “You don’t want to be involved in anything that could endanger your safety or your family’s safety.”

Khan has since noted he faced pressure before submitting his application for the arrest warrant.

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

Trump will conditionally support West Bank annexation

Published

on

Former Trump aides have cautioned Israeli ministers not to assume Trump’s unconditional support for West Bank annexation in a potential second term, according to The Times of Israel.

At least two officials from Donald Trump’s previous administration advised Israeli ministers to temper expectations about Trump’s support for Israel’s annexation of the West Bank. Sources close to the discussions indicated that while annexation is not off the table, Israeli leaders should avoid viewing it as a “foregone conclusion.”

The message was delivered in meetings and discussions held in the months leading up to Trump’s recent presidential victory. However, some far-right cabinet members remained undeterred. On Monday, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich declared that 2025 would mark “the year of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank]” following Trump’s re-election. Last week, National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir also asserted that “the time for sovereignty has come.”

On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu announced Yechiel Leiter as Israel’s next ambassador to the United States. Leiter, a former settler leader, is known for his support of West Bank annexation and opposition to a Palestinian state.

In a statement to The Times of Israel, an anonymous Israeli official said Trump’s former advisers have not ruled out his potential support for annexation. However, they indicated it could jeopardize Trump’s broader foreign policy priorities, including countering Iran, competing with China, and ending the war in Ukraine. Trump would likely need the support of key Gulf allies—notably Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE)—to achieve these goals. Unconditional support for Israeli annexation, however, could risk backlash from these regional allies.

In 2020, Trump’s peace plan proposed annexing all Israeli settlements while leaving open the possibility of a Palestinian state in other areas of the West Bank. Although Prime Minister Netanyahu had hesitations, settler leaders and officials like Smotrich celebrated Trump’s recent victory as a chance to realize annexation plans.

A former Trump adviser told an Israeli minister that Trump’s support for Israeli sovereignty would likely come with more conditions than in 2020. After the Palestinian Authority rejected Trump’s “Peace to Prosperity” proposal in 2020, the Trump administration and Israel began planning a partial annexation of the West Bank. However, this initiative was set aside when the UAE agreed to normalize relations with Israel.

The U.S. commitment to the UAE to delay Israeli annexation efforts expires at the end of 2024. Still, a former Trump official told The Times of Israel that a major shift in U.S. support for annexation should not be expected. “If any shift happens, it would need to be part of a process,” the official commented.

Jason Greenblatt, Trump’s former Middle East envoy, reinforced this message, stating:

“I think it’s important that those in Israel who are celebrating President Trump’s victory do so because of his strong support for Israel, as evidenced by many historic achievements during his first term. Some Israeli ministers are assuming that expanding Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is an automatic done deal and will happen as soon as President Trump takes office.

I suggest they take a deep breath. If I were advising these ministers, I would strongly urge them to focus on working closely with Prime Minister Netanyahu to strengthen U.S.-Israel relations and address the significant threats facing Israel. The time for discussions around Judea and Samaria will come, but context and timing are crucial.”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey