Israel Bombs Humanitarian Aid Flotilla on Way to Gaza

A similar aid convoy was attacked by Tel Aviv in 2010, killing 10 people and injuring dozens more.
by Will Porter May 2, 2025 , https://news.antiwar.com/2025/05/02/israel-bombs-humanitarian-aid-flotilla-on-way-to-gaza/
A ship carrying supplies bound for the Gaza Strip was attacked by Israeli drones in international waters on Friday, according to the activist group that organized the flotilla. The vessel reportedly took at least one direct hit to its hull and sustained damage from fire, forcing its crew to issue an urgent call for help.
Organizers with the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) said one of their vessels was attacked by an unidentified drone in the early hours of Friday morning, noting the ship was not far off the coast of Malta when it was hit.
“At 00:23 Maltese time, the Conscience, a Freedom Flotilla Coalition ship, came under direct attack in international waters,” the group said in a press release. “Armed drones attacked the front of an unarmed civilian vessel twice, causing a fire and a substantial breach in the hull. [. . .] The drone strike appears to have deliberately targeted the ship’s generator, leaving the crew without power and placing the vessel at great risk of sinking.”
An FFC spokesperson, Caoimhe Butterly, later told Reuters that the ship was struck en route to Malta, where it was scheduled to pick up other activists, among them climate campaigner Greta Thunberg and retired US Army Colonel Mary Ann Wright. The group said it had arranged the aid shipment “under a media black out to avoid any potential sabotage.”
The FFC also shared footage which allegedly shows the aftermath of the strike, with smoke and flames seen on the ship. At one point in the brief video, an apparent explosion can be heard.
In a second press release, the group later shared a photo of the damage sustained in the strike.
Maltese authorities said they received an SOS call from a vessel in international waters soon after midnight local time, adding that a nearby tugboat assisted the ship, according to Reuters. Officials added that the crew of the Conscience declined to board the tugboat, and also confirmed to CNN that the fire on the ship had been extinguished. No casualties have been reported in the attack.
The FFC press release added that “Israeli ambassadors must be summoned and answer to violations of international law, including the ongoing blockade [on Gaza] and the bombing of our civilian vessel in international waters.”
In a social media post early on Friday, the United Nations special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese, said she “received a distressed call from the people of the Freedom Flotilla that is carrying essential food and medicine to the starving Gaza population.”
“I call on concerned state authorities, including maritime authorities, to support the ship and its crew as needed. I trust the competent authorities will also ascertain the facts and intervene appropriately,” she added.
The Israeli military has yet to comment on the incident, but said it was looking into reports about the attack, according to the BBC. Israel’s Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment by Reuters.
The FFC mission aimed to bring supplies to Gaza some two months into a heightened blockade by Tel Aviv, whose forces have leveled much of the territory in air and ground operations in response to Hamas’ October 7, 2023 attack on Israel. On Friday, the International Committee of the Red Cross said aid operations in Gaza were on the verge of “total collapse” thanks to the blockade.
In 2010, a similar humanitarian aid flotilla organized by the Free Gaza Movement and the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief, a Turkish org, was attacked by Israeli forces in international waters. Nine people were killed in the assault, with another later dying of their injuries, while dozens more were wounded. A UN report later found that all 10 activists had sustained gunshot wounds, and added that “the circumstances of the killing of at least six of the passengers were in a manner consistent with an extra-legal, arbitrary and summary execution.”
Will Porter is assistant news editor and book editor at the Libertarian Institute, and a regular contributor at Antiwar.com. Find more of his work at Consortium News and ZeroHedge.
Six in 10 Americans Support US Participation in a Nuclear Agreement with Iran.
Chicago Council on Global Affairs, 30 Apr 25
Majorities of Democrats and Independents support a potential deal similar to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, but only a minority of Republicans agree.
For the first time since the United States withdrew from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), American and Iranian officials held direct talks to negotiate a new nuclear deal. These talks come amid reports of Iran’s rapid production of enriched uranium and acceleration of its nuclear weapons program.
A recent Chicago Council on Global Affairs-Ipsos survey, fielded April 18–20, 2025, finds a majority of Americans consider a nuclearized Iran unacceptable and believe the United States should negotiate a deal with Tehran to limit its development. While Democrats and Independents support a deal that would trade sanctions relief for limitations on Iranian nuclear enrichment, Republicans oppose such a tradeoff. However, they may end up following US President Donald Trump’s lead if current negotiations bear fruit.
Key Findings
- Eight in 10 Americans oppose Iran obtaining nuclear weapons (79%) and favor taking diplomatic steps (83%) or tightening economic sanctions (80%) to limit further nuclear enrichment.
- A smaller majority of Americans believe the United States should participate in an agreement that lifts some international economic sanctions against Iran in exchange for strict limits on its nuclear program (61%).
- Partisan differences on a nuclear agreement are striking: 78 percent of Democrats and 62 percent of Independents support US participation in a deal with Iran compared to just 40 percent of Republicans.
- If diplomacy or economic sanctions fail, many Americans are willing to take more forceful approaches: Six in 10 support the United States conducting cyberattacks against Iranian computer systems (59%), and half support conducting airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities (48%).
- A majority oppose sending US troops to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities (60%).
Americans Favor Diplomatic Approach to Iranian Nuclear Development
The 2015 JCPOA, or the Iran Deal, was a landmark agreement reached between Iran and the P5+1 (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Germany) that limited Iranian nuclear enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief and other provisions. While it was initially successful in limiting Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium, the United States withdrew from the deal in 2018, as the first Trump administration considered it insufficient in curbing Iran’s ballistic missile program and protecting American regional interests. Upon the US withdrawal from the agreement, Iran promptly lifted the cap on its stockpile of uranium and increased its enrichment activities; it has since reached weapons-grade levels of enriched uranium.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Conclusion
Although US President Donald Trump has not ruled out using military action to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, he said he favors a diplomatic agreement to address this issue. Recently, Trump administration officials have given contradictory remarks about current talks, and they have yet to specify how renewed negotiations will produce an agreement more stringent and impactful than its predecessor.
