world news
Israel seeking to create 5 km. ‘dead zone’ in southern Lebanon – report
An investigation by the Financial Times has claimed that the IDF’s operations in southern Lebanon are part of a plan to create a 5 km. “dead zone” on the border.
The FT combined data from satellites along with research from US universities using “synthetic aperture radar” satellites to detect changes in buildings without being affected by cloud cover.
Following the beginning of the war in October, Hezbollah began firing on Israel, with Israel responding in kind.
The report also stated that that over 95,000 Lebanese have been displaced, as well as 60,000 Israelis.The FT also reported that Israel has killed more Hezbollah commanders in this flare-up than died in the 2006 war.
Hezbollah fighters quoted in the report balked at the idea that they would withdraw from southern Lebanon.
Lebanese officials seemed to hope that a wider war could be stemmed by the creation of a buffer zone and a diplomatic solution.
The IDF denied it was creating a buffer zone. The IDF claimed it was only pushing back Hezbollah in order to prevent persistent attacks on Israeli residents of the North.
Many Lebanese have only been able to return to their villages during funerals, which appear to be one of the few respites from airstrikes.
“Every day, the destruction is getting worse,” Hassan Shayt, mayor of Kfar Kila, told FT.
A new era of war
“The damage is massive,” Hashem Haidar, the head of Lebanon’s Southern Council, said.
“The type of weaponry that’s being used is different from what we saw in 2006. Before, when a house was bombed, the damage would be confined to the house and its immediate surroundings. Now, there are entire neighborhoods that are being affected by one bombing.”
A senior Israeli military official defending their position said, “Every third home in south Lebanon is used by Hizbollah for weapons storage, training, firing positions, and meeting points for a possible cross-border attack.”
Several residents of targeted villages told FT that they believed that Israel was targeting the homes of people who returned to retrieve their belongings. Some of them noted that within two hours of returning to retrieve their belongings, the IDF had struck their house.
However, the FT also reported that soon after an airstrike they witnessed, Hezbollah fighters told them that their fighters had been hiding and storing weapons in abandoned homes.
There were also questions raised about Israel’s tactics for clearing brushland near the border, with several clips of Israeli troops employing unconventional methods, such as the use of trebuchets to launch flaming projectiles across the border and even flaming arrows.
Wow. Fighting Middle Age-mindset terrorists with Middle Age technology.The IDF soldiers built a TREBUCHET to clear foliage/bushes that Hezbollah have been hiding in and firing from.pic.twitter.com/24cURSYdw2
— Kosher (@KosherCockney) June 13, 2024
They also raised issues regarding Israel’s use of white phosphorus in combat. Israel claims that the use of white phosphorus is in line with international law and is strictly used for smokescreens and not fired at combatants.
העדכון החדש של מייפל סטורי נראה מטורף pic.twitter.com/x2cmBJUm9i
— David Yerman (@davidyerman) June 13, 2024
Although local mayors claim that this use has contaminated agricultural land, that may take years to undo, with some estimates of over $1.7 billion in damage.
This week, a special tour group of Knesset members is expected to visit various schools in east Jerusalem as part of the work of the ‘Subcommittee for Curricula in east Jerusalem and Their Supervision’ headed by MK Avichai Boaron of Likud. Due to security and political sensitivities, only subcommittee members will be allowed to participate in the visit under heavy security.
During the visit, Knesset members will be able to discuss and meet face-to-face with relevant factors in the education system, learn about existing challenges and opportunities, and examine ways to improve and enhance learning and teaching processes to meet the government’s targets for transitioning students from Palestinian to Israeli curricula.
MK Boaron emphasized that the visit is intended to allow Knesset members to get a firsthand impression of what’s happening in East Jerusalem schools and to formulate an up-to-date and accurate picture that will serve as a basis for promoting wise and effective policy in the field of education in the eastern part of the city.
Boaron added, “The subcommittee under my leadership is committed to working to improve the quality of education in East Jerusalem, while ensuring quality curricula adapted to the needs of the students. We believe that education is the key to integration and advancement of society in the eastern part of the city, and we will do everything in our power to ensure that every student gets the opportunity to realize their potential.”In a discussion held a few days ago in the Education Committee’s subcommittee, the data behind the government’s decision regarding education in East Jerusalem was revealed, budgeted at one billion NIS, and far from meeting its goals.
The committee’s findings
The committee also revealed that 6000 out of 6700 teachers were trained in the Palestinian Authority, and 85 percent of schools (over 90,000 out of 110,000 students) still study the Palestinian Authority’s curriculum.
The data also showed that close to 200 million NIS from the amount allocated for this matter in the government’s decision were invested in the program. Still, only 2000 students have transitioned in the last two years from the Palestinian program to the Israeli program. In fact, the State of Israel invests one million NIS to transition a student in East Jerusalem from the Palestinian program to the Israeli one.
In the discussion ahead of the special tour, Boaron said, “This committee was established to deal with a problem that is nothing less than a powder keg placed in the heart of Jerusalem, the capital city of the State of Israel. Before we go to ‘de-Nazify’ the students of the Gaza Strip, we must examine the learning content here in Jerusalem. After many years under the minister’s leadership, incitement content was removed from the learning materials. In parallel, about a year and a half ago, the minister led a government decision to replace the Palestinian curriculum with an Israeli curriculum. This decision is good and important. However, this decision did not bring about the desired change – east Jerusalem residents are not interested in adopting the Israeli curriculum, and the teachers themselves are not willing to teach the program.”
“My colleagues and I will do everything to change this delusional reality. This intolerable situation cannot continue.” He continued.
“The latest government decision on this issue speaks of slow and gradual treatment of the problem before us, but this is a big mistake. The treatment of this problem must be sharp and quick. In the coming months, if the situation does not change significantly for the better, I will turn to the Prime Minister and recommend canceling the government’s decision on the matter and making a completely different decision. We need to deal with the complex problems existing in the current education of east Jerusalem students in a much more stubborn and severe manner than what is happening today. The committee’s discussions help us understand the scope of the problem and its severity and decide on the best tools to deal with its correction.”
Following that discussion, MK Boaron sent a letter to the Prime Minister, the Minister of Education, and other officials to share the data and conclusions and even proposed an innovative idea to examine cooperation with Arab countries and connect them to the education system in east Jerusalem.
“Education in east Jerusalem is a national event, no less.” MK Boaron concluded, “And that’s how it should be treated, with seriousness and gravity. For decades we have allowed this bomb to grow quietly and without interference, with God’s help we intend to study the issue in depth, and lead significant processes in the matter together with all the factors, the existing situation must change.”
There is no question about it: Hamas chief Yahya Sinwar has trapped somebody – the only question is whom? Has he trapped Israel into falling clumsily into the regional war that he always wanted on October 7, with all of the negatives that entails?
Or has he trapped Iran, and its main proxy Hezbollah, into prematurely wasting their great moments, capabilities, and threats to aid Sinwar’s lost cause in Gaza, instead of reserving them to deter Jerusalem from attacking Iran’s nuclear program?
Going back in time, Sinwar’s calculation – until now, miscalculation – was that if he invaded southern Israel, Hezbollah, Iran, Yemen, Syrian militias, West Bank terrorists, and Arab Israelis would all join in.
In his best-case scenario, Hezbollah would have invaded Israel’s northern villages just as Hamas was invading the South, providing a one-two punch that would have confused and paralyzed the IDF even more than it was from Hamas’s stunningly successful initial thrust.It also would have rocketed large portions of Israel to create further chaos and disorder and put Israelthe Jewish state on the defensive.
Instead, Hezbollah sufficed with a mostly symbolic (at a strategic level) string of rocket and drone attacks on only on Israel’s villages and cities located very close to the border.
At the earliest stages, Hezbollah did not attack the Golan Heights or places like Safed, Acre, or Nahariya.
Yemen never joined in anything more than a sporadic way and onwith a significant delay.
Iran neverdidn’t joined until April, and since then has mostly remained on the sidelines.
The other fronts have been quiet or nonstrategic factors.
But maybe after waiting 11 months, Sinwar could have trapped Israel into picking a larger fight with Hezbollah, which could finally bring Hezbollah, Iranthe Lebanese-based terrorist group, its Iranian sponsor, and others into the war in a more full-fledged fashion.
Sinwar also hoped to delay or end the trend of Israeli normalization with moderate Sunni Arab countries, such as with the Saudis, which seemed imminent in September 2023.
LastLastly, he hoped to undermine Israel’s alliances with the US, UK, and EU, and to get Israel in trouble with international courts.
In turn, this could lead Israel to finally agree to his terms of allowing Hamas to remain in power and to releasing massive numbers of Palestinian security prisoners. He could then be seen as the new Palestinian “Saladin” of the 21st century – the man who brought Israel to its knees and forced it to recognize Hamas.
This is no fantasy.
Normalization with the Saudis has been delayed, alliances with the West have been frayed, and international courts are after Israel in an unprecedented fashion, even as compared to prior wars.
The unanswered dilemma is who will come out on top in the escalating conflict with Hezbollah.
If Hezbollah manages to harm Israel enough with its rocket arsenal or outlast Jerusalem enough to force improved ceasefire terms for itself and Hamas, Sinwar’s trap will have succeeded, albeit with an 11-month delay.
But this is far from the most likely scenario.
Since last Tuesday, Hezbollah has been battered and pummeled in ways it never expected.
The Lebanese terror group has lost 3,000-4,000 fighters, its Radwan commander Ibrahim Aqil and 13-15 of his subordinate commanders, more than 500 rocket launchers, and many thousands of rockets.
What if the IDF at some point overcomes Hezbollah’s ability to swarm it with long-range precision rockets and enormous volumes of short-range rockets?
What if the IDF at some point achieves an overmatch capability against Hezbollah where its main threats against Israel are neutered, if not neutralized?
Shockingly, this might even be possible without an invasion.
Or what if the IDF manages an invasion of Lebanon without Hezbollah being able to destroy large stretches of the home front with its rocket arsenal juggernaut, as had always been predicted in worst-case scenarios?
The whole purpose of Hezbollah from Iran’s perspective, which provides its rocket arsenal, funding, and training, was to deter Israel from ever attacking Tehran’s nuclear facilities, lest it give up its ace in the hole.
What if Sinwar had led Hezbollah into a war it was not ready to fight, with the IDF achieving massive strategic surprise and suddenly degrading the Hezbollah threat to a point where it no longer served to deter the Jewish state from acting against Iran?
In that case, Sinwar’s trap will have boomeranged into undermining the head of the axis of Middle Eastern evil, Iran, as well as defanging its top proxy threat – Hezbollah.
He would then go down in history as not only the destroyer of Gaza but as the gambler who bungled decades of careful Iranian planning and put Israel in its strongest security position in years
Abd Al-Salam Haniyeh, the son of the killed Hamas terror leader Ismail Haniyeh, claimed in an August interview with SamaQuds that his father rejected the “deal of a century” which would have seen the establishment of Palestinian statehood, according to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute.
Haniyeh Jr. claimed that the deal would have allegedly seen billions invested into Gaza.
“May our hands be paralyzed if we sign an agreement which would separate Gaza from Palestine,” the Hamas leader has allegedly said in response to the proposed deal.
The deal would have also encompassed the disarmament of Hamas.
Haniyeh also claimed that media coverage of the 2008-2009 conflict also saw increased convoys entering the Gaza Strip, which led to more active construction of terror tunnels.
Rejecting statehood
The Palestinian leadership has rejected multiple deals that would see the establishment of Palestinian statehood. In 1936, the British offered the Peel Commission, which would have seen a separate Arab state but which was rejected by the Palestinian leadership, according to CIJA.
In 1948, Palestinian leadership rejected the Partition Plan, which also encompassed an opportunity for statehood. In 2000, under Prime Minister Ehud Barak, the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat, again rejected an offer of statehood. Finally, as referenced by Haniyeh, in 2008, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas rejected a land-for-peace offer.
Hamas officials have continued to speak against a two-state solution in conversation with Arab media, insisting on a singular Arab nation.
Ismail Haniyeh
Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh was assassinated in July while attending the inauguration of Iran’s new president in Tehran.
While Israel neither accepted nor denied responsibility for the attack, Iran has promised to retaliate.
-
Solar Energy3 years agoDLR testing the use of molten salt in a solar power plant in Portugal
-
world news11 months ago
Gulf, France aid Gaza, Russia evacuates citizens
-
Camera11 months agoDJI Air 3 vs. Mini 4 Pro: which compact drone is best?
-
Camera3 years agoCharles ‘Chuck’ Geschke, co-founder of Adobe and inventor of the PDF, dies at 81
-
Solar Energy11 months agoGlencore eyes options on battery recycling project
-
world news11 months ago
Strong majority of Americans support Israel-Hamas hostage deal
-
Camera11 months agoSony a9 III: what you need to know
-
TOP SCEINCE6 months agoCan animals count?
