❌

Reading view

World Food Programme cuts aid to 500,000 Palestinians in Gaza

The UN World Food Programme has said funding shortages are forcing major cuts to its aid programme in Gaza, leaving about 500,000 people without monthly food support in a territory where two-thirds of the population struggle to get enough to eat.

The WFP said it was reducing the number of recipients of its monthly assistance from 1.6 million to 1.1 million.

In addition, food rations have been halved, cash assistance has been cut for 75,000 families, and daily hot meals for those unable to cook have fallen to 150,000 from 250,000, with some families in hard-to-reach areas now receiving a hot meal only every other day.

The WFP said about 1.4 million people, or two-thirds of Gaza's population, face crisis levels of food insecurity or worse, including roughly 200,000 people in emergency conditions.

Last year's US-brokered Gaza ceasefire calls for the eventual reconstruction of the territory. But little progress has been made towards implementing a deal to end the conflict that includes terms for Hamas to disarm and Israel to withdraw its troops.

Life is still brutal in Gaza, says acting head of WFP

"It's a year into the agreement of this ceasefire. Well, life is still brutal here. There is no proper shelter...There are no basic services. There is no safety, no security," acting Executive Director of the WFP Carl Skau told Reuters in Gaza.

"These cuts are happening just as we are facing the fourth winter. You know, I've been through the winters here, absolutely brutal," he added.

The WFP said it urgently needs $450 million over the next six months to maintain critical operations in Gaza and the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

"We tell the world now is not the time to look away. This is the time to step up to sustain this support, to protect the progress that has been made, but also to push for early recovery," said Skau.

Israeli forces still hold more than 60 percent of the territory and conduct almost daily airstrikes, while Hamas controls most of the area where more than two million Palestinians live, mostly in temporary shelters with what aid agencies call inadequate aid supplies.

The Gaza government media office described the WFP announcement as "catastrophic" and said it might accelerate famine in the enclave, calling for more fund to aid agencies to prevent it.

"On top of the circumstances and the difficult life, you want to make it even harder on us," said Palestinian woman Sabrine Kuhail, standing by a tent shelter at a displacement site in Nuseirat refugee camp in central Gaza Strip.

"You made us hungry for three years with war, destruction, siege, and the bloodshed that is not stopping. What do you want from us? Enough, enough, we are tired."

  •  

How settler violence is devastating the West Bank olive harvest

Across the occupied West Bank, the olive harvest, one of Palestine’s most cherished cultural traditions, is underway.

But every year, Israeli settlers have a tradition of their own: attacking farmers and disrupting the harvest in whatever ways they can.

Olive farming supports the livelihoods of roughly 100,000 Palestinian families.

But the economic toll of Israeli settler attacks and military operations has been devastating, with tens of millions in damages caused to the industry last year. 

And this year, settler attacks across the West Bank are occurring at the highest rate ever recorded by the UN.

Without any meaningful means of self-defence, Palestinians are increasingly relying on a small but growing network of international and Israeli activists who help with the harvest and stand between Palestinian farmers and Israeli settlers.

Ultimately, though, their support is not enough.

Watch Fin de Pencier’s In-Depth dispatch from the occupied West Bank to find out more

  •  

Polanski defends 'Zionism is racism', points to Israel's actions

UK Green Party leader Zack Polanski on Sunday defended his party's decision to adopt the 'Zionism is racism' policy, amid sustained media focus on the motion passed at the party's conference.

Speaking on the BBC's Sunday with Laura Keunssberg, Polanski said the motion would not be overturned, and pushed back against the notion that it was "controversial", pointing to the atrocities committed against Palestinians by Israel and other adherents of Zionism.

“What’s controversial is that 75,000 Palestinians have been murdered in the last few years, including more child amputees than ever in modern history," Polanski said, referring to Israel's genocidal war in Gaza. "So when you take that to account, the fact that they’re being murdered because they’re Palestinian – that’s very obviously a racist ideology.”

“I think Zionism is racism in the practical application of it. Now the conference had a debate about the motion, about the word. I said I think debates about words are unhelpful, and I still think that," he added.

Polanksi also dismissed Keunssberg's characterisation of Zionism as "ahistorical", after she said that "the creation of Israel itself by the United Nations was itself a response to racism".

Keunsberg also questioned the Green leader on whether he believed Israel had a "right to exist" -- a phrase frequently used by supporters of Israel.

“I don’t think any state has a right to exist under international law,” he said, while also highlighting Israel's opposition to a two-state solution.

Polanski did not vote for the 'Zionism is racism' motion at the Greens' conference earlier this month but has given his backing to the party's decision.

However, he has voiced concern about the motion's support for a one-state solution.

"At the first available opportunity, I do want to amend it - I want to move away from one state, towards saying that Israelis and Palestinians should decide that future for themselves," he said, adding that the policy would not be able to be changed until 2028 due to the party's rules.

Under Polanski's leadership, the Green Party has seen a bounce in support from left-leaning voters, many of whom left the Labour Party over the previous Starmer government's stance on Palestine.

The 'Zionism is racism motion' was passed on 4 October, attracting crticism from UK media outlets, Prime Minister Andy Burnham, and pro-Israel groups.

Polanski was not present at the party conference in Brighton at the time of the vote, due to his by-election campaign in the London seat of Holborn and St Pancras.

Since losing the race to Labour candidate Sagal Abdi Wali, questions have been raised about his future as party leader, however Polanski has said he will stay on.

  •  

Egypt: Will Sisi really step down in 2030?

Egypt's President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi on Saturday announced plans to step down from power at the end of his third term in 2030.

Observers have long speculated about whether the president could attempt a re-run of the 2019 constitutional amendments and change the rules to allow a fourth term as the head of state.

But in a speech at the Egyptian Military Academy, Sisi vowed not to run for a fourth time and announced plans about how his potential successors would be chosen.

Here's what we know - and what we don't.

Sisi says he will step down in 2030

Speaking at a military graduation ceremony in the New Administrative Capital, Sisi said that his current term will be his last in office and pledged not to stand in the next election in 2030.

"The period leading up to 2030 will be the end of my term as president of the state, if I am still alive. This is completely settled, and there will be no discussion about it," he said.

Sisi is currently serving a six-year term after winning the December 2023 presidential election with 90% of the vote.

He also ruled out further constitutional changes to keep him in office into the next decade. Constitutional amendments in 2019 lengthened presidential terms from four to six years and enabled him to serve a third term.

There has long been speculation among political commentators and opposition figures about whether the constitution would again be amended to allow him to run for a fourth term.

"The Egyptian constitution will not be touched," he vowed.

But will he?

Sisi has a track record of reversing course on comments related to his political future. After his coup against Egypt's first democratically elected president, Mohammed Morsi, in July 2013, Sisi downplayed any ambitions to run for president, only to later enter the 2014 election race.

Three years later, he vowed to honour the constitution and not seek a third term in office. But in 2019, the constitutional amendments were passed in a landslide public vote, clearing the way for Sisi to contest the 2023 vote and remain in power for the next decade.

"I wouldn't get too secure about any assumptions about who will occupy Egypt's presidential palaces in 2031," Timothy E. Kaldas, deputy director of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, told The New Arab.

Whether or not his statements over the weekend were sincere, crises over the next four years could be used as a pretext to keep him in office, he said. Regime officials and media personalities may try to build a case that he should remain in power due to "popular demand".

"A lot could happen in the coming four years before 2030 … Whatever the real plan is today, there's no guarantee that plan will survive the coming four years of uncertainty and volatility," Kaldas added.

Military training for potential successors

Sisi announced that all potential presidential candidates will be required to undergo more than two years of training at the Egyptian Military Academy, which will teach them how to "protect the state".

Under draft legislation, the military will take charge of training potentially hundreds of people to stand in future presidential elections. Graduates of the programme could also be appointed to lead ministries and government agencies and serve as governors.

The Speaker of Parliament will lead a committee of ministers, politicians and intellectuals to draft the legislation, which will determine how candidates are selected.

"They would spend 30 months here at the academy learning what a state means, what its capabilities are, and how to protect them," Sisi said.

"We must not hand it over to just anyone. Someone who can put a few well-organised sentences together is not automatically qualified to lead the Egyptian state," he said.

The move is the latest to expand the military's power over the state during Sisi's 12-year presidency. Since coming to power, the army has significantly grown its economic footprint and acquired new influence over the government.

This includes the 2019 constitutional amendments, which broadened its role beyond protecting national security and tasked it with "protecting the constitution and democracy".

That the army will play a central role in determining future presidential candidates "reflects its continued centrality to the regime," Kaldas said.

"This is part of the growing influence of the security apparatus over civilian sectors throughout Egypt and the increased subjugation of civilian ministries and agencies to control by various security sector pillars of President Sisi's regime," he added.

  •  

Reignited Yemen war brings back prospect of UAE intervention

As fighting rages on between Saudi Arabia and Yemen's Houthi rebels, reports have emerged of possible intervention by the United Arab Emirates to help their Gulf neighbour.

The UAE officially announced the end of its involvement in Yemen in December 2025, after the Saudi-led military coalition bombed a southern separatist arms depot in Mukalla, and backed the Yemeni government's call for Abu Dhabi's forces to leave the country.

The episode marked a new low in relations between Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, who had both entered Yemen's conflict to oppose the Iran-backed Houthis.

The Houthis control the Yemeni capital Sana'a and most of northern Yemen. 

Less than a year later, however, it appears that the UAE could once again join Saudi Arabia against the Houthis.

How would the UAE re-enter Yemen's war?

Citing unnamed sources in Yemen, The Guardian reported on Saturday that the UAE had agreed to resume payments to some separatist factions it had previously backed in the south, in order to help the anti-Houthi cause.

Maysaa Shujaa al-Deen, a senior analyst at the Sanaa Centre for Strategic Studies, said that while it is unlikely that the Emiratis will jump back in militarily, they could help Saudi Arabia logistically.

"They have experience, which they have through their military intervention in Yemen, and experience in fighting the Houthis and being in charge of some important areas, including the coast and Aden," Shujaa al-Deen told The New Arab.

Shujaa al-Deen noted that it would also "take time" for the separatist Southern Transitional Council (STC), which was backed by the UAE, to mobilise in the south.

Meanwhile, questions remain over whether the southern separatists will take their fight beyond the borders of old southern Yemen.

"There are generally two positions in the south - one is that they should engage in the war before it comes to the south, and the other is that we are not going to engage unless the Houthis attack the south - and this second position is that of most of the STC," Shujaa al-Deen said.

What would be the UAE's demands?

Prior to disengaging from Yemen in late 2025, the UAE had backed southern separatist factions, most notably the STC, which led an offensive into against government forces in the Hadramaut region at that time.

The takeover was one of several moves by the separatists that led to the Saudi-backed call for the Emiratis to leave Yemen.

Shujaa al-Deen says that while Abu Dhabi has backed the separatists, its own interest is not to see the complete separation of the south from the rest of Yemen, as this would reduce UAE leverage in the country. Rather, any Emirati intervention would come with guarantees that "that their political agenda will be enforced in return".

"Aidarous al-Zubaidi has shown up for the first time since the crisis of December/ January, so this is one of the indications that the UAE's conditions [are in play]," Shujaa al-Deen said, referring to the STC leader who fled to Abu Dhabi after the fallout from the Saudi-UAE clash in January 2026.

Al-Zubaidi had attempted to establish STC control across southern Yemen, and called for a referendum on independence, leading to the demand that the UAE disengage from Yemen.

Al-Zubaidi made a video appearance last week after a long hiatus, drawing speculation of an attempted return to the political scene.

If re-engaged in Yemen, the Emiratis would also like to influence which factions are able to rule in the country, Shuja al-Deen adds.

"Another condition would be to oppose the Muslim Brotherhood, who have a really strong presence there, particularly in Taiz and Marib," she said.

Are relations cooling between Abu Dhabi and Riyadh?

The prospect of Abu Dhabi re-entering Yemen's war has also been viewed as a signal of a detente with Riyadh.

Shuja al-Deen says that the presence of a common enemy -- the Houthis -- would defuse tensions between Saudi Arabia and the UAE, adding that relations between them also deteriorated after the Saudi-Houthi truce in March 2022.

However, she notes that Yemen is just one theatre in which Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have clashed.

"They disagreed on Israel, Sudan, Somalia, also there is economic competition between them. So any agreement would only be about Yemen, not a comprehensive agreement between the two countries."

  •  

Lebanon: Tunnel found near Beirut sparks fresh Hezbollah tension

The discovery of a tunnel northeast of Beirut has sparked fresh tensions in Lebanon, with opposition lawmakers demanding a security crackdown amid suspicions over possible links to Hezbollah.

Lebanese army engineers launched an investigation on Monday after a tunnel was discovered in the Fanar-Zaitariyeh area of the Metn district, prompting calls for a comprehensive security sweep and the arrest of those responsible.

The discovery comes just over a week after Lebanese security forces intercepted a shipment of explosives belonging to Hezbollah in Dahr al-Baydar, raising tensions between the group and its political opponents.

However, a Lebanese military source told The New Arab that initial investigations suggested the newly discovered tunnel was small and was not intended for military or security purposes.

"Inspections and investigations are continuing, but so far it has emerged that the tunnel is small and was not prepared for military or security use," the source said.

Fanar mayor Michel Salameh told The New Arab that a resident discovered the tunnel on Sunday evening and alerted the municipality, which subsequently contacted the security authorities.

Salameh said the tunnel was located in a remote wooded area that was difficult to access, with the excavation concealed by trees.

تواصلت صباحاً مع وزير الدفاع، وطلبت منه اجراء الجيش والقوى الأمنية مسحاً شاملاً لمنطقة الرويسات - الجديدة ومحيطها، عقب اكتشاف نفق في المنطقة. وأبدى تجاوباً مع المطلب. نفق في المتن، شحنة متفجرات في ضهر البيدر، ومواجهات مع قوى الأمن في الضاحية… مؤشرات خطيرة تفرض وضع حدّ نهائي لازدواجية السلاح والتنظيم العسكري لحزب الله على كامل الأراضي اللبنانية. استمرار عمل السلاح غير الشرعي والتنظيم العسكري والأمني لحزب الله يشكل خطر داهم، وعلى الدولة الحسم حفاظاً على لبنان.

— Samy Gemayel (@samygemayel) October 19, 2026

When the vegetation was removed, a ladder, basic digging equipment and freshly excavated sand were discovered nearby.

"The tunnel is located in a wooded area in a remote spot that is difficult to reach," Salameh said, adding that the municipality had immediately informed army intelligence, which dispatched an engineering unit to inspect the site.

According to the mayor's preliminary assessment, the tunnel was approximately four metres deep, extended horizontally for two metres and then continued for another four metres.

He suggested that the excavation appeared recent, possibly dating back no more than a week, although its location made it difficult to detect.

Hezbollah accused as lawmakers demand security sweep

The discovery quickly prompted accusations against Hezbollah, which maintains influence in parts of the surrounding Zaitariyeh-Roueissat al-Jadideh area.

However, no evidence establishing Hezbollah's involvement in the tunnel's construction has been announced.

Lebanese Kataeb Party leader and MP Sami Gemayel said he had contacted Defence Minister Michel Menassa on Monday morning to demand a comprehensive security sweep of Roueissat al-Jadideh and its surroundings.

Gemayel said the minister had responded positively to his request.

"A tunnel in Metn, an explosives shipment in Dahr al-Baydar, and confrontations with security forces in the southern suburbs... dangerous indicators that require a definitive end to the duality of arms and Hezbollah's military organisation across all Lebanese territory," Gemayel said.

He warned that the continued operation of Hezbollah's military and security structures outside state authority posed a serious threat to Lebanon.

Kataeb MP Elias Hankach, who represents the area, also called for immediate army intervention.

He said he was contacting the Lebanese army command to demand searches of streets and buildings in Roueissat and neighbouring areas, the confiscation of weapons, arrests of those involved and the establishment of permanent security checkpoints and patrols.

The accusations come amid growing calls from Hezbollah's opponents for the Lebanese authorities to accelerate efforts to bring all weapons under exclusive state control.

Explosives seizure deepens political divisions

The tunnel controversy follows the seizure of a shipment of explosives in Dahr al-Baydar, on a route linking Beirut to the Bekaa Valley and Syria, more than a week ago.

Hezbollah acknowledged ownership of the explosives, insisting they were intended exclusively for use against Israel, and demanded their return along with the release of those detained.

The case has become a major point of contention between Hezbollah and the Lebanese government, with authorities pledging to pursue those involved in transporting and possessing weapons outside state control.

Further tensions erupted on Friday evening in the Galerie Semaan area at the entrance to Beirut's southern suburbs, when Hezbollah members confronted security personnel who had arrived to seal a pharmaceutical warehouse.

The incident was subsequently contained, but it fuelled criticism from Hezbollah's opponents over the group's continued security presence in areas where it holds considerable influence.

Lebanese security forces have intensified operations in recent days, including in Beirut's southern suburbs and the eastern Bekaa and Baalbek-Hermel regions, targeting wanted suspects, smuggling networks and unauthorised crossings along the Syrian border.

Hezbollah warns government over rising tensions

Hezbollah MP Ali Fayyad, a member of the Loyalty to the Resistance parliamentary bloc, warned on Monday that the Lebanese authorities bore "full responsibility for pushing the country towards dangerous internal tensions".

In a statement distributed by Hezbollah's media relations office, Fayyad accused the government of confronting a major component of Lebanese society and pursuing policies dictated by foreign powers.

He argued that the dispute had expanded beyond Hezbollah's weapons to encompass the movement's social, institutional and political presence.

"The authorities deliberately, knowingly and persistently expanded the dispute with the resistance, so that it is no longer limited to the issue of weapons," Fayyad said.

He also accused the government of compromising Lebanese sovereignty and failing to confront Israel's continued occupation and attacks.

Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, meanwhile, reiterated on Sunday that lasting stability could not be achieved without extending state authority across all Lebanese territory.

"Stability will not be established in the country unless the state's authority is extended over all its territory, even gradually, exclusively through its own forces," Salam said.

The prime minister said he had contacted army commander General Rodolphe Haykal and Internal Security Forces chief Major General Raed Abdallah to commend the increased deployment of security personnel across Greater Beirut.

The measures followed overnight gatherings in the capital that had raised public concerns about security.

Salam also met Justice Minister Adel Nassar and Public Prosecutor Rami al-Hajj to review the investigation into the Dahr al-Baydar explosives shipment and ensure that everyone involved in possessing or transporting unauthorised weapons was brought before the judiciary.

He stressed that there would be no limits to the investigation beyond those imposed by law.

Salam further urged political groups to prioritise Lebanon's national interests over foreign agendas, reiterating that decisions over war and peace must remain exclusively in the hands of the state and its constitutional institutions.

His comments followed a telephone conversation last week in which US Secretary of State Marco Rubio urged Lebanese President Joseph Aoun to hold those responsible for ordering, financing and directing the explosives shipment accountable.

Rubio also insisted that returning the seized explosives to Hezbollah should be ruled out entirely.

The latest incidents have heightened concerns over internal instability as Lebanon faces continued Israeli military attacks and occupation in the south.

  •  

Yemen forces advance in Taiz; Iran blames US for Hormuz crisis

Good afternoon,

Here are the key developments so far today:

  • Yemen's government forces have targeted Houthi positions, vehicles and weapons south of Taiz, as fighting continues to escalate across the country.
  • More than 50 people were killed and over 200 wounded in a Houthi ballistic missile attack on a military camp in Yemen's Shabwa province, marking the deadliest attack in weeks.
  • Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi has blamed the US for insecurity and tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, calling for regional disputes to be resolved through diplomacy.
  • Speaking alongside Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Araqchi also called for a regional security arrangement without the presence of foreign forces.
  •  

Why Mahmoud Abbas keeps postponing Palestinian elections

On 10 October, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas issued a decree cancelling the legislative elections set for 28 November.

Instead, presidential and legislative polls will be held together on 11 September 2027. The decree followed approval by the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and consultations with political factions.

The official explanation was Israel's occupation. Fatah officials insist that the movement was ready and that Israeli restrictions made a free, fair, and inclusive vote impossible. While that argument is real, it is also incomplete.

Read closely, the accounts of those around the decision point to three pressures converging at once: external obstacles that have not changed, rivalries inside Fatah that its own leaders acknowledge, and a factional dialogue that gave the leadership a consensual route away from a deadline its critics say it was not ready to meet.

The postponement is less a verdict on Israeli obstruction than a decision about who gets to shape the next Palestinian political order, and on what terms.

The official case

The decree lists various obstacles, including Israel's continuing offensive in Gaza, restrictions on the movement of the Central Elections Commission and observers, and the impossibility of voting in occupied East Jerusalem given Israel's position.

Restrictions on movement, settlement expansion, and settler attacks across the West Bank were also cited, as were the exceptional security and humanitarian conditions in Gaza.

Fatah insists its own machinery was not the problem.

“We prepared seriously for these elections,” Tayseer Nasrallah, a member of Fatah's Revolutionary Council, told The New Arab.

“We mobilised our organisational structures in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, held meetings and electoral assemblies to choose our candidates, and we were about to register our official list with the Central Elections Commission.”

He rejects the suggestion that internal weakness forced the delay. “Organisational unreadiness and internal disagreements were not the direct reason for the postponement,” he said.

“Creating the right conditions for voting and guaranteeing that our people can take part in every area are among the biggest challenges that must be dealt with before elections are held.”

The obstacles are not invented. But the decree itself describes them as continuing, meaning they were already in place when the November date was set. Nothing in it explains why they should have been lifted by September 2027.

As a full explanation of why this vote was cancelled at this moment, the occupation argument does too little work on its own.

The fault lines inside Fatah

The harder question is what was happening inside the ruling movement.

“The disputes inside Fatah, whether between its leadership centres or with the Democratic Reform Current, have left their mark on the preparations for the elections,” said Noaman al-Abed, a writer and political analyst.

“These disputes came alongside questions about how ready the factions actually are,” he told The New Arab, “and whether they can provide the political, field, and logistical conditions needed, especially in Jerusalem and Gaza.”

Al-Abed's sharpest criticism is aimed at the mechanism Fatah used to pick its candidates. “The experience of the electoral assemblies inside Fatah has deepened the organisational divisions,” he said. “It is doubtful how far they included the different currents within the movement”.

This is where the power dynamics sit. Candidate selection decides who rises inside a movement and who is left out. A process that rival currents see as exclusive does not settle internal contests; it pushes them toward the ballot box, where they can split the vote.

The postponement halted that process: the same decision froze the work of the electoral assemblies for the Palestinian National Council. Folding the presidency into the same ballot raises the stakes further for whoever controls the list.

Fatah's leaders do not deny the rifts. They simply deny that the rifts decide anything.

“Differences within Fatah are not new,” Nasrallah said. “The movement has always dealt with them through internal dialogue”.

Wasel Abu Youssef, a member of the PLO Executive Committee, puts Israel's continuing aggression and the obstacles to the vote first, alongside the need for a comprehensive national dialogue.

Yet even this defence concedes the central point. If the delay was needed to secure consensus, then consensus was missing. The internal divide may not be the only cause of the postponement, but it is part of what made the November date untenable.

Consensus as cover - and leverage

The delay was not announced as a Fatah decision. It was framed as a response to the factions.

“Fatah respected the outcomes of the dialogue held in Cairo with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Hamas,” Nasrallah said, “and conveyed them to the movement's leadership bodies before the procedures for the postponement were completed”.

The decision was presented as answering factional initiatives, above all the PFLP's. On 10 October, the same day as the decree, the PFLP welcomed the change of date and the freezing of the National Council assemblies. It called for a comprehensive national dialogue based on its initiative, "A Roadmap for National Salvation".

That dialogue, it said, should end the division, restore national unity, and rebuild the political system on democratic and participatory foundations, with all forces taking part.

Abu Youssef echoed that agenda. “We need a comprehensive national dialogue that rearranges the internal Palestinian situation, ends the division and produces a consensus guaranteeing that all factions take part in the elections,” he said, adding that contacts with the factions and Egyptian officials were continuing.

“The aim of dialogue must be to end the division and strengthen national unity, so that elections become a means of renewing legitimacy and ordering Palestinian institutions, not an additional cause of fragmentation.”

This framing does two things. A delay requested by a faction outside Fatah reads as national consensus rather than self-interest, which gives the leadership cover. It also changes the question. The debate is no longer only about when Palestinians vote, but about the terms of the political system they vote into, with Hamas at the table in Cairo.

That is a bigger prize, and a riskier one. Whoever shapes the dialogue now shapes the timetable.

“Fatah is ready to abide by the outcomes of the dialogue and the national understandings that are reached,” Nasrallah said. Whether those understandings become concrete, enforceable steps is what the PFLP's roadmap, and the credibility of the delay, will depend on.

The international pressure test

The one clear dissent came from outside. In a statement on 14 October, the European Union expressed regret at the postponement of legislative and presidential elections until September 2027. It stressed the importance of holding them as soon as possible and said it stood ready to support the process, including through an EU observation mission.

Fatah's answer was to redirect the pressure. “Fatah respects the European Union's position rejecting the postponement,” Nasrallah said, “but we ask that this position be matched by political pressure on the occupation government to remove the obstacles hindering the work of the Central Elections Commission, and to guarantee freedom of movement and participation in the West Bank, including Jerusalem, and in the Gaza Strip”.

Abu Youssef framed it as a diplomatic task. “We must keep communicating with European states and the international parties concerned, explain the impact of the occupation's measures on the possibility of holding elections, and work to build an international position that guarantees their integrity and transparency,” he said.

The exchange sets a test for both sides. If Israeli obstruction is the main barrier, European pressure and an observer mission are the remedy Fatah says it wants. If the leadership does not take up that offer with a clear plan, the occupation argument will look more like a shield for internal problems than a reason.

A new deadline, an old political crisis

No single factor explains the postponement. Israeli obstruction is a real barrier to voting across the Palestinian territories. Fatah's internal rifts are real too, and its leaders' insistence on consensus shows the movement was not ready to face voters divided. The factional dialogue gave the leadership a way to turn that weakness into a national project.

The risk is that the delay becomes the outcome. “Repeated postponement of the elections may deepen the crisis of trust between citizens and the Palestinian leadership,” al-Abed warned, “and raise doubts about how serious the commitment is to renewing legitimacy through the ballot box”.

His prescription is simple.

“Overcoming this requires a clear date, early preparation and the political and organisational guarantees needed to hold the elections,” he said.

The postponement has bought eleven months. Its value will be judged by one measure: whether the dialogue produces a national consensus that clears the way for free and fair elections and renews Palestinian legitimacy, or whether divisions and obstacles push the vote back again and deepen the crisis of trust.

Monjed Jadou is a Palestinian journalist and founder of Palestine News Network (PNN), an independent Palestinian media network. He has contributed to international and regional media outlets. His work focuses on Palestinian affairs, independent journalism, media freedom, and promoting the principles of editorial independence and professional journalism in Palestine

This story was produced in collaboration with Egab

Edited by Charlie Hoyle

  •  

From Tehran, Lavrov urges return to pre-war conditions in Hormuz

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has called for conditions in the Strait of Hormuz and the wider region to return to what they were before the US-Israeli war on Iran, following talks with his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi in Tehran on Monday.

Speaking at a joint press conference, Lavrov reaffirmed Moscow's strategic partnership with Tehran and said Russia remained committed to its comprehensive cooperation agreement with Iran.

He described the talks as "productive" and said the two countries shared similar positions on regional developments, while pledging to continue cooperation through international organisations including BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the Eurasian Economic Union.

Lavrov also announced that Russian personnel would gradually return to Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant.

The developments come as diplomatic efforts to avert another confrontation intensify, with The New Arab reporting on Monday that a breakthrough in US-Iran mediation efforts could be announced this week.

Senior sources familiar with negotiations told TNA that Qatar and Pakistan were working to narrow differences between Washington and Tehran and secure mutual concessions, while ruling out an immediate military escalation.

Lavrov's visit, his first to Iran since the US-Israeli war began on 28 February, follows Moscow's recent involvement in exchanging messages between the two countries.

It also comes ahead of a possible visit to Tehran by Pakistan's army chief, General Asim Munir, who has been involved in mediation efforts between Washington and Tehran.

Iran and Russia blame US-Israeli attacks for regional instability

Araghchi described Iran's relationship with Russia as "strategic", saying it had taken on new dimensions since the implementation of their comprehensive cooperation agreement nearly two years ago.

He said Monday's discussions had been "extremely productive", covering regional and international developments alongside practical plans to expand political, cultural and commercial cooperation.

The Iranian foreign minister said economic ties between the two countries were developing significantly and that no major obstacles stood in the way of expanding bilateral trade.

On regional security, Araghchi blamed US and Israeli military attacks for instability in the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, as well as recent security incidents in the Caspian Sea involving attacks on Iranian and Russian vessels and port infrastructure.

He warned that the situation posed serious consequences for regional peace, security and the environment.

Araghchi also called for an immediate end to the genocide in Palestine, Israeli expansion in Lebanon and the war in Yemen.

The two ministers discussed tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan, including the need to reduce tensions between Kabul and Islamabad and address threats from armed groups operating in Afghanistan.

Araghchi stressed that regional disputes could not be resolved through military means and required diplomacy and political solutions.

Lavrov, meanwhile, said opposition to US unilateralism remained a shared priority for Moscow and Tehran, with both countries seeking to strengthen multilateral institutions and uphold international law.

He also reaffirmed Russia's commitment to its comprehensive cooperation agreement with Iran.

Can Russia mediate between Iran and the US?

Despite the emphasis on regional diplomacy, neither minister publicly announced a new Russian mediation initiative between Washington and Tehran following Monday's talks.

Russia's potential mediation role began taking shape earlier this month, amid growing contacts between Moscow and Washington over the war in Ukraine.

On 10 October, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov revealed that Russian President Vladimir Putin had informed his Iranian counterpart Masoud Pezeshkian of an upcoming telephone conversation with US President Donald Trump.

The exchange followed a meeting between Putin and Pezeshkian in Turkmenistan on 9 October.

The Kremlin subsequently announced that Putin had conveyed Iran's position on a possible settlement to Trump, raising expectations that Moscow could become another diplomatic channel between Washington and Tehran.

However, Iranian officials have stopped short of recognising Russia as a formal mediator.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said last week that, "technically, in the strict sense of the word", Pakistan and Qatar remained the actual mediators between Iran and the United States.

He added that consultations between Tehran and Moscow, particularly on the nuclear issue, were nothing new.

Ahead of his arrival in Tehran, Lavrov criticised Trump's approach towards Iran as "wrong", arguing that it would not help achieve an agreement based on mutual respect and international law.

His visit followed a stop in Bahrain, prompting speculation that he could also be carrying messages from Gulf states amid heightened regional tensions.

Experts question prospects of Russian mediation

Iranian analyst Hadi Mohammadi told The New Arab that Lavrov's visit reflected growing Russian concerns about developments in the Gulf and the possibility of further escalation.

He said Moscow appeared to be intensifying its diplomatic activities in an attempt to contain tensions, noting that the US-Iran confrontation had become closely linked to the war in Ukraine amid renewed contacts between Washington and Moscow.

Mohammadi suggested that Lavrov could be carrying messages from Washington or Israel during what he described as an extremely sensitive period.

He recalled that Putin had previously conveyed messages between Tehran and Israel, including an Israeli assurance before the latest war that it did not intend to attack Iran.

However, Mohammadi expressed limited confidence in Russia's ability to secure a breakthrough.

He argued that some international actors were making a fundamental mistake by pressuring Iran alone to accept the other side's conditions, while overlooking Tehran's position that it had been attacked and had complied with the Islamabad memorandum of understanding reached in June, which Iran accuses Washington of violating.

Mohammadi said Lavrov's visit could help reduce regional tensions but was unlikely to resolve the crisis on its own.

At best, he suggested, it could mark the beginning of further diplomatic exchanges, although he did not rule out the possibility that it represented a final attempt to avert another war.

Iranian analyst Abbas Aslani similarly told The New Arab that Lavrov's visit reflected the depth of cooperation between Tehran and Moscow in confronting Western pressure.

He said shared economic, political and military challenges had strengthened the importance of bilateral and regional coordination.

Aslani considered it possible that Lavrov was carrying a response or message from Washington, although he cautioned against drawing conclusions before the talks took place.

He also suggested that Moscow could use the visit to assess the Trump administration's position ahead of the US midterm elections on 3 November.

According to Aslani, Russia was already familiar with Iran's strategic red lines, including the conditions outlined in Tehran's seven-day proposal, and was unlikely to persuade Iranian officials to make substantial changes.

He described the visit as a potential opportunity to exchange "hard truths", but argued that any genuine breakthrough would depend on Washington accepting what he described as the new balance of power and security in the Gulf.

  •  

Egypt postpones Sisi's Saudi troop deployment vote to next week

Egypt's parliament has postponed a vote on authorising military support for Saudi Arabia until 26 October, amid growing political debate over President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi's request to deploy forces to help Riyadh confront Houthi attacks from Yemen.

The postponement comes as Egyptian political parties and public figures call for a diplomatic solution to the escalating conflict, warning against drawing the country into another regional war without clearly defined objectives or an assessment of the potential costs.

Lawmakers delayed the vote after debating whether Egyptian forces should be sent to Saudi Arabia to support its confrontation with Yemen's Houthi rebels.

Sisi has requested parliamentary authorisation to provide air defence forces and logistical support to help Saudi Arabia counter Houthi missiles and drones.

The Egyptian National Defence Council, chaired by the president, has also expressed Cairo's readiness to provide Saudi Arabia with necessary and available forms of assistance.

However, the prospect of military involvement has divided political parties, with some supporting the proposed authorisation and others demanding clearer limits on any deployment.

Calls for mediation instead of military intervention

The debate has intensified following a call by Al-Azhar's Grand Imam, Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb, for an urgent mediation initiative involving prominent Arab and Muslim figures to help end regional conflicts.

Tayeb called on Sunday for an immediate and comprehensive halt to fighting and destruction, proposing the formation of a committee of respected figures from Arab and Islamic countries to defuse tensions and bring opposing parties closer together.

He also expressed Al-Azhar's readiness to support the initiative.

The proposal has gained support from Egyptian political parties and public figures seeking to prioritise negotiations over military intervention.

Egypt's Grand Mufti Nazir Ayyad welcomed the initiative, calling for dialogue and efforts to promote peace.

The Constitution Party also expressed solidarity with Saudi Arabia against threats to its security and sovereignty but urged caution over any decision that could involve Egypt in a regional military confrontation.

It called for the proposed military authorisation to have clearly defined objectives, limits and conditions, while stressing the importance of ending the war through mediation and diplomatic efforts.

The Egyptian Social Democratic Party adopted a more cautious position, instructing its parliamentary representatives to abstain from voting on the request.

While reaffirming its support for Saudi Arabia, the party argued that insufficient information had been provided about the nature of the proposed military missions.

It warned that Egyptian involvement could expose the country's interests and infrastructure to additional risks, particularly shipping through the Red Sea, Bab al-Mandab Strait and Suez Canal.

Lawmaker Reda Abdel Salam proposed limiting any Egyptian deployment to defending Saudi territory and critical infrastructure, including airports and water and electricity facilities, while avoiding combat operations inside Yemen.