The pressure is on American diplomats to secure a deal that would limit Tehran’s nuclear enrichment without providing the sanctions relief that could potentially fund Iran’s efforts to further destabilize the Middle East or threaten the United States’ regional allies, including Israel. While the outcome of these negotiations remains to be seen, the public continues to express a preference for using diplomatic or economic coercion than direct military action. https://globalaffairs.org/research/public-opinion-survey/six-10-americans-support-us-participation-nuclear-agreement-iran?fbclid=IwY2xjawKA64xleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFISGV5ZEdSZW16a2ZnQzh3AR7iwwVkEnczI_DJHzOGHWvNWeSlg2xdd9YJCsBz0_OiQmJcM48Ujd0ZNX8ZNQ_aem_5kroZ8t3KQ5RgYf4EfYdDA
Why is No. 1 US bombing No. 137 Yemen?
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL,
Is there a bigger bully in the world than President Trump?
Trump’s current effort is bullying the hapless innocents in Yemen. Trump will never war against anyone his own size. His No. 1 $30.5 trillion economy singled out for destruction No. 137, the $17.4 billion economy of Yemen.
Trump has launched 750 airstrikes against Yemen since March 15, killing and injuring over thousand innocents. His latest strike on Yemen’s Ras Isa fuel port in Hodeidah Province killed 95 and injured 192. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, in a nod to America’s all time premier warmonger Teddy Roosevelt, has dubbed the bombing campaign Operation Rough Rider. Ouch.
As with every US bombing campaign against innocents in weak countries, Congress simply rolls over allowing these grisly, unconstitutional wars to proceed without an iota of pushback.
Why is Trump bullying pitifully poor Yemen? Because Yemen is interfering in the ongoing Israeli/US genocide in Gaza. Yemen has largely shut down vital (tho not to US) Red Sea shipping with drone attacks to degrade Israel’s Gaza genocide campaign. Trump’s futile bombing campaign, which will never stop the Yemeni Houthis from opposing genocide, has no connection to US national security interests whatsoever.
That is unless our national security interests include enabling Israel to complete their genocidal ethnic cleansing of Gaza so Trump can kick off his dream real estate development, creating Trump Gaza Mediterranean to expand Greater Israel.
What’s Legally Allowed in War – Gaza a dress rehearsal for U.S. war on China.

The claim that Israel has adhered to the laws of war is extremely contentious.
1977, an international agreement explicitly prohibited the intentional targeting of civilians.
Gaza not only looks like a dress rehearsal for the kind of combat U.S. soldiers may face. It is a test of the American public’s tolerance for the levels of death and destruction that such kinds of warfare entail….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
US prepares $100bn arms deal with Saudi Arabia ahead of Trump visit
The mega deal comes as Washington continues to push for the normalization of ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel
APR 25, 2025, The Cradle,
Washington is preparing a major arms package for Saudi Arabia worth over $100 billion, according to six sources cited by Reuters.
The deal is expected to be announced during US President Donald Trump’s upcoming visit to the kingdom in May.
This proposed package follows a failed attempt by the former US president Joe Biden government to broker a broader security agreement that included Saudi normalization with Israel in exchange for advanced US arms, assistance in developing a civilian nuclear program, and reduced Chinese influence in the region.
While it remains unclear whether Trump’s proposal includes similar conditions, the package is expected to feature a range of advanced weaponry.
This includes C-130 transport aircraft, missiles, and radars supplied by major US defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin, RTX (formerly Raytheon Technologies), Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and General Atomics.
Lockheed is reportedly involved in a potential $20 billion drone deal involving MQ-9B SeaGuardian-style aircraft – an agreement discussed since 2018.
Defense company executives are reportedly considering traveling to Saudi Arabia as part of the US delegation. The Pentagon emphasized that the US–Saudi defense relationship remains strong under Trump’s leadership.
The US has a longstanding history of arms sales to Saudi Arabia, highlighted by Trump’s 2017 proposal of $110 billion in weapons deals. However, only $14.5 billion of those sales had been initiated by 2018, and Congress raised concerns following the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. These concerns led to a 2021 congressional ban on offensive weapons sales under president Biden.
The Biden administration began softening its stance in 2022 due to shifting geopolitical dynamics, including the Ukraine war’s impact on oil markets. The ban on offensive weapons sales was lifted in 2024, as the US worked more closely with Riyadh after Hamas’s 7 October 2023 attack on Israel.
Meanwhile, Saudi Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman visited Tehran on April 17, meeting Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and conveying a message from King Salman.
The visit resulted from renewed nuclear talks between the US and Iran amid fears of regional escalation………………….https://thecradle.co/articles-id/30331
As Israel Openly Declares Starvation as a Weapon, Media Still Hesitate to Blame It for Famine

this is a genocide, after all—even if the corporate media refuse to say the word—and starvation is part and parcel of that.
Belén Fernández, April 25, 2025, https://fair.org/home/as-israel-openly-declares-starvation-as-a-weapon-media-still-hesitate-to-blame-it-for-famine/
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on March 2 that “Israel has decided to stop letting goods and supplies into Gaza,” where the ongoing Israeli genocide, with the loyal backing of the United States, has officially killed more than 51,000 Palestinians since October 2023. The announcement regarding the total halt of humanitarian aid amounted to yet another explicit declaration of the starvation policy that Israel is pursuing in the Gaza Strip, a territory that—thanks in large part to 17 consecutive years of Israeli blockade—has long been largely dependent on such aid for survival.
Of course, this was not the first time that senior Israeli officials had advertised their reliance on the war crime of forced starvation in the current genocidal assault on Gaza. On October 9, 2023, two days after the most recent launch of hostilities, then–Defense Minister Yoav Gallant ordered a “complete siege” of the Gaza Strip: “There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed.” Two days after that, Foreign Minister Israel Katz boasted of cutting off “water, electricity and fuel” to the territory.
And just this month, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir proclaimed that there was “no reason for a gram of food or aid to enter Gaza.” Following an April 22 dinner held in his honor in Florida at US President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, Ben-Gvir reported that US Republicans had
expressed support for my very clear position on how to act in Gaza and that the food and aid depots should be bombed in order to create military and political pressure to bring our hostages home safely.
Never mind that the hostages would have been brought home safely as scheduled had Israel chosen to comply with the terms of the ceasefire agreement with Hamas that was implemented in January, rather than definitively annihilating the agreement on March 18.
It is no doubt illustrative of Israel’s modus operandi that the March 2 decision to block the entry of all food and other items necessary for human existence took place in the middle of an ostensible ceasefire.
