Israel Vetoes Trump in the Middle East—Again

The special relationship undermines American sovereignty.

Andrew Day

Aug 6, 2026

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/israel-vetoes-trump-in-the-middle-east-again/

If not for Israel’s veto power over U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, the Trump administration might have secured peace in Gaza, stabilized relations with Iran, and clinched a deal with Saudi Arabia to help build a nuclear program for the kingdom.

OK, that last “opportunity” deserved a hard pass, unless you reckon nuclear proliferation in the world’s most volatile region somehow serves U.S. interests. But in journalism, three makes a trend, so I’ve got myself a column.

And America has got itself a big problem: Israeli pushback on President Donald Trump’s efforts to build a better Middle East shows how our most entangling of alliances undermines U.S. sovereignty.

The Gaza example is the most recent. Washington has enabled Israel’s assault on Gaza, and Trump would now like to use his Board of Peace, which he oversees, to bring peace to the Palestinian enclave. That’s quite the task, and Israel, an ostensible client state of the U.S., isn’t making it any easier.

Last Thursday, Trump announced on social media that the Board had reached “a HISTORIC agreement for the COMPLETE DISARMAMENT of Hamas and all other armed groups in Gaza.” Trump added, “As disarmament is completed, Israeli forces will withdraw.”

Sorry, Mr. President, but you’ve been reading fake news.

“Contrary to inaccurate reports,” the Board of Peace said in a statement this Monday, the Israeli military would withdraw forces only after Hamas handed over all its weapons.

That’s not what Trump had said, and it’s not what Hamas had understood the phased agreement to require. So, what happened? The Times of Israel reports:

The US-backed Board of Peace appeared to change its conditions for the IDF to withdraw from Gaza after its top officials held a meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem on Monday, shortly before a fresh Israeli airstrike was reported in the enclave.

It’s déjà vu all over again. In late July, the Trump administration announced an agreement to develop a Saudi civilian nuclear program. But there was a catch. The very next day, Trump clarified on Truth Social that the deal “is totally subject to Saudi Arabia joining the very respected and successful Abraham Accords.” 

By “Trump clarified,” I mean that he retroactively decreed a new stipulation apparently designed to kill a deal opposed by Israel. The chances in the near future of Riyadh joining the Abraham Accords—which normalize relations between Muslim nations and Israel—are approximately, checking my math, consulting my copy of Introduction to Statistical Concepts: not gonna freakin’ happen.

Again, the death of the U.S.–Saudi nuclear deal is a good thing, but it was brought about by a very bad thing, namely, Israel’s de facto veto power over Trump’s Middle East policy.

One Mideast nuclear agreement that actually would be good for American interests is the one with Iran that Trump was on the verge of securing in 2025. Early in his second term, Trump aimed to strike a deal that would deny Iran a pathway to the bomb. Statements by White House officials indicated Tehran could still be allowed to enrich uranium for civilian nuclear purposes.

But in spring 2025, something changed, and the Trump administration adopted the hardline position that Iran must commit to zero enrichment. That was a non-starter for Tehran, as the Islamic Republic had repeatedly declared.

Comments by Joe Kent, who resigned this March from a top counterterrorism position in the administration, shed light on what happened: Israel pressured the White House to move the goal posts. In an interview with The American Conservative, Kent recounted that Israel and its American supporters promoted the zero-enrichment demand to “break up the agreement” and set Trump on the path to a regime-change war.

I expect we’ll soon have a fourth “Israeli veto” example to sustain the trend, and this one might illustrate the fundamental problem best of all. In July, Trump said that he’ll consider selling America’s F-35 fighter jet to Turkey. Apparently, that’s not the kind of thing American presidents are allowed to do.

Weeks after Trump’s comments, the State Department said Turkey hasn’t met “conditions” necessary to receive the plane. The main problem is legitimate: Turkey possesses a surface-to-air missile system made by Russia, raising intelligence risks since that system can spy on nearby aircraft. But even if Ankara relinquished it, a major hurdle would still stand between the Turks and the F-35.

You’ll never guess the hurdle.

“Israel reportedly has pressed Trump not to provide Turkey with the aircraft, amid fears that a sale could weaken Israel’s qualitative military edge,” Fox News reports.