Parties divided over risks of involvement

Other Egyptian parties have backed Sisi's request, arguing that Saudi Arabia's security is closely linked to Egypt's national security and wider Arab stability.

The parliamentary blocs of the Wafd Party, the Republican People's Party and the Justice Party have expressed support for the proposed authorisation.

However, even among those supporting assistance to Riyadh, questions remain over the scope of any deployment and the risks of prolonged involvement.

Justice Party deputy leader and MP Mohamed Fouad told The New Arab that a decision of this magnitude required a serious discussion of its objectives, limitations and possible consequences.

He said political parties should move beyond simply supporting or opposing the proposal and examine the circumstances under which Egyptian forces might be deployed.

Fouad stressed that previous regional conflicts demonstrated the importance of establishing clear objectives from the outset, warning against open-ended military operations that could drain human and economic resources.

He argued that supporting Saudi Arabia did not contradict efforts to reduce tensions, and that political and diplomatic engagement remained essential to preventing a wider conflict.

  •  

Tehran's dilemma: Is there a growing Baloch insurgency in Iran?

Armed clashes in Iran’s southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchestan have intensified in recent weeks, reaching their highest level in a decade.

With the US-Israel war threatening to enter an even more volatile phase, such tensions have raised growing concern in Tehran.

At the centre of the escalation is the emergence of a coalition of diverse Baloch militant factions, the Popular Fighters Front (PFF), also known by its Persian acronym JMM (Jebhe-ye-Mobarezin-e Mardomi).

Consisting of Jaish-ul-Adl, PADA Baluch, Harakate Nasr Baluchestan, and the Mohammad Rasulullah Brigade, the militant umbrella was formed in December 2025.

Though they claim to fight for all of Iran, which they say has been “held hostage,” at least one faction among them has advocated Baloch separatism in the past.

But despite their differing political ambitions, the groups share a conservative Sunni Muslim identity, providing common ground in Shia-dominant Iran where the Sunni population is less than 9%.

Tehran's security dilemma

Suddenly, Sistan-Baluchestan has become dangerous.

Since January 2026, at least 37 armed attacks have been reported on police stations, military bases, and checkpoints, while security patrols have been targeted as they move through cities.

Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) personnel are a primary target. There have been high-ranking assassinations, and last month, a regime-linked Sunni cleric was shot dead.

If this continues, the Iranian government may have to send large reinforcements from other parts of the country to contain the unrest, stretching the security infrastructure at a time when it is prepared for a return to war.

Such instability in Sistan-Baluchestan could have consequences for Iran in the coming months.

As per the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED), approximately 70 armed confrontations took place between Iranian security forces and armed groups in Sistan and Baluchestan during 2026, the highest annual level in a decade. Thirteen occurred in the past two weeks alone.

ACLED’s assessments suggest that although Tehran has intensified efforts to dismantle the militant network, raids have often turned into “prolonged battles”, with some lasting as long as nine hours.

Pointing towards a more entrenched insurgency, it says that the “key risk” would be convergence, and a full-scale resumption of the US-Israeli war on Iran could “stretch Tehran’s security forces thin.”

Meanwhile, the human toll is also mounting, according to the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), with at least 94 people killed and 33 wounded in 63 armed incidents between 31 March and 10 October.

On 13 October, more than 20 Fatemiyoun brigade members were reported killed or wounded in fighting that lasted for seven hours in the mountainous Taftan area.

The Fatemiyoun are an Iran-backed Shia militia composed largely of Afghan fighters and organised to fight alongside the IRGC. Their reported involvement underscores the extent to which Tehran is drawing on its wider security network to confront the violence.

The use of drones, artillery, and armoured vehicles by government forces in recent clashes further indicates the intensity of the fighting and raises concerns about the consequences of expanded operations in populated areas.

Consequently, Tehran faces a difficult strategic dilemma, and while a forceful response could disrupt militant networks, it may result in deepening local alienation. 

While the Iranian government is not losing its grip, chronic instability constrains its ability to respond to war.

Rebranding a Baloch uprising?

Ridden by poverty, plagued by unemployment, and the least developed region in Iran, Sistan-Baluchestan has been tense for decades.

Since their unification as the PFF, however, the region’s militants have changed their narrative, pointing not only to Baloch grievances but also calling for broader political change in Iran.

So far, it cannot be determined whether this consolidation has increased their capabilities, but the ongoing war with Washington has created space for the militants to regroup in Iran.

Dr Farzan Sabet, an Iran expert at the Geneva Graduate Institute, told The New Arab that when “conditions for ordinary people are deteriorating, and the regime is perceived as vulnerable, there are surges of opposition hoping to overthrow the regime, or extract concessions”.

He highlighted the convergence during the 12-day war in June 2025 amid the so-called ‘Lion and Sun’ protests among “leading opposition organisations including the nationwide Pahlavi movement, the coalition of political forces of Iranian Kurdistan in majority Kurdish-speaking areas of Iran, and the PFF in Sistan-Baluchestan”.

Sabet said that Iranian security forces in this province have “historically been poorly equipped and trained, experiencing greater disarray due to the assassination of Iranian security leaders and personnel” during the war.

Militancy in the province has also received a boost from deteriorating material conditions, the dire state of human rights, a disproportionate degree of executions and violations, and, possibly, foreign support.

According to Sabet, the political dynamics in Sistan-Baluchestan are often distinct from those in the core of the country, and there are fewer sensitive population centres and economic hubs.

“It is seen as less of a threat than, say, a comparable event in Tehran or another major city in the core, and there is a lower risk that discontent and instability spread from the periphery to the core than the other way around,” he added.

The impact of such peripheral insurgencies is usually geographically and politically contained in Iran, even though the PFF is “targeting its discourse toward the broader Iranian nation”.

However, “given the recent successes of Balochi militants, the regime may want to surge further security forces into the area,” Sabet said, such as the Fatemiyoun Division - an IRGC-backed militia of Afghan Shia whose members died in recent clashes.

The US-Israel war has added a new dimension to the fragile situation in Sistan-Baluchestan as Iran’s security establishment has diverted away resources and armed groups have seen it as “an opportunity to intensify their activities and test the state’s capacity to respond”, Babak Vahdad, an independent researcher and Iran analyst, told The New Arab.

In his view, the escalation is not an immediate threat to the survival of the Islamic Republic, as Baloch militancy remains geographically concentrated and is not a broader national uprising.

But the situation has exposed “some of the structural weaknesses of the Iranian state, particularly its difficult relationship with ethnic and religious minorities, and a predominantly military response may contain the insurgency in the short term without addressing its underlying causes”.

Meanwhile, according to Iran’s narrative, “certain regional actors” might be encouraging instability there to “divert Tehran’s military and security resources away from the main confrontation in the Gulf, possibly even preparing the ground for a future military attack against Iran”, Vahdad added.

Fractious borders, wider risks

The security issue is made worse by geography. Across mountainous terrain, the porous 900 km Iran-Pakistan border stretches from a tripoint with Afghanistan to the northern Arabian Sea, and policing it is an arduous task for Tehran as deserted, interconnected frontiers with low populations create fertile ground for armed groups and mercenaries.

Even the Pakistani province of Baluchistan across the border has separatist outfits, mercenaries, a smuggling nexus, and long-standing political and socio-economic issues.

Currently, border crossings along the Pakistan-Iran border have been closed by Islamabad.

Naveed Ali Sheikh, an Islamabad-based military analyst, told The New Arab that Pakistan has been facing terrorist attacks originating from the Iranian border region of Sistan and Baluchestan, where banned militant outfits operate and carry out “hit-and-run” [back across the border] attacks.

These groups have targeted Iranian and Pakistani government forces, as well as civilian infrastructure, he said. Noting that a surge in such attacks was observed recently, Sheikh said the border required better security infrastructure, upgraded surveillance systems, and more effective mechanisms to prevent further incursions.

However, border security was not the primary reason behind the recent closure of cross-border trade, as “shadow banking networks are being used by smugglers and black-market operators, which the United States alleges are helping finance Iran's sanctioned military establishment”.

And the temporary closure of border crossings may be intended to manage the anticipated backlog of transactions and documentation if the banking and trade standstill continues.

Sabena Siddiqui is a foreign affairs journalist, lawyer and geopolitical analyst specialising in modern China, the Belt and Road Initiative, the Middle East, and South Asia.

Follow her on X: @sabena_siddiqi 

Edited by Charlie Hoyle

  •  

Lavrov visits Iran as Russia explores role in US-Tehran talks

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov arrived in Tehran on Monday for talks with senior Iranian officials, raising questions over whether Moscow could play a greater role in mediating between Iran and the United States amid fears of renewed war.

The visit comes as diplomatic efforts to avert another confrontation intensify, with The New Arab reporting on Monday that a breakthrough in US-Iran mediation efforts could be announced this week.

Senior sources familiar with negotiations told The New Arab that Qatar and Pakistan were working to narrow differences between Washington and Tehran and secure mutual concessions, while ruling out an immediate military escalation.

Lavrov's visit, his first to Iran since the US-Israeli war began on 28 February, follows Moscow's recent involvement in exchanging messages between the two countries.

It also comes ahead of a possible visit to Tehran by Pakistan's army chief, General Asim Munir, who has been involved in mediation efforts between Washington and Tehran.

The timing has raised speculation that Lavrov could be carrying messages from Washington, while his arrival from Bahrain on Sunday has also prompted questions about whether he could be conveying messages from Gulf states amid heightened regional tensions.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei described the visit as part of ongoing consultations between Tehran and Moscow aimed at following up on bilateral agreements and discussing regional and international developments.

Russia's foreign ministry said the talks would involve a "frank and in-depth" exchange of views on bilateral cooperation, major international issues and developments in the Gulf, including possible ways to resolve the crisis stemming from the US-Israeli war on Iran.

Ahead of his arrival, Lavrov criticised US President Donald Trump's approach towards Tehran as "wrong", arguing that it would not help achieve an agreement based on mutual respect and international law.

Can Russia mediate between Iran and the US?

Russia's potential mediation role began taking shape earlier this month, amid growing contacts between Moscow and Washington over the war in Ukraine.

On 10 October, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov revealed that Russian President Vladimir Putin had informed his Iranian counterpart Masoud Pezeshkian of an upcoming telephone conversation with Trump.

The exchange followed a meeting between Putin and Pezeshkian in Turkmenistan on 9 October.

The Kremlin subsequently announced that Putin had conveyed Iran's position on a possible settlement to Trump, raising expectations that Moscow could become another diplomatic channel between Washington and Tehran.

However, Iranian officials have stopped short of recognising Russia as a formal mediator.

Baghaei said last week that, "technically, in the strict sense of the word", Pakistan and Qatar remained the actual mediators between Iran and the United States.

He added that consultations between Tehran and Moscow, particularly on the nuclear issue, were nothing new.

Experts question prospects of Russian mediation

Iranian analyst Hadi Mohammadi told The New Arab that Lavrov's visit reflected growing Russian concerns about developments in the Gulf and the possibility of further escalation.

He said Moscow appeared to be intensifying its diplomatic activities in an attempt to contain tensions, noting that the US-Iran confrontation had become closely linked to the war in Ukraine amid renewed contacts between Washington and Moscow.

Mohammadi suggested that Lavrov could be carrying messages from Washington or Israel during what he described as an extremely sensitive period.

He recalled that Putin had previously conveyed messages between Tehran and Israel, including an Israeli assurance before the latest war that it did not intend to attack Iran.

However, Mohammadi expressed limited confidence in Russia's ability to secure a breakthrough.

He argued that some international actors were making a fundamental mistake by pressuring Iran alone to accept the other side's conditions, while overlooking Tehran's position that it had been attacked and had complied with the Islamabad memorandum of understanding reached in June, which Iran accuses Washington of violating.

Mohammadi said Lavrov's visit could help reduce regional tensions but was unlikely to resolve the crisis on its own.

At best, he suggested, it could mark the beginning of further diplomatic exchanges, although he did not rule out the possibility that it represented a final attempt to avert another war.

Iranian analyst Abbas Aslani similarly told The New Arab that Lavrov's visit reflected the depth of cooperation between Tehran and Moscow in confronting Western pressure.

He said shared economic, political and military challenges had strengthened the importance of bilateral and regional coordination.

Aslani considered it possible that Lavrov was carrying a response or message from Washington, although he cautioned against drawing conclusions before the talks took place.

He also suggested that Moscow could use the visit to assess the Trump administration's position ahead of the US midterm elections on 3 November.

According to Aslani, Russia was already familiar with Iran's strategic red lines, including the conditions outlined in Tehran's seven-day proposal, and was unlikely to persuade Iranian officials to make substantial changes.

He described the visit as a potential opportunity to exchange "hard truths", but argued that any genuine breakthrough would depend on Washington accepting the new balance of power and security in the Gulf.

  •  

Israel Katz boasts about wiping out 60 south Lebanon villages

Israeli defence minister Israel Katz bragged about "wiping out" dozens of villages in southern Lebanon in a television interview on Saturday.

In an appearance on Channel 14, the far-right minister said the Israeli military had destroyed more than 60 villages across the so-called security zone that reaches deep inside Lebanon.

"Every single village, we’re talking about 23,000 homes, is in ruins. And that’s not even mentioning the underground infrastructure and the tunnels," he said to a round of applause in the studio.

"There are no residents left, 200,000 people have been displaced," he said.

"This is the Gaza model. That's what we've been implementing."

Israeli forces have for months been systematically levelling villages across the south, repeating their strategy in Gaza which has seen more than 80% of the territory wiped from the face of the earth.

The UN estimated last month that as many as 360,000 Lebanese remained displaced due to Israel's occupation.

Fighting between Israel and Hezbollah has subsided since a US-brokered ceasefire came into force in June, though Israeli forces regularly violate it with airstrikes in the south.

They continue to occupy hundreds of square-kilometres of Lebanese territory inside the so-called "yellow line" and are refusing to withdraw until Hezbollah is completely disarmed.

Earlier last week Katz visited Israel's occupying forces in southern Lebanon, where he threatened to seize more territory if Hezbollah resumes attacks on Israel.

"If Hezbollah joins Iran in an attack on Israel, it will be dealt a heavy blow and lose additional territory in southern Lebanon, in the areas of Nabatieh and the Litani [River], which will become part of a permanent Israeli security zone," he said.

The minister's comments came 10 days ahead of Israel's general election, which has seen the incumbent far-right parties compete for the vote by bragging about the military's violence and the brutality shown towards Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.

  •  

Ben-Gvir calls on French Jews to move to Israel amid protests

Israel's far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has urged the French Jewish community to leave France and move to Israel amid widespread protests over the cost of living, as the Israeli government reportedly prepares a broader campaign to encourage Jewish immigration from the European country.

Ben-Gvir made the appeal during a conference for France's Jewish community in the central Israeli city of Netanya, attended by hundreds of supporters of his far-right Otzma Yehudit party, according to a statement released late on Sunday.

"There are people in France today from various quarters who are seeking to harm Israel," Ben-Gvir claimed, without identifying the groups he was referring to or providing evidence for his allegations.

He urged the French government to reconsider its policies and its treatment of those allegedly seeking to expand their influence in the country.

"All of Europe must wake up, and the whole world must wake up," he declared, before addressing French Jews directly.

"Come home. Come back here. Be here. This is your home, and this is your homeland," he said.

Ben-Gvir, who oversees Israel's police and prison system rather than immigration policy, has long been associated with anti-Palestinian extremism and has previously been convicted of incitement to racism and violence and supporting a banned Jewish extremist organisation.

He has also repeatedly advocated the expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories and called for the expulsion by force of Palestinians from Gaza.

His appeal comes just days before Israel's 27 October parliamentary elections, amid a campaign in which far-right politicians have increasingly promoted expansionist policies.

It also follows reports that Israeli ministers have been preparing to encourage a potentially significant increase in Jewish immigration from France.

According to Israeli media, Immigration and Integration Minister Ofir Sofer urged the government during a cabinet meeting on 6 October to prepare for potentially "massive" immigration from France.

"We need to remove the barriers in order to allow them to come here," Sofer reportedly told ministers.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich also reportedly called for funding to help prospective immigrants, while Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu instructed ministers to develop a joint plan.

The discussions suggest Ben-Gvir's latest appeal forms part of a wider Israeli government effort to capitalise on the unrest in France to encourage immigration, rather than an isolated response to the protests.

Israeli officials have also sought to link the demonstrations to concerns about antisemitism, although the protests themselves have primarily focused on economic hardship, education and public services.

France formally recognised the State of Palestine in September 2025 and joined other Western countries last month in announcing restrictions on trade involving products from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.

France grapples with mass protests

France has experienced some of its worst civil unrest in years, following mass demonstrations on Saturday against rising living costs, fuel prices and deteriorating public services.

Around half a million people took to the streets, with students, trade unionists and members of the Yellow Vests movement among those protesting.

While many demonstrations were peaceful, clashes erupted in several cities, including Paris, where buildings and vehicles were set ablaze and shops looted.

More than 2,500 people were arrested over the weekend, while nearly 1,000 members of the security forces were injured, according to French authorities.

On Monday, Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu called for localised curfews after protesters blocked the entrance to the Louvre Museum, warning that a state of emergency could be imposed if necessary.

President Emmanuel Macron acknowledged failures in the security response but blamed groups on the far left for the violence, while recognising the legitimacy of peaceful protesters' social demands.

Iran's foreign minister takes aim at Macron

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also seized on the protests to criticise Macron, accusing him of supporting the US-Israeli war against Iran while failing to listen to demonstrators in his own country.

"Mr. Macron brought this situation upon himself when he assured the US President that he welcomed crimes against Iranians," Araghchi wrote on X, according to IranWire.

"Now it is too late to blame the war that people like him helped unleash."

The Iranian minister then offered Macron advice on handling public discontent.

"The French people want fundamental changes, including the freedom of assembly. Mr. President, listen to the voice of France's future," he wrote.

The unrest in France has meanwhile spread to other European countries, with demonstrations and clashes reported in Belgium and Italy, while protests over housing and living costs continue in Spain and Portugal.

  •  

Dozens killed in Houthi attack on Yemeni gov't military camp

More than 30 soldiers for the internationally recognised Yemeni government were reportedly killed and dozens wounded on Monday after Houthi forces launched a ballistic missile attack on a military camp in Yemen's southern Shabwa province, according to military and medical sources.

The attack targeted Al-Alam military camp near the city of Ataq while soldiers were taking part in a training course.

Yemeni armed forces spokesperson Majed al-Nuzaili said the Houthis had fired three ballistic missiles at the camp.

The Houthis, officially known as Ansar Allah, have not yet commented on the attack.

The camp belongs to Shabwa's emergency forces and was hosting recruits from a newly formed military brigade at the time of the strike.

A source at a government hospital told The New Arab that the number of casualties was high, while other sources reported that Houthi drones had been flying over the area on Sunday evening, hours before the attack.

A Yemeni military source told Germany's DPA news agency that more than 30 soldiers had been killed and dozens of others wounded.

Social media users also circulated footage purportedly showing dead and wounded soldiers scattered across the military camp following the strikes. The New Arab could not independently verify the footage.

The attack comes amid an escalation in Yemen's conflict, with fighting continuing between government forces and the Houthis on several fronts, accompanied by increasingly hostile rhetoric and threats from the warring sides.

Fighting intensifies in Taiz

On Sunday evening, warplanes belonging to the Saudi-led coalition supporting Yemen's internationally recognised government carried out airstrikes on Houthi positions in the Dhi al-Birah and Najd Qasim areas of Al-Misrakh district, south of Taiz province.

Two additional strikes targeted Al-Wazi'iyah district in western Taiz.

The airstrikes coincided with an escalation in fighting around Jabal Sabir, where government forces and local resistance fighters have been attempting to repel Houthi attacks and infiltration attempts.

Sources told The New Arab that local resistance fighters from the village of Al-Rahn were engaged in fierce clashes with Houthi groups attempting to advance from the villages of Khurayshah and Al-Ma'yanah towards Al-Najjadah and neighbouring communities.

The sources said the Houthis were seeking to reach the summit of Jabal al-Arus and cut off a road connecting several villages and districts across the Sabir mountain area.

The clashes coincided with heavy Houthi attacks on the Al-Sina'a position on the opposite side of the front, following the group's reported loss of several positions in Al-Sanamat, Al-Sarari and Ambiyan.

Elsewhere in Taiz, an 11-year-old Yemeni girl was wounded by shrapnel to the head on Sunday evening after Houthi shelling struck the village of Al-Shaqab in Sabir al-Mawadim district, south of the province.

The latest violence comes as Yemen's long-running war continues to intensify, with renewed clashes and missile attacks threatening to deepen the country's humanitarian and security crisis.

  •  

Putin, Trump and Xi could hold a three-way meeting next month

The Kremlin said on Monday that President Vladimir Putin, US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping could hold a three-way meeting on the sidelines of next month's APEC summit in China and that a potential meeting had come up in talks.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov was commenting after being asked about a report in the Wall Street Journal which said that Putin had proposed such a meeting in order to discuss how to end the conflict in Ukraine.

"Given that all three heads of state may potentially take part in the summit in China, the subject of such a hypothetical meeting was indeed raised. It was raised, but no specific proposals or agreements were discussed or put forward by anyone, either regarding the meeting itself or the possible agenda and content of that meeting," said Peskov.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha criticised the idea of such a summit.

"A trilateral meeting between the leaders of Ukraine, the US, and Russia could help end the war sooner. A trilateral meeting between the leaders of Russia, China, and the US would do only the opposite: encourage Putin to continue this war," he said on X.

Peskov, who told reporters on a daily conference call that the US was continuing its mediation efforts to resolve the conflict and that Russia appreciated those efforts, said it was obvious that Ukraine would need to be involved in any final peace deal.

"Of course, a final settlement is impossible without the participation of someone in Kyiv who is prepared to take responsibility," he said.

The last US-mediated ​peace ⁠talks took place in February before the United States and ⁠Israel ​launched a war ​against Iran. Ukraine and Russia remain as far apart as ever when it comes to the terms of any possible peace deal.

  •  

Exclusive: Breakthrough expected in US-Iran mediation efforts

A breakthrough in mediation efforts between the United States and Iran is expected to be announced this week, sources familiar with the negotiations told The New Arab on Monday, as Qatar and Pakistan continue diplomatic efforts to prevent a renewed war between Washington and Tehran.

Senior sources familiar with the mediation efforts, speaking to The New Arab on condition of anonymity, said negotiations were continuing to narrow differences and encourage mutual concessions aimed at preventing another military confrontation.

Despite ongoing threats exchanged between Washington and Tehran, and concerns that the war with Iran could resume after the US midterm elections on 3 November, the sources ruled out an immediate escalation in the region.

The anticipated breakthrough comes amid mounting tensions over Iran's nuclear programme, the continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz and US demands for Tehran to curb its uranium enrichment capabilities.

On Saturday evening, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth warned that Iran would face "destruction" unless it abandoned its nuclear ambitions at the negotiating table.

Speaking at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville, Hegseth accused Iran of building a "large arsenal" of conventional missiles and attempting to pursue a strategy similar to that of North Korea.

Meanwhile, US embassies across the region have warned of the possibility of rapidly developing security threats, including potential attacks by Iran and its regional allies.

Iran accuses Netanyahu of pushing for another war

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Sunday accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of attempting to drag the United States into another war with Tehran to avoid imprisonment.

Responding to remarks made by Netanyahu about Iran, Araghchi wrote on X that the Israeli leader was "dragging the United States into a new war to avoid going to prison", while disregarding the potential consequences for Israel and the US president.

The Iranian foreign minister also reiterated Tehran's proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz within seven days, provided Washington meets several Iranian demands.

These include lifting the blockade on Iranian ports, easing restrictions on Iranian oil exports and halting hostilities across regional fronts.

Araghchi said Tehran had received US feedback on the proposal and was reviewing it, although significant disagreements continued to obstruct progress.

According to Reuters, one of the main sticking points remains Washington's insistence on placing Iran's nuclear programme at the centre of negotiations, including demands for substantial reductions in Tehran's uranium enrichment capabilities.

Iran, however, wants to prioritise reopening the Strait of Hormuz and addressing the economic and security restrictions imposed on the country.

Qatar and Pakistan intensify mediation efforts

Qatar and Pakistan have continued diplomatic efforts to bridge differences between Washington and Tehran, although political and security obstacles have so far prevented an agreement that could end the confrontation and restore regional stability.

The talks come amid growing concerns over the consequences of the Strait of Hormuz remaining closed, with disruptions to shipping and global energy supplies adding urgency to efforts to reach a settlement.

Iran's ISNA news agency reported on Sunday that Pakistan's army chief, Asim Munir, could visit Tehran this week as part of ongoing cooperation between the two countries and discussions concerning regional developments and US-Iran negotiations.

The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the central issues in the crisis because of its strategic importance to global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments.

Reopening the waterway could serve not only as a measure to restore maritime traffic but also as an initial confidence-building step towards reducing tensions and restarting negotiations on broader disputes.

However, Tehran's proposal remains conditional on Washington meeting its demands, while the United States continues to insist that concerns over Iran's nuclear programme must be addressed.

Disagreements over sanctions, the blockade on Iranian ports and mechanisms for ending hostilities across the region also remain unresolved.

The latest mediation efforts therefore present Qatar and Pakistan with a critical challenge of preventing the collapse of diplomatic contacts while securing reciprocal confidence-building measures that could pave the way for broader negotiations on Iran's nuclear programme, sanctions and regional security arrangements.

The sources' assessment that an immediate escalation is unlikely offers a potential opening for diplomacy, despite the continued exchange of threats and the absence of a comprehensive agreement between Washington and Tehran.

  •  

Netanyahu unveils war doctrine, maps new regional threats

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has unveiled a security doctrine advocating pre-emptive military strikes and buffer zones along Israel's borders, despite the collapse of his previous security strategy during the 7 October 2023 attack, while displaying maps of supposed regional alliances just days before Israeli elections.

The three-page document, titled "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Security Concept", was published on the Israeli government's website on Sunday and outlines the country's alleged principal security threats and 10 central principles guiding its military strategy.

The proposals drew sharp criticism from Israeli opposition leaders, who dismissed the document as superficial, filled with hollow slogans and an attempt to distract from Netanyahu's security failures ahead of the 27 October parliamentary elections.

The document was released as Netanyahu struggles in opinion polls and has recently acknowledged being "very worried" about his prospects of winning another term.

According to Haaretz, Netanyahu's previous security doctrine, unveiled in 2018, was in place ahead of the Hamas-led attack on 7 October 2023, when Israel's intelligence, deterrence and border defences failed.

An Israeli state comptroller's report last year criticised Netanyahu for failing to submit his national security doctrine for formal cabinet approval, meaning it was never translated into binding military plans or budgets.

The report found that three fundamental pillars of Israel's security strategy collapsed on 7 October: deterrence, intelligence warnings and border defences, including advanced technological barriers that were breached during the attack.

Despite those failures, Netanyahu has yet to establish an independent state commission of inquiry into the decisions that preceded the attack, instead focusing his latest presentation on Israel's subsequent military campaigns.

Pre-emptive strikes and military expansion

In the document's introduction, Netanyahu argued that the Hamas-led attack on 7 October 2023 had "forced" Israel into a wide-ranging war, claiming that Israeli military operations from Gaza to Yemen, Lebanon and Iran had averted an elleged threat of imminent nuclear "annihilation".

He also claimed that Israel had dismantled the "stranglehold" imposed by the so-called Iranian axis, despite the devastating consequences of Israel's military campaigns across the region, including its genocidal war in Gaza.

Netanyahu said the conflict had required a fundamental revision of Israel's security doctrine, prioritising offensive military action over containment and defence.

The document calls for "prioritising the prevention of threats and attacking them rather than containing them and defending against them", including pre-emptive strikes against emerging threats.

It identifies Iran, which Israel accuses of seeking nuclear weapons, as a principal threat, alongside Yemen's Houthis, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Palestinian armed groups in Gaza.

Precision-guided missiles, drones, electronic warfare and cyberattacks are also listed among Israel's major security concerns, alongside what it calls "domestic terrorism and internal enemies" and international efforts to isolate Israel.

Among its central principles, the doctrine calls for maintaining Israel's military superiority, strengthening deterrence and early-warning capabilities, and preparing for preventive attacks.

It also advocates establishing buffer zones along Israel's borders where deemed necessary, although it does not specify their locations or which neighbouring countries could be affected.

Israel has already occupied additional territory in southern Syria and maintained military positions inside southern Lebanon, while continuing its occupation of Palestinian territory.

The document also calls for strengthening Israel's domestic military industries to reduce dependence on foreign arms suppliers, including underground weapons production, while expanding technological capabilities in artificial intelligence, quantum computing and space.

Under a section titled "Spirit of the People", it advocates encouraging settlement in the "Land of Israel", despite the illegality of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank under international law.

According to Netanyahu's office, the document was prepared with assistance from Israel's National Security Council and its head, Shmuel Ben Ezra.

Maps of regional alliances raise questions

During Sunday's presentation, Netanyahu displayed a geopolitical map depicting what he claimed were emerging regional alliances and alleged threats to Israel.

The map, which carried the logo of Germany's Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung foundation, identified Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Pakistan as the "Sunni Diamond", alongside Iran and its allies as the "Axis of Resistance", and an Israel-UAE grouping described as the "Hexagon Alliance".

Originally published in May 2026 by researchers Marc Saxer and Marcus Schneider, the graphic also categorised countries and territories considered friendly to the competing blocs.

Somaliland and Puntland were depicted as friendly to Israel and the UAE, alongside Ethiopia, Djibouti and Greece, while Somalia and its North East State were shown as friendly to the Turkey-Egypt-Pakistan-Saudi Arabia grouping.

The classifications reflect the researchers' assessment of regional alignments rather than formal military alliances.

The presentation also referred to an "Iranian-Shia axis" and a Turkey-linked Muslim Brotherhood axis as regional challenges.

Netanyahu urged Israel to take advantage of the remaining two years of US President Donald Trump's administration to expand its alliances, warning that a future American government might be less supportive.

He acknowledged differences with Trump over Turkey and claimed Israel had acted to prevent Ankara from expanding its military presence in Syria.

"I hope we don't reach a direct confrontation," Netanyahu said.

Israel recognised Somaliland as an independent state in December 2025, a move rejected by Somalia's federal government as a violation of its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Israeli opposition dismisses 'empty slogans'

The publication of Netanyahu's security doctrine prompted fierce criticism from opposition leaders Yair Lapid and Gadi Eisenkot, who accused the prime minister of attempting to conceal his government's failures, particularly those surrounding 7 October 2023.

In a post on X, Lapid described the document as "superficial and strange", saying it appeared to have been written using a free version of an AI chatbot.

He argued that it offered no genuine national security strategy and criticised Netanyahu's refusal to establish an official commission of inquiry into the 7 October failures.

Lapid also accused the prime minister of contradicting his own security principles by allowing ultra-Orthodox Jews to avoid military service, damaging Israel's international relationships and deepening domestic divisions.

Eisenkot, who leads the opposition Yashar party, described the document as "two empty pages filled with slogans", arguing that it exposed the strategic vacuum created by Netanyahu's leadership.

He questioned why the prime minister had waited until nine days before the elections, and three years after the 7 October attack, to publish his national security vision.

Eisenkot accused Netanyahu of failing to achieve his stated military objectives, including dismantling the military and governing capabilities of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, deterring Hezbollah and maintaining stability in the occupied West Bank.

He also argued that Hamas continued to maintain armed forces in Gaza while Hezbollah was rebuilding its military capabilities.

Eisenkot accused Netanyahu of refusing to investigate the failures of 7 October or draw lessons from them.

He described the document's publication as another example of Netanyahu's political tactics, accusing him of "manipulating public consciousness, stirring fear and trying to divert attention from the series of lies and racism surrounding his election campaign".

Eisenkot pledged that an opposition-led government would prepare and approve a formal Israeli national security strategy within 150 days of taking office.

  •  

How Sudan's war is big business for Egypt

Sudan’s civil war has created opportunities for businesses to profit from the country’s collapsing economy.

In Egypt, state-linked companies have expanded their role in wartime trade, supplying essential goods while benefiting from the flow of Sudanese gold across the border

The conflict has reshaped regional trade networks, allowing commercial relationships with military-linked businesses to continue despite international sanctions.

Gold exports have surged, highlighting how valuable commodities can move through neighbouring countries and into global markets even as war devastates Sudan.

So how does wartime trade work - and who benefits?

Anas Ambri traces the trade networks generating profits from the conflict in this special In-Depth video report

  •  

Israel arrests 10 over settler attacks amid record of impunity

Israeli police arrested 10 people in the occupied West Bank before dawn on Monday following settler attacks on Palestinians harvesting olives, a Washington Post photojournalist and a delegation of European diplomats, though Israel's record of rarely prosecuting settlers raises questions over whether any will face charges.

The arrests followed days of violence that left photographer Heidi Levine seriously injured and a visiting French mayor beaten, drawing international condemnation as settlers targeted Palestinians during the annual olive harvest.

Despite repeated pledges by Israeli authorities to hold perpetrators accountable, prosecutions of settlers for violence against Palestinians remain exceptionally rare, with convictions even rarer.

Police said the suspects were detained on suspicion of involvement in violent incidents, violating a military order declaring a closed military zone, and illegal construction.

They did not identify those arrested or specify their individual roles in the attacks. Israel's Army Radio reported that the suspects were Israeli citizens.

"Following the severe incidents of violence over the past weekend, including the assault of a media worker and the suspected attacks on foreign civilians, an arrest operation was conducted before dawn," said Major General Moshe Finchi, the Israeli police commander in the occupied West Bank.

Police said they had seized vehicles and items linking suspects to alleged offences, although Israeli police have long been accused of enabling settler attacks on Palestinians.

The Shin Bet security agency, Israeli military and border police also participated in the investigation, according to the police account. Those arrested were transferred for questioning.

Pledges to prosecute amid entrenched impunity

Police said those arrested had been taken into custody "with the intent to bring anyone who perpetrated criminal activity to justice".

"The Israel Police condemns all forms of violence and will pursue these active investigations so that anyone involved in these incidents faces the judicial process, regardless of background," the force alleged.

But those pledges stand against a longstanding record of impunity for Israelis who attack Palestinians and their property in the occupied West Bank, casting doubt on whether the latest arrests will result in prosecutions.

Israeli human rights organisation Yesh Din found that 93.6% of the police investigation files it monitored concerning ideologically motivated offences by Israelis against Palestinians between 2005 and 2025 were closed without an indictment. Just 3% of those cases led to full or partial convictions.

Yesh Din said the findings demonstrated a systematic failure to hold perpetrators accountable and protect Palestinians, arguing that settler violence helps expand Israeli control over Palestinian land by intimidating residents and driving them from their communities.

The latest arrests come amid an escalation in settler violence during the annual olive harvest, with Palestinians facing repeated attacks while attempting to access and cultivate their land.

Nearly 200 settler attacks linked to this year's olive harvest had caused casualties or property damage by mid-October, according to the UN humanitarian office, a figure that already surpasses the 185 incidents recorded throughout the entire 2025 season.

  •  
❌