Connect with us

Middle East

US move brings Netanyahu to his knees, not Israel

Published

on

The US abstention for the first time on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza has further strained Biden-Netanyahu relations, which have been tense for some time. Netanyahu cancelled the programme of the Israeli delegation that was due to travel to the US to discuss the Rafah operation plan. The US, which does not want to stop Israel’s attack on Gaza but wants to save its own damaged image and bring Netanyahu to his knees, claimed that the UNSC resolution was not binding, which drew the reaction of the UN.

The US abstained from yesterday’s call for a ceasefire after rejecting 6 of the UNSC resolutions calling for a ceasefire since Israel’s attacks on Gaza began, making it the first time since 7 October that the UNSC has called for an emergency ceasefire in Gaza.

In the draft resolution prepared by non-permanent UNSC members Algeria, Ecuador, Guyana, Japan, Malta, Mozambique, South Korea, Sierra Leone, Slovenia and Switzerland, the phrase “permanent ceasefire” was agreed. At the last moment, the US delegation requested an amendment to the text of the draft resolution, replacing the word “permanent” with “durable”. This is believed to have given the US more flexibility in the ceasefire process.

The resolution, which calls for “an immediate ceasefire during Ramadan that is respected by all parties, leading to a permanent and sustainable ceasefire, and the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages,” also calls for access for humanitarian and medical assistance to the hostages.

Reaction from Israel

Following the decision, Israeli Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz said: “Israel will not stop firing. We will destroy Hamas”. Netanayhu announced that he had cancelled the delegation’s visit to Washington for the Rafah operation in light of the US abstention. The Israeli opposition blamed Netanyahu for the US abstention.

Why did the US take this step now?

US President Joe Biden, the leader of the Democrats, is facing criticism from his own base as well as on the international stage over the ongoing Israeli attacks in Gaza, which do not spare civilians. Biden is the target of criticism both for his support of Israel and for his inability to rein in Netanyahu. Biden is trying to take careful steps to mitigate the criticism, but not to confront the Israel lobby, which is known to be quite strong. For some time, Biden has been urging Netanyahu to present a credible and coherent vision for post-war Gaza and to prepare a realistic plan for a ground operation in Rafah that would not harm civilians. But the Netanyahu government, which rejected the US plans for the next day, has failed to explain its own vision, nor has it been able to present a convincing plan for Rafah. To sum up, the US does not want Israel to stop the Gaza operation altogether, but to limit it to the extent that civilian casualties are reduced, or at least to present a vision along these lines.

Netanyahu, who rejects all US demands, hopes to stall Washington until the presidential elections in November. The Biden administration has taken several steps to “teach” the Israeli prime minister a lesson for his intransigence. First, he hosted Benny Gantz, a member of the war cabinet and possible next Israeli prime minister, in Washington, despite Netanyahu’s opposition. Then Biden’s close friend, Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer, said that Israel should go to elections, which was applauded by Biden. Since these moves by the Biden administration were aimed at Netanyahu, they did not elicit a reaction from the Israel lobby.

The reason for the “non-binding” statement

The abstention on the UNSC resolution, however, may not be greeted with the same optimism. Even if it puts Netanyahu in a difficult situation, it has consequences for Israel.

Indeed, in the wake of this resolution, which provoked Israel’s reaction, the Washington administration surprisingly claimed that the UNSC resolution was not binding and reiterated its support for Israel. White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby said that they did not veto the Gaza resolution because of the combination of the demand for a ceasefire and the release of all hostages and the reference to the ongoing hostage negotiations. On the other hand, Kirby explained that they abstained from voting “yes” because Hamas was not condemned in the text of the bill, saying, “Our vote does not represent a change in our policy.Noting that they had seen the release of hostages as the most important part of the ceasefire agreement from the beginning, Kirby said, “We continue to stand behind Israel.We continue to provide them with the resources and military capabilities they need to defend themselves against Hamas. Nothing in this non-binding resolution has changed in terms of what Israel can and cannot do in terms of self-defence.

The US had put a similar resolution, which it claimed was non-binding, to a vote in the UN Security Council, but it was not adopted due to the vetoes of Russia and China.

The US claim that the resolution is non-binding is linked to the fact that the resolution uses the phrase “a ceasefire is requested” instead of “decides on the need for a ceasefire” according to Article 7 of the UN Charter.However, under Article 25 of the UN Charter, resolutions do not have to refer to Article 7 to be binding.

The US “non-binding” statement drew the reaction of the UN and other countries.UN deputy spokesman Farhan Haq said: “All UN Security Council resolutions are international law. Just as international law is binding, so are UNSC resolutions”. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres also stressed that “this resolution must be implemented, its failure is inexcusable”.

Middle East

Qatar and UAE LNG tankers go dark in Strait of Hormuz to evade security risks

Published

on

Qatar and United Arab Emirates liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers are turning off their transponders in the Strait of Hormuz, shifting their logistical strategies in response to ongoing military conflict in the Middle East and the closure of the strategic waterway.

According to a Bloomberg report citing industry sources and vessel-tracking data, as time and patience run thin for both nations, tankers have begun operating under radio silence to conceal their movements and secure their LNG shipments.

The report noted that neither Qatar nor Abu Dhabi, the federal emirate of the UAE, is subject to international sanctions. Despite this, state-owned QatarEnergy and Abu Dhabi National Oil Co. (ADNOC) are employing these “going dark” tactics to minimize security risks for their vessels and crews transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

Vessel-tracking data revealed that in May, at least four Qatari LNG vessels and four tankers linked to Abu Dhabi-based ADNOC transited the Strait of Hormuz without transmitting tracking signals. Sources speaking to Bloomberg stated that Qatari authorities requested captains of state-owned and chartered tankers to turn off their Automatic Identification System (AIS) transponders when navigating around the Ras Laffan port—the world’s largest LNG export terminal—as well as when transiting or exiting the Persian Gulf.

The implemented security measures extend beyond turning off transponders. Sources reported that vessels have been instructed to transit the gulf in pairs to enhance security, and tanker captains who refused to comply with the “shadow” navigation protocols have been replaced.

Industry sources speaking to Bloomberg warned that the increase in covert transits undermines the fundamental rules of international maritime trade and transforms these shipping routes into high-risk areas.

They emphasized that until recently, every cargo in the LNG sector could be tracked in real time, but these newly adopted tactics have eliminated that transparency.

Saul Kavonic, a senior energy analyst at energy consultancy MST Marquee, commented on the situation, saying: “It is entirely natural for Persian Gulf LNG producers to try to avoid Iranian attacks and consequently adopt shadow fleet methods. This could persist as long as Iran continues to control and threaten transits through the Strait of Hormuz. This practice may continue for a long time even after a peace agreement is signed.”

Following the start of US and Israeli attacks on Iran, the Tehran government closed the Strait of Hormuz, a choke point for approximately 20% of global oil shipments and 30% of global liquefied natural gas.

After negotiations in Islamabad failed, US President Donald Trump announced on April 13 that he would impose a blockade on Iranian ports. In late May, he announced that the blockade was lifted as part of the planned peace treaty process with Tehran.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Israeli defense exports hit record $19.2 billion fueled by regional conflicts

Published

on

The Israeli Ministry of Defense has announced that international demand for military systems manufactured in the country and deployed in regional conflicts has reached unprecedented levels.

In an official statement, the ministry declared that exports of military equipment and weaponry have hit an all-time high for the fifth consecutive year.

According to the disclosed data, export volume reached $19.2 billion in 2025, representing an approximate 30% increase compared to the previous year. The figures demonstrate that the country’s defense exports have doubled over the past five years and quadrupled over the past decade.

Data shared by the ministry indicates that missile, rocket, and air defense systems secured the largest share of military sales contracts signed throughout 2025.

Sales in this sector accounted for 29% of the total trade volume. The ministry noted that the vast majority of these agreements fell into the category of “mega-contracts”—each valued at a minimum of $100 million—and that these large-scale deals constituted 53% of the total export volume.

The Ministry of Defense directly attributed this export growth to ongoing regional military operations.

The statement argued that global demand was driven by results achieved on the ground and the “combat-proven” performance of Israeli-made systems across all fronts, including the “Rising Lion” operation launched against Iran in June 2025.

Since October 7, 2023, Israel has conducted simultaneous military operations across multiple fronts in Gaza, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran.

