Washington, DC - The midterm elections in the United States are in full swing, with early voting starting in most states.

The results will set the tone of US foreign and domestic policy for the rest of President Donald Trump's term. Control of both chambers of Congress - the Senate and the House of Representatives - is at stake.

If the Democrats flip one of the two chambers, which are currently under the control of Trump's Republican Party, they can thwart Trump's legislative agenda.

And if they can gain control of the Senate, they can block his judicial nominees. The upper chamber is also responsible for confirming cabinet appointees, ratifying treaties and holding impeachment trials.

There are 35 seats in the 100-member chamber up for grabs in this year's election, which will conclude on 3 November.

The current makeup of the Senate is now 53-47, so the Democrats need to flip four seats without losing any to reclaim the majority in the legislative body.

In most Senate races, the results are all but known before the votes are cast due to the political makeup of the states where the contests are playing out.

Barring a miracle, Republicans will win in Alabama, and Democrats will win in Massachusetts. That leaves a handful of competitive states that will determine the fate of the Senate.

The New Arab looks at the candidates in five key close races and where they stand on the issues.

Michigan (open seat): Abdul El-Sayed (Democrat) v Mike Rogers (Republican)

The Senate contest in Michigan is one of the most closely watched races in the election. Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive public health advocate, is taking on Mike Rogers, a Trump-backed former Congress member.

In recent weeks, Rogers and his allies have tried to focus the race on El-Sayed's Muslim identity, smearing him with baseless accusations of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran.

Trump has repeatedly mocked El-Sayed's name. "His name is actually Abduladadalalala. It's Adulbabababababa Mohammed Al-Sayed," the US president said at a rally last week.

El-Sayed has pushed to refocus the race on the issues - particularly the affordability crisis, tariffs and the rise in the price of gasoline linked to the Iran war and his support for universal healthcare.

The progressive Democrat opposes US aid to Israel and argues that Washington should focus on investing in communities at home.

He has accused Israel of carrying out a genocide in Gaza - an allegation backed by leading human rights groups and United Nations investigators.

"I oppose the illegal and unjustifiable war in Iran and demand an immediate end to the hostilities," El-Sayed says on his platform.

Rogers initially supported the war with Iran, calling the decision to launch the conflict the "right thing to do".

But the former Republican legislator curbed his enthusiasm for the conflict as it dragged on and proved unpopular with voters. "The war with Iran needs to end, and end quickly," he said in a campaign ad in September.

Rogers is a staunch supporter of Israel. "When I get to the United States Senate, I will continue to unconditionally support Israel's right to defend itself," he said earlier this year.

Texas (open seat): James Talarico (Democrat) v Ken Paxton (Republican)

In a sign that highlights the declining popularity of Republicans, Democrats are mounting a competitive Senate challenge in deep-red Texas, which has been a Republican stronghold for decades.

Public opinion polls have shown Democratic State Representative James Talarico neck-and-neck with Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Talarico has focused his campaign on fighting corruption, closing tax loopholes and lowering the cost of living. Paxton has presented himself as a defender of Trump's agenda, emphasising securing the southern border against irregular migration.

On foreign policy, Talarico calls for conditioning US aid to Israel. He broadly backs Israel's right to "defend itself", while focusing his criticism of Israeli atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

"As a former teacher, seeing the death and the destruction in Gaza, seeing what’s happening to children in particular, makes me sick to my stomach," he said at a CNN townhall last week.

Talarico has stopped short of calling the atrocities a genocide, saying that the issue is a legal determination that should be made by international courts.

He has pledged to work to "end the forever war in Iran that’s driving up the cost of gas and groceries".

In contrast, Paxton has backed Trump's military action in Iran, but in a recently leaked audio recording he bemoaned the war's impact on gasoline and diesel prices.

"It's the war, it's gas prices, it's diesel," he said when asked about the issues dragging his campaign, according to Axios, which first reported on the leaked remarks.

Paxton is a strong supporter of Israel. As attorney general, he has defended and enforced laws to penalise companies and individuals that boycott Israel.

Maine: Susan Collins (Republican incumbent) v Troy Jackson (Democrat)

Maine generally leans Democratic in presidential elections, but Republican Susan Collins has won five consecutive elections in the northeastern state, earning her a reputation as one of the most tenacious politicians in the country.

This time, Democrats are hoping to use the mounting anger against Trump to finally topple the 73-year-old senator.

But the Democratic push was off to a terrible start after the party's nominee, Graham Platner, stepped down due to allegations of sexual misconduct.

Platner was replaced by former state Senate President Troy Jackson.

Collins, who has shown willingness to break with Trump, has promoted herself as an experienced and hardworking "common sense" leader.

Jackson has focused on his deep roots in the state as a former logger and supporter of workers' rights.

The Democrat agrees that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. "When I'm in the US Senate, I’ll never vote in favour of US taxpayer-funded military aid to Israel," he wrote in a social media post in July.

Collins is an unflinching advocate for Israel and has backed continuing military aid to the US ally, calling herself a "strong supporter" of the assistance, which totals at least $3.8 billion annually.

On Iran, the Maine senator has been a rare Republican dissenter against the conflict, voting repeatedly with Democrats to curb Trump's war powers.

Jackson, however, has argued that Collins' presence in the Senate tilts the balance in favour of Republicans and enables Trump's agenda, including the Iran war.

"Senator Susan Collins says that she voted against [the war] nine times, but she didn’t have the votes," Jackson said during a debate earlier this month.

"Well that sounds like then we probably ought to have Democrats in charge of the US Senate so that we have the votes."

Alaska: Dan Sullivan (Republican incumbent) v Mary Peltola (Democrat)

Alaska is another traditional Republican stronghold where Democrats are making gains and hoping to stage a big surprise.

The race pits Trump-backed two-term senator Dan Sullivan against former Democratic Congresswoman Mary Peltola. The Democratic candidate's campaign slogan is "fish, family, freedom", focusing on lowering costs in Alaska.

Sullivan is running on his record of helping push large tax cuts and "historic investments" in the US military. The senator has voted consistently against Democratic efforts to restrict Trump's ability to continue the war with Iran.

Last week, he appeared to blame the Democrats' energy regulations for the rising fuel prices in an effort to defend the war with Iran.

"Ladies and gentlemen, the conflict in the Middle East is temporary. The true forever war is the national Democrats’ war against Alaska oil and gas and our jobs. That’s the forever war," he said, according to Alaska Public Media.

Peltola has been overtly critical of the war and Sullivan's votes in support of Trump's military campaign in Iran.

"This war is driving up our energy bills and hurting Alaskans with no end in sight," she said earlier this month.

Both Peltola and Sullivan are staunch Israel supporters. Sullivan has voted repeatedly on pro-Israel measures in Congress, including sponsoring a measure to deepen military cooperation with the US ally.

When she served in the House of Representatives between 2023 and 2025, Peltola was one of the most uncompromising pro-Israel Democrats.

In 2024, she joined Republicans in voting to ban then-President Joe Biden from withholding weapons from Israel. She backed a bill to impose sanctions on the International Criminal Court in response to the arrest warrant against Netanyahu.

Ohio: Jon Husted (Republican incumbent) v Sherrod Brown (Democrat)

Former Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown is attempting to make a comeback in the Midwestern state that has been trending in Republicans' favour over the past decade.

He is taking on Jon Husted, who replaced Vice President JD Vance in the Senate after the Trump administration took office last year.

Beyond the single seat, the contest is of symbolic importance. It would restore the Democrats' competitive edge in the Midwestern state and serve as an early dig at Vance, who is expected to run for president in 2028.

Brown has made his opposition to the Iran war a key theme in his campaign.

"Jon Husted has voted 14 times to continue the reckless Iran war as gas and grocery prices continue to rise," he recently wrote in a social media post. "I’ll vote to end the war the first chance I get."

In March, Husted proclaimed that the war was going "much better than anyone thought it would".

But like other Republicans in competitive races, he has tempered his support for the conflict.

"The war needs to come to an end as quickly as possible so that we can lower gas prices," he told Politico earlier this month.

Husted and Brown are more closely aligned when it comes to Israel. Both are strong supporters of the US ally.

Ali Harb is a journalist based in Washington, DC. His work focuses on US foreign policy, elections, and Arab American communities

Follow him on X: @Harbpeace

Edited by Charlie Hoyle

Two days of military talks between Lebanon and Israel at the headquarters of US Central Command (CENTCOM) in Tampa, Florida, appear to have ended without a breakthrough, as Israel continues its attacks on southern Lebanon and rejects Lebanese demands for a third-party mechanism to verify the Lebanese army's operations.

Lebanese military sources told The New Arab on Thursday that no further negotiating session had been scheduled, although concluding bilateral discussions with CENTCOM could still take place.

The sources said the United States was expected to issue a statement on the talks, which have been dominated by disagreements over monitoring the Lebanese army's activities in designated pilot areas of southern Lebanon and Israel's refusal to halt its military operations.

"No breakthrough has been recorded so far. There is intransigence in Israeli positions, while the Lebanese side is holding firm to its demands that steps must be reciprocal," the sources said.

They stressed that Lebanon could not be expected to fulfil its commitments unilaterally while Israel continued its attacks, bulldozing operations, demolitions, explosions and ground incursions.

The Lebanese army has also rejected Israeli demands for direct coordination between the two militaries on the ground.

Instead, Beirut is insisting on an independent verification mechanism involving third parties, potentially including France, the United States and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), similar to the committee established to monitor the November 2024 ceasefire agreement.

"The Lebanese army is fully carrying out its duties, and all Israeli allegations against it are false," the military sources said.

They argued that Israel's continuing attacks and violations were the main obstacles to the army's deployment and the implementation of agreements, as had been the case following the ceasefire on 27 November 2024.

Dispute over Israeli withdrawal and disarmament

Lebanon is demanding that Israel halt its military attacks and operations across the south, which continue to endanger the lives of the area's residents.

Beirut is also pressing for farmers to be allowed access to their land to harvest crops, alongside broader demands for Israel's withdrawal from Lebanese territory, the release of prisoners, the return of displaced residents and reconstruction.

Lebanese authorities are calling for a clear timetable to implement the commitments outlined in a framework agreement signed with Israel in Washington on 26 June.

The agreement is intended to advance Israel's withdrawal from Lebanese territory while the Lebanese state extends its authority across the country through its own security forces and establishes a monopoly over weapons.

However, major disagreements remain over how these commitments should be implemented.

Israel has refused to expand the pilot areas designated for Lebanese army operations beyond a single zone announced in July, which includes the towns of Srifa, Froun and western Zawtar.

Israeli authorities claim the Lebanese army has failed to disarm Hezbollah in these areas and are pushing for direct military coordination through joint operations rooms.

Lebanon has rejected this demand, insisting that any verification must be carried out through an independent mechanism rather than direct cooperation with the Israeli military.

Israel has also refused to suspend its attacks or abandon the security zone it has established in southern Lebanon.

Washington, meanwhile, is attempting to narrow the differences between the two sides and maintain the negotiations, viewing the June framework agreement as the principal route towards stability and security.

Israeli attacks continue across southern Lebanon

The diplomatic deadlock coincided with another day of Israeli military escalation in southern Lebanon.

On Thursday, Israeli forces carried out two explosions in the towns of Tallouseh and Bani Hayyan in the Marjayoun district, according to reports from southern Lebanon.

