Arab–Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Saturday, 6 January 2018 - 11:00 am (CET/MEZ) Berlin | Author/Destination: Knut Wingsch
Category/Kategorie: General, Editorial, Union for the Mediterranean Reading Time: 1987 minutes

(Latest update: 23 August 2022) The Arab–Israeli conflict is the political tension, military conflicts and disputes between a number of Arab countries and Israel. The roots (European colonial period, Ottoman Empire, widespread Antisemitism in Europe, Jews in the Russian Empire, Baron Edmond James de Rothschild (Jewish land purchase in Palestine), Theodor Herzl, Jewish National Fund (Israel Bonds), timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, World War I, Sykes–Picot Agreement (San Remo conference, Mandate for Palestine, UN Charter, Chapter XII – International Trusteeship System, Article 80 (commonly known as the “Palestine Article” used by both conflict parties, Israel and Palestine, to create the wildest interpretations, speculations and conspiracy theories to assert the respective alleged right to the total land area), McMahon–Hussein Correspondence), Balfour Declaration, World War II, The Holocaust (International Holocaust Remembrance Day), Évian Conference, Mandatory Palestine, Forced displacement, and United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine) of the modern Arab–Israeli conflict (or the history of collective failure) are bound in the rise of Zionism and Arab nationalism towards the end of the 19th century. Territory regarded by the Jewish people as their historical homeland is also regarded by the Pan-Arab movement as historically and currently belonging to the Palestinians, and in the Pan-Islamic context, as Muslim lands. The sectarian conflict between Palestinian Jews and Arabs emerged in the early 20th century, peaking into a full-scale civil war in 1947 and transforming into the First Arab–Israeli War in May 1948 following the Israeli Declaration of Independence (Nakba and the assassination of UN mediator Folke Bernadotte by the terror organization Lehi/Stern gang. Among them, the later Israeli PM Yitzhak Shamir). Large-scale hostilities mostly ended with the cease-fire agreements after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Ramadan War, or October War. Peace agreements were signed between Israel and Egypt in 1979, resulting in Israeli withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula and abolishment of the military governance system in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, in favor of Israeli Civil Administration and consequent unilateral, internationally not recognized, annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights and East Jerusalem. Even when the text is about 556 pages long, it is just a summary. The multitude of links point out that there is a lot more to learn in detail. At first, it is a timeline of the major developments in the region and it leads to today’s challenges. The starting point is the view of the international community, especially the European Union and North America, on the conflict, enriched with excursions into the ideas, convictions, believes, and thoughts of the direct and indirect involved parties to the conflict.

Content

Timetable of wars and violent events
National movements
1974–2000
Egypt
Jordan
Iraq
Lebanon
Palestine
2000–09
2010–present

Main conflicts today
State borders

April 2019 Israeli legislative election (Round 1)
September 2019 Israeli legislative election (Round 2)
March 2020 Israeli legislative election (Round 3)
March 2021 Israeli legislative election (Round 4)
November 2022 Israeli legislative election (Round 5)

Right of return
Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories
Water supply
Jerusalem
Security
Peace process

Trumps’s “Deal of the Century”

2020 annexation of further parts of Palestine by Israel

Iran Deal
Iran and Israel
Israel and Lebanon
Israel and Syria
Israel and Turkey
Israel and Ukraine
Gulf States and Israel
Yemen
Afghanistan
Tunisia
Libya
Morocco
Algeria
Iraq
Role of the European Union
Role of the United States of America
Role of Russia
Role of China
Question of guilt

Cultural identity
Religious aspects of the conflict
Cost of conflict
Solution approaches

Solution proposal

Incentives

Observers of the Middle East and Israeli-Palestinian conflict
BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions)
German raison d’être/German National Interest
Israel and the European Union

Designation of origin

Sources

Timetable of wars and violent events

The nature of the conflict has shifted over the years from the large-scale, regional Arab–Israeli conflict to a more local Israeli–Palestinian conflict, which peaked during the 1982 Lebanon War. The interim Oslo Accords led to the creation of the Palestinian National Authority in 1994, within the context of the Israeli–Palestinian peace process. The same year Israel and Jordan reached a peace accord. In 1988 the Palestinian Authority recognized the state of Israel. A cease-fire has been largely maintained between Israel and Baathist Syria, as well as with Lebanon since 2006. However, developments in the course of the Syrian Civil War reshuffled the situation near Israel’s northern border, putting the Syrian Arab Republic, Hezbollah (whose military arm is classified by the Western community as a terrorist organization, even when the organization was only filled with life through the Israeli attack on Lebanon and the extremely short-sighted attempt to place a Christian minority (Mennonites and Christianity in Lebanon) in the country’s leadership – The Guardian, 25 February 2019: UK to outlaw Hezbollah’s political wing, Washington Institute – Hezbollah Interactive Map) and the Syrian opposition at odds with each other and complicating their relations with Israel. The conflict between Israel and Hamas-ruled Gaza, which resulted in the 2014 cease-fire, is usually also considered part of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and therefore the Arab–Israeli conflict. Its 2006–2012 phase is, however, also attributed to the Iran–Israel proxy conflict in the region (Government of Syria and Hezbollah are being supported by Iran). Since 2012, Iran (predominantly Shia) has cut ties with the Sunni Hamas movement on account of the Syrian Civil War. Despite the peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, interim peace accords with Palestine and the generally existing cease-fire, the Arab world and Israel remain at odds with each other over many issues.

National movements
The roots of the modern Arab–Israeli conflict lie in the rise of Zionism and the reactionary Arab nationalism that arose in response to Zionism towards the end of the 19th century (at that time, Zionism was still a liberal, political, religious, nationalist movement with a clear democratic orientation, which has only experienced a major right-wing, racist, nationalist spin during the past decades and is therefore discussed controversially in the diaspora, in particular because the Zionist movement in Israel isn’t only claiming to speak for all Jews worldwide, but also to determine who is a Jew and how Jews have to live. As expected, this is received well only in parts of the diaspora. Of course, Zionism is not alone in this. In Germany, for example, it is the far right of the AfD, NPD, Pegida & Co. who want to suggest with their “We are the people” whining that they would move within the societal consensus, which is definitely not the case. After trying to capture the slogan of the Monday demonstrations in 1989/1990 in the GDR, they consider themselves “victorious”. This actually seems to be perceived within their 10% filter bubble. Outside of it, however, not at all, which is why the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is now taking care of them). Territory regarded by the Jewish people as their historical homeland is also regarded by the Pan-Arab movement as historically and presently belonging to the Palestinian Arabs. Before World War I, the Middle East, including Palestine (later Mandatory Palestine), had been under the control of the Ottoman Empire for nearly 400 years. During the closing years of their empire, the Ottomans began to espouse their Turkish ethnic identity, asserting the primacy of Turks within the empire, leading to discrimination against the Arabs. The promise of liberation from the Ottomans led many Jews and Arabs to support the allied powers during World War I, leading to the emergence of widespread Arab nationalism. Both Arab nationalism and Zionism had their formulative beginning in Europe. The Zionist Congress was established in Basel in 1897, while the “Arab Club” was established in Paris in 1906. In the late 19th century European and Middle Eastern Jewish communities began to increasingly immigrate to Palestine and purchase land from the local Ottoman landlords. The population of the late 19th century in Palestine reached 600,000 – mostly Muslim Arabs, but also significant minorities of Jews, Christians, Druze and some Samaritans and Bahai’s. At that time, Jerusalem did not extend beyond the walled area and had a population of only a few tens of thousands. Collective farms, known as kibbutzim, were established, as was the first entirely Jewish city in modern times, Tel Aviv. During 1915–16, as World War I was underway, the British High Commissioner in Egypt, Sir Henry McMahon, secretly corresponded with Hussein ibn Ali al-Hashimi, the patriarch of the Hashemite family and Ottoman governor of Mecca and Medina. McMahon convinced Husayn to lead an Arab revolt against the Ottoman Empire, which was aligned with Germany against Britain and France in the war. McMahon promised that if the Arabs supported Britain in the war, the British government would support the establishment of an independent Arab state under Hashemite rule in the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire, including Palestine. The Arab revolt, led by Thomas Edward Lawrence (“Lawrence of Arabia”) and Husayn’s son Faysal, was successful in defeating the Ottomans, and Britain took control over much of this area. A very relaxed phase reached the relationships, as Baron Edmond James de Rothschild 1882 began to buy land in Palestine. All parties were satisfied with the solution, especially as Rothschild pushed ahead with his own goals, while the Arabs laughed that they had sold another piece of desert to the “batty European”. This could have gone on happily and endlessly, if there had not been fundamental upheavals in Europe and finally the Holocaust (Haaretz, 3 October 2020: Jewish Soldiers and Civilians Looted Arab Neighbors’ Property en Masse in ’48. The Authorities Turned a Blind Eye (these are Netanyahu’s heroes whom he celebrates year after year. It will certainly not please the Israelis at all to have to pay billions in reparations to the Palestinians), Haaretz, 7 January 2021: How Israel Tormented Arabs in Its First Decades – and Tried to Cover It Up).

1974–2000

Egypt
Following the Camp David Accords of the late 1970s, Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty in March 1979. Under its terms, the Sinai Peninsula returned to Egyptian hands, and the Gaza Strip remained under Israeli control, to be included in a future State of Palestine. The agreement also provided for the free passage of Israeli ships through the Suez Canal and recognition of the Straits of Tiran and the Gulf of Aqaba as international waterways (Foreign Policy, 15 January 2019: Club Med: Israel, Egypt, and Others Form New Natural Gas Group, Times of Israel, 17 June 2019: Egypt agrees to pay Israel $500 million to end gas dispute, Bloomberg, 24 July 2019: Israel Gas Partners to Change Egypt Deal to Avert Supply Halt, Arab News, 25 July 2019: Israel to start exporting natural gas to Egypt in November — minister, Israel Hayom, 7 August 2019: At summit, Israel, US, Greece, Cyprus agree to boost energy cooperation, Reuters, 8 September 2019: Pipeline operator EMG signs terminal deal for Israel-Egypt gas exports, Reuters, 9 September 2019: Plans for Israeli gas exports to Egypt on track: Egyptian minister, The Wall Street Journal, 12 September 2019: Security Threats Delay Egypt-Israel Gas Deal, Says U.S. Official, Bloomberg, 2 October 2019: Israeli Gas Shares Soar After Egypt Planned Supply Boost, Times of Israel, 15 January 2020: In milestone, Israel starts exporting natural gas to Egypt, Israel Hayom, 17 January 2020: Growing Hamas-Iran ties spark concern in Egypt, Times of Israel, 16 February 2020: Worshipers fete ‘very emotional’ Shabbat in refurbished Alexandria synagogue, Jerusalem Post, 5 April 2020: German sub about to be delivered to Egyptian Navy – report, 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Egypt, The Guardian, 1 May 2020: Egyptian TV show about Israel’s destruction opens real world rift, The Hill, 7 May 2020: Trump administration approves $2.3B helicopter deal for Egypt, $556M in vehicles for UAE, Jerusalem Post, 8 May 2020: Steinitz: US, Israel to discuss drawing down peacekeeping force in Sinai).

Jordan
In October 1994, Israel and Jordan signed a peace agreement, which stipulated mutual cooperation, an end of hostilities, the fixing of the Israel-Jordan border, and a resolution of other issues. The conflict between them had cost roughly 18.3 billion dollars. Its signing is also closely linked with the efforts to create peace between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) representing the Palestinian National Authority (PNA). It was signed at the southern border crossing of Arabah on 26 October 1994 and made Jordan only the second Arab country (after Egypt) to sign a peace accord with Israel (BBC, 21 October 2018: Jordan seeks to end Israel land lease, Jerusalem Post, 9 November 2019: Israel to lose Naharayim, Tzofar to Jordan on Sunday, Haaretz, 9 November 2019: Twenty Five Years After Peace Treaty: Jordan Resumes Control of Enclaves Leased to Israel, Times of Israel, 9 November 2019: Gate closes at ‘Isle of Peace’ park as border lands to return to Jordan, Times of Israel, 22 November 2019: King Abdullah: Israeli-Jordanian relations are at ‘an all-time low’, Haaretz, 23 November 2019: Relations Between Israel and Jordan at an All-time Low, King Abdullah Says, Times of Israel, 23 November 2019: Jordan FM: Amman not enjoying full ‘peace dividend’ from ties with Israel, The National, 23 November 2019: Jordan’s King Abdullah says Israel relations worst ever, The Guardian, 26 November 2019: Jordan and Israel’s 25-year peace deal under more strain than ever, Israel Hayom, 6 December 2019: Preserving the peace with Jordan, Haaretz, 8 December 2019: Israel’s Campaign to Destabilize Jordan, France24, 26 January 2020: Jordanian charged with ‘terror’ over tourist stabbings, Arab News, 30 April 2020: Last Israeli farmers leave enclave after Jordan deal ends, Der Spiegel, 15 May 2020: Jordan’s King Abdullah II: “The Danger of People Starving to Death Is Greater than the Danger from the Virus”, 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Jordan, Times of Israel, 25 April 2022: Status woe: Temple Mount is an enduring thorn in Israel’s ties with Jordan, Jerusalem Post, 14 May 2022: Biden assures Abdullah US recognizes Jordan as custodian of holy places, Arab News, 14 May 2022: Jordan announces uranium production).

Lebanon
In 1970, following an extended civil war, King Hussein expelled the Palestine Liberation Organization from Jordan. September 1970 is known as the Black September in Arab history and sometimes is referred to as the “era of regrettable events”. It was a month when Hashemite King Hussein of Jordan moved to quash the autonomy of Palestinian organisations and restore his monarchy’s rule over the country. The violence resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people, the vast majority Palestinians. Armed conflict lasted until July 1971 with the expulsion of the PLO and thousands of Palestinian fighters to Lebanon. The PLO resettled in Lebanon, from which it staged raids into Israel. In 1978, Israel launched Operation Litani, in which it together with the South Lebanon Army forced the PLO to retreat north of the Litani river. In 1981 another conflict between Israel and the PLO broke out, which ended with a ceasefire agreement that did not solve the core of the conflict. In June 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon. Within two months the PLO agreed to withdraw thence. In March 1983, Israel and Lebanon signed a ceasefire agreement. However, Syria pressured President Amine Gemayel into nullifying the truce in March 1984. By 1985, Israeli forces withdrew to a 15 km wide southern strip of Lebanon, following which the conflict continued on a lower scale, with relatively low casualties on both sides. In 1993 and 1996, Israel launched major operations against the Shiite militia of Hezbollah, which had become an emergent threat. In May 2000, the newly elected government of Ehud Barak authorized a withdrawal from Southern Lebanon, fulfilling an election promise to do so well ahead of a declared deadline. The hasty withdrawal lead to the immediate collapse of the South Lebanon Army, and many members either got arrested or fled to Israel. In 2006, as a response to a Hezbollah cross-border raid, Israel launched air strikes on Hezbollah strongholds in Southern Lebanon, starting the 2006 Lebanon War. The inconclusive war lasted for 34 days, and resulted in the creation of a buffer zone in Southern Lebanon and the deployment of Lebanese troops south of the Litani river for the first time since the 1960s. The Israeli government under Ehud Olmert was harshly criticized for its handling of the war in the Winograd Commission (see Israeli–Lebanese conflict, Israel–Lebanon relations, and Palestinian insurgency in South Lebanon).

Palestine
The 1970s were marked by a large number of major, international terrorist attacks, including the Lod Airport massacre and the Munich Olympics Massacre in 1972, and the Entebbe Hostage Taking in 1976, with over 100 Jewish hostages of different nationalities kidnapped and held in Uganda. In December 1987, the First Intifada began. The First Intifada was a mass Palestinian uprising against Israeli rule in the Palestinian territories. The rebellion began in the Jabalia refugee camp and quickly spread throughout Gaza and the West Bank. Palestinian actions ranged from civil disobedience to violence. In addition to general strikes, boycotts on Israeli products, graffiti and barricades, Palestinian demonstrations that included stone-throwing by youths against the Israel Defense Forces brought the Intifada international attention. The Israeli army’s heavy handed response to the demonstrations, with live ammunition, beatings and mass arrests, brought international condemnation. The PLO, which until then had never been recognised as the leaders of the Palestinian people by Israel, was invited to peace negotiations the following year, after it recognized Israel and renounced terrorism. In mid-1993, Israeli and Palestinian representatives engaged in peace talks in Oslo. As a result, in September 1993, Israel and the PLO signed the Oslo Accords, known as the Declaration of Principles or Oslo I; in side letters, Israel recognized the PLO as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people while the PLO recognized the right of the state of Israel to exist and renounced terrorism, violence and its desire for the destruction of Israel. The Oslo II agreement was signed in 1995 and detailed the division of the West Bank into Areas A, B, and C. Area A was land under full Palestinian civilian control. In Area A, Palestinians were also responsible for internal security. The Oslo agreements remain important documents in Israeli-Palestinian relations (see Israeli–Palestinian conflict and the film “The Oslo Diaries” by Mor Loushy and Daniel Sivan) – 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the State of Palestine.

2000–09
The Second Intifada forced Israel to rethink its relationship and policies towards the Palestinians. Following a series of suicide bombings and attacks, the Israeli army launched Operation Defensive Shield. It was the largest military operation conducted by Israel since the Six-Day War (“Censored Voices” by Mor Loushy and Daniel Sivan). As violence between the Israeli army and Palestinian militants intensified, Israel expanded its security apparatus around the West Bank by re-taking many parts of land in Area A. Israel established a complicated system of roadblocks and checkpoints around major Palestinian areas to deter violence and protect Israeli settlements. However, since 2008, the IDF has slowly transferred authority to Palestinian security forces. Israel’s then prime minister Ariel Sharon began a policy of disengagement from Gaza from the Gaza Strip in 2003. This policy was fully implemented in August 2005. Sharon’s announcement to disengage from Gaza came as a tremendous shock to his critics both on the left and on the right. A year previously, he had commented that the fate of the most far-flung settlements in Gaza, Netzararem and Kfar Darom, was regarded in the same light as that of Tel Aviv. The formal announcements to evacuate seventeen Gaza settlements and another four in the West Bank in February 2004 represented the first reversal for the settler movement since 1968. It divided his party. It was strongly supported by Trade and Industry Minister Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni, the Minister for Immigration and Absorption, but Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom and Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly condemned it. It was also uncertain whether this was simply the beginning of further evacuation. On 16 March 2003, Rachel Corrie, an American peace activist was crushed to death by an Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) bulldozer in Rafah during a non-violent protest of the Israeli demolition of Palestinian homes. Corrie stood in confrontation with the bulldozers for three hours wearing a bright orange jacket and carrying a megaphone. Although the Israeli government has denied responsibility in the incident and ruled her death as an accident, several eye-witness reports say that the Israeli soldier operating the bulldozer deliberately ran her over. In June 2006, Hamas militants infiltrated an army post near the Israeli side of the Gaza Strip and abducted Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. Two IDF soldiers were killed in the attack, while Shalit was wounded after his tank was hit with an RPG. Three days later Israel launched Operation Summer Rains to secure the release of Shalit. He was held hostage by Hamas, who barred the International Red Cross from seeing him, until 18 October 2011, when he was exchanged for 1,027 Palestinian prisoners. In July 2006, Hezbollah fighters crossed the border from Lebanon into Israel, attacked and killed eight Israeli soldiers, and abducted two others as hostages, setting off the 2006 Lebanon War which caused much destruction in Lebanon. A UN-sponsored ceasefire went into effect on 14 August 2006, officially ending the conflict. The conflict killed over a thousand Lebanese and over 150 Israelis, severely damaged Lebanese civil infrastructure, and displaced approximately one million Lebanese and 300,000–500,000 Israelis, although most were able to return to their homes. After the ceasefire, some parts of Southern Lebanon remained uninhabitable due to Israeli unexploded cluster bomblets. In the aftermath of the Battle of Gaza, where Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip in a violent civil war with rival Fatah, Israel placed restrictions on its border with Gaza borders and ended economic cooperation with the Palestinian leadership based there. Israel and Egypt have imposed a blockade of the Gaza Strip since 2007. Israel maintains the blockade is necessary to limit Palestinian rocket attacks from Gaza and to prevent Hamas from smuggling advanced rockets and weapons capable of hitting its cities. On 6 September 2007, in Operation Orchard, Israel bombed an eastern Syrian complex which was allegedly a nuclear reactor being built with assistance from North Korea. Israel had also bombed Syria in 2003. In April 2008, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad told a Qatari newspaper that Syria and Israel had been discussing a peace treaty for a year, with Turkey as a go-between. This was confirmed in May 2008 by a spokesman for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. As well as a peace treaty, the future of the Syrian Golan Heights is being discussed. President Assad said “there would be no direct negotiations with Israel until a new US president takes office.” Speaking in Jerusalem on 26 August 2008, then United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice criticized Israel’s increased settlement construction in the West Bank as detrimental to the peace process. Rice’s comments came amid reports that Israeli construction in the disputed territory had increased by a factor of 1.8 over 2007 levels. A fragile six-month truce between Hamas and Israel expired on 19 December 2008; attempts at extending the truce failed amid accusations of breaches from both sides. Following the expiration, Israel launched a raid on a tunnel suspected of being used to kidnap Israeli soldiers which killed several Hamas fighters. Following this, Hamas resumed rocket and mortar attacks on Israeli cities, most notably firing over 60 rockets on 24 December. On 27 December 2008, Israel launched Operation Cast Lead against Hamas. Numerous human rights organizations accused Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes (United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (Goldstone Report). European Coalition for Israel, which one day dreams of having the same power over the EU Parliament as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has over parts of the US Senate and Congress). In 2009 Israel placed a 10-month settlement freeze on the West Bank. Hillary Clinton praised the freeze as an “unprecedented” gesture that could “help revive Middle East talks.” A raid was carried out by Israeli naval forces on six ships of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla in May 2010. After the ships refused to dock at Port Ashdod. On the MV Mavi Marmara, activists clashed with the Israeli boarding party. During the fighting, nine activists were killed by Israeli special forces. Widespread international condemnation of and reaction to the raid followed, Israel–Turkey relations were strained, and Israel subsequently eased its blockade on the Gaza Strip. Several dozen other passengers and seven Israeli soldiers were injured, with some of the commandos suffering from gunshot wounds (The National, 9 July 2019: Israeli court rules Palestinian Authority responsible for Second Intifada attacks).

MAIN CONFLICTS TODAY
Consensus in Europe and North America is, that Israel within the 1967 borders is non-negotiable (Times of Israel, 14 February 2019: Is it really legitimate to talk about legitimacy?). This position has prevailed in most of the rest of the international community as well. Such a basic agreement between the two parties to the dispute is only partially given yet. In all other challenges, of which there are many, significant national and international differences in interests are evident. Of course, it is easier to classify and assess the conflict when not affected personally or emotionally, especially because of the differentiation in countries, states, policies, governments, populations and religions is easier. The closer you get to the action, the more emotional it becomes, and the differentiation hardly succeeds or is going lost at all. Even in this blog post it become clear how difficult it is to keep a semi-neutral observer role in order to include as many voices and views as possible, so that all readers can find themselves at one point or the other and at the same time familiarize themselves with the views of others. This has already been achieved on many points, while we are still working on others. This can also be seen by the selection of the media reports. There are, of course, hundreds of reports on every single topic, of which only a small portion is linked, which reflect the views of the respective journalists/authors and give a good impression of how different the views and evaluations are. Often interesting are less the individual news topics themselves, which are now presented quite similarly internationally. Especially interesting are the different interpretations on the basis of social, societal and historical aspects of the respective countries of origin, but also following political agendas, personal or collective animosities. The result is a mixed situation, which is probably best described as the “Oriental Bazaar of Opinions”, a spice bazaar with spices from all over the world – and each of them is unique in its own way. All in all, however, this is not scientific work, but rather a summary of the conflicts in the region and the approach to the topics from different perspectives, as well as the attempt to make the complexity of the conflicts more comprehensible and accessible, also against the background that the realities of life in Europe and North America are quite different from those in the Levant, which is not conducive to mutual understanding in the sometimes opposing worlds of thought (even if you “only” follow the news in the EU and North America, it becomes clear how different the views of the West are in detail, despite the very close ties. Then there is the Israeli perspective. Together, however, they only depict 180° of the conflicts, so that the remaining 180° must be included so that an all-round view is possible, because ultimately no solution can be found without the Arab perspective). Overall, it is of course also important how you approach the topic yourself. Do you want to get to know the different aspects and perspectives or just see your own worldview confirmed? In the latter case you will not always be able to stay relaxed while reading the following text and especially the linked contents.

State borders
The territory of a future State of Palestine and its border with Israel are unclear and even controversial among Israelis and Palestinians themselves. With the Arabs rejecting the UN Partition Plan of 1947 (Resolution 181 and Haaretz, 29 November 2019: Secrets and Lies: Scenes From the 1947 UN Partition Plan for Palestine) and Israel annexing much of the Palestinian territories during the Palestinian War, the area originally planned for a Palestinian state was reduced enormously. From 1960 to about 1989, according to internal and official documents, the PLO sought a Palestinian state that included Jordan, Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. The PLO gave up the demand for a state in Israel in the Oslo Accords and officially recognized Israel’s right to exist in 1988 (UN Security Council Resolution 242 – at the same time proclaiming the Palestinian Declaration of Independence), while international law doesn’t provide a “right for existence of states” (if there would be a right to exist, there wouldn’t be that many wars around the world, because they wouldn’t make any sense in principle and, of course, would apply to Israel’s continued land grabbing in Palestine and Syria. The occupation and in particular the illegal settlements in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights as well as the blockade of the Gaza Strip would, in addition to the fundamental illegality of settling in occupied areas, fundamentally violate Palestine’s right to exist. It would even go so far that all Israeli land grabs over the areas from the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine would have to be vacated immediately and returned to Palestine). However, the word creation and the makeshift fairy tales around it serve Israel well, especially as a vehicle was needed to create an alternative to the “Territorial Integrity of States” (as can be seen in the case of Eastern Ukraine, Crimea, Abkhazia, Transnistria and South Ossetia, among others, this right is only of value if it is observed by everyone and not broken by a warlord gone wild) which explicitly refers to “the inviolability of the territory and borders of sovereign states”. Israel and Palestine, Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon doesn’t have such borders yet (United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194), so that it will take some time before nationally and internationally recognized borders will be given (it is astonishing that although the “right to exist” of Israel is mantra-like prayed, the fact, that the Palestinians have declared their independence in 1988 is often missed out. Both countries are only majority recognized by the UN as states, or conversely: If one country got granted the right to exist, this must be granted to the other country as well or, consequently, deny the existence to both. There is no solution in between (double standard)). Today, the PLO is seeking a state in the territory of the entire West Bank and the Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capital, and is with solution in line with the international community. Parts of Fatah as well as the Islamist, classified by Israel and by parts of the Western community as terrorist organizations, Hamas (international positions) and Islamic Jihad (Times of Israel, 1 April 2019: Reports: Islamic Jihad planning large Gaza attack to derail ceasefire talks) continued to demand the “liberation of the whole of Palestine” including the territory of Israel, with it its elimination. In its recently revised charter, Hamas has distanced itself from this goal and is now referring to the 1967 borders, with the state of Israel still not recognized as such. On the Israeli side, there are calls from settlers and other right-wing extremist, radical and nationalist terrorist organizations (in Israel, referred to as “Taliban with Kippah“) for Eretz Israel, that is, the violent annexation of Gaza, the West Bank (the so-called, internationally unacknowledged, but supported by Christian Zionists (Second Coming of Christ), Judea and Samaria (Judea is the historical core settlement area of the Jews) and the Syrian Golan Heights to create a “Greater Israel”. The demolition of the Bedouin village Khan al-Ahmar in September 2018 has created further conditions for the full partition of the West Bank into two disjointed parts (on both sides of Highway 1) to illegally settle on more Palestinian lands and at the same time prevent the implementation of the 1988 Palestinian Declaration of Independence permanently and at any cost, thereby continuing the Netanyahu government’s endless sabotage of a peace treaty and the two-state solution (Israel National News, 29 May 2017: “Netanyahu no longer supports two-state solution”, BBC, 26 September 2018: Trump: Two-state Middle East solution would work best, NPR, 30 September 2018: Netanyahu’s Not-Quite-2-State Solution, Bloomberg, 15 November 2018: Netanyahu’s Opposition Keeps the Two-State Solution Alive and Times of Israel, 5 March 2019: What if a desperate Netanyahu embraces West Bank annexation?), driving the country more and more into international isolation and turning it into a theocracy. As a result, Netanyahu’s Israel has developed at a remarkable pace backwards and thus becoming increasingly similar to neighboring countries.

Important players in the region are the Gulf States, which are aiming for the two-state solution within the 1967 borders (Arab Peace Initiative), as well as the Western community. Without these players, solving the given challenges will not be possible (Jerusalem Post, 24 March 2019: Stronger Evangelical-Muslim relations will be key in achieving Middle East peace). To signal willingness to negotiate, Saudi Arabia surprisingly announced in May 2017 that it would allow Israeli companies to do business in the country (as part of the Saudi Vision 2030 (Arab News: Road to 2030, Al Arabiya, 15 August 2019: Saudi Arabia’s reforming business landscape)). Another milestone followed in March 2018: for the first time in history, Saudi airspace was opened for commercial passenger flights of Air India to Israel. On 2 April 2018, the reform-oriented (The Washington Post, 1 March 2018: Are Saudi Arabia’s reforms for real? A recent visit says yes.) Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman announced in an interview with The Atlantic (Saudi Crown Prince: Iran’s Supreme Leader ‘Makes Hitler Look Good’) that “the Palestinians and the Israelis have the right to their own land.” This is the first time ever, that a Saudi Arabian high profile awards Israel the right to exist. A statement that seemed to be unthinkable a year ago (New York Times, 3 April 2018: Saudi Prince Says Israelis Have Right to ‘Their Own Land’, BBC, 3 April 2018: Israel and Saudi Arabia: The relationship emerging into the open, France24.com, 3 April 2018: Saudi Crown Prince recognises Israel’s right to exist, Deutsche Welle, 3 April 2018: What is the Saudi prince’s strategy in recognizing Israel?, Haaretz, 1 May 2018: Palestinians Should ‘Shut Up’ or Make Peace, Saudi Crown Prince Told Jewish Leaders, Haaretz, 5 August 2018: Why Younger Saudis Won’t Fund, Facilitate or Fight for a Palestinian State, The New York Times, 23 November 2017: Saudi Arabia’s Arab Spring, at Last: The crown prince has big plans for his society., The Washington Post, 7 August 2018: Saudi Arabia cannot afford to pick fights with Canada, The Guardian, 12 August 2018: The bizarre spat with Canada shows Mohammed bin Salman’s true colours, The Washington Post, 26 October 2018: Israel’s Netanyahu pays surprise visit to Oman, Middle East Eye, 26 October 2018: Netanyahu makes surprise trip to Oman and meets with Sultan Qaboos, Reuters, 26 October 2018: Israeli PM Netanyahu makes rare visit to Oman, Bloomberg, 28 October 2018: Netanyahu’s Oman Visit Sets Off Israeli Cabinet Rush to Gulf, The Washington Post, 1 November 2018: Saudi crown prince described journalist as a dangerous Islamist in call with White House, officials say, The Atlantic, 1 November 2018: Progress Without Peace in the Middle East and BBC, 6 November 2018: Israel-Arab ties warm up after long deep freeze). Even if the Gulf States and Israel officially exclude mutual diplomatic missions, there has been unofficial backroom diplomacy for years, advocated and supported by the respective country leaders. Otherwise these talks wouldn’t be held at all (Jerusalem Post, 6 August 2019: Israelis and Arabs say one thing in public and another behind closed doors). That’s why sometimes Arab delegations stroll through West Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, or observers wonder which conversation partners meet in the business and conference centers of the hotels in Abu Dhabi and Dubai.

Today, the state of Israel is recognized by 169 of the 193 United Nations states, and since 1988 by the Palestinians. Today, the state of Palestine is recognized by ~~136~~ 137 states (The Washington Post, 7 November 2017: Map: The countries that recognize Palestine as a state, Times of Israel, 30 July 2019: Tiny island nation St. Kitts and Nevis recognizes Palestinian state). Israel isn’t among them (or as Israreli writer Amos Oz wrote: “Israel is a refugee camp, Palestine too. The conflict is a tragic clash between the right and the right … both nations don’t have another place to go. They cannot unite into a big happy family, because they are not family, and they are not happy – these are two miserable, different families. A historical compromise must be made: a two-state solution.” Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once said, after difficult and apparently frustrating negotiations, “Israel has no foreign policy, only domestic policy.” Keeping the quote in mind makes some of the Israeli government’s decisions easier to understand. You can see it, for example, in the different types of reporting. While international events are reported in the West and what consequences these have or could have for the countries concerned, the Israeli media reports on international events and the first question afterwards is almost always “What does this mean for Israel?”, regardless whether the events happened in neighboring countries or on the other side of the world).

Right of return
Among the parties particularly controversial is the right of return for the Palestinian refugees, who lost their homes and their property in the wake of the founding of Israel and were not allowed to return. The Palestinians demand the right of return (supported by UN General Assembly resolution 194) for all former refugees (about 800,000) and Palestinians today counted as refugees (about 6 million, Palestinian claims 8.5 million). Israel denies this, referring to the Israeli Law of Return for Jews from all over the world (the Likud coalition has recently passed legal restrictions on this), as well as the Jews expelled from the Arab lands during Israel’s founding: a right of return for both Jews and Palestinians would lead to the dissolution of the state of Israel in its current conception as a Jewish dominated state (which would also apply to the counter-concept of Eretz Israel by Israeli settlers’ and other right-wing extremist, radical and nationalist terrorist organizations), a right of return or compensation for the Arab Jews is unthinkable. The Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, despite their affiliation to the Palestinian Territories, are still mostly counted as refugees by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and are in most cases stateless. The same applies to the Palestinians, who still live in refugee camps in Lebanon and Syria. Despite the difficult living conditions in the refugee camps and the areas occupied by Israel, there is a sustained increase in population, especially in the latter. From 1967 to 2002, the number of Palestinians in the areas increased from 450,000 to 3.3 million. The birth rate in the Gaza Strip has been among the highest in the world for years. About half of all inhabitants of the occupied territories and refugee camps are under 15 years old (Foreign Policy, 25 June 2018: Shadow Government: Kushner’s Peace Plan Is a Disaster Waiting to Happen, Foreign Policy, 3 August 2018: Trump and Israel Seek End to Refugee Status for Millions of Palestinians, Haaretz, 23 October 2018: Israeli Foreign Ministry Official: If Trump Delays Peace Plan, France Will Offer Alternative, The Guardian, 1 January 2019: Why Trump’s Middle East peace plan is just a sideshow and Times of Israel, 7 January 2019: Justice ministry rejects Netanyahu’s criticism of corruption probes, Times of Israel, 7 January 2019: Justice ministry rejects Netanyahu’s criticism of corruption probes, Times of Israel, 28 February 2019: High Court rejects Likud petition to prevent AG announcing Netanyahu indictment, France24, 28 February 2019: Israeli Justice Ministry confirms intention to indict Netanyahu, The New York Times, 28 February 2019: Prosecutor Moves to Indict Netanyahu on Corruption Charges, Times of Israel: Netanyahu criminal investigations – full coverage (which is why he is no longer referred to as “Prime Minister” but as “Crime Minister” in Israel), The New York Times, 28 February 2019: Trump Ordered Officials to Give Jared Kushner a Security Clearance (The Washington Post, 1 April 2019: White House whistleblower says 25 security clearance denials were reversed during Trump administration), The Washington Post, 20 March 2019: Under investigation and up for reelection, Netanyahu’s kinship with Trump has never been clearer, Haaretz, 20 March 2019: Pocket Money, Loans and Millions for Legal Advice: Has Netanyahu’s Wallet Finally Been Found?, Times of Israel vom 20.03.2019: State prosecutors said mulling criminal probe of Netanyahu in submarine case and Jerusalem Post, 22 March 2019: Trumpet recruits Netanyoohoo as 2020 running mate in US elex).

Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories
The third issue is the persistence of Israeli settlements established by Israel since 1967 in the occupied territories, where over 600,000 Israeli Jews live today and have skyrocketed in recent years. These settlements are internationally regarded as contrary to international law, whereby the military occupation as such is legitimate, since there is no peace agreement between the parties to date. The colonization of foreign territory violates international law (Geneva Conventions). The West Bank was divided into three zones (A: 18%, B: 20% and C: 62% of the territory behind the Green Line) as a result of the 1995 Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, in which the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli military each have different powers. Jewish settlers established numerous Israeli settlements after the occupation especially in the C area, for which Palestinian land was partially confiscated. Thus, in the C area of today, there were about 1,200 Jewish-Israeli settlers in 1972, 110,000 in 1993 and 310,000 in 2010, which were settled in 124 settlements and about 100 outposts by the Israeli settlement policy. About 150,000 Palestinians live in the C areas. Israel controls the entire infrastructure and suppresses Palestinian development. This settlement policy is vehemently criticized by the Palestinians and the international community. The Israelis’ hope that the dissolution of various settlement areas, such as the complete eviction of Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip in 2005, would decisively advance the peace process (land for peace), was not fulfilled. The Gaza Strip became the center of power for Islamist Hamas, much as the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon in the late 1980s did not bring peace, but the strengthening of the radical Islamic Hizbullah, which justified its fight against Israel with an internationally unacknowledged agreement between Syria and Lebanon over unsuccessful land transfer (Shebaa farms). At the end of January 2009, the Israeli daily Haaretz published a secret settlement database, which was held back by Defense Minister Ehud Barak because of its political explosiveness. The database shows that 75% of all settlements in the West Bank have been built to a significant extent without authorization or even against Israeli law. In more than 30 settlements, buildings and infrastructure (roads, schools, synagogues, yeshivas and police stations) were built on private property of Palestinians. Many different sources speak of “occupied Palestinian territories” when they refer to Palestine or parts of it. An interesting, ground-breaking and at the same time surprising turn experienced the problem on 23 December 2016 under the UN Resolution 2334, which declared all Israeli settlements (East Jerusalem, West Bank and Golan Heights – United Nations, 23 December 2016: Israel’s Settlements Have No Legal Validity, Constitute Flagrant Violation of International Law, Security Council Reaffirms, The Guardian, 23 December 2016: US abstention allows UN to demand end to Israeli settlements, The Guardian, 24 December 2016: Israel rejects ‘shameful’ UN resolution amid criticism of Netanyahu, The New York Times, 24 December 2016: Netanyahu Promises Retribution for ‘Biased’ U.N. Resolution, Foreign Policy Journal, 28 December 2016: The Significance of UN Resolution 2334 on Israeli Settlements, Times of Israel: UN Security Council Resolution 2334, Jerusalem Post: UN Security Council Resolution 2334, The Guardian, 16 November 2018: US to oppose UN motion condemning Israeli control of Golan Heights, The Washington Post, 16 November 2018: Syrian and Israeli diplomats clash at U.N. over Golan Heights, Reuters, 16 November 2018: U.S. opposes U.N. Golan resolution, wins Israeli praise and The Guardian, 30 December 2018: ‘It was terror’: Palestinians decry rise in attacks by Israeli settlers) as well as the Gaza Strip “non-Israeli” and thus the Jewish settlers indirectly to Palestinians or Syrians, which means that Palestine is now home to the second largest Jewish community in Western Asia, even in front of Iran. In 2017, the occupation by Israel last for 50 years (Six-Day War). During numerous demonstrations and events, this was addressed internationally and in Israel and Palestine itself and an end was demanded so that two equal, peaceful, free, socially and economically prosperous states can coexist. Meanwhile, however, both societies are deeply affected by the conflict, with all conceivable negative aspects, but also some positive side effects (common peace efforts, cultural, social and sporting projects (grassroots movements) and many more).

Water supply
The Middle East consists of 95% desert areas and has low freshwater resources. Only a few rivers carry water throughout the year, and the number of underground aquifers and aquifers is limited. Overall, only 1% of the world’s freshwater resources are available to the Greater Middle East (around 5% of the world’s population), which corresponds to a per-capita availability of 761 cubic meters / year (by comparison, the average global availability is 6895 cubic meters per capita per year). Based on estimates of the population of Israel and the occupied territories, the amount of fresh water is just over 200 cubic meters per capita per year. The situation in the Gaza Strip is particularly critical due to high population growth. This results in a water supply of only 27-38 cubic meters per capita per year. Across the Middle East, access to freshwater holds potential for conflict. Similarly, possible cooperative solutions are an important basis for the development of the entire region. The fundamental conflict, the Jordan Water Question, was solved as early as 1953 as part of the Johnston Plan, a UN compromise proposal to which the neighboring states abide. The agreement was never officially ratified at the instigation of the Arab League, as any contractual agreement was considered recognition of Israel. The water question started a very early unofficial and intensive bilateral dialogue between Jordan and Israel. In contrast, the Syrian intention to use the waters of the Jordan by diversion of rivers Banyas and Hasbani for itself exclusively, is viewed as a trigger of the Six-Day War.

Jerusalem
Another unsolved problem is the future status of Jerusalem, which both sides claims as the future capital but is actually annexed by the state of Israel. The Middle East conflict has a strong religious component for many people involved on both sides, and certainly for some observers. Jerusalem is a holy city for Christians, Jews and Muslims. The Temple Mount, on which the temple of Jerusalem stood until 70 AD, and the western boundary wall of the plateau on which the temple stood – the so-called Wailing Wall, which is the most important shrine of Judaism today – for religious reasons many Jewish Israelis don’t want give out of hand. With the return to the Holy Land and the conquest of Jerusalem in 1967, they see the fulfilling of the promises of the Torah and are waiting for the return of Messiah (surprisingly, Jerusalem isn’t even mentioned once in the Torah). The settlement of holy places like al-Khal?l/Hebron in the West Bank would not have been possible to that extent without religious motivation. The Dome of the Rock, located in East Jerusalem, is a special sanctuary for Muslims. For radical Muslims, the very existence of Israel is a problem, because an area that once belonged to the sphere of influence of Islam can’t be handed over to “non-believers” (radical Muslims call Jews “non-believers” and Christians “crusaders”. In some cases, Christians and Jews are equally named “people of the book” (the Bible)). The most important concern of the Muslim Palestinians is to make sure that Jerusalem will become the capital of their own state with the Temple Mount as the center. These claims are based on the early Homayadian tradition that, according to Sura 17, verse 1-2 of the Koran, the meeting of Muhammad with Allah in company of the Archangel Gabriel and the Ascension of Muhammad at the site of today’s Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount should have taken place (it should be noted that all religious texts – Bible, Quran and Torah – have significant biological, geographical and physical weak points). In the conflict area, therefore, the conflict and its possible solutions appear differently depending on the application of the principles of the right of self-determination of the population residing there today, solely on the basis of demographic circumstances or by applying historical or historical-religious considerations. Since there is not even agreement on the applicable criteria on both sides and that each side postulates the principles which serve them most in the argument, the long-lasting and tenacious conflict can be explained. It is even further fueled by constantly creating new facts on the ground. As an example, the construction of new Israeli settlements in the West Bank is often mentioned. On the other hand, fears are voiced by the Israeli side that the overall significantly higher birth rate of the Arabs would change the existing demographic situation in the long run and lead to an Arab overweight. However, this is often counteracted by the equally high birth rate in the Jewish settlements in the West Bank. These and other arguments make it difficult to find a consensus solution to build two equal states side by side (international positions on Jerusalem and United States recognition of Jerusalem as capital of Israel).

Interesting about the “capital dispute” is that Jerusalem has been a whole lot in its long history, but hardly ever the capital of anything, but for millennians little more than a collection of huts. It is indisputable that the place has a long history as a religious center of various faiths – long before Christians, Jews and Muslims stayed in the region (the Old City in Palestinian East Jerusalem is the historic Jerusalem). Only during the British Mandate, the British headquarters was relocated to Jerusalem, so that the place became the capital of the mandate area. In this respect, the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians about the “capital” is unnecessary because it belongs equally to both parties or neither party.

For some time now, the Jerusalem suburb Abu Dis in the West Bank has been repeatedly discussed by Israeli and US representatives as an alternative capital of Palestine, instead of East Jerusalem. The offices of the authorities and administrations of the Palestinian National Authority, which are entrusted with Jerusalem-related tasks, are already located there today. Understandably, the Palestinians categorically reject this idea.

Security
There are further concerns on the Israeli side as to whether a future Palestinian government can guarantee the security of Israel and its citizens. In the past, there were repeated attacks from the Gaza Strip, were rockets where shot that hit Israeli territory. In addition, there were Israelis killed during suicide attacks that had been prepared in the Palestinian territories. On the other hand, terrorist attacks in the West Bank by radical Israeli settlers, the so-called Hilltop Youth and other Jewish-Israeli terrorist structures, against the Palestinian population repeatedly happened and still happen. There are also increasing attacks of members of the Israeli military against the Palestinian civilian population.

Cultural identity
According to one theory, there is a threat of an impending loss of identity on both sides, that is standing in the way of a solution in the near future. In addition to the religious and territorial aspects, both population groups need each other’s enemy image for their own identity/nation building process (JAFFA, the orange’s clockwork 2009).

Peace process
The Middle East peace process refers to diplomatic efforts to find a peaceful solution to the Middle East conflict (Arab–Israeli conflict, Road map for peace, List of Middle East peace proposals, Arab Peace Initiative), in particular the initiatives to end the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, mediated by the United States and the Middle East Quartet. However, critics often sees the term as a mere political buzzword due to the alleged insolubility of the conflict or a lack of political will to implement a peaceful solution. These people may want to have a look at the living counter-evidence Abie Nathan, whose ideas would have brought peace to the region decades ago – if in particular politicians, activists, but as well the extremists of the various camps would have listened. Ultimately, however, with the sinking of his ship “Peace” off the coast of Ashdod, he charted the path of failed Israeli (not exactly peaceful or rational) efforts to resolve the conflict and further annexations of Palestinian land under Netanyahu. In retrospect, at no time before or after the Oslo peace process (Oslo Accords), which was negotiated between Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat during Bill Clinton‘s term of office, was a peace agreement closer (The Venice Declaration, The Washington Post, 12 September 2018: A Middle East mirage – Twenty-five years ago, Israelis and Palestinians reached out for peace. But it escaped them.). The efforts ended abruptly when Yitzhak Rabin was shot dead after a peace event in th ecountry’s capitol Tel Aviv by an Israeli, who was obviously encouraged by Netanyahu’s massiv hate campaign against Rabin and his peace efforts (Haaretz, 22 October 2018: Analysis: Netanyahu’s Current Politics Reopen 23-year-old Wound of Rabin’s Assassination and Hotel New York). At the time, Netanyahu’s Greater Israel Party (Likud) was rightfully equated with the Palestinian Hamas (Politico Magazine, 9 October 2014: Why the Middle East Still Doesn’t Matter, Haaretz, 17 September 2018: Israel’s Irreconcilable Differences With U.S. Jews and the Democratic Party May Soon Lead to Final Divorce). To date, both parties have further radicalized themselves. Surprisingly, with the help of several 100 million in PR and image campaigns, continuous propaganda and historical revisionism, Netanyahu somehow managed to persuade parts of the international public to consider only Hamas (or at least parts of it) as a terrorist organization, although the Likud has neither changed its staff nor its ideology, and that Netanyahu’s role in the assassination of Rabin is either hushed up to the present day or highly emotionally debated, but hasn’t been legally processed at any time. The Rabin Square in Tel Aviv is a reminder of this. Shortly after, Netanyahu’s first term began, which has since severely and consistently massively worsened the starting point and conditions for peace agreements and the two-state solution. His efforts go hand in hand with the consistent erosion of Israel’s democracy (The New York Times, 19 July 2018: Israel Passes Law Anchoring Itself as Nation-State of the Jewish People (which is more a law for Jewish nationalists than a national law. Those Jews who do not live permanently in Israel and continue to work for a democratic Israel will be arbitrarily prevented from entering the country. The “home of all Jews” was abandoned more than a year ago in favor of unconditional nationalism and a harsher version of the law is already on the way – The New York Times, 22 July 2018: Israel Picks Identity Over Democracy. More Nations May Follow., BBC, 19 July 2018: Jewish nation state: Israel approves controversial bill, The Guardian, 19 July 2018: EU leads criticism after Israel passes Jewish ‘nation state’ law, The Guardian, 26 July 2018: Israeli cartoonist fired over ‘Animal Farm’ Netanyahu caricature, New York Times, 26 July 2018: Did Israel Just Stop Trying to Be a Democracy?, Haaretz, 30 July 2018: The Apartheid Prime Minister, Haaretz, 30 July 2018: Israeli Druze Commander Quits Army Over Nation-state Law in Open Letter to Netanyahu, Haaretz, 5 August 2018: Why It’s Now Every American Jew’s Duty to Oppose Israel’s Government, Haaretz, 7 August 2018: Israel’s War on Democracy Is Here – and the Justice Minister’s Leading the Charge, Jewish News, 7 August 2018: Vivien Duffield: I’ll be more ‘choosy’ in backing Israel after ‘apartheid’ law, The New York Times, 13 August 2018: Israel, This Is Not Who We Are, Haaretz, 14 August 2018: Peter Beinart and the Crisis of Israel’s Illiberal Zionism, Haaretz, 17 August 2018: When Jewish Billionaires Get Buyer’s Remorse Over Israel, Haaretz, 23 August 2018: Israel’s Message to the Liberal Diaspora Jews Who Support It: Shape Up or Stay Out, Haaretz, 30 September 2018: The Right-wing Think Tank That Quietly ‘Runs the Knesset’, Huffington Post, 13 December 2018: Natalie Portman Slams Israel’s Nation-State Law As ‘Racist,’ ‘Wrong’, Wikipedia Nationality Bill, which contradicts the content and spirit of the Balfour Declaration and the Israeli Declaration of Independence – Haaretz, 29 March 2019: Annul the Nation-state Law, Jerusalem Post, 8 June 2019: Conversion. Joining a religion or joining a nation?). Astonishingly, in Israel there is talk of an “Orbánization” of the country these days, although Viktor Orbán is successfully destroying Hungary’s democratic pillars only since 2010, while Benjamin Netanyahu has been doing so in Israel since 1996. In that sense, the “Orbánization” of the Visegrád Group and Israel is actually a “Netanyahuization”.

How fragile the whole process is was made clear, after the apparently inconsiderated announcement of the 45th US President in early December 2017, to unilaterally recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and relocate the US Embassy from Tel Aviv, where all international embassies are located at (United Nations Security Council Resolution 478 and Times of Israel, 17 January 2019: Embassy tactic? No more mere ‘honorary consuls’ in Jerusalem, Israel tells world), to West Jerusalem (therefore, the U.S. Consulate General in West Jerusalem will be upgraded in the middle of May 2018 to the Provisional U.S. Embassy until the new building will be completed one day (so far, not even a property corresponding to the requirements has been found. In addition, not thought-through or straight out stupid ideas usually result in high costs: CNN, 18 July 2018: US Embassy in Jerusalem to cost $20 million more than Trump’s estimate, Times of Israel, 4 March 2018: US closes Jerusalem consulate, demoting Palestinian mission, France24, 4 March 2019: US downgrades its Palestinian diplomatic mission, Jerusalem Post, 4 December 2018: Merkel urged EU countries not to move embassies to Jerusalem (a very clever move by the Merkel administration to try to hinder the Netanyahu administration to commit even more crimes under international law against Palestine and the Palestinians), Al Arabiya, 15 December 2019: Brazil opens Jerusalem trade office as step to embassy shift, Israel Hayom, 15 December 2019: ‘Brazil will move its embassy to Jerusalem’). Most of the embassy staff will remain in Tel Aviv until the new building will be opened. Only the ambassador himself and few of his personal staff will work in the provisional embassy. The Consulate General building complex is located in the Arnona neighborhood and bisect by the City Line, which has survived to this day due to the repeatedly annulled Jerusalem Law by the UN, as part of the Green Line and thus partly in what was defined in 1949 as No Man’s Land – The New York Times, 5 December 2017: U.S. to Recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital, Trump Says, Alarming Middle East Leaders, Middle East Monitor, 13 December 2017: Palestine: What’s next after the collapse of the two-state project?). Within hours there were historically significant communications from the other governments of the international community. In rare coincidence, they made clear that they do not support the unilateral partisanship of the US administration, that they will not relocate their embassies, and that the current Israeli and US administrations (and the micro states Guatemala, Honduras, Togo, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, and Nauru extorted by Trump to join (Reuters, 16 May 2018: Guatemala opens embassy in Jerusalem, two days after U.S. move and Haaretz, 14 May 2019: Evangelicals and Empty Promises: A Year After Trump’s Embassy Move, Only One Country Has Followed U.S. to Jerusalem)) are completely isolated on this issue. Unisono, it was announced that the “status of Jerusalem is a firm and inseparable part of the future peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians (The New York Times, 27 January 2018: It’s Time for Mahmoud Abbas to Go) and must be negotiated between these parties.” Even NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres and the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Federica Mogherini felt the need to publish statements (Haaretz, 20 March 2019: Hungarian Foreign Minister: Embassy in Israel Will Not Be Moved to Jerusalem, Times of Israel, 20 March 2019: EU reiterates opposition to diplomatic missions in Jerusalem, Jerusalem Post, 24 March 2019: Romania at AIPAC: We will move our embassy to Jerusalem and Times of Israel, 24 March 2019: Romanian president rebuffs ‘ignorant’ PM over pledge to move embassy, Times of Israel, 30 July 2019: Foreign Ministry’s NIS 50m plan aims to help nations move embassies to Jerusalem). Ultimately, the American announcement addresses the wrong parties (radicals, extremists and terrorists on the Palestinian and the Israeli side and the evangelicals in the US (Christians United for Israel and Times of Israel, 23 July 2018: Netanyahu vows ‘complete solidarity’ with Christians persecuted in Iran)) and at the same time, the current US administration unnecessarily and without necessity disqualified itself as a mediator between the parties. The peace process has thereby suffered considerable damage. At the same time, Iran, China and Russia will be able to achieve further land gains in an attempt to fill the power vacuum left by the US in Western Asia. The Arab and Muslim world is in turmoil, which will probably have a negative impact on future cooperation with the US and Israel. For the first time since 1945, the US administration opened Pandora’s box by creating a dangerous precedent under international law that opens the door to conquest campaigns, which will, e.g., facilitate the repeated violations of international law by Russian President Vladimir Putin while annexing the Ukrainian Crimea and the Georgian country parts Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and the annexation of the Northern part of Cyprus by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdo?an. In response to the unilateral recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, consisting of 57 member stats, unilaterally recognized East Jerusalem as Palestine’s capital in mid-December. Further escalation steps are expected (The New York Times, 18 December 2017: U.S. Vetoes U.N. Resolution Condemning Move on Jerusalem, The Guardian 21 December 2017: UN votes resoundingly to reject Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as capital, The Washington Post, 14 January 2018: Palestinian leader attacks Trump, calling his peace deal the ‘slap of the century’, CNN, 16 January 2018: Palestinian leaders advise suspending recognition of Israel, The Guardian, 22 January 2018: US to open Jerusalem embassy sooner than expected, says Pence, Reuters, 22 January 2018 Abbas wins renewed EU backing for Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem, Haaretz, 31.01.2018: ‘Happy to Hear Israel Wants Two States’: German FM Meets Netanyahu 10 Months After Crisis Over Sit-down With Leftist NGOs, Hareetz, 31 January 2018: German FM After Meeting Netanyahu: Is Israel Prepared to Pay the Price of Perpetual Occupation? and The Guardian, 23 February 2018: US brings forward Jerusalem embassy opening to May). Meanwhile, some former and active members of the Israeli security structure (intelligence and military) have expressed their opposition to Trump’s decisions. The basic attitude is: “Only a two-state solution secures peace for Israel and the region, while protecting Israel from itself and continued democratic decline.” If it weren’t that tragic, one would have to laugh loudly about the recent remarks of the 45th US President on aid to the Palestinians because of the unbelievable impudence and distorted realities, after all it was he himself who had massively harmed the peace process: The Guardian, 25 January 2018: Trump threatens to cut aid to Palestinians for ‘disrespecting’ Pence, Politico, 25 January 2018: Trump on Palestinian aid: ‘The money is on the table’, The Guardian, 1 September 2018: Palestinian anger over US decision to end funding for UN agency, The Guardian, 8 September 2018: Trump axes $25m in aid for Palestinians in East Jerusalem hospitals, The Wall Street Journal, 10 September2018: Trump Administration to Close Palestine Liberation Organization Office in Washington – National security adviser John Bolton also plans to threaten sanctions against International Criminal Court, in a Monday speech, The Guardian, 10 September 2018: ICC will continue ‘undeterred’ after US threats, The Guardian, 15 Septmeber 2018: US has no plan for Middle East peace, says senior Palestinian, Times of Israel, 15 November 2020: Is Jordan Really Palestine?. As long as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict isn’t settled and secured by treaties, the international community has no choice but to continue to see Tel Aviv as the capital of Israel de jure, even though the Israeli government see West Jerusalem as Israel’s de facto capital, and this status is at least tolerated by the international community. Only a sustainable, lasting peace solution between and supported by the parties to the dispute, the result can be recognized on an international level, which includes the future status of Jerusalem. International law and international agreements, regulations, resolutions and solutions always top national attempts in the legal hierarchy, whereby the hierarchy in this case (UN partition plan) has contributed to escalating the conflict in the first place. Whatever pranks #45 and Netanyahu are figuring out doesn’t matter on the international level, but has caused considerable turbulences in this case. Since there are negotiators and heads of state on both sides of the parties to the dispute, who are a lot but negotiators or statesmen, the dissolution of the conflict in the next 50 years is becoming increasingly unlikely (Jerusalem Post, 7 June 2019: AIPAC, J Street support restoring Israel-Palestine peace dialogue funding, Times of Israel, 7 June 2019: AIPAC and J Street back restoring funds to Israeli-Palestinian dialogue programs, Times of Israel, 9 July 2019: Get ready for the new wave: Young, passionately Jewish — and anti-Zionist).

The Arab states have stated for some time now, that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a whole is no longer of high priority to them (Jerusalem Post, 18 January 2019: Arab League: Palestinian issue has ‘reduced’ importance). Only the free and unhindered access to the holy places of Muslims isn’t negotiable. The result is a conceivable solution scenario, which would mean the final end of the Palestinian dream of an own state (on the Palestinian part this creates “a state without a land” and on the Israeli part it creates “a state on partly stolen land”). At the same time, Israel would face the final decision of either wanting to become a Jewish or a democratic state (ask your girl friend or wife what she thinks of the concept of a “little bit pregnant” – let me guess: It will become a short and loud discussion, that you will lose (note: “happy wife, happy life!”). However, Netanyahu has already made his choice, denouncing democracy to Israel and instead opting for a Jewish theocracy: France24, 10 March 2019: Netanyahu says Israel ‘not a state of all its citizens’, Haaretz, 10 March 2019: ‘Israel Is the Nation-state of Jews Alone’: Netanyahu Responds to TV Star Who Said Arabs Are Equal Citizens and Times of Israel, 10 March 2019: Amid Likud’s ‘Bibi or Tibi’ campaign, ADL slams ‘demonization’ of Israeli Arabs), especially since both isn’t possible at the same time. The scenario outlined here will not provide peace for another few years or decades, but rather the exact opposite, especially since the Palestinians will certainly not give up their land without fights in various forms. This has already been priced-in by the Netanyahu government, especially since Israel’s prime minister has repeatedly and plainly pledged the population in recent years to “many years of struggle”.

The bottom line is that neither Israelis nor Palestinians are willing or able to make peace. It is up to the respective US presidents to enforce peace between the parties to the dispute, but no US president has dared to take that step yet. This, of course, primarily with regard to the domestic electorate (about 26% of US-Americans are Evangelicals, who are mostly voting in favor of the Republicans. Around 2% – 3% of Americans are Jews, who are mostly voting in favor of the Democrats), which is why, in the first term of office, such a step is out of the question at all and could not be implemented until the end of the second term, because then no more elections need to be won. However, it is questionable whether the successor would or could withstand the political pressure to undo the step, which would undoubtedly be built up by the Israeli side and its lobbyists in the Senate and Congress, in conjunction with the usual unsubstantiated anti-Semitism accusations, threats of all kinds, etc.

At the end of March 2018 and in the course of the so-called “March of Return” demonstrations with 120 dead and more than 2,500 injured, Hamas in the Gaza Strip has adopted a new, technically very simple but very effective tactic to attract attention. During favorable wind directions, incendiary devices are attached to stunt kites and/or balloons, which are driven by the wind towards southern Israel. During the landings, the incendiary devices causes fires in natural parks, forests and on agricultural land. Overall, the economic damage has been limited to a small, single-digit million amount so far. There was no personal injury on the Israeli side. How many Palestinians are killed and injured by Israeli snipers and air force counter attacks isn’t clear yet (i24news.tv, 16 April 2018: Firebombs tied to kites launched from Gaza spark fires in Israel near border, The New York Times, 4 May 2018: Flaming Kites From Gaza Thwarted by Winds, Haaretz, 9 July 2018: Netanyahu: Israel to Close Commercial Gaza Crossing Over Airborne Firebombs, BBC, 20 July 2018: Israel launches Gaza strikes as soldier dies from gunshot, Haaretz, 21 July 2018: Israel, Hamas Make U-turn on the Precipice With Gaza Cease-fire, B’Tselem, 15 October 2018: In 6 months of Gaza protests, Israeli forces fatally shoot 31 Palestinian minors, The Guardian, 22 January 2019: The Guardian view on Israel’s democracy: killing with impunity, lying without consequence?, Times of Israel, 23 January 2019: Israel lambasts The Guardian for accusing it of ‘killing with impunity’, The Guardian, 28 February 2019: UN says Israel’s killings at Gaza protests may amount to war crimes, Times of Israel, 28 February 2019: UN probe accuses Israel of possible crimes against humanity in Gaza border riots, Haaretz, 28 February 2019: UN Council: Israel Intentionally Shot Children and Journalists in Gaza, Times of Israel, 22 March 2019: 23 to 9, UN rights council adopts report accusing Israel of war crimes in Gaza, Times of Israel, 14 June 2019: Gazans launch dozens of fire balloons into Israel as hundreds riot on border, Jerusalem Post, 14 June 2019: Dozens of Palestinians unjured along fence, 10 fires break out along border, Times of Israel, 26 June 2019: Gaza arson balloons spark 19 blazes in south).

After so-called “secret military operations” in the West Bank had already been heavily gone wrong in recent months, the Israelis have tried it now again in the Gaza Strip. As a result, six Palestinians were killed by the attackers and one of the attackers himself. The troop withdrawal was secured by renewed bombardment of Gaza by the Israeli Air Force. It was followed by a classic: The usual whining of the Netanyahu government about that the Palestinians are fighting back, instead of simply standing still so that they can be easily shot dead. The repeatedly and with great fervor expressed irresponsibility and simplicity of the Netanyahu government is quite remarkable. At the same time, the international community was invited to join the fantasy world of the Israelis, who in turn renounced to do so (The Washington Post, 12 November 2018: Botched Israeli army operation in Gaza triggers sharp escalation in violence and The Washington Post, 6 December 2018: Resolution condemning Hamas fails at U.N. in setback for Israel and Trump administration). After all, this has first consequences now: The right-wing extremist on duty, boss of the ultra-nationalistic Yisrael Beiteinu party and Israel’s dubious Secretary of Defense, Avigdor Lieberman (leader of the radical right-wing and national party Israel Our Home (Yisrael Beiteinu) and, at the same time, representative of Russian Israelis), has resigned from his post. As a result, Netanyahu is now Prime Minister, Foreign Minister, Health Minister, Minister of Aliyah and Integration and Defense Minister – as it is already known from Erdogan’s Turkish presidential system (Jerusalem Post, 11 December 2018: Netanyahu and his ministries, The Guardian, 14 November 2018: Israeli defence chief Avigdor Lieberman quits over Gaza truce and The Guardian, 18 November 2018: Netanyahu meets with coalition partner to stop government collapse). It was announced that the Minister of Education Naftali Bennett and the Minister of Justice Ayelet Shaked, both of the right-wing religious settler party The Jewish Home (Times of Israel, 29 December 2018: Bennett, Shaked quit Jewish Home, announce formation of ‘The New Right’), will resign from their posts on Monday, 19. November 2018. These ministries will then be transferred to Netanyahu as well (Times of Israel, 18 November 2018: TV: Jewish Home’s Bennett, Shaked will resign from government on Monday). However, with 27 active ministries and 10 inactive ministries in Israel, there is still room for improvement of his collection. After all, the announced resignations did not materialize, arguing that a successor government would then seriously work on a peace agreement with the Palestinians instead of continuing the flimsy Likud theater, in order to eventually usurp Palestine and attempting to legitimize this through the international community. A second Oslo peace process would be the ultimate nightmare of all right-wing nationalist and right-wing radical Israeli, that is, all parties involved in Netanyahu’s Likud administration. The first peace process ended in fatality for then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, when an Israeli, incited, among others by Netanyahu’s hate campaigns against Rabin and the peace process, killed Rabin after a peace rally in Tel Aviv. Since then, Israel’s right-wingers became neither more peaceful nor intelligent. One can imagine, how their trigger fingers already itch at the thought of a great statesman of the format of a Yitzhak Rabin to replace the rather simple-minded nationalist Netanyahu (The Washington Post, 19 November 2018: Netanyahu keeps coalition intact, but Hamas emerges stronger, Israel Hayom, 28 October 2019: From peace between the brave to peace between equals, Israel Hayom, 7 November 2019: Peace cannot be made with anti-Semites).

venice_declaration_1980_en

Apartheid_Report_15_March_En_Final

Iran Deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action)
However, in the medium and long term, the events can have a positive effect for Israel, especially since the Gulf States, especially Saudi Arabia (Sunni Islam), and their regional allies are currently seeking for more allies against Iran (Shia crescent – predecessors in parts of the region were, among others, the Assassins). Israel, not much beloved and esteemed in the Arab world, would be eligible, according to the motto “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” (Iran–Saudi Arabia relations and Iran–Israel relations). Conversely, Israel need every ally in the region that the country can find and can’t be picky. Benjamin Netanyahu will enjoy this, especially as he can continue his personal vendetta (Yonatan Netanyahu), which has now been going on for almost 40 years, with all the means at his disposal against Arab states in the Levant, Iran and in particular against Palestinians. Among other things, he succeeded to trick George W. Bush in a war with Iraq under false pretenses (Iraq allegedly has an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, which turned out to be a blatant lie – French President Nicolas Sarkozy and American President Barack Obama about Netanyahu’s personality: The Guardian, 8 November 2011 Sarkozy: Netanyahu’s a ‘liar’). Netanyahu was against the Iran deal, which was arduously negotiated between the P5+1 and Iran over the years, from the beginning, especially since the agreement has clearly fenced Iran in this point and by doing so is no longer suitable as an “enemy”. Of course, this needs to be changed immediately from Netanyahu’s point of view. Netanjahu is currently trying his for intelligence-minded people easy to understand game (Iran would allegedly violate the Iran deal and continue to build a nuclear bomb (The New York Times, 3 March 2015: Mr. Netanyahu’s Unconvincing Speech to Congress, The Guardian, 30 April 2018: Nuclear deal: Netanyahu accuses Iran of cheating on agreement, National Review, 28 August 2017: How to Get Out of the Iran Nuclear Deal), but according to his own words this should be crowned with success already tomorrow for the past 30 years) to push the intellectually overwhelmed #45 (whose “work” and “accomplishments” are characterized by being unable to develop own successful strategies and, due to this considerable deficit, thus it is limited to wiping out the nationally and internationally acclaimed achievements by his outstanding predecessor, US President Barack Obama. If the situation weren’t that serious, one would have to laugh about the duo Netanyahu and Trump (The New York Times, 9 July 2019: Who Is a Bigger Threat to His Democracy: Bibi or Trump?), which inevitably reminds of Pinky and the Brain – The Guardian, 9 March 2018: Meet Donald Trump’s twin: Benjamin Netanyahu) into an altercation with Iran (Iran–United States relations). Certainly, no one does need to place bets on it if this will work or not. The intellectual resources of the current US president aren’t big enough to see through the game. After Netanyahu’s theatrical performance, followed by big applause from (at the moment) US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, a similar statement from Washington was declared (The Guardian, 24 December 2003: Pakistan admits it may be source of Iran’s nuclear expertise, Irish Times, 11 March 2005: Pakistan says Khan supplied key nuclear technology to Iran, Haaretz, 20 May 2015: Pakistan Is the Only Muslim Nuclear State – So Why Is Israel’s Hysteria Reserved for Iran?, BBC, 1 May 2018: Israel’s Iran documents show nuclear deal ‘was built on lies’, Haaretz, 30 April 2018: Trump: Netanyahu’s Speech on Iran Deal Proves That I Was 100% Right on Iran Deal, The Guardian, 1 May 2018: Europeans cast doubt on Israel’s claims about Iran nuclear breaches, The New York Times, 1 May 2018: Netanyahu’s Flimflam on Iran, DW, 1 May 2018: Netanyahu slideshow reinforces need for Iran nuclear deal, says EU, BBC, 1 May 2018 Iran nuclear row: Tehran says Israel’s Netanyahu lied, Reuters, 6 May 2018: Macron warns of risk of war if Trump withdraws from Iran deal, Haaretz, 6 May 2018: Netanyahu: Iran Must Be Stopped, Even if It Means Conflict – and Better Sooner Than Later, The Guardian, 6 May 2018: Fate of Iran nuclear deal at stake as UK foreign secretary heads to Washington, and New York Times, 15 May 2018: Allies at Cross-Purposes: Trump Puts Europe Into Damage-Control Mode). The whole of the theatrical spectacle organized by the US President and Netanyahu in favor of the dissolution of the Iranian agreement, that Iran fully complies to, overshadows two major aspects due to the volume of the two aforementioned show master: First, the entire Israeli security architecture (intelligence services and the IDF leadership) is backing the Iran deal in full (“It’s much better to have this deal than none!”). Secondly, neither the US President nor Netanyahu provide viable alternatives to the existing agreement, so that the opposition against it turns out to be pure and dangerous nonsense that threatens the security of Europe and would damage the credibility of treaties with the US for decades. An agreement similar to the Iran deal with North Korea would off the table as well (at the end of May 2018 happened what was already expected: The “great dealmaker” #45 failed during at the negotiations with North Korea as well – The New York Times, 24 May 2018: Trump’s Relationship With North Korea Just Got More Dangerous. Apparently, it doesn’t stop North Korea and South Korea in its negotiations. Who would have thought that one day a North Korean dictator would act smarter than a US president? Xinhua News Agency, 26 May 2018: Moon, Kim hold second summit in Panmunjom. If you look at the overall situation with humor, then a quote from the US sitcom Last Man Standing come to mind: “Why are there so many designer diseases like ADHD and allergies in the US? In the days back, we used to have measles and mumps and we just ignored everything else. Today, the North Koreans don’t even need a nuclear bomb because they could kill half of the US population with a single glass of peanut butter!”). It is certainly true that additional agreements on the ballistic missile programs with Iran would be desirable, but the amateur spectacle delivered by the US President and Netanyahu isn’t only not purposeful but extremely counterproductive. In addition to the foreign policy aspects obviously domestic policy aspects play a major role here. The US president tries to distract from the numerous affairs before (Trump / Russia – A definitive History by Seth Hettena, BBC, 3 May 2018: Why the Stormy Daniels-Donald Trump story matters, The Guardian, 6 May 2018: ‘Trump’s going to be forced to resign’: Stormy Daniels’ lawyer predicts a fall, Bloomberg, 26. August 2018: The Prosecutors Who Have Declared War on the President and France24, 27 February 2019: ‘Conman’ Trump broke law in office, Cohen tells Congress in explosive testimony) and during his first term to reach a second term. His voters forgive him all of his disastrous missteps anyway. Netanyahu in turn tries to distract him from the numerous corruption and fraud allegations (New York Times, 2 March 2018: Benjamin Netanyahu Is Questioned in 3rd Corruption Case in Israel, CNN, 2 December 2018: Israeli police say there’s enough evidence to indict Benjamin Netanyahu in a third corruption case, Haaretz, 2 December 2018: Police: Charge Benjamin and Sara Netanyahu With Bribery in Telecom Case, France24, 2 December 2018: Israeli police recommand indicting Netanyahu in graft probe, The Guardian, 2 December 2018: Police recommend indicting Benjamin Netanyahu on bribery charges (Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu), The New York Times, 3 December 2018: Netanyahu’s Obsession With Image Could Be His Downfall, NBC News, 3 December 2018: Israel police recommend Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu be charged with bribery, Haaretz, 3 December 2018: Almost Half of All Israelis Fear ‘Grave Danger’ to Democracy in Their Country, The New York Times, 5 December 2018: Suspected of Crimes, Netanyahu Is Also Suspected of Fear-Mongering, Times of Israel, 6 January 2019: Ex-Supreme Court justice likens Netanyahu’s rhetoric to crime boss threats, BBC, 22 May 2020: Benjamin Netanyahu: What are the corruption charges?) against him (his wife Sara Netanyahu make a start here: The Washington Post, 21 June 2018: Sara Netanyahu not first leader’s wife accused of corruption, Haaretz, 7 October 2018: Judge in Sara Netanyahu Fraud Trial Gives Sides One Additional Month to Reach Deal, Washington Post, 7 October 2018: Lifestyle of Israeli prime minister’s wife under scrutiny as she goes on trial in Jerusalem, BBC, 16 June 2019: Benjamin Netanyahu’s wife Sara admits misusing public funds, Times of Israel, 16 June 2019: Sara Netanyahu convicted of misusing state funds, says she’s ‘suffered enough’, The Guardian, 16 June 2019: Israeli court convicts Sara Netanyahu for misusing state funds, France24, 16 June 2019: Israeli court convicts, fines Netanyahu’s wife for misusing public funds, Jerusalem Post, 31 May 2020: Two employees suspected of lying in favor of Sara Netanyahu during trial and “Like father, like son”: The Guardian, 17 December 2018: Netanyahu’s son banned from Facebook over hate speech – Times of Israel, 13 September 2017: The troll of Balfour Street, Times of Israel, 21 August 2019: Losing bite, friendlier state watchdog is accused of being Netanyahu’s poodle). Apparently, it has become a “good habit” among Israeli leading politicians of the past years to take appropriate prison sentences after the end of their terms. In addition, after losing his immunity status, Netanyahu will rarely leave Israel, especially since numerous international arrest warrants are waiting for him, including two from Spain. Nevertheless, it happened as expected: On May 8, 2018, #45 announced, expressly based on Netanyahu’s fairy tales (not to say lies), the withdrawal from the Iran deal and renewed the sanctions (and the addition of further sanctions) against Iran, which were stopped under the fantastic President Barack Obama on the basis of the Iran deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action). The US is responding to Netanyahu’s expressed desire to allow Iran to build/obtain nuclear weapons (The Guardian, 8 May 2018: Iran deal: Trump breaks with European allies over ‘horrible, one-sided’ nuclear agreement). Netanyahu is delighted to welcome the expected economic deterioration and the resulting unrest in Iran, especially since a destabilizing effect would be very accommodating to his plans of attack, for which again US soldiers will be sacrificed (as in the case of Iraq when Netanyahu tricked Bush Junior into the Iraq war), instead of Israeli soldiers. Not a good day for peace in the Middle East and the security of Europe – above all, it will be remembered who is responsible for it, namely Benjamin Netanyahu and then the duped by him Donald Trump (and his masterminds and stooges Leo Strauss (The Claremont Institue, and the The Heritage Foundation – The Guardian, 8 May 2018: Obama condemns ‘misguided’ violation of Iran deal as Republicans cheer move, Washington Post, 8 May 2018: Trump’s Iran decision just brought us closer to war, USA TODAY, 8 May 2018: Obama: Trump withdrawing from Iran deal is ‘serious mistake,’ turns our back on U.S. allies, New York Times, 8 May 2018: Trump Vandalizes the Iran Deal, Times of Israel, 17 July 2018: In recording, Netanyahu boasts Israel convinced Trump to quit Iran nuclear deal, The Guardian, 10 May 2018 :Israel has hit nearly all Iranian infrastructure in Syria, military claims, The New York Times, 23 May 2018: Deep in the Desert, Iran Quietly Advances Missile Technology, Jerusalem Post, 6 February 2019: Ambassador urges Germany to change anti-Israel stance at U.N., Times of Israel, 12 May 2019: Germany vows to back Israel at UN, in apparent break from past record (while in the real world, Germany isn’t voting against Israel, instead in very own and EU interests, which is, of course, the N° 1 priority of all German governments. Then and only then, the interests of foreign countries are taken into account. On the other hand, Israel sees itself as a possible EU member country and should ask itself, why its state interests are so fundamentally different to those of EU States and at the same time make a EU membership widely impossible – Auswärtiges Amt, 11 May 2019: Foreign Minister Maas on Israel in the United Nations)). After Israel’s renewed and massive air strikes on Syria during the night of 9th to 10th May 2018, it became finally clear that Netanyahu wants to force a war with Iran now, because he doesn’t know if he and his right-wing Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman will ever get another chance to do so (and to trick a US president into a war in the Middle East). The current scenario is very similar to the Suez Crisis 1956 and the Six-Day War, in the preparation of which the Israeli government had asserted Egypt or Syria would in turn prepare for war against Israel. In retrospect, it turned out that these were complete lies of the Israeli leadership in order to begin wars of aggression against the unprepared Egypt and Syria – the only reason why israel was able to win theses selfmade wars. Netanyahu apparently wants to continue this tradition. The perception of the Golan Heights from the international and Israeli point of view is interesting as well: In fact, the Golan Heights are part of the Syrian state territory, although annexed by Israel, this annexation has never ever been recognized by the international community. Assuming that the Syrian government (or its coalition partners) had actually done rocket-firing exercises in the Golan Heights, they would have every rights in the world to do so, especially because they can of course carry out as many military maneuvers and exercises as they want on their own soil. That is also why United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres has rejected Israel’s request to hold a special session of the UN Security Council (at the end of July 2018, Israel shot down a Syrian fighter plane over Syrian territory: The New York Times, 24 July 2018: Israel Downs Syrian Fighter Jet Over Golan Heights). Over the past few days, newspaper reports have come to the fore that the Israeli government is now #45, after the unilateral and internationally ineffectual recognition of (West) Jerusalem as Israel’s capital (at international level, it is de jure still Tel Aviv), to declare the Golan Heights Israeli unilaterally and thus again international ineffective (Times of Israel, 6 January 2019: Hosting top Trump aide, PM asks US to recognize Israeli sovereignty over Golan, Jerusalem Post, 11 March 2019: Is Netanyahu angling for a Golan gift from Trump before election? and Times of Israel, 11 March 2019: Trump ally Graham says he’ll lobby White House for Golan recognition). It is interesting, that the judicious Obama administration has voted against it under the effective United Nations Resolution 2334 in December 2017 (both in terms of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights), so that it doesn’t matter what the dream dancers Netanyahu and #45 are coming up with: The international community will not play along (Haaretz, 29 August 2018: Israel Will Pay for Its Too-tight Embrace of Donald Trump). Netanyahu starts his European tour on 04 June 2018 to try to convince the governments in Berlin, Paris and London of his anti-Iran course, which is unlikely to succeed (The Guardian, 4 June 2018: Israel’s Netanyahu tours Europe to lobby leaders against Iran). With his sabotage of the Iran deal he endangers the security of Europe and that can’t be tolerated. His theater performances might impress #45 (for whom breach of agreements and contracts is everyday business), but certainly not European leaders. His first talks leads him to Berlin. Once again very bad timing, because on this day Joachim Loew will finally announce the formation of the German team for the World Cup in Russia. Neighborhood disputes in the Levant are at best secondary on such a day. Netanyahu spent the next day in Paris: France24, 5 May 2018: French President Emmanuel Macron warned of the risk of an “escalation” in the Iranian nuclear standoff on Tuesday following talks in Paris with Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu. How far the whole thing got out of hand becomes clear when one discovers with a mixture of disbelief, speechlessness and horror that one has to agree to remarks of Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei: Reuters, 21 July 2018: U.S. launches campaign to erode support for Iran’s leaders and Reuters, 21 July 2018: Iran supreme leader says ‘obvious mistake’ to negotiate with U.S.: website. And the show went on: The New York Times, 22 July 2018: Trump Threatens Iran on Twitter, Warning Rouhani of Dire ‘Consequences’, The Washington Post, 22 July 2018: Middle East: After Trump slams Iran’s president, Iranian officials accuse him of ‘psychological warfare’, The Guardian, 23 July 2018: John Bolton backs Trump’s Iran threat: ‘They will pay a price’, The Washington Post, 23 July 2018: Ignore Trump’s clueless bluster on Iran, The Guardian, 23 July 2018: Trump says Iran will ‘suffer consequences’ after speech by President Rouhani, The Guardian, 23 July 2018: Trump’s tweet to Iran cannot bully the west away from making peace and The Guardian, 24 July 2018: It’s not Trump Iranians are worried about – it’s their homegrown crises. At the UN General Assembly in New York in September 2018, Netanyahu has revealed his latest discovery: There are even warehouses in a village called Turquzabad in Iran 😲, presumably to store the CDs and ring binders from Netanyahu’s previous “sensational findings” (The Washington Post, 27 September 2018: Israel accuses Iran of harboring ‘secret atomic warehouse’, France 24, 22 February 2019: Iran is holding up its end of nuclear deal, shows IAEA report and Times of Israel, 22 February 2019: UN nuclear watchdog say Iran staying within limits of 2015 deal). The international response to Netanyahu’s “sensational findings” was mixed but overwhelmingly amused, especially as understandably pretty much nobody believed him.

The consequences of the re-enforced and additional sanctions imposed by #45 on Iran for European companies can’t be determined clearly yet. The essential aspect is how banks react to it. Without loans and payments, there will be no international business in Iran. Banks, operating in the US, will refrain from doing business with Iran in the near future, in order to avoid of being on the #45’s sanction/play list and thus risking the US business or the entire US dollar-based business. Companies, which aren’t active in the US business, but would like to do business in Iran, therefore, have to be very creative, especially with regard to the selected bank and the currency (the European Investment Bank would be eligible if the European Union accidentally came to an agreement. The 1996 Helms-Burton Blocking Statute of the European Union, in order to fend off sanctions of the former Clinton administration, would be eligible (New York Times, 16 May 2018: E.U. Official Takes Donald Trump to Task: ‘With Friends Like That’ …, The Guardian, 17 May 2018: EU sets course for US clash with law blocking Iran sanctions, Reuters, 17 May 2018: EU to start Iran sanctions blocking law process on Friday, Der Spiegel, 22 May 2018: Interview with Joschka Fischer: ‘The U.S. President Is Destroying the American World Order’, The New York Times, 6 May 2018: Europe Asks U.S. for an Exemption From Sanctions on Iran, The New York Times, 6 August 2018: U.S. to Restore Sanctions on Iran, Deepening Divide With Europe, USA Today, 6 August 2018: Donald Trump reimposes economic sanctions on Iran, BBC, 7 August 2018: Iran sanctions: Trump warns trading partners, Reuters, 7 August 2018: Trump says firms doing business in Iran to be barred from U.S. as sanctions hit, The Guardian, 7 August 2018: The Guardian view on Iran and sanctions: the EU stands firm, Reuters, 11 December 2018: German exports to Iran soar ahead of U.S. sanctions, Reuters, 21 August 2018: Germany urges EU payment system without U.S. to save Iran deal, Reuters, 27 August 2018: World Court hears Iran lawsuit to have U.S. sanctions lifted, France24, 9 January 2019: EU sanctions Iran over assassination plots, The Washington Post, 9 January 2019: Iran supreme leader calls US officials ‘first-class idiots’, Politico.eu, 18 January 2019: Trump seeks to split EU as fight intensifies over Iran nuclear deal, Jerusalem Post, 18 January 2019: Are European countries moving closer to Trump on Iran?, Handelsblatt, 21 January 2019: Mahan Air: Berlin bans Iranian airline after EU slaps sanctions on Tehran, Bloomberg, 24 January 2019: EU Says Preparations for Iran SPV Are at ‘Advanced Stage’, The Washington Post, 28 January 2019: Germany says EU soon to launch Iran funding scheme, Times of Israel, 28 January 2019: Trump warns Europeans not to try to evade Iran sanctions, The New York Times, 29 January 2019: On North Korea and Iran, Intelligence Chiefs Contradict Trump, Times of Israel, 30 January 2019: Rouhani: Iran facing ‘greatest pressure and economic sanctions’ in 40 years, The Guardian, 31 January 2019: Europe sets up scheme to get round US sanctions on Iran, Bloomberg, 31 January 2019: Europe Protects Itself From Trump’s Caprice, Instex (NPR, 5 July 2019: How Instex, Europe’s Trade Channel With Iran, Will Work, AP News, 8 August 2019: Designated Head of Europe-Iran Trade Entity Won’t Take Job, Jerusalem Post, 8 August 2019: German Ambassador se to run EU-Iran trade resigns, linked to Holocaust denier, Haaretz, 9 August 2019: German Diplomat Designated to Head Iran Trade Vehicle Pulls Out at Last Minute (Barter), euractiv.com, 29 November 2019: Six European countries join EU-Iran financial trading mechanism INSTEX, IRNA, 30 November 2019: Iran Deputy FM welcomes six European states’ joining INSTEX to improve it, Al Arabiya, 30 November 2019: Six European nations to join INSTEX in bid to bypass US sanctions against Iran, Jerusalem Post, 1 December 2019: Netanyahu calls out European attempt to bypass Iran sanctions (BS bingo at it’s best, brought to you by Netanyahu and Danny Danon), Times of Israel, 1 December 2019: Netanyahu slams European ‘rush to appease Iran’ by sidestepping sanctions, Xinhuanet, 1 December 2019: 6 countries join EU-initiated payment channel with Iran as shareholders, The National, 26 February 2020: European nations raise prospect of using Instex to ease lran’s coronavirus crisis, France24, 31 March 2020: Europe sends medical goods to Iran in test of sanctions bypass mechanism, Politico.eu, 31 March 2020: Europe completes first export deal with Iran to dodge US sanctions, Jerusalem Post, 31 March 2020: Germany, France, UK circumvent sanctions to send medical goods to Iran – all EU states + China and Russia should participate in INSTEX), The New York Times, 31 January 2019: 3 European Nations Create Firm to Trade With Iran, but Will Anyone Use It?, European Comission: Iran, Foreign Policy, 13 February 2019: Iran’s Economy Is Crumbling, but Collapse Is a Long Way Off, Reuters, 25 February 2019: Iran’s Foreign Minister Zarif, architect of nuclear deal, resigns, The Guardian, 25 February 2019: Iran’s foreign minister Javad Zarif announces resignation, The New York Times, 25 February 2019: Iran’s Foreign Minister, Architect of Nuclear Deal, Says He Is Resigning, The Washington Post, 25 February 2019: Iran’s foreign minister, who became the face of his country, tenders his resignation, Iran–European Union relations, France24, 27 February 2019: Iran’s Rouhani rejects Foreign Minister Zarif’s resignation, Times of Israel, 27 February 2019: Iranian president rejects Foreign Minister Zarif’s resignation, Washington Post, 27 February 2019: Iran’s Rouhani rejects chief diplomat’s resignation, calling it ‘against national interests’, Hawala, Remittance, Economy of Iran, Germany–Iran relations and Iran–European Union relations). Today, and in the face of an obviously unstable US president, it would probably involve the risk of triggering a full-blown US-EU trade war through countermeasures from Washington – of course, despite the current transatlantic moods, the US remains the EU’s main and most important (trading) partner, because there aren’t any real alternatives given. People who think of Moscow or Beijing here, obviously didn’t deal enough with the basic data and the opposing social/society models (the democracy in the EU stands in clear and obvious opposition to the so-called “controlled democracy” in Russia under President Vladimir Putin, which in fact corresponds to an autocracy, and in the People’s Republic of China under President Xi Jinping, according to its constitution “under the democratic dictatorship of the people”, but is governed since 1949 authoritarian by the Chinese Communist Party)). Sometimes the mostly rightfully scolded, anonymized tax havens sometimes seems to be good for something. As a cherry on #45’s absurdity cake, at the same time the current US Secretary of State (who knows how long he will stay or whether he will survive the next tweet) Mike Pompeo chats happily with #45’s new buddy, North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, about possible help from the US to build up the country (The Guardian, 13 May 2018: Pompeo: US firms could invest in North Korea and Kim may get ‘security assurances’).

In the dispute over the Iran deal, the EU has now come a step further to protect small and medium-sized EU companies that are not active in the US business but want to do business in Iran – and there are surprisingly many. The European Commission has created a protection mechanism against US sanctions and has authorized the European Investment Bank to carry out payment transactions. By contrast, large companies and corporations can not benefit from the protection mechanism.

The next bomb exploded on June 27, 2018, when it became known that the blackmail duo Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump will once again try to take the global economy hostage for their crude plans. Starting on November 4, 2018, those companies and countries (China is the largest buyer of Iranian oil, followed by the EU), which continue to import oil from Iran, will face US sanctions. Apart from the fact that the US will shoot itself in the foot, the step will certainly not increase the sympathy values for and the willingness to foreign investment in Israel and the United States. Should the economic situations of both countries change in the near future, which can be assumed, they can not only hope for appropriately amused reactions from the Arab world. As with the first round of US sanctions on Iran, following the unilateral termination of the Iran deal by #45, the second round now means for the EU to seek again for banks that this time can handle the oil business with Iran. A prerequisite for the selection is to do little or no business in the US and therefore be able to laugh about possible sanctions. As with the first round, the EU will not be able to cope with the risk of default of large companies and corporations, especially since their international business usually includes considerable US business volumes. At the same time, countermeasures against the US must again be planned (e.g., complete suspension of liquefied gas and oil trade), and measures against Israel’s Trump whisperers should be considered as well. The current attempt is the 1:1 takeover of a confused Netanyahu plan to initially destabilize Iran economically and then attack the country militarily. Here is another aspect: The affair surrounding the assassination of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, which is making big waves internationally, is shaking Trump’s entire “Middle East policy” (if it exists at all), as it is build on Saudi Arabia’s important role as a regional power player and policymaker, especially with regard to Iran. After the evidence against Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman intensify, Democrats and influential Republicans are increasingly calling for the US to move away from Saudi Arabia and impose sanctions on the country. For Trump, but especially for Benjamin Netanyahu, that would be a bitter defeat. In particular, the latter hope for a major breakthrough in the Middle East conflict from the recent rapprochements between Saudi Arabia and Israel, especially as the appeal of Saudi Arabia to the Muslim world has considerable weight. Against the background, it is understandable why Trump and Netanyahu are desperately looking for ways out of the crisis (for the Saudi crown prince). Before Trump, this would’t have been possible (Haaretz, 20 November 2018: Trump: U.S. to Remain Steadfast Partner to Saudi Arabia to Ensure Israeli Interests, The Guardian, 20 November 2018: Trump ‘stands with’ Saudi Arabia and defends crown prince over Khashoggi, The New York Times, 20 November 2018: In Extraordinary Statement, Trump Stands With Saudis Despite Khashoggi Killing, Times of Israel, 14 January 2019: Pompeo: US wants accountability for Khashoggi murder, and Saudis agree, Haaretz, 31 May 2018: Ex-Mossad Chief Says He Questioned Legality of Netanyahu’s Order to Prepare Iran Strike, Times of Israel, 6 April 2019: US said set to declare Iran’s Revolutionary Guards as terrorist group, France24, 8 April 2019: US designates Iran’s Revolutionary Guards a ‘terrorist organisation’, The New York Times, 8 April 2019: Trump Designates Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a Foreign Terrorist Group, Jerusalem Post, 8 April 2019: Netanyahu praises Trump for putting Iran’s Revolutionary Guards on terror list, Times of Israel, 8 April 2019: Netanyahu says Trump designated Iran Guards a terror group at his request, The New York Times, 22 April 2019: U.S. Moves to Stop All Nations From Buying Iranian Oil, BBC, 22 April 2019: Iran oil: US to end sanctions exemptions for major importers, Reuters, 22 April 2019: U.S. to end all waivers on Iran oil imports, crude price jumps, Jerusalem Post, 22 April 2019: Netanyahu lauds Trump decision to eleminate Iran oil waivers, Times of Israel, 22 April 2019: Iran threatens to close Strait of Hormuz after US ends sanction waivers, France24, 23 April 2019: US sanctions over Iran oil will ‘intensify Mideast turmoil’: China, Times of Israel, 24 April 2019: Iran threatens ‘consequences’ if US takes ‘crazy measure’ of blocking oil sales, Times of Israel, 25 April 2019: Zarif accuses Netanyahu and Saudis of trying to provoke US into war with Iran, The Guardian, 24 April 2019: Iran will continue to defy US oil sanctions, says Tehran (Netanyahu and Trump obviously want to drive Iran to self-defense actions and then, of course, once again, mendacious and hypocritical as both are, cry into the cameras that Iran would have to take full responsibility for it. Netanyahu and Trump apparently assume that the rest of the world is just as limited in their ability to think as they are themselves. At any rate, they are closer to their goal of imposing war on Iran than ever before (2020 United States presidential election, Rally ’round the flag effect, Pledge of Allegiance, United States sanctions against Iran, The Guardian, 6 May 2019: US deploys aircraft carrier and bombers after ‘troubling indications’ from Iran, gunboat diplomacy, psychological warfare, BBC, 6 May 2019: US sends aircraft carrier and bomber task force to ‘warn Iran’, France24, 8 May 2019: Iran nuclear deal: what happens now?, The Guardian, 8 May 2019: Trump’s antics over Iran have endangered us all. The stakes are now lethally high, The Guardian, 8 May 2019: Iran announces partial withdrawal from nuclear deal, BBC, 8 May 2019: Iran nuclear deal: Tehran urged to honour commitments, The New York Times, 8 May 2019: U.S. Threatens New Sanctions as Iran Plans to End Compliance With Parts of Nuclear Deal, Washington Post, 8 May 2019: Why Russia is the big winner of the Iran deal fallout, The National, 8 May 2019: European pressure on Tehran is needed, Washington Post, 8 May 2019: Iran announces it will stop complying with parts of landmark nuclear deal, Times of Israel, 8 May 2019: Democrats warn Trump is leading US toward war with Iran, France24, 8 May 2019: Trump tightens Iran sanctions as France warns against ‘escalation’, The Guardian, 9 May 2019: EU rejects Iran’s two-month ultimatum on nuclear deal, France24, 9 May 2019: Europe rejects Iran’s ‘ultimatum’ but stands by nuclear deal, The Guardian, 10 May 2019: Trump’s foolish Iran policy only makes war more likely, The Washington Post, 11 May 2019: Why the U.S.-Iran Conflict Is Now Coming to a Head, i24 News, 12 May 2019: Analysis: Will escalation between US, Iran revive Netanyahu’s decade-old strike plans?, Times of Israel, 12 May 2019: Amid US-Iran tension, Israeli minister fears Tehran ‘may fire rockets at Israel’, The Guardian, 12 May 2019: US war against Iran is impossible, claims Iranian general, The Guardian, 13 May 2019: Iran-US tensions are reaching new heights – and neither is likely to blink, The Guardian, 13 May 2019: Europe urges Mike Pompeo and US to show restraint towards Iran, The New York Times, 13 May 2019: White House Reviews Military Plans Against Iran, in Echoes of Iraq War, The National, 13 May 2019: Mike Pompeo delays Russia visit to lobby against Iran deal in Brussels, The National, 13 May 2019: The US and Europe must unite over Iran, The Washington Post, 13 May 2019: Pompeo crashes Brussels meeting of E.U. diplomats but changes few minds on Iran, The Times, 14 May 2019: US could stumble into a war with Iran, allies tell Mike Pompeo, The New York Times, 14 May 2019: It’s Time for the Leaders of Saudi Arabia and Iran to Talk, The Washington Post, 14 May 2019: It’s up to Israelis to stop Iran’s nuclear program. Here’s how they did it before., Times of Israel, 15 May 2019: Allies split with US over Iranian threat as war worries mount, The New York Times, 14 May 2019: Skeptical U.S. Allies Resist Trump’s New Claims of Threats From Iran, Haaretz, 15 May 2019: Iran Vows to Defeat ‘American-Zionist Alliance’ as Putin Warns Against U.S. Pressure, BBC, 15 May 2019: US pulls ‘non-emergency staff’ from Iraq as Iran tensions mount, Times of Israel, 15 May 2019: Iran’s defense minister: ‘We will defeat the American-Zionist front’, Arab News, 16 May 2019: Iran must not go unpunished, Haaretz, 16 May 2019: If the U.S. Goes to War With Iran, Netanyahu Will Be the Prime Suspect, Arab News, 18 May 2019: Gulf nations ‘approve US request to deploy troops in the Gulf’, Times of Israel, 18 May 2019: Saudi newspaper calls on Washington to launch strikes on Iran, Jerusalem Post, 19 May 2019: Saudi Arabia says it seeks to avert war, ball in Iran’s court, Times of Israel, 20 May 2019: Trump warns if Tehran attacks, it will be ‘official end of Iran’, Haaretz, 20 May 2019: Trump: ‘If Iran Wants to Fight, That Will Be the Official End of Iran’, The Guardian, 20 May 2019: Iran hits back at Trump for tweeting ‘genocidal taunts’, Jerusalem Post, 20 May 2019: Iranian commander: We are ready to confront the enemy, Times of Israel, 20 May 2019: Hitting back at Trump, Zarif says ‘genocidal taunts won’t end Iran’ (the whole extent of Trump’s stupidity shows again: Only those who are members of a club can change its rules. On the other hand, anyone who leaves the club and roars around from the fence just looks like a ridiculous idiot. With Benjamin Netanyahu’s forced unilateral termination of the Iran deal, the US president has reached exactly this position. An emperor without clothes), Times of Israel, 20 May 2019: Iran quadruples low-enriched uranium production, Times of Israel, 21 May 2019: Rouhani: In current situation, Iran chooses path of ‘resistance only’, The New York Times, 23 May 2019: Trump Officials Prepare to Bypass Congress to Sell Weapons to Gulf Nations, New York Post, 23 May 2019: Dianne Feinstein had dinner meeting with Iranian minister amid US tensions, Times of Israel, 24 May 2019: Trump to invoke emergency to sell arms to Saudis, citing Iran threat, CNN, 24 May 2019: Trump declares emergency to expedite arms sales to Saudi Arabia and UAE, Jerusalem Post, 24 May 2019: Controvery in Iran amid reports Zarif met U.S. senator, Times of Israel, 29 May 2019: Netanyahu uncommonly quiet as US-Iran crisis escalates, Jerusalem Post, 29 May 2019: German intel: Iran wants to expand to weapons of mass destruction, Haaretz, 30 May 2019: Israel’s False Messiah of Religious Freedom Just Brought Down Netanyahu. It’s Hilarious, France24, 31 May 2019: Saudi king demands firm action against ‘criminal’ Iran at Arab summit, Times of Israel, 31 May 2019: Iran accuses Saudi Arabia of ‘sowing division’ to Israel’s benefit, Times of Israel, 1 June 2019: Saudi king says will reject US measures that ‘prejudice’ Jerusalem, Jerusalem Post, 1 June 2019: Handshakes, Jerusalem and Iran: The politics of the Saudi summits, Times of Israel, 1 June 2019: Iran president says Islamic Republic won’t be ‘bullied’ into US talks, Times of Israel, 1 June 2019: Khomeini’s legacy looms over Iran, 30 years after his death, Times of Israel, 6 June 2019: Saudi missile program expanded with help from China, US intel said to show, Iran Press, 6 June 2019: German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas to visit Iran next week, Times of Israel, 6 June 2019: Trump signals readiness for negotiations with Iran, Jerusalem Post, 7 June 2019: Iran rejects French call for wider talks beyond nuclear deal – state TV, The New York Times, 7 June 2019: Trump Allows High-Tech U.S. Bomb Parts to Be Built in Saudi Arabia, France24, 7 June 2019: Iran rejects France’s call for wider talks beyond nuclear deal, Times of Israel, 8 June 2019: Iran said accelerating uranium centrifuge production, anticipating deal collapse, Times of Israel, 8 June 2019: US hits Iran with new sanctions targeting petrochemicals, Times of Israel, 8 June 2019: Iran says new US sanctions show offer for talks is ‘hollow’, France24, 8 June 2019: Iran says selling oil through ‘unconventional’ means, Jerusalem Post, 8 June 2019: Understanding the Saudi, UAE arms deals and Iran, The Guardian, 10 June 2019: Iran’s foreign minister warns US ‘cannot expect to stay safe’, Jerusalem Post, 10 June 2019: Iran welcomes German FM to pressure Europe on nuke deal, France24, 10 June 2019: Germany urges Iran to stick to nuclear deal, Times of Israel, 10 June 2019: Iran’s top envoy: Netanyahu wants to destroy us, and we will respond, Jerusalem Post, 10 June 2019: Iran foreign minister slams Netanyahu and Trumo ‘deal’, Times of Israel, 10 June 2019: UN nuclear watchdog: Iran uranium production up, can’t confirm compliance, Times of Israel, 12 June 2019: Japan premier hopes to ease US-Iran tensions in Tehran visit, Times of Israel, 13 June 2019: Khamenei: Iran doesn’t want nuclear bomb, but US couldn’t stop us if we did, The Guardian, 13 June 2019: Two oil tankers struck in suspected attacks in Gulf of Oman, USS Liberty, France24, 13 June 2019: US blames Iran for attacks on oil tankers in Gulf of Oman, The Guardian, 14 June 2019: US says video shows Iranian military removing mine from tanker, France24, 14 June 2019: US releases video accusing Iran of tanker attack, Tehran blasts ‘Iranophobic campaign’, The Guardian, 14 June 2019: Trump blames Iran for oil tanker attacks and calls country a ‘nation of terror’, The New York Times, 14 June 2019: Distrusting Both Iran and U.S., Europe Urges ‘Maximum Restraint’, The New York Times, 14 June 2019: Was Iran Behind the Oman Tanker Attacks? A Look at the Evidence, The New York Times, 14 June 2019: Iran and the U.S. Are on a Collision Course, France24, 14 June 2019: Trump accuses Iran of tanker attacks but flags need for talks, The Guardian, 15 June 2019: Iran-US dispute grows over attacks on oil tankers in Gulf of Oman, Times of Israel, 15 June 2019: Israel said to blame Iran’s Revolutionary Guard for attacks on oil tankers, Times of Israel, 16 June 2019: Saudi prince blames Iran for tanker attacks, says won’t hesitate on ‘threats’, The New York Times, 16 June 2019: In Face-Off With Iran, Escalation May Depend on Who Prevails Inside Washington and Tehran, The New York Times, 17 June 2019: Iran Threatens to Violate Nuclear Deal’s Limits on Uranium Enrichment, The Guardian, 17.06.2019: Iran to break uranium stockpile limit set by nuclear deal, Times of Israel, 17 June 2019: After enrichment threat, US accuses Iran of ‘nuclear extortion’, Times of Israel, 17 June 2019: Germany, UK warn Iran over enrichment threat; EU takes wait-and-see approach, Jerusalem Post, 17 June 2019: U.N. officials: U.S. planning a ‘tactical assault’ in Iran, Times of Israel, 18 June 2019: US deploying 1,000 more troops to Middle East as Iran tensions soar, France24, 18 June 2019: US deploys 1000 more troops to Middle East, citing ‘hostile behaviour’ from Iran, The Guardian, 18 June 2019: US to send 1,000 more troops to Middle East, citing ‘hostile behavior’ by Iran, The Guardian, 18 June 2019: The Trump administration’s dangerous fever dream about Iran, The Guardian, 19 June 2019: UK, France and Germany in last-ditch effort to save Iran deal, The Guardian, 19 June 2019: A US war with Iran looms. Don’t for one second think that it is justified, Times of Israel, 18 June 2019: , The Guardian, 18 June 2019: The Iran crisis was created in Washington. The US must be talked down, Jerusalem Post, 19 June 2019: Kremlin says Russia-Us_Israel meeting ‘very important’, CNN, 20 June 2019: Iran shoots down US drone aircraft, The Guardian, 20 June 2019: Iran shoots down US drone, The New York Times, 20 June 2019: Attacking Iran Is Congress’s Call, Times of Israel, 20 June 2019: US official confirms Iran shot down drone, says it was in international airspace, The Guardian, 20 June 2019: Iran shoots down US ‘spy’ drone, Times of Israel, 20 June 2019: Moscow to look out for Iranian interests in upcoming Jerusalem meet, The Guardian, 20 June 2019: US joins four rogue countries seen as likely forces for bad, poll finds, The Guardian, 21 June 2019: Donald Trump ‘cancelled Iran strikes with planes in the air’, France24, 21 June 2019: US approved, then scrapped Iran strikes after drone shooting, US media say, CNN, 21 June 2019: Military operation against Iran was set before Trump called it off, CNN, 21 June 2019: How Donald Trump created one hell of a mess with Iran, The New York Times, 21 June 2019: Trump Stopped Strike on Iran Because It Was ‘Not Proportionate’, The National, 21 June 2019: Prince Khalid bin Salman: Saudi Arabia supports ‘maximum pressure’ on Iran, The Guardian, 21 June 2019: The Guardian view on Iran and Trump: the risks remain, The National, 21 June 2019: Donald Trump confirms reversing order for strikes on Iran, Arab News, 21 June 2019: Trump warned Iran via Oman that US attack was imminent, called for talks, Reuters, 21 June 2019: Trump’s half-cocked and loaded tweet draws barrage of reaction, Arab News, 21 June 2019: Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman speaks with Donald Trump on Iran, The New York Times, 21 June 2019: Urged to Launch an Attack, Trump Listened to the Skeptics Who Said It Would Be a Costly Mistake, The Guardian, 22 June 2019: Foreign Office minister to visit Iran to call for ‘urgent de-escalation’, France24, 23 June 2019: US launched cyber attack on Iranian computer systems, The National, 23 June 2019: US-Iran tensions remain high as UAE calls for de-escalation, The Guardian, 23 June 2019: Trump says ‘absolutely broken’ Iran will face major new sanctions, France24, 23 June 2019: Saudi minister of state for foreign affairs: ‘Iran’s policies are not acceptable and have to change’ (Netanyahu has been trying to engage Iran in war for decades, first with the help of the Bush II administration, now with the help of the Trump administration, and the Iranian leadership simply does not fall for his tricks – how mean of them. It remains to be seen what the simpletons Netanyahu and Trump will come up next with to reach their goal in any case. Again, it is obvious that Iran is playing “3D chess“, while Netanyahu and Trump are just able to play “Mensch ärgere Dich nicht” (while large parts of the West perceive the conflicts in the Middle East as singular events and react accordingly with individual strategies, Iran understands all of this as a single conflict in different places and fueled by different Iranian proxies (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Yemen etc. .), for which there is a single large plan with different chapters. Only the Islamic State / Daesh terrified Iran because it posed an existential threat. Here, too, the West would have had the opportunity to talk to the country, but here too they didn’t want to. At the end of the day, however, it should be noted that it was Iraq, economically pepped up by the USA, that invaded Iran in 1980 (First Gulf War) and thus ultimately unleashed Iran). On the other hand, it should also be clear to Iran that the support of Hezbollah, Hamas, the Islamic Jihad in Palestine and the Houthis does not contribute to deepening international friendships or building confidence in international relations. Even if the Trump administration is understandably unsuitable as a negotiating partner, it should have spread to Teheran that the other signatories to the Iran deal were not only concerned with the continuation and observance of the treaty, but want to include the Irian ballistic missile programs as well. In the knowledge of the connections, it should not be difficult for Iran to offer the remaining contractual partners from the Iran deal corresponding additional contract formulations. Thus, the contract would be in tact and would have lasting existence, at the same time all sanction reasons would be omitted and as a cherry on the cake, the US would be permanently barred by pressure from Netanyahu from the Iran deal. That would sell well even with the Iranian hardliners and inflict enormous political damage on Trump. That would be the first part. In order to turn the tables completely against Netanyahu and Trump, who apparently want to see the Middle East burn, and to put a crown on top, it would also be smart to start a Peace and Neighborhood Initiative with the Arab Gulf States very soon, in order to conclude a non-aggression pact and in the course start the pacification process in Yemen, while making sure that Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates come out of it by keeping their faces. This would lead to an groundbreaking agreement for the region, based on its own initiative. That would be a precedent for the whole region and could be the start of much broader regional cooperation for a prosperous future. For the West in particular, it has never been comprehensible why Muslims have been fighting each other for decades for essentially vain reasons. Because, to be honest, wars about the interpretation of Islam (Tafsir, Sunnis and Shias) are about as meaningful as the war between Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola, or about whose imaginary friend is cooler. It would be a signal of reason and strength to put an end on this kind of action, based on a regional initiative. In view of the fact that even Muslims in the region are less and less religious, the time for an inner-Muslim peace initiative would be absolutely right (The Guardian, 24 June 2019: Arab world turns its back on religion – and its ire on the US, BBC, 24 June 2019: The Arab world in seven charts: Are Arabs turning their backs on religion?). There will certainly come the objection “Yes, that’s a good thing, but the Muslim countries have been waging unnecessary wars against each other for centuries, and they’re not going to stop that!” Given the current situation, which can easily lead to the entire Arabian Peninsula, Iran and the countries of the Levant being plunged into a firestorm, such a peace initiative would be one of the few emergency exits and solutions to cool the overall situation down a bit, prevent widespread war, but at the same time send very positive signals for future developments), The New York Times, 23 June 2019: Trump’s Iran Reversal Raises Allies’ Doubts Over His Tactics, and U.S. Power, CNN, 23 June 2019: Why Trump can’t fill the gaping holes in his government, France24, 24 June 2019: USA’s Pompeo seeks global coalition against Iran as fresh sanctions due to be announced, The Guardian, 24 June 2019: Donald Trump orders fresh sanctions against Iran’s Ali Khamenei, Times of Israel, 24 June 2019: Europe cool on Iran coalition talk, seeks deescalation, Haaretz, 24 June 2019: Trump on Iran: Will Talk Without ‘Preconditions’ — Warns Bolton Would Go to War With the World, Times of Israel, 24 June 2019: Zarif: Netanyahu, Bolton, Gulf leaders ‘thirst for war’ between Iran, US, The National, 24 June 2019: Pompeo visits UAE and Saudi as Trump puts new sanctions on Iran, Jerusalem Post, 24 June 2019: Putin adviser: Israel’s security important, Russian “countrymen” are here, Haaretz, 24 June 2019: As Winds of War Blow in Gulf, Trump Will Try to Workshop Mideast Peace, Arab News, 24 June 2019: King Salman meets Pompeo amid US-Iran tensions, Times of Israel, 25 June 2019: Pompeo pushes Gulf allies on chipping in to counter Iran, USA Today, 25 June 2019: Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani calls new US sanctions ‘outrageous and idiotic’, The Guardian, 25 June 2019: Iran says it will never build a nuclear weapon, France24, 25 June 2019: Iran says new US sanctions mean ‘permanent closure’ of diplomacy, Times of Israel, 25 June 2019: Rouhani says US ‘lying’ about talks offer, suffers from ‘mental retardation’, The New York Times, 25 June 2019: Trump Threatens ‘Obliteration’ of Iran, as Sanctions Dispute Escalates, Haaretz, 25 June 2019: Contradicting Trump, Top Putin Adviser Says U.S. Drone Downed in Iranian Airspace, Times of Israel, 25 June 2019: In trilateral Jerusalem summit, Russia sides with Iran, against Israel and US, The Guardian, 25 June 2019: Trump threatens ‘obliteration’ after Iran suggests he has a ‘mental disorder’, France24, 25 June 2019: Iran says new US sanctions mean ‘permanent closure’ of diplomacy, CNN, 25 June 2019: Iranian president says White House is ‘suffering mental disability’ over sanctions, The New York Times, 25 June 2019: Trump Takes On China and Persia at Once. What’s to Worry About?, The Guardian, 26 June 2019: Iran’s ultimatum on breaching nuclear deal puts EU3 on the spot, France24, 26 June 2019: Iraq must not be dragged into another regional war: president, The National, 26 June 2019: Iraq president vows country will not be used as platform of Middle East instability, CNN, 26 June 2019: The US isn’t interested in dialogue with Iran, France says, The National, 26 June 2019: Averting conflict with Iran is the right move, but Trump’s margins for manoeuvre are limited, CNN, 26 June 2019: US is ‘not in a position to obliterate Iran,’ Iranian foreign minister says, The Guardian, 26 June 2019: EU makes last-ditch effort to keep Iran from leaving nuclear deal, The New York Times, 26 June 2019: This Isn’t About Iran. It’s About China., Times of Israel, 27 June 2019: Iran tells UN it cannot uphold nuclear deal ‘alone’, Times of Israel, 27 June 2019: Iran said to be short of uranium limit but expected to reach it by weekend, The Guardian, 27 June 2019: Iran holds back on threat to breach nuclear deal, The Guardian, 27 June 2019: UK and other powers to hold crunch talks with Iran over nuclear deal, Times of Israel, 28 June 2019: Iran, nuclear deal partners to meet as accord under threat, Haaretz, 28 June 2019: U.S.-Iran Tensions: What the Key Players Around Trump Are Pushing For, The National, 29 June 2019: Iran says progress at last-ditch nuclear deal talks ‘not enough’, Palestine Chronicle, 29 June 2019: An Honorable Course in Iran: End Sanctions, Resume Dialogue, France24, 29 June 2019: UAE scales down troops in Yemen as Iran-Gulf tensions mount, Times of Israel, 29 June 2019: Senate fails to limit Trump war powers amid Iran tensions, Haaretz, 29 June 2019: Why Trump May End Up Calling Rohani ‘Dear Friend’ After All, Arab News, 30 June 2019: The rise and fall of the Iran nuclear deal (the recent episode between the US and North Korea already shows clearly that Iran would be well advised to promptly acquire nuclear weapons from North Korea, China, Russia or India to be able to respond to any military aggression with the strongest possible power. The easiest way would be a deal between North Korea and Iran (oil against nuclear warheads), especially since both countries are under maximum US sanctions and therefore couldn’t care less about what Trumps USA and its few remaining allies think about it. Of course, Iran would not use the nuclear warheads, because following the proverb “jumped as a lion and landed as a bedside rug” the US would then immediately withdraw. Netanyahu’s aggressions against Iran would certainly end soon, too). The next escalation stage should not be long in coming, especially since Iran is unable to transport abroad enriched heavy water and the amount exceeding the limit of 300 kg of slightly enriched material due to US sanctions. So Iran will again not be at fault here, even when the “Fake News” experts Netanyahu and Trump will of course try to make it look the other way round), The New York Times, 30 June 2019: Trump’s Iran Strategy Will Fail. Here’s Why., The Guardian, 1 July 2019: Iran breaks nuclear deal and puts pressure on EU over sanctions, France24, 1 July 2019: Iran has broken stockpile limit set by nuclear deal, FM Zarif says, BBC, 1 July 2019: Iran nuclear deal: Enriched uranium limit breached, IAEA confirms, CNN, 1 July 2019: Iran exceeds uranium caps set by nuclear deal, foreign minister says, The New York Times, 1 July 2019: Iran Passes Critical Nuclear Fuel Limit Under 2015 Pact, State Media Reports, The Washington Post, 1 July 2019: U.N. watchdog confirms Iran has breached nuclear deal stockpile limit, Arab News, 1 July 2019: IAEA confirms Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile exceeds nuclear deal limit, The National, 1 July 2019: Iran tensions set to mount as Tehran breaches uranium enrichment limit, The Guardian, 1 July 2019: EU powers resist calls for Iran sanctions after breach of nuclear deal, BBC, 1 July 2019: Iran’s nuclear deal is on life support. Can it be saved?, The New York Times, 1 July 2019: Iran Passed Its Uranium Limit. What Happens Next?, Saudi Gazette, 2 July 2019: Macron calls on Iran to ‘immediately’ reduce enriched uranium reserves, The National, 2 July 2019: European Union urges Iran to comply with nuclear deal, Palestine Chronicle, 2 July 2019: Iran is Not Iraq: American Warmongers Must Be Stopped, The National, 2 July 2019: Iran seeks influence over Europe by tampering with nuclear deal, Arab News, 3 July 2019: Regional realities see Germany focus on Gulf over Iran, The National, 3 July 2019: Renegotiate or Iran will breach more nuclear deal commitments, Hassan Rouhani tells EU, Arab News, 3 July 2019: Iran warns it will increase nuclear enrichment within days, France24, 4 July 2019: Iran condemns, US applauds Britain’s seizure of Iranian oil tanker at Gibraltar, BBC, 4 July 2019: Iran summons UK ambassador in tanker seizure row, CNN, 5 July 2019: Gibraltar seizes Iranian oil tanker bound for Syria, The Guardian, 5 July 2019: Iran fury as Royal Marines seize tanker suspected of carrying oil to Syria, Times of Israel, 5 July 2019: US: Detention of tanker loaded with Iranian crude is ‘excellent news’, BBC, 5 July 2019: Iranian official threatens to seize British oil tanker, Times of Israel, 5 July 2019: UN nuclear watchdog to hold emergency meeting on Iran next week, The Guardian, 6 July 2019: Iran says it is ready to enrich uranium beyond nuclear deal levels, The National, 6 July 2019: Iran planning to boost uranium enrichment level, official says, Arab News, 6 July 2019: Iran hints it could enrich uranium to 5% for ‘peaceful’ means, Al Arabiya, 6 July 2019: Iran to announce more reductions to nuclear deal commitments, The Guardian, 6 July 2019: Iran breaks nuclear deal enrichment targets for second time (Iran would then have gone into the obvious trap set by Netanyahu and Trump), The New York Times, 7 July 2019: Why This Narrow Strait Next to Iran: Is So Critical to the World’s Oil Supply, Arab News, 7 July 2019: Iran to exceed 2015 nuclear deal uranium enrichment cap, Gulf News 7 July 2019: Iran ramping up uranium enrichment beyond 2015 deal limits, France24, 7 July 2019: Iran announces it will exceed uranium enrichment cap in latest breach of nuclear deal, Arab News, 7 July 2019: US sent message to Iran after drone downing, warning of limited strike: Iranian official, The National, 7 July 2019: Iran uranium enrichment: why do the nuclear deal limits matter?, BBC, 7 July 2019: Iran nuclear deal: Government announces enrichment breach, Arab News, 7 July 2019: Europe should pull the plug on Iran nuclear deal, CNN, 7 July 2019: Iran to breach uranium enrichment limits set by landmark nuclear deal, Saudi Gazette, 7 July 2019: Macron condemns Iranian violation of 2015 nuclear commitments, Haaretz, 7 July 2019: Iran Set to Breach Enriched Uranium Level Allowed by Nuke Deal, The New York Times, 7 July 2019: Iran Announces New Breach of Nuclear Deal Limits, and Threatens Further Violations, The National, 7 July 2019: Iran, France seek conditions to resume nuclear talks by mid-July, Times of Israel, 7 July 2019: Netanyahu likens Iran’s enrichment breach to Nazis’ 1936 occupation of Rhineland (this simpleton and main responsible for the warmongering against Iran need to be replaced urgently. One can only hope for Israel and the entire region that Netanyahu will lose the election in September 2019 and then get a well-deserved and long-term prison sentence), Haaretz, 7 July 2019: After Iran Nuke Deal Breach, Netanyahu Calls on World Powers to Impose ‘Snapback Sanctions’, Saudi Gazette, 7 July 2019: Britain, Germany tell Iran to stop, reverse nuclear activities, Haaretz, 7 July 2019: Bibi and Trump’s Iran Dilemma: Wage War or Win an Election, Times of Israel, 7 July 2019: European powers call on Iran to halt nuke deal breach, but balk at sanctions Jerusalem Post, 7 July 2019: When Netanyahu talks about Iran, chances slim of anyone shooting – analysis, CNN, 7 July 2019: Iran’s slow-burn nuclear strategy: Wait out Trump and get new deal from his successor, Haaretz, 7 July 2019: Netanyahu Is Leading Trump Into Disaster With Iran, Guardian, 7 July 2019: Iran’s uranium enrichment programme: the science explained, Al Arabiya, 8 July 2019: Iran: Enriching uranium to 20 pct an option in next steps to reduce commitments, Haaretz, 8 July 2019: Iran Still Has Room to Maneuver, but Trump Is Running Out of Diplomatic Options, Politico.com, 8 July 2019: The U.S. and Qatar: A critical relationship: Al Udeid: Home to 11,000 U.S. troops and critical to winning the War on Terror, Arab News, 9 July 2019: Europeans take first step to punish Iran over nuclear pact breaches, Saudi Gazette, 9 July 2019: Europeans take first step to punish Iran over nuclear pact breaches, Haaretz, 9 July 2019: European Foreign Ministers Call for ‘Urgent’ Meeting Over Iran Nuke Deal Breach, Times of Israel, 9 July 2019: Netanyahu warns Iran that Israel’s F-35s can reach ‘anywhere in the Middle East’, France24, 9 July 2019: Macron seeks leading EU role in Iran crisis, Times of Israel, 9 July 2019: Iran’s Zarif hints US, Israeli demands for zero enrichment will backfire, Jerusalem Post, 9 July 2019: Secret meetings between U.S., Iran officials in Iraq – report, The Guardian, 10 July 2019: Iran refuses to end breach of nuclear deal until it gets ‘full rights’, BBC, 10 July 2019: US to enlist military allies in Gulf and Yemen waters, BBC, 11 July 2019: Threat level raised to ‘critical’ for UK ships in Iranian waters (after the British downgraded themselves to lapdogs of the USA with the help of the Brexit, they have no choice but to play a role in Netanyahu’s and Trump’s dirty game. The British consumers, and especially their agriculture, will certainly be even more pleased to note that they “will be allowed” to import vast quantities of US agricultural products in the future to minimise the fallout of Trump’s trade war with China), France24, 11 July 2019: UK says it prevented Iranian Revolutionary Guard from intercepting oil tanker, CNN, 11 July 2109: Iranian boats attempted to seize a British tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, Jerusalem Post, 11 July 2019: Iran’s hard-to-attack underground nuke facility part of increasing threat, CNN, 12 July 2019: UK raises threat level and sends second warship to Persian Gulf as Iran tensions simmer, The Guardian, 12 July 2019: UK to step up its military presence in Gulf amid crisis with Iran, Haaretz, 12 July 2019: As Iran Tensions Flare, Israel Suspects Trump Aims for ‘Nuclear Deal 2.0’, Times of Israel, 13 July 2019: Nasrallah warns Israel could be ‘wiped out’ in war between US and Iran, Jerusalem Post, 13 July 2019: Iranian foreign minister heading to New York for U.N. conference – IRNA, Mail on Sunday, 13 July 2019: Trump axed Iran deal to spite Obama: How the British ambassador called the President’s actions ‘diplomatic vandalism’ fueled by ‘personality reasons’ – as revealed in more explosive cables that have sparked a free speech row while Iran tensions mount, BBC, 14 July 2019: New leak claims Trump scrapped Iran nuclear deal ‘to spite Obama’, CNN, 14 July 2019: Daily Mail: Leaked cables show British ambassador saying Trump abandoned Iran deal in act of ‘diplomatic vandalism’ to spite Obama, Arab News, 14 July 2019: European powers ‘deeply troubled’ by shipping attacks, warn nuclear deal could collapse, France24, 14 July 2019: Trump axed Iran deal to spite Obama, says leaked diplomatic cable, Times of Israel, 14 July 2019: Rouhani says Iran prepared to talk to US if it rejoins nuclear deal, The Guardian, 14 July 2019: Failure of Iran deal could pose ‘existential threat’, says Hunt, Arab News, 15 July 2019: France sees risk of stumbling into US-Iranian conflict, The National, 15 July 2019: UK warns Iran nuclear bomb a year away as foreign ministers seek to save 2015 deal, Times of Israel, 15 July 2019: EU seeks to deescalate Persian Gulf tensions, BBC, 15 July 2019: Iran nuclear deal: Jeremy Hunt aims to ease tensions, Reuters, 15 July 2019: Nuclear deal parties not ready to trigger dispute mechanism against Iran – EU’s Mogherini, Haaretz, 15 July 2019: Iran Nuclear Deal Parties Not Ready to Trigger Dispute Mechanism, EU Says, The Guardian, 15 July 2019: It’s folly for Jeremy Hunt to think Britain can solve the Iran crisis without the EU, Reuters, 15 July 2019: Britain sees ‘small window’ to salvage nuclear deal, Iran urges Europe to act, France24, 15 July 2019: Iran nuclear deal ‘not in good health, but still alive,’ says EU top diplomat, The New York Times, 15 July 2019: E.U. Ministers, Scrambling to Save Iran Nuclear Deal, Play Down Breaches, Jerusalem Post, 16 July 2019: What the EU reaction tells us about the Iran nuke deal – analysis, BBC, 16 July 2019: Netanyahu: ‘Europe might ignore Iran threat until nuclear missiles hit’ (fortunately, the simpleton Netanyahu isn’t a contract partner in the Iran deal, so that he can continue to tell as much nonsense as he wants without having any influence on the negotiations whatsoever), Al Arabiya, 16 July 2019: Trump says US wants to help and work with Iran, not looking for regime change, The National, 16 July 2019: US official concerned Iran has seized UAE-based tanker, Arab News, 16 July 2019: Donald Trump tells Iran to ‘get out of Yemen’, Haaretz, 16 July 2019: Trump Says Progress Made With Iran, as Tehran Threatens Further Nuke Deal Breaches, Haaretz, 16 July 2019: In First, Top Iranian Diplomat Says Talks on Ballistic Missiles Possible, Times of ISrael, 16 July 2019: Iran denies it’s willing to negotiate with US over ballistic missile program, Jerusalem Post, 16 July 2019: Trump, Pompeo hint at US-Iran talks, Gulf News, 16 July 2019: UAE says missing oil tanker not Emirati owned or operated, Saudi Gazette, 16 July 2019: Iran says its missile program is not negotiable, Reuters, 16 July 2019: Iran says it came to help of disabled foreign oil tanker in the Gulf, Times of Israel, 17 July 2019: At summit with Russia, Israel and US demanded Iran leave Lebanon, Iraq — report, The National, 17 July 2019: Vanished Strait of Hormuz tanker ‘towed to Iran for repairs’, says Tehran, Times of Israel, 17 July 2019: Russia says it can have good ties with both Israel and Iran, Palestine Chronicle, 17 July 2019: Hamas Delegation Meets Russia Officials in Moscow, CNN, 18 July 2019: Iran seizes foreign oil tanker with 12 crew, state media says, The National, 18 July 2019: Steven Mnuchin warns EU leaders to respect US sanctions when trading with Iran, Saudi Gazette, 18 July 2019: US amphibious group patrols Arabian Sea as Iran tensions simmer, Arab News, 18 July 2019: Iran state TV: Iranian forces seize foreign oil tanker, crew, NPR, 18 July 2019: Rules of Engagement, France24, 18 July 2019: Iraq: On the fault line of rising US-Iran tensions, NPR, 18 July 2019: Trump Administration Turns To South America For Help With Anti-Iran Coalition, Al Arabiya, 15 July 2019: US sanctions on Hezbollah officials are a call to action for the Lebanese state, CNN, 17 July 2019: Iran’s foreign minister says Tehran ‘will never start a war,’ but will defend itself, CNN, 18 July 2019: US preparing to send hundreds of troops to Saudi Arabia amid Iran tensions, BBC, 18 July 2019: US shot down Iranian drone in Strait of Hormuz, says Trump, Saudi Gazette, 18 July 2019: US places sanctions on international network involved in Iran nuclear program, CNN, 18 July 2019: US Navy ship ‘destroyed’ an Iranian drone, Trump says, Gulf News, 19 July 2019: Trump says US Navy ship shot down Iranian drone, The Guardian, 18 July 2019: Iran makes ‘substantial’ nuclear offer in return for US lifting sanctions, The New York Times, 19 July 2019: As Conflict With U.S. Grows, Some Iran Hard-liners Suggest Talking to Trump, Times of Israel, 19 July 2019: In US, Zarif offers permanent scrutiny of nuclear sites for sanctions relief, Arab News, 19 July 2019: Why the Islamic Republic is so unpopular with Iranians, France24, 19 July 2019: Tehran suggests US downed its own drone ‘by mistake’ in Strait of Hormuz, BBC, 19 July 2019: Iran seizes two UK tankers in Strait of Hormuz, The National, 19 July 2019: Iran seizes British-flagged tanker Stena Impero in new Gulf escalation, CNN, 19 July 2019: Iran announces capture of British oil tanker; US officials say two have been seized, Gulf News, 19 July 2019: Iran says it seized UK tanker Stena Impero in Strait of Hormuz; owners confirm lost contact, France24, 19 July 2019: Iran seizes British tanker in Strait of Hormuz as tensions mount, CNN, 20 July 2019: Iran’s gamble on a tanker seizure will end its credit — even among friends, BBC, 20 July 2019: Tanker seizure: Jeremy Hunt warns Iran against choosing ‘dangerous path’, CNN, 20 July 2019: Tensions soar after Iran seizes tanker, Politico, 20 July 2019: US to send troops to Saudi Arabia amid Iran tensions, Saudi Gazette, 20 July 2019: European powers urge Iran to release British-flagged tanker, Arab News, 20 July 2019: Iran on ‘dangerous path’: UK warns British ships to avoid Strait of Hormuz, Times of Israel, 20 July 2019: As sanctions choke Iran, Hezbollah said deploying for war on Israel’s border, Al Arabiya, 20 July 2019: Saudi King Salman approves hosting US troops to enhance security in region, The Guardian, 20 July 2019: Iran’s top diplomat in UK summoned over seizure of Stena Impero tanker, The Guardian, 20 July 2019: How Trump’s arch-hawk lured Britain into a dangerous trap to punish Iran, The New York Times, 19 July 2019: Trump and Ahmadinejad Are Right, The Guardian, 20 July 2019: Boris Johnson warned: focus on Iran crisis or risk war, France24, 21 July 2019: Britain mulls sanctions in response to Iran tanker seizure, report says, The Guardian, 21 July 2019: UK defence minister rebuffs criticism over tanker seized in Gulf, BBC, 21 July 2019: Iran tanker seizure: UK ‘didn’t take eye off ball’, Hammond says, CNN, 21 July 2019: ‘Alter your course,’ Iranians warned before seizing UK-flagged ship, Arab News, 21 July 2019: UK mulls sanctions as Iran admits seizing British ship as a ‘reciprocal’ move, Gulf News, 21 July 2019: Oman urges Iran to release seized tanker, Haaretz, 21 July 2019: U.S.-Iran Escalation on Verge of Turning Into Real Slugfest, The Guardian, 21 July 2019: The Guardian view on Iran’s seizure of a British tanker: dangerous waters ahead, CNN, 21 July 2019: Trump and the Ayatollah: The odd couple, France24, 22 July 2019: Iran announces breakup of ‘CIA spy ring’, some sentenced to death, The Guardian, 22 July 2019: By punishing Iran, Trump risks a full-scale war between our two countries, BBC, 22 July 2019: Iran says it arrested CIA spies and sentenced some to death, France24, 22 July 2019: Britain blasts Iran seizure of tanker as act of ‘state piracy’, The Guardian, 22 July 2019: UK to seek European maritime mission to counter Iran’s ‘ illegal acts of piracy’ (Irony of history: Wanting to leave the “patronizing” EU sooner than later, but begging for help at the slightest headwind. So much for “take back control”), Arab News, 22 July 2019: British intelligence fears Gulf crisis could lead to attacks on UK by Iranian terror cells, The National, 22 July 2019: Iran to face European naval protection force in the Gulf after tanker seizure, Saudi Gazette, 22 July 2019: UK calls for European naval mission to counter Iran’s ‘piracy’, Times of Israel, 22 July 2019: Britain says it is planning European-led protection force in Persian Gulf, France24, 22 July 2019: Trump blasts Iran, says hard to deal with top ‘terror’ state, Arab News, 22 July 2019: Gulf confrontation a battle of nerves, France24, 22 July 2019: On Iran, Donald Trump is running out of options, Haaretz, 23 July 2019: Excluding the U.S., Remaining Countries in Iran Nuclear Deal to Meet in Vienna on Sunday, The Guardian, 23 July 2019: Iran rejects UK’s proposal for European-led maritime force, Haaretz, 23 July 2019: Between ‘Ending Iran’ and ‘No More Endless Wars’: The Unraveling of Trump’s Incoherent Iran Strategy, Arab News, 23 July 2019: Iran to meet nuclear deal parties on Sunday, Times of Israel, 23 July 2019: Israel: Iran smuggling dual-use items for Hezbollah weaponry via Beirut port (Israel is once again playing children’s theater at the UN, and at the same time is still assuming that there would be poeple who actually believe this nonsense :-D ), Politico, 23 July 2019: Iran’s Threats Are an Attempt to Negotiate, Arab News, 24 July 2019: What is Iran hoping to achieve with Gulf confrontations?, Arab News, 25 July 2019: Germany remains uncertain over Hormuz naval mission with UK and France (the German participation in the EU mission for the safe passage of European merchant ships through the Strait of Hormuz should be implemented, while clearly communicating to Iran that the EU mission will not participate in the aggressive actions of the Netanyahu and Trump administrations), Times of Israel, 25 July 2019: Israel, Bahrain foreign ministers talk Iran in groundbreaking public meet, The National, 25 July 2019: UK warships to escort British-flagged vessels through Strait of Hormuz, Arab News, 25 July 2019: Iran tensions give new UK PM Johnson an early test, Times of Israel, 25 July 2019: Iran poses loyalty test for ‘British Trump’ Johnson, Jerusalem Post, 25 July 2019: Iran offers to return to nuclear deal even if U.S. doesn’t, Al Arabiya, 26 July 2019: Iran test-fires medium-range ballistic missile: CNN, Arab News, 26 July 2019: Pompeo says he’d go to Iran if needed as he asks US allies to join maritime force, Al Arabiya, 22 July 2019: Washington should wake up to the fact that Hezbollah runs Lebanon, CNN, 26 July 2019: With Iran, Trump speaks loudly but (fortunately) carries a small stick, Times of Israel, 27 July 2019: Trump’s ‘maximum pressure’ campaign against Iran comes to critical crossroads, The National, 28 July 2019: Second British warship arrives to assist vessels through Strait of Hormuz, Arab News,28 July 2019: Oman not mediating, but in contact with ‘all parties’ over navigation in Hormuz, Haaretz, 29 July 2019: On Iran, Trump Is Shoving Israel Out Into the Cold, Arab News, 29 July 2019: Talks with Iran must be genuinely joint and comprehensive, DW, 29 July 2019: German government divided over joining Strait of Hormuz naval mission, Politico.eu, 30 July 2019: US asks Germany to join security mission in Persian Gulf, Politico.com, 30 July 2019: Trump to disappoint Iran hawks with more nuclear waivers, The Guardian, 30 July 2019: UK calls meeting with US and France to discuss Hormuz plan, Haaretz, 30 July 2019: Rivals Iran and UAE to Hold Maritime Security Talks, Politico.eu, 31 July 2019: German vice chancellor ‘very skeptical’ about joining US military mission in Gulf, Haaretz, 31 July 2019: In Major Shift, Israel Twice Struck Iranian Targets in Iraq ‘Using F-35’, Jerusalem Post, 31 July 2019: Zarif: Iran to reduce nuclear deal commitments unless Europe protects it, Haaretz, 31 July 2019: Iran Presence in Iraq Threatens Israel, Security Officials Say, Jerusalem Post, 31 July 2019: UK commander: Iran testing British Navy, but remains professional, The National, 31 July 2019: UK frigate had 85 interactions with Iranian forces in a month, Times of Israel, 31 July 2019: Report: Israel believes Hamas, Iran agreed on Gaza front in case of northern war, Arab News, 31 July 2019: Iran to reduce nuclear deal commitments more unless Europe protects it, Al Arabiya, 31 July 2019: Zarif: Iran will cut nuclear deal commitments further unless Europe acts, The National, 31 July 2019: Germany rebuffs US demand to join maritime mission in Strait of Hormuz, Arab News, 31 July 2019: Europe far from united when it comes to Iran, Saud Gazette, 31 July 2019: Britain must back US in tougher stance against Iranian destabilization of Middle East, Times of Israel, 31 July 2019: US imposes financial sanctions on Iran’s foreign minister, France24, 31 July 2019: US imposes sanctions on Iran’s foreign secretary Zarif, BBC, 31 July 2019: US sanctions Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, Times of Israel, 31 July 2019: US says it has asked Germany to ‘help secure’ Strait of Hormuz, Haaretz, 31 July 2019: Germany Says It Won’t Join U.S.-led Mission in Strait of Hormuz, Reuters, 31 July 2019: Germany: European naval mission in Strait of Hormuz worth considering, Defense News, 31 July 2019: Germany punts on Hormuz Strait mission with US involvement, Reuters, 31 July 2019: Germany will not join U.S.-led mission in Strait of Hormuz: Maas, Bloomberg, 31 July 2019: The Hormuz Crisis Shows U.S. Alliances Are Weak, DW, 31 July 2019: Opinion: Strait of Hormuz crisis a political dead-end for Germany, Israel Hayom, 31 July 2019: In game of cat and mouse, Iran changes tactics, CNN, 31 July 2019: US sanctions Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif, Times of Israel, 1 August 2019: Rouhani slams US for ‘childish’ sanctions on Iran’s foreign minister, Arab News, 1 August 2019: Iran’s leaders to blame for country’s financial crisis, Israel Hayom, 1 August 2019: Iran isn’t giving up on regional domination just yet, Foreign Policy, 1 August 2019: Iran Owns the Persian Gulf Now, Times of Israel, 1 August 2019: EU to work with top Iran diplomat despite US sanctions, Arab News, 1 August 2019: US envoy slams Germany after reluctance on Hormuz mission (it’s not Germany’s obligation to fulfil U.S. duties in the Gulf and the Straight of Hormuz. As the saying goes: “You break it, you own it!” Fix the problems, caused by yourself, on your own.” Germany will be part of a possible EU mission (France, Italy, Germany, Denmark and maybe the United Kingdom, if Bojo should come to his senses. In addition, the German Navy is already part of the Operation Atalanta near the Strait of Hormuz, so that a combined mission, supported by aerial reconnaissance, would be conceivable as well), the escort of merchant ships in the Strait of Hormuz. At the same time, it would be a signal of solidarity to the Arab Gulf States and Israel. Germany, the EU and the rest of the world are already making major contributions to the detriment of their own economies because they have been collectively taken hostage for the completely nonsensical Trump sanctions on Iran), Politico.eu, 2 August 2019: Trump’s coalition of one, Arab News, 2 August 2019: Gargash: UAE is redeploying forces in Yemen with the agreement of Saudi Arabia, The National, 2 August 2019: Anwar Gargash debunks rumours of UAE-Saudi split as a ‘desperate attempt’ by Qatar, The New Yorker, 2 August 2019: Iran’s Foreign Minister was invited to meet Trump in the Oval Office, The Guardian, 3 AUgust 2019: Iran to further reduce compliance with nuclear deal, Gulf News, 3 August 2019: What Iran will do next, and how to stop it, The National, 3 August 2019: Tehran could push Europe closer to the US if it continues its provocation, Jerusalem Post, 3 August 2019: Netanyahu to Boris Johnson: Stand tough against Iran, Arab News, 3 August 2019: Iran will take ‘third step’ to reduce commitments to nuclear deal: Iranian FM, Times of Israel, 3 August 2019: Iran’s Zarif was invited to meet Trump at White House last month — report, The New York Times, 3 August 2019: Despite U.S. sanctions, China and other countries are receiving oil from Iranian tankers, a Times investigation found., France24, 4 August 2019: Iran seizes Iraqi oil tanker in Persian Gulf, Israel Hayom, 4 August 2019: Danger ahead: A US-Iran ‘deal of the century’, CNN, 4 August 2019: Iran says it seized foreign oil tanker in Gulf for smuggling fuel, Times of Israel, 4 August 2019: US struggles to build willing coalition amid Strait of Hormuz tensions, Haaretz, 4 August 2019: Inside Hezbollah’s American Sleeper Cells: Waiting for Iran’s Signal to Strike U.S. and Israeli Targets, Arab News, 4 August 2019: Why the Mullahs fear the Iranian diaspora, Jerusa