That last phrase is key. Since the Cold War, Washington has followed a policy of maintaining Israel’s military superiority in its region. In 2008, the policy was codified into law by the Naval Vessel Transfer Act, which obliges the president to monitor and uphold Israel’s ability to defeat “any credible conventional military threat from any individual state or possible coalition of states or from non-state actors.”

It’s an odd policy. Realism 101 says the U.S. should foster a balance of power in other regions, but this law requires the commander-in-chief to do the opposite: underwrite Israeli hegemony in the Middle East. Obviously, the three episodes dealt with above are part of a problem that transcends the Trump administration.

For America First patriots devoted to safeguarding our nation’s independence in foreign affairs, this problem demands attention and concern. Though of course, our special friend in the Holy Land will move heaven and earth to veto our efforts to solve it.

Are US and Israel benefitting from 'migration blackmail' in Spain?

Analysts accuse Morocco of unleashing undocumented migrants into Ceuta. Many note how Tel Aviv and Washington are seizing the moment with particular zeal.

Sarah Leah Whitson

Aug 05, 2026

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/morocco-spain-migrants-israel/

Questions continue to swirl around the flash flood of nearly 60,000 migrants who swam or walked from Morocco into Ceuta, a tiny Spanish enclave on the tip of Africa last week.

How did so many migrants manage to breach Moroccan border security forces, who appear to have largely disappeared from their stations? Why had so many migrants received social media messages encouraging them to swarm the enclave?

Analysts pointed their fingers at the Moroccan government, arguing it was once again deploying “migration blackmail,” as the practice has been dubbed, to punish its European neighbors and bend them to its will. But this time, Israel and the United States appear to be the principal beneficiaries. Indeed, they have seized on the politically embarrassing episode to weaken a Spanish government they view as one of their principal European antagonists.

This was not the first time Ceuta’s border had been breached, nor the first time that Morocco was accused of opening its borders to allow streams of migrants to enter European territory.

In 2021, Ceuta and Melilla, Spain’s other enclave in Africa, also saw a mass incursion of 6,000 people into their territories; Spain explicitly blamed Morocco for deliberately relaxing its migration controls to punish the government for criticizing Trump’s 2020 recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, which Trump did in exchange for Morocco entering into the Abraham Accords with Israel.

The pressure worked, as Spain acquiesced in 2022 to support Morocco’s autonomy plan for the occupied territory, in exchange for Morocco’s promise that it would not allow further incursions into the enclaves.

France too has often found itself facing down Moroccan tactics to weaponize migration for political concessions. Rabat long refused to accept French returns of undocumented migrant children from Morocco until it secured a package of trade and investment concessions from Paris in 2020. To reward Morocco for acting as Europe’s external border police, the European Union also has time and again rewarded Morocco with hundreds of millions of Euros in aid, most recently as part of the 2024 “EU Migration Pact.”

This time, the exact reasoning behind Morocco’s actions remains unclear. Some analysts wondered whether the move was meant to pressure Spain as a first step toward an attempted annexation of Ceuta, which the Moroccan government views as illegally occupied.

While officially, the U.S. government recognizes Ceuta as sovereign Spanish territory, voices in the U.S. and Israel have increasingly encouraged Morocco to claim the enclave. The timing is uncanny. For example, the 2027 U.S. House Appropriations Bill passed in July included a report specifically asserting that “Spanish-administered cities of Ceuta and Melilla are located in Moroccan territory,” and urged the State Department to encourage talks over their “future status.”

As far back as 2019, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s son Yair tweeted a map of Ceuta and Melilla, saying, “Dear Arabs and Muslims. Want to free occupied Arab Islamic lands? Here’s a good start!” In March, Michael Rubin, a longtime neoconservative analyst with the American Enterprise Institute, openly urged Moroccans to invade the enclaves in a new “Green March,” referring to when Moroccans marched to Western Sahara to claim it from Spain in 1975.

Others argue that Morocco is acting more broadly in service of a U.S.-Israeli campaign to punish Spain for calling on Israel to stop its genocide in Gaza and refusing to support the war on Iran.

The circumstantial evidence for a broader strategy is significant. Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has been a particular thorn in the side of the U.S. and Israel, emerging as a leading global critic of both countries. In the past three years, Sanchez has imposed arms and settlement trade embargoes on Israel and refused to allow U.S.-flagged cargo ships carrying weapons for Israel, as well as an Israeli warship, to dock or refuel at Spanish ports. (Both ships docked in Moroccan ports instead.) More recently, Sanchez refused to allow the U.S. to use jointly operated military bases on Spanish soil for military operations for the war with Iran.