‘Starved, bombed, strangled’
While Ben-Gvir’s most recent comments have thus far eluded commentary in the US corporate media, the roundabout media approach to the whole starvation theme has been illuminating in its own right. It has not, obviously, been possible to avoid reporting on the subject altogether, as the United Nations and other organizations have pretty much been warning from the get-go of Israel’s actions causing widespread famine in Gaza.
In December 2023, for example, just two months after the onset of Israel’s blood-drenched campaign, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification initiative, or IPC scale, determined that “over 90% of the population in the Gaza Strip (about 2.08 million people) was estimated to face high levels of acute food insecurity, classified in IPC Phase 3 or above (Crisis or worse).” The assessment went on: “Among these, over 40% of the population (939,000 people) were in Emergency (IPC Phase 4) and over 15% (378,000 people) were in Catastrophe (IPC Phase 5).”
A full year ago, in April 2024, even Samantha Power—then the administrator of the US Agency for International Development—conceded that it was “credible” that famine was already well underway in parts of the Gaza Strip. And the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs now warns that Gaza is “likely facing the worst humanitarian crisis in the 18 months since the escalation of hostilities in October 2023”—its population being “starved, bombed, strangled” and subjected to “deprivation by design.”
Disappearance of agency
None of these details have escaped the pages and websites of corporate media outlets, although the media’s frequent reliance on ambiguous wordiness tends to distract readers from what is actually going on—and who is responsible for it. Take, for instance, the New York Times headline “Gaza Famine Warning Spurs Calls to Remove Restrictions on Food Shipments” (6/25/24), or the CBS video “Hunger Spreads Virtually Everywhere in Gaza Amid Israel/Hamas War” (12/5/24). Even news outlets that intermittently undertake to spotlight the human plight of, inter alia, individual parents in Gaza losing their children to starvation remain susceptible to long-winded efforts to disperse blame. (As of April of last year, Save the Children confirmed that 27 children in northern Gaza had already died of starvation and disease.)
In an era in which news consumption often consists of skimming headlines, the phrasing of article titles is of utmost import. And yet many headlines manage to entirely excise the role of Israel in Gaza’s “hunger crisis”—as in CNN’s report (2/24): “‘We Are Dying Slowly:’ Palestinians Are Eating Grass and Drinking Polluted Water as Famine Looms Across Gaza.” Or take the Reuters headline (3/24/24): “Gaza’s Catastrophic Food Shortage Means Mass Death Is Imminent, Monitor Says.” Or this one from ABC News (11/15/24): “Famine ‘Occurring or Imminent’ in Parts of Northern Gaza, Experts Warn UN Security Council.”
It’s not that these headlines are devoid of sympathy for Palestinian suffering. The issue, rather, is the dilution—and even disappearance—of agency, such that the “catastrophic food shortage” is rendered as transpiring in a sort of vacuum and thereby letting the criminals perpetrating it off the hook. Imagine if a Hamas rocket from Gaza killed an infant in Israel and the media reported the event as follows: “Israeli Baby Perishes as Rocket Completes Airborne Trajectory.”
‘No shortage of aid’
Then there is the matter of the media’s incurable habit of ceding Israeli officials a platform to spout demonstrable lies, as in the April 17 NBC News headline “Aid Groups Describe Dire Conditions in Gaza as Israel Says There Is No Shortage of Aid.” The fact that Israel is permitted to make such claims is particularly perplexing, given Israeli officials’ own announcements that no aid whatsoever may enter the territory, while the “dire conditions” are made abundantly clear in the text of the article itself: “The Global Nutrition Cluster, a coalition of humanitarian groups, has warned that in March alone, 3,696 children were newly admitted for care for acute malnutrition” in Gaza.
Among numerous other damning statistics conveyed in the dispatch, we learn that all Gaza bakeries supported by the UN World Food Programme closed down on March 31, “after wheat flour ran out.” Meanwhile, the WFP calculated that Israel’s closure of border crossings into Gaza caused prices of basic goods “to soar between 150% and 700% compared with prewar levels, and by 29% to as much as 1,400% above prices during the ceasefire.”
Against such a backdrop, it’s fairly ludicrous to allow Israeli officials to “maintain there is ‘no shortage’ of aid in Gaza and accuse Hamas of withholding supplies.” If the press provides Israel with space to spout whatever nonsense it wants—reality be damned—where is the line ultimately drawn? If Israel decides Hamas is using wheat flour to build rockets, will that also be reported with a straight face?
Lest anyone think that thwarting the entry of food into the Gaza Strip is a new thing, recall that Israel’s blockade of Gaza long predated the present war—although the details of said blockade are generally glossed over in the media in favor of the myth that Israel unilaterally “withdrew” from the territory in 2005. In 2010, the BBC (6/21/10) listed some basic foodstuffs—pardon, potential “dual-use items”—that Israel had at different times in recent history blocked from entering Gaza, including pasta, coffee, tea, nuts and chocolate. In 2006, just a year after the so-called “withdrawal,” Israeli government adviser Dov Weissglas outlined the logic behind Israel’s restriction of food imports into Gaza: “The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger.”
Fast forward almost two decades, and it’s safe to say that the “idea” has evolved; this is a genocide, after all—even if the corporate media refuse to say the word—and starvation is part and parcel of that. But on account of Israel’s extra-special relationship with the United States, US media have institutionalized the practice of beating around the bush when it comes to documenting Israeli crimes. This is how we end up with the aforementioned long-winded headlines instead of, say, the far more straightforward “Israel is starving Gaza,” a Google search of which terms produces not a single corporate media dispatch, but does lead to a January 2024 report by that very name, courtesy of none other than the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem.
‘Starving as negotiation tactic’
That said, there have been a few surprises. The New York Times (3/13/25), for example, took a short break from its longstanding tradition of unabashed apologetics for Israeli atrocities in allowing the following sentence to appear in a March opinion article by Megan Stack: “Israeli officials are essentially starving Gaza as a negotiation tactic.” In the very least, this was a vast improvement, in terms of syntactic clarity and assignation of blame, over previous descriptions of Israeli behavior immortalized on the pages of the US newspaper of record—like that time the Israeli military slaughtered four kids playing by the sea in Gaza, and the Times editors (7/16/14) went with the headline “Boys Drawn to Gaza Beach, and Into Center of Mideast Strife.”