The military equipment and ammunition described as “combat-tested” in the ministry’s report continue to be deployed in active conflict zones, most notably in Lebanon.

Among the defense firms highlighted during this period is the Israel-based company Xtend, which has drawn attention for its unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

Systems developed by the company have reportedly been utilized in operations in Gaza and for targeted assassinations. International reports revealed that an Xtend UAV was used to locate Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, who was killed in October 2024.

Earlier in the year, Eric Trump, son of US President Donald Trump, announced that he would make significant investments in Xtend’s technology and support the company’s merger with the Florida-based JFB Construction Holdings.

Meanwhile, airstrikes and bombings conducted by the Israeli military continue to drive up civilian casualties in Gaza and Lebanon. In Lebanon alone, attacks over the past few months have claimed more than 3,400 lives. Thousands of deaths have also been reported in US-backed military operations carried out in Iran.

Studies published in the medical journal The Lancet project that the total death toll in Gaza, when including both direct and indirect fatalities, could reach hundreds of thousands.

During this period, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which has supported Israel’s operations, emerged as one of the largest buyers of Israeli-origin weapons.

The Gulf nation is reported to have procured billions of dollars in military equipment from Israel over the past five years. According to US sources, the Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv administrations have established a joint fund to develop and procure new weapons systems.

On the other hand, as Tel Aviv continues to market its air defense systems globally, military tensions along the Lebanese border persist.

Hizbullah kamikaze drones have reportedly targeted Iron Dome batteries positioned at Israeli locations near the Lebanese border. The Israeli military has reportedly faced difficulties intercepting these attacks, with dozens of Israeli soldiers killed in Hizbullah strikes launched since March 2.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Report challenges official assessments of damage from Iranian attacks on US military assets

Published

on

BBC Verify, the verification unit of the BBC, published a detailed investigation on June 1 based on satellite imagery and video analysis that found Iranian retaliatory strikes had successfully hit and damaged at least 20 US military facilities across the Middle East since the start of the war launched against Iran by the United States and Israel.

The findings suggest that the scale and accuracy of Iran’s retaliatory attacks were significantly greater than previously acknowledged by US officials. Some independent analysts estimate that the number of affected bases may be as high as 28.

The military facilities targeted were reportedly spread across eight Gulf countries: Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan, Bahrain and Oman.

Material losses in the region are said to include three THAAD missile defense batteries, each valued at approximately $1 billion and regarded as a cornerstone of the regional defense network.

Expert assessments also identified at least 42 aircraft that were destroyed or severely damaged, including F-35 fighter jets, MQ-9 Reaper drones and an E-3 Sentry airborne early warning and surveillance aircraft valued at $700 million.

According to military analysts, Iran achieved these results by altering its tactics. Rather than relying on large-scale, high-volume barrages, Tehran reportedly shifted to using smaller, more precise salvos concentrated on high-value infrastructure targets.

The shift in strategy was said to have exploited what was described as a degree of complacency within the US military during the early stages of the conflict.

US military commanders reportedly failed to relocate aircraft and other military assets at strategic installations such as Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia despite previous attacks on those facilities, a factor that is said to have increased losses. Commenting on the strikes, Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei declared that the Middle East was no longer a “safe place” for US bases.

The White House had previously claimed that Iran’s military capabilities had been almost entirely eliminated.

However, the Pentagon’s latest estimates place the cost of the war at $29 billion.

A substantial portion of that expenditure is reportedly being directed toward repairing heavily damaged military equipment and replenishing significantly depleted munitions stockpiles. Former military officials have warned that damaged air defense systems in the region “cannot be replaced quickly or easily.”

The heavy consumption of interceptor missiles during the conflict has also left other US facilities across the Gulf increasingly vulnerable to future Iranian precision-guided missile attacks, according to the assessments cited.

The Washington administration is also reported to have sought restrictions on satellite imagery providers in an effort to conceal the extent of the damage and limit criticism.

However, the “smoking craters” and flattened aircraft hangars featured in the BBC report appear to contradict official US assertions, illustrating what the report described as the true scale of the destruction on the ground.

Iran also announced that it struck a US air base in Kuwait with missiles and drones on Sunday night in retaliation for attacks by US forces on Iranian military targets over the weekend, which Tehran said constituted a violation of the ceasefire.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey