Our Friday News Analysis | What the World Reads Now!

According to Wikipedia, as of September 2025, the State of Palestine is recognized as a sovereign state by 157 of the 193 member states of the United Nations (UN), or just over 80% of all UN members.[1][2][3] It has been a non-member observer state of the UN General Assembly since November 2012. This limited status is largely because the United States, a permanent member of the UN Security Council with veto power, has consistently blocked Palestine's full UN membership;[4][5] Palestine is recognized by the other four permanent members, which are China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom.[6][7]

EDITORIAL | Think! History is On Whose Side? (Part 20)

Click here for Part 1
Click here for Part 2
Click here for Part 3
Click here for Part 4
Click here for Part 5
Click here for Part 6
Click here for Part 7
Click here for Part 8
Click here for Part 9
Click here for Part 10
Click here for Part 11
Click here for Part 12
Click here for Part 13
Click here for Part 14
Click here for Part 15
Click here for Part 16
Click here for Part 17
Click here for Part 18
Click here for Part 19

By Abraham A. van Kempen
17 October 2025

THINK! Look! How Do You React to What the Map Tells You? History is On Whose Side?

The Collective West's significance has diminished compared to the rest of the world. Only 36 UN member states oppose Palestine. Many of these countries, the so-called Coalition of the Willing, aka the Coalition of the Deluded, are the same renegades backing EU-US/NATO aggression against Russia, China, and India, along with the entire Middle East and Iran. Since 2007, the Coalition of the Willing has spent $ billions on false and inflammatory hoopla to persuade the world that they are right and everyone else is wrong. The world knows better and clearly rejects the West’s hype and disinformation that underpins its neo-colonialist modus operandi:

• What is mine is mine
• What is yours is mine also
• It’s either our way or the highway
• If you’re not for us, you’re against us
• If you don’t do it our way, you’re dead meat.

Last week, I had wanted to begin writing the story of the century, highlighting how, in the eyes of most of the 8 billion people on earth, President Vladimir Putin is regarded as the Statesman of the Century. I’ll try to expound on this issue next week. This week, I’m focusing on the Middle East. But I won’t keep you hanging. Please read President Putin’s speech delivered to the German Bundestag on 25 September 2001, featured in the Friday News Analysis of 5 September 2025:

PRESIDENT VLADIMIR PUTIN | SPEECH IN THE BUNDESTAG OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

Bundestag Gives Putin Standing Ovation

President Vladimir Putin addressing the Bundestag.

September 25, 2001
Berlin, Germany

President Vladimir Putin: Distinguished Mr President, Distinguished ladies and gentlemen,

I am sincerely grateful for this opportunity to speak in the Bundestag. This is the first such opportunity for a Russian head of state in the entire history of Russian-German relations. And this honor granted to me today only reaffirms the mutual interest of Russia and Germany in dialogue.

Scroll down in the same Friday News Analysis of 5 September 2025:

PRESIDENT PUTIN'S PIVOTAL MUNICH SPEECH IN 2007 SPARKED A TECTONIC RIPPLE EFFECT THAT CHANGED HISTORY.

President Vladimir Putin's landmark speech on February 10, 2007, at the 43rd Munich Security Conference, was a significant moment in which he candidly voiced concerns about the EU-US/NATO push for a unipolar world, its unchecked use of force, and its apparent disregard for international law.

For the first time since the end of the Cold War, he clearly expressed that Russia isn't interested in fitting into such a global order. While his words were critical, Putin's intent wasn't to ignite conflict but to advocate for a new partnership built on fairness and mutual respect.

The Western mainstream media, however, distorted his speech and portrayed it as a malicious attack.

Watch and judge for yourself.

View the Video Here (30 minutes, 46 seconds)

Voevoda
10 February 2007

PRESIDENT VLADIMIR PUTIN | SPEECH AND DISCUSSION AT THE 2007 MUNICH CONFERENCE ON SECURITY POLICY

Read The Full 8,000-Word Transcript Here

Opening Remarks

President Putin expresses gratitude for the invitation to the conference, which brings together influential figures from over 40 countries. The format enables honest discussion about international security without resorting to empty diplomatic formalities.

International Security: Principles and Challenges

President Putin described Security as a universal concept that encompasses political, economic, and civilizational dialogue. He highlighted the principle that "security for one is security for all," referencing Franklin D. Roosevelt's assertion that “breaches of peace anywhere threaten peace everywhere.”

Since Mr. Putin’s speech, the West sees multipolarity as a threat and has started to vilify and demonize him, calling him the new Hitler, with accusations and inflammatory rhetoric more provocative than the Russian Hoax in the US. Many in the Collective West were sucked into the so-called 'Empire of Lies,' which blinded them with deception. Most Western Europeans and Americans will come out of the trance.

As I stated last week and the many weeks before, we’ve reached a point in human history where universal deterrence prevails. Mutual deterrence catalyzes diplomacy. So, let’s talk and reason (unless you prefer a nuclear crater in your backyard).

Enjoy your weekend.

Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor

Building the Bridge Foundation, The Hague
A Way to Get to Know Each Other and the Other

GUEST EDITORIAL | THE EU ISN’T AT WAR WITH RUSSIA – IT’S AT WAR WITH THE MINDS OF ITS OWN CITIZENS.

European leaders are trying to gaslight their populations into believing that it’s Moscow that wants a fight, not them.

© RT

By Tarik Cyril Amar, a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory

@tarikcyrilamartarikcyrilamar.substack.comtarikcyrilamar.com

HomeWorld News
14 October 2025

This moment in history will be remembered as the Great European Drone Scare for weeks now, with NATO-EU Europe subjected to weeks of vague, scary reports of drones over various sites, including airports in Denmark and Germany.

They are of unknown origin and purpose, often also unknown whether they are real. There is no proof of Russia's involvement, as Western media admit. We are asked to trust politicians and ‘experts.”

That is, the same ones who took months to stop pretending that Russia – absurdly – blew up its own Nord Stream pipelines in 2022. As late as spring 2023, Germany’s Carlo Masala, for instance, who also believes “Girkin” and “Strelkov” are two different individuals (just like “Santa” and “Claus”), was still spreading groundless speculation – really, a conspiracy theory – about a “false flag attack” on Nord Stream, that is: Russia, Russia, Russia.

And—coincidentally!—recently, Moscow has once again found itself busy with three incidents: a suspected electronic warfare attack on EU leader Ursula von der Leyen's plane over Plovdiv, an alleged incursion into Estonian airspace, and low fly-overs over the German frigate Hamburg during a NATO exercise.

These three stories only share one thing with the drone saga: they don’t stand up to scrutiny. The Plovdiv GPS attack case is so flawed it’s been dismissed. The Estonian airspace incursion didn't happen; it only involved a 3-mile zone, not 12. Estonia’s case is baseless, as the 1994 agreement removes any legal justification.

Western officials now say Hamburg's buzzing was not "imminently dangerous" but "unfriendly and provocative." Frankly, what do you expect from military exercises near Russia while fighting a proxy war in Ukraine? A friendly chat over grog?

Yet, all within NATO-EU politics and its mainstream media keep repeating the same tired refrain: Russia is approaching, has arrived, and is everywhere. The new head of Germany’s spy agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst, appears to think his role isn't to conduct covert operations discreetly but to add to the panic with his alarmist warnings. He is haunted by constant fears of an imminent Russian attack, possibly emerging from beneath his bed or hiding in his cupboard.

It appears that all parties are operating in unison, effectively reading from the same memorandum. Furthermore, the recent surge in self-induced hyperventilation has been extensively exploited—amounting to billions of euros—for the purpose of allocating additional funds to military expenditures, including but not limited to unspecified areas. Concurrently, the general populace is subjected to increasingly severe austerity measures. More concerningly, there is a conspicuous effort to centralize greater authority within the same political institutions that persistently govern through intimidation and misinformation directed at their constituents.

The drone stories are crumbling, but a French attempt to blame a tanker failed, and a German drone sighting was quickly cleared up—blamed on a clueless hobbyist.

Perish the idea that Ukraine could be involved with those mysterious drones! Its regime has ample motive, and even the West now admits it can carry out large-scale sabotage and deceive its European supporters, as evidenced by the official story of the Nord Stream terror attack. However, thinking logically—off-limits!

Let's pretend we know what we don’t know—Russia, Russia, Russia! and overreact based on ignorance and panic or malicious strategies of cognitive warfare. In Germany, Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Defense Minister Boris Pistorius bizarrely claim that although the government isn't at war, it isn't at peace either. The head of the BND says the current peace is "icy" and could turn into a heated confrontation at any moment.

Please continue reading...

Tarik Cyril Amar, PhD, is a distinguished historian and international politics specialist. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in Modern History from Oxford University, a Master of Science in International History from the London School of Economics, and a Doctorate in History from Princeton University. His academic pursuits include scholarships at the Holocaust Memorial Museum and the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute. Additionally, he served as the director of the Center for Urban History in Lviv, Ukraine. Originally from Germany, he has resided in the United Kingdom, Ukraine, Poland, the United States, and Turkey.

Dr. Amar’s book, 'The Paradox of Ukrainian Lviv: A Borderland City between Stalinists, Nazis, and Nationalists,' was published by Cornell University Press in 2015. A forthcoming study examining the political and cultural history of Cold War television spy stories is in preparation, and he is presently engaged in authoring a new volume on the international response to the conflict in Ukraine. He has provided insights through interviews on various platforms, including several appearances on Rania Khlalek Dispatches and Breakthrough News.

The Holy Trinity of Zionism Versus the Holy Trinity of Christianity

'Christian Zionism ... Enraptured Around a Golden Calf' pits the Holy Trinity of Zionism - One People, One Land, One God - against the Holy Trinity of Christianity -- ALL people, ALL the nations; indeed, glorifying the one 'I Am', with many names.

When asked on my first day in kindergarten, 'Where were you born?' I sparkled with pride: '

‘Palaestina!'

Later, I realized I was born as a refugee, on a British ship on the outskirts of Israel-Palestine. To complicate matters, I was born a Jew in Palestine. My mother was Jewish, and I look Hawaiian —a long story.

The region is home. I am attached to the splendor of its many colors, their tints and hues. I understand why neither the indigenous Palestinians nor the immigrant-Israelis will ever leave.

My story is the story of many Jews. We are blessed with diversity. That we are one, immortal tribe, exclusively begotten from the seeds of Abraham, is spiritual. Nonetheless, myths abound.

What is not mythical is that many Palestinians are more genetically linked to the Ancient Israelites than most European Jews who sought refuge, especially after World War II.

Will a shared identity prompt the 'cousins' to share the land?

"The 'Promised Land,’” says Jesus Christ, the Christian Messiah, “is the spiritual kingdom of God, a 'Land without borders.’" The Deed of Trust of your piece in the Promised Land is vested in the New Testament, inscribed in blood on Calvary.

Will Evangelicals rediscover New Testament Revelations? Is restoration - a revival - imminent?

Reader Responses to Abraham A. van Kempen’s Christian Zionism Enraptured Around a Golden Calf, 2nd Edition Kindle Version.

Overview

The central idea of Abraham A. van Kempen’s ‘Christian Zionism … Enraptured Around a Golden Calf?’ is a thoughtful look at Christian Zionism.

It points out that many supporters have become so passionate about the modern state of Israel that they sometimes treat it like an idol. Van Kempen compares this intense support to the biblical story of the golden calf, symbolizing misplaced faith and reverence. He expresses concern that Christian Zionists, in their deep enthusiasm for Israel, might be unintentionally altering core Christian teachings and values, putting political loyalty above spiritual honesty.

This thought-provoking work encourages us to reflect on the deeper theological and moral questions it raises. It advocates a return to genuine Christian principles rather than falling into nationalistic or political idolatries.

Christian Zionism Enraptured Around a Golden Calf by Abraham A. van Kempen has sparked interest and debate among readers through its in-depth exploration of Christian Zionism and its broader religious, political, and social impacts.

Positive Reactions

Thought-Provoking Analysis: Many readers value van Kempen’s critical perspective, considering the book intellectually engaging and challenging to conventional views on Christian Zionism.

Comprehensive Research: Readers praise the author’s extensive research, highlighting the integration of historical and theological viewpoints that deepen understanding of the topic.

Encourages Dialogue: The book is praised for fostering meaningful conversations about the intersection of religion and politics, especially in the Middle East.

Critical Perspectives

Controversial Standpoints: Some readers perceive van Kempen’s arguments as provocative, sometimes disagreeing with his conclusions or questioning his interpretation of particular theological issues.

Complex Subject Matter: The book’s depth and complexity may pose challenges for readers unfamiliar with the subject. Some readers have said it requires careful, attentive reading.

Common Themes in Reader Feedback

In both positive and critical reviews, readers often highlight the book’s capacity to provoke thought about personal beliefs, its role in modern religious discussions, and its relevance to today’s global challenges.

Conclusion

Overall, Abraham A. van Kempen’s work is regarded as a notable and provocative addition to the study of Christian Zionism. It encourages readers to reexamine familiar narratives and thoughtfully explore complex issues of faith, identity, and geopolitics.

SCHLOMO SAND: EXPLORING GENETIC AND HISTORICAL ARGUMENTS REGARDING THE ORIGINS OF MODERN PALESTINIANS AND JEWS

In "The Invention of the Jewish People,” Israeli historian Schlomo Sand questions common assumptions about Jewish history and identity. He notably claims that today’s indigenous Palestinians are genetically closer to the ancient Hebrews—the Children of Israel—than European Jews who moved from Eastern Europe. Sand’s reasoning combines historical, genetic, and sociological evidence.

Historical Context

Sand challenges the presumption of Jewish exile following the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE. He argues that the majority of the local Jewish population remained in the region and gradually converted to Islam after the Arab conquests in the 7th century. He suggests that many Palestinians today are direct descendants of the ancient Hebrews, rather than Jews who were exiled and later returned or migrated.

Conversion and Identity

Sand’s thesis highlights that Judaism was once proselytizing, and many modern Jewish groups are descended from gentile pagan converts. He references historical instances such as the Khazars, a Turkic people who adopted Judaism in the 8th or 9th century, as well as other communities, such as the Moroccan Berbers in North Africa and the Mediterranean. Sand proposes that the Jewish diaspora consists of these converted groups rather than solely of the direct descendants of the ancient Hebrews. The Khazars evolved into the Eastern European Ashkenazim, and the Moroccan Berbers into the Southern European Sephardim.

Genetic Evidence

Sand refers to genetic studies that demonstrate a certain degree of continuity between populations inhabiting the Levant over millennia. He contends that, owing to centuries of residing in the same geographic area, the indigenous Palestinian population would preserve a higher proportion of genetic markers characteristic of the original inhabitants of ancient Judea and Samaria. Conversely, European Jews, particularly Ashkenazi Jews, have experienced substantial genetic admixture through centuries of settlement in Eastern Europe and intermarriage with local communities. Sand employs this genetic argument to substantiate his assertion of closer biological connections between Palestinians and ancient Hebrews.

Socio-Political Implications

Sand’s arguments are not merely academic; they challenge the foundations of national identity and land claims in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By questioning the genetic and historical continuity between ancient Hebrews and modern Jews, and highlighting the links between Palestinians and ancient Israelites, Sand provokes a re-examination of the narratives used to justify modern political realities.

Conclusion

Schlomo Sand’s claim that present-day Palestinians are more genetically linked to the ancient Children of Israel than European Jews is rooted in a combination of historical research, genetic discoveries, and sociological analysis. He bases his argument on the continuity of local populations, the history of conversion within Judaism, and genetic evidence of admixture among diaspora Jews. His views have sparked debates over history, identity, and the region's politics.

What is the Side of the Story that is Not Yet Decisive? Edited and annotated by Abraham A. van Kempen

SCOTT RITTER: - A PALESTINIAN VICTORY!

Judge Napolitano examines with Scott Ritter the debate over a potential pardon for Netanyahu, criticizes his leadership during the war, and analyzes the diplomatic interactions surrounding a proposed peace plan involving Trump, Egypt, and Turkey.

It emphasizes the importance of economic initiatives, such as the Abraham Accords and the India-Middle East-European Economic Corridor, in fostering regional cooperation, while noting that sustainable progress ultimately depends on resolving the Gaza conflict.

The discussion concludes with providing a comprehensive overview of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and associated political and economic issues.

Watch the Video Here (22 minutes, 59 seconds)

Host: Judge Andrew Napolitano
Judging Freedom
13 October 2025

Judging Freedom: Interview with Scott Ritter on the Palestinian-Israeli Peace Developments

The episode begins with music and a short introduction from Judge Andrew Napolitano for "Judging Freedom" on Monday, October 13, 2025. Judge Napolitano notes that Scott Ritter will soon join the discussion to discuss the recent Palestinian victory — a result not recognized by President Trump or Prime Minister Netanyahu in their comments earlier that day.

Financial Segment: Silver as an Asset

The segment briefly transitions to financial advice, emphasizing silver as the most undervalued asset according to experts. Its significance for emerging technologies such as solar energy, electric vehicles, and AI is driving demand, yet silver remains affordable. With substantial investments in AI, silver prices are projected to rise. Robert Kiyosaki, author of "Rich Dad Poor Dad," considers silver an overlooked opportunity that could double or triple in value by 2026. Judge Napolitano supports physical silver investments and suggests reaching out to Lear Capital for a free report on the AI revolution and silver market trends.

Scott Ritter's Perspective on the Peace Deal

Scott Ritter joins the discussion as Judge Napolitano asks for his perspective on the events earlier that day in Israel's capital and elsewhere. Ritter observes that many leaders, including Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, are expressing self-congratulation, even though the core terms of the deal are Hamas's longstanding demands, as outlined on October 7th. He emphasizes that the agreement—encompassing a prisoner exchange, Israeli withdrawal, and steps toward a Palestinian state—represents a strategic win for Hamas. Ritter concludes that while media and political figures may attempt to spin the outcome, the underlying reality remains consistent.

Details of the Peace Plan

Ritter notes that the peace plan, initially proposed by Trump as a 20-point agreement, was extended to 22 points following negotiations. The 21st point explicitly permits Hamas to participate in the government, while the 22nd allows them to keep arms for policing Gaza. Ritter also points out Trump's acceptance of these provisions, including his mention of Hamas's policing role during a recent flight, indicating support for Hamas's ongoing influence and control in Gaza.

Changing Political Realities

Ritter and Napolitano analyze shifts in the political landscape, highlighting that Israel's influence over the United States has waned. Ritter notes that American Christian evangelicals, the prominent supporters of Christian Zionism for Israel, are becoming less willing to prioritize Israel over the U.S. If Netanyahu violates the peace agreement, American backing for Israel could diminish dramatically, risking disaster for Israel. Ritter warns that with midterm elections near, Trump cannot afford to be alienated by Israel and has heavily invested in the peace deal.

Trump's Statements and Guarantees

Judge Napolitano shows a clip of Trump talking about Hamas acting as a police force in Gaza, highlighting the importance of stability and safety for residents returning home. Trump agrees that permitting Hamas to police Gaza is necessary due to the widespread destruction and the need to prevent crime. Napolitano also mentions Trump's reluctance to give explicit assurances on Hamas disarmament and Israel's compliance, pointing out that Trump's impulsive policy choices often cause diplomats to scramble to explain U.S. positions to Israel.

American Sentiment and Patriotism

The discussion shifts to American perspectives on Israel, with Ritter proposing that public opinion is moving away from a "Israel first, America second' mindset. Napolitano recalls Trump's comments about affluent American supporters of Israel, highlighting the ambiguous boundary between patriotism and foreign allegiance. Ritter condemns Trump for neglecting American patriotism and failing to fulfill presidential duties, prioritizing wealth and power instead.

Controversial Pardoning and Netanyahu's Legacy

Napolitano and Ritter examine Trump's relaxed approach to legal violations, citing Trump's proposal to pardon Netanyahu for corruption related to champagne and cigars. Ritter criticizes Netanyahu's conduct, calling him the worst wartime prime minister and accusing him of genocide and mass murder. He warns that the peace initiative could lead to the end of international legal proceedings against Netanyahu, potentially enabling him to avoid justice.

International Diplomacy: Summit in Cairo

The Guardian reports that, as Trump headed to Israel, he persuaded Egyptian President Al-Sisi and Netanyahu to attend a summit in Cairo. When Netanyahu's invitation became public, Turkish President Erdogan threatened to withdraw, prompting Netanyahu's disinvitation. Ritter interprets Erdogan's position as an effort to assert regional dominance and take a strong stance against Israel's actions in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria. Erdogan's political prospects rely on this stance.

Longevity and Viability of the Peace Plan

Ritter evaluates the chances of the peace plan, noting that its success depends on Trump's willingness to hold Netanyahu accountable and the domestic political climate in both the U.S. and Israel. If Trump continues to support Hamas's involvement in governance and policing, Netanyahu might have little choice but to endorse the plan. Conversely, if Trump changes his position, Israel could resume military operations, but such a move would likely attract quick and fierce global criticism.

The Role of Economic Initiatives

Ritter highlights that Trump's approach in Cairo focuses on revitalizing the Abraham Accords' legacy, intending to normalize Israel-Arab relations and foster economic collaboration. The India-Middle East-European Economic Corridor, unveiled by Biden and applauded by Netanyahu, underpins this strategy by establishing Israel as the region's financial hub. Nonetheless, advancements depend on addressing the Gaza situation.

Conclusion

Napolitano concludes the discussion by thanking Ritter for his insights and previews upcoming interviews with Colonel Douglas McGregor and Professor Jeffrey Sachs later today. The episode ends with music, signaling the end of this in-depth analysis of the changing Israeli-Palestinian peace process and its wider political and economic effects.

AMB. CHAS W. FREEMAN, JR: CAN TRUMP CONTROL NETANYAHU?

Judge Napolitano discusses with Amb. Chas Freeman, Jr., discusses the ongoing political and legal issues confronting Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Topics include speculation about potential military actions to stay in power, unresolved core issues in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, concerns about democratic integrity, media influence, and the impact of political pardons on the rule of law. The current agreement is seen as a temporary solution that doesn't address fundamental problems, with humanitarian issues still unresolved and a limited international response expected. The conversation ends with appreciation for the candid analysis and a promise of ongoing coverage on these vital topics.

Watch the Video Here (23 minutes, 54 seconds)

Host: Judge Andrew Napolitano
Judging Freedom
13 October 2025

Analysis of Recent Events in Jerusalem: Perspectives on Peace, Power, and International Law

Judge Andrew Napolitano questions Ambassador Chaz Freeman about recent happenings in Jerusalem. When asked if these events signify a real peace agreement or are just a show, Freeman remains doubtful. He sees Israel's move more as a tactical step than a genuine effort for peace. Freeman mentions President Trump's claim of a new beginning in the Middle East, but he is skeptical that it will come to pass. He believes Israel's actions are a tactical retreat aimed at weakening Palestinian nationalism and removing Palestinians from their land. Freeman concludes that while the genocide has been halted, it has not been stopped.

International Reactions and the Role of Western Leaders

Ambassador Freeman points out the irony of Western leaders convening in Cairo, claiming to be saviors of the Palestinians, while they are also among those responsible for the ongoing crisis. He states that recent events resemble a ceasefire and hostage exchange, with the West mainly concerned about Israeli hostages and ignoring broader issues related to coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians. Freeman stresses that the fundamental problem remains unresolved: Israel's reluctance to live peacefully with Palestinians, shown by Israeli officials' comments about restarting military actions after hostages are freed.

Prospects for Lasting Peace and Guarantees

Freeman notes that Hamas faces pressure to disarm but is unlikely to do so, since it does not want to concede what it has resisted through force. He calls the current deal a "flash in the pan" and a "pseudo event" that does not tackle the core issues of peaceful coexistence in the Middle East. When asked if the US can guarantee Israel won't resume bombing after the hostages are free, Freeman states that President Trump's comments offer no such guarantee. He emphasizes that the agreement was made without consulting Palestinian representatives, making it an imposition rather than a consensus.

Israel's Strategic Position and International Reputation

Freeman suggests that Israel's conduct is a tactical retreat driven by strategic failures, particularly in reaching its goals in Gaza. He explains that Israel's strategy has harmed its international image, leading to increasing doubts about the moral legitimacy of a Zionist state. According to him, Israel has not succeeded in eliminating Palestinian resistance and has damaged its reputation through actions broadly seen as breaches of international law.

International Law and Violations by Both Sides

The discussion shifts to the legal rules surrounding the conflict. Freeman points out that Israel, which is a party to the Fourth Geneva Convention, has breached international law by relocating settlers into occupied territories and annexing those areas. He emphasizes that the Third Geneva Convention bans the deliberate targeting of civilians and the inhumane treatment of prisoners, and he asserts that Israel has violated these provisions. Additionally, he recognizes that Hamas has also broken international law through attacks on civilians and hostage-taking. Still, he notes that occupied populations have the right to resist, including armed resistance, provided it doesn’t break other laws.

Potential Consequences and Future Conflict

Freeman considers the potential for future legal or political repercussions from these actions, including the speculation that Netanyahu might pursue another war—potentially with Iran—to stay in power. He notes that as the focus on hostages subsides, attention will likely return to topics like genocide, starvation, torture, and the broader prospects for coexistence. Additionally, he mentions Netanyahu's continuing legal issues and the possible reasons behind his desire to remain in office.

Internal Politics and Media Influence

Internal Israeli politics play a significant role, especially regarding the Knesset's makeup and how Palestinian members are treated. Freeman highlights an incident where Knesset members waving Palestinian flags were expelled, viewing this as an indicator of a democratic deficit for non-Jewish citizens. He further analyzes Netanyahu's efforts to sway public opinion, including attempts to influence social media and to harness PR campaigns to strengthen support.

Presidential Intervention and the Rule of Law

The discussion highlights President Trump's public call for Israeli President Herzog to pardon Netanyahu, exemplifying a larger pattern of political leaders attempting to evade justice. Freeman cautions that regular pardons for political purposes weaken the rule of law both domestically and internationally, resulting in arbitrary decision-making and diminished checks and balances.

The Future of the Agreement and Humanitarian Concerns

Freeman argues that the current agreement is more of a short-term peacekeeping effort than an actual move toward peace. Since it was made without Palestinian input and primarily concentrates on hostage swaps, it risks further conflict. He observes that any renewed violence in Gaza probably won't elicit a strong international reaction, especially from the U.S., and emphasizes that the core issues are still unresolved.

Closing Remarks

Judge Napolitano thanks Ambassador Freeman for his honest and insightful remarks, recognizing the complexity and seriousness of the situation. The conversation concludes with a teaser of future interviews and commentary, highlighting a continued focus on the developing situation in the Middle East.

ANALYSIS: WHILE TRUMP SHAPES THE MIDEAST FUTURE, ISRAEL STAYS ON THE SIDELINES, AVOIDING HARD TRUTHS

In the coming months, conferences will tackle Gaza and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But as long as Netanyahu's right-wing government refuses to recognize a Palestinian state, the region's future will continue to be transformed by Trump and his allies, Turkey and Qatar, who have little love lost for Israel.

President Donald Trump stands next to the Qatari Emir and Egypt's President at a summit to support ending the Gaza war, Monday, Oct. 13, 2025, in Sharm El Sheik, Egypt. Credit: Evan Vucci, AP.

By Liza Rozovsky
Haaretz Israel News
15 October 2025

Two simple words—"Palestinian state"—were missing from Netanyahu and Trump's speeches from the Knesset podium.

In fact, they were missing from all the ceremonial speeches that afternoon in the plenary, including Opposition Leader Yair Lapid's speech, which was nearly identical to Netanyahu's, with only slight differences in emphasis.

Trump did not mention a Palestinian state, likely because he knew Netanyahu opposed it, and Netanyahu's omission probably aimed to avoid souring the atmosphere before the summit in Sharm el-Sheik with "Israel's greatest friend."

Trump may indulge in the illusion that "peace in the Middle East" is possible without meaningful recognition. Still, Netanyahu knows this isn't an option—especially after two years since the October 7 attack and the Gaza war.

Leaders of Arab, Muslim, and European countries in Sharm el-Sheik focus on "maintaining momentum" and ensuring a smooth transition from the first, "simple" phase of Trump's 20-point plan to the more complex second phase.

The joint statement by Trump, Egyptian President al-Sissi, Turkish President Erdoğan, and Qatari Emir Tamim was deliberately vague, referencing a "lasting peace" where Palestinians and Israelis could thrive, safeguarding human rights, security, and dignity.

For the summit in Egypt, the key part of the document is the signatures: the U.S., Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey effectively took full responsibility for implementing the Gaza agreement between Israel and Hamas.

U.S. President Donald Trump shows a document he signed with the Egyptian, Qatari, and Turkish leaders, guaranteeing the end of the Gaza war, during a summit in Sharm el-Sheik on October 13, 2025. Credit: AFP/SAUL LOEB

They took ownership: the U.S. to restrain Israel, and three countries to restrain Hamas. Two senior American officials confirmed this during a briefing to journalists the night the agreement was signed.

Admiral Brad Cooper, commander of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), will oversee the mission in Gaza, allocating 200 troops who are not expected to enter the strip, to prevent violations or infiltrations, amid mutual concerns.

The officials said CENTCOM chief's presence boosted Arab confidence and signaled to Hamas that Trump was firmly backing his guarantees and commitments.

Please continue reading...

JACQUES BAUD: BORDERLESS ISRAEL & GAZA PAUSE

Prof. Glenn Diesen examines with Col. Jacques Baud the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, highlighting how external pressures undermine Palestinian self-determination and detailing Israel’s internal challenges, including societal discrimination and unclear borders. It discusses the recent escalation with Iran, which has weakened Israel’s military and global standing, resulting in diplomatic and economic setbacks. The current peace agreement is portrayed as a temporary measure, with core issues unresolved and real progress dependent on inclusive negotiations and nuanced international engagement. The conclusion stresses the need for genuine diplomacy and dialogue to address the conflict’s historical and legal complexities.

Watch the Video Here (57 minutes, 02 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen

Substack.com
14 October 2025

The Middle East Peace Agreement: Challenges, Perspectives, and Implications

Welcome back to the program. Today, we are again joined by Colonel Jacques Bou, a former Swiss intelligence officer, Middle East expert, and prolific author. We discuss the recent peace agreement aimed at ending the two-year Gaza conflict, exploring its structure, the parties' perspectives, and its broader regional implications.

The Structure and Durability of the Peace Agreement

The recent peace agreement has sparked hope for ending violence in Gaza and restoring normalcy. Nonetheless, doubts remain about its sustainability. Its uniqueness lies in the unclear subsequent steps, raising concerns about possible challenges as implementation progresses. A key issue is the lack of a clear plan to establish a Palestinian state, which many see as crucial to long-term peace. Although the plan references a Palestinian state, the commitment to it remains vague, especially given the differing rhetoric from Israeli and American leaders.

Phases of the Agreement and Negotiation Challenges

The agreement adopts a phased strategy, with the initial phase—focused on a ceasefire and prisoner exchange—being well-defined. However, the second and third phases, which involve reconstruction, humanitarian aid, and the establishment of Palestinian institutions, remain vague and haven't been negotiated. This pattern echoes past peace efforts, where later phases were often left undefined and not actively discussed.

A key point is the widespread Israeli consensus opposing the creation of a Palestinian state. This view is shared broadly among the population, not just among leaders. The Palestinian side, especially Hamas, had a limited opportunity to respond to the plan, which was mainly crafted through discussions involving Arab countries, the U.S., and Israel. In the end, Hamas agreed to the deal with some reservations, seeking to prevent Israel from justifying the ongoing conflict, while still indicating that some issues need further negotiation.

Palestinian Resistance and International Legitimacy

The core of the Palestinian stance emphasizes the right to self-determination and resistance, including armed struggle, as supported by UN Resolution 45-130 (December 1990). According to the International Court of Justice, Palestinian territory is a single entity occupied unlawfully by Israel, thereby justifying resistance. Global perspectives differ, with some nations only prepared to recognize Palestine if resistance is disarmed, a stance that conflicts with the UN resolution.

Hamas’s tentative acceptance of the agreement serves as a strategic effort to portray itself as a constructive player in the peace process, likely expecting Israel might not fully uphold the deal. This tactic reflects the traditional Palestinian approach of raising the profile of their cause internationally rather than relying solely on violent resistance.

The October 7th Event and Strategic Objectives

On October 7, 2023, escalating tensions in Gaza and the West Bank, along with social issues like unpaid salaries following Qatar’s withdrawal and religious conflicts in Jerusalem, led to a significant incident. The attack, carried out by various Palestinian groups, sought to draw global attention to the Palestinian issue. Although the humanitarian impact has been severe, the main objectives of gaining international attention and facilitating prisoner exchanges have been largely achieved.

Limitations of Western Diplomacy and Mediation

The discussion highlights how Western countries tend to criminalize opponents, which restricts diplomatic solutions. By branding groups such as Hamas as terrorist organizations, countries like Switzerland have reduced their capacity to mediate successfully. This strategy, part of broader Western foreign policy patterns, has led to increased instability and made crisis resolution more difficult.

Unlike other cases, the United States’ decision not to label the Afghan Taliban as terrorists enabled eventual negotiations, demonstrating the value of maintaining diplomatic communication. The ongoing issues with Palestine and Russia show the risks of demonizing adversaries and forsaking crisis diplomacy.

Recognition and Self-Determination

While the international community recognizes Palestinians' right to self-determination, it simultaneously imposes conditions on their selection of leaders. This undermines the fundamental principle of self-determination and makes the pursuit of lasting peace more difficult.

Internal Challenges Facing Israel

Israel encounters major internal issues stemming from the conflict. Most of the public supports the existing government’s stance on the Palestinians, showing limited interest in a two-state solution. As a Jewish state, Israel’s legal and societal systems embed discrimination against Palestinians and non-Jewish residents.

Historically, Israel has never had formally defined borders, and its legitimacy is disputed from the Palestinian perspective. The lack of clear boundaries and a persistent expansionist attitude based on revisionist Zionism make the conflict difficult to resolve.

Geopolitical Ramifications and International Perception

The recent missile exchanges between Israel and Iran have revealed weaknesses in Israel’s military defenses, emphasizing the need for a strategic pause to rebuild capabilities and restore public trust. Concurrently, Israel’s international reputation has declined significantly, resulting in diplomatic isolation and economic impacts as foreign firms reevaluate their involvement with the country.

Despite these challenges, there is little indication that Israel has changed its core goals concerning Palestine, the West Bank, and Gaza. The current pause is viewed as a chance for Israel to regroup before restarting its policies.

Conclusion

The peace agreement, at best, functions as a temporary ceasefire rather than a lasting solution. Its lack of clear terms for future steps, uncertainties about creating a Palestinian state, and fixed positions on both sides indicate that the core issues are still unresolved. For lasting peace, all relevant parties—particularly those directly involved—must participate in negotiations, and the international community must move past oversimplified narratives to pursue genuine diplomacy.

The discussion concludes by recognizing the complexity and paradoxes of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and highlighting the importance of inclusive dialogue and a readiness to confront historical grievances and legal ambiguities.

BUILDING THE BRIDGE! | A WAY TO GET TO KNOW THE OTHER AND ONE ANOTHER

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Photo Credit: Abraham A. van Kempen, our home away from home on the Dead Sea

By Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor
Updated 19 January 2024

Those who commit to 'healing our broken humanity' build intercultural bridges to learn to know and understand one another and others. Readers who thumb through the Building the Bridge (BTB) pages are not mindless sheep following other mindless sheep. They THINK. They want to be at the forefront of making a difference. They're seeking the bigger picture to expand their horizons. They don't need BTB or anyone else to confirm their biases.

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Accurate knowledge fosters understanding, dispels prejudice, and sparks a desire to learn more about the subject. Words have an extraordinary power to bring people together, divide them, forge bonds of friendship, or provoke hostility. Modern technology offers unprecedented possibilities for good, fostering harmony and reconciliation. Yet, its misuse can cause untold harm, leading to misunderstandings, prejudices, and conflicts.

Continue reading

A Free Trial for Life – SUBSCRIBE NOW!

• It's quick and straightforward.

• We won’t ask for your credit card number.

• Just enter your e-mail address to receive your complimentary free-for-life subscription to our newsletter.

• Please include your First and Last Name.

• We won’t share or sell your e-mail address.

_________________________

Related Articles Recently Posted on www.buildingthebridgefoundation.com:

OUR FRIDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR WEDNESDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR MONDAY EDITION

________________________

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of the Building the Bridge Foundation