In the end, Israel’s starvation of the Gaza Strip is multifaceted. It’s not just about physically blocking the entry of food into the besieged enclave. It’s also about Israel’s near-total decimation of Gaza’s healthcare system: the bombardment of hospitals, the targeting of ambulances, the massacres of medical personnel (FAIR.org, 4/11/25). It’s about Israeli military attacks on humanitarian aid convoys and workers, including the April 2024 massacre of seven international employees of the food organization World Central Kitchen.
It’s about Israel razing agricultural areas, wiping out food production, devastating the fishing industry and depleting livestock. It’s about Israel bombing water infrastructure in Gaza. And it’s about Israeli troops slaughtering at least 112 desperate Palestinians queuing for flour on February 29, 2024 (FAIR.org, 3/22/24)—which was at least a quicker way of killing starving people than waiting for them to starve.
In his 2017 London Review of Books essay (6/15/17) on the use of famine as a weapon of war, Alex de Waal referenced the “physical debilitation of groups as a technique of genocide,” noting that “forced starvation was one of the instruments of the Holocaust.” It’s worth reflecting on the essay’s opening paragraph:
In its primary use, the verb “to starve” is transitive: It’s something people do to one another, like torture or murder. Mass starvation as a consequence of the weather has very nearly disappeared: Today’s famines are all caused by political decisions, yet journalists still use the phrase “man-made famine” as if such events were unusual.
As for the current case of the Gaza Strip, US establishment journalists appear to be doing their best to avoid the transitive nature of the verb in question—or any subject-verb-object construction that might too overtly expose Israeli savagery. And by treating famine in Gaza as a subject unto itself, rather than a “technique of genocide,” to borrow de Waal’s words, the media assist in obscuring the bigger picture about this very man-made famine—which is that Israel is not just starving Gaza. Israel is exterminating Gaza.
Call it what it clearly is: Genocide

April 26, 2025, By Walt Zlotow, https://theaimn.net/call-it-what-it-clearly-is-genocide/
Some dare not call it genocide
Folks following the ongoing Israeli genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, fully enabled by America, are of two views.
Those of us in the peace community instantly recognised that Israel’s response to Hamas’ October 7, 2023 attack was a genocidal ethnic cleansing of all Palestinians from Gaza.
We didn’t have to guess. Israeli leaders made clear through word and deed that return of Israeli hostages was secondary to their primary goal of killing and clearing out all 2,300,000 Palestinians so Gaza could be redeveloped to expand Greater Israel.
It was also clear that the US, under both Biden and Trump, were and are in complete accord with Israel’s grisly, murderous policy. Biden feigned sympathy for the tens of thousands of dead Palestinian innocents on his watch and the decimated 139 square miles of Gaza rubble. But he kept mum while delivering over $20 billion in weapons allowing Israel to rain down on Gaza over 50,000 tons of American bombs dropped from American planes.
Trump, no surprise, gloried in the worst genocide this century. He invited indicted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu to the Oval Office to discuss which African countries they could intimidate to take in the roughly 2.2 million remaining starving, sick, traumatized Palestinians. Trump is eager to kick start his biggest real estate project ever, expanding Greater Israel into Gaza once the Palestinians have been cleared out. That is grotesque, not something to champion.
Then there are those who refuse to believe or admit that genocide is occurring before their eyes and ears in real time.
Reasons likely many.
Some simply view it not as genocide but a war between Israel and Hamas.
Some argue that the Palestinian destruction, no matter how horrible, does not rise to genocide which they equate to the Nazi horrors of WWII.
Some are in complete sympathy with Israel’s ethnic cleansing campaign, indeed, cheering it on. Mike Huckabee, Trump’s new Ambassador to Israel, claims there is no such thing as Palestine or even Palestinians, so let the ethnic cleansing proceed unabated to expand Greater Israel.
There is a near total blackout in mainstream media of the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Whether conservative or progressive, the talking heads go mute when it comes to the informing the public of the most horrific US policy in their lifetime.
None in Congress dare cross the Israel lobby by calling it genocide. To do so risks having millions in lobby campaign funds dry up or worse, going to a pro lobby primary opponent. Some are horrified by the violence crushing the Palestinians but cannot embrace the moral imperative to call it out and demand its end.
To his credit, Sen. Bernie Sanders tried twice to pass Senate Joint Resolutions to cut off the flow of genocide weapons to Israel but only garnered 17 votes from the other 99 mostly genocide-supporting Senators. But tho Sanders calls Israel’s conduct “ethnic cleansing”, he refuses to call it what it truly is: genocide.
Representing Sanders’ Senate opposite is colleague John Fetterman, who supports Israel cutting off all food, medicine, and water to Gaza until the Israeli hostages are released. Horrifying.
Israel breaks the January ceasefire with daily bombings, killing dozens of Palestinian innocents while most Americans turn away.
Collectively, American genocide deniers enable President Trump to fund, supply, and cheer on arguably the most murderous, destructive and tragically bi-partisan foreign policy in American history.
Trump’s transactional instincts could help forge a new Iran nuclear deal
Mohamad Bazzi, 265 Apr https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/25/trump-iran-nuclear-deal
The president has a chance to make good on his reputation as a dealmaker as Iran moves closer to a nuclear weapon.
In May 2018, Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from the Iran nuclear deal and reimposed American sanctions that crippled the Iranian economy. Trump tore up the 2015 agreement, which had taken years for Iran to negotiate with six world powers, under which Tehran limited its nuclear program in exchange for relief from international sanctions. Trump insisted he would be able to negotiate a better pact than the one reached by Barack Obama’s administration.
Today, in his second term as president, Trump is eager to fix the Iran deal he broke nearly seven years ago.
While Trump’s overall foreign policy has been chaotic and has alienated traditional US allies in Europe and elsewhere, he has an opportunity to reach an agreement with Iran that eluded Joe Biden. Since Trump walked away from the original deal, Iran has moved closer to having a nuclear weapon than it has ever been. It has enriched enough uranium close to weapons-grade quality to make six nuclear bombs, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). But analysts believe that even after enriching enough uranium for a bomb, Iran would still need up to a year to develop an actual nuclear warhead that could be deployed on a ballistic missile.
Last month, Trump sent a letter to Iran’s supreme leader, the 86-year-old Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, saying the US wanted to negotiate a new deal. Trump followed up with a public threat, saying if Iran’s leaders did not agree to renewed talks, they would be subjected to “bombing the likes of which they have never seen before”. After Trump’s threats and a buildup of US forces in the Middle East, Iran’s military said it would respond to any attack by targeting US bases in the region, which house thousands of American troops.
