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.

The Turkish national defense minister affirmed Wednesday the ongoing commitment of Türkiye to revitalize the Black Sea Grain deal.

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?

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.

The events of 2023 have significantly diversified potential geopolitical and strategic scenarios for 2024.

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.

While state universities in the American higher education system are obliged to adhere to constitutional provisions, private universities, like Harvard and MIT, aren't directly bound by the First Amendment, which safeguards freedom of speech. Private institutions can establish their rules and regulations, often attempting to extend freedom of expression in the name of academic freedom. However, they have, in the past, canceled programs and events deemed provocative or likely to incite disturbances, fostering a perception that such restrictions disproportionately favor conservative groups. Even on liberal campuses like Columbia, limitations and even bans on pro-Palestinian demonstrations have been observed.

Protest movements against Israel's operations in Gaza have sparked a reexamination of the limits of freedom of expression in the United States. Efforts by pro-Israel groups to equate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism have become organized and systematic. The campaign, conducted through advertisements in media outlets and lobbying activities in Congress, aimed to convey the message that crowds taking to the streets to defend Palestinian civilians were contributing to the rise of anti-Semitism. However, censorship applied by some of the world's leading universities to groups supporting Palestine, the fear of being labeled as anti-Semitic, and threats to withdraw support from influential donors demonstrated how the boundaries of academic freedom could be defined. The experience of a prominent figure losing their job or being marginalized due to their pro-Palestinian stance also illustrates how organized political forces can effectively use the trauma of anti-Semitism as a weapon.

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.

Elon Musk, the world's wealthiest businessperson, faced a new campaign against him when he liked an antisemitic post on his platform, X (Twitter). Media Matters, an organization that published a report on the prevalence of antisemitic content on the platform, triggered major American companies advertising on X to withdraw their ads. Musk, experiencing significant commercial losses, attempted to demonstrate his non-antisemitic stance by visiting Israel. However, associating this with proving one's non-antisemitic stance is problematic, considering the history of antisemitism predates Israel's history, and leaders like Prime Minister Netanyahu have a long history of trying to equate criticism of Israel's policies with antisemitism.

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 mass killings carried out by Israel in response to the large-scale Hamas attack on Oct. 7 have caused a great reaction, both in the region and around the world. As Israeli attacks continued to commit all kinds of war crimes, even some of the Western states that have been giving unconditional support to Israel began to call on Israel to stop its atrocities.

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.

President Biden's opinion piece published in The Washington Post over the weekend reveals how disconnected he is from reality. Biden makes a peculiar analogy by suggesting that Putin and Hamas are "fighting to erase their 'democratic neighbors' from the map." This is, at the very least, a strange comparison. Biden claims that these actors hope to benefit from the chaos they create by undermining regional stability and integration. However, it's evident that Biden fails to accurately contextualize Russia's invasion of Ukraine or Israel's actions in Gaza.

What has been 46 days since the beginning of Israel's unrestrained and inhumane attacks against the innocent people of the occupied Gaza Strip. Receiving unconditional support from Western powers, Israel has crossed all red lines from the beginning of its attacks. So far, Israel has killed more than 13,000 Palestinians, and wounded more than 30,000 people in Gaza. More than 6,000 Palestinians are still missing, most of which remained under the rubble.