Back to Kinzler’s Global News Blog
Jerusalem Post, January 19
Hamas admits leadership losses, moves into crisis mode – opinion
Hamas negotiates from exposure rather than strength or ambition, and Gaza has become a place it can neither control nor govern freely.
Full text:
The recent statement from the Izzadin al-Qassam Brigades about the death of Mohammed Sinwar and the tribute to Abu Obeida marks more than just a delayed military update or another name added to the list of losses.
It is a political and security admission, full of consequences. In practice, it signals the end of one phase of Hamas leadership and the forced beginning of another. In this new phase, the movement focuses on avoiding collapse rather than leading a project or rebuilding its authority.
In ideological groups like this, the death of major symbolic figures is only admitted when hiding the loss becomes impossible. Hamas, which spent decades perfecting ambiguity and narrative control, did not choose transparency willingly. It had no choice. Silence stopped working as protection, and admitting the truth became less damaging than keeping up the pretense.
The real importance lies not just in Sinwar’s death (which many already knew about) or in Abu Obeida’s symbolism alone. It comes from the timing and the way the announcement was made. A new military spokesman delivered it, combining tributes to several leaders in one single message. This does not show smooth continuity. It reveals an emergency restructuring of the leadership story under heavy pressure.
This is where the new Hamas starts to appear. The movement is no longer run through a balance between its political wing and military arm, or through symbolic figures who both mobilize people and keep control. Decisions now stay within small military and security circles. The main goal is no longer taking the initiative or growing stronger. It is holding the ranks together and stopping further breakdown.
Hamas chain of command damaged by war
The war has steadily targeted Hamas’s structure: its organization, its sources of power, and its command chain. With less support from regional countries and changes in the wider world, the group now faces a harsh new reality: an exhausted organization with little political depth and no real protection. In such conditions, you do not rebuild leadership. You just try to manage the crisis.
This change inside Hamas cannot be separated from the way Israel has broken the deterrent image the movement relied on for so long in its words and actions. Israel has shown it can fight a long war across multiple fronts, mixing conventional battles with guerrilla tactics, while keeping operational superiority.
Even more important, this superiority came mainly from intelligence. Israel penetrated Hamas’s command structure, followed decision-making lines, and steadily eliminated both field commanders and symbolic figures. These targeted killings not only reduced fighting strength.
They destroyed the whole idea of deterrence. The movement went from one that built up threats to one now operating under constant pressure, forced to admit losses after losing the ability to hide them or use them for political gain.
Here, the analysis needs to go beyond counting losses and into the real issue. What is left of a movement that has lost its leaders, its story, and its ability to take action, leaving only damage control? In times of such open weakness, the question becomes unavoidable: are we seeing a movement trying to rebuild, or just an organization trying to hold on to whatever remains?
Hamas’s own history points to the latter. In 2006, it entered politics as a way to rise, then turned against the whole political process the moment it blocked its hold on power. Politics was never a matter of principle for Hamas; it was a tool used when convenient. Today’s talk of political change inside Hamas follows the same path. It comes from a much weaker position.
Hamas negotiates from exposure rather than strength or ambition. Gaza has become a place it can neither control nor govern freely. It has gone through military and geographical changes. Holding weapons fails to translate into governance, or even long-term survival. So any political shift is not a real strategy. It is simply an attempt to reduce the cost of staying alive under total siege.
The writer is a UAE political analyst and former Federal National Council candidate.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-883814
Jerusalem Post, January 17
Trump’s hesitation on Iran: Why a prompt strike, even if only symbolic, is crucial – opinion
A failure to strike Iran risks empowering the regime and betraying Iranian protesters. President Trump must act decisively now, even if it means a symbolic strike, says Brig. Gen. Nagel.
Full text:
The world, including Israel, went to sleep a few days ago with the understanding and expectation of a significant American strike on Iran, following the brutal suppression of protests, the indiscriminate killing of thousands (and perhaps tens of thousands) of demonstrators, and President Donald Trump’s promises of imminent assistance. Yet, despite all the signs, the world awoke to a reality in which President Trump had still not struck, reminiscent of what happened in the past under President Obama in Syria.
Because President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke during the day preceding the “planned strike” (the call was confirmed by both Jerusalem and Washington, though its content was not disclosed), reports began spreading on social media like wildfire that Netanyahu had asked Trump to delay the strike, or perhaps even not to strike at all, in order to give Israel time to prepare for a response. As a result, inside those reports, responsibility for the fact that the United States did not strike Iran was placed solely on Israel.
Regardless of whether these reports are true, partially true, or not true at all, it is crucial to understand and internalize that the responsibility and the decision rest with President Trump alone. This is a principled and highly important decision, and even if he consults with the Prime Minister of Israel and perhaps other leaders in the Middle East, anyone familiar with Trump and his decision-making style must know that the decision, apparently still not taken, resides solely between the President’s own ears.
In the days before the “planned strike’, we witnessed the materialization of all the preliminary indicators leading to a strike: recommendations for Americans to leave Iran, the evacuation of families and non-essential personnel from US bases in the Gulf, the deployment of some critical assets in the region, and the explicit threats by the President and his aides.
Despite all this, the strike has not yet taken place, likely due to internal debates within the administration, stemming primarily from the difficulty of defining a clear objective and a desired endgame outcome for a possible strike, of whatever scope is chosen. There is no indication that the administration has defined a goal of toppling the regime and replacing it, particularly since it is clear that the right way to do it is through the Iranian people, not via an external actor.
The greatest danger is no strike at all
However, the great danger that must be prevented is that the chain of events will lead to the United States ultimately not striking Iran at all, even symbolically. In such a case, regardless of what was said in Netanyahu-Trump conversations, Netanyahu will be blamed. Iranian protesters, who are already off the streets out of fear of brutal repression, will conclude that they have no one to rely on and that help will not come from any external actor; consequently, they will not return to the streets.
President Trump, as part of his campaign for the Nobel Prize, will then declare that thanks to his clear threats, calm has returned to the streets of Iran, and now is the time to enter negotiations with Khamenei and his associates on all disputed issues. This is a realistic and catastrophic scenario, because it is clear how it would end. Not once in the past has entering the negotiating room with Iran produced a good agreement, except for the Iranians.
Because this scenario is realistic and highly likely if there is no strike, and because President Trump is apparently still deliberating, it must be made clear to him, regardless of what was said in previous conversations, that he must strike Iran. Preferably, there should be a broad American strike on infrastructure facilities, regime institutions, and on the entities and individuals who led the suppression of the protests. But even if a broad strike is not approved, a symbolic strike may still avert the danger of drifting into calm that leads to negotiations whose outcome would be highly problematic for both the United States and Israel.
If, despite this, the recommendation is not accepted and we will arrive at an undesirable US–Iran negotiation, then after the Israeli-US campaign that destroyed large parts of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, ballistic missiles, and drones, only one objective should remain for negotiations: the complete dismantlement of whatever remains of the nuclear and ballistic missiles programs and capabilities. We must not continue creating illusions, partial and incremental agreements, and diplomatic “games”.
A new round of talks with Iran
The problem is that the president’s special envoy Witkoff, together with Jared Kushner, are apparently pushing for a new round of talks with Tehran, inspired by Qatar, Turkey, and even Saudi Arabia, and we must stop it in time.
Trump’s old ultimatum to Tehran was sharp and clear: “Accept the terms of the United States or face the consequences.” This threat must remain, accompanied by determination. Any entry into negotiations without clear preconditions that Iran must fulfill could be dangerous. Now, after Iran’s capabilities have been severely damaged and the state is close to security and economic collapse, the threshold for entering talks must be very high. Any negotiations must begin only after Iran meets concrete, verifiable preliminary demands.
Iran enriched uranium to high levels in violation of IAEA decisions, attacked Israel directly from Iranian territory, and launched hundreds of ballistic missiles, more than a thousand drones, and dozens of cruise missiles against civilian and military targets. Iran must dismantle all nuclear infrastructure and missile and UAV production infrastructure and sites, destroy existing stockpiles, and halt any development of delivery systems capable of carrying nuclear warheads, including intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) that can also threaten the United States.
In the past, Iran has specialized in exploiting diplomacy to buy time, deceive, and mislead while continuing to advance its programs, as it is doing today, focusing on building new underground capabilities that are currently presented as benign but will, in the future, be outfitted with facilities to develop nuclear and ballistic capabilities that cannot be struck from the air, according to foreign reports.
The United States must continue on the path President Trump declared during the protests in Iran and provide the assistance and answers he promised to Iranian citizens yearning for change. External support would reignite the flames and the protests and might lead to the breaking of the protective front shielding the current corrupt regime, and to its replacement by the Iranian people.
Brig. Gen. (res.) Jacob Nagel is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and a professor at the Technion. He served as National Security Advisor to Prime Minister Netanyahu and as the head of the National Security Council (acting).
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-883616
Jerusalem Post, January 17
White House confirms Gaza Board of Peace members including Turkish, Qatari representatives
The announcement includes the members of the BoP, alongside the commander of the International Stabilization Force (ISF), and the Gaza Executive Board, which includes representatives from Turkey.
Full text:
The White House announced the members of the new Gaza Board of Peace (BoP) on Friday, which will be responsible for rebuilding the enclave and ensuring the disarmament of Hamas.
The announcement includes a list of members of the BoP, alongside the designation of the commander of the International Stabilization Force (ISF), and the Gaza Executive Board, which includes representatives from Turkey and Qatar.
The statement also detailed that Dr. Ali Sha’ath will be in charge of the technocratic National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), which will “oversee the restoration of core public services, the rebuilding of civil institutions, and the stabilization of daily life in Gaza, while laying the foundation for long-term, self-sustaining governance.”
The BoP, with US President Donald Trump assuming the role of chairman, will be composed of seven executive founding members: US Secretary of State Marco Rubio; US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff; Jared Kushner; Sir Tony Blair; Marc Rowan; Ajay Banga; and Robert Gabriel.
The statement also confirmed that former UN Middle East envoy Nickolay Mladenov will have an executive role “on the ground” as the High Representative for Gaza and serve as a link between the BoP and the NCAG administration.
ISF commander, Gaza Executive Board revealed
The White House revealed that the ISF will be commanded by Major General Jasper Jeffers, and will “lead security operations, support comprehensive demilitarization, and enable the safe delivery of humanitarian aid and reconstruction materials.”
The announcement also includes the names of several members of the Gaza Executive Board, who assume the responsibilities of helping “support effective governance and the delivery of best-in-class services that advance peace, stability, and prosperity for the people of Gaza.”
Its members, alongside the already mentioned members of the BoP, will include Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, Qatari diplomat Ali Al-Thawadi, Egypt’s General Hassan Rashad, Emirati Minister Reem Al-Hashimy, Yakir Gabay, and Sigrid Kaag.
Trump commented on Thursday: “I am backing a newly appointed Palestinian Technocratic Government, the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza, supported by the Board’s High Representative, to govern Gaza during its transition.”
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-883624
Jerusalem Post, January 16
‘If Israel falls, we fall’: Fate of West tied to Israel, Former French PM tells ‘Post’ – interview
“The stakes of the world… the fight against the regime of the Mullahs and its dangers, the links between Iran and Russia, the future of France and Europe is being decided here,” he said.
Full text:
“If Israel falls, we fall,” former French prime minister Manuel Valls told The Jerusalem Post in Jerusalem on Thursday.
“The stakes of the world, the fight against Islamism, the fight against the regime of the Mullahs and its dangers, the links between Iran and Russia, the future of France and Europe is being decided here, in the land of Israel,” he said, adding that this is why Israel must be supported.
Valls has long been considered a friend of Israel and the Jews, and has spoken out consistently against antisemitism. He is currently on a visit to Israel, where he has been meeting with prominent Israeli figures such as Knesset speaker Amir Ohana.
This was definitely not his first trip to Israel, having come for the first time in 1982 at 20 years old when he was the international secretary of the French Young Socialists, and multiple times since.
He stressed to the Post that, while he is not Jewish, he has been a “friend of Israel for a very long time” and that his commitment to Israel is symbiotic with his background in the political Left.
“Incidentally, this is often forgotten, but the relationship between France and Israel often passed through the left. That was the case with the relationship between Golda Meir, Rabin, Shimon Peres, Mitterrand, Jospin, and all those whose heirs we are today.”
“But today, I also believe that the best way to fight antisemitism, clearly and honestly, is to support Israel.” Valls defines antisemitism as the “hatred of Jews and hatred of Israel intertwined.”
Valls however believes that some of France’s political leaders misunderstand the nature of modern antisemitism. “They do not understand that today’s antisemitism is not the antisemitism of yesterday. The Dreyfus Affair, collaboration with the Nazis in 1940, the Shoah, the deportation of French Jews, old Christian or far-right antisemitism, this is all real, and we must continue to teach the Shoah in schools.
“But hatred of Jews today is linked to hatred of Israel. The best way to fight antisemitism is to defend Israel. And this is where I disagree with some politicians, such as [President] Emmanuel Macron.”
He also said that the reality is that, within the Muslim population in France, “there is a minority that expresses hatred of Jews.”
“Islamism endangers French Jews, but it also endangers the Republic,” he added. “I believe that France without Jews would no longer be France; I said this in 2015. Judaism is intertwined with the history of France and Europe, despite the tragedies.”
Valls: Jew-haters are the minority, not mainstream
Valls does believe that the Jew-haters are a minority and not a majority. Nevertheless, the minority is loud enough to be of concern.
“They are the same people who hate the Republic and believe that Sharia is more important than the law of the Republic. So it is the same fight. It is not only a Jewish problem; it is a problem for all French people.”
He accused far-left party La France Insoumise of “turning hatred of Jews into a political business model.” For this reason, Valls considers La France Insoumise to be a bigger threat than the National Rally in terms of antisemitism, despite the latter having been accused of Jew hatred in the past.
“During the large demonstration for the Republic and against antisemitism in November 2023, the far left was not there. The left-wing unions were not there. But the far right was there.”
“For the first time in history, at a demonstration against antisemitism, the far left was absent, and the far right was present. So this is a change. The National Rally supports Israel and declares itself opposed to antisemitism. The National Rally fights antisemitism and declares itself against antisemitism. And the far left uses antisemitism for electoral reasons. For votes.”
He calls this a “major political and anthropological shift” and something that has only occurred in recent years. Valls did acknowledge that there is of course still antisemitism in the National Rally – like with every party – and that a lot of its support for Israel may stem more in its hatred for Muslims.
Regarding his country’s recognition of a Palestinian state in 2025, Valls said it is “a mistake.”
“I told the President of the Republic this, some even say it cost me my ministerial position.” Valls served as French Minister of the Overseas in the Bayrou government between 23 December 2024 and 12 October 2025.
“First, it shows a lack of imagination regarding what is happening in the Middle East, especially after October 7. Of course, a solution for the Palestinians is necessary. It may come, I hope, through the reconstruction of Gaza and the involvement of the Arab world — especially Egypt and Jordan, and notably Saudi Arabia and the Emirates.”
“But continuing today to speak of recognizing a Palestinian state without taking the context into account is a mistake. Giving the impression that recognizing the State of Palestine unconditionally somehow legitimizes Hamas is a grave error.”
“That is why I opposed it. And French public opinion is also opposed to it.”
Valls always has believed in a two-state solution being the long-term solution to the conflict, but not with Hamas present. “Yes in Gaza, of course, but also in the West Bank.”
“As long as there is no recognition of Israel by all Arab countries and as long as the regime of the Mullahs has not been dealt with, as long we do not change the education given to Palestinians, including in East Jerusalem, we will never find a solution.”
Valls told the Post that any solution must first take into account Israel’s security.
“Let us move beyond old formulas and outdated European diplomatic approaches that no longer reflect the transformations of the Near and Middle East,” he concluded.
https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/article-883552
Le Point, January 15
« Plus de 12 000 personnes ont été tuées en Iran »
Le Point a pu s’entretenir avec un cadre médical à l’intérieur du pays malgré le blocage des communications. Son récit est glaçant.
Full text:
insoutenable huis clos se poursuit en Iran. Depuis le jeudi 8 janvier, les communications Internet et téléphone sont coupées dans le pays sur ordre des autorités islamiques, rendant extrêmement difficile la récolte d’informations sur la révolte en cours, ainsi que la répresion des autorités.
D’après l’organisation de défense des droits de l’homme HRANA, basée à Washington, au moins 2 404 manifestants auraient été tués par les forces de sécurité depuis le début du mouvement de contestation, le 28 décembre dernier, la chaîne d’opposition Iran International évoquant même le chiffre de 12 000 victimes, citant des rapports gouvernementaux.
Le Point a pu s’entretenir avec un cadre médical situé dans une région périphérique de l’Iran. Son témoignage anonyme, pour des raisons évidentes de sécurité, est glaçant.
Le Point : Comment allez-vous ?
Cadre médical iranien : Je ne vais pas bien. Pourquoi irais-je bien ? J’ai assisté à des scènes horribles que je n’avais vues que dans les films. Je ne pensais jamais voir de telles choses de mes propres yeux.
Qu’avez-vous vu ?
Les blessés par balle que l’on recevait auparavant, par exemple des voleurs arrêtés par la police, étaient touchés au niveau des pieds, des mains ou des cuisses. Là, on reçoit des personnes ciblées à la poitrine ou au ventre à l’arme de guerre, dans le but clair de tuer.
Plusieurs sources évoquent aujourd’hui un bilan de plusieurs milliers de morts en Iran. Est-ce crédible ?
Ces chiffres sont vrais, et sont même, à mon sens, sous-estimés. Le jeudi 8 janvier, en une nuit, dans mon hôpital, qui est de petite taille, vingt manifestants sont décédés. Dans un établissement de taille moyenne, trente-cinq personnes ont été tuées. À l’échelle de la ville, au moins un millier de personnes sont mortes durant cette nuit. Pour ma part, je connais la capacité des établissements de ma région, le nombre de patients qu’ils peuvent accueillir en vingt-quatre heures, le taux normal de mortalité, ainsi que le potentiel d’accueil lors d’une garde de nuit. Lorsque je compare ces chiffres au nombre de blessés et de morts enregistrés, je peux réaliser une estimation sur la région, et même au niveau national. Voilà pourquoi, on en est donc au moins à 12 000 morts, probablement plus, car ce chiffre n’inclut même pas les personnes tuées dans la rue qui, par définition, ne sont pas admises à l’hôpital. J’ai moi-même vu au bord de la chaussée une victime gisant au sol, dans une mare de sang, dont l’intestin avait explosé après avoir été visé, vraisemblablement, par une mitrailleuse lourde.
Avez-vous reçu un tel nombre de patients durant la guerre des douze jours entre Israël et l’Iran, en juin 2025 ?
Pas du tout. Ce n’est pas la même échelle. Durant la guerre de juin dernier, on ne recevait pas plus de deux ou trois blessés en même temps, un nombre que nous étions en mesure de prendre en charge en vertu de nos processus de gestion mis en place en cas de plan de victimes de masse et établis selon le nombre de lits. Mais le 8 janvier, on s’est tout à coup retrouvé avec 50 blessés par balle arrivés en une seule vague, non par ambulance, mais dans des voitures de particuliers. La situation était insoutenable. Nous n’étions pas prêts et beaucoup sont morts sur place, avant même d’avoir pu atteindre la salle d’opération.
Quel était votre rôle ?
En raison de nos capacités limitées, mon rôle était de trier les patients. Tous n’étaient pas pris en charge. Par exemple, l’un d’entre eux, dont l’état était jugé trop grave, n’a pas été traité et a rendu son dernier souffle dans la salle d’accueil. Un autre était blessé au niveau de la poitrine et je l’ai directement envoyé en salle d’opération. Une autre victime, touchée moins sérieusement au niveau du ventre, a été mise en attente. Le but était bien sûr de sauver un maximum de vies.
Les familles des victimes sont-elles autorisées à récupérer les corps ?
D’après la loi en vigueur en Iran, tous les décès par balle doivent impérativement être transférés à la médecine légale. Après autopsie, celle-ci doit donner l’autorisation pour remettre le corps aux familles. La réalité est que les médecines légales à travers le pays sont aujourd’hui submergées par l’aflux de corps et ne disposent pas de la place nécessaire pour les conserver. Voilà pourquoi les familles sont invitées à venir identifier et chercher les corps, comme on a pu le voir dans plusieurs vidéos difficiles à regarder diffusées sur les réseaux sociaux, qui sont tout à fait crédibles.
« La sécurité est présente dans tous les hôpitaux »
Les forces de sécurité sont-elles présentes dans les hôpitaux ?
Oui, la sécurité est présente dans tous les hôpitaux. Maintenant, il faut dire qu’elle nous laisse accomplir notre travail et ne s’est jamais interposée entre les patients et nous. En revanche, elle se renseigne sur l’identité des blessés dans le but de les poursuivre par la suite. Voilà pourquoi nous, médecins, conseillons à nos patients de donner de faux noms et numéro de carte d’identité.
Qui sont d’après vous les manifestants qui descendent dans la rue ?
Les gens qui descendent dans la rue ne le font pas principalement pour la démocratie. Ce n’est pas majoritairement pour la liberté qu’ils font face aux balles. C’est avant tout parce qu’ils ont faim. Leur salaire reste tel quel alors que les produits de première nécessité ne font qu’augmenter. Ils n’arrivent plus à subvenir à leurs besoins de base. Voilà pourquoi ils sont prêts à affronter les tirs. Ils n’ont aucune autre possibilité pour se faire entendre.
Pourtant, on entend de nombreux slogans politiques, par exemple contre l’ayatollah Khamenei ?
La raison est que ce sont eux (le régime, NDLR) qui les ont mis dans cet état de pauvreté. Khamenei et la République islamique ont tout d’abord confisqué au peuple la liberté et la démocratie. Au cours des dernières années, la population n’a fait que manifester, sans résultat. Aujourd’hui, elle meurt de faim.
L’Iran est aujourd’hui coupé du monde. Quel message souhaitez-vous passer aujourd’hui ?
Il faut dire que c’est la dernière fois que le peuple se soulève en Iran. Après cela, les gens n’auront plus l’énergie nécessaire. Si, cette fois, le reste du monde ne vient pas au secours du peuple iranien, ce pays deviendra la Corée du Nord. Internet est aujourd’hui coupé. Les gens sont emprisonnés. Le pays risque de sombrer dans la misère, et le peuple de mourir dans le plus grand désespoir.
Souhaitez-vous davantage de moyens médicaux ?
Pas du tout. La communauté internationale doit faire pression, mais pas sur le plan diplomatique. Si elle veut vraiment éviter un désastre humain, la seule solution est un soutien militaire, c’est-à-dire renverser le régime. Dans le cas contraire, si le peuple est à nouveau étouffé, alors la répression sera encore plus terrible. Et je peux vous dire qu’il perdra toute capacité de lever la voix à nouveau.
Jerusalem Post, January 15
Hezbollah warns Lebanese gov’t against pushing disarmament, threatens ‘chaos, civil war’
Hezbollah insists that the deal only applies to the southernmost region of Lebanon that borders Israel and has refused to relinquish its arsenal elsewhere.
Full text:
A senior Hezbollah official has warned Lebanon’s government that pressing on with efforts to disarm the group throughout the country would trigger chaos and possibly civil war, according to comments circulated by the armed group on Wednesday.
Lebanon has pledged to bring all arms in the country under state control, in line with a 2024 agreement that ended a devastating war between Hezbollah and Israel.
Hezbollah insists that the deal only applies to the southernmost region of Lebanon that borders Israel and has refused to relinquish its arsenal elsewhere.
In an interview with Russian state media outlet RT, senior Hezbollah political official Mahmoud Qmati said pursuing a state monopoly on arms further north would be “the biggest crime committed by the state.”
“The path taken by the Lebanese government and state institutions will lead Lebanon to instability, chaos, and perhaps even civil war,” Qmati said, though he added that Hezbollah would not be dragged into a confrontation with Lebanon’s army.
The Lebanese army said last week that it had taken operational control in the area between the Litani River and Israel’s border. The Lebanese cabinet has asked the army to brief it in early February on how it would pursue disarmament in other parts of the country.
Hezbollah has said that Israeli troops must withdraw from five hilltop positions they occupy in southern Lebanon, halt near-daily airstrikes on Lebanon, and release detained Lebanese before any further disarmament is discussed.
“There will be no talk or dialogue about any situation north of the Litani River before Israel withdraws from all Lebanese territory, liberates the South and the prisoners, and stops its violations against Lebanon,” said Qmati.
Aoun: Lebanon will continue disarmament campaign even as Israeli strikes continue
Israel says that efforts to disarm Hezbollah fighters have been insufficient, raising pressure on Lebanese leaders who fear Israel could escalate strikes.
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said Sunday that Beirut’s campaign to dismantle armed groups will continue even as Israeli strikes continue, insisting that disarmament will move forward across the country, including areas north of the Litani River.
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-883312
The European Conservative, January 15
The Iranians’ Freedom Fight: The Prospect of a Hamas-Free Palestine
A regime change in Iran would not only liberate the Persian people but would also ‘free’ Palestine by weakening Hamas, ultimately benefitting the whole region, Israel, Europe, and the United States.
Full text:
Since the morning of October 7, 2023, the Western world has witnessed a profound moral inversion. Those who wrapped themselves in keffiyehs and shouted “Free Palestine” were celebrated as voices of conscience, while those who spoke up for Israeli civilians, the families butchered in their homes, young people murdered at a music festival, and hostages dragged into Gaza by a designated terrorist organization, were smeared as Nazi Zionists.
Massive rallies swept across the United States, Canada, and major European cities. Freedom of speech was perverted into a license to incite violence against Jews, Zionists, and anyone who refused to chant slogans like “Globalize the Intifada.” Almost overnight, people who could not locate Gaza on a map rebranded themselves as Middle East experts, united less by knowledge than by an obsessive hostility toward Israel.
Posters of Hamas hostages were torn down. Jewish synagogues and institutions were vandalized. University campuses were occupied. And eventually, rhetoric turned into bloodshed: a young couple was murdered in Washington, D.C., and a Holocaust survivor was killed by a Molotov cocktail in Boulder, Colorado, all in the name of “Free Palestine.”
Fast forward to today, and that same movement is conspicuously quiet.
That very same movement is now in complete silence while more than 10,000 Iranians have been massacred by the Islamic regime. The question is unavoidable: why?
Why are our streets not filled with massive banners demanding that the Iranian regime stop killing its own people?
Why is the regime not labeled “child killer”?
Where is the LGBT movement standing in solidarity with Iranian gays who are executed?
Where are the feminists?
Where is BLM that is so eager to condemn Israel for defending itself as a sovereign nation, yet is silent now?
These questions may be rhetorical, but they expose a grim reality.
If we assumed that those chanting “Globalize the Intifada” were merely ignorant and misled, we might be inclined to show some leniency. Even then, the moral failure would remain. But if we look at the facts and at what we have witnessed for years, the answer is far more disturbing and must be said plainly: these people are directly or indirectly supporting an Islamist regime.
Tehran has been funding Hamas since the 1990s, providing millions of dollars, weapons, and training. It funds Hezbollah in Lebanon, stationed on Israel’s northern border. And now, that very organization is slaughtering its own people by the thousands, aided by well-established proxies and imported militias from Iraq.
The Iranian people, largely abandoned by the world, are fighting to overthrow an Islamic regime that has caused bloodshed not only inside Iran, but across the entire so-called “axis of resistance.” Since December 28, 2025, Persians have been giving their lives for freedom. This is what real freedom fighting looks like. Marching through Manhattan donning keffiyehs while looting the city is no freedom fight. That is just performative outrage.
If the global protest movement truly cared about Palestinians, it would stand unequivocally with the Iranian people. A regime change in Tehran would do more to free Palestine than any chant ever could. Hamas survives because of Iranian money and weapons. Remove that lifeline, and the terror infrastructure collapses.
Instead, we are witnessing silence, or absurd conspiracy theories claiming Israeli Mossad agents are behind the unrest in Iran. The insinuation is as insulting as it is absurd. Let us be honest for a moment: Does it sound remotely reasonable that tens of thousands of Mossad agents are roaming the streets of Iran, willingly facing torture and execution by the ayatollahs? Blaming the death of thousands of Iranians on Israel, a reflexive scapegoating, is antisemitism in its clearest form. This level of vilification is reserved for one group alone. But beyond antisemitism, it is also a profound insult to Iranians themselves, as if they are incapable of agency, incapable of deciding their own fate, mere puppets in someone else’s story.
What should be understood is that a regime change in Iran would not only liberate the Persian people, who have been oppressed for 47 years. It would also free Palestine by cutting Hamas’s lifeline, and ultimately benefit Israel, the whole region, Europe, and the United States. If Iran’s Shiite proxy militias collapsed along with the ayatollahs’ goal of regional hegemony and Israel’s destruction, the world would be safer. And yet, somehow, this does not appear to be a noble enough cause for those who are otherwise eager to flood the streets for every fashionable outrage that crosses their path.
And that, more than anything, reveals the moral bankruptcy of today’s loudest activists.
Jerusalem Post, January 15
‘Over 90% of Iranians hate the regime,’ INSS’s Beni Sabti reveals from leaked Iran survey
“It was a secret poll which said that 92% of the Iranian people hate their regime,” Sabti said, according to a transcript provided to The Jerusalem Post.
Full text:
A leaked internal survey commissioned by Iran’s presidency found that 92% of Iranians “hate the regime,” Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) Iran expert Beni Sabti said this week at The Jerusalem Post Miami Conference, as speakers at the summit focused on the widening gap between the Islamic Republic’s leadership and public sentiment.
Speaking at the conference, held in Miami earlier this week, Sabti said the poll was not aimed at measuring attitudes toward a specific government officeholder, but toward the Islamic Republic’s broader power structure, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
“It was a secret poll which said that 92% of the Iranian people hate their regime,” Sabti said, according to a transcript provided to The Jerusalem Post that was generated using Otter.ai.
Sabti linked the reported findings to long-running domestic crises that have fueled repeated unrest, citing water shortages and economic hardship. “They don’t have water for so many years,” he said, describing the conditions as a driver of anger toward Tehran’s leadership and policies.
While the claim Sabti cited used the language of “hate,” recent reporting outside Iran has described a similar figure in terms of broad dissatisfaction.
Speaking at the conference, held in Miami earlier this week, Sabti said the poll was not aimed at measuring attitudes toward a specific government officeholder. Credit: The Jerusalem Post.
Survey reveals 92% public dissatisfaction with Iran’s leadership
In November 2025, IranWire reported that a poll conducted by the Iranian Student Polling Agency (ISPA) on behalf of the administration found “public dissatisfaction with conditions in Iran has reached 92 per cent,” after details were published by a presidential office communications official.
Iran International reported in November 2025 that a “confidential survey” indicated that more than nine in ten Iranians were unhappy with the country’s direction, describing the poll as prepared for internal decision-makers and not intended for public release.
Sabti also argued that the IRGC plays a central role in projecting Iranian power beyond its borders, pointing to Tehran’s regional activities and its campaign against Israel through allies and proxy networks. He described the Guards as the “evil hand” of the regime and cited Iranian activity in Lebanon and Syria as examples, according to the transcript.
Sabti, who was born in Iran and later became a leading Israeli researcher on Iranian society and decision-making, serves as an Iran expert at INSS.
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-883465
Atlantico, January 15
Massacre en Iran : la part vérifiée, la part d’incertitude
La répression des manifestations en Iran a franchi un seuil d’une violence inédite. Selon Iran International, média basé à l’étranger et disposant d’un vaste réseau de sources sur le terrain, le nombre de morts pourrait atteindre 12 000 personnes.
Full text:
Atlantico : Les manifestations qui se déroulent actuellement en Iran depuis un peu plus d’une semaine sont réprimées avec une extrême violence par la République islamique et les différentes forces de sécurité du régime. Certains bilans font état de 12 000 morts. Le chiffre est particulièrement préoccupant. Qu’est-ce que vous pouvez nous en dire ?
Hirbod Deghani-Azar : Là, on est dans un massacre. Une situation de massacre généralisé — et, oui, on peut employer les termes : crimes contre l’humanité. Ce chiffre est effrayant, mais il n’est pas forcément improbable.
Pourquoi ? Parce que quand on regarde les images, et surtout les témoignages qu’on reçoit de médecins, on comprend qu’il n’y a plus de place dans les morgues. Les hôpitaux sont saturés partout. Ils sont obligés de poser des corps à même le sol, ou de les stocker dans des camions frigorifiques. Donc on ne parle pas de « quelques centaines de morts ».
Certaines ONG — très bien intentionnées — annoncent des chiffres plus bas, parce qu’elles ont besoin de recueillir, d’agréger, de vérifier, et de présenter des éléments jugés « objectifs » au sens méthodologique du terme. Or, aujourd’hui, il n’existe pas de chiffre objectivable « pur et dur », justement parce que la politique iranienne rend le décompte extrêmement difficile : les morts sont multiples, et surtout les traces sont effacées.
Il y a d’abord des morts dont on n’a pas connaissance. Les hôpitaux ont été attaqués. Les blessés n’osent plus aller à l’hôpital, parce qu’ils savent qu’ils risquent d’être arrêtés sur place. Il y a des personnes tuées par balles, dont les corps sont confisqués : ils disparaissent. Et il y a les morts qu’on voit, ceux dont les images sortent malgré tout.
Je n’ai pas de chiffre exact. Mais 12 000 morts, sur un pays de 90 millions d’habitants, compte tenu de l’état des hôpitaux et des morgues, cela ne me paraît pas improbable. Cela me paraît même en deçà de ce que je peux imaginer de la situation.
Je vous donne un exemple très concret : j’ai une vidéo, un son que j’écoutais — un extrait de 20 ou 30 secondes. On entend en continu une foule qui crie, qui scande « Mort à Khomeini », et d’autres slogans actuels. Et en même temps, on entend des tirs continus : ça ne s’arrête presque pas. Ça fait ta-ta-ta-ta, avec des armes automatiques. On parle aussi de chevrotines, donc de fusils à pompe, et d’autres types d’armes. C’est sidérant.
Vous voulez dire qu’il s’agit d’une zone de guerre désormais ?
Ce n’est plus simplement du maintien de l’ordre, ni même une police anti-émeute « classique », comme on a pu le voir à d’autres périodes. Là, on est dans une situation où l’on tire sur la population civile. Et d’ailleurs, des gens nous rapportent que sur le terrain il y a des Irakiens — des personnes qui ne sont pas les forces habituelles du régime —, des « proxys », avec des uniformes différents, et qu’ils sont là aussi pour tuer.
La République islamique ferait appel à des troupes de mercenariat ?
Bien sûr. Le régime soutient des proxys, et il demande à ses proxys de venir l’aider. Pour le coup, il y a des éléments visibles : le Hezbollah est identifiable, certaines milices chiites aussi, parce que leurs uniformes sont reconnaissables. Pour d’autres proxys, je ne saurais pas vous dire précisément lesquels, mais ce qui est clair, c’est que cela existe.
Et c’est très documenté : aujourd’hui, parmi ce qu’on appelle les « forces de répression » — moi, j’emploierais plutôt le mot « assassins » —, il n’y a pas uniquement le personnel habituel : les pasdarans, la police, les basidji. Il y a, en plus, des mercenaires, des milices étrangères, présentes pour préserver réellement le régime religieux.
Est-ce que le fait de recourir à ces mercenaires étrangers est aussi le signe d’une fébrilité, d’une fragilité du régime, qui sentirait que la situation peut basculer ?
Oui. J’y vois une faiblesse, une faiblesse réelle du gouvernement. Quand un régime n’arrive pas à assurer lui-même sa propre sécurité, il fait appel à l’extérieur : c’est un symptôme.
Et il y a en plus une hypocrisie : d’un côté, le régime prétend demander à sa police de ne pas tirer sur la population ; de l’autre, il convoque des forces extérieures pour tirer. C’est le double discours permanent.
En parallèle, ils mettent en scène la peur : ils montrent les morts à la télévision, ils organisent des pendaisons. Et à partir du moment où ils décrètent que tous ceux qui sont dans la rue sont des agents d’Israël et des États-Unis, ils peuvent qualifier leurs actes d’espionnage ou « d’action contre la République ». Et cela ouvre la voie au seul débouché judiciaire : la pendaison.
Cette pendaison est mise en scène : on pend des gens sur des places publiques, parfois avec des grues. La peur, la pression et la mort servent au maintien d’une rente, d’une politique, d’un pouvoir local qui, pour moi, a perdu toute notion de souveraineté.
Parce qu’à partir du moment où un pouvoir tue sa population à grande échelle, et qu’en plus, pour conserver sa position, il fait appel à des corps étrangers, à des armées étrangères, il n’est plus possible de parler de souveraineté au sens classique. Là, on peut dire les choses clairement : la République islamique d’Iran est en guerre contre sa population, assistée par des agents étrangers, des mercenaires. Oui, clairement.
Est-ce que ce que vous décrivez témoigne que nous sommes passés d’un mouvement de protestation à un embryon de révolution ?
De toute façon, c’est évident : ce n’est plus du maintien de l’ordre, c’est une attaque contre la population civile. Et malgré cela, la population continue de sortir, toutes les nuits.
À partir du moment où des gens continuent de descendre dans la rue en sachant qu’ils risquent de mourir, on est déjà dans une dynamique révolutionnaire.
Et les slogans n’ont pas changé depuis le premier jour. Ils disent qu’ils ne veulent plus de ce régime. Ils le disent clairement : ils ne veulent plus de théocratie. Ils réclament la mort de Khamenei. Ils scandent aussi le retour — peut-être un slogan plus qu’une personne, je ne veux pas entrer dans ce débat parce que je refuse qu’on confisque la révolution en la réduisant au nom de celui qui viendrait après.
Ce que disent les gens est simple : « On en a marre. Stop. » Et pourtant, sur tous les médias, on voit apparaître des « spécialistes » qui expliquent qu’ils savent mieux que les Iraniens ce qu’ils demandent : que ce ne devrait être ni untel, ni untel, parce que ce serait ceci ou cela. Cette discussion, c’est une confiscation.
Et c’est aussi un narratif organisé : par les ambassades, partout dans le monde, on déplace le sujet. Le sujet est unique : les gens sont entrés dans la rue pour dire stop au régime théocratique. Quelle que soit la raison initiale — l’économie ou autre — il y a une convergence sur ce rejet. Et en face, la réponse est une tuerie de masse.
Au fond, cela engage la responsabilité internationale. Quel que soit celui qui viendra derrière, ça nous engage tous.
Au fond, vous dites qu’il y a un trait commun entre tous les manifestants qui protestent aujourd’hui contre la République islamique, quelles que soient leurs origines politiques, leurs motivations. S’agit-il d’abord et avant tout la volonté de mettre un terme au régime, et de vivre dignement aussi sur le plan économique, parce que ce régime les appauvrit ?
Oui, mais ils ne formulent même pas forcément cela en termes de « vivre dignement ». Les slogans sont très simples : « On n’en peut plus. On n’y croit plus. »
Ils disent : le soi-disant réformateur fait des promesses ; on met un ancien gardien de la révolution qui a du sang sur les mains pour dire « on va vous entendre, on va vous écouter », et les gens ressortent encore plus nombreux. Ils n’y croient pas. Et ils ont raison de ne pas y croire.
Et pendant ce temps, sur les plateaux en France, dans certains articles, on est décommandés du jour au lendemain. Et la seule question qui revient souvent, c’est : « est-ce une révolte sur la vie chère ? » Puis : « que pensez-vous de Reza Pahlavi ? » On s’en fiche ! Vous confisquez la discussion.
Moi, ce que je pense, c’est qu’il y a des gens qui meurent toutes les minutes en Iran, et c’est de ça qu’il faut parler.
Face à une répression aussi brutale et aussi équipée — pasdaran, gardiens de la révolution, basidji, proxys —, c’est une armée qui fait face au peuple iranien.Quels sont les moyens pour ce peuple de se défendre ? Est-ce qu’il est dans l’attente d’une aide internationale ? Ou peut-il, à lui seul, renverser le régime ?
Nous avons tous une responsabilité internationale.
C’est comme si vous me disiez que, sous l’occupation nazie, la Résistance française aurait pu tenir sans intervention extérieure : sans armes, sans soutien, sans neutralisation des têtes de réseau. Vous voyez ce que je veux dire.
Aujourd’hui, on est face à une autorité — j’ai même du mal à dire « gouvernement » — qui tue sa propre population. C’est une situation d’occupation : quand un peuple dit « je ne veux pas de vous » et que, par la violence, vous restez et vous tuez pour rester, cela s’appelle une occupation.
Cette occupation repose sur la violence et la répression, avec l’aide d’agents extérieurs. Donc ce n’est même pas une question, c’est une certitude : il y a une responsabilité collective.
Et on ne peut pas continuer à parler diplomatiquement avec ces assassins. Pour moi, la République islamique ne peut plus être considérée comme un interlocuteur diplomatique normal : un pouvoir qui tue sa population perd sa légitimité. La souveraineté d’un État, c’est d’abord la protection de sa population. Si vous n’assumez plus cela, vous parlez au nom de qui ?
Oui, c’est un cas inédit, et on devrait arrêter d’avoir peur, arrêter de se cacher derrière son petit doigt. Il faut accepter de faire évoluer le droit positif international. Il existe des procédures : l’idée d’aller au secours d’une population — ce qu’on appelle parfois « devoir de protéger » ou « responsabilité de protéger ». Normalement, cela passerait par une force organisée sous mandat du Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU. Aujourd’hui, ce n’est pas possible, parce que la position de la Chine et d’autres acteurs l’empêche.
Il y a aussi une ambiguïté dans la position américaine : deux courants semblent s’opposer. Certains, comme Gilles Devant, seraient défavorables à une intervention ; d’autres factions seraient plutôt favorables. Et Trump a déclaré il y a à peine une heure que de l’aide arrivait, sans préciser laquelle, ni sous quelle forme, ni en quelle quantité. Qu’est-ce que vous en pensez ?
Je veux développer deux sujets : les États-Unis, et le volet du droit international et de l’intervention.
D’abord : est-ce que la population a besoin d’aide ? Oui. Les gens courageux qui sont en première ligne se font assassiner. S’ils avaient été armés, je pense que ce serait déjà terminé.
On nous répond : « oui, mais ça provoquerait une guerre civile ». Peut-être. Mais en attendant, ils se font assassiner pour rien. C’est le premier point.
Deuxième point : la responsabilité collective des États. Il y a des outils. On peut créer des forces interalliées. On peut imaginer des formes d’appui, y compris militaires, ciblées. Et il faut rappeler une chose : les têtes de cette pieuvre ne sont pas si nombreuses. L’appareil des gardiens de la révolution est énorme, mais ceux qui sont au-dessus — ceux qui détiennent l’essentiel du pouvoir — ne sont pas si nombreux. D’ailleurs, Israël a déjà commencé un certain travail, et cela pourrait s’inscrire dans une continuité.
Troisième point, crucial : la population iranienne n’a surtout pas besoin de bombardements de masse. L’objectif n’est pas de vider les rues et de tuer des civils. L’objectif est d’apporter de l’aide, de la protection. L’aide peut prendre des formes multiples — un inventaire à la Prévert.
J’entendais tout à l’heure qu’en France, Barrot a appelé l’ambassadeur iranien : très bien, geste diplomatique. Mais moi je dis que cet ambassadeur n’a plus aucune crédibilité pour représenter le peuple iranien.
Vous avez vu le document sorti par l’ambassade d’Iran, affirmant que tout cela serait « faux » et qu’il ne se passerait rien en Iran ? C’est délirant. On est dans un monde de fous.
Et enfin : cette action humanitaire de sauvegarde et de protection peut se faire avec plusieurs pays. Elle peut s’accompagner d’une action diplomatique visant à dénier la représentativité de ce régime. Et elle peut être complétée par la création d’une cour pénale internationale ad hoc pour poursuivre les responsables. Cela pourrait aussi accélérer les défections au sein même des proches du pouvoir.
Toute dernière question pour conclure : vu de France, il y a un impensé. On comprend les motivations du peuple iranien, mais on comprend mal comment le mouvement a émergé. Il semble spontané. Est-ce qu’il peut s’organiser pour faire face à la répression ? Et comment s’organise-t-il concrètement ?
Je pense que le blackout a justement été décidé parce que les gens s’organisaient entre eux. L’Iran est un pays jeune : les Iraniens maîtrisent très bien les outils numériques.
Si le régime a coupé Internet, c’est qu’il a vu que les gens s’organisaient concrètement. Et oui, avant le blackout, cela semblait très organisé : les slogans étaient les mêmes partout, dès le début. Les vidéos sortaient partout. Sur Telegram et d’autres canaux, on voyait une corrélation entre ce qui se passait dans différentes villes.
Le blackout sert à deux choses :
tuer impunément, sans que les preuves sortent ;désorganiser l’organisation, en empêchant les gens de communiquer entre eux.
C’est même certainement une des raisons principales de la coupure : empêcher la coordination et permettre la répression hors caméra.
Et il y a une demande très claire : la communauté internationale doit empêcher par tous les moyens la coupure d’Internet en Iran. Et si on pouvait avoir une aide « cyber » pour neutraliser les moyens de reconnaissance — caméras, dispositifs d’identification et tout ce qui permet ensuite les arrestations et les sanctions — ce serait déterminant.
New York Times, January 14
‘Shoot to Kill’: Accounts of Brutal Crackdown Emerge From Iran
As many as 3,000 feared dead as witnesses describe government forces firing on unarmed protesters.
Full text:
As the Iranian authorities impose a near-total communication blackout on a country convulsed by mass protests, videos and witness accounts slowly emerging suggest that the government is waging one of its deadliest crackdowns on unrest in more than a decade.
Eyewitnesses say government forces have begun opening fire, apparently with automatic weapons and at times seemingly indiscriminately, on unarmed protesters. Hospital workers say protesters had been coming in with pellet injuries but now arrive with gunshot wounds and skull fractures. One doctor called it a “mass-casualty situation.”
Despite the communications blockade, a recurring image has made its way out of Iran: rows and rows of body bags.
In videos uploaded by opposition activists on social media, families can be seen sobbing as they huddle together over bloodied corpses in unzipped bags. And in footage aired on Iranian state television, a morgue official, sheathed in blue scrubs, stands amid bags neatly arranged along the floor of a white room, under glaring fluorescent lights.
The state broadcaster said the images show the danger that protests pose to Iran’s society: “There are individuals in these gatherings who want to drag ordinary people — people who have nothing to do with these events — and their families into this situation. So that they too are drawn into the chaos,” the reporter in the voice over said. “I have never seen images like these in my life before.”
Those who still support Iran’s theocratic government and those in the streets calling for its downfall agree: These are days of brutality unlike anything they have ever seen.
The toll of dead and injured across the country is unclear. Human rights groups are struggling to reach their contacts inside Iran and follow the methodology they normally use to verify information but say they have counted more than 500 dead.
Multiple American officials say that U.S. intelligence agencies have conservatively estimated that more than 600 protesters have been killed so far.The agencies have noted that both the current protests and the crackdown are far more violent than those in 2022 or other recent uprisings against the government.
A senior Iranian health ministry official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said about 3,000 people had been killed across the country but sought to shift the blame to “terrorists” fomenting unrest. The figure included hundreds of security officers, he said.
Another government official, also speaking on the condition of anonymity, said he had seen an internal report that referred to at least 3,000 dead, and added that the toll could climb.
If confirmed, the death toll would be among the worst in recent Iranian history.
Witnesses spoke of seeing snipers positioned on rooftops in downtown Tehran and firing into crowds; of peaceful protests turning abruptly into scenes of carnage and panic as bullets pierced through people’s heads and torsos, sending bodies toppling to the ground; and of an emergency room treating 19 gunshot patients in a single hour.
“The regime is on a killing spree,” said one protester, Yasi. She, like other Iranians interviewed by The New York Times, asked that her full name be withheld for safety.
Yasi, who is in her 30s and works for a publishing company, said she was marching along Andarzgoo Boulevard in Tehran on Friday night with friends when security forces stormed in and shot a teenage boy in the leg as his mother looked on.
“My son! My son! They shot my son!” the woman cried, Yasi said.
Videos posted to social media on Monday night and verified by The New York Times showed a large crowd of protesters in Tehran. The sound of gunfire could be heard, and the cry: “Death to the dictator!”
For the past five days, the Iranian authorities have shut down the internet, international phone lines and sometimes even domestic mobile phone connections. That has left rights groups, journalists and families alike struggling to understand the scope of what has happened.
But videos trickling out of the country and the messages of some Iranians who occasionally get satellite internet connections offer a devastating picture of bloodshed.
“I managed to get connected for a few minutes just to say it’s a blood bath here,” Saeed, a businessman in Tehran, told The Times. He said he was using a Starlink internet connection late on Sunday.
When protests over the dire Iranian economy broke out in Tehran’s marketplace, on Dec. 28, Saeed took to the streets to join them. He had done the same during the protest movement in 2022 and those before it, he said.
But as Iran descends into deeper isolation, it has become increasingly clear, he said, that this crackdown is “unlike any of the protests that came before.”
“I personally saw a young man get shot in the head,” he told The Times in recorded audio messages. “I witnessed someone get shot with a bullet to the knee. The person fell to the ground unconscious, and then security forces gathered over him.”
Two weeks ago, when a sharp currency devaluation sent protesters into the streets, officials acknowledged their grievances as legitimate, though they warned protesters not to be swayed by “rioters.”
But in the past week, the smaller demonstrations in city markets and universities exploded into a broader popular movement, with throngs of protesters filling major city squares and rural town centers alike. Now Iranian officials have begun to talk of them being taken over by “terrorists,” and foreign agents loyal to its enemies, the United States and Israel.
In a sign of the scale of the crackdown, the government has taken the unusual step of acknowledging that there have been large numbers of casualties, but it has sought to portray the dead as victims of violent protesters and members of the security forces.
“Take firm and effective measures to avenge the martyrs and those killed,” Iran’s attorney general, Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei, said at a meeting of the Supreme Judicial Council on Monday, according to the semiofficial news agency, Tasnim.
A video posted online on Tuesday and verified by The Times showed security forces firing a hail of bullets at protesters in eastern Tehran. The six-minute video, dated Jan. 9, captures the sound of hundreds of gunshots and shows the muzzle blasts of weapons atop the police station in Tehranpars. At one point in the video, a person is dragged inside the courtyard of the police station. At another stage, a convoy of security forces riding motorcycles enters the station.
Nine residents of Tehran, along with two doctors and a nurse who work at government hospitals, said they had witnessed the government’s harder line firsthand.
Two said in interviews that they had seen snipers firing down at crowds in the Sattarkhan and Pasvaran neighborhoods of Tehran, and one recounted a security agent in the Aghdasieh neighborhood indiscriminately shooting at the crowd as he drove by.
A Tehran resident who went to Sattarkhan with his wife on Saturday night said he had witnessed security forces open a barrage of gunfire with machine guns into a crowd of young men and women. They dropped to the ground on top of one another, he said.
At Nikan Hospital in northern Tehran, a nurse said medical workers had been overwhelmed when 19 gunshot victims came in almost at once. At Shohada Hospital in the Tajrish neighborhood of Tehran, a doctor said many protesters taken there were declared dead upon their arrival at the hospital, and that many had been shot at a close range in the head, neck, lungs and heart.
The Center for Human Rights in Iran, which is based in New York, released testimony on Monday from a doctor who has been treating patients in Tehran and Isfahan since the crackdown began. The group withheld his name for safety.
Earlier in the protests, the doctor said, protesters were being treated for tear gas exposure and pellet gun wounds. Then on Thursday, the doctor said, he started hearing heavy machine gunfire from the hospital.
“This was a mass-casualty situation,” the doctor said in his account. “Our facilities, space and personnel were far below the number of injured people arriving. The trauma cases I saw were brutal, shoot to kill.”
The executive director of the Center for Human Rights in Iran, Hadi Ghaemi, said his team had pieced together accounts from Karaj, west of Tehran, and Kermanshah, in western Iran, indicating that hospitals and clinics had been occupied by security forces who were searching for wounded protesters and collecting their personal information.
Saeed, the Tehran businessman, described a similar experience in the capital.
“They take the injured protesters to the hospital and if they recover, they arrest them,” he told The Times. “If their families arrive first, they try to somehow help them escape. The families who come to receive the bodies of those killed are forced into humiliating confessions: They have to say that the ‘terrorists’ have killed them.”
Activists at the Washington-based Iranian rights group HRANA have gathered reports from hospitals suggesting that in some cases security officials were detaining protesters even before they had been treated for their wounds.
Skylar Thompson, the deputy director of HRANA, said her organization’s death toll has jumped in fits and starts over the past two days, as people sporadically managed to get online and share what they had learned.
On Saturday, the group was putting the toll at 70 dead. By Tuesday, the number had grown to 1,850 protesters and 135 members of the government and military killed. There will most likely be another spike, once the group works through verifying 770 other cases.
The Center for Human Rights has chosen not to keep a toll, Mr. Ghaemi said, because it has been unable to connect with enough people to follow its typical procedures of corroborating the accounts of local rights activists with those of victims’ families.
“We can’t confirm detailed numbers, but all indications so far point to large-scale killings over the past few days,” Mr. Ghaemi said in an interview. “We estimate at least 1,000 deaths nationwide and potentially higher. But the current information is just the tip of the iceberg.”
Whether the violent crackdown will succeed in intimidating protesters into silence remains to be seen. On Monday, fewer videos of the unrest appeared than in previous days. But Saeed insisted that the killings would not stop the protesters.
“People are not afraid anymore,” he said.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/13/world/middleeast/iran-protester-deaths.html
New York Times, January 14
The Ayatollahs’ Antisemitism Has Undone Iran
Full text:
Notable among the slogans being chanted by the protesters flooding Iran’s streets is this one: “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon, my life for Iran.” That’s more than a repudiation of the regime’s foreign policy. It’s a reminder that a policy of antisemitism has a way of eventually destroying the antisemite.
Since the Iranian Revolution of 1979, the regime has had a singular obsession with Jews. The suppurating hatred of Israel is downstream from that.
The foundational political text of the regime, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s “Governance of the Jurist,” is shot through with antisemitism. As in: “From the very beginning, the historical movement of Islam has had to contend with the Jews, for it was they who first established anti-Islamic propaganda.” Iran’s current leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is an avowed Holocaust denier. Though Iran officially tolerates its dwindling Jewish community, the vast majority of Iranian Jews have fled the country, often under perilous circumstances.
Iranian foreign policy freely mixes anti-Israel furies with anti-Jewish ones. It has supported Hezbollah, sworn to Israel’s destruction, to the tune of billions of dollars over four decades. It has ordered antisemitic terrorist attacks at long range, including the 1994 bombing of a Jewish cultural center in Buenos Aires that killed 85 people. It has supplied weapons and training for Hamas, along with ballistic missiles for Yemen’s Houthis. It has repeatedly courted international outrage by hosting a conference of Holocaust deniers and antisemitic cartoon contests.
The regime also spent decades assembling the elements needed to build a nuclear weapon. One motivation was deterrence and self-defense. Another was given away by this chilling cost-benefit analysis from Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a former president, in a 2001 speech: “The use of one atomic bomb in Israel leaves nothing left, but in the Islamic world, there will only be damage.”
All this might at least be intelligible if Iran and Israel had ancient grievances or territorial disputes. There are none. Iran was among the first predominantly Muslim states to de facto recognize Israel, and Jerusalem and Tehran maintained close ties while the shah was in power. Even today, ordinary Iranians themselves are markedly less antisemitic than people in other Middle Eastern states, according to surveys published by the Anti-Defamation League. The current regime’s obsession is purely a function of Islamist ideology, not national interest.
That’s what’s at the root of that anti-regime chant.
Earlier this month, the regime tried to mollify protesters by offering most of its citizens a pathetic $7 monthly stipend amid skyrocketing inflation and a collapsing currency. Yet the same regime managed to send an estimated $1 billion to help Hezbollah rebuild its military capabilities while refusing to make meaningful concessions over its nuclear portfolio, leading to European sanctions that have further crippled the economy. What ordinary Iranians are revolting against isn’t just economic mismanagement and corruption. It’s also a regime that would rather pursue a perpetual jihad against the Zionist enemy than feed its own people.
For years, the cruelty of the policy was disguised by its apparent success, as Iranian proxies entrenched themselves across the Middle East and built a so-called ring of fire around the Jewish state. But after the attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, Israel systematically dismantled that ring in Gaza, Beirut, Damascus, Sanaa and ultimately Tehran, whose skies the Israeli Air Force dominated throughout a 12-day war in June.
At a stroke, it turned decades of Iranian investment in its efforts to destroy Israel to rubble and ash. It exposed to the Iranian people the regime’s military incompetence and helplessness. And it reminded Iranians that there’s a different path for Muslim states — like the United Arab Emirates, they can be moderate, prosperous, at peace with Israel and just across the Persian Gulf.
The knowledge that the regime is brittle is surely part of what is driving Iranians into the streets despite the mounting toll in lives — at least 2,000 so far, according to the regime itself, though possibly much higher. Iran’s leaders seem to realize that their rule is close to being shattered, which is why they’re responding to the protests with a mix of ferocity and diplomatic flexibility. Maybe it will work for a while.
But when the regime collapses, as sooner or later it will, its antisemitic politics will have played a large role in its demise. It’s a historic paradox, given what Khomeini and Khamenei intended. It’s also a historic fulfillment: Jews have owed a debt to Persians ever since Cyrus the Great ended the Babylonian Captivity 2,564 years ago and restored Jews to Zion.
There’s a broader lesson here in an era when anti-Jewish politics are gaining broad purchase. Antisemitism is wicked for many reasons, but it’s also wickedly dumb: for fostering a mind-set of lurid conspiracy theories; for seeking scapegoats for national failures rather than taking responsibility; for stigmatizing and suppressing a productive and educated minority. Societies that have expelled or persecuted their Jewish communities, from Spain to Russia to the Arab world, were all destined for long-term decline. The same has been true for modern-day Iran.
It needn’t be like that forever. A regime that sought to project on Jews its own malevolence may soon have its long overdue comeuppance. And an Iranian people who reclaim their freedom as individuals can also reclaim their reason as a nation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/13/opinion/iran-ayatollah-antisemitism.html
The Wall Street Journal, January 13
Iran Is Hunting Down Starlink Users to Stop Protest Videos From Going Global
Video from the streets is one of the few ways of getting information out about the scale of the protests and authorities’ actions
Very brief Summary :
Iranian protesters are relying on Starlink—owned by Elon Musk—to send videos of nationwide protests and government crackdowns to the outside world after authorities largely shut down the internet and mobile networks. In response, Iranian security forces are jamming the satellite service, tracking signals, and confiscating illegal Starlink dishes, particularly in protest hotspots like Tehran. Despite disruptions, the service remains one of the few ways to document events, with rights groups such as Human Rights Activists in Iran reporting hundreds of deaths. The information battle has drawn international attention, with Donald Trump considering options that include expanding Starlink access, even as Iran presses international bodies to block the service.
Jerusalem Post, January 13
Trump’s new world order is hitting the Middle East at full speed – opinion
Donald Trump’s aggressive foreign policy is reshaping the global order and sending shockwaves through the Middle East, from Iran to Israel.
The writer is a former IDF spokesperson.
Full text:
Before our eyes, the vision once sung by the socialist Internationale (the workers’ anthem that calls to tear down the old world to its foundations) is taking shape, and it is happening at the hands of the other pole, the capitalist West, or more precisely, under US President Donald Trump.
In its new configuration, the US is producing and encouraging a new world order, tectonic political shifts, more aggressive power, lighter trigger on military force, and burial of political correctness”.
It starts at the global level and spills into our Middle East at a pace and intensity that sparks astonishment, panic, growing pains, and maybe a sliver of hope.
Let’s begin with the question of questions: Is the US still the largest and strongest democracy in the world? The answer has become complicated and no longer clear-cut.
It is possible that even Israel, struggling over its democracy, may currently lead compared to a superpower turning extreme and increasingly unfamiliar.
One thing is clear: President Trump is pulling the world back, in a very direct way, to a unipolar world, led by a single superpower, with all due respect to China and Russia.
Right now, the world has one king who wields tariffs and economic power with one hand, and military power with the other, in Iran, in Venezuela, soon in Greenland, and so on. The ambitions are big. Cuba is also on the radar.
In the military operation, impressive, it must be said, to seize dictator Nicolás Maduro and his wife and bring them to stand trial in New York, Trump presented the world with resolve, capability, and deterrence that put leaders and states on notice.
Does this step grant legitimacy to other countries to act the same way? Probably yes. Will they dare? Not sure. Still, this is an unusual and dangerous move that can hand a green light to a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, a Russian push into additional parts of Ukraine, and perhaps even “samples” here in our region.
Middle East faces problems stemming from American power
The Middle East has its own problems, shaped by American power and missteps. Israel is focused right now on Iran: the regime’s pressure, and the steps the ayatollah regime might take when it feels its back against the wall and tries to divert attention toward a war with Israel.
Inside Iran, the rebuilding of capabilities in missiles and air defense is moving fast. There is also a desire for revenge, a sense of mission to eliminate the Zionist project, and a drive to reset the region’s agenda.
Lebanon and Hezbollah are also on the agenda. The agreement under which the terrorist organization was supposed to disarm has failed. The air force has returned to activity there against rehabilitation and rearmament targets, and a broader operation is waiting for the right moment and a decision.
And maybe the next front will be somewhere else: on the Jordan border, in the West Bank, or through an incursion by Iranian-backed militias from the south or the north.
In the meantime, Israel is trying to settle matters with Syria, focusing on Somaliland (the self-declared republic in the Horn of Africa) across from Houthi Yemen, trying to slow Trump’s dash toward a Nobel Peace Prize at our expense, and tempting him with an “Israel Prize for Peace” floated by Education Minister Yoav Kisch.
This is a new world, without any doubt, in governing culture, in language, in technology, and in brute force. Trump, Erdogan, Putin, Kim Jong-un, Netanyahu, Xi Jinping, and even Zohran Mamdani in New York, these are the leaders of our new world. Good luck.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-883071
Jerusalem Post, Opinion, January 13
Israel is sliding toward authoritarianism, and elections won’t stop it
Israel tiptoes on the edge of authoritarianism as Netanyahu’s government tightens its grip on power.
Full text:
In recent years, Israeli democracy has been steadily darkened, its light dimming. The elections of November 2022, which produced the 25th Knesset, brought to power the most extreme right-wing, theocratic government in Israel’s history, led once again by Benjamin Netanyahu.
This coalition rests on two governing principles. The first is the Leader Principle: absolute loyalty to Netanyahu himself. The second is the Autonomy Principle: ministers are free to pursue their own ideological agendas within their ministries, enjoying the prime minister’s full backing regardless of legality, ethics, or public interest. Members of Knesset may advance self-serving, sectarian, and even corrupt legislation, confident of Netanyahu’s support.
Invoking a hollow notion of “democracy,” coalition leaders insist that electoral victory grants them unlimited power. But this argument is fundamentally flawed. Democracy is not merely the rule of the majority; it is majority rule constrained by the protection of minority rights. Strip democracy of this second component, and what remains is not democracy at all but a tyranny of the majority.
On January 3, 2026, former president of the Supreme Court Aharon Barak issued a grave warning. In an extraordinary move for a jurist who has traditionally avoided public rallies, Barak addressed the nation, stating that “our life work – liberal democracy – is crumbling.” He spoke not as a partisan actor but as a guardian of Israel’s constitutional ethos, witnessing its collapse.
Barak did not mince words: “We are no longer a liberal democracy.” He described not a single rupture but a sustained process in which “essential aspects of Israeli democracy are under withering attack.”
In this, I regret to say, I concur. I have argued for years that Israel ceased to qualify as a liberal democracy well before the current crisis. The very construction of Israel as a “Jewish democracy” is fraught with tension, given Orthodox Judaism’s monopoly over key institutions of personal status and public life. Reform and Conservative Judaism remain marginalized and politically weak, unable to mobilize the substantial portion of Israeli society that might otherwise support pluralistic, egalitarian, and humanistic values.
Netanyahu’s prolonged tenure has inflicted deep and lasting damage on liberty, equality, tolerance, pluralism, human rights, and the rule of law. In my article, “Is Israel a Liberal Democracy?” I explain in detail why Israel no longer meets the standards of one. Should this government remain in power after the 2026 elections, I fear that even the label “democracy” itself will become untenable.
Barak rightly observed that Israel’s system of governance has been transformed into one dominated by a single political authority, with the prime minister exercising effective control over both the executive and legislative branches. He warned that the judiciary has become the last meaningful check on government power – and that even this safeguard cannot endure indefinitely without public support. “Only the people,” Barak insisted, “can stop the backsliding.”
He is correct. In a democracy, the most vital gatekeepers are not institutions alone but citizens. Without active civic resistance, formal checks and balances will be hollowed out, delegitimized, and ultimately dismantled in the false name of “the people’s will.”
For this reason, Barak has become the government’s preferred bogeyman. Poisonous propaganda portrays him as an enemy of democracy, a relic of an elitist Ashkenazi establishment, and a traitor to Zionism as they understand it. These distortions have taken hold. Despite the profound crises Netanyahu has precipitated, the Likud remains projected to be the largest party in the next elections. My hope – though not my certainty – is that it will be unable to form a coalition.
I therefore doubt whether Barak’s solitary voice can penetrate the consciousness of Netanyahu’s base. He persuades those already persuaded. This is why I have urged the former Supreme Court president and others to mobilize collectively: former Supreme Court justices, former attorneys-general, and senior legal officials must speak with one voice. A unified moral and legal warning, grounded in shared authority and institutional memory, could yet compel broader segments of Israeli society to confront reality – and to act.
Time is running out. Israel stands at the edge of a dangerous descent into authoritarianism. The choice is stark: civic awakening or democratic collapse.
Professor Raphael Cohen-Almagor, DPhil Oxford, is a prolific scholar and institutional founder who held distinguished roles at Haifa, UCLA, Hull, Johns Hopkins, Lund, UCL, Jerusalem and The Woodrow Wilson Center, and taught globally. His books span politics, law and ethics, including Confronting the Internet’s Dark Side (2015), Just, Reasonable Multiculturalism (2021) and Resolving the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict (forthcoming 2026).
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-882499
Jerusalem Post, January 13
Former hostage Eitan Mor on Hamas: ‘They will not give up until the last Israeli is gone’
Former hostage Eitan Mor shares shocking insights into Hamas’ military preparedness, revealing their deep knowledge of Israel and their unwavering commitment to future attacks.
Full text:
Former hostage Eitan Mor said he was “amazed” by how much intelligence he saw Hamas had on Israel during his time in captivity, adding that the terrorist group had been focused on rebuilding and preparing for further attacks.
Mor’s remarks came as right-wing ministers and lawmakers called for a complete takeover of the Gaza Strip during a Knesset conference on Monday titled Gaza the Day After: The Political Plan of the Israeli Right.
“People underestimate how organized they are,” Mor said about Hamas. “Shifts. Guard rotations. Thousands of shafts. Even under siege, they have food supplies for a year. The only real weakness is water.”
Water resources run out in the tunnels, he noted.
“They will not give up. Many of them told me: ‘Until the last Israeli is removed from here, we’ll keep kidnapping.’ Jihad is the highest commandment in their religion. They are obsessed with us; this is their life’s purpose,” Mor said.
Hamas maintained strict discipline
Hamas maintained strict discipline while holding hostages, he continued. “Their safety discipline shocked me. When moving hostages, there’s always a safety briefing. One terrorist, now dead, used to say: ‘The first mistake is the last mistake.’”
“They have booklets on the army and the tools we have. Everything down to the smallest detail.”
Mor was working as a security guard at the Nova music festival when Hamas invaded on October 7. He was held captive for two years and released as part of the latest US-brokered ceasefire deal in October 2025.
“On October 7, I saw the atrocities. I knew they were huge, but I didn’t understand the scale,” Mor said, speaking about the beginning of his time in captivity.
Hamas terrorists had given him a radio and turned on broadcasts for him to translate into English.
“I heard on the radio that over a thousand people had been murdered, hundreds wounded. They started mentioning names, friends of mine, people I worked with. I shut off the radio. I wanted to know, but I couldn’t hear it.”
Mor said he also learned how to speak Arabic during his time in captivity. While in the tunnels, he could also hear military activity above him.
“What helped me was something straightforward: praying for morning to come. I didn’t want night anymore. There were many moments where you’re just clinging to a blanket, trying to get through all the noises around you,” he said.
Though Israel entered a ceasefire deal with Hamas in October 2025, the agreement is still in its first stage, as the remains of slain Israeli hostage St.-Sgt.-Maj. Ran Givili have yet to be returned by the terrorist group.
The Knesset conference featured panels on Israel’s next steps after more than two years of war. Justice Minister Yariv Levin said, “We will not give up until we complete the mission of bringing Ran Givili home.”
He called for Israel to take over Gaza, saying, “The entire approach whereby we hand control of our land to terrorist organizations and buy ourselves quiet is wrong and destructive.”
“We must be in Gaza and throughout the Land of Israel because this is our land – not only for security reasons,” he added.
The conference was initiated by MK Simcha Rothman (Religious Zionist Party), who said, “The political outlook of the Right must move to the next stage – not settle for containment, but go all the way.”
https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-883142
The Economist, January 12
Trump threatens the mullahs : The options America faces in Iran
Donald Trump promises to “rescue” Iranian protesters. How could he try?
Summary (AI) :
In this Economist article, the magazine examines how Donald Trump’s escalating threats toward Iran intersect with a widening protest movement that has shaken the Islamic Republic since late December. Trump has vowed to “rescue” Iranian protesters and warned Tehran of severe consequences if security forces continue killing demonstrators, but the regime has pressed ahead with a violent crackdown while restricting internet access to blunt unrest.
The article argues that Trump faces a stark dilemma: his rhetoric has limited deterrent effect, yet his practical options are narrow and risky. Symbolic military strikes could backfire; broader attacks on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps might boost protesters but would not stop repression and could alienate Iranians fearful of state collapse. More radical actions—such as targeting senior leaders including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei—would be extremely complex and might ultimately empower hardline factions rather than protesters.
Given military constraints and regional risks, the article suggests the most likely U.S. response is “non-kinetic,” such as helping Iranians bypass internet shutdowns or tightening sanctions. Ultimately, The Economist concludes that Trump has set an ambitious and morally charged goal—supporting unarmed protesters against a brutal regime—but history offers little reassurance that America can decisively shape such an outcome without grave unintended consequences.
https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2026/01/11/the-options-america-faces-in-iran
The Times of Israel, January 12
La 28ᵉ Gay Pride de Tel Aviv-Jaffa aura lieu le 12 juin
Annulée à la dernière minute l’an dernier en raison de la guerre avec l’Iran, le défilé est bien prévu cette année dans le parc Charles Clore, le long de la Tayelet
Full text:
La 28ᵉ Gay Pride de Tel Aviv-Jaffa aura lieu le vendredi 12 juin dans le parc Charles Clore, le long de la promenade de Tel Aviv, après avoir été annulée à la dernière minute en juin 2025 en raison de la guerre de douze jours avec l’Iran, a-t-on appris dimanche.
La parade de 2024 s’était déroulée dans une ambiance plus sobre, moins d’un an après le pogrom perpétré par le groupe terroriste palestinien du Hamas le 7 octobre 2023, et alors que la guerre faisait toujours rage à Gaza.
« La Gay Parade intervient à un moment où la société israélienne a plus que jamais besoin d’un rappel clair : l’égalité, la liberté et le libre choix ne sont pas une faveur ou un privilège, mais des conditions fondamentales pour l’existence d’une société démocratique », a déclaré Meital Lahav, adjointe au maire de Tel Aviv-Jaffa, chargée du portefeuille de la communauté LGBTQ+.
Lahav a affirmé que la municipalité de Tel Aviv-Jaffa continuerait à mener le combat pour les droits des membres de la communauté LGBTQ+, avec une marche pour « un avenir libre, égalitaire et sûr pour tous ».
https://fr.timesofisrael.com/la-28%e1%b5%89-gay-pride-de-tel-aviv-jaffa-aura-lieu-le-12-juin/
New York Times, January 11
Guest Essay: Iran Is Teetering. The West Isn’t Prepared.
Holly Dagres, an Iranian American, is a senior fellow at the Washington Institute and the curator of The Iranist newsletter.
Full text:
A lone man crouched in the middle of a Tehran street, a black jacket pulled over his head, blocking advancing Iranian security forces. The video went viral among Iranians, quickly drawing comparisons to the famous “Tank Man” in China’s Tiananmen Square in 1989. Similarly courageous actions have occurred across Iran: young protesters — sometimes alone, sometimes in pairs or more — standing or kneeling peacefully before their repressors.
The protests, which started on Dec. 28, have spread to all of Iran’s 31 provinces. They intensified after Kurdish groups announced a strike and former Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi called on Iranians to take to the streets on Thursday and Friday evenings — a call echoed by activists, celebrities and other Iranians. Videos showed large numbers of Iranians in the streets before an internet blackout put the country off line. Some protesters called for the return of the Pahlavi dynasty, which was ousted in the 1979 revolution.
The protests are the largest since the Woman, Life, Freedom uprising that began in 2022 and are taking place despite what the United Nations has called crimes against humanity committed by the authorities during that period. At least 49 protesters have been killed and 2,300 arrested,according to the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency.
The trigger this time was the collapse of the Iranian rial against the dollar. However, the protesters’ core grievances remain constant: government mismanagement, corruption and repression, and include an explicit demand for the ouster of the Islamic Republic.
The new element is the Islamic Republic’s deepening fragility. Since the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and Israel’s war on Gaza, Tehran has experienced a series of blows to its regional strategy with the maiming of its proxies in Gaza and Lebanon and the fall of its main regional ally in Syria. The disastrous 12-day war with Israel in June revealed a security apparatus rotten with Israeli infiltration and exposed the regime as a paper lion unable to defend its airspace. Its nuclear program is in shambles after U.S. bombing.
This vulnerability is compounded by families unable to make ends meet, power outages in a resource-rich country and the possibility that the capital could run out of water. The paralysis of the clerical establishment, led by the increasingly rigid octogenarian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, suggests it is operating from an outdated strategy of resistance by backing proxies and developing ballistic missiles.
At a moment of such fragility, President Trump, perhaps emboldened by the capture of the Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, embarked on a round of threats. He said on Jan. 2 that the United States was “locked and loaded and ready to go,” and two days later that the Islamic Republic was “going to get hit very hard by the United States” if Iranian protesters were killed. The president also appeared in a photograph with a signed “Make Iran Great Again” baseball cap, echoing his post from the June war: “If the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!”
The Islamic Republic may yet again repress the protests and survive U.S. pressure. Ayatollah Khamenei on Friday vowed that the security apparatus would “not back down” in its suppression of protests and accused those opposing his rule of being foreign agents. No serious signs of regime collapse, such as significant defections by Iranian security forces, are visible. Indeed, repeated rounds of unsuccessful anti-regime protests in recent years appear to have left Western governments numb to the idea that the Islamic Republic will no longer exist in its current form. That certainly has been my experience in discussions with Iran experts and Western government officials.
But it is clear that the West needs to engage in serious policy planning to provide support to the Iranian people if such a dramatic change occurs. This would entail coordination among U.S. allies, exploring sanctions relief, figuring out what should be done with Iranian assets abroad and speaking with human rights organizations about establishing a transitional justice system that would hold regime officials accountable for human rights violations.
Some protesters have responded positively to Trump’s support, renaming Tehran streets after the U.S. president and even placing in various locations stickers bearing his visage that read: “Trump! Iran is waiting for you.” Other anti-regime Iranians worry about foreign intervention.
“The very fact that people are out in the streets is surprising considering that it usually takes years for people to recover and networks to form after recent brutal crackdowns,” Roya Boroumand, the executive director of the Abdorrahman Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran, told me.
Her center documented 2,045 executions in 2025, the highest number in 30 years. The Human Rights Activists News Agency reported that at least 26 executions took place over 48 hours last week. The protesters seem undeterred.
Like earlier waves, these current protests have distinguishing qualities. After the 2022 uprising evolved into a movement, Iranian youth — especially women — have been pushing back against mandatory hijab laws and trying to reclaim public spaces. This is a generational rupture. Gen Z Iranians are a different breed from their parents — unwilling to bow to the Islamic Republic and driven to fight for a future without its rule. Not surprisingly, today’s protests appear to be partly led by Gen Z.
The Nobel laureate Narges Mohammadi, who is now languishing in solitary confinement, recently noted that the idea of merely reforming the Islamic Republic has been dead for years — a common refrain among opponents of the regime. The “main struggle,” she said, “is truly between the realist ‘survivalists’ and the ‘downfall seekers’ of the theocratic authoritarian regime.”
Activists like Ms. Mohammadi have called for a constitutional assembly and a referendum and now a transition to a secular democracy “grounded in popular sovereignty, national interests and normal relations with all countries of the world.” Instead U.S. and key European leaders have ignored these demands in favor of diplomacy — choosing, once again, the devil they know: a sclerotic clerical establishment.
The Islamic Republic faces an array of challenges: the lingering specter of renewed war with Israel, upheaval over the eventual succession of a replacement for Ayatollah Khamenei, the supreme leader, and the likelihood of continuing protests. Many U.S. and Western policymakers and analysts recoil at the prospect of change in Iran out of fear of the unknown. But the status quo has wreaked havoc and suffering on the Iranian people and the region for decades.
Western governments must not be caught flat-footed. They should begin serious policy planning for the possibility of change in Iran, a country with more than 90 million people, including the destabilizing waves that could accompany regime collapse, which U.S. allies in the Persian Gulf are worried about.
There are numerous scenarios that could unfold. One possibility is a transitional government led by a figure from civil society, a collective body or Reza Pahlavi, tasked with establishing a democratic system and ushering in elections. More concerning, a figure from within the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps could move to seize control and preserve the existing system under a new facade.
Western governments should move urgently to fill the gaps the Trump administration created by slashing funding to internet freedom programs and human rights organizations working on Iran.
After the 1979 Iranian revolution, Anthony Parsons, then the British ambassador to Tehran, commented that “with full hindsight, my judgment is that our failure was not so much one of information but one of imagination.” Washington and its Western allies should not make the same mistake again.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/10/opinion/iran-protests-trump-regime-islamic-republic.html
Le Monde, January 10
En Iran, une répression sanglante et à huis clos
Le régime, qui a coupé l’Internet, qualifie désormais les manifestants d’« agents terroristes » à la solde d’Israël et des Etats-Unis.
Full text:
Dans le discours des dirigeants iraniens, les manifestants ont d’abord été présentés comme des « personnes légitimement mécontentes », en raison des problèmes économiques, qu’il fallait écouter et distinguer des « émeutiers ». Depuis vendredi 9 janvier, les médias d’Etat et les responsables politiques et judiciaires les qualifient d’« agents terroristes » au service des Etats-Unis et d’Israël. Un changement sémantique, qui, au lendemain des grandes manifestations de jeudi, ouvre la voie à une répression sanglante.
Vendredi matin, le Guide suprême, Ali Khamenei, a pris la parole devant ses partisans, promettant que la République islamique « ne reculera pas face aux destructeurs », un signal clair aux autorités pour intensifier la répression. « Hier soir à Téhéran et dans d’autres villes, une poignée de vandales sont descendus dans les rues et ont détruit des bâtiments appartenant à leur propre pays afin de satisfaire le président américain », a-t-il ajouté, faisant référence aux menaces répétées de Donald Trump de bombarder l’Iran en cas de répression des manifestants pacifiques.
Dans un contexte de coupure totale d’Internet, du téléphone et des systèmes de messagerie, seules quelques informations ont pu filtrer du pays. Une vidéo tournée à Karadj, à l’ouest de Téhéran, dans la nuit de jeudi à vendredi et vérifiée par la BBC, montre au moins sept corps ensanglantés au sol dans un parking, des hommes et des femmes qui semblent avoir été touchés par des balles. Une autre vidéo, vérifiée par des journalistes iraniens à l’étranger, montre une dizaine de corps inanimés, certains entassés les uns sur les autres, dans la cour d’un hôpital de l’est de Téhéran.
Vendredi matin, Sina, un habitant de Téhéran qui témoigne sous pseudonyme par peur des représailles et qui est parvenu à se connecter pendant quelques minutes à Internet par le biais d’un VPN (logiciel de contournement des blocages du réseau), raconte que la répression a été extrêmement violente dans l’est de la ville : « Dans au moins deux hôpitaux, des médecins m’ont parlé de dizaines de manifestants tués. » A Racht, dans le nord, « il y a eu des tirs à balles réelles. Deux proches d’un ami ont été tués, et les gens ont aussi incendié le bazar », raconte pour sa part Ali, un commerçant connecté grâce à une antenne Starlink, qui a souhaité conserver l’anonymat. Une vidéo montre les commerces du bazar en flammes.
D’autres images, datant de la soirée de jeudi et diffusées par la BBC Persian, montre plusieurs personnes blessées, visiblement dans un état critique, dans un hôpital de Chiraz, une ville du sud du pays. Selon un membre du personnel médical, cité par la chaîne britannique, « environ 20 blessés y ont été transportés, après avoir reçu des tirs à la tête et au cou ». L’homme précise que l’hôpital fait face à une pénurie de chirurgiens, notamment en neurochirurgie, orthopédie et chirurgie ophtalmologique.
« Les balles réelles sifflaient »
Malgré la coupure d’Internet et des communications, de nouvelles manifestations ont eu lieu vendredi soir, à Téhéran, Machhad et Yazd, à l’appel de Reza Pahlavi, le fils exilé de l’ancien chah d’Iran. Sur des images tournées dans le quartier de Pounak, dans l’est de Téhéran, hommes et femmes masqués frappent sur des poubelles renversées et déplacées au milieu de la foule, scandant : « Ceci est la dernière lutte, Pahlavi va revenir » et « Liberté ».
Samedi matin, Le Monde n’avait pas pu obtenir d’informations précises sur l’étendue de la répression des rassemblements de la veille. Les témoignages recueillis à distance laissent entrevoir une grande violence. Une manifestante à l’est de Téhéran raconte : « Les gaz lacrymogènes étaient partout, les balles réelles sifflaient. J’ai vu un homme à moto touché à la jambe par balle. Une grenade ou une petite bombe a éclaté près de nous, provoquant une grande déflagration. Un homme a été tué à proximité. »
Selon l’ONG Human Rights Activists News Agency, au moins 65 personnes ont été tuées depuis le début des manifestations, le 28 décembre 2025, dont 14 membres des forces de l’ordre, et environ 2 311 personnes ont été arrêtées. Les ONG estiment que le bilan réel est sans doute bien plus élevé. Hengaw Organization for Human Rights, qui observe la situation des droits humains dans les régions kurdes d’Iran, rapporte au moins 10 morts parmi les gardiens de la révolution à Kermanshah, et trois à Eslamabad-e Gharb.
Cette nouvelle vague de contestation, qui a émergé initialement comme une réaction de colère à la chute de la monnaie, a rapidement pris la forme d’un appel au renversement de la République islamique et au retour de la dynastie Pahlavi. Jeudi 8 janvier, après l’appel à manifester de Reza Pahlavi, de grandes foules se sont formées dans différents quartiers de Téhéran et dans d’autres grandes villes : Machhad, Racht, Babol dans le nord, Chiraz et Bandar-e Abbas dans le sud, et Ispahan dans le centre. Les vidéos qui ont ensuite circulé montrent l’ampleur du mouvement, ainsi que la férocité de la répression, avec tirs de gaz lacrymogène, tirs au fusil à plomb et à la kalachnikov. On voit également des véhicules de police, des bâtiments publics et des mosquées en proie aux flammes.
Vendredi soir, Reza Pahlavi a appelé Donald Trump à intervenir pour protéger le peuple iranien. « Il s’agit d’un appel urgent et nécessaire à votre attention, à votre soutien et à votre action », a-t-il écrit sur X, ajoutant : « La nuit dernière, vous avez vu des millions d’Iraniens courageux dans les rues, confrontés à des balles réelles. » Il a alerté que le régime profitait de la coupure d’Internet pour tuer de « jeunes héros » et a encouragé la population à descendre dans la rue pour déborder les forces de sécurité par leur nombre. Le président américain a fait savoir qu’à ce stade il n’entendait pas rencontrer Reza Pahlavi, qui a appelé les Iraniens à redescendre dans la rue les 10 et 11 janvier.
Passible de la peine de mort
Face à l’intensification des manifestations, le régime se fait de plus en plus menaçant. Dans un communiqué, l’Organisation du renseignement des gardiens de la révolution a averti que la responsabilité du « sang des victimes des récents événements terroristes » retomberait sur les « instigateurs » des manifestations. « Nous resterons aux côtés du peuple iranien jusqu’à la neutralisation complète des complots ennemis et au rétablissement de la sécurité », ajoute le communiqué qui, mention inhabituelle, met aussi en garde les responsables iraniens tentés de déserter.
Le chef du pouvoir judiciaire, Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, a averti que « les peines infligées aux éléments émeutiers » seraient « fermes, maximales et sans aucune indulgence légale ». Ali Salehi, procureur général et révolutionnaire de Téhéran, a fait savoir que ceux qui détruisent ou incendient des biens publics ou privés seraient poursuivis pour « moharebeh [guerre contre Dieu, en persan] », accusation passible de la peine de mort dans certains cas.
Amnesty International a dénoncé, vendredi, « la violence des autorités contre les manifestations », qui a provoqué « des dizaines de morts et des centaines de blessés ». Alors que la coupure totale d’Internet risque, selon l’ONG, de « masquer les violations des droits humains », elle appelle, aux côtés de Human Rights Watch, les autorités iraniennes à mettre fin immédiatement à cette nouvelle effusion de sang.
The Jerusalem Post, January 9
As ceasefires unravel, Israel faces critical decisions on Gaza, Lebanon, Syria fronts – editorial
Israel faces mounting challenges: a stalled ceasefire in Gaza, rising Hezbollah threats in Lebanon, and a critical security opportunity with Syria.
Full text:
With ceasefires unraveling on nearly every front, Israel is once again confronting the unstable reality of the Middle East.
The coming weeks will decide whether the Jewish state drifts back into wider wars or secures at least one border that stays quiet. In the Gaza Strip, a failed rocket launch aimed at Israeli territory has reignited fears that expanded operations there are becoming inevitable.
Israel cannot treat even a misfire as background noise while Hamas holds an Israeli as a bargaining chip and keeps its fighting capability intact. Israel’s leaders face a familiar dilemma: Respond hard enough to restore deterrence, and avoid a spiral that buries diplomacy.
Israel faces foreign pressure to move to Phase II of Gaza Deal
The ceasefire’s implementation has stalled over the awaited return of Ran Gvili, the last Israeli hostage whose remains are still held in Gaza.
Israel has resisted efforts by American, Qatari, Egyptian, and Turkish mediators to enter Phase II of the deal, insisting that the ceasefire will not progress until Gvili is returned and Hamas is fully disarmed.
That demand reflects a basic reality: A ceasefire that leaves Hamas armed leaves Israel exposed.
As days and weeks pass without movement, Hamas has grown more emboldened. The planned International Stabilization Force (ISF) remains mostly theoretical, because other nations have shown little readiness to send forces that could actually stand between Hamas and the IDF.
Hamas leaders now openly reject the same disarmament they agreed to when the ceasefire took effect, betting that the world will pressure Israel harder than it pressures them.
Israel should answer with enforceable benchmarks. Mediators can keep channels open, but Phase II needs a definition of what disarmament means in practice, who verifies it, and what happens when Hamas violates the terms.
Without milestones, the process becomes a loop of delays and threats, followed by another round of fighting.
Along the Lebanese border, Hezbollah remains a threat to Israel’s security despite attempts by the Lebanese Armed Forces to monopolize arms south of the Litani River.
On Thursday, the Lebanese army declared it had achieved full operational control in southern Lebanon, with the exception of five Israeli-controlled outposts a few hundred meters from the border. The statement did not mention Hezbollah.
It remains to be seen whether Lebanon’s “operational control” will deter Hezbollah terrorists from launching attacks on Israel, or whether Lebanese forces will act to prevent such attacks before Israel does.
Until Lebanon proves it can restrain Hezbollah on the ground, the IDF will keep striking Hezbollah targets and infrastructure, as it has continued to do over the past days, weeks, and months.
Amid the precarious state of ceasefires in Lebanon and Gaza, the northeastern border with Syria stands out as the one arena where tangible developments have taken place in recent days.
In US-mediated talks earlier this week, Israel and Syria agreed to establish a joint “fusion mechanism” to serve as a communication cell for intelligence sharing, military de-escalation, diplomatic engagement, and commercial issues.
Jerusalem and Damascus also agreed to hold talks on cooperation in civilian areas, including medicine, energy, and agriculture, The Jerusalem Post’s Amichai Stein reported.
Israel remains doubtful about Syria’s Sharaa
Doubts about Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa remain strong in Israel’s political and military echelons.
Nevertheless, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears to have accepted US President Donald Trump’s request to give Sharaa a chance. Israel should take the opening seriously and test it with hard requirements.
For Israel, a successful security understanding with Syria would preserve its ability to secure itself through control on the ground while laying the foundations for wider communication and cooperation.
The rare joint statement released on Tuesday signals Israel’s willingness to try a different approach on the Syrian front while tying any diplomatic steps to the protection of Druze minorities in the area.
That condition offers a real indicator of whether Damascus can govern responsibly and keep hostile actors away from the border.
As ceasefires in Lebanon and Gaza remain in limbo, Israel now has a rare opportunity to pacify the Syrian border and strengthen the security of its northern communities.
Jerusalem should define redlines, demand verification, and keep freedom of action intact. It must also remain wary of a weak agreement that collapses at the first test.
The potential benefits feel closer than they did a week ago, including an image that once sounded absurd: Israelis and Syrians sharing Mount Hermon in peace – even if that vision starts with a jointly operated ski resort.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-882821
Le Figaro, January 9
«Je n’ai pas peur, je suis morte depuis 47 ans !» : en Iran, la contestation contre les mollahs s’étend à travers tout le pays
RÉCIT – La révolte gonfle et déteint sur l’ensemble du pays, mêlant grèves et manifestations, malgré la répression.
Full text:
Si la révolte iranienne avait un visage, ce pourrait être celui de cette femme âgée au milieu d’une foule de manifestants : poing levé vers le ciel, tête nue sans foulard, elle hurle de sa bouche ensanglantée par les coups des miliciens : « Je n’ai pas peur. Je suis morte depuis 47 ans ! » Ce qui se joue aujourd’hui dans les rues de Téhéran, de Machhad, de Zahedan ou encore d’Abdanan trouve tout son écho dans son cri, emblématique du sursaut unanime d’une société écrasée depuis 1979 sous le poids d’une tyrannie religieuse qu’elle rejette dans son intégralité. « La République islamique est finie ! », cancane Bijan, un étudiant de Shiraz. Ce jeudi 8 janvier, il a bravé les matraques pour rejoindre le flot battant des protestataires : une première depuis son arrestation lors des manifestations de 2019 contre la cherté de la vie. Toute sa famille, sans exception, l’a rejoint cette fois-ci : parents, cousins, oncles et tantes. « Du jamais vu ! », dit-il. Comme des centaines de milliers d’Iraniens, le jeune homme a répondu à l’appel à la mobilisation générale de ces jeudi et vendredi, l’équivalent du week-end en Iran, lancé par Reza Pahlavi.
Depuis le début de la contestation, dimanche 28 décembre, le fils en exil de l’ancien monarque s’est imposé comme le porte-parole d’une révolte en manque de chef. Adulé par les jeunes, contesté par de nombreux dissidents de l’intérieur qui n’ont pas oublié la dictature de son père, il doit sa fulgurante popularité, selon le politologue iranien Sadegh Zibakalam, au rejet total du système actuel plus qu’à « ses capacités de leadership ». Mais, concède un vendeur du Bazar de Téhéran, d’où la grogne est partie, « la République islamique a mené le pays vers une telle impasse que n’importe quel scénario est bon à prendre ».
Pour l’heure, le scénario ressemble à une vague humaine qui grossit à vue d’œil, aux cris de « Mort à Khamenei » (le guide suprême iranien), de « Liberté, liberté », et de « Longue vie au chah ». Aux grèves des commerçants et de certains ouvriers se mêlent une multitude de cortèges de protestataires. Restés en retrait depuis le début de la protestation, les Kurdes et les Baloutches ont rallié ce jeudi le mouvement, et plusieurs figures réformistes, accusées jusqu’ici de silence complice, ont également apporté leur soutien aux manifestants. « N’ayez pas peur, nous sommes tous ensemble. Oui, collectivement, nous passerons de la tyrannie à la démocratie », écrit sur sa page Instagram Zahra Rahnavard, l’épouse de Mir Hossein Moussavi, candidat malheureux au scrutin de 2009, quand la réélection frauduleuse de l’ultraconservateur Mahmoud Ahmadinejad déclencha d’immenses manifestations.
Mort de deux policiers
L’actuel président réformiste, Massoud Pezechkian, a appelé les forces de l’ordre à la retenue. Mais les ultras du régime l’entendent différemment : plus les villes sont éloignées, plus elles subissent une répression sans concession – tirs au fusil de chasse, arrestations musclées, utilisation d’un gaz suffoquant pour disperser les foules. En face, les protestataires répliquent par des jets de pierre, parfois avec des couteaux ou des coups de feu. « On s’est tous donné le mot d’ordre : si vos proches sont attaqués, vous tirez », confie un manifestant de la ville de Kazeroun. « Avant, les gens reculaient quand ils étaient aspergés de gaz lacrymogène, aujourd’hui, ils foncent droit devant », observe Mina, une habitante de la ville conservatrice de Machhad. La colère vise les symboles du régime : sur une des nombreuses vidéos qui circulent sur l’internet, des manifestants de la ville de Lomar, dans la province d’Ilam, ont incendié ce jeudi la banque Keshavarsi, perçue comme un symbole du pouvoir corrompu, et saccagé un magasin de la chaîne Ofogh Kourosh, accusée d’être liée aux gardiens de la révolution, l’armée d’élite du régime.
À Lordegan, un rassemblement de commerçants a dégénéré en affrontements armés, provoquant la mort de deux policiers. Les manifestations, qui ont fait plus de 45 morts et des centaines de blessés, s’inscrivent dans la continuité des revendications et des révoltes du passé, dont la dernière, « Femme, vie, liberté », avait provoqué un immense raz-de-marée en 2022 avant de se tasser sous le poids de la répression. « Mais aujourd’hui, beaucoup d’Iraniens en viennent à considérer comme réaliste la possibilité d’un renversement du régime en interne, ou bien par des frappes extérieures », confie une journaliste iranienne qui préfère taire son nom. Sous pression de la rue et de ses ennemis jurés, Trump et Netanyahou, l’ayatollah Khamenei serait également dans le viseur de son propre clan. « On dit que des tractations sont en cours pour écarter Khamenei et mettre fin au principe du guide suprême afin de préserver le système. Mais, à ce stade, les Iraniens se contenteront-ils de ce genre de concession ? », s’interroge la reporter.
The Economist, January 8
Watching Maduro in Tehran : Facing protests at home and threats abroad, the Iranian regime looks rattled
America’s raid in Venezuela has some officials in Tehran wondering if their country will be next
Summary :
This The Economist article argues that Iran’s leadership is unusually shaken as growing domestic unrest coincides with rising fears of foreign intervention. Protests sparked by a collapsing currency and soaring prices are spreading beyond Tehran, and while they remain smaller than past uprisings, the regime is responding with pre-emptive repression—riot police, school closures and arrests—suggesting heightened anxiety.
Two factors distinguish this wave of unrest. First, Iran’s economic failure is now stark and undeniable: the rial has crashed, inflation is rampant, and the government’s reform plan—small cash handouts in place of subsidies—offers little relief. Second, the external threat feels more real. After the U.S. raid that removed Nicolás Maduro, some Iranian officials fear that Donald Trump might consider similar action against Iran, a concern amplified by Trump’s public warnings and Israel’s past strikes under Binyamin Netanyahu.
The Jerusalem Post, January 8
Ousting Hamas is not enough: New reality of Gaza must change – opinion
The new reality of Gaza has to change. It is not enough for Hamas to no longer control Gaza.
Full text:
I write this article as someone who has consistently and unequivocally advocated for Palestinian rights for freedom, self-determination, and national dignity. I am aware that some of what I am writing will not find favor with perhaps many of my Palestinian friends, colleagues, and partners (and perhaps some of my Israeli friends as well). The message I am delivering comes after deep and often antagonistic conversations with some of the top decision-makers in the United States.
This article is an attempt to deal with the realpolitik of the current days with a strong desire for an outcome that will move us all forward to genuine peace based on the self-determination of the two peoples sharing the land between the river and the sea.
The military defeat of Hamas has occurred, even if not yet completed. The current ability of Hamas to continue to impose its will on the majority of the population of Gaza is solely the result of the power vacuum that was created with the official end of the war, without a pre-prepared solution of alternative Palestinian governance in Gaza. That should have been accomplished many months ago as a partnership between the Palestinian Authority and Arab countries interested in seeing a free and peaceful Palestine. But it was not.
The alternative Palestinian governance for Gaza is on its way and as we enter phase two of the end-of-war deal, the various levels of the new reality will soon appear. Some of it is already happening. I have tried to advocate for the new reality to also include a situation in which Israel does not have the right to determine who or what enters or leaves Gaza. I am afraid that I did not succeed in convincing the powers that be in favor of my position.
Israel will continue to have a voice in the future of Gaza. That is because the primary decision-maker will be the United States and the Trump administration. The Board of Peace headed by President Donald Trump will apparently convene for the first time toward the end of this month. The BoP will be a group of 10 or more heads of state with interests in the region – probably including the heads of state of some of the Arab countries but apparently not including the prime minister of Israel.
Under the Board of Peace will be an executive committee including senior members such as Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, Tony Blair, and others with similar profiles. The executive committee will serve as the direct liaison and director of the Palestinian technocrat governing committee responsible for the day-to-day affairs of Gaza. Former UN official and Bulgarian politician Nikolay Evtimov Mladenov will serve as the coordinator of the executive committee to the Palestinian governing committee.
To the best of my knowledge, the members of the Palestinian technocratic committee have been selected and notified. They have been vetted in a long process by the United States with the Arab countries weighing in heavily to appoint their own people, including attempted intervention by the most senior Palestinian officials from the Palestinian Authority. At the end of the day, apparently, the Americans had the last and final word.
From what I understand, the vetted members of the Palestinian technocratic governing committee are all serious, loyal, nationalist Palestinians who have demonstrated clearly for years their contempt for Hamas.
I have tried to advocate with the powers that be to also include a position for a senior Palestinian official, respected by the Palestinian people, and Israelis, to provide political agency for the Palestinians at the level of the executive committee who would also serve as a liaison between the Palestinian committee and the Israeli people and government.
Surrounding all these levels of new governance will also be the International Stabilization Force. All of these layers will ensure the disarmament of Hamas, but that will not happen overnight. The decommissioning of Hamas weapons will take considerable time.
Will the lives of Palestinians in Gaza be improved?
The most important test of the success of this process will be the degree to which the lives of more than two million Palestinians in Gaza are significantly and quickly improved. Politics and political positions of the new governing committee are far less important to the Gazans than the ability of this committee to organize life, provide basic needs, rebuild the economy, and be engaged in a speedy process of reconstruction.
From the point of view of the United States, with strong Israeli prodding, the success of the process will also be measured by the extent to which the new reality in Gaza changes Gazan society regarding its willingness to live in peace next to the State of Israel.
Gazan society has been deeply and negatively influenced by nearly two decades of Hamas rule and control. Although Hamas never imposed Sharia (Islamic law) as the law of the land, Hamas’s rule had deep sociological and cognitive impacts on the society. This included the inculcation of hate toward Israel, which was not hard to generate because of the harsh reality of life in Gaza. Much of the mindset of Gazans was shaped through 18 years of blockade and repeated Israeli military offenses, usually provoked by Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad attacks against Israel’s civilian population.
The new reality of Gaza has to change. It is not enough for Hamas to no longer control Gaza. Change must be seen in daily life. Change must also be seen in the classroom. I have no doubt that there will be immediate changes in all the Gazan textbooks.
Textbooks in Gaza (and in the West Bank) need to educate toward a proud Palestinian national identity, that addresses culture, literature, Arabic language, science, mathematics, economics, English, computer science, and all that is needed to help build a modern and successful Palestinian society willing to live in peace next to Israel.
It should also include the study of Hebrew and a clear recognition that the Palestinian people share the land with the Israeli Jewish people – both of whom have a legitimate religious and historic connection to the same homeland. I sincerely hope that when this kind of educational system exists in Gaza, and hopefully in the West Bank as well, it will impact the same kind of change happening on the Israeli side.
It seems that the US and the Board of Peace will initiate a new system of how the international community will assist in the process of not only providing humanitarian aid to Gaza but also how Gaza will be rebuilt. From what we have seen over the past two-and-a-half months since the end of the war, international aid organizations that are perceived as being anti-Israel will no longer be able to function in Gaza. That has already happened.
I believe that a lot of aid and reconstruction projects will be directed to the private sector and away from international nongovernment organizations. My understanding is that Israel will still have a say in who is accredited to work in Gaza. This opens the door to organizations and private sector ventures that are advocates of Palestinian-Israeli peace to have a positive role in the reconstruction of Gaza. Looking forward, it seems that Gaza will be a test case for the United States and allies of the US plans for the future of the West Bank as well.
I am sure that if this version of the future was presented to international lawyers and international human rights organizations, they would immediately knock it down and criticize it, claiming that the only rule of law that must be applied in Gaza is the rule of international law and international humanitarian law.
They would be correct in their argument from their focused point of view. For them, the point of view presented in this article would be illegitimate and out of bounds – because what the United States is seeking is the fastest path to genuine Israeli-Palestinian peace based on full mutual recognition of the legitimacy of both national movements, the fulfillment of the right of self-determination for the Palestinian people and the Israeli people, and the beginning of the sanctification of life and not death in the conflict between these two peoples for the past one hundred years.
The American vision for Gaza and for Palestine shifts the focus from human rights and Israel-bashing to trying to shape a Palestinian political vision that includes Israel as a partner in peace. If there will be success in this mission, it will also impact Israeli public opinion on Palestine and on peace.
The writer is the Middle East director of the International Communities Organization and co-head of the Alliance for Two States.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-882595