The Trump administration has already threatened to punish Spain with a full trade embargo, particularly dangerous given Spain’s reliance on the U.S. for 30% of its gas and 20% of its oil imports. Israel withdrew its ambassador from Spain in 2024 and expelled Spain from the Civil-Military Coordination Center, which ostensibly oversees the ceasefire and humanitarian aid to Gaza.

But the Ceuta incursion unleashed a whole new level of rhetorical fire from Israeli and U.S. officials and right-wing commentators, who jumped on the incident to blame Sanchez’s left-wing government for failing to protect its borders from African migrants, to mock its “colony” in Africa, and even to urge Morocco to overtake the enclaves from Spain for itself.

Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, tweeted, “Maybe before it continues lecturing us, it’s time it explained to the world why it still maintains colonial enclaves in Africa.” J.D. Vance chimed in to chide the incursion as the “consequences of mass migration and the radical left-wing globalist policies that have enabled the Invasion of the West,” while President Trump warned, “That’s going to be us in three years if the wrong side gets in.”

The Israel-U.S.-Morocco trifecta has grown stronger and more coordinated ever since Morocco signed the Abraham Accords, normalizing its relationship with Israel, in exchange for U.S. recognition of its sovereignty over Western Sahara. The Moroccan government, a monarchical dictatorship, has ignored overwhelming domestic opposition to Israel and has dramatically expanded its military, security and economic ties with the country, rivaling only the United Arab Emirates for the closest Arab-Israeli government relationship.

In 2021, Israel and Morocco signed a vast defense cooperation agreement, and Morocco is now one of Israel’s largest arms purchasers; it has expanded intelligence sharing and counterterrorism cooperation and signed at least nine agreements, including on cybersecurity, trade, tourism, agriculture, and energy. In exchange, Israel itself recognized Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara, a useful precedent for its own wish to annex what remains of Palestine.

Morocco has not issued any formal statement about its role in the Ceuta incursion, nor offered any condolences to the migrants who perished. But by July 31, it had dramatically expanded its deployment of forces to secure the enclave and provided transportation for the 48,000 migrants who returned to Morocco a day after arriving in Ceuta.

Whatever the immediate precipitating factor for the migrant incursion, it has served as a useful political cudgel for Israel and the United States.

The new migration blackmail now has impacts that extend far beyond the borders of Spain or Europe, just as the U.S.-Israeli conflict over Palestine now reaches deep into the politics of African and Latin American states.

Netanyahu Says Israel Didn’t Agree to Proposal on Hamas Disarmament Announced by Trump

The so-called 'Board of Peace' has already walked back a key part of the plan after a meeting with Netanyahu

by Dave DeCamp | August 4, 2026 

https://news.antiwar.com/2026/08/04/netanyahu-says-israel-didnt-agree-to-proposal-on-hamas-disarmament-announced-by-trump/

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday that Israel had rejected a proposal for Hamas’s disarmament in Gaza that was announced by President Trump and the so-called “Board of Peace.”

Netanyahu made the comments in a brief video posted to his Facebook page, where he denied that the IDF was withdrawing from Gaza. “I stand firm on our security interests. We will not withdraw from our current lines until Hamas is completely disarmed,” he said.

Netanyahu also suggested that Israeli attacks would continue in Gaza, saying he has directed “IDF soldiers to do whatever is necessary to protect themselves, our territory and our citizens.”

He added that Trump and his advisors “believe they can disarm Hamas and demilitarize Gaza” through the deal. “They sent us a draft, we did not agree to it, we sent our comments,” he said.

A day earlier, Netanyahu held talks with representatives from the BoP, which walked back a key part of the agreement following the meeting. In the initial announcements from Trump, the BoP, and the body’s top Gaza envoy, Bulgarian politician Nickolay Mladenov, it was clear that the idea was for the “decommissioning” of Hamas’s weapons to happen as the IDF withdrew from Gaza.

Mladenov even explicitly said that the withdrawal “must move in lockstep with decommissioning,” but after his meeting with Netanyahu, the BoP claimed that wasn’t the case.

“Contrary to inaccurate reports, we note that the withdrawal of the IDF beyond the Yellow Line will take place only once decommissioning is complete, as Hamas committed to the mediators. This applies to light weapons, heavy weapons, and the tunnels alike,” the BoP said.

Hamas has maintained that it won’t begin the process of disarming until Israel ceases its attacks and withdraws back to the initial “yellow line,” the dividing line between the IDF-occupied side of Gaza and the rest of the Strip. After the October 2025 ceasefire deal was signed, Israeli forces were left controlling 53% of Gaza, but that has increased to somewhere around 70% as Israeli troops conducted ground incursions to seize more territory, a clear violation of the agreement.

Israel has also violated the October 2025 deal by continuing constant attacks in Gaza, which have killed at least 1,252 Palestinians. Dozens have been killed since Trump announced the disarmament deal, including two killed on Monday.

While disarming Hamas has been used as the pretext for Israel’s continued attacks and occupation of Gaza, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz has previously said the IDF won’t withdraw from the Palestinians territory even if Hamas disarms and that the ultimate goal is to start establishing Jewish settlements.

Fox News screaming desperately into wind as Trump loses grip

The popular rightwing network spent months building a case for the Iran War. Now they are invested in keeping up support, even if hosts have to skirt the truth

Nolan Denaro

Aug 03, 2026

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-war-fox-news/

Fox News has always served as a purveyor of Republican war propaganda, but its coverage of the Iran conflict has been particularly aggressive, and in many ways unmoored from reality, giving their viewers a more than skewed vision of what President Donald Trump can — and cannot — accomplish in Iran today.

It appears that it has been an editorial decision at Fox to convince their audience (whose median age is 55) that the Iranians cannot be negotiated with nor trusted and that war was — and still is — the only option. Its range of hosts and guests continue to insist that Trump’s military campaign has been a rousing success (by all independent, observable accounts it has not) and he just needs to finish the job.

Of course this a bit of a far cry from the decisive regime change narrative that Fox had generated in the lead-up to the war.

Mark Levin, one of Trump’s favorite hosts on the channel, has been a leading champion of this narrative, saying for weeks before the February war on his Fox show “Life, Liberty & Levin,” that “if we don’t act, and by that I mean not diplomacy, but decisively, quickly, and overwhelmingly with our military against the top of the regime,” then Iran will certainly, according to Levin, “build nuclear weapons, as North Korea has.” Levin also warned his audience that Iran “will not hesitate to launch ICBMs with nuclear warheads against our cities.”

Trump made it a point to post these kinds of arguments from Levin and others on Truth Social, prepping the Fox News audience, and the American people more broadly, for war.

After the conflict began, longtime host Laura Ingraham reframed the conflict using a classic neoconservative spin. “The real debate here… is not between the interventionists and the isolationists, or even between Trump and some elements of his base,” Ingraham said, “The real conflict here is between those who believe America is good, and those who believe fundamentally America is corrupt and evil.”

This of course is a warmed-over strawman seeking to chill any debate over the war, and encouraging the Fox audience to label anyone who opposes Trump’s actions as “anti-American.”

As military force failed to meet Trump’s vacillating objectives, Fox’s hosts remained unfazed. Confident as ever, Jesse Watters stated on March 25 that the Iranians were “running out of time and firepower.” In an effort to convince his audience of imminent regime collapse, Watters also said that, “every day that our bombers fly unchallenged, the regime loses power.”

Of course time is not on our side. The regime is still in power but the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is now dangerously low, and the same goes for U.S. stockpiles of defensive missile systems. Meanwhile, the first and most intense stage of fighting did little to deplete Iran’s arsenal of ballistic missiles and drones.

Touted as Fox’s wisest military mind, Gen. Jack Keane is a key fixture of the network's war coverage. He, like Levin, says that the Iranians are too irrational for diplomacy. In a recent appearance on “Life, Liberty & Levin,” Gen. Keane said, “We have said on this show multiple times, you cannot trust the Iranians. They will lie and cheat. And even if they make a deal… they will not comply with it.”

Now he is on Fox as recently as this weekend suggesting Trump was within range of victory when he paused fighting for the MOU (memorandum of understand) of which he said the Iranians did not comply. He said on July 29 that the U.S. must engage in a "comprehensive" military attack on Iran, focusing on civilian infrastructure like bridges and roads and airports, "isolating" it while the CIA and Mossad can help the people there overthrow the regime.

The network creates an echo chamber by bringing on guests to repeat and validate the hawkish positions of the hosts. Maria Bartiromo hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for a softball interview on July 26, in which she asked him what it would take for the war with Iran to conclude. The prime minister urged Americans to support another round of fighting, arguing that only regime change will stop Iran from “wreaking economic chaos through the world, murdering thousands of its own citizens, and shooting at everyone.”

“This is what this regime is doing when they don’t have nuclear weapons, so imagine what they would do if they had nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu told Fox News viewers.

Marc Thiessen — a prominent neoconservative, Bush administration alum, and Fox News contributor — is another voice in favor of escalation. Throughout the war, Thiessen, a former “never-Trumper,” has appealed to the MAGA base by painting attractive pictures of “simple” ways to win the war.

On a July 23 episode of “Special Report,” Thiessen said, “It’s very simple… We have about 14 days of combat where we have to take out all the targets we have available. We took out 85% of their defense industrial base, [so now] we take out 95% of it. We set back all their programs, and we further entomb the nuclear dust, then we stop major combat operations, we impose the blockade, we open up the Strait of Hormuz, and then we go and we help the Iranian people overthrow their regime.”

The network’s morning show “Fox & Friends,” offers Today Show-sized breakfast bites for war coverage. Recently, the program featured pro-Israel radio host Sid Rosenberg. He made the case that military action was the only path forward, saying, “it is inevitable that President Trump is going to have to do what he doesn't want to do, which is go in there with this massive, all-out attack. There’s no other way to stop this,” Rosenberg said, “Once you start this,” he added, “there needs to be a finish, and the only finish is complete surrender by the Iranians. I hate to say it, but complete annihilation."

The round-the-clock warmongering on Fox News has done little to move the general public, aside from a percentage of older Republican die-hards. But the network's role as a source of validation for the president could give him the confidence to escalate.

If Fox News expresses support for any and all military actions Trump takes, he could well conclude that the public as a whole is supportive of his war – a devastating miscalculation, likely to be followed by ill-advised policy decisions.

Full text: 15-point draft peace plan between Hamas and Israel in Gaza

The Palestinian movement says it will relinquish its weapons to allow for a technocratic administration to run Gaza

MEE staff

Published date: 31 July 2026

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/full-text-15-point-draft-peace-plan-between-hamas-and-israel-gaza

Hamas has formally agreed to a detailed framework for implementing the next phases of the Gaza ceasefire, which was drafted with US President Donald Trump's Board of Peace.

The agreement forms part of the latest attempt to end Israel's campaign of killing in the besieged Palestinian territory.

In a statement on X, the Board of Peace wrote:

"The agreement concludes months of intensive, good faith negotiations to advance President Donald J. Trump's vision for establishing new governance, security, humanitarian relief, reconstruction, and economic recovery in Gaza as set out in the Comprehensive Peace Plan and U.N. Security Council Resolution 2803." 

The statement described the decision as a "historic breakthrough", adding that Hamas would disarm before the Israeli army withdrew from Gaza.

Israel has killed more than 73,000 people during its genocide so far, with thousands more missing and presumed dead. It has reduced the enclave, home to nearly 2 million people, to rubble - with around 90 percent of the population displaced and most living in crowded tents without sanitation. 

Middle East Eye has obtained a draft of the agreement that Hamas agreed to and is publishing an English translation of the Arabic here in full.

A comprehensive strategy for the full implementation of President Trump's peace plan for Gaza, 30th July

Principles

1. All parties reaffirm their commitment to President Trump's comprehensive plan to achieve peace in Gaza, which, along with UN Security Council Resolution 2803 (2025), constitutes the internationally agreed-upon framework that shall guide the implementation of this process. Through this process, the parties aim to end the cycle of destruction, secure the full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, restore normal life, enable Palestinian governance, advance reconstruction, security, recovery and economic development, rehabilitation of affected sectors, and facilitate the launch of a credible political path that achieves self-determination and the establishment of a Palestinian state.

2. Israel will complete the implementation of all remaining obligations under the Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandum in full and without delay, specifically the cessation of military operations as detailed in Annex (1). Hamas and the Palestinian factions will likewise complete the cessation of all military operations in accordance with the Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandum and the peace plan. In parallel, the timeline and implementation mechanisms attached to ("Implementation of Phase Two") will be prepared within 14 days, subject to extension by a decision of the International Verification Committee following the approval of the plan by all parties. As soon as the timeline and implementation mechanisms have been finalised, the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) will enter the Strip and begin carrying out its duties. ​An International Verification Committee - established by the Board of Peace and composed of representatives of the guarantors, the Board of Peace, and the International Stabilisation Force - will certify that both parties have fulfilled their obligations under the agreed strategy before proceeding to the implementation of Phase Two.

3. The transition from one phase to the next will be contingent upon the verified completion of the previous phase's obligations. This will be certified by the International Verification Committee, which will monitor any violations by either party through enhanced monitoring mechanisms.

4. Hamas and the other factions agree to hand over all civil and security governance functions in Gaza to the National Committee, in alignment with President Trump’s comprehensive peace plan for Gaza. They further affirm that the National Committee will operate with full independence in fulfilling its mandates and that the factions will refrain from interfering in the committee’s affairs during the transitional period, pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution 2803 (2025).

5. Upon taking full responsibility in Gaza, the National Committee will ensure the continuity of civil institutions and public services. All public employees will be treated fairly, legally, and with dignity regarding their rights. Those whose services are terminated or who are retired during the transitional period will be granted their entitlements in accordance with Palestinian law. With international support, the National Committee shall conduct a comprehensive audit of the financial and administrative situation in Gaza, while safeguarding and restoring the management of public resources and assets. The National Committee shall assess and address legitimate commitments to suppliers, contractors, and other parties, not exceeding a total of $400m. These measures shall be implemented gradually, within three years, according to priorities determined by the National Committee. Any unresolved rights, liabilities, or financial claims shall be addressed later within the context of a broader national process, in accordance with relevant Palestinian law.

Security

6. Gaza will be governed according to the principle of "one authority, one law, one weapon." The National Committee will operate in alignment with Palestinian laws, relevant international standards, and the principles of good governance.

7. Newly trained police personnel will be integrated into existing police structures. All police personnel shall undergo comprehensive vetting. Those who do not meet the required vetting standards will be offered alternative civil roles consistent with their previous expertise or will be retired in accordance with Palestinian law. None of these individuals will be deprived of their financial entitlements, specifically due to their political affiliations. All police weaponry will be transferred to the responsibility and authority of the National Committee upon its entry into Gaza and the commencement of its duties.

8. A process for inventorying and storing heavy weapons, military production sites, weapons depots, and tunnels shall commence following the completion of the remaining obligations under the Sharm el-Sheikh Protocol, the entry of the National Committee, and the deployment of the International Stabilisation Force. This process will be managed and implemented by the National Committee in a gradual, sequential, and time-bound manner, based on an implementation schedule to be finalised within 14 days, subject to extension upon a decision of the International Verification Committee following the approval of all parties to the strategy. This process is linked to a phased Israeli withdrawal from the areas it controls in Gaza and the inventorying of weapons held by armed militias in accordance with section 10 of this plan. The process will be monitored and verified by the International Verification Committee, with support from the International Stabilisation Force. Palestinian factions will participate in this process, and no weapons will be transferred or surrendered to Israel or any non-Palestinian parties. At the conclusion of the process outlined in sections seven to 10 of this plan, the National Committee alone shall retain, store, or control weapons in Gaza. The implementation of this plan, including the issue of weapons and the other provisions of the comprehensive peace plan, shall create the appropriate conditions for a credible path towards achieving Palestinian self-determination and the establishment of a Palestinian state.

9. Personal weapons in Gaza shall be subject to the provisions of relevant Palestinian laws. The National Committee, as the transitional authority in Gaza, shall be the sole authority for registering weapons, issuing and revoking licenses, and enforcing the law, including through reintegration and social support. All factions, clans, and elements of Palestinian society in Gaza shall cooperate with the National Committee in this process.

10. The inventory/collection of militia weapons and their storage under the authority of the National Committee shall take place according to an agreed-upon timeline. Personnel from these militias shall not be absorbed into the security apparatuses or police. The International Verification Committee shall be responsible for verifying the achievement of this.

11. A social peace agreement shall be signed, in line with Palestinian customs and laws, including commitments to an immediate cessation of internal violence, the avoidance of acts of revenge, shows of force, military parades, and armed demonstrations.

International Stabilisation Force and Israeli Troop Withdrawal

12. An interim International Stabilisation Force shall be deployed in the Gaza Strip to separate Israeli forces from areas under the control of the National Committee. The International Stabilisation Force will not perform any policing duties or tasks related to Palestinian society, nor will it undertake any ceasefire enforcement or training of Palestinian police. It will also monitor all parties' compliance, the flow of humanitarian and essential needs into the Gaza Strip, and any non-policing tasks as requested by the National Committee.

13. Israeli forces will complete their phased withdrawal from the Gaza Strip according to an agreed-upon timeline, as stipulated in Section Eight of the plan, which includes a commitment not to force anyone to leave the Strip.

14. The National Committee will be responsible for handling internal security incidents.

Reconstruction

15. The reconstruction of the Gaza Strip and the provision of necessary resources and funding will be implemented according to a plan and timeline established and overseen by the Peace Council and the National Committee, in accordance with relevant laws and international standards.

Spanish commentators accuse Israel and US of involvement in Ceuta crisis

Some 60,000 people crossed into Ceuta from Morocco this week, including around 8,000 children

Imran Mulla

Published date: 1 August 202

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/spanish-minister-clashes-israeli-diplomat-over-migrants-entering-ceuta-morocco

A Spanish minister has suggested Israel was stirring problems over 60,000 migrants crossing from Morocco into Spain's North African enclave of Ceuta. 

Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, posted on X on Friday: "Spain, which never misses an opportunity to lecture Israel, has declared a state of emergency in Ceuta following the crisis over its immigration policy.

"Maybe before it continues lecturing us, it's time it explained to the world why it still maintains colonial enclaves in Africa," he added.

Sharing Danon's post, Spanish Transport Minister Oscar Puente remarked: "Well, it all seems to be becoming quite clear."

This comes as numerous Spanish politicians and commentators have alleged that Israel and the United States have sought to cause trouble for Spain in retaliation for the Spanish government's opposition to the US-Israeli war on Iran and Israel's war on Gaza. 

Gabriel Rufian, the parliamentary spokesperson for the Republican Left of Catalonia, a left-wing party, argued that the crisis served American and Israeli interests.

Spanish journalist Jose Vizner, meanwhile, shared a 2019 social media post by Yair Netanyahu, the son of Israel's prime minister, discussing alleged Israeli support for separatism in Ceuta.

Prominent Spanish actor Javier Bardem shared a video accusing Israel of being behind the crossings.

Former Portuguese minister and commentator Bruno Macaes said that "whether or not the US and Israel were involved before the fact, they were deeply involved and intensely active after the fact, especially trying to use it against the current Spanish government".

Ceuta, a Spanish territory on Morocco's Mediterranean coast, and Melilla, another Spanish autonomous city on the country’s northern coast, share the only land borders between the European Union and Africa.

Some 60,000 people crossed into Ceuta from Morocco this week, including around 8,000 children, according to the Spanish government.

Footage posted online showed people swimming into the enclave around the border barrier, with some wearing swimsuits and using flotation rings to make the dangerous journey.

Diplomatic spats over migrant crossings

France said it was increasing checks along its border with Spain, while Italy threatened to suspend Spain from the EU's internal open-border scheme.

But on Saturday, Spain said most migrants, around 48,000, had already returned to Morocco, ushered by Spanish soldiers.

Videos online showed migrants hiding in tunnels and walking around on the streets of Ceuta.

At least 67 people are believed to have died while attempting to reach the enclave.

It is unclear what prompted the wave of attempted crossings, but there have previously been similar incidents.

In May 2021, 8,000 Moroccans entered the enclave amid a diplomatic dispute between Spain and Morocco over Western Sahara. At the time, Spain accused Morocco of using migrants as leverage, and a Moroccan minister said Morocco was justified in relaxing its border control as a response to the diplomatic dispute.

Some commentators have accused Morocco of facilitating this week's crossings, pointing to the Moroccan government's anger at Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez's recent visit to Algeria, Spain's biggest gas supplier.

Lorenzo Gabrielli, a senior researcher at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona who researches migration in Ceuta, told the New York Times: "It is impossible for nearly 50,000 people to cross the border between Morocco and Spain in a single day without Morocco having a hand in it."

Ceuta President Juan Jesus Vivas condemned the migration as a "violation of Spain's territorial integrity".

Morocco's ambassador to Spain, Karima Benyaich, said: "We have always prioritised legal, orderly and safe migration for all."

She insisted the crossings had been against the wishes of the Moroccan government.

Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump called the situation a "catastrophe" and added that "if we're not in office our country will be invaded at levels that will make Spain look small time".