The 'immediate ceasefire resolution' issued by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) due to the United States' abstention indicates that the Biden administration's political pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu persists. Despite the White House emphasizing that the decision is not binding and that there are no changes in policy, Netanyahu canceled the visit of the delegation he planned to send to Washington immediately after the UNGA decision. The fact that the Biden administration, which has been diplomatically protecting Israel with its veto power since October 7th, chose to abstain this time suggests that the crisis in bilateral relations has reached its peak. While Netanyahu may lean towards Trump, who has advocated for ending the conflict, Trump's remarks have increased American pressure.

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has passed a resolution demanding an immediate cease-fire in Gaza for the month of Ramadan. The 14 members council members voted in favor of the resolution, which was proposed by the 10 elected members of the council. Only the United States abstained from the vote. After the vote, there was an unusual round of applause in the council chamber, showing how much the international community wants the bloodshed to end.

In 2015, Netanyahu came to Washington to dynamite Obama's deal with Iran and made a speech in Congress. Obama was trying to delay Congress's new sanctions to make a nuclear deal with Iran. Netanyahu accepted the invitation of Republicans in the House of Representatives and did not coordinate his visit with Obama's White House. Netanyahu's speech at the session, attended by both wings of Congress, was repeatedly applauded. Netanyahu, who tried to end Obama's nuclear talks with Iran by imposing sanctions on Iran by Republicans and some Democrats in Congress, failed. Vice President Biden, who sat behind Netanyahu during his speech to Congress, seems to be facing a similar Netanyahu problem these days.

Friday marked the fifth day of Ramadan. Unfortunately, there is still no cease-fire in Gaza, and Israel continues to kill Palestinians waiting for food supplies. Earlier this week, Israeli troops killed six Palestinians and injured 83 others as they waited in line to receive a bag of flour. That was not the first time, and it won’t be the last.

We're talking about the possibility of Israel's attacks on Gaza triggering a regional war after October 7. Recent developments actually indicate that we are already in the midst of a regional war. However, the fluctuating intensity of such conflicts and the fact that the parties involved are not always clearly defined make it difficult to label it as a regional war. The evolution of warfare between countries, occurring in complex ways across different arenas and activating the capacities of various parties, has made traditional, all-encompassing wars increasingly rare. Many countries now prefer proxy wars due to their lower cost, lower risk, and deniability.

As Israel stands accused of genocide in The Hague, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict spreads to the broader region. On Thursday, the United States and the United Kingdom bombed 72 targets in Yemen, retaliating against Houthi attacks on commercial vessels heading to Israel via the Red Sea to protest the Gaza massacre.

This paper argues that the al-Aqsa Flood operation launched by the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades –the military wing of Hamas– on the morning of October 7 has led to a psychological and epistemological rupture in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and Middle East politics as the operation marked a paradigm shift in the philosophy of the resistance. The infiltration of al-Qassam into the occupied territories by land, sea, and air was a clear sign of a change in the strategy of the resistance to continue the active struggle against the aggressive expansionism and aggression of the Zionist Israeli government. In this context, the study tries to frame Operation al-Aqsa Flood and analyze the dimensions of the rupture. Besides this, it will also outline the possible impact of the operation on global and regional politics, considering that the ongoing process will change the political balance in the Middle East.

This article delves into the legal discussions surrounding the crisis unleashed by the military operation launched on October 7, 2023, in Southern Israel by Palestinian forces of the resistance based in Gaza. Israel considered this a “terrorist attack,” asserted the right of self-defense, declared war on Gazans, and started the continuous and indiscriminate bombardment of Gaza. As a result, Gaza has become the new Dresden, in which thousands have been killed and tens of thousands injured. This article is an attempt to answer the following questions to illuminate the legal issues surrounding the current crisis and the broader context of Israel’s legal status as a state and its territorial claims: Was the Palestinian offensive in Southern Israel an instance of terrorism and/or an act of aggression? Which side of the conflict can rightfully claim the right of self-defense? Did Israel commit genocide in Gaza? Do Israel’s statehood and territorial claims rest on firm legal grounds? Is it legally sensible to argue that Israel is a threat to international peace and security?

The year 2023 began relatively strong for the U.S. in terms of its claim to global leadership in foreign policy. However, due to a strategic blind spot in the context of the Gaza conflict, it ended on a disappointing note. In the upcoming year, it is not difficult to predict that the Biden administration will attempt to diminish this loss of reputation. However, President Biden's unwavering support for Israel poses a significant obstacle. While Washington acknowledges the unsustainability of this stance, overcoming it to influence Israel's "war cabinet" will require more than leaking discontent to the press. In 2024, Biden must shift his focus from providing ideological support to Israel and concentrate on repairing America's political interests and reputation. Failing to do so will hinder his ability to unite his party or establish superiority in the power struggle with Russia and China.

Important parameter for guarantor model is Israeli government and its expected transformation, which is highly probable in the short term after its clear failures

The current Western governments have been giving full and unconditional support to Israel’s oppressive policies and atrocities. Pro-Israeli Western governments do not take into account their citizens’ views on the latest developments in Palestine. They prefer to support the Zionists but not their people. However, they know that their pro-Israeli positions damage their relations with other countries.

During his visit to Israel, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin reiterated the Biden administration's support but conveyed the message that operations should be more limited. Austin, who previously stated that Israel faced the risk of 'strategic defeat,' is believed to be delivering the message that winning the war in urban combat requires gaining civilian support. The U.S. administration reportedly urged Israel to reduce the intensity of operations by the end of the year and increase humanitarian aid passages. While continuing support for Israel, the Biden administration seems to be trying to limit the political cost generated by the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Biden, in a ceremony where he criticized antisemitism this week, recounted the political pressures he faced for stating 35 years ago, 'Being Jewish is not necessary to be a Zionist. And I am a Zionist.' Biden has previously used expressions like 'If there was no Israel, we would have to invent it' and linked the security of Jews to the existence of Israel. It can be politically surprising that Biden, in his second term, insists on his Israel policy, risking American national interests. The only explanation for Biden's insistence might be an irrational and ideological perspective based on assumptions that many Jews might not accept.

Israel has been bombing the Gaza Strip for almost two months, killing more than 15,000 Palestinians, most of whom are innocent children and women. In spite of calls and criticism from international organizations, hundreds of millions of people around the world and more than a hundred governments, Israel keeps committing atrocities.

The temporary cease-fire in Gaza was scheduled to expire Tuesday, but the parties agreed to extend it for two days. Still, witnessing the joy of Palestinians being rescued from Israeli prisons, rather than the killing of Palestinian women and children, offered some relief to people around the world. It is important, however, for the international community to keep objecting to Israel’s massacres. The prisoner exchange revealed that Israel was violating the human rights of Palestinians even before the Oct. 7 attack. Hence the need to keep talking about the two-state solution and mounting pressure on Israel to facilitate a permanent cease-fire is necessary. Specifically, the backlash from the West, including Spain and Belgium, needs to continue without interruption.

Even if Israel emerges from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a limited military victory, it remains the loser of the conflict. Following its intense campaign against Gaza post-Oct. 7, Israel either failed or chose not to seize the greatest historical opportunity since its establishment. Today, it grapples with an ontological security crisis and profound regional and global status anxieties on a scale unseen since 1948.

The prisoner exchange agreement reached between Israel and Hamas marks a significant turning point in the course of the war. The agreement implies that Israel has stepped back from its pledge to halt operations until all prisoners are released. However, it is clear that Israeli attacks will continue after a brief hiatus. Predicting that the release of all Hamas prisoners will take months, if not years, it is not difficult to anticipate that the conflict will intermittently intensify and persist for an extended period. The events since October 7 have become the foremost agenda item in the region, transforming the pursuit of a solution to the Palestinian issue into a new driving force. Therefore, in the coming period, we can expect the Gaza war to continue with its ups and downs, while diplomatic efforts for a final resolution intensify.