RSS
Israel Escalates Strikes on Hamas ‘Political’ Wing
A drone view shows buildings lying in ruins, following a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Jabalia in the northern Gaza Strip, Jan. 19, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mahmoud Al-Basos
JNS.org – The Israel Defense Forces conducted extensive air and artillery strikes across northern, central and southern Gaza overnight on Thursday, killing Abd al-Latif Qanoua, a senior Hamas spokesman, slain in Jabalia in a strike on his tent.
The attacks are part of a broader campaign to systematically eliminate key figures in both Hamas’s military-terrorist wing, and its “political” leadership.
This, combined with Israel preventing aid trucks from entering Gaza—supplies that were stolen by Hamas and used to bolster its regime—signals an Israeli strategic pivot from strictly targeting “military” wing operatives to dismantling the governing infrastructure sustaining Hamas’s rule.
In recent days, Israel has killed several senior officials of Hamas’s Political Bureau. These included Ismail Barhoum, who managed the organization’s finances and directed funds toward terror planning and weapons procurement.
He was killed in a joint IDF and Shin Bet operation at Nasser Hospital in Khan Yunis. Just before his death, Barhoum had succeeded Issam Da’alis, Hamas’s “prime minister” in Gaza, who was killed in mid-March. Salah Bardawil, head of Hamas’s Planning and Development Office in southern Gaza, was also targeted and killed by Israel.
The goals of the war
Meir Ben-Shabbat, head of the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy, who is former Israeli national security adviser and ex-head of the National Security Council, told JNS on Wednesday that “one of the goals of the war, as determined by the political echelon, is the destruction of Hamas’s governing capabilities. This goal cannot be achieved without targeting the functionaries who run Hamas’s administration in Gaza. This is a necessary step.”
He added, “The achievements in recent days are impressive, but the pace must be increased and the blow to Hamas intensified.”
Ben-Shabbat emphasized the importance of Israel controlling the flow of aid “after we have seen that this aid is being used by Hamas both to rearm for continued war and to bolster its governance over the population.”
According to Ben-Shabbat, “To understand why, one must revisit the footage and images from October 7, the monstrous atrocities, and the participation of elderly and youths in these acts. The celebrations in Gaza over the abduction of elderly people, women and children. The horrific stories of what our hostages endured—59 of whom are still held in Gaza.”
In the first part of the war, Israel’s approach to Hamas’s “political” infrastructure. Ben-Shabbat argued that Israel at that time “acted under different conditions—under constraints imposed by the Biden administration and operational limitations that forced it to prioritize its overall tasks. Today, those constraints no longer exist and the operational space is far broader.”
The eyes of the population
Lt. Col. (res.) Amit Yagur, former deputy head of the Palestinian arena at the IDF Planning Branch and a former naval intelligence officer, told JNS on Wednesday that Hamas’s true strategic center of gravity lies not in its rockets or gunmen but in its civilian governance and perceived legitimacy among Gazan civilians.
“Hamas know that in a military confrontation with Israel, their ammunition depots and all their military capabilities will be damaged—that’s something they expect. What they aim to preserve is their organizational survival and legitimacy in the eyes of the population,” Yagur said.
“The military capacity is relatively easy to rebuild. You get hit, you start to restore the military capability. You start restoring workshops using aid coming in, you manufacture more rockets again, you arm the youths. But the civilian governing capacity is much harder to rebuild for Hamas once it’s been damaged.”
Yagur explained that Hamas’s legitimacy rests on its ability to govern and deliver aid. “The population says to Hamas, ‘you stayed as the ruler, okay, rebuild. Bring back our homes and our lives.’”
When Hamas can’t do that, it begins to lose legitimacy, argued Yagur, which is why Hamas is desperate for caravans and aid infrastructure—so it can demonstrate that it’s rebuilding.
Yagur criticized Israel’s past focus on purely military targets, stating that eighty to 90% of everything the IDF had attacked in Gaza was focused on military targets like terror operatives, rockets, weapons. “That’s what I call speaking in the military language only. It’s a mistake,” he said, since Hamas’s “main goal is to stay in power.”
The previous military echelon was highly opposed to any activity by Israel in Gaza’s civilian sphere, he noted. “There were a few attempts to cement civilian clans that would take control from Hamas in the middle of 2024. These efforts failed,” he recalled. “Today, everyone understands how important it is to seize control of the distribution of humanitarian aid.”
According to Yagur, the recent focus on Hamas’s political wing marked a necessary correction. “For the first time, we’re seeing the large-scale targeting of the people who run the civilian system in the Gaza Strip. These are Hamas figures. This damages their ability to recover, to govern and interface with the population.”
Protests against Hamas
The shift in approach was quickly followed in Gaza by mounting and unprecedented civilian Palestinian protests against Hamas.
Between March 25 and 27, protests erupted in at least seven locations across Gaza, including Beit Lahia, Jabalia Camp, Shejaiya in Gaza City, Zeitoun, Nuseirat, Khan Yunis and Deir al-Balah. These followed a major demonstration on March 25 in Beit Lahia, where hundreds of civilians waved white flags and called for an end to the war.
That protest, reportedly organized in part by Fatah affiliates and the “Bidna Na’ish” (“We want to live”) initiative, marked the first large-scale civilian protest since Israel closed Gaza’s border crossings.
Protesters chanted, “Hamas out, Hamas out,” and called out journalists, including from Al Jazeera, demanding media coverage of the events.
Videos circulated showing notable elders from Beit Lahia speaking openly and uncovered against Hamas, indicating bread down of a previous fear barrier.
“These are respected community figures coming out with uncovered faces. That’s not children or women saying, ‘save me’—these are known figures going directly against Hamas. It shows the fear barrier might be cracking a little,” said Yagur.
Human shields
Meanwhile, Col. Avichay Adraee, the IDF’s Arabic-language spokesperson, issued fresh evacuation warnings on Thursday to Gaza residents in Zeitoun, Tel al-Hawa, the Old City of Gaza, Sheikh Ajlin and other neighborhoods, advising them to evacuate ahead of intensified Israeli strikes on Hamas, which continues to systematically use civilians as human shields.
Foreign Minister Israel Katz directly addressed Gaza’s population on Wednesday, warning that more areas will be evacuated, and called on civilians to rise against Hamas and pressure for the release of Israeli hostages. “This is the only way to stop the war,” he said.
Ben-Shabbat outlined what he believed should be Israel’s long-term goal for Gaza: “In my view, President Trump’s vision outlines the scenario that Israel should strive for regarding Gaza: voluntary emigration, enabling first of all the departure of those who wish to live elsewhere. This is an opportunity for historic, fundamental change.”
“Israel must obtain all of the goals it set for this war: return of the hostages, destruction of Hamas, removal of the threat from Gaza. The minimal security goal that it must achieve is demilitarization.
“In the end state of the war in Gaza, Israel will have full security control in this area, and there will be no other fighting force, means, or capabilities that will threaten Israel and its people. Hamas will not only not rule, it will not be a significant force in this area and lose its military, governing, and organizational infrastructure.”
Yagur added that Hamas must be stripped of its interface with the population. “We need to take away its connection to the population—and that means controlling humanitarian aid distribution.” He argued this could be done through American security contractors under IDF protection, or directly by IDF units in designated humanitarian zones.
Such civilian control efforts are more damaging to Hamas than bombs alone, he said. “These are the things that disrupt them most.”
The post Israel Escalates Strikes on Hamas ‘Political’ Wing first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Colorado Attack Suspect Charged with Assault, Use of Explosives
FILE PHOTO: Boulder attack suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman poses for a jail booking photograph after his arrest in Boulder, Colorado, U.S. June 2, 2025. Photo: Boulder Police Department/Handout via REUTERS
A suspect in an attack on a pro-Israeli rally in Colorado that injured eight people was being held on Monday on an array of charges, including assault and the use of explosives, in lieu of a $10-million bail, according to Boulder County records.
The posted list of felony charges against suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, in the attack on Sunday also includes charges of murder in the first degree, although police in the city of Boulder have said on social media that no victims died in the attack. Authorities could not be reached immediately to clarify.
Witnesses reported the suspect used a makeshift flamethrower and threw an incendiary device into the crowd. He was heard to yell “Free Palestine” during the attack, according to the FBI, in what the agency called a “targeted terror attack.”
Four women and four men between 52 and 88 years of age were transported to hospitals after the attack, Boulder Police said.
The attack took place on the Pearl Street Mall, a popular pedestrian shopping district near the University of Colorado, during an event organized by Run for Their Lives, an organization devoted to drawing attention to the hostages seized in the aftermath of Hamas’ 2023 attack on Israel.
Rabbi Yisroel Wilhelm, the Chabad director at the University of Colorado, Boulder, told CBS Colorado that the 88-year-old victim was a Holocaust refugee who fled Europe.
A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson said Soliman had entered the country in August 2022 on a tourist visa that expired in February 2023. He filed for asylum in September 2022. “The suspect, Mohamed Soliman, is illegally in our country,” the spokesperson said.
The FBI raided and searched Soliman’s home in El Paso County, Colorado, the agency said on social media. “As this is an ongoing investigation, no additional information is available at this time.”
The attack in Boulder was the latest act of violence aimed at Jewish Americans linked to outrage over Israel’s escalating military offensive in Gaza. It followed the fatal shooting of two Israel Embassy aides that took place outside Washington’s Capital Jewish Museum last month.
Ron Halber, CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, said after the shooting there was a question of how far security perimeters outside Jewish institutions should extend.
Boulder Police said they would hold a press conference later on Monday to discuss details of the Colorado attack.
The Denver office of the FBI, which is handling the case, did not immediately respond to emails or phone calls seeking clarification on the homicide charges or other details in the case.
Officials from the Boulder County Jail, Boulder Police and Boulder County Sheriff’s Office did not immediately respond to inquiries.
The post Colorado Attack Suspect Charged with Assault, Use of Explosives first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran Poised to Dismiss US Nuclear Proposal, Iranian Diplomat Says
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attends a press conference following a meeting with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, April 18, 2025. Photo: Tatyana Makeyeva/Pool via REUTERS
Iran is poised to reject a US proposal to end a decades-old nuclear dispute, an Iranian diplomat said on Monday, dismissing it as a “non-starter” that fails to address Tehran’s interests or soften Washington’s stance on uranium enrichment.
“Iran is drafting a negative response to the US proposal, which could be interpreted as a rejection of the US offer,” the senior diplomat, who is close to Iran’s negotiating team, told Reuters.
The US proposal for a new nuclear deal was presented to Iran on Saturday by Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi, who was on a short visit to Tehran and has been mediating talks between Tehran and Washington.
After five rounds of discussions between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, several obstacles remain.
Among them are Iran’s rejection of a US demand that it commit to scrapping uranium enrichment and its refusal to ship abroad its entire existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium – possible raw material for nuclear bombs.
Tehran says it wants to master nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and has long denied accusations by Western powers that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
“In this proposal, the US stance on enrichment on Iranian soil remains unchanged, and there is no clear explanation regarding the lifting of sanctions,” said the diplomat, who declined to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter.
Araqchi said Tehran would formally respond to the proposal soon.
Tehran demands the immediate removal of all US-imposed curbs that impair its oil-based economy. But the US says nuclear-related sanctions should be removed in phases.
Dozens of institutions vital to Iran’s economy, including its central bank and national oil company, have been blacklisted since 2018 for, according to Washington, “supporting terrorism or weapons proliferation.”
Trump’s revival of “maximum pressure” against Tehran since his return to the White House in January has included tightening sanctions and threatening to bomb Iran if the negotiations yield no deal.
During his first term in 2018, Trump ditched Tehran’s 2015 nuclear pact with six powers and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran’s economy. Iran responded by escalating enrichment far beyond the pact’s limits.
Under the deal, Iran had until 2018 curbed its sensitive nuclear work in return for relief from US, EU and U.N. economic sanctions.
The diplomat said the assessment of “Iran’s nuclear negotiations committee,” under the supervision of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was that the US proposal was “completely one-sided” and could not serve Tehran’s interests.
Therefore, the diplomat said, Tehran considers this proposal a “non-starter” and believes it unilaterally attempts to impose a “bad deal” on Iran through excessive demands.
NUCLEAR STANDOFF RAISES MIDDLE EAST TENSIONS
The stakes are high for both sides. Trump wants to curtail Tehran’s potential to produce a nuclear weapon that could trigger a regional nuclear arms race and perhaps threaten Israel. Iran’s clerical establishment, for its part, wants to be rid of the devastating sanctions.
Iran says it is ready to accept some limits on enrichment, but needs watertight guarantees that Washington would not renege on a future nuclear accord.
Two Iranian officials told Reuters last week that Iran could pause uranium enrichment if the US released frozen Iranian funds and recognized Tehran’s right to refine uranium for civilian use under a “political deal” that could lead to a broader nuclear accord.
Iran’s arch-foe Israel sees Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat and says it would never allow Tehran to obtain nuclear weapons.
Araqchi, in a joint news conference with his Egyptian counterpart in Cairo, said: “I do not think Israel will commit such a mistake as to attack Iran.”
Tehran’s regional influence has meanwhile been diminished by military setbacks suffered by its forces and those of its allies in the Shi’ite-dominated “Axis of Resistance,” which include Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen, and Iraqi militias.
