Hier à Oman, le dialogue a repris entre les Etats-Unis et l’Iran, des pourparlers décrits comme constructifs par les deux parties. Le spectre d’une intervention américaine de grande envergure s’éloigne-t-il? Pas vraiment, prévient le spécialiste de la région David Rigoulet-Roze, invité dans l’émission Tout un monde.

Comme le voulait Téhéran, le dialogue se concentre sur la question du nucléaire iranien, avec en particulier la problématique de l’enrichissement de l’uranium. Les missiles balistiques, le réseau d’influence de l’Iran et le sort de la population semblent avoir été écartés, alors que le Secrétaire d’Etat américain Marco Rubio avait insisté pour qu’ils soient aussi abordés.

Malgré les apparences, ces discussions ne constituent pas vraiment un premier pas vers un abaissement des tensions dans la région, a relativisé David Rigoulet-Roze, chercheur à l’Institut français d’analyse stratégique (IFAS) et chercheur associé à l’Institut européen pour les études sur le Moyen-Orient et l’Afrique du Nord (EISMENA), lundi dans l’émission Tout un monde de la RTS.

“Il y a une forme de scénarisation, de théâtre d’ombres. En réalité, les lignes rouges respectives n’ont pas changé”, pointe celui qui est aussi rédacteur en chef de la revue Orients Stratégiques. Du côté américain, on veut que Téhéran renonce à tout enrichissement d’uranium, peu importe l’usage qui doit en être fait, civil ou militaire. Or, il est hors de question pour l’Iran de revoir le principe de l’enrichissement sur son sol. “On ne voit donc pas très bien comment les deux pourraient s’ajuster, même si, en termes d’affichage, chaque partie fait mine de considérer que les premiers contacts ont été positifs”, résume David Rigoulet-Roze.

Les deux camps jouent la montre

Pour le chercheur, chacun cherche à gagner du temps: l’Iran pour retrouver une situation stable, les Etats-Unis pour étoffer leur dispositif militaire. “Il faut se garder de l’affichage présenté […] A un moment, la question va se poser de savoir qui est prêt à faire un compromis, et on ne voit pas qui pourrait le faire d’un côté comme de l’autre”.

Au problème de l’uranium se superpose celui des missiles balistiques. Depuis les bombardements israéliens sur l’Iran, Téhéran a relancé son programme de missiles balistiques. Ce dernier devient un enjeu existentiel pour Israël, qui n’a pas manqué de le faire savoir à Washington, note le chercheur français. A ses yeux, “les choses se mettent en place pour vraisemblablement, à un moment ou à un autre, une confrontation à caractère militaire”.

Pour le régime iranien, l’enjeu est considérable: il joue sa survie, rappelle David Rigoulet-Roze. De quoi faire dire au chercheur à l’Institut français d’analyse stratégique que nous sommes arrivés à un moment charnière: “On considère encore que l’option diplomatique demeure, alors même qu’on s’en éloigne de plus en plus de jour en jour”.

Le programme nucléaire iranien a-t-il vraiment été anéanti?

Après la campagne de bombardements américano-israélienne de mars dernier, Donald Trump avait affirmé que le programme nucléaire iranien avait été anéanti. Si tel est vraiment le cas, que reste-t-il à négocier?

“Les experts ont émis des doutes sur l’anéantissement complet du programme”, rappelle David Rigoulet-Roze. “Il a été considérablement amoindri, les infrastructures ayant subi des dommages très importants. Mais des questions demeurent en suspens, d’abord parce que l’Agence internationale de l’énergie atomique (AIEA) n’a pas pu avoir accès au site bombardé, ensuite parce qu’il reste un grand point d’interrogation au sujet des 440 kilos d’uranium enrichis à 60% [que l’Iran détenait avant les bombardements, ndlr]”, pointe le chercheur.

“On est aujourd’hui dans l’incapacité de donner la localisation de cet uranium, qui est proche du seuil militaire”, souligne-t-il.

“Les populations ne sont pas le critère essentiel de décision”

“Tenez bon, l’aide est en route!”: il y a un mois, en plein soulèvement populaire iranien, Donald Trump avait laissé entendre à la population que les Etats-Unis interviendraient pour destituer le régime et empêcher ses exactions. La rue y croit-elle encore aujourd’hui? Ou bien, comme le parie Téhéran, va-t-on assister à un “effet drapeau” en cas d’attaque américaine, avec un regain de patriotisme qui viendrait reléguer au second plan le ressentiment de la population contre le pouvoir iranien?

“ll y a une grande amertume” dans la population iranienne depuis ce “quasi-appel à l’insurrection de la part de Donald Trump”, relève David Rigoulet-Roze, qui note que cette fois, les choses pourraient changer car “il y a maintenant un dispositif militaire qui n’existait pas à l’époque et laisse présager d’une éventuelle option militaire”.

Le sort du peuple, de toute manière, ne fait pas partie des variables principales dans l’équation, relativise toutefois le chercheur: “Ce sont les questions stratégiques, à savoir le nucléaire en premier, mais aussi le balistique désormais, surtout pour Israël. […] On est dans la realpolitik. Dans ce cadre-là, les populations ne sont pas le critère essentiel de détermination d’une décision”

World Opinion + Agences

L’article Débats. En Iran, malgré les pourparlers, “les choses se mettent en place pour une confrontation militaire” est apparu en premier sur زوايا ميادين | Mayadin Columns.

The US is seen with growing suspicion within Kurdish communities and elites, which is changing political calculations.

Last month during the violent clashes between Kurdish forces and the Syrian army, the United States delivered a devastating message to Syria’s Kurds: Their partnership with Washington had “expired“. This was not merely a statement of shifting priorities – it was a clear signal that the US was siding with Damascus and abandoning the Kurds at their most vulnerable moment.

For the Kurds across the region watching events unfold, the implications were profound. The US is no longer perceived as a reliable partner or supporter of minorities.

This development is likely to have an impact not just on the Kurdish community in Syria but also those in Iraq, Turkiye and Iran.

Fears of repeat marginalisation in Syria

US support for Damascus under interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa paves the way for a centralised Syrian state – an arrangement that Kurds throughout the region view with deep suspicion. Their wariness is rooted in bitter historical experience.

Centralised states in the Middle East have historically marginalised, excluded and assimilated Kurdish minorities. The prospect of such a system emerging in Syria, with US backing, represents a fundamental divergence from Kurdish hopes for the region’s future.

The approach the Assad regime to the Kurdish question was built on systematic denial. Kurds were not recognised as a distinct collective group within Syria’s national fabric; the state banned the public use of the Kurdish language and Kurdish names. Many Kurds were denied citizenship.

Al-Sharaa’s presidential decree of January 16 promised Kurds some rights while the January 30 agreement between Damascus and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) included limited recognition of Kurdish collective identity, including acknowledgment of “Kurdish regions” – terminology conspicuously absent from Syria’s political vocabulary and government documents in the past.

These represent incremental gains, but they are unfolding within a transitional government structure that aims for centralisation as its ultimate objective. That is why Syrian Kurds remain suspicious of whether the promises made today will be upheld in the future.

While a consensus has emerged among the majority of Kurdish groups that armed resistance is not strategically viable at this stage, any future engagement with the US will be perceived with mistrust.

Possibility of renewed Shia-Kurdish alliance in Iraq

After years of power rivalries between Shia and Kurdish parties in Iraq, both groups are now observing developments in Syria and potential changes in Iran with a shared sense of threat and common interests. If in 2003, their alliance was driven by a shared past – the suffering under Saddam Hussein’s regime – today it is being guided by a shared future shaped by fears of being marginalised in the region.

At both the political and popular levels, Shia and Kurdish parties and communities have had much more in common over the past few weeks than in the past. This convergence is evident not only in elite political calculations but also in public sentiment across both communities.

For the first time in recent memory, both Kurdish elites and ordinary citizens in Iraq are no longer enthusiastic about regime change in Iran, a position that would have been unthinkable just a few weeks ago.

In addition, last month, Iraq’s Shia Coordination Framework, an alliance of its Shia political parties, nominated Nouri al-Maliki for prime minister, the most powerful position in the Iraqi government. Remarkably, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), the dominant Kurdish political force, welcomed the nomination.

The KDP’s support for al-Maliki was not solely a reaction to anger over US policy in Syria. It was also rooted in Iraqi and Kurdish internal politics. The endorsement is part of an ongoing rivalry between the KDP and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) over Iraq’s presidency, an office reserved for the Kurds. The KDP needs allies in Baghdad to ensure its candidate, rather than the PUK’s, secures the position.

However, Washington might see an alignment between the KDP-led Kurdistan Regional Government in northern Iraq and an al-Maliki-led government or a similar government in Baghdad as not conducive to its interests in Iraq, especially its efforts to curb Iranian influence.

Before casting blame, Washington should ask itself why the Kurds feels compelled to adopt this position. The Kurdish stance cannot be fully understood without factoring US policy in Syria into the discussion. From a Kurdish perspective, the US has not been a neutral arbiter in Syria.

The peace process in Turkiye

Over the past year, many believed that the sustainability of Turkiye’s peace process with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) hinged on a resolution of the Kurdish question in Syria and the fate of the SDF.

The violent clashes between Damascus, backed by Ankara and Washington, and the SDF threatened to close the door on negotiations. Remarkably, however, not all avenues have been shut.

It now appears the two issues are being treated as separate files. Negotiations with the PKK are likely to continue within Turkiye’s borders, and crucially, PKK leaders have not translated their disappointment over the weakening of the SDF into a definitive rejection of talks with Ankara.

What sustains this dynamic is that the SDF has not been entirely dismantled, leaving some breathing room for continued dialogue between Ankara and the PKK.

The Iranian Kurds

The Iranian Kurds, although farther away from Syria, have also observed events there and made their conclusions. The abandonment of the SDF reveals the unpredictable nature of US support for the region’s minorities.

In light of this and given continuing US incitement against the Iranian regime, it is quite significant that the Iranian Kurds collectively and deliberately decided not to be at the forefront of the recent protests or allow themselves to be instrumentalised by Western media.

The Kurdish community in Iran is not enthusiastic about a potential return of Reza Pahlavi, who clearly enjoys support from Washington, and the restoration of the shah’s legacy, which was also oppressive. Iranian opposition groups – many of them based in the West – have not offered a better prospect for the Kurdish question. There is widespread fear that the current regime could simply be replaced by another with no guarantee for Kurdish rights.

Some Iraq-based Iranian Kurdish armed groups did carry out attacks on Iranian positions near the Iran-Iraq border. But the main Iranian Kurdish armed actors chose not to engage directly or escalate militarily. Their calculations are based on the uncertainty about the endgame envisioned by Israel and the US and the reality that any escalation would provoke Iranian retaliation against Iraqi Kurds.

With each abandonment of its Kurdish allies, the US further erodes the foundation of trust upon which its local partnerships rest. Iraqi and Syrian Kurds have learned to live with American unreliability, but this arrangement may not endure indefinitely. When it fractures, the consequences for US influence in the region could be profound.

By Kamaran Palani – Aljazeera

L’article Analysis. US abandoning the SDF has impacted Kurds across the region est apparu en premier sur زوايا ميادين | Mayadin Columns.

President Donald Trump has ordered the deployment of US troops to Portland, Oregon, authorising use of “full force” if needed.

Trump said he was “directing Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, to provide all necessary Troops to protect War ravaged Portland”.

He claimed that the move would help protect “any of our ICE Facilities under siege from attack by Antifa, and other domestic terrorists,” adding on Truth Social: “I am also authorizing Full Force, if necessary.”

The announcement drew pushback from Democratic lawmakers, who said there was no need for federal troops to be deployed to the city.

“There is no national security threat in Portland. Our communities are safe and calm,” said Oregon Governor Tina Kotek in a statement, adding that she has asked the Trump administration for further information.

Portland’s mayor Keith Wilson said in a statement that the “number of necessary troops is zero, in Portland and any other American city”.

Saturday’s announcement marks the further expansion of deployment of troops in American cities, amid a wider crackdown by the Trump administration on illegal immigration.

Trump’s post does not specify whether he intends to activate national guard or regular US military. The post also did not specify what is meant by the use of “full force”.

“We stand ready to mobilize U.S. military personnel in support of DHS operations in Portland at the President’s direction,” Chief Pentagon Spokesman, Sean Parnell told the BBC. “The Department will provide information and updates as they become available.”

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Portland has been targeted by protesters since early June, sometimes leading to violent clashes.

As of 8 September, the US Attorney’s Office had brought federal charges against 26 people for crimes including arson, assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest.

On Friday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said that demonstrators had “repeatedly attacked and laid siege to an ICE processing centre” in Portland.

In a post on the social media platform X, the department stated that several individuals had been arrested and charged with federal offences.

“Rose City Antifa, a recently designated domestic terrorist organization, illegally doxed ICE officers. They published their home address online and on public flyers. Individuals associated with Antifa also sent death threats to DHS personnel,” DHS wrote on X.

Earlier this week, Trump signed an order formally designating antifa as a domestic terrorist organisation.

Antifa, short for “anti-fascist”, is a loosely organised movement of primarily far-left activists.

Legal experts have pointed out that there is no legal mechanism in the US that would formally establish any group as a domestic terror organisation. Such efforts, they said, could face constitutional challenges under the First Amendment, which protects free speech and assembly.

Democratic lawmakers have criticised both the president’s rhetoric and the reported actions of ICE agents in the state.

Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon said on Friday that there were “credible” reports that federal agents “may be replaying the 2020 playbook “, in a reference to federal forces being deployed in response to protests against the murder of George Floyd, a black man who died in police custody.

“I urge Oregonians not to fall into Trump’s attempt to incite violence,” Wyden said.

Local lawmakers have also accused ICE of going after people who are not an actual danger to society.

“ICE has said they’re targeting people for arrest and detainment who have committed crimes. That’s what they told us. But that’s not what we are seeing,” said Democratic house representative Suzanne Bonamici on Friday.

Lawmakers cited recent incidents, including the detention of a father outside his child’s preschool and a wildland firefighter who was arrested while battling fires in the Olympic National Forest.

They also pointed to a statistic published by the Cato Institute, a US think tank based in Washington DC, which reported that 65% of people detained by ICE had no criminal convictions.

World Opinions + BBC News

L’article Debate. Trump orders deployment of troops to Portland and authorises ‘full force’.. Video est apparu en premier sur زوايا ميادين | Mayadin Columns.

PM Bayrou lost the vote, but a deadlock in Parliament means France might struggle to find a replacement who can pass a budget aimed at cutting the deficit.

French Prime Minister François Bayrou has lost a confidence vote of MPs, ending his nine months in office during a period of chaos in the country’s parliament, the National Assembly.

Bayrou, 74, was the fourth prime minister in two years under President Emmanuel Macron, whose second term is office has been overshadowed by political instability.

The outgoing PM’s minority government called for €44bn (£38bn) of budget cuts to tackle France’s mounting public debt. It has now effectively collapsed.

The BBC looks at what led to his removal by MPsand what could happen next.

Ahead of the no-confidence vote, Bayrou spoke on Monday afternoon in the National Assembly, France’s lower house of Parliament, where he told lawmakers that the economy faced serious risks because of its deep indebtedness. He then fielded questions from parliamentarians, before the vote took place.

Here’s what you need to know:

What could happen next?

For several weeks, lawmakers had made it clear they would vote against Bayrou’s state-slashing budget. Opposition parties from the far left to the far right hold 330 seats in the 577-seat National Assembly – so Monday’s ouster was widely expected.

After Monday’s vote, Bayrou’s government has collapsed. However, he will stay in office until President Emmanuel Macron decides what to do next. Unfortunately for the president, France lacks a consensus figure to replace Bayrou.

Macron is faced with uniquely hard choices – appoint another prime minister in the hope that he or she can pass an unpopular budget, call new elections to try to re-establish a parliamentary majority, or stand down himself, something he has refused to do before his term ends in 2027.

With the arithmetic in Parliament unchanged, picking a new premier risks simply repeating the events from last year when Bayrou succeeded Michel Barnier.

A fiscal conservative, Macron is unlikely to appoint a premier who advocates for higher state spending. But after the government recently tried to cut deals on the right of the political spectrum, some wonder if Macron might try something new.

According to Stefano Palombarini, assistant professor of economics at the University of Paris VIII, “the two previous appointments, Barnier and Bayrou, both failed. He [Macron] lost a lot of credibility in that process, and if he tries a similarly centrist approach, he’d lose even more.”

Palombarini told Al Jazeera that “in this context, it would make the scenario of a relative opening towards the left possible. Some Macronist, Socialist and Green politicians say they’re ready for compromises to form a government that lasts until 2027.”

Does this mean there is a clear political path?

Not really.

According to an opinion poll this month for Le Figaro Magazine by the Verian Group, just 15 percent of the electorate has confidence in Macron, down 6 percentage points since July. However, the president has consistently ruled out resigning from office.

Separate surveys by Ifop, Elabe and Toluna Harris Interactive indicated that 56 to 69 percent of French people want snap parliamentary elections, indicating growing dissatisfaction with current party politics in a country run by minority cabinets since 2022.

For Palombarini, “there’s general political malaise [in France] and also dissatisfaction specifically with Macron. So overall, opinion polls are actually quite stable.” Indeed, the latest polls show no material change in voting intentions over the past year.

This means there is no certainty that a new prime minister would be safe from a similar fate as Bayrou.

What are the origins of this crisis?

At the heart of France’s political paralysis is Macron’s risky decision to call snap parliamentary elections last year. That came after he was re-elected in 2022.

Macron’s gamble in June 2024 was an effort to shore up support for the political centre. But French voters edged towards the extremes, leaving Macron with a weakened minority government and limiting his ability to pass legislation.

The vote resulted in a hung Parliament split between three groups. A left alliance won the most seats, but fell far short of a majority. The far-right National Rally won the most votes, but also doesn’t have a majority. Macron’s centrist coalition lost seats, but still forms a significant third bloc.

This parliamentary shake-up has made France hard to govern. Divisions have shown up most clearly around spending.

How does the budget fit into it?

The immediate reason for Bayrou’s fall is his budget proposal for next year. His unpopular 44-billion-euro ($51bn) deficit-reduction plan, including freezing most welfare spending and scrapping two public holidays, has been widely rejected by parliamentarians.

On August 25, Jordan Bardella, head of the National Rally, said his party would “never vote in favour of a government whose decisions are making the French suffer”. Bayrou in effect has announced “the end of his government”, Bardella said.

The French budget deficit is now nearly 169 billion euros ($198bn), or 5.8 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP), well above the 3 percent limit set by the European Union for countries using the euro.

Bayrou is trying to lower the government’s borrowing to 4.6 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2026 and to 2.8 percent by 2029. In turn, that would lower the overall debt-to-GDP ratio to 117.2 percent in 2029, compared with 125.3 percent if no changes are made.

Bayrou recently said young people will be saddled with years of debt payments “for the sake of the comfort of boomers” if France fails to tackle its fiscal pressures. Born in 1951, Bayrou himself qualifies as a baby boomer, the generation born in the years soon after World War II.

But any attempt to curtail social benefits is politically difficult in France, as made clear by conflicts in 2023 over Macron’s decision to raise the retirement age to 64 from 62.

Still, investors worry that France’s persistent deficits will cause ever higher debt ratios and undermine its credit score.

Is more gridlock expected?

A series of street demonstrations known as “Block Everything” is expected this week, followed by union-led hospital and rail strikes in the second half of September.

In 2018 and 2023, France witnessed what became known as the “gilets jaunes”, or yellow vest. anti-government protests against various domestic policies overseen by Macron, who will want to avoid a repeat this time, analysts said.

“Macron’s policies since 2017 have been very unpopular. If there were legislative elections tomorrow, a Macronist government would not get elected,” Palombarini said.

But with the president rejecting the idea that he might resign early, “he is likely to continue to enjoy power of the office for a few more years”, Palombarini added.

Beyond that there are also voices – from the far left this time – calling for Macron’s resignation. That is most unlikely to happen.

Who could replace Bayrou?

Pressure will be on Macron to name a successor from the left. The last two prime ministers were from the right and centre, and a left alliance came out numerically top in the 2024 election.

Olivier Faure, the leader of the Socialist Party, would be one possibility. The 57-year-old has a group of 66 deputies in the National Assembly.

Two other possibilities from the left are former PM Bernard Cazeneuve, and the veteran ex-minister Pierre Moscovici, currently head of the Cour des Comptes, the official accounting office.

If Macron decides to stick with the centre and right, his first choice would probably be Sebastien Lecornu, 39, the current defence minister who is a member of Macron’s Renaissance party and said to be close to the president.

Another conservative whose name has been mentioned is the current minister of labour and health, Catherine Vautrin.

Two other possibilities from inside government are Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau, who now leads the Republicans, and Justice Minister Gérald Darmanin.

But with all eyes on the 2027 presidential election, would these heavyweights want the electoral kiss-of-death which is to be Macron’s next PM?

World Opinions – BBC News – Aljazeera

L’article Why has the French PM had to go and what happens next? est apparu en premier sur زوايا ميادين | Mayadin Columns.

Le plan des Etats-Unis pour l’après-guerre à Gaza prévoit de déplacer toute la population du territoire palestinien. Celui-ci serait placé sous administration américaine pendant dix ans pour le transformer en un centre touristique et technologique, rapporte dimanche le Washington Post.

Le plan de 38 pages, consulté par le quotidien américain, envisage le déplacement “volontaire” des quelque deux millions d’habitants de Gaza vers d’autres pays ou dans des zones sécurisées à l’intérieur du territoire dévasté par près de deux ans de guerre, le temps de sa reconstruction.

Ceux qui accepteraient de partir recevraient 5000 dollars en cash ainsi qu’une aide couvrant quatre ans de loyer et un an de nourriture, selon ce plan. Les propriétaires terriens se verraient quant à eux offrir des “jetons numériques”, à utiliser pour financer une nouvelle vie ailleurs ou à échanger contre un appartement dans l’une des six à huit nouvelles “villes intelligentes et alimentées par l’IA” devant être construites à Gaza.

Des usines de voitures électriques, des centres de données ou des hôtels y seraient financés par des investissements publics et privés. Le territoire palestinien serait placé le temps de la reconstruction sous l’administration d’une entité baptisée Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation Trust, ou GREAT Trust. Le plan prévoit que cet organisme gouverne pendant dix ans avant de laisser la place à une “entité palestinienne réformée et déradicalisée”.

“Riviera du Moyen-Orient”

Il a été élaboré selon le Washington Post par certains des Israéliens à l’origine de la Fondation humanitaire de Gaza (GHF), une organisation privée soutenue par Israël et les Etats-Unis, créée pour distribuer l’aide alimentaire et au centre de nombreuses critiques. Sollicité par l’AFP, le département d’Etat américain n’a pas répondu dans l’immédiat.

Donald Trump avait lancé en février l’idée d’une prise de contrôle de la bande de Gaza par les Etats-Unis pour en faire la “Riviera du Moyen-Orient”, une fois vidée de ses habitants qui pourraient selon lui être déplacés vers l’Egypte et la Jordanie. Salué par l’extrême droite israélienne, ce plan a été rejeté par les pays arabes et la plupart des pays occidentaux, l’ONU mettant de son côté en garde contre un “nettoyage ethnique” à Gaza.

La guerre à Gaza a été déclenchée par l’attaque du Hamas en Israël du 7 octobre 2023, qui a entraîné la mort de 1219 personnes côté israélien, en majorité des civils, selon un décompte de l’AFP basé sur des données officielles. La campagne de représailles d’Israël a fait au moins 63’459 morts à Gaza, en majorité des civils, selon le ministère de la Santé du Hamas, dont les chiffres sont jugés fiables par l’ONU.

“Gaza n’est pas à vendre”, répond un membre du Hamas

“Gaza n’est pas à vendre”, a déclaré Bassem Naïm, membre du bureau politique du Hamas, sur les réseaux sociaux, en affirmant que le territoire est “une partie intégrante de la grande patrie palestinienne”. Il a souligné le “refus du Hamas et de notre peuple” de ce plan.

“Le Hamas rejette tous ces plans qui déplacent notre peuple et maintiennent l’occupant sur nos terres”, a déclaré un autre responsable du Hamas sous couvert de l’anonymat.

World Opinions + Agences

L’article Analyse. Un plan américain prévoit de déplacer toute la population de Gaza pour reconstruire est apparu en premier sur زوايا ميادين | Mayadin Columns.

Public anger is growing against looters and exploitative merchants. Their actions are seen as betrayal.

On July 17, I was in a market in Nuseirat camp in central Gaza looking for any affordable food item to buy when I saw a crowd of people gather in front of some shops. The people were angry about the exorbitant prices that the shop owners were charging for goods that had clearly been looted from aid convoys.

Two weeks later, I was at the same market and witnessed another angry protest. People were chanting, “You thieves!” and cursing the merchants.

Having no fear of God, shop owners are exploiting the famine without mercy, selling aid as if it were rare luxury items when in fact it is supposed to be distributed for free. The greed and exploitation have gone too far, and the people are taking things into their own hands. Across Gaza, there are protests against price speculation. In some places, shops are being forcibly closed.

Indeed, the prices of essential goods have soared to unimaginable levels, beyond anything dictated by the forces of supply and demand. People cannot understand why goods cost so much despite their minimal purchasing power. The prices I saw while walking at the market were insane: a kilo (2.2lb) of flour – 40 shekels ($12), a kilo of rice – 60 shekels ($18), a kilo of lentils – 40 shekels ($12), a kilo of sugar – 250 shekels ($73), a litre (1 quart) of cooking oil – 200 shekels ($58).

Since Israel imposed a full blockade on Gaza in March, the normal aid distribution through the United Nations – something that has to happen unabated in any warzone – has ceased.

To stave off global criticism, Israel set up humanitarian hubs to supposedly distribute aid. But they have been nothing more than death traps. Many of those who come to collect aid are shot at, and thousands have been killed or wounded.

In parallel, the Israeli government started allowing in a very small quantity of aid trucks, but a large portion of those are looted once they enter Gaza. The goods are then resold at outrageous prices.

Those who control this supply of looted food are powerful merchants and brokers, often protected by local influential actors or benefitting from indirect coordination with Israel. These actions are not spontaneous. They take place within a deliberately created atmosphere of chaos. With the collapse of state institutions and absence of legal accountability, exploitation has become the rule, not the exception.

It is clear to the Palestinians that the occupation doesn’t merely aim to show that Gaza is weak. It actively seeks to prove that it is ungovernable. To achieve this, closing the borders isn’t enough. The people of Gaza must be pushed into a state of constant chaos and friction.

Starvation is a key instrument here. Hunger doesn’t only kill. It also changes human nature. A starving person, stripped of the bare minimum needed to survive and subjected to daily humiliation, slowly loses the ability to think clearly, to judge or to restrain themselves from turning against those they perceive – rightly or wrongly – as contributing to their suffering.

There are black markets and war profiteers in every conflict. But in this one, the occupying power is encouraging these criminal activities, not because it is earning money from them, but because it serves its overall goal. The Palestinians who choose to participate in this form of extortion are motivated by greed, blackmail or survival.

This slow unravelling is exactly what the occupation has aimed for. It wants chaos in the streets of Gaza so Israeli and international media can be quick to point a finger at the Palestinians and declare: “Look, the Palestinian people are imploding. They can’t govern themselves. They don’t deserve a state.” But the truth is, this is not a sign of a failed nation. It is evidence of the occupation’s success in dragging it to the brink.

It is not the people who have lost control. Control has been forcibly stripped from them – through starvation, the systematic destruction of healthcare and sanitary infrastructure, the dismantling of state institutions and the empowerment of criminals.

Yet Gaza will not break. People may grow angry and desperate, cry out and protest, but they still retain a moral compass. This collective outcry is not infighting. It is a clear warning that society will no longer tolerate betrayal. Those who raise prices mercilessly in times of siege are traitors, and they will be held accountable before institutions of justice when Gaza rebuilds.

The occupation may be revelling now in the unfolding collapse, but it would be wrong to think it has defeated the Palestinians. Every crisis breeds new awareness. Every betrayal gives birth to new resistance. The vast majority of Palestinians refuse to become tools in the hands of their torturers. They refuse subjugation and erasure. They refuse to exploit and harm their fellow citizens.

Palestinian national solidarity is still alive.

By Amal Abu Seif Palestinian writer and researcher from Gaza – Aljazeera ENG

L’article Palestinians won’t tolerate war profiteering in Gaza est apparu en premier sur زوايا ميادين | Mayadin Columns.

Alors que l’aide est à nouveau distribuée dans la bande de Gaza, le médecin Pierre Micheletti insiste dans Forum sur des conditions nécessaires et pas remplies actuellement: volume suffisant de nourriture, capacité de se déplacer pour en acquérir ou encore stock de carburant indispensable pour cuisiner les denrées.

Sous la pression internationale, Israël a permis dimanche aux premières cargaisons d’aide d’être distribuées dans la bande de Gaza, dans un contexte d’extrême urgence pour la population et de famine. Quelque 120 camions sont entrés dans le territoire dimanche, selon Israël.

Ce volume n’est pas suffisant, souligne Pierre Micheletti, ancien président d’Action contre la Faim et Médecins du Monde France et membre de l’Observatoire Ethique et Santé Humanitaire à Neuchâtel. Selon lui, il faudra aussi “rester très attentif que ça ne soit pas une mesure cosmétique de marketing humanitaire qui viendrait répondre à la pression que subissent aujourd’hui les autorités israéliennes, sans pour autant que n’avancent les résolutions politiques”.

Effet d’annonce

Le médecin dénonce “une forme de réduction de la complexité dans ces mesures”. Plusieurs conditions doivent être remplies pour qu’une population soit en situation de sécurité alimentaire, rappelle-t-il. Tout d’abord, il faut “que les aliments soient disponibles”, décrit Pierre Micheletti. “Les décisions récentes s’inscrivent dans cette logique. Plus d’aliments vont arriver dans la bande de Gaza et augmenter la disponibilité”, analyse-t-il.

Mais il faut également veiller à l’accessibilité de la nourriture, que ce soit en termes géographiques (se déplacer) ou financiers (payer un certain nombre de ces denrées au marché noir, car “le marché noir fonctionne”).

Il y a encore un autre pilier fondamental: “Est-ce que les populations, dans l’état d’extrême dénuement dans lequel elles sont, pourront utiliser ces denrées alimentaires? (…) est-ce qu’elles disposeront des instruments de cuisine pour cuire ce qui doit être cuit, le riz et toutes les autres denrées? Est-ce qu’elles disposeront du carburant ou des combustibles pour faire cette cuisson? Est-ce qu’elles disposeront d’une eau de bonne qualité pour réaliser ces éléments de cuisson?”

“On se centre sur un effet d’annonce qui réduit cette complexité à la seule disponibilité, avec un nombre très restreint de camions autorisés”, déplore le médecin.

Largages aériens, une mauvaise idée

Les largages aériens sont désormais aussi autorisés. Mais pour Pierre Micheletti, “ils posent problème”, car ils “peuvent, dans un territoire aussi densément peuplé, exposer les bénéficiaires à des accidents de sécurité selon où tombe ce méga colis”.

Le médecin souligne également que ces colis “sont disséminés sans beaucoup de précisions et donc se pose la question de l’accessibilité. Comment des populations concentrées peuvent-elles se déplacer compte tenu de leur état de santé?” Certains acteurs économiques pourraient aussi “préempter ces largages”, décrit Pierre Micheletti, avec “des formes de marché noir et de revente”. Selon lui, “on est sur une absence totale d’organisation, de distribution telle que le nécessite la situation actuelle”.

“Les gens ont peur de quitter leur tente et de voir une palette tomber sur leur enfant. Beaucoup sont morts à cause des largages aériens sur les tentes”, témoigne d’ailleurs Ahmed Al-Sumairi, Palestinien déplacé qui vit dans le centre de Gaza, auprès de l’agence américaine Associated Press et relayé mardi dans l’émission Tout un monde.

World Opinions + Agences

L’article Faim à Gaza: les multiples obstacles à une aide humanitaire efficace.. Vidéos est apparu en premier sur زوايا ميادين | Mayadin Columns.

Syrians poured out into the streets across Syria and around the world, jubilant at the end of Bashar al-Assad’s rule.

A number of European countries, including the UK, have suspended the processing of asylum applications for Syrians, after the downfall of former president Bashar al-Assad.

Austria’s caretaker government has stopped all asylum claims from Syrians and says it is making plans to to repatriate or deport people back to their homeland, arguing that the situation in the country has changed fundamentally.

Germany (home to a million Syrians), the United Kingdom, France, and Greece have all said they will halt asylum decisions for now.

The moves leave many in the Syrian diaspora in limbo, following the collapse of the Assad regime after 50 years of brutal rule.

Since 2011, the UN says more than 14 million Syrians have been forced to flee their homes in search of safety.

Austria’s Chancellor Karl Nehammer, a conservative who is a hardliner on immigration, said in a post on X that the government would “support all Syrians who have found refuge in Austria and want to return to their home country”.

He added that the “security situation in Syria must also be reassessed in order to make deportations possible again in the future”.

In a statement, Austria’s Interior Ministry said “the political situation in Syria has changed fundamentally and, above all, rapidly in recent days”.

Around 95,000 Syrians live in Austria, many of whom arrived during the migrant crisis of 2015 and 2016. A backlash against them has fuelled support for the far right and conservatives in Austria.

We will not dispense with the old regime, says al-Jolanipublished at 20:1120:11

The leader of the main Islamist rebel group in Syria has met the former prime minister to co-ordinate the transfer of power.

Footage released by the rebel’s military operations command shows Abu Mohammed al-Jolani saying the transition would benefit from the experience of the old government.

“The young men have gained a lot of experience,” al-Jolani says. “They started working from nothing.

“Idlib is small and has no resources, but thank God, we were able to achieve something big during the past period. You will see experience, it’s not zero. In certain areas, they had varying high levels of success.

“However, we will not dispense the old status, it is essential that we take advantage of its existence.”

Hamas ‘more isolated than ever’ after al-Assad’s fall: Netanyahu

Netanyahu tells reporters that Israel is using “all the tools it has” to ensure its security after the change in leadership in Syria and says the fall of al-Assad is the “direct result of the heavy blows [Israel] landed on Hamas, on Hezbollah and on Iran”.

The Israeli prime minister also said Hamas is “more isolated than ever” after the fall of al-Assad.

“It expected help from Hezbollah – we took that away. It expected help from Iran – we took that as well,” Netanyahu said. “It expected help from the Assad regime – OK, that won’t happen anymore.”

Netanyahu added that Hamas’s growing isolation would potentially “open doors” for a captive release deal although he added that it is “too early” to say whether a deal will succeed.

Netanyahu reiterated that he will not stop the war now.

World Opinions + Agencies

L’article Joyous celebrations across Syria after al-Assad’s fallJoyous celebrations in Syria.. Video est apparu en premier sur زوايا ميادين | Mayadin Columns.

Kamala Harris a affirmé mercredi que “oui”, son rival républicain Donald Trump était un fasciste, à moins de deux semaines d’une élection aussi tendue qu’acrimonieuse entre les deux candidats à la Maison Blanche.

“Pensez-vous que Donald Trump est un fasciste?”, lui a demandé un journaliste de la chaîne CNN lors d’une réunion publique avec des électeurs, en Pennsylvanie. “Oui, je le pense”, a répondu la vice-présidente et candidate démocrate à l’élection du 5 novembre.

Cette question lui a été posée en référence cette semaine aux propos de l’ancien chef de cabinet du républicain à la Maison Blanche.

Les Américains ne veulent pas d’un “président des Etats-Unis qui admire les dictateurs et qui est un fasciste”, a lancé la vice-présidente lors d’une réunion publique avec des électeurs, en Pennsylvanie, organisée par CNN.

“Pensez-vous que Donald Trump est un fasciste?” lui avait demandé peu auparavant un journaliste de la chaîne.

“Oui, je le pense”, a répondu la candidate démocrate à l’élection du 5 novembre, dans une déclaration forte tranchant avec ses réponses plus vagues à des questions sur d’autres sujets, notamment l’économie et l’immigration.

Cette question lui a été posée en référence cette semaine aux propos de l’ancien chef de cabinet du républicain à la Maison Blanche, John Kelly.

“Pouvoir absolu”

Cet ancien haut gradé de l’armée américaine a estimé que le candidat républicain répondait à la définition d’un fasciste, et a assuré que l’ex-président aurait dit que le dictateur nazi Adolf Hitler avait “fait de bonnes choses”.

Kamala Harris a estimé que John Kelly avait “sonné l’alarme”, à l’approche d’un scrutin qui se jouera certainement à quelques dizaines de milliers de voix d’écart dans une poignée d’Etats cruciaux.

Dans une courte allocution très solennelle à Washington mercredi, la candidate démocrate avait déjà estimé que Donald Trump était “de plus en plus déséquilibré” et à la recherche d’un “pouvoir absolu”.

Donald Trump, en Géorgie, le 23 octobre 2024 AFP Jim WATSON

Le candidat républicain qualifie lui aussi son opposante de “fasciste”, mais aussi de “marxiste” et de “communiste”.

Mardi, Kamala Harris poursuivra dans la même veine en livrant un “réquisitoire final” contre Donald Trump à Washington, à l’endroit où l’ancien président avait harangué des milliers de partisans juste avant qu’ils n’attaquent le Capitole le 6 janvier 2021.

Les deux candidats se démultiplient dans la dernière ligne droite de la campagne, cherchant à toucher tous les électeurs, toutes les communautés avant le 5 novembre.

Serrée

La course entre Donald Trump et Kamala Harris, deux candidats que tout oppose, est décrite comme l’une des plus serrées de l’histoire américaine dans un pays particulièrement polarisé.

Âge des candidats à la présidence des Etats-Unis au jour de l’élection, pour chaque élection depuis 1789 AFP Valentin RAKOVSKY, Gal ROMA, Jean-Michel CORNU

Dans cet immense pays, les candidats arpentent tout particulièrement une poignée d’Etats cruciaux pour tenter de convaincre les électeurs indécis.

Donald Trump s’est rendu mercredi dans l’un d’entre eux, en Géorgie, où le vote anticipé a commencé très fort. Le républicain s’est offert un bain de foule après une réunion publique sur le thème de la foi dans une chapelle à Zebulon, avant de donner un grand meeting de campagne auprès de jeunes ultra-conservateurs.

Le républicain n’a pas évoqué durant ce rassemblement les accusations, révélées mercredi par The Guardian, selon lesquelles il aurait agressé une mannequin durant les années 90.

Des insultes de la part de Donald Trump

Tenant des propos de plus en plus outranciers ces derniers jours, Donald Trump a de son côté multiplié les attaques personnelles contre son adversaire qu’il décrit comme “une personne stupide” qui “ne mérite pas de pouvoir se présenter”. “Si elle devient présidente, ce pays est fini.”

“Vous devez dire à Kamala Harris que vous en avez assez. (…) Tu es une vice-présidente de merde, la pire, tu es virée. Dégage d’ici”, avait-t-il lancé à ses partisans le 19 octobre lors d’un meeting en Pennsylvanie.

World Opinions + AFP + Agences

L’article  Présidentielle américaine 2024 : Harris qualifie Trump de “fasciste”.. Vidéo est apparu en premier sur زوايا ميادين | Mayadin Columns.

Hamas confirms leader Yahya Sinwar was killed in combat with Israeli forces in Gaza, says he died defending Palestine until the last moments of his life.

International leaders heralded the death of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar as an opportunity to begin ceasefire negotiations — an idea Hezbollah, Israel and Hamas have rebuffed.

Israeli captives held in Gaza will not return until war on Gaza stops and Israeli forces withdraw from the besieged and bombarded territory, senior Hamas official Khalil Hayya says.

Israel’s PM Benjamin Netanyahu says “this is not the end of the war in Gaza” despite the killing of Sinwar.

Lebanese group Hezbollah says it is entering a “new phase” in its fight against invading Israeli troops, adding that it has introduced new weapons over the past days.

In Gaza, at least 42,500 people have been killed and 99,546 wounded in Israeli attacks since October 7, 2023. At least 1,139 people were killed in Hamas’s attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, and more than 200 were taken captive.

International leaders heralded the death of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar as an opportunity to begin ceasefire negotiations — an idea Hezbollah, Israel and Hamas have rebuffed.

Following the killing of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar in Gaza on Thursday, US presidential candidate Kamala Harris said it was time for the “day after to begin” in the Middle East.

The day after his death, however, Israel, Hamas and Hezbollah gave little indication any immediate fighting would stop, with both sides of the conflict instead buckling down on their conflicting demands.

After the Israeli military confirmed it had killed Sinwar, international leaders — led by US President Joe Biden — said that his death would allow ceasefire negotiations to move forward.

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said that Sinwar, who was widely considered to be the primary architect behind the 7 October terrorist attacks, was a big obstacle in the negotiations between Israel and Hamas.

“On multiple occasions over the past months, Sinwar rebuffed efforts by the United States and its partners to bring this war to a close through an agreement that would return the hostages to their families and alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people,” Blinken said in a statement Thursday.

So far, Israel has not given any indication it would be willing to start negotiations with Hamas or its Iran-backed ally, Hezbollah.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the families of hostages Thursday, saying that it was an “important moment” to bring the hostages home, adding that anyone who assisted with the return of hostages would be allowed to leave Gaza.

Still, the leader failed to say how Israel would fulfil Hamas’ key demand that Israel withdraw completely from the Gaza Strip.

Netanyahu also said after Sinwar’s death was confirmed that the war was not over, with “the task before us not yet complete”.

The Israeli military called up an additional reserve brigade in northern Israel on Thursday, a signal that it is prepared to continue its ground incursion into southern Lebanon whilst it simultaneously pummels Beirut’s suburbs.

Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran sabre-rattle

Senior Hamas official Khalil Al Hayya, who served as the chief negotiator for Hamas in talks for a ceasefire, also gave little hope that the group would be willing to compromise on their ceasefire conditions.

In a televised address, Al Hayya reiterated the group’s core demands that Israel withdraw from the Gaza strip and Palestinian prisoners in Israel be released.

Hezbollah, whose targets Israel is hitting in Lebanon, said that Sinwar’s death meant “the transition to a new and escalating phase in the confrontation with Israel.”

On Friday, the group issued a statement saying their fighters have used new types of precision-guided missiles and explosive drones against Israel in recent days, including one that hit a military training camp in Israel last Sunday, killing four people.

They added that the group were preparing in advance to battle Israeli troops in southern Lebanon and announced several missile and artillery attacks on Israeli forces on the border between the countries overnight.

Iran, who hit Israel in an attack two weeks ago, said that Sinwar would be remembered as an “inspiration”.

Israel has threatened to retaliate to Iran’s attack, compromising that it would not hit military or nuclear targets in the country after Biden warned Netanyahu that the US would not support such attacks.

World Opinions + Agencies

L’article Analysis. Hamas confirms Yahya Sinwar killed in Gaza combat with Israel forces.. Hopes for ceasefire diminish day after killing of Hamas leader.. Video est apparu en premier sur زوايا ميادين | Mayadin Columns.