But Iranian leaders also agreed to indirect negotiations, rather than the direct talks Trump had proposed. Trump dispatched his special envoy, the real estate developer Steve Witkoff, to lead a team of US negotiators to meet indirectly with top Iranian officials, including the foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi. The two sides held two rounds of productive talks so far this month, under the mediation of Oman. And the US and Iranian teams are due to meet again this weekend in Muscat, the capital of Oman, where they will start talks on technical details of a potential agreement.
While Trump and Iran’s leaders both changed their tones in recent weeks, there are many obstacles before a deal can be reached, including hardliners in Iran and Washington, as well as opposition from Israel’s rightwing government, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, who has spent years working to undermine negotiations between the US and Iran. The main barrier will be whether the Trump administration insists on a total dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program – the so-called “Libya model”, named after the late Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, who decided to eliminate his country’s nuclear weapons program in 2003 under pressure from the US. But that decision deprived Gaddafi of a major lever to stave off western military intervention after the Arab Spring uprisings in 2011, which led to his regime’s fall and his killing by Libyan rebels.
Some foreign policy hawks in Washington, including Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Waltz, and the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, insist on this maximalist strategy, which echoes Netanyahu’s demand that Iran must completely dismantle its nuclear enrichment activity and infrastructure as part of any deal with the US. If Trump takes a similar approach, negotiations would probably break down and Trump could follow through on his threat to carry out military strikes.
Iran has made clear that it will not agree to the total end of its nuclear program, but would accept a verification-based approach, as it did under the 2015 deal negotiated by the Obama administration along with China, France, Russia, the UK and Germany, together with the European Union. That type of agreement would place strict limits on Iran’s ability to enrich uranium and impose an inspections regime involving international monitors. Several of Trump’s advisers, including Witkoff and the vice-president, JD Vance, seem to favor this solution.
“I think he wants to deal with Iran with respect,” Witkoff said of Trump’s outreach to the Iranian regime, in a long interview last month with Tucker Carlson, the rightwing media host who has been highly critical of Republican hawks agitating for war with Iran. “He wants to build trust with them, if it’s possible.”
Iran’s leaders apparently got that message – and have tried to stroke Trump’s ego and convey that they respect him in ways they never respected Biden. In a Washington Post op-ed published on 8 April, Iran’s foreign minister seemed to be speaking to Trump directly when he blamed the failure of earlier negotiations on a “lack of real determination by the Biden administration”. Araghchi also played to Trump’s oft-repeated desire to be a peacemaker who ends America’s legacy of forever wars, writing: “We cannot imagine President Trump wanting to become another US president mired in a catastrophic war in the Middle East.”
And the minister appealed to Trump’s reputation as a deal-maker, citing the “trillion-dollar opportunity” that would benefit US companies if they could gain access to Iran after a diplomatic agreement. Iran’s leaders evidently understand that Trump loves to frame his foreign policy as being guided by his desire to secure economic deals and benefits for American businesses.
In this case, Trump’s transactional instincts and bulldozer style of negotiations could lead to a positive outcome, avoiding war with Iran and undermining the hardliners in Washington, Iran and Israel. Trump has already adopted a significant shift toward Tehran from his first term, when he had insisted that Iran was the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism and the greatest threat to US interests in the Middle East.
After he took office in 2017, Trump wanted to tear up the Iran deal partly because it was one of Obama’s major foreign policy accomplishments. Trump also surrounded himself with hawkish advisers who reinforced the danger of an Iranian threat, including HR McMaster, who served as national security adviser, and James Mattis, who was defense secretary. Both men commanded US troops during the occupation of Iraq, and they fought Iraqi militias funded by Iran. Trump later appointed John Bolton, another neoconservative and advocate of the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, as his national security adviser.
In his second term, Trump has banished most of the neocons from his administration. Trump also seems to realize that Netanyahu could become one of the biggest obstacles to an Iran deal, as he was during the Obama and Biden administrations. It was no accident that the president announced his plan for renewed talks with Iran while Netanyahu sat beside him at an Oval Office meeting on 7 April. Netanyahu had arranged a hasty visit to Washington to seek an exemption from Trump on new tariffs on Israeli exports. But he left empty-handed and embarrassed by Trump’s Iran announcement. That meeting was a signal to Iran’s leaders: that Trump would not allow Netanyahu to steamroll him, as the Israeli premier had done with other US presidents.
If Trump continues to resist Netanyahu, along with hawkish Republicans and some of his own advisers, he might well be able to negotiate a dramatic deal with Iran – and repair the nuclear crisis he unleashed years ago.
- Mohamad Bazzi is the director of the Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern studies and a journalism professor at New York University.
UN: Gaza Is Facing Worst Humanitarian Situation Yet Due to Israeli Blockade.
“Hunger is spreading & deepening, deliberate & manmade,” “Two million people: a majority of women & children are undergoing collective punishment.”
The Israeli blockade on humanitarian aid and all other goods entering Gaza has been imposed for 50 days
by Dave DeCamp April 22, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/04/22/un-gaza-is-facing-worst-humanitarian-situation-yet-due-to-israeli-blockade/
The UN’s humanitarian office, OCHA, warned on Tuesday that Gaza is facing its worst humanitarian situation yet, as a total Israeli blockade on humanitarian aid and all other goods has been imposed for more than 50 days.
“Right now is probably the worst humanitarian situation we have seen throughout the war in Gaza,” Jens Laerke, a spokesperson for OCHA, said at a press briefing in Geneva, according to Turkey’s Anadolu Agency.
Also on Tuesday, the UN’s Palestinian relief agency, UNRWA, said Gaza had become a “land of desperation” and warned of spreading hunger.
“Hunger is spreading & deepening, deliberate & manmade,” UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini wrote on X. “Two million people: a majority of women & children are undergoing collective punishment.”
Lazzarini said that aid trucks, including 3,000 from UNRWA, are ready to enter Gaza but are being blocked by Israel. “The siege must be lifted, supplies must flow in, the hostages must be released, the ceasefire must resume,” he said.
The US has strongly backed Israel’s collective punishment of the civilian population of Gaza. US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee released a video statement on Monday in response to calls for him to pressure Israel to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza and blamed Hamas for the Israeli blockade.
Last week, 12 major aid organizations issued a statement that said the “people of Gaza – particularly women and children – are paying the price” and that “famine is not just a risk, but likely rapidly unfolding in almost all parts of Gaza.”