In April, Saudi Arabia’s defence minister delivered a blunt message to Iranian officials to take Trump’s offer of a new deal seriously as a way to avoid the risk of war with Israel.
The post Iran Poised to Dismiss US Nuclear Proposal, Iranian Diplomat Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
The Islamist Crescent: A New Syrian Danger
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks during a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron after a meeting at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, May 7, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Stephanie Lecocq/Pool
The dramatic fall of the Assad regime in Syria has undeniably reshaped the Middle East, yet the emerging power dynamics, particularly the alignment between Saudi Arabia and Turkey, warrant profound scrutiny from those committed to American and Israeli security. While superficially presented as a united front against Iranian influence, this new Sunni axis carries a dangerous undercurrent of Islamism and regional ambition that could ultimately undermine, rather than serve, the long-term interests of Washington and Jerusalem.
For too long, Syria under Bashar al-Assad served as a critical conduit for Iran’s destabilizing agenda, facilitating arms transfers to Hezbollah and projecting Tehran’s power across the Levant. The removal of this linchpin is, on the surface, a strategic victory. However, the nature of the new Syrian government, led by Ahmed al-Sharaa — a figure Israeli officials continue to view with deep suspicion due to his past as a former Al-Qaeda-linked commander — raises immediate red flags. This is not merely a change of guard; it is a shift that introduces a new set of complex challenges, particularly given Turkey’s historical support for the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization deemed a terror group by Saudi Arabia and many other regional states.
Israel’s strategic calculus in Syria has always been clear: to degrade Iran’s military presence, prevent Hezbollah from acquiring advanced weaponry, and maintain operational freedom in Syrian airspace. Crucially, Israel has historically thought it best to have a decentralized, weak, and fragmented Syria, with reports that it has actively worked against the resurgence of a robust central authority. This preference stems from a pragmatic understanding that a strong, unified Syria, especially one under the tutelage of an ambitious regional power like Turkey, could pose much more of a threat than the Assad regime ever did. Indeed, Israeli defense officials privately express concern at Turkey’s assertive moves, accusing Ankara of attempting to transform post-war Syria into a Turkish protectorate under Islamist tutelage. This concern is not unfounded; Turkey’s ambitious, arguably expansionist, objectives — and its perceived undue dominance in Arab lands — are viewed by Israel as warily as Iran’s previous influence.
The notion that an “Ottoman Crescent” is now replacing the “Shiite Crescent” should not be celebrated as a net positive. While it may diminish Iranian power, it introduces a new form of regional hegemony, one driven by an ideology that has historically been antithetical to Western values and stability. The European Union’s recent imposition of sanctions on Turkish-backed Syrian army commanders for human rights abuses, including arbitrary killings and torture, further underscores the problematic nature of some elements within this new Syrian landscape. The fact that al-Sharaa has allowed such individuals to operate with impunity and even promoted them to high-ranking positions should give Washington pause.
From an American perspective, while the Trump administration has pragmatically engaged with the new Syrian government, lifting sanctions and urging normalization with Israel, this engagement must be tempered with extreme caution. The core American interests in the Middle East — counterterrorism, containment of Iran, and regional stability — are not served by empowering Islamist-leaning factions or by enabling a regional power, like Turkey, whose actions have sometimes undermined the broader fight against ISIS. Washington must demand that Damascus demonstrate a genuine commitment to taking over the counter-ISIS mission and managing detention facilities, and unequivocally insist that Turkey cease actions that risk an ISIS resurgence.
The argument that Saudi Arabia and Turkey, despite their own complex internal dynamics, are simply pragmatic actors countering Iran overlooks the ideological underpinnings that concern many conservatives. Turkey’s ruling party, rooted in political Islam, and its historical ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, present a fundamental challenge to the vision of a stable, secular, and pro-Western Middle East. While Saudi Arabia has designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, its alignment with Turkey in Syria, and its own internal human rights record, means that this “new front” is far from a clean solution.
The Saudi-Turkey alignment in Syria is a double-edged sword. While it may indeed serve to counter Iran’s immediate regional ambitions, it simultaneously risks empowering actors whose long-term objectives and ideological leanings are deeply problematic for American, Israeli, and Western interests. Washington and Jerusalem must approach this new dynamic with extreme vigilance, prioritizing the containment of all forms of radicalism — whether Shiite or Sunni — and ensuring that any strategic gains against Iran do not inadvertently pave the way for a new, equally dangerous, Islamist crescent to rise in the heart of the Levant.
Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx
The post The Islamist Crescent: A New Syrian Danger first appeared on Algemeiner.com.