Figures such as Eisenkot and Bennett come from a security establishment that remains deeply hostile to Hezbollah’s military infrastructure and highly sensitive to threats from Lebanon.

An opposition government might negotiate differently.

It is unlikely to think fundamentally differently about military deterrence.

⚔️ THE REAL QUESTION

The crucial issue is not simply:

“Who will win the Israeli election?”

It is:

“What happens to Israel’s northern military posture when electoral survival becomes the overriding political objective?”

Because in Israel, elections do not exist in a vacuum.

Security operations shape political narratives.

Political narratives shape coalition survival.

And coalition survival can influence the timing, intensity and presentation of military action.

🎯 THE BOTTOM LINE

Israel’s October 2026 election could produce a new government—but not necessarily a new northern strategy.

Whether Netanyahu remains in power or an opposition coalition takes over, the basic political reality remains:

🇮🇱 No Israeli government can afford to appear weak on Hezbollah or the northern border.

For South Lebanon, therefore, the election should not be watched merely as a contest over Netanyahu’s future.

It should be watched as a potential indicator of how Jerusalem calculates the cost—and political utility—of continued confrontation on the northern front.

The battlefield and the ballot box are no longer separate arenas.

☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5

🚨🚨

The End of Patience: The Axis of Resistance Takes the Offensive ( Part 1 )

The equation in the Middle East has definitively changed. The Era of Strategic Patience is over, and the Axis of Resistance has drawn a red line in fire and steel.
At approximately 2:25 AM Tehran time, the Islamic Republic of Iran launched a coordinated, multi-front military response across the region, firing precision strikes from launch sites spread across 32 Iranian cities and provinces.

The message is single-minded and direct: aggression will no longer be absorbed; it will be met with overwhelming, offensive strength.


The Target and the Arsenal: Defensive Patience End, Offensive Reality Begins

This counter-strike targeted key infrastructure supporting the American military presence and naval blockade in the region:


🔹US Bases in Jordan: The IRGC Aerospace Force unleashed concentrated salvoes of medium-range ballistic missiles against the King Hussein Air Base and Al-Azraq Air Base in Jordan. These sites serve as critical hubs for regional US military logistics and air operations. The strikes systematically targeted technical repair hangars, maintenance infrastructure, and fighter jet housing facilities, degrading operational capability on the ground.


🔹US Maritime Assets in the Strait of Hormuz: Simultaneously, Iranian coastal units launched advanced anti-ship cruise missiles targeting US destroyers and naval assets enforcing the blockade near the Strait of Hormuz.

The operation utilized an integrated mix of Iran’s precision-guided ballistic arsenal—including Khaibar Shekan and Fattah-class systems—complemented by high-speed cruise missiles and swarms of loitering munitions. The scale of simultaneous launches across 32 provinces proved that Iran’s operational depth remains completely intact, unified, and ready for deployment at a moment's notice.


Why Iran Struck: Legitimate Defense Against Unprovoked Aggression

This military response was neither unprovoked nor isolated; it was an absolute necessity.
Around 2:40 AM, and following earlier provocations on Sunday, American forces conducted hostile strikes against Iranian territory on Larak Island. American strikes targeting Iranian territorial sovereignty spilled the blood of Iranian fighters and civilians. Combined with Washington’s illegal naval blockade—which has unlawfully intercepted, redirected, or disabled 88 commercial vessels in regional waters—the US has consistently pushed the region toward open conflict.
Iran acted out of sovereign duty to defend its soil, protect its people, and break an illegal economic and military siege. As Ebrahim Azizi, Head of the Iranian Parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, declared:

"Testing our resolve once again will only multiply the cost of your defeats. Wait in terror and fear."

🚨🚨

Grounded in Faith and Unity: The Mandate for the Offensive Shift (Part 2)

This shift in military doctrine directly reflects the landmark address delivered by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei, during the 40th International Islamic Unity Conference of 2026 in the Iranian capital, Tehran. The conference began on Thursday, August 27, 2026, and concluded on Sunday, August 30, 2026, coinciding with the events of Islamic Unity Week and the anniversary of the birth of the Noble Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

Addressing a unified gathering of Shia and Sunni scholars from across the Muslim world, the Leader declared that the Muslim Ummah can no longer afford to remain in a posture of passive defense while hostile foreign powers occupy, blockade, and strike Muslim lands.

“Iran is no longer on the defensive side. We are on the offensive.”

This statement was not merely rhetorical; it represented a reset of military doctrine. The offensive operations carried out across the region demonstrate that when the sovereign dignity of the Islamic Republic—or the broader Muslim world—is violated, the response will be immediate, assertive, and unyielding.

The unity celebrated by Sunni and Shia leaders and scholars in Tehran has now materialized as unified resistance against external coercion.

🌍 Current Regional Ripple Effects

The impact of Iran’s precision strikes was felt immediately across the Middle Eastern theater of operations:

🔻 Saudi Arabia:
Commercial flight operations were completely suspended at King Abdulaziz International Airport in Jeddah, effectively disrupting the activities of this major regional air-transport hub.

🔻🔻 Jordan & Qatar:
Jordanian authorities reported interceptions over their airspace, while Qatar’s Ministry of Interior raised the security threat level to its maximum and instructed residents to remain indoors.

🔻🔻🔻 Occupied Palestine & Southern Lebanon:
Israeli fighter aircraft entered a state of maximum alert, conducting low-altitude sorties from southern Lebanese airspace toward the border areas.

Concurrently, occupation forces began heavy artillery fire and white-phosphorus shelling against targets in Nabatieh al-Fawqa, Mayfadoun, and Baraachit in southern Lebanon.

The message from Tehran and the Axis of Resistance is unequivocal:

The days of unilateral aggression without a price or consequences are over.

Any further miscalculation by foreign forces will face an even harsher and more decisive reality on the ground.


☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5

🚨

UPDATE — AUGUST 31, 2026: THE ECONOMIC WAR IS NOW HITTING GLOBAL MARKETS

The latest developments have made one reality impossible to ignore:

Washington did not merely escalate against Iran. It escalated against the global energy system.

Following the U.S. strike on Iran’s Larak Island and Tehran’s subsequent retaliation against U.S. positions in Jordan, oil prices jumped sharply.

🛢️ Brent crude surged around 2.8% to approximately $90.60 a barrel, while WTI climbed about 2.5% to roughly $85.53.

But the oil price is only the first warning signal.

🚢 HORMUZ REMAINS THE PRESSURE POINT

Commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has collapsed from more than 100 vessels a day to around five.

That is not a normal market disruption. It is a structural shock to one of the world’s most important energy arteries.

And this is precisely where the strategic contradiction of Washington’s policy becomes visible.

The United States wants to pressure Iran economically while simultaneously conducting military operations around the very chokepoint through which a substantial portion of global energy supplies normally moves.

You cannot weaponize the Gulf and then pretend the world economy will remain untouched.

📉 THE MARKETS ARE ALREADY RESPONDING

Asian stock markets fell as renewed U.S.-Iran hostilities intensified fears of higher energy prices and inflation.

At the same time, U.S. Treasury yields remained elevated, while markets increased the probability of another Federal Reserve rate hike in September.

In other words:

War → Hormuz disruption → higher oil prices → inflation → tighter monetary policy → weaker markets.

🇺🇸 WASHINGTON’S SANCTIONS WAR IS ALSO ESCALATING

The economic pressure campaign is expanding beyond Iran itself.

The U.S. Treasury has moved against Banque Misr’s UAE branches, restricting their access to dollar transactions over alleged Iran-related dealings. Egypt and the UAE have responded by coordinating on the matter, while the UAE Central Bank is examining the bank’s operations.

And Washington is reportedly preparing additional secondary sanctions against financial institutions dealing with Iran, potentially turning the sanctions campaign into a recurring escalation mechanism.

⚠️ THE REAL STRATEGIC QUESTION

For years, the American assumption was simple:

Pressure Iran → weaken Iran → force Tehran to concede.

But the current equation is becoming far more complicated.

Every additional military escalation around Iran increases the risk premium on energy.

Every disruption in Hormuz affects shipping.

Every rise in oil prices feeds inflation.

Every inflationary shock complicates Western monetary policy.

And every new financial sanction pushes regional actors to search for alternative payment channels and financial arrangements outside the U.S.-dominated system.

That is the paradox of Washington’s strategy:

The more aggressively it attempts to isolate Iran, the more it exposes the world’s dependence on the very region it is destabilizing.

🔥 Iran does not need to control the entire global economy to impose strategic costs on its adversaries.

It only needs to remain capable of making the world’s most important economic chokepoints too dangerous, too expensive, or too uncertain to ignore.

And that is exactly what the markets are beginning to price in.

This is no longer simply a war over territory or military positions.

It is becoming a confrontation over energy, trade, financial power—and the architecture of the global economy itself.


☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5

🔴 Hormuz and Ali al-Tahir... Fuel for the Elections!

📌 Key highlights from political writer Habib El-Boustany's article (Tayyar website):

🔹 Rome Negotiations and Withdrawal: The Rome negotiations are expected to resume in September without achieving tangible progress on core issues. The main problem remains the Netanyahu government's refusal to place the occupied areas under the authority of the Lebanese Army, in accordance with the framework agreement.

🔹 French-Saudi Intervention: A French move backed by Saudi Arabia to enforce the implementation of Resolution 1701 and restore balance against the US monopoly and Israeli pressure. France announced a conference to support the Lebanese Army, though success depends on Washington not using its "veto."

🔹 Diplomatic Activity (Tehran - Washington): Intense activity in the region through the Qatari initiative (visit of Abdulrahman Al Thani) following the Pakistani initiative, coinciding with the announcement of an agreement between Tehran and Muscat regarding the Strait of Hormuz.

🔹 Fire Messages and Election Exploitation: The recent US aggression near Hormuz reflects Washington's desire to keep the issue as a winning card for the US elections, in parallel with Israel's push to keep the "Ali al-Tahir" issue as a card for its internal elections.

☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5

🔴 The Serpent Eats Its Tail: Netanyahu’s Desperate Purge of Ben Gvir Signals the Collapse of the Zionist Bloc

Let’s cut through the diplomatic noise. The Hebrew daily Maariv just confirmed what we in the Axis have been watching for months: the Zionist right is entering its death-spiral phase. Netanyahu’s Likud has officially abandoned the idea of a united front with Ben Gvir’s "Otzma Yehudit." No merger. No deal. Instead, they are launching a full-frontal campaign to shrink Ben Gvir’s voter base.

Why? Because Bibi is terrified. His strategy is cynical, transparent, and utterly desperate. He wants to pull right-wing extremists back into the Likud fold while simultaneously tossing a lifeline to Smotrich, who is currently flatlining below the electoral threshold in several internal polls. Netanyahu is trying to play firefighter, arsonist, and savior all at once.

But here is the brutal geopolitical reality: This is the strategic failure of a man who has lost command of his own ship.

By choosing to cannibalize Ben Gvir rather than absorb him, Netanyahu is admitting he cannot hold his coalition together through ideology or fear anymore. He is betting that he can eat his own allies' lunch and still have enough seats to form a government. But he miscalculates. Ben Gvir thrives on persecution. The more Likud punches him, the more his radical base sees Netanyahu as a

"weak traitor"

– and they will stay home or vote for splinter factions out of spite.

So, who wins the next election?

Not Netanyahu.

Even if he squeezes out a few extra mandates for Likud by attacking Ben Gvir, the overall right-wing bloc is fracturing. Smotrich might barely survive, but a weakened Ben Gvir means a poisoned coalition that cannot sustain a majority. The most likely scenario is political paralysis – a hung Knesset that forces yet another round of elections, leaving the occupation government in caretaker limbo.

And while Tel Aviv tears itself apart over petty power struggles, the Axis of Resistance watches with satisfaction. A divided enemy is a defeated enemy. Netanyahu’s future is not a victory march; it is a slow, bloody grind toward irrelevance, hostage to his own mutinous extremist spawn.

Latest update: Just this week, the Israeli coalition is buckling under the 2025 budget crisis, with Smotrich openly threatening to torpedo the state budget if his settler interests aren't met—further proving that even if Bibi survives the vote, he will govern over a corpse of a coalition.

The occupation is eating its own children. We just need to bring the popcorn.

☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5

🔴🇱🇧🇮🇱🇺🇸

Tawfiq Chouman: Lebanese Negotiations Have Hit a Wall… Washington Is Pressuring Beirut, Not Tel Aviv

In three interviews with RT Arabic, Al-Manar, and Al-Qahera News, writer and political analyst Tawfiq Chouman offered a harsh assessment of the Lebanese and Iranian tracks, arguing that what is happening behind the scenes reveals a far deeper predicament than official statements suggest.

🇱🇧 Lebanon Is Facing Negotiations With No Clear Way Forward

According to Chouman, Lebanon’s negotiating track with the Israeli occupation state started in a tunnel and is now stuck in a deadlock.

The Lebanese negotiating side still does not know when the eighth round will take place, what its agenda will be, or even whether it will actually be held.

And this is where the core problem lies: when the negotiating party is unable to determine the date or agenda of the next round, it means the process itself has entered a phase of uncertainty and paralysis.

More troubling is that, according to reports circulating, Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has informed the U.S. administration that the “pilot zones” model has failed.

If true, the implications are clear: there will be no redeployment of occupation forces and no serious steps of this kind.

Consequently, one of the key provisions of the framework agreement signed on June 26 has effectively been thrown into question.

🚨 But the more serious development is coming from Washington.

According to what is now being reported in the U.S. and Israeli media, Washington and Tel Aviv are moving toward an attempt to secure a UN Security Council resolution endorsing the framework agreement.

And this is where close attention is required:

The framework agreement, in its reported form, does not call for a ceasefire or the withdrawal of the occupation army from occupied Lebanese territory.

In other words, turning it into an international resolution may not simply be a procedural step. It could be an attempt to institutionalize a new political formula that does not give Lebanon what should be at the core of any settlement: an end to the aggression and a withdrawal.

🇺🇸 And what about the United States?

Chouman points to a notable shift within the American debate itself, with a number of prominent U.S. thinkers and strategists beginning to speak openly about the limits of American power and its inability to resolve major global conflicts through military force, including the war against Iran.

That, in itself, is a significant indicator.

Because acknowledging the limits of Washington’s ability to achieve decisive outcomes amounts, in one way or another, to acknowledging that the war’s objectives were not achieved as planned.

🌍 Beyond that, the world is beginning to deal with the United States differently.

According to Chouman, there is a growing trend among regional states, as well as some European countries, toward building their own security umbrellas rather than relying entirely on Washington.

This shift is potentially more dangerous to American influence than simply losing a military battle.

A great power begins to decline when its allies start looking for security alternatives outside its umbrella.

🇮🇷 As for the Tehran–Washington track, Chouman’s assessment is clear:

There will be no Iranian-American negotiations in the foreseeable future—and perhaps beyond that.

🇱🇧 As for Lebanon, the picture is even harsher.

Chouman describes the Lebanese negotiations with the Israeli occupation state as resembling a policy of deliberately insisting on running into a wall.

The reason, according to his assessment, is that the Lebanese negotiating side is betting on Washington to pressure Israel.

But the reality, he argues, points in exactly the opposite direction:

American pressure is being directed at Lebanon.

The clearest indication is that Washington is not pressuring Netanyahu to define the pilot zones, while it is pressuring the Lebanese side to tighten what it calls “sovereign measures.”

And here is the question that cannot be ignored:

If Washington is a mediator, why does the pressure appear to be directed more heavily at the Lebanese side than at the side occupying Lebanese territory?

Perhaps because this is no longer simply a negotiation over field arrangements.

The real battle is over what Lebanon will look like after the war—and who will impose the terms when the settlement is written.

More dangerously, Lebanon may find itself facing an agreement it is expected to honor while the Israeli side retains its occupation and freedom of maneuver, with international pressure becoming a tool for reshaping Lebanon’s internal political and security landscape.

This is precisely where the real predicament lies.

☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5

🔴 🇱🇧

48 Years Since Imam Musa al-Sadr’s Disappearance: Who Benefits from Keeping the Truth Buried?

On August 31, we do not need more speeches about Imam Musa al-Sadr.

We need answers.

Forty-eight years have passed since the disappearance in Libya of Imam Sayyed Musa al-Sadr and his two companions, Sheikh Mohammed Yaacoub and journalist Abbas Badreddine.

Forty-eight years of statements, committees, investigations, promises—and endless questions.

And the result?

No complete truth. No bodies. No definitive account. And no accountability that puts the final pieces together.

And the most uncomfortable question is not simply:

Where is Imam al-Sadr?

It is:

❗️Who benefits from keeping the mystery alive to this day?

Muammar Gaddafi’s regime fell in 2011.

Security agencies collapsed, prisons were opened, files emerged, witnesses came forward, and mass graves and secret detention sites were uncovered.

It was only logical to assume that the fall of the regime whose authorities were accused of responsibility for the disappearance of Imam al-Sadr and his companions would finally open the door to the truth.

But it did not.

To this day, successive Libyan authorities have been accused of failing to fully cooperate in the case, while the fate of the three men remains unknown.

And that makes the question entirely legitimate:

Did the truth disappear with Gaddafi? Or is there someone who still possesses it—and is afraid to reveal it?

And why?

In the years following Gaddafi’s fall, more than one lead, story, and suspected body emerged.

In 2012, a body believed to be that of Imam al-Sadr was handed over to the Lebanese side. DNA testing, however, established that it belonged to Libyan opposition figure Mansour al-Kikhia.

In 2016, another body emerged, but DNA testing again produced negative results. The case remained open.

Then, in 2025, a BBC investigation revealed new evidence concerning a body discovered in a secret morgue in Tripoli in 2011. Facial-recognition analysis suggested that the body could potentially be that of Imam al-Sadr.

But even this evidence did not constitute definitive forensic identification, and the Imam’s family and the Amal Movement rejected it as conclusive.

And this is where the questions multiply.

If the Imam was killed, where is his body?

If he was imprisoned, who held him? And when did his life end?

If orders were given to conceal his fate, who issued them?

And if the truth exists in files, testimonies, or the archives of Libya’s security services, why has it not fully emerged after the fall of the regime?

And perhaps most troubling of all:

Why did the Libyan revolution, after opening so many doors and exposing so many secrets, fail to reveal the fate of one of the most prominent political disappearances in the history of the region?