Aid workers describe Gaza as “stuff of nightmares” as Israel’s mass forced displacements cause carnage and despair.

April 23, 2025, Oxfam. https://theaimn.net/aid-workers-describe-gaza-as-stuff-of-nightmares-as-israels-mass-forced-displacements-cause-carnage-and-despair/
Restrictions on movement and total siege making aid operations almost impossible
As Gaza enters the eighth week of an Israel-imposed siege, blocking aid, vital supplies and commercial goods, Oxfam staff are describing conditions as the “stuff of nightmares”, with Israel’s mass forced displacement orders spreading terror, Oxfam said.
Israel has issued repeated forced displacement orders to clear out civilian populations from its renewed airstrikes and attacks on Gaza since 18 March, which has left about 70% of the Strip under displacement orders or “no go” zones, affecting more than 500,000 people. Many have been pushed into inhospitable, unsafe and inaccessible areas.
Since 2 March, Israel has allowed no aid or commercial goods to enter Gaza. Many humanitarian agencies have been forced to pause their operations. Oxfam and its partners have not received a single aid truck, food parcel, hygiene kit or any other essential equipment since the siege began. Oxfam’s supplies are nearly exhausted, with only a few water tanks remaining in Gaza City.
Palestinians in Gaza are now emotionally and physically exhausted after 18 months of airstrikes and ground offensives, repeated forced displacement orders and restrictions on basic services since October 7, 2023.
The recent escalations in efforts by Israel to bombard, deprive and displace the Palestinian population of Gaza, sees Oxfam and partner organizations severely restricted and struggling to provide support to civilians, who are facing starvation and relentless violence.
One Oxfam staff member, who was displaced under fire twice in one weekafter the forced evacuation of Rafah, said nearly everything had been destroyed. She described the sounds of gunfire at night and people crying in the street, not knowing where to go. Another Oxfam worker said the experiences were “the stuff of nightmares” – people crying for help under piles of rubble, with others desperately trying to flee with injured family members, and others facing a daily struggle to find anything to drink or eat.
Clemence Lagouardat, Oxfam Response Lead in Gaza said:
“It’s hard to explain just how terrible things are in Gaza at the moment. Our staff and partners are witnessing scenes of carnage and despair every day. People are in terror, fearing for their lives as displacement orders tell them, with little notice, to move with whatever they can carry.
“The restrictions on internal movement are also making it very difficult to carry out vital, life-saving work. With so many people displaced, the strains on dwindling resources and operational needs are massive. What little aid we have left inside Gaza is hard to get to people living in makeshift shelters and tents when travel is so dangerous.”
Mohammad Nairab, Executive Manager, Palestinian Environmental Friends Association (PEF), one of Oxfam’s partners in Gaza said:
“Since the war resumed many of our teams have been displaced. We have had to continue our work, despite the lack of safety, as countless people rely on us for water, especially during these dire times. Nothing could have prepared us for such an unprecedented war. The damage we face—both psychological and physical—is profound and cannot be easily undone.”
Oxfam says that people are struggling to find safe drinking water, with facilities bombed or unable to operate since Israel cut the last remaining electricity supplies needed to run sanitation facilities. Backup generators are of little use because fuel stores are depleted. The prices of what little food is available have skyrocketed, and many people are at risk of extreme hunger.
Lagouardat said: “We must see an end to this terror and carnage right now, with a lifting of the siege to allow urgent humanitarian aid to reach all of those in need.”
Oxfam is calling for a renewed and permanent ceasefire, the safe return of Israeli hostages and illegally detained Palestinian prisoners, and immediate and unfettered aid access at scale in Gaza. Oxfam reiterates its call for justice and accountability for all those affected. States should stop selling arms to Israel, risking complicity in war crimes and crimes against humanity committed.
Iran opens door to restoring nuclear surveillance, UN watchdog says

Iran has agreed to allow a technical team from the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) to discuss restoring camera surveillance in Iranian
nuclear facilities, the head of the UN nuclear watchdog said on Wednesday.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi confirmed the agency would send a
technical team to Iran following his visit to Tehran this month. Grossi
said his impression is that the Islamic Republic’s leaders are “seriously
engaged in discussions… with a sense of trying to get to an agreement.”
The UN body would be the party responsible for verifying Iran’s compliance
with a deal, Grossi said. “This will have to be verified by the IAEA.”
Iran International 23rd April 2025 https://www.iranintl.com/en/202504237179
No Joke: US considering nuclear power for Saudi in grand bargain

Surprise — the Trump team’s latest bid for Saudi-Israel normalization goes way too far and appears to be a one-way street.
Ivan Eland, Apr 21, 2025, https://responsiblestatecraft.org/no-joke-us-considering-nuclear-power-for-saudi-in-grand-bargain/
The Trump administration is reportedly pursuing a deal with Saudi Arabia that would be a pathway to developing a commercial nuclear power industry in the desert kingdom and maybe even lead to the enrichment of uranium on Saudi soil.
U.S. pursuit of this deal should be scrapped because the United States would bear all the increased commitments, costs, and risks with very little in return.
In the Abraham Accords of 2020 and early 2021, the first Trump administration brokered bilateral agreements between Israel and the Middle Eastern countries of Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Morocco, and Sudan to normalize diplomatic relations. The administration also attempted to get Saudi Arabia to recognize Israel as a sovereign state and open similar relations, to no avail.
The Biden administration carried the torch in this regard but it became even more difficult to get Riyadh on board after the 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel and ensuing war in Gaza. The rising civilian death toll and humanitarian crisis led to an elevation of the Palestinian cause and engendered region-wide animosity toward Israel. The Saudis demanded at that point that Israel commit to meaningful steps toward the creation of an independent Palestinian state before any normalization would occur.
That continued into this year as the Saudi government denied President Donald Trump’s assertion that it had dropped its demand for a Palestinian state in order to normalize relations with Israel.
Even though efforts aimed at ending the war in Gaza have been unsuccessful, the second Trump administration is seemingly now reviving its efforts toward brokering an Israel-Saudi rapprochement, albeit beginning with a new U.S.-Saudi agreement first, as hinted by U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright.
The problem is that all the countries would benefit from such a grand bargain except the one brokering it — the United States, which would also absorb all of the costs. Israel and Saudi Arabia would gain the most. The Saudis have desperately wanted a nuclear power deal for some time. Meanwhile, if there is eventual normalization, Israel would neutralize what is now a powerful Arab rival and likely even gain a new ally in its quest to counter Iran (but it had better do it fast as Riyadh and Tehran have been approaching some level of detente for some time now).
Saudi Arabia has also sought formal security guarantees, which were reportedly on the table during the Biden administration. This would supplant the long-standing informal agreement between President Franklin Roosevelt and Saudi King Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, which provided security for the desert kingdom in exchange for U.S. access to cheap oil supplies.
Yet, with a $37 trillion national debt, why would the United States take on another ward that doesn’t pay its fair share for security (a common Trump gripe about other U.S. allies)? With fracking, the United States is no longer running out of oil, as FDR assumed would be the case, and is again the world’s largest oil producer. A formal defense pact with Saudi Arabia would incur yet more costs, further entrench the U.S. in the region, and put our own troops in harm’s way if Washington is expected to defend and bail out Riyadh in any military dispute with its neighbors.
In addition, what could go wrong if Saudi Arabia was given a nuclear program? Talks on an Israel-Saudi agreement previously faltered when the Saudis opposed restrictions that would have prevented them from using a commercial nuclear program to build nuclear weapons (to counter any Iranian nuclear capability), or to assist other countries in obtaining them.
The truth is, the Saudis have wanted to be able to enrich uranium — perhaps to bomb-grade levels — on their own soil rather than import uranium already enriched only to a level capable of generating commercial energy, for some time.
Some in the United States insist that the Saudis could get nuclear technology from other nations like Russia or China, but if they resist safeguards to prevent them from getting a weapon, then it wouldn’t matter who gave them the technology that would allow them to do it.
Thus, the Trump administration should desist in reaching any such agreement with the Saudis in its (right now) futile quest for Israel-Saudi grand rapprochement. Normalization of relations between the two countries would be a fine aspiration for the region (if it is not merely to isolate and poke Iran), but the United States meeting the Saudis’ exorbitant demands to achieve it would come at too great a cost.
After all, bilateral normalization should be in the interest of both countries, so they should negotiate it on their own without being coddled by the United States.
Iran-US talks wrap up in Rome with agreement to establish framework for potential nuclear deal

Omani officials stated that the indirect talks are ‘gaining momentum’ after Tehran and Washington agreed to establish technical delegations to draft a potential replacement for the Obama-era JCPOA
The second round of indirect talks between Iranian and US officials concluded in the Italian capital, Rome, on 19 April, with both sides agreeing to establish working groups to draft a “general framework” for a potential new nuclear deal.
“In this round of talks, senior Iranian and US negotiators outlined the general framework for the talks and exchanged views on some important issues in the areas of sanctions relief and the nuclear issue. The two sides agreed to continue the next round of indirect talks next Saturday in Muscat,” the Iranian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
Tehran also stated that talks to limit the country’s uranium enrichment program in exchange for sanctions relief “require more detailed discussion and examination at the expert level.” As such, the two sides agreed to send technical delegations to the Omani capital next Wednesday for detailed discussions.
Following Saturday’s talks, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi described the atmosphere as “positive” and said that officials “made clear how many in Iran believe that the [2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] is no longer good enough for us.”
“For now, optimism may be warranted but only with a great deal of caution,” he told reporters.
The Omani Foreign Ministry said the second round of talks “led to the parties agreeing to move to the next phase of targeted negotiations to achieve a fair, permanent, and binding agreement that ensures Iran is free from nuclear weapons and the full lifting of sanctions while preserving the country’s right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful uses and purposes.”
“Dialogue and clear communication are the only way to achieve a credible and reliable understanding that will benefit all parties in the regional and international context,” Omani officials said.
There was no immediate comment from the US side following the talks.
Nevertheless, soon after Saturday’s talks ended, Israeli TV broadcast a pre-recorded address by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in which he reiterated his commitment to preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
“I am committed to preventing Iran from attaining nuclear weapons. I won’t give on this, I won’t let up on this, and I won’t withdraw from this — not a millimeter,” Netanyahu said.
Earlier in the day, Reuters reported that Tel Aviv “has not ruled out” launching an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the near future without US involvement.
Iran to brief China as it accuses Israel of ‘undermining’ US nuclear talks
Tehran official’s Beijing trip comes before third round of talks with the US and follows consultations with Russia.
Iran says it will brief China this week in advance of a third round of talks with the United States on its nuclear programme, as Iranian officials separately accused Israel of seeking to “undermine and disrupt the diplomatic process”.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will visit Beijing on Tuesday to discuss the latest talks with the administration of US President Donald Trump on the country’s nuclear programme, spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said on Monday.
The trip echoes “consultations” Iran held with Russia last week, before the second round of direct US-Iran talks was held over the weekend. A third round of talks between Araghchi and US envoy Steve Witkoff is scheduled to take place in Oman on Saturday.
Araghchi has previously said Tehran always closely consults with its allies, Russia and China, over the nuclear issue.
“It is natural that we will consult and brief China over the latest developments in Iran-US indirect talks,” Baqaei said.
Russia and China, both nuclear-armed powers, were signatories to a now-defunct 2015 deal between Iran, the US and several Western countries intended to defuse tensions around Tehran’s nuclear programme.
The 2015 deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), from which Trump withdrew in 2018, saw Tehran curtail its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief.
The US and Israel have accused Iran of seeking to use the programme to develop nuclear weapons. Tehran has staunchly denied the claim, saying the programme is for civilian purposes.
On Monday, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs stressed close ties between Beijing and Tehran, but did not confirm the Iranian minister’s planned visit.
“China and Iran have maintained exchanges and contacts at all levels and in various fields. With regard to the specific visit mentioned, I have no information to offer at the moment,” Guo Jiakun, spokesperson for the ministry, said.
Strengthened alliance
Israel’s war in Gaza has seen Iran pull closer to Russia and China. Recent diplomatic moves surrounding the US-Iran talks have further underscored the strengthened ties.
Araghchi met his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, last week, just before his second round of negotiations with Witkoff.
On Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed off on a 20-year strategic partnership treaty agreed earlier this year with his Iranian counterpart, Masoud Pezeshkian.
Meanwhile, Iran’s already fraught relations with Israel and its “ironclad” ally, the US, have nosedived amid the war. Since taking office, Trump has reinstated a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign against Tehran, while repeatedly threatening military action if a new nuclear deal is not reached.