Israeli aircraft also struck the outskirts of Qantara in Marjayoun and Kfar Tebnit in the Nabatieh district.

Israeli tanks were seen advancing towards the Nabaa al-Khoukh area on the outskirts of Hebbariyeh in the Hasbaya district and artillery shelling tageted several towns in south Lebanon.

The attacks have continued despite diplomatic efforts to secure an Israeli withdrawal and advance arrangements for the Lebanese army's deployment in the south.

Lebanese officials have repeatedly said that the ongoing Israeli military operations are obstructing reconstruction, preventing displaced residents from returning home and exposing civilians to further danger.

Lebanese cabinet faces explosives case

Separately, Lebanon's cabinet was due to meet at Baabda Palace on Thursday afternoon under the chairmanship of President Joseph Aoun, with a politically sensitive explosives case expected to feature on the agenda.

The Justice Ministry has requested that the case involving explosives seized in Dahr al-Baydar on 5 October and in al-Qasr, in Baalbek-Hermel governorate, on 9 October be referred to the Judicial Council, Lebanon's highest court for cases involving state security.

The request also covers any other matters found by investigators to be directly or indirectly connected to the seized explosives.

According to information obtained by The New Arab, extensive political and judicial consultations have taken place, including discussions involving Lebanon's president, prime minister, and Speaker of Parliment, who represent the country's three largest religious sects, over the potential consequences of referring the case to the Judicial Council.

Approval of the request could trigger a confrontation with Hezbollah.

Some political figures have favoured delaying a decision until security and judicial investigations, which remain at an early stage, have progressed further.

However, several ministers, particularly those opposed to Hezbollah, are insisting that the case should be referred to the Judicial Council.

Sources close to Justice Minister Adel Nassar told The New Arab that the seriousness of the case required such a referral.

"The gravity of the case requires its referral to the Judicial Council. This concerns the country's national security, and there can be no leniency or complacency," the sources said.

They stressed that investigations were continuing and that the ministry was determined to pursue the case without granting special treatment to anyone.

"We are determined to move forward with the investigations, without leniency towards anyone. That era is over," they added.

The leader of the UK's largest education union has strongly criticised a recommendation for schools across England to adopt the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, warning that it risks silencing legitimate criticism of Israel and stifling classroom discussions about the Gaza genocide.

Daniel Kebede, general secretary of the National Education Union (NEU), condemned the proposal as the "wrong approach", arguing that the contested definition could further restrict freedom of expression on Palestine by blurring the distinction between antisemitism and criticism of Israeli government policies.

His criticism followed the publication of Sir David Bell's independent review into antisemitism in schools, which recommended that educational institutions adopt the IHRA definition, despite longstanding concerns from civil liberties groups and academics about its implications for political speech.

The government has accepted all 27 recommendations in the review, with Education Secretary Lucy Powell announcing plans to write to educational institutions urging them to adopt the definition.

In a statement on Wednesday, Kebede warned that the recommendation could exacerbate the very problems it was intended to address, leaving teachers uncertain about how to discuss Israel's actions in Gaza without facing accusations of antisemitism.

"The IHRA’s contested framing risks blurring the line between antisemitism and legitimate criticism of the Israeli government and the genocide in Gaza, leaving teachers with uncertainty when they need clarity," Kebede wrote.

"A young person’s opposition to the Gaza genocide and scrutiny of the Israeli government are not, in themselves, antisemitic."

The IHRA definition has faced sustained criticism over its accompanying examples relating to Israel, which opponents argue risk conflating anti-Zionism and legitimate criticism of Israeli state policies with antisemitism.

Many have warned that its adoption by public institutions can create a chilling effect on freedom of expression, particularly when discussions concern Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories, its treatment of Palestinians and its military campaign in Gaza.

Kebede warned that promoting the definition in schools could deepen this chilling effect, discouraging teachers from addressing the Gaza genocide and preventing pupils from engaging openly with one of the most contentious political issues of recent years.

He also raised concerns that restricting classroom discussions could push young people towards unsafe online spaces to explore issues they feel unable to raise at school.

"Recommending the IHRA definition risks tightening the chilling grip already stifling classroom discussion of the Gaza genocide. Schools need practical support to confront antisemitism, not a contested framework that risks shutting down legitimate discussion," Kebede said.

He also rejected suggestions that teachers were failing to uphold their responsibilities when addressing politically sensitive issues.

"This report will not tackle antisemitism. It wrongly calls into question the professionalism of teachers. The existing rules on impartiality in the classroom are very clear and teachers take that responsibility very seriously."

While welcoming "a strengthened focus on antisemitism" and acknowledging an increase in antisemitic incidents following the outbreak of the Gaza war in 2023, Kebede urged the Department for Education to "go a step further" by strengthening efforts to tackle all forms of racism.

His intervention highlighted concerns that adopting a disputed definition could undermine efforts to combat antisemitism by creating confusion over the boundaries between racial or religious hatred and legitimate political expression.

Government backs contested definition

The Bell review sets out 27 recommendations aimed at tackling antisemitism in schools, including calls for education unions to establish robust policies and procedures and ensure their members receive adequate training to recognise and respond to antisemitic incidents.

It also recommends that allegations of antisemitism involving trade union officials, representatives or members be addressed consistently under existing union policies on racism and prejudice.

Bell said reports from Jewish organisations and teachers highlighted concerns that some activities within education unions had become increasingly "politicised" on issues including the Israel-Palestine conflict.

However, the recommendation to promote the IHRA definition has brought renewed attention to longstanding objections that its examples concerning Israel could be used to police political speech rather than simply identify antisemitic prejudice.

The controversy centres on the risk that teachers and pupils could feel pressured to avoid legitimate discussions of Israeli government policies for fear that their comments might be interpreted as antisemitic.

Addressing the House of Commons, Powell defended the government's response to the review.

"All children and teachers should be able to go to school or college free from fear," she said.

She added that schools and colleges would receive further support on discussing "controversial and sensitive" issues and geopolitical events in an informed and impartial manner.

Bell, who led the independent review, also acknowledged the importance of allowing pupils to discuss Israel's military campaign in Gaza without experiencing "prejudice or hatred".

In an interview with the Press Association, he said it was "not good enough" that some teachers and pupils felt conversations about the conflict were "too difficult to touch" when the subject arose in classrooms.

He decided against recommending an outright ban on teachers and pupils wearing political symbols or flags, describing such a measure as "unworkable" and "untested legally".

However, he suggested that individual schools and colleges could use existing staff and pupil codes of conduct to establish rules governing what could be worn.

Education leaders divided over proposals

Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), told The New Arab that the review had offered "clearer guidance and practical support for schools and colleges".

He said it could help teachers navigate discussions about complex and divisive political issues.

"Antisemitism, like all forms of discrimination, is utterly unacceptable and abhorrent," he told The New Arab.

"Unfortunately, there are differing views on what may or may not constitute antisemitism and what is a legitimate expression of views over the conflict between Israel and Palestine."

He added: "Schools and colleges are often caught in the middle of divisive issues and find themselves having to navigate between strongly held opinions on either side of an argument."

Di’Iasio stressed that "schools and colleges already robustly protect children and young people from all forms of racism, bullying, and harassment".

He said they complied with strict legal obligations prohibiting the promotion of partisan political views and added that "they take this responsibility extremely seriously".

Libya's parliament has unanimously approved a controversial maritime agreement with Turkey, reversing years of opposition and reigniting a regional dispute over territorial waters, energy resources and political influence in the eastern Mediterranean.

The vote on Tuesday by Libya's eastern-based House of Representatives marked a significant shift in the country's divided political landscape, bringing rival authorities in Tripoli and Benghazi into agreement on a deal first signed in 2019.

But the decision has drawn strong objections from Egypt, Greece, Cyprus, the European Union and Israel, which have challenged the agreement's legitimacy and its implications for maritime sovereignty.

Turkey has rejected the criticism, insisting that the agreement is lawful and protects the rights of both countries.

The dispute goes beyond maritime boundaries, touching on competition for offshore gas, Turkey's growing influence in Libya and the shifting alliances of regional powers.

So what does the agreement involve, why has it caused such controversy, and what happens next?

What is the Libya-Turkey maritime agreement?

The agreement was signed on 27 November 2019 by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Fayez al-Sarraj, then head of Libya's internationally recognised Government of National Accord (GNA).

It establishes maritime jurisdiction zones between Libya and Turkey across the eastern Mediterranean, giving both countries a basis to claim rights over areas believed to contain potentially valuable oil and gas resources.

The deal was signed during Libya's civil war, when Turkey was providing military support to the Tripoli-based government against an offensive by forces loyal to eastern commander Khalifa Haftar.

Turkey subsequently deployed drones and military advisers to help repel Haftar's assault on the capital.

At the time, Libya's eastern-based House of Representatives, which supported Haftar, rejected the agreement.

However, on Tuesday, the parliament unanimously voted to ratify the deal, reversing its previous position.

The decision was welcomed by Libya's Government of National Unity, Presidential Council and High Council of State, as well as Ankara.

Why are Egypt, Greece and the EU opposed?

The agreement has faced longstanding opposition from several eastern Mediterranean countries that argue it infringes on their maritime rights.

Greece maintains that Turkey and Libya do not have opposite or adjacent coastlines that would justify the maritime boundary established under the deal.

Athens argues that the agreement disregards the maritime rights of Greek islands, including Crete, Rhodes and Karpathos.

The Greek foreign ministry has warned that it will take appropriate measures to defend the country's sovereign rights and has raised the issue with the UN Security Council.

Egypt has also rejected the ratification, arguing that the agreement encroaches on its exclusive economic zone and continental shelf.

Cairo's foreign ministry said the deal "constitutes a clear infringement upon Egypt's sovereign rights within its exclusive economic zone and continental shelf", insisting that Libya's parliamentary approval has no legal consequences for Egypt.

The European Union has similarly reaffirmed its opposition.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa said in a joint statement that the agreement infringes on the sovereign rights of third countries and is incompatible with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

The bloc reiterated its support for Greece and Cyprus, both EU member states.

Turkey, which is not a party to UNCLOS, rejects these objections.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan described the agreement as "entirely legitimate", while Omer Celik, spokesperson for the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), argued that it rested on strong legal foundations.

The dispute also has implications for the planned Great Sea Interconnector, a subsea electricity cable intended to connect Greece and Cyprus, and eventually Israel.

The project, estimated to cost approximately $2.1 billion, has already encountered delays linked to maritime disagreements between Greece and Turkey.

Why is the agreement important for oil and gas?

The eastern Mediterranean has become an increasingly important region for energy exploration, with competing maritime claims affecting access to potential offshore oil and gas reserves.

The Libya-Turkey agreement defines maritime economic zones and creates a framework for exploring natural resources, including hydrocarbons.

Neither country has announced proven reserves in the maritime areas covered by the deal.

However, a 2021 assessment by the US Geological Survey estimated that the wider eastern Mediterranean region contained an average of 286.2 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered, technically recoverable conventional natural gas resources.

Energy cooperation between Ankara and Tripoli has continued despite the political dispute.

In October 2022, Turkey and Libya's Government of National Unity signed a separate hydrocarbons cooperation agreement covering scientific, technical, legal and commercial collaboration.

In June 2025, Libya's National Oil Corporation and Turkish Petroleum signed a memorandum of understanding to conduct geological and geophysical studies in four offshore areas.

The arrangement included discussions over a two-dimensional seismic survey covering 10,000 kilometres.

For Libya, offshore exploration could attract investment and diversify energy revenues beyond its existing production of approximately 1.4 million barrels of oil per day and 72 million cubic metres of natural gas daily.

For Turkey, the deal could strengthen its position in the eastern Mediterranean energy sector and support efforts to reduce its dependence on imported energy.

However, the existence of a maritime agreement does not guarantee commercially viable discoveries or immediate production.

Why has eastern Libya changed its position?

The parliamentary reversal reflects significant changes in Libya's internal politics and Turkey's relations with the country's eastern leadership.

When the agreement was first signed, Ankara was supporting the Tripoli government against Haftar's forces.

Since then, Turkey has worked to improve relations with the eastern authorities, including Haftar and his son Saddam, the deputy commander of the Libyan National Army.

In July, Ankara and the eastern military leadership reportedly reached agreements involving military facilities, surveillance systems and training programmes.

The parliamentary vote also followed a change in leadership.

On 6 October, Al-Salhin Abdelnabi al-Obeidi replaced Aguila Saleh as speaker of the House of Representatives after more than 12 years.

Saleh, who was considered close to Cairo, had long resisted ratifying the agreement.

His successor, who previously chaired the Libyan-Turkish parliamentary friendship committee, oversaw its approval as one of his first major decisions.

Youssef Essaied, an academic and researcher specialising in oil and energy economics, told The New Arab that the timing of the vote was linked to broader political developments, including US-backed efforts to unify Libya's rival authorities.

He pointed to the role of Massad Boulos, US President Donald Trump's adviser, in attempting to bring together the rival administrations in Tripoli and Benghazi.

The shift suggests that Ankara's influence now extends beyond its traditional allies in western Libya.

Does this mean Libya's rival authorities are uniting?

Not necessarily. The approval is significant because both Libya's rival centres of power now support the maritime agreement. However, the country's deeper political divisions remain unresolved.

Libya continues to have competing authorities, while disputes over control of the national budget, armed forces and electoral institutions remain central obstacles to political reunification.

The agreement therefore represents a notable area of cooperation between rival political camps rather than evidence of a comprehensive political settlement.

What happens next?

Despite parliamentary ratification, implementing the agreement could take years and face substantial legal, political and economic obstacles.

Essaied told The New Arab that the agreement was not an operational contract and that commercial energy production would require extensive geological surveys, exploration, financial assessments and negotiations.

He warned that Libya's political instability and unresolved maritime disputes could discourage international investment.

Companies may be reluctant to invest in offshore projects exposed to legal challenges from Greece or Egypt, particularly where competing sovereignty claims remain unresolved.

Essaied also highlighted concerns about corruption, weak oversight and the need for transparent management of Libya's energy resources.

Beyond the economic challenges, there is a risk that exploration activities in contested waters could provoke further tensions.

In August 2020, Turkey deployed the seismic survey vessel Oruç Reis to waters claimed by Greece, bringing the two NATO members close to military confrontation.

For now, the ratification represents a diplomatic gain for Ankara and a significant change in eastern Libya's position.

The UAE has formally nominated veteran diplomat Lana Nusseibeh to become the next UN secretary-general, placing one of its most experienced international representatives in the race to succeed Antonio Guterres.

The nomination was submitted on Wednesday by UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in a letter to the presidents of the UN General Assembly and Security Council.

Nusseibeh, 48, is a former UAE ambassador to the UN who spent more than a decade in international diplomacy, including during the country's 2022-23 membership of the Security Council.

If successful, she would become the first woman to lead the UN and the second person from the Middle East and North Africa to hold the position, following Egypt's Boutros Boutros-Ghali.

Who is Lana Nusseibeh?

Nusseibeh is the daughter of Zaki Nusseibeh, a senior Emirati presidential adviser who has served successive UAE leaders for decades. However, the Nusseibeh family are originally from Palestine and have longstanding connections to Jerusalem.

Her grandfather, Anwar Nusseibeh, was a prominent Palestinian politician and lawyer who served in senior government positions in Jordan.

She studied history at the University of Cambridge before obtaining a master's degree in Israeli and Jewish Diaspora Studies from the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London.

Nusseibeh founded the UAE foreign ministry's Policy Planning Department in 2009, becoming its first director, and subsequently served as a joint special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In September 2013, she became the first Emirati woman appointed as the country's permanent representative to the UN, a position she held until April 2024.

During her tenure, she served as president of the executive board of UN Women in 2017 and as a vice-president of the General Assembly. She also co-chaired negotiations concerning UN institutional reform.

Her most prominent diplomatic role came during the UAE's membership of the Security Council between 2022 and 2023, when she twice presided over the body.

During Israel's war on Gaza, Nusseibeh helped secure Security Council Resolution 2720 in December 2023, establishing a UN mechanism intended to facilitate humanitarian assistance to Palestinians.

She was also involved in securing resolutions condemning the Taliban's restrictions on Afghan women working for the UN and addressing the relationship between hate speech, discrimination and international security.

Following her departure from New York, she continued serving in senior positions within the UAE foreign ministry, becoming a minister of state in September 2025.

Can she become UN secretary-general?

Nusseibeh enters the contest as the organisation confronts financial pressures, questions over its effectiveness in responding to conflicts and growing divisions between major powers.

Her campaign programme, titled 'A United Nations for the Next Eighty Years', advocates strengthening conflict prevention, reducing institutional duplication and improving accountability.

Her extensive diplomatic experience could prove advantageous in a contest where leading candidates have struggled to secure the consensus required for appointment.

Costa Rica's Rebeca Grynspan, head of UN Trade and Development, and Argentina's Rafael Grossi, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, are among her principal rivals.

However, Nusseibeh's candidacy could encounter geopolitical obstacles.

The UAE has faced serious allegations of supplying weapons and financial support to Sudan's Rapid Support Forces (RSF), whose members and allied militias were determined by the US in January 2025 to have committed genocide.

Amnesty International has documented weapons it believes reached the RSF through the UAE, while Abu Dhabi has consistently denied providing military support to either side in Sudan's war.

The controversy could complicate Nusseibeh's candidacy, although no evidence has been presented implicating her personally in the alleged arms transfers.

Regional rivalries, particularly the UAE's complicated relationship with Saudi Arabia, could also influence the contest, alongside expectations that the next secretary-general should come from Latin America.

Ultimately, her prospects will depend on securing at least nine Security Council votes without facing a veto from any of its five permanent members.

The successful candidate will take office on 1 January 2027, succeeding Guterres after two five-year terms.

Iran's Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has reportedly met parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf to discuss the ongoing confrontation with the United States and Israel, including preparations to strengthen the country's defences against further attacks.

The meeting focused on the latest developments in "military, economic and cognitive warfare" being waged against the country by the US and Israel, according to Iran's Tasnim news agency on Wednesday.

The two officials stressed the need to strengthen Iran's national capabilities and maintain domestic unity amid continuing tensions with Washington.

They also discussed the role of parliament in preserving social cohesion and national solidarity, as well as the importance of continued public mobilisation and participation in gatherings across the country.

According to Tasnim, Khamenei and Ghalibaf emphasised the need for greater cooperation between the government and parliament to address economic difficulties and the rising cost of living, as Iran continues to grapple with the consequences of the conflict.

The discussions also covered efforts to strengthen relations with Iran's strategic partners.

Ghalibaf briefed Khamenei on parliament's activities since the outbreak of the US-led war against Iran, outlining measures already taken and plans to address the country's political and economic challenges.

The meeting comes amid renewed tensions following months of military confrontation between Iran and the United States.

The US and Israel launched a war against Iran on 28 February, prompting Tehran to retaliate with strikes against Israel and US military positions across the region.

A ceasefire was reached in April, but hostilities subsequently resumed as negotiations between Washington and Tehran quickly broke down, despite the two countries signing a memorandum of understanding in mid-June.

The United States launched further attacks on Iranian targets on 8 July, prompting Tehran to announce the renewed closure of the strategically important Strait of Hormuz on 12 July.

The waterway, through which a significant share of global oil supplies normally passes, has become a major flashpoint in the confrontation, raising concerns about regional security and international energy markets.

Wednesday's meeting highlighted the Iranian leadership's focus on maintaining political unity, strengthening national defences and addressing economic pressures as the confrontation with Washington and Israel continues.

Christianity has survived in Gaza through the rise and fall of empires, religious transformations, and centuries of political upheaval, but Israel's devastating war has raised the possibility that one of the faith's oldest communities could disappear from its ancestral homeland.

Before October 2023, approximately 1,000 Christians lived in Gaza. Today, estimates suggest that only 500 to 600 remain, with hundreds having fled the territory during Israel's war and genocide.

Bishop William Shomali, the Latin Patriarchal Vicar of Jerusalem, has warned that Gaza's remaining Christians are exhausted and increasingly wish to leave, raising questions about whether the community can survive another generation.

For Palestinian Christian activist Ihab Hassan, the danger is not simply the loss of individual families, but the possibility that an ageing population will become incapable of sustaining itself.

"Many of those who remain are elderly, and the young are the most likely to leave. A community of grandparents cannot survive on its own," he told The New Arab.

Christianity's ancient roots in Palestine

The history of Christianity in Gaza traces back to the earliest centuries of the faith, when Palestine was part of the Roman Empire, and Christianity was emerging from the land where Jesus Christ had lived, preached, and been crucified.

For Gaza's Christians, this history is not merely an archaeological inheritance. Their religious traditions connect them to the earliest Christian communities of the Holy Land, whose presence predates the emergence of Christianity as Europe's dominant religion.

Pastor Hanna Massad, a Gaza-born Palestinian Christian and founder of Christian Mission to Gaza, believes the possible disappearance of this community would represent a profound historical and spiritual loss.

"Two thousand years ago, the gospel was proclaimed in Jerusalem, where Peter preached his first sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:9-11). People from many different nations and ethnic groups were present, including Arabs," he told The New Arab.

"Our Christian roots in this region go back to the earliest days of the church. It's heartbreaking to imagine that one day there may be no Christians left in Gaza and only small Christian communities remaining in the West Bank, in the very land where Christianity began."

By the fourth century, Gaza had become an important centre of Christian monasticism. Among its most influential figures was St Hilarion, born near Gaza around AD 291, who is traditionally credited with pioneering monastic life in Palestine.

The monastery associated with him at Tell Umm Amer became an important religious centre during the Byzantine period. In 2024, UNESCO designated the site a World Heritage Site and simultaneously placed it on its List of World Heritage in Danger because of the conflict.

Gaza City also contains the Greek Orthodox Church of Saint Porphyrius, named after the fourth- and fifth-century bishop who helped consolidate Christianity in the city.

Although Gaza's population became overwhelmingly Muslim over subsequent centuries, its Christian community endured, maintaining churches, schools and religious traditions through successive political transformations.

Most of Gaza's remaining Christians are Greek Orthodox, alongside a significant Catholic population and a handful of Protestants.

For Hassan, the significance of their continued presence extends beyond religion.

"If it disappears, we lose more than a minority. We lose a chain of memory that runs back almost to the Apostles."

The destruction of a living heritage

The war has brought unprecedented devastation to the physical foundations of Gaza's Christian community.

In October 2023, an Israeli airstrike struck a building within the Saint Porphyrius church compound, where displaced Palestinians had sought shelter, killing civilians and damaging part of the historic complex.

UNESCO has verified damage to the church compound, while the conflict has also endangered archaeological sites, including the monastery of St Hilarion.

Yet the destruction of historic buildings represents only one dimension of the threat. Churches depend on congregations, schools on pupils, and community institutions on the families who sustain them.

Lex Pouliot, Manager of Middle East and Special Projects at the Vulnerable People Project, said the devastation had extended across Gaza's Christian neighbourhoods and institutions.

"By current estimates, nearly 80% of Christian homes have been destroyed, along with almost every Christian institution in the Strip, including schools, cultural centres, libraries, and the YMCA," she told The New Arab.

Families who initially sheltered inside church compounds have since moved into damaged homes or rented apartments, according to Pouliot. Some church schools have reopened, but conditions remain precarious.

She said two Christian women killed this month had recently moved into rented accommodation.

Hassan also described the community's losses in human terms.

"Christians were not spared in this war. Around 60 have died, about half of them killed directly by the Israeli army. Most of their homes have been destroyed," he said.

The destruction has therefore created a dilemma that cannot be resolved simply by restoring religious monuments.

Even if Gaza's historic churches survive, their significance as places of worship depends on whether Christians remain to use them.

As Hassan put it: "A restored church without a congregation becomes just a site."

An exodus without return?

Gaza's Christian population had been declining long before the present war, reflecting decades of economic hardship, restrictions on movement and emigration.

Wadie Abunassar, coordinator of the Forum of Holy Land Christians, told The New Arab that the community numbered approximately 5,000 in the late 1980s, falling to around 1,000 before October 2023 and roughly 500 today.

The latest displacement has intensified a longstanding concern among church leaders: that families who establish themselves overseas may never return, even if Gaza is eventually rebuilt.

Massad said hundreds of Christians had left since October 2023, with many resettling in Australia and other Western countries.

"I believe most of those who have left are unlikely to return unless there is significant change and lasting peace and stability in Gaza," he said.

Emigration can become permanent as children enter schools, parents find employment and families establish new relationships abroad. For a community already numbering only a few hundred, the departure of even a relatively small number of young families can have lasting consequences.

Abunassar believes that experience elsewhere in the Middle East offers little encouragement.

"I believe that more than 90 percent of those who left, the chances to see them coming back are very close to zero," he said.

His estimate reflects his assessment of wider regional migration patterns rather than a measured return rate for Gaza's displaced Christians.

A wider Palestinian struggle

Although Gaza's destruction is exceptional, the pressures confronting its Christians are part of a wider struggle over the future of Palestinian Christian communities.

In the occupied West Bank, movement restrictions, economic difficulties and Israeli settler violence have raised concerns about the security of Christian towns and villages, including Taybeh, near Ramallah.

Hana Bendcowsky, an expert on Holy Land Christians at the Rossing Center, cautioned against treating the circumstances in Gaza and the West Bank as equivalent.

"While Palestinians in the West Bank face enormous hardships, the situation in Gaza is catastrophic," she told The New Arab.

She also emphasised the difference between choosing to emigrate and being driven from one's home by war.

"We must also distinguish between emigration and displacement or becoming a refugee, which is more relevant to Gaza."

For Bendcowsky, the departure of Gaza's remaining families could mean the end of its longstanding Christian lay community, even if churches, hospitals and charitable institutions continue operating.

Nevertheless, she stressed that the preservation of religious heritage could never justify exposing people to danger simply to maintain a historical presence.

The possible disappearance of Gaza's Christians would also diminish the religious diversity that has long characterised Palestinian society.

"Gaza's Christians are Palestinians, and their story is part of Palestinian history," Hassan said.

"Palestinian identity has always included both Muslims and Christians. They shared everything, including hardship, wars, and displacement."

Can Gaza's Christians return?

The future of Gaza's Christian community ultimately depends on conditions affecting the entire Palestinian population: security, housing, employment, education and the possibility of rebuilding lives without renewed displacement.

Church leaders have sought to encourage Christians to remain in their homeland while recognising the circumstances that compel families to leave.

Abunassar said the churches were working to preserve their communities, but argued that resolving the underlying political crisis was beyond their capacity. He called for a genuine ceasefire and a peaceful settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Massad similarly argued that a lasting solution must address the Israeli occupation and guarantee Palestinians the right to live in dignity in an independent state.

For Pouliot, the fate of Gaza's Christians cannot be separated from the survival and recovery of their Muslim neighbours.

"Whether Christians can rebuild their lives depends on whether Gaza itself is rebuilt, and on an end to the occupation and the siege."

But reconstruction alone may not reverse the exodus. Families who have lost relatives, homes and livelihoods must also believe that returning would offer their children a future.

Hassan argued that meaningful recovery would require fundamental political change, including an end to both Israeli occupation and Hamas's rule.

"A community depends on more than houses and church buildings. It needs families, schools, work, safety, and the freedom to worship and stay connected with relatives and other Christian communities," he said.

For a community whose history reaches back to Christianity's earliest centuries, the possibility of return is therefore inseparable from the question of whether Gaza can once again become a place where families can safely build their lives.

Despite his pessimism about the prospects of reversing the exodus, Abunassar said the aspiration of Christian leaders remained unchanged.

"On one hand, we don't want anyone to leave. For sure, not the Christians of Gaza, not the Christians of the West Bank, not the Christians inside Israel," he said.

"On the contrary, we want those who left to come back."

Sam Hamad is a historian, freelance writer, and editor 

Edited by Charlie Hoyle

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa on Wednesday met with US special envoy to Syria and Iraq Tom Barrack in Damascus.

The meeting was also attended by Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani and covered political and security developments in Syria and the wider region, according to the Syrian state SANA news agency.

The previous day, Barrack called for an end to Israeli incursions inside Syrian territory, while speaking at the Global Security Forum in Doha, saying that there was a danger that this would expand the conflict in the region.

Barrack added that diplomacy and dialogue were essential to preventing new regional crises.

On Thursday, Israeli troops launched another attack into Syrian territory killing a man with a disability in the village of Jamla in Deraa province, according to AFP.

Earlier, the media office of the Rif Dimashq governorate denied social media reports claiming that Israeli occupation forces had been patrolling the road between Daraa and Kiswah, a suburb of Damascus, saying that these “rumours” were “entirely false”.

The Syrian Network for Human Rights recently reported that at least 69 other Syrians have been killed in Israeli attacks since December 2024, when the regime of former dictator Bashar al-Assad was overthrown.

After rebels led by current President Ahmed Al-Sharaa overthrew the regime in that month, Israeli forces invaded southwestern Syria, seizing land beyond the Golan Heights, which was occupied by Israel in 1967, and launching hundreds of airstrikes.

Sharaa has offered Israel a security deal if it returns to the 1974 disengagement lines, while ruling out full normalisation of relations.

He has also adopted a pro-Western foreign policy, improving relations with the US, while distancing Syria from Iran, a key backer of the former Assad regime.

Barrack praised Sharaa’s management of the transitional period, noting that Damascus had demonstrated a serious willingness to engage in dialogue and negotiations to reach a security deal with Israel.

He argued that potential understandings could include a “non-aggression agreement,” which could pave the way for the normalisation of relations in the future.

Barrack’s discussions with Sharaa addressed ways to ease tensions on the ground and support economic recovery through the Syria Recovery and Reconstruction Trust Fund (START), a multi-donor fund which Syria agreed with the World Bank earlier this week.

Syria is still suffering from the devastation caused by 14 years of brutal civil war, with around 90 percent of the population living in poverty.

The meeting in Damascus follows a series of intensive diplomatic consultations between Barrack and the Syrian government.

These have included previous meetings with al-Shaibani in Ankara, as well as an earlier meeting between President al-Sharaa and the US envoy on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York last September.

The Egyptian parliament has postponed a vote which would authorise the government to provide military support to Saudi Arabia and defend it against Yemen's Houthi attacks, raising questions about Cairo’s willingness to become militarily involved in the regional conflict.

The vote, initially scheduled for Monday 19 October, has been delayed until 26 October.

Parliament convened an emergency session on Sunday at the request of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, an hour after the National Defence Council, comprising the president and senior ministers and military and security officials, approved the principle of supporting Saudi Arabia.

The postponement is significant, given that parliament, dominated by pro-government forces, routinely approves major executive decisions without prolonged debate. This time, MPs held consecutive sessions without reaching a vote before postponing it for another week.

The move is unprecedented, as emergency parliamentary sessions have previously lasted no more than three consecutive days.

Parliamentary sources told The New Arab that the delay was partly due to the absence of the usual directives sent to blocs aligned with the government to guide their positions on major decisions. MPs had received no clear guidance on how to vote on Sisi's request, amid uncertainty over the leadership's position on the nature and limits of any potential military involvement in Yemen.

The sources said this didn't necessarily indicate opposition to supporting Saudi Arabia, but suggested the decision had yet to reach the political stage required for approval through parliament's usual procedures.

Cairo may still be examining its options or waiting for greater clarity on the confrontation before deciding whether to participate, the sources added.

Saudi support remains under consideration

The same sources explained that the delay was down to military and economic calculations surrounding any potential Egyptian involvement. The establishment of a military logistical air corridor between Egypt and Saudi Arabia doesn't mean that the decision to deploy troops has been made, they said.

Key questions remain over the expected cost of the war, the scope of Egypt's possible contribution and the military and financial obligations involved. Providing defensive assistance inside Saudi Arabia would entail different tasks and risks from participating in direct combat operations inside Yemen.

Any deployment would require assessments of its duration, the number of troops and capabilities needed, command and coordination arrangements, as well as regard given to the potential expansion of the conflict and its regional security implications.

These concerns were also raised by political parties and MPs during parliamentary discussions, particularly over the lack of information about the mission's objectives, duration, likely cost and risks to Egyptian soldiers.

The Egyptian Social Democratic Party said its parliamentary bloc intended to abstain from the vote, citing ambiguity over the mission and its obligations. Other MPs called for further discussion before a vote was taken.

Party MP Freddy ElBaiady told The New Arab that parliament's role extended beyond voting on the authorisation request to examining its implications and ensuring that the mission's purpose and limits were clearly defined.

Supporting Saudi Arabia and safeguarding its stability did not necessarily mean direct military intervention was the only available option, he said.

ElBaiady added that any military decision should account for potential casualties, financial costs and additional pressure on Egypt's economy, as well as possible repercussions for shipping through the Red Sea and the Suez Canal.

A lawmaker from a liberal party aligned with the government, who requested anonymity, said neither Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly, Defence Minister Ashraf Salem Zaher, nor any of their representatives had attended closed-door discussions to explain the authorisation request.

This left MPs unable to assess the military assistance Riyadh might seek, the duration of the proposed authorisation or the financial burden on Egyptian citizens, the lawmaker said.

The MP said he opposed the authorisation despite his party's supportive position, adding that the lack of a clear government vision had left lawmakers to make their own assessments. Many were prepared, in principle, to provide Saudi forces with equipment and experts to help them counter Houthi attacks, but wanted clear government plans before committing Egyptian troops to combat abroad.

Strategic ties with Gulf states

Egypt's close financial and investment ties with Gulf countries, particularly Saudi Arabia, make supporting Riyadh an important strategic consideration for Cairo. However, these relationships do not remove the need to assess the costs of military involvement.

Article 152 of Egypt's constitution stipulates that deploying troops on a combat mission outside the country requires consultation with the National Defence Council and approval by a two-thirds majority of parliament.

The vote is therefore a constitutional requirement, not merely a formality. Even if MPs approve the authorisation, this would not necessarily mean an immediate deployment or settle the form and timing of Egyptian involvement.

Granting the political leadership authority to act if necessary remains distinct from taking a specific executive decision on troop numbers, mission objectives and the theatre of operations.

This article was originally published by The New Arab's Arabic language edition, and has been translated into English. Click here to read the original Arabic version.

The Joint List, an alliance of predominantly Palestinian parties contesting Israel's 27 October Knesset elections, has made removing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right allies from power its main priority.

But while the alliance is prepared to help bring about a change of government, it insists that any support for an alternative to Netanyahu must come with clear conditions and must not compromise its political principles.

The Joint List brings together the Democratic Front for Peace and Equality (Hadash), the National Democratic Assembly (Balad) and the Arab Movement for Change (Ta'al).

The alliance has signalled that it is willing to use its parliamentary influence to help oust Netanyahu, potentially by providing outside support to an alternative government.

However, it has ruled out backing a government that expands illegal settlements, wages war or allows attacks on Al-Aqsa Mosque and other religious sites.

It also says it will not support a government that continues Israel's attacks in the occupied West Bank, its genocide in Gaza or violations against Palestinians in Jerusalem and inside Israel.

The Joint List's willingness to support a new government will depend on whether opposition parties agree to a minimum set of political demands.

These include tackling racism, addressing the violence and organised crime affecting Palestinian communities in Israel, advancing equality for Palestinian citizens and reopening dialogue with the Palestinian leadership.

Its approach differs from that of the United Arab List (Ra'am), led by Mansour Abbas, which is competing for the Palestinian vote.

While the Joint List favours supporting a government from outside parliament's governing coalition, Ra'am has expressed its willingness to directly join government, arguing that participation would give it greater influence over policy and help secure funding and services for Palestinian communities.

Despite their differences, both alliances face growing hostility and incitement from Israeli right-wing groups, raising concerns about possible intimidation and violence against Palestinian voters on election day.

Opinion polls suggest the two lists could win a combined 13 to 15 seats, potentially giving Palestinian voters a decisive role in determining the next government.

Much will depend on turnout among the more than one million eligible Palestinian voters in Israel, as well as the performance of other parties and whether they pass the electoral threshold.

Against this backdrop, The New Arab spoke to Balad leader Sami Abu Shehadeh, whose candidacy was previously disqualified by Israel's Supreme Court, about the election, the challenges facing Palestinian citizens of Israel and the Joint List's priorities in a possible post-Netanyahu political landscape.

Below is an edited version of the interview:

Q. You have been travelling extensively through Arab towns and villages. What is the mood like ahead of the election?

Abu Shehadeh: We are just one week away from election day, and it is a decisive moment. We are out every day meeting people in our towns and villages. In nearly 30 years of political work, I have never seen Palestinian citizens of Israel, both men and women, so ready to go out and vote. Our aim is to achieve a turnout of more than 70%, a level we have not seen in years. But reaching that target will require even more work.

Q. You are aiming to win 10 seats, but opinion polls put you at eight or nine. Is your target realistic?

Abu Shehadeh: Week after week, the polls have shown turnout projections rising. And every day, as we travel through our communities, we see strong support for the Joint List.

We are now entering the final week, which is both the most important and the most difficult. The Israeli far right exists in both political camps, Netanyahu's bloc and the bloc opposing him.

I believe the more they recognise the strength and political influence of Palestinians in Israel, the more the incitement against us will intensify. We are also concerned that this could escalate into violence. There is no precedent in human history for a far-right fascist government like the one currently ruling Israel losing an election and accepting the result. We are facing a critical week, with extremely sensitive and difficult issues at stake.

Q. Are you concerned that Arab voters could face restrictions at polling stations, including extremist monitors attempting to prevent them from voting?

Abu Shehadeh: Ultimately, elections come down to numbers. The attacks on Palestinians in Israel and attempts to suppress turnout are driven by electoral calculations. Israel's Jewish majority is split into two almost equally matched political camps. The Knesset has 120 seats, and opinion polls put each camp at around 50 seats, give or take a few. That means Arab voters will decide this election.

This explains the attempts to target and disqualify the Joint List, the United Arab List, Hadash candidate and Knesset member Ofer Cassif, and Balad. My own candidacy was effectively disqualified, and we are now hearing about further measures aimed at reducing turnout among Arab voters. We have also seen growing incitement and physical attacks against male and female students, as well as bus drivers. This is not a simple battle. Israeli Jewish society is deeply racist, and it now faces a major challenge: the majority cannot decide the election on its own. The votes of the Arab minority will determine the outcome.

In a normal country, there would be nothing unusual about that. But because of racism in Israel, the prospect is seen as a serious threat. That is why we are so concerned about what could happen in the coming days.

Q. How do you intend to use this potentially decisive influence?

Abu Shehadeh: Our community makes up around 20% of Israel's population, and we have the power to decide this election. That is exactly what we intend to do. Our first priority is to prevent the government responsible for genocide from returning to power. We will do everything we can to achieve that.

Q. You have also criticised the opposition bloc that could replace Netanyahu, saying you do not trust it. Isn't that a contradiction?

Abu Shehadeh: There is no contradiction. The political reality in Israel is extremely difficult. There is no peace camp, no political bloc committed to ending the occupation, and no camp seeking to build a democratic state based on justice and equality.

The choices are bad. For the Joint List and Arab society, the choice is between bad and worse. That is not an easy position to be in. We say this openly and explain it to people. Our community is educated and politically aware. People understand the situation for themselves.

In this existential struggle, our first priority is to stop the bloodshed, ease people's suffering and preserve the hope that change will one day be possible. Netanyahu and his ministers, Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, have made it clear that they want to continue the genocide in Gaza and "resolve" the situation in the West Bank, by which they mean ethnic cleansing. They also want to deal with Palestinian citizens of Israel, who are already facing political persecution and restrictions.The situation is extremely dangerous.

At times like these, political leaders must act wisely and responsibly and make difficult decisions. We are not pretending that there is a good option. We wish there were, but there isn't. We say that with great pain. We would have welcomed a genuine partner among Israel's Zionist parties, one that wanted to end the war and work towards peace.

Q. But wouldn't providing a "safety net" for an alternative government come at a political cost?

Abu Shehadeh: There has been a misunderstanding about what we mean by a safety net. I was the first to propose the idea. The safety net we are talking about is for our people and our communities. It is intended to protect them from the racist policies targeting Palestinians and the Palestinian cause.

We have never used the term in the Israeli political sense of providing a safety net for one Zionist politician or another. We proposed it as a way of protecting our community, because our people need security.

Our people are suffering everywhere: in Gaza, the occupied West Bank, Jerusalem and inside Israel. One of the most urgent problems facing Palestinian citizens of Israel is organised crime. Our communities need security. That is why we formed the Joint List, bringing three parties together to create a political force capable of protecting our people. That is what we mean by a safety net, not the way the term is understood in Israeli politics.

Q. But wouldn't such a safety net also benefit the political bloc opposed to Netanyahu?

Abu Shehadeh:  First, there is no single possible outcome to this election. We are facing a situation in which Israel's Jewish majority is divided into two political camps of almost equal strength. Some Zionist parties are hovering around the electoral threshold, and whether they make it into the Knesset could have a major impact on the results.

There are several possible scenarios—Netanyahu could refuse to accept the election results. A national unity government could emerge. Or all the right-wing and far-right parties could pass the electoral threshold, allowing Netanyahu to return to power. There are other possibilities too. We cannot know the outcome in advance.

Once the results are announced, we will sit down, examine them carefully, consider what they mean for our people and our cause, discuss the options and then decide how to proceed.

Q. What is your message to Arab voters ahead of the election?

Abu Shehadeh: We have developed a political programme with the help of dozens of professionals, specialists and political leaders. It addresses the most urgent demands of our people, and by that I mean the entire Palestinian people.

We see the Joint List as a source of security for our people in what is the most important election we have faced since the Nakba. Our list brings together an exceptional group of candidates with expertise in different fields, setting us apart from competing lists in both Arab and Jewish politics. They have the energy, experience and knowledge needed to represent people's concerns and confront the major challenges ahead.

What I have been telling people in recent days is that the time has come to reap what we have sown. We must turn out in large numbers and bring down this government after four years of oppression, persecution, genocide, ethnic cleansing, home demolitions, rampant crime and suffering on every front. We have an opportunity to bring about change.

The Joint List has a political programme that is different from both Netanyahu's camp and the bloc led by Gadi Eisenkot. We want to end the war and work towards peace and a political solution between the two peoples, based on justice, equality, freedom and human rights. Our community wants change. It wants to stop Netanyahu and his gang from returning to power.

The decision is in our hands. That is why we need a strong Joint List, and why we must push turnout above 70%. With enough determination, we can achieve that.

As for what happens after the election, we will deal with those scenarios when the time comes.

This interview was originally published by The New Arab's Arabic language edition, and has been translated into English. Click here to read the original Arabic version.

Dozens of prominent writers, actors, musicians and activists have rallied behind Irish novelist Sally Rooney after her books were withdrawn from sale in Britain over her support for the banned pro-Palestinian group Palestine Action.

The open letter, titled "Sally Rooney is a writer, not a terrorist", was published on the front page of British political magazine New Statesman, condemning the withdrawal of her books as an attack on freedom of expression.

Among the signatories include acclaimed authors Zadie Smith, Ahdaf Soueif, Arundhati Roy and Nobel Prize-winning writer Annie Ernaux, alongside actors Paul Mescal, Daisy Edgar-Jones, Tilda Swinton and Susan Sarandon.

The intervention comes amid growing controversy over Britain's decision to proscribe Palestine Action under anti-terrorism legislation, a move that has sparked concerns about the criminalisation of pro-Palestinian activism and the wider implications for civil liberties.

Rooney, one of the most prominent novelists of her generation, has been an outspoken supporter of Palestinian rights and has refused to distance herself from Palestine Action despite the legal and commercial consequences.

The group, known for direct-action protests targeting companies linked to Israel's military, was proscribed by the British government as a terrorist organisation. The designation remains the subject of legal challenges.

Last year, Rooney pledged to donate proceeds from her books and their television adaptations to Palestine Action, turning her literary success into a source of financial support for the pro-Palestinian movement.

However, her position has placed her at the centre of a growing dispute over whether Britain's anti-terrorism laws are being used to restrict political expression and solidarity with Palestinians.

In November 2025, Rooney revealed that Element Pictures, the Irish production company behind the television adaptation of her bestselling novel Normal People, had warned that paying her royalties could breach British law if she intended to donate the money to Palestine Action.

Her publisher, Faber, subsequently announced that it would no longer supply her books, prompting widespread criticism from fellow writers and public figures.

But the controversy appears to have fuelled renewed interest in Rooney's work.

On Wednesday, The Guardian reported that sales of her books had surged by nearly 300% in the week following Faber's announcement.

Rooney's Normal People has sold more than one million copies in Britain alone, while its television adaptation helped establish her as one of the country's most widely read contemporary authors.

'Sally Rooney is a writer, not a terrorist'

The open letter denounces the withdrawal of Rooney's books and urges the British government to change the legislation that has led to their removal from sale.

"Sally Rooney is a writer, not a terrorist. Her books must be available to the public," the signatories declare.

They describe the withdrawal of her books as "an affront to basic principles of free speech and expression so long taken for granted in this country".

"We categorically reject censorship – whether direct or indirect – and urge the government to change course, amending the legislation which has led us to this point of repressive absurdity."

The letter brings together some of the most recognisable figures in British and international culture, including Oscar winners Jessie Buckley and Jonathan Glazer, filmmaker Asif Kapadia, Irish musician CMAT and former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Mescal and Edgar-Jones, who starred in the acclaimed television adaptation of Normal People, also added their names, publicly standing alongside the author whose work helped propel them to international fame.

Other signatories include British football presenter Gary Lineker, Massive Attack musician Robert Del Naja, Irish rap group Kneecap, author Omar El Akkad and Palestinian-British writer and activist Ahdaf Soueif.

Their collective intervention has placed renewed attention on the consequences of Britain's Palestine Action ban, particularly its impact on artists, writers and public figures who openly support Palestinian rights.

Inside a displacement tent in al-Mawasi, a crowded camp on Gaza’s southern coast, Yahya Abu Lahia sits on a plastic chair, holding a small brush and sweeping dust and sand off a piece of mosaic.

"We extracted this piece of mosaic from under the rubble of Youssef al-Astal’s house, which held dozens of valuable artefacts before the war on Gaza," Yahya told The New Arab, referring to a farmer who spent a lifetime gathering Byzantine and Islamic antiquities, including column capitals, tombstones and pottery.

Youssef fled his home in eastern Khan Yunis at the start of Israel's genocide in Gaza. Heavy bombardment later hit the area, and his house was partially destroyed by Israeli occupation forces' operations.

"During the search, I found pieces of mosaic, and I rescued them and put them together," said the 28-year-old. "It was one of the happiest moments of my life."

Yahya is a field technician with Guardians of Heritage, a volunteer team of about 20 men and women that digs for artefacts in bombed buildings across Gaza, then cleans, photographs and catalogues them.

The group launched in 2024 under the Mayasem Association for Culture and Arts, a Gaza-based nonprofit.

It won the 2026 PNT Heritage Award for Community Engagement and Social Inclusion, a regional prize run by the Petra National Trust — a Jordanian heritage group, with the European Union’s delegation to Jordan.

Volunteers recovered the pieces from Youssef's house in al-Qarara near Khan Younis — where he had collected antiquities since childhood and amassed about 74 historical pieces — by digging through the rubble and sifting sand by hand with basic tools.

"Our work under the rubble isn’t a traditional archaeological excavation," said Shaimaa al-Natour, assistant coordinator of Mayasem’s heritage protection programme.

"We work in exceptional conditions that demand extreme caution, because we may come across unstable stones, concrete blocks and fragile pieces that can be damaged simply by moving them."

She said items are bagged or boxed and taken to a storeroom, a corner of the tent, for cleaning, photographing, and archiving.

The team is building a digital archive of every rescued item, backed by the ALIPH Foundation, a fund for heritage in conflict zones, and The Palestinian Museum.

It has documented more than 1,000 pieces of movable heritage so far, Shaimaa said, and the work continues.

One mission was the destroyed al-Qarara Cultural Museum, which held 3,500 pieces before Israel's war on the besieged enclave. 

Storing the finds is a challenge in itself.

The team faces a shortage of suitable packing and conservation materials, and struggles to provide a stable environment that protects the artefacts from humidity, dust and temperature fluctuations.

"My belief in the need to protect our cultural heritage is what drove me to volunteer and work with my own hands in the middle of this war," said Yahya.

"With every piece we find and restore, I feel I have saved part of my city’s memory."

Heritage's 'first line of defence'

The Gaza Strip, a narrow coastal territory on the ancient trade route between Egypt and the Levant, was home to about 130 archaeological sites and at least a dozen local museums before Israel's genocide began, spanning the Bronze Age to the Ottoman era, along with museums, mosques and churches that held centuries of Palestinian history.

As of March 2026, UNESCO had verified damage to 164 sites in Gaza since October 7, 2023, including 14 religious sites, 128 buildings of historical or artistic interest, three depositories of movable cultural property, nine monuments, two museums and eight archaeological sites.

It used satellite imagery analysed by UNOSAT, the UN’s satellite agency, and, since an October 2025 ceasefire, rapid on-site assessments where access allows.

Gaza’s Government Media Office said in February that Israeli occupation forces had destroyed 835 mosques completely, damaged 180 partly and destroyed 40 of the Strip's 60 cemeteries.

The office and the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities say 12 local and private museums have been destroyed and looted.

Itimad Abu Amra, 23, joined the Guardians of Heritage team at its launch, after working at the al-Qarara museum since 2018.

Her most recent mission was the Abu Salim Mosque in Deir al-Balah, central Gaza, which was built in 1951 and used for Quran memorisation circles and community activities. Israeli warplanes struck it on August 25, causing widespread destruction, she said.

"When conditions allowed, we went straight to the Abu Salim Mosque, and we found historic limestone blocks and a collection of important and valuable books," she said.

"The moment you find an artefact in the rubble, you feel you are facing a trust that must be handled responsibly."

Hamouda al-Dahdar, a cultural heritage expert, called the volunteers "the first and courageous line of defence of human heritage," but said such groups are "in dire and urgent need of institutional and international support."

He called on UNESCO and other UN bodies to go beyond statements and provide direct funding, technical help, damage assessments and missions of international experts. 

Hamouda also described the destruction of Gaza’s heritage as "a clear attempt to erase the living material evidence of the identity and historical memory of the Palestinian people."

UNESCO says it is already working on the ground. Together with the Centre for Cultural Heritage Preservation, it has stabilised five heritage sites in Gaza’s Old City, has seven more underway, and has trained local professionals in damage assessment and emergency stabilisation.

The agency has also called on the international community to "increase support and investment" to scale up the work.

"The Gaza Strip is a unique historical bridge of civilisations," Hamouda said, pointing to Gaza’s Bronze and Iron Age, Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine and Islamic layers.

"Heritage is the living memory of existence. The work continues from within the rubble to protect our identity and pass it on to future generations."

For the team, Shaimaa said, the tent is a symbol.

"It’s a message to the community that a museum isn’t just a building or exhibition hall,” she said, adding that its role can continue in the simplest spaces, as long as people protect its collections and pass their stories on.

"Gaza isn’t only the destruction we see today," she said.

"It’s thousands of years of history, civilisation and human memory, and protecting it is a collective responsibility."

Ismail Nofal is a Gaza-based journalist specialising in human interest stories

This article was published in collaboration with Egab

French retail giant Carrefour has seen its shares plunge by 13.8% following widespread unrest in France, adding to mounting pressure already faced by the company from pro-Palestinian boycott campaigns across Arab markets due to its commercial ties with Israel.

The retailer lowered its financial forecasts for 2026 after dozens of its stores were damaged during protests in France on 17 and 18 October, estimating that the French unrest could cost it between €80 million and €200 million in operating profits.

Carrefour's shares fell sharply during trading on the Paris stock exchange, as the company warned that disruption to its operations, rising security costs and weakening consumer spending would weigh on its performance for the remainder of the year.

The latest setback comes as Carrefour continues to face boycott campaigns linked to Israel's genocidal war on Gaza, with pro-Palestinian activists targeting the retailer over its partnerships with Israeli companies and allegations that its Israeli franchisees have supported Israeli soldiers.

Unrest hits French operations

Carrefour chief executive Alexandre Bompard told financial analysts on Tuesday that around 50 stores had been damaged on the first day of unrest, with several suffering extensive looting and destruction.

Other branches were closed as a precaution amid fears of further attacks, while employees and business partners faced what Bompard described as extremely difficult conditions.

Chief financial officer Matthieu Malige estimated direct losses at tens of millions of euros, including stolen or destroyed merchandise, damage to stores and equipment, and temporary closures.

The company has also been forced to increase spending on security, including hiring external guards, while restrictions on commercial activity remain in place.

Carrefour operates approximately 6,000 stores across France, with a significant presence in Paris, Lyon and Marseille.

Even stores that escaped physical damage have experienced falling customer numbers, reduced opening hours and other operational difficulties.

The disruption followed protests over the rising cost of living and conditions in the education sector, some of which descended into violence and looting. French authorities imposed partial and localised curfews in affected urban areas.

Following the unrest, Carrefour reduced its forecast for improvement in its operating margin to between zero and 0.15 percentage points, down from an earlier target of 0.25 percentage points.

It now expects adjusted earnings per share to remain broadly stable or increase only slightly compared with 2025, having previously forecast growth of between 7% and 9%.

The company also revised its free cash flow outlook from slight growth to a slight decline.

In a statement on Tuesday, Carrefour announced plans to reduce investment in France for the remainder of the year, cutting its annual capital expenditure target from €1.7 billion to €1.6 billion.

The company attributed the decision to weaker customer demand and rising security and logistics costs.

Financial research firm AlphaValue estimated that the unrest could wipe out between 20% and 55% of Carrefour's expected fourth-quarter operating profit in France.

The disruption comes at a particularly difficult time for retailers, with the Black Friday and Christmas shopping periods approaching.

Carrefour faces the prospect of accumulating unsold non-food products, potentially forcing it to introduce deeper discounts and placing additional pressure on cash flow.

Bompard described the situation facing the company in France as unprecedented, citing uncertainty over consumer spending and the ability of stores to remain open.

Further demonstrations are expected on Saturday and 5 November, raising concerns about additional disruption.

Gaza boycott campaigns add to pressure across Arab markets

Alongside its difficulties in France, Carrefour has faced sustained boycott campaigns in several Arab countries over its commercial relationships with Israeli businesses amid Israel's genocidal war on Gaza.

The Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement has targeted the French retailer over its partnership with Israeli electronics and retail company Electra Consumer Products and its subsidiary Yenot Bitan.

The Palestinian BDS National Committee launched a global boycott campaign against Carrefour in December 2022, before expanding it following the outbreak of the Gaza war in October 2023.

The committee has accused Carrefour's Israeli franchisees of supporting Israeli soldiers through the distribution of gifts and food packages and the organisation of fundraising initiatives.

The allegations have fuelled calls for consumers to avoid Carrefour stores and products, particularly across the Middle East and North Africa.

By October 2025, the Carrefour brand had disappeared from Jordan, Oman, Bahrain and Kuwait, where stores were replaced by the HyperMax brand.

The regional retail business operated by UAE-based Majid Al Futtaim, which runs Carrefour franchises across several Arab countries, reported an 11% decline in revenue to 11.6 billion dirhams ($3.16 billion) in the first half of 2024.

Its earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation fell by 47% to 278 million dirhams ($75.7 million).

In its financial statement issued on 27 August 2024, the group attributed the decline to weaker sales and consumer confidence linked to the regional conflict.

In Morocco, Rachid Hadni, chairman of LabelVie, which operates Carrefour stores in the country, acknowledged that the brand had suffered in 2024 and that efforts were underway to regain customers, according to French newspaper Le Monde in April 2025.

LabelVie's revenue growth slowed from 13% in 2023 to 3.9% in 2024, despite opening 24 new Carrefour stores.

In Tunisia, pro-Palestinian demonstrations outside Carrefour outlets in April 2025 prompted several branches to close temporarily.

The boycott campaigns have become part of a broader movement targeting international companies maintaining commercial relationships that benefit Israel amid its genocide in Gaza.

Less than two weeks before the 2026 US midterms, progressive candidate Connie Chan held a rally in her bid to step into the seat of outgoing Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.

She didn’t hold back in calling for an arms embargo on Israel, the abolition of ICE and to take money out of politics.

Tuesday evening, at the University of California, Berkeley, Chan, a San Francisco supervisor who is running for San Francisco’s District 11, told a crowd of several hundred: "We deserve better."

She was joined by Congress members Ro Khanna and Aisha Wahab, congressional candidate Angela Gonzales-Torres and other progressive leaders.

She was standing on the university’s Savio Steps at Sproul Plaza, a site known for free speech and anti-war activism, a symbolic venue for a candidate who, if elected to one of the most prominent seats in Congress, would try to make profound changes to the Democratic Party.

"This is our moment and we have to meet this moment," she said.

In her speech, she railed against AI, ICE corporate funding of elections and billionaires, and urged for the funding of universal healthcare.

"We need to fund Medicare right now. We need to abolish ICE right now," she said.

She spent a significant portion of her speech emphasising the importance of using her platform to advocate for Palestinians.

"This is a moment that we also have to stand in solidarity with the Palestinian community," she said, as she was met with some of the loudest applause of the evening.

"It is a moment that requires leadership and moral clarity that we demand our Congress be able to cast their vote, our vote, with conscience to end the genocide in Gaza and to end apartheid state," she said. "We must call for a full arms embargo. We will not rest until we have a full arms embargo on the Israeli government."

"Let’s not look the other way. We cannot look the other way. We cannot allow politicians, anyone, to look the other way and give us simply lip service. People in Gaza deserve more than lip service. They deserve a vote," she added.

Chan’s opponent, Scott Wiener, a California state senator, also a Democrat, is considered the more moderate option in the race. He is supported by the business community, large AI companies and the Democratic Party establishment.

Chan, who is considered the underdog in the race, trailing Wiener in a tight race, is supported by Pelosi, Bernie Sanders and the Working Families Party.

Last week, the forensic digital security NGO Citizen Lab documented a cyberattack it named Adfection. It was found on 45 Al Jazeera journalists’ computers. It used zero-click spyware created by Israeli spyware developer Candiru, which implanted malware in ads displayed on a web page. It infected the computer and gave access to nearly every user activity, including email, texts, video and audio, browser activity, etc. The targeted user did not have to click on a link or download a file.

The campaign required an online company to buy the ads which compromised the device. It was an Israeli company called Discover-Tech. Its platform, Controlium, strips the anonymity of targeted individuals even if they have encrypted or masked their digital footprint. The ads also covertly directed millions of devices to Candiru’s servers, where their content was harvested for large-scale tracking and reconnaissance.

Citizen Lab noted that Discover Tech purports to be a legitimate ad company. But in reality, it is a front for large-scale Israeli espionage

This campaign required a second player, the spyware firm, Candiru. Ironically, it was named for an Amazonian fish which feeds on the blood of host fishes. Considering its business model, the name seems apt. Candiru wrote the code which was implanted with the ads. They then placed the ads on specific websites visited by targeted individuals.

Its partner, Discover-Tech, not only placed the ads but also amassed geo-data that let it identify and track targets, a process known as microtargeting. They track users’ physical location and follow their movements. The spyware also tracks devices in cellular, Wi-Fi, or VPN modes.

Discover-Tech placed 4 billion ad bids. The ads were served on 200,000 different Android and Apple apps and various websites. In particular, they targeted defence, foreign affairs, internal security, military and intelligence bodies. These agencies included NATO, the Pentagon, the International Criminal Court, Israeli government ministries (foreign, defence, police), and the European Parliament. In all, users in 23 countries were attacked.

Candiru, which designed Adfection, has led a mysterious existence since its founding in 2014. It has changed its name repeatedly to skirt sanctions and accountability. It is currently named Integrity Labs. Another bit of irony considering the “integrity” of malware design.

Its website claims it is based in Hong Kong with offices in various Asian cities. It doesn’t mention Herzliya, where it was founded and where its CEO is based.

In fact, Israeli companies seeking to shield themselves from exposure and avoid potential interference from Israeli regulations employ a well-known subterfuge by moving operations abroad. Similarly, Integrity Labs’ peripatetic existence “created a corporate buffer to distance its operations from US sanctions [against Candiru] while continuing to deploy surveillance tools.”

Who engineered the spyware campaign?

Citizen Lab declined to identify which country or government entity managed this overall project. It seems highly likely it was Israel, considering a majority of those targeted were either in Europe or the Middle East.

The most likely Israeli source for such a campaign is the IDF’s SIGINT branch, Unit 8200, whose mission is to intercept communications using precisely the tools developed by Candiru/Integrity Labs. 

Israel also has explicit interest in many of the entities targeted, including the Pentagon, ICC and Al Jazeera. Though Adfection appeared on Pentagon computers, Citizen Lab did not indicate whether US intelligence assets were attacked as well.

Israel is a world leader in developing surveillance, spyware, and cyber-attack products. The IDF field tests many of them in Palestine, which is among the most surveilled places on earth. There are tens of thousands of CCTV cameras, facial recognition technology, AI, drones, telecommunication intercepts, and a massive database compiled on every individual Palestinian.

Israel's primary signals intelligence corps, Unit 8200, has created multiple AI-based tools to exert control over a restive population. Among them are Where’s Daddy, Ha’bsorah (“Good News”), and Fire Factory. The AI program, Lavender, assigns a 1 to 100 score for all 2.5 million Gazans to determine if they should be killed. In other words, artificial intelligence makes life-and-death decisions leading to the murder of thousands of Palestinians.

Many Israeli companies like NSO Group, Candiru, Intellexa, Cellebrite, Circles and Paragon were founded by Unit 8200 veterans. They are leaders in the development of spyware used by police and intelligence agencies throughout the world to surveil—and even murder--human rights activists, journalists (among them, Jamal Khashoggi), and lawyers. They are products of the Israeli surveillance state, exported worldwide along with the oppressive values they represent.

Israel has created a Brave New World of digital surveillance and sold it to some of the most dangerous individuals and repressive regimes on earth. It is a World of chaos and cruelty, like Hobbes' war of all against all.

International bodies like the United Nations appear unable or unwilling to impose any regulation on these nefarious tools, which pose a grave threat to democracy, justice and human rights.

Richard Silverstein writes the Tikun Olam blog and is a freelance journalist specialising in exposing secrets of the Israeli national security state. He campaigns against opacity and the negative impact of Israeli military censorship.

Follow Richard on X: @richards1052

Have questions or comments? Email us at: editorial-english@newarab.com

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff.

"I was taking my right hand and putting it on my heart, saying, ‘It’s okay, it’s okay, maalish, maalish,’" recalls Dina Mahmoud, founder of M3lesh UK, a community initiative that brings people together through music, cultural events, and wellbeing activities. "When I did that, I felt very, very calm, and I became attached to the name."

An Egyptian Arabic expression meaning ‘it’s okay’ or ‘never mind’, the word 'maalish' became a source of comfort for Dina during a difficult period after moving to the UK.

Three months after arriving, Dina was diagnosed with a serious medical condition and spent more than six months in hospital. Away from her family, she began to understand the importance of emotional support during recovery.

"They wanted me to understand that this wasn't the end of life, that I still had a chance and needed to have hope," she says, recalling the nurses who encouraged her to stay hopeful.

After leaving hospital, Mahmoud travelled to Egypt to visit her parents, who had not known the full extent of her illness. During the trip, her brother gave her a keyring bearing the word 'maalish'. Having already found comfort in the phrase, she was struck by the coincidence and began to wonder whether it could mean something more.

The gift also prompted her to think about people facing difficult circumstances without the support she had received. She wondered how many people across the UK were dealing with serious illness, grief, domestic abuse or the challenges of building a life away from family, often without anyone to turn to.

"I was thinking about how many people in the UK were suffering on their own," she shares. 

That concern eventually led Mahmoud to establish M3lesh UK around a year and a half ago. Having lived in the UK for more than 15 years, she understood how difficult it could be to build a support network far from home. She wanted to create a space where people could meet, talk openly about their problems and find help without feeling ashamed of what they were going through.

Raising awareness through community

As Dina puts it, M3lesh UK is built around three pillars: awareness, stress relief and networking. Together, they aim to help people understand their wellbeing, manage everyday pressures and build relationships with others.

One of the initiative's key partnerships is with the NHS Be Well hub, which provides free mental health training in Arabic.

M3lesh UK also works with the Stroke Association to raise awareness of stroke and the importance of recognising warning signs.

Meanwhile, her The Power of You workshop focuses on building mental resilience, helping participants recognise their strengths and develop ways to navigate personal and professional challenges. Through these sessions, Dina hopes to make conversations about mental wellbeing more accessible, particularly within Arabic-speaking communities.

“It's not a shame to say that I am not okay," she says. "Come and say that you are not okay, and we are going to help you through our awareness sessions, workshops and events."

Music, movement and connection

Alongside awareness sessions, music has become one of M3lesh UK's main ways of bringing people together. During her recovery, listening to music and the Quran helped Dina feel calmer, inspiring her to organise events that could offer others a similar experience.

One of the initiative's early gatherings featured the London Arab Orchestra, with audiences encouraged to sing along and take part in the performance.

This idea continues through Yalla Nighani, M3lesh UK's Arab music events. Its latest gathering attracted around 1,500 people, bringing attendees together to celebrate their music and culture.

The initiative has also organised anniversary celebrations, Ramadan iftars and suhoors, giving people opportunities to meet outside their everyday routines.

M3lesh UK has also used its activities to encourage conversations about women's health. A five-day retreat in Soma Bay, Egypt, brought together women from Iraqi, Tunisian, Algerian, Lebanese, Egyptian and Nubian backgrounds.

The retreat also welcomed women from Morocco, the UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain, and included a breast cancer awareness session. Dina hopes to build on this work through further retreats, including a planned trip to Luxor and Aswan in December, as well as somatic movement and belly dance classes.

These activities reflect Dina's belief that wellbeing also involves having time to relax, enjoy yourself and connect with others.

Building cultural connections

For Dina, bringing people together also means creating opportunities for different Arab communities to connect through their shared heritage.

One example is her relationship with Emirati engineer Latifa Bent Eissa, who gifted Dina a piece of artwork carrying a humanitarian message from the UAE to people everywhere. Dina sees the gesture as a reminder of how cultural exchange can build understanding and bring people together across borders.

M3lesh UK also welcomes people of different backgrounds and genders. Mahmoud says men have approached M3lesh UK for support after separation or divorce, while others in their late 30s and 40s have said they want to find a partner and get married. These conversations have highlighted the need for spaces where people can discuss relationships without feeling judged.

The initiative is also developing camping trips and M3lesh UK Plus, a weekly gathering where people can share meals, listen to music, dance and build friendships.

Dina hopes these activities will help international students living away from family and young people who feel disconnected from their family's country of origin find a greater sense of belonging.

Practical support when it matters most

While social activities help people build connections, some need more direct assistance. M3lesh UK has built a network of volunteers, including solicitors, financial advisers, and doctors, who can help people access practical support. Dina also supports Syrian refugees in Oxford, where she lives, through community events and talks on mental health and wellbeing.

She recalls helping a woman who had experienced domestic abuse and travelled to Egypt with her two young children. According to Dina, the woman's husband left with the children, taking her passport and phone.

Dina contacted a solicitor and other organisations to help the woman return to the UK. Volunteers met her at the airport, while another organisation helped arrange safe accommodation. The woman and her children are now safe, she says.

"Our work goes beyond community events. We also want to help people access legal and practical support when they don’t know where to turn," Dina tells The New Arab.

'A life well lived'

Alongside her community work, Dina has a background in business, healthcare recruitment and education. She previously worked as sales and marketing director at DHL and holds MSc qualifications in Digital Marketing and Business Management. She now connects healthcare providers with staff, including healthcare assistants and registered nurses, and provides teaching assistants for special educational needs schools.

For Dina, these different roles share a common aim: supporting people and helping them access the resources they need.

She says helping others through difficult experiences has also given her a sense of purpose.

"When I help someone who is struggling, especially someone going through something severe, it makes me happy," she says. "People need to be able to talk about their wellbeing and feel safe when they do."

As M3lesh UK grows, Dina hopes to build more partnerships and expand its activities, helping people access support, make connections and feel part of a community.

Under the initiative's logo is a phrase that sums up her vision: 'A life well lived'. For Dina, that means looking after yourself, looking after others and helping people feel that they belong.

Zainab Mehdi is a British Iraqi journalist and the Associate Features Editor at The New Arab. She holds a BSc in Modern History and International Relations from the University of Essex and an MA in Near and Middle Eastern Studies from SOAS

Follow her on Instagram: @zaiamehdi_/@zainabmehdiwrites_

On Sunday, Egypt announced that it would provide support to Saudi Arabia amid its ongoing war against Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebel group, which controls most of northern Yemen.

The decision required authorisation from Egypt’s parliament, which usually votes according to government directives. Parliament, however, decided to delay the vote, in what may be a sign of reluctance by the Egyptian state to get involved.

It is not yet clear what form Egypt’s support will take, and it is likely to be only “defensive”, focused mostly on the interception of Houthi missiles and drones and the protection of shipping through the Red Sea.

However, the prospective intervention has already brought back memories of Egypt’s disastrous involvement in the 1962-1970 civil war in what was then North Yemen.

Key figures associated with the Houthi movement have warned Egypt against intervening.

Abdul Qader Mortada, the president of the Houthis’ National Committee for Prisoners’ Affairs, said in a post on X that Egypt’s 1962 intervention in Yemen had led to its disastrous defeat in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, and that if it were to get involved again, that would also embolden Israel’s expansionist ambitions across the region.

Israel, which is engaged in wars in Lebanon, Iran and Gaza and aggressive military activity in Syria, offered Saudi Arabia “assistance” in the conflict with Yemen’s Houthis, but this has reportedly been rejected by Riyadh.

Egypt’s bitter memories of intervening in Yemen

When Egypt first intervened in Yemen in 1962, the Arab World split into two camps, amid the Cold War taking place in the wider world. On the one hand were the pro-Western monarchies such as Saudi Arabia and Jordan. On the other were those exemplified above all by President Gamal Abdul Nasser’s Egypt, which espoused a pan-Arabist and socialist ideology and was friendly to the Soviet Union.

Egypt, however, had suffered a series of setbacks across the region. In 1961, the United Arab Republic it had formed with Syria broke up, dashing the hopes for a pan-Arab union many people in the region wished for at the time, while strengthening the position of Egypt’s adversaries.

After the 14 July 1958 coup which overthrew the Iraqi monarchy, Egypt hoped that it would gain a new ally, but Iraq’s new leader Abdul Karim Qasim kept his distance from Nasser and his pan-Arab nationalist ideology. Egypt therefore was facing isolation in the Arab World.

However, when army officers in what was then North Yemen, led by Nasser adherent Abdullah Sallal, overthrew Yemen’s new Imam Muhammad al-Badr, who had only taken power one week previously, Egypt saw a chance to extend its influence in the Arab world, while curtailing that of Saudi Arabia, its chief rival at the time.

Yemen was at the time seen as one of the most backward countries in the Arab world. Its rulers, the Imams, held near-absolute political as well as religious power. While Egypt had maintained relatively good relations with the Imams under Nasser, Egyptian views of the country were marked by contempt.

Mohammed Hassanein Heikal, the editor-in-chief of Al-Ahram, who was seen as Nasser’s leading propagandist, wrote in reference to the country, “while some of the Arabs live in the twentieth century, others find themselves still existing in the conditions of the thirteenth century”.

The army coup which overthrew the Imamate and declared a republic was seen as a revolution against “subservience, backwardness and tyranny” with the aim of building an “emancipated modern republic” according to the Egyptian state-owned newspaper Al-Jumhuriya.

Vietnam on the Red Sea

However, these simplistic views belied a much more complex reality. Sallal’s coup was bloody, with many monarchist officials executed without trial. Imam Muhammad al-Badr managed to escape Sana’a despite initial reports of his death.

While the coup did have some popular support in North Yemen, particularly in the old capital Taiz and the southern provinces, Imam Muhammad, with crucial support from Saudi Arabia, managed to rally northern tribes to his cause.

Saudi Arabia’s assistance to the Imam spurred an Egyptian decision to intervene militarily. Any abandonment of the “revolution” in Yemen would have been seen as a major setback to “progressive” forces in the Arab world.

Within two months, 15,000 Egyptian troops were in Yemen, and their number would increase to 70,000 by late 1965.

Egypt poured troops, money and resources into a war it could not win. While Saudi Arabia was its main opponent, ironically it was in a similar position to the one that Riyadh found itself in after it decided to intervene against the Houthis in 2015.

The result was a disaster, caused by what Adeed Dawisha called in a 1975 academic paper Egypt’s “almost total ignorance of the social and political conditions of Yemen”.

More than 10,000 Egyptian troops were killed, and Egypt was beset by massive war debts, but Nasser couldn’t afford the loss of face that would come with withdrawal.

Egypt even used chemical weapons in the conflict, killing an estimated 1,500 people. The conflict soon became known as “Egypt’s Vietnam”.

Its involvement in the Yemen war was one of the key causes of its humiliating defeat by Israel in 1967, and it was forced to withdraw from Yemen after that. The North Yemen Civil War kept going for three more years after that, ending with the victory of republican forces.

Parallels with today

Today Egypt finds itself contemplating intervention in Yemen again (albeit in a limited form) on the same side as Saudi Arabia, which opposed it and did so much to curtail its regional influence in the previous Yemen war.

Arguably, Saudi Arabia made many of the same mistakes Egypt did in the 1960s, underestimating the tenacity and ability of its opponents to resist it and the regional dynamics involved.

Saudi Arabia’s 2015 intervention against the Houthis was motivated by fear of being surrounded by the growing regional influence of Iran at the time.

Its involvement was – at least partially - responsible for what the UN previously described as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, and it was unable to dislodge the Houthis from the Yemeni capital Sana’a and their northern strongholds.

After the Yemen conflict reignited last September, the US refused to support Saudi Arabia militarily.

Saudi Arabia has looked for other allies almost everywhere, turning to Turkey and Pakistan, its allies in the Mecca Defence Pact, who initially seemed reluctant to get involved.

Egypt’s reliance today on Saudi aid and investment and its concerns over the Houthis’ presence on the Red Sea are perhaps the key drivers for its potential intervention in Yemen.

However, its past experience in Yemen has important parallels with today and suggests that both Saudi Arabia’s renewed war in the country – and any Egyptian involvement in it – will be long, complex and unpredictable.

Egyptian authorities on Wednesday evening ordered the release on bail of Lina Attalah, co-founder and editor-in-chief of independent news website Mada Masr, after summoning her for questioning in the latest case brought against her, amid a continued crackdown on journalists in the country.

The decision came hours after Attalah's questioning began. Mada Masr said the session lasted around three hours at the Supreme State Security Prosecution's headquarters in New Cairo and was attended by her defence team.

The summons sent to Attalah did not specify the reasons for the investigation or the allegations in the new case. No further official details have been announced.

The latest summons followed the publication of a Mada Masr report detailing complaints by detainees who said they had been subjected to violations inside Egyptian prisons.

"Prosecutors have been investigating Mada Masr Editor-in-Chief Lina Attalah for three hours at the headquarters of the Supreme State Security Prosecution in New Cairo. Her defence team has been present with her throughout the questioning. The investigation session is ongoing," Mada Masr wrote on X on Wednesday.

The news site said this was the sixth case brought against the outlet, its journalists or its editor-in-chief over the past six years.

The most recent was in August 2025, when the State Security Prosecution ordered Attalah's release on bail of 30,000 Egyptian pounds after charging her with "publishing false news" and "using a website without a licence".

Egyptian authorities arrested Attalah in May 2020 while she was interviewing Laila Soueif, the mother of political activist Alaa Abdel Fattah, outside Tora Prison, where he was being held at the time. Attalah was detained for seven hours before being released on bail.

The latest summons comes amid mounting pressure and a continued crackdown on press freedom in Egypt. In September, authorities arrested six journalists from the fact-checking platform Matsad2sh (Don't Believe It).

After five days in secret detention under the country's anti-terrorism law, the six journalists appeared before the Supreme State Security Prosecution.

Some said they had been subjected to torture and ill-treatment, including blindfolding, being handcuffed behind their backs, being stripped of their clothes, beatings and electric shocks.

On 13 October, the prosecution ordered the journalists' detention to be extended by a further 15 days pending investigation by the Supreme State Security Prosecution. They face charges of joining and financing a "terrorist group" and "publishing false news".

Egypt ranks 169th out of 180 countries in Reporters Without Borders' 2026 World Press Freedom Index. The organisation says 18 Egyptian journalists are currently behind bars.

A man with a disability was killed Thursday by the Israeli army during an attack on southern Syria, where it has stepped up its invasion, Syrian state news agency said.

Since the fall of Bashar al-Assad in December 2024, the Israeli army has carried out hundreds of strikes in Syria and regular invasions into its territory.

"A civilian with a disability was killed Thursday by fire from the Israeli occupation forces during their incursion into the village of Jamla" in Deraa province, SANA news agency said.

Israeli forces deployed in one neighbourhood of the village and placed snipers on the rooftops after bombing the area late on Wednesday, the report said.

After Ahmed al-Sharaa came to power in Damascus in late 2024, Israel launched hundreds of strikes against Syria.

The Israeli military also expanded its occupation of Syria's south and deployed troops in the UN-monitored buffer zone along on the occupied Syrian Golan Heights.

In recent days, Israeli forces have also uprooted vast olive groves in Quneitra province, near Deraa, according to the agency.

Trees were destroyed across an area of about 1.3 hectares by the village of Saida, SANA said. The village faces the buffer zone where the Israeli army has been building fortifications.

"Tanks entered my land without any warning," Mohammad Ali al-Chaghla, 58, the owner of the field, told AFP. "They cut down and destroyed some 400 trees during their incursion."

The Syrian Foreign Ministry on Sunday condemned "the intensification of incursions by the Israeli occupation" in Quneitra and Deraa.

Israeli officials have repeatedly stated their intention to maintain troops in the "security zone".

The two countries have launched negotiations to reach a security agreement, so far without success due to Israeli actions.