Speaking on Monday, Foreign Ministry spokesman Baqaei accused Israel of trying to disrupt the nascent negotiations to open the way for military action.
In comments carried by the AFP news agency, he declared that Israel is behind efforts from a “kind of coalition” to “undermine and disrupt the diplomatic process”.
“Alongside it are a series of warmongering currents in the United States and figures from different factions,” the spokesman said.
Last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated that Israel would not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.
His statement came a day after The New York Times reported that Trump had dissuaded Israel from striking Iran’s nuclear sites in the short term, saying Washington wanted to prioritise diplomatic talks.
‘Consultations must continue’
Baqaei added that “consultations must continue” with countries that were party to the JCPOA.
Iran has gradually breached the terms of the treaty since Trump abandoned it, most notably by enriching uranium to levels higher than those laid out in the deal.
The International Atomic Energy Agency says Iran has enriched uranium to 60 percent, close to the 90 percent level needed to manufacture weapons. The JCPOA had restricted it to 3.67 percent, the level of enrichment needed for civilian power.
Speaking last week, Witkoff sent mixed messages on what level Washington is seeking. He initially said in an interview that Tehran needed to reduce its uranium enrichment to the 3.67 percent limit, but later clarified that the US wants Iran to end its enrichment programme.
Why Is The BBC Middle East Desk Run By A Mossad Collaborator?
Dorset Eye, 14th April 2025
A senior figure at the BBC’s Middle East desk, Raffi Berg, has been exposed as a former employee of a CIA propaganda division and a collaborator with Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad, according to a detailed investigation by MintPress News.
Berg, who currently heads the BBC’s Middle East coverage, is facing growing internal criticism. At least thirteen BBC journalists have reportedly accused him of holding an overt bias in favour of Israel. Staff allege that Berg’s influence is so extensive that his role essentially revolves around “watering down” any reporting that might be overly critical of Israel. One source described him as wielding a “wild” degree of power within the newsroom.
A separate investigation published by Drop Site News in December disclosed that an atmosphere of “extreme fear” prevails at the BBC when it comes to covering stories critical of Israel, with Berg allegedly playing a central role in steering the network’s output towards what has been described as “systematic Israeli propaganda”.
Links to U.S. Intelligence
Before joining the BBC in 2001 as a writer and producer on the world news desk, Berg worked for the U.S. State Department’s Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS), according to MintPress News, which cited his LinkedIn profile and other corroborating sources.
The FBIS was part of the CIA’s Directorate of Science and Technology, tasked with monitoring, translating, and distributing open-source international news and information for U.S. government consumption. According to its publicly available profile, the FBIS played a key role in U.S. intelligence gathering.
Berg himself confirmed his association with the CIA during a 2020 interview with The Jewish Telegraph. Recounting his time at the FBIS, he revealed, “One day, I was taken to one side and told, ‘You may or may not know that we are part of the CIA, but don’t go telling people.’” I was absolutely thrilled. It wasn’t too much of a surprise because the application process was enormous — it took 10 months. They scrutinised my character and background meticulously, even asking whether I had visited communist countries and, if so, whether I had formed any relationships there.”
Mossad Collaboration
The revelations do not stop with Berg’s past ties to the CIA. The MintPress News investigation uncovered a significant professional entanglement between Berg and Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service. This relationship emerged during his work on Red Sea Spies: The True Story of Mossad’s Fake Diving Resort — a book recounting Mossad’s covert mission to smuggle Ethiopian Jews into Israel.
Berg openly acknowledged that the book was written “in collaboration” with Mossad commander Dani Limor…………………..
A Pattern of Pro-Israel Editorial Bias
According to MintPress News, Berg has consistently demonstrated overt sympathies towards Israel since the beginning of his tenure at the BBC. He was elevated to head of the Middle East desk shortly after instructing colleagues during Israel’s 2012 “Operation Cast Lead” to avoid language that could place “undue emphasis” on Israel’s role in the violence.
Operation Cast Lead saw Israel accused of widespread human rights violations, including indiscriminate attacks on civilians, the use of Palestinians as human shields, and the deployment of prohibited munitions such as white phosphorus.
Leaked emails revealed that Berg encouraged reporters to present the military assault as a response to rocket fire from Gaza, thus framing Hamas as the primary aggressor. MintPress noted this editorial slant as a clear effort to deflect blame from Israel.
More recently, during Israel’s ongoing military offensive in Gaza — described by critics as a genocidal campaign — Berg is said to have transformed the BBC’s coverage into “systematic Israeli propaganda”, according to a journalist cited by the Drop Site investigation.
“Almost every correspondent you know has an issue with him,” one journalist revealed. “He has been named in multiple meetings, but [management] just ignore it.”
Berg has also been accused of making extensive editorial changes to reporters’ work before publication, frequently reframing narratives to downplay Israel’s culpability. A stark example involved the killing of Mohammed Bhar, a Palestinian man with Down’s syndrome who was fatally attacked by Israeli military dogs and denied medical assistance as he bled to death.
Under Berg’s direction, the BBC originally ran the headline: “The Lonely Death of Gaza Man with Down’s Syndrome”. Only after significant international backlash did the broadcaster amend the headline to acknowledge the circumstances of Bhar’s death.
Despite repeated internal grievances highlighting Berg’s bias and unprofessional conduct, the BBC has “offered unequivocal support for him and his work,” according to the MintPress report.
Media Whitewashing of Israeli Atrocities
The controversy surrounding Berg comes amid broader criticism of Western media outlets for whitewashing or downplaying Israeli war crimes in Gaza. The BBC is not alone in facing scrutiny; other networks have been accused of propagating misleading narratives supplied by Israeli officials.
An investigation by Al Jazeera in October last year revealed that CNN broadcast false claims that Hamas fighters had hidden captives inside Gaza’s al-Rantisi Children’s Hospital — claims that were based on documents presented by the Israeli military. In reality, the documents turned out to be an ordinary calendar showing the days of the week in Arabic, a fact that CNN’s own Palestinian producer had flagged internally.
Nevertheless, CNN aired the footage, with correspondent Nic Robertson uncritically accepting the Israeli army’s account.
For more info: Raffi Berg: BBC Middle East Editor Exposed as CIA, Mossad Collaborator https://dorseteye.com/why-is-the-bbc-middle-east-desk-run-by-a-mossad-collaborator/
-
Archives
- May 2026 (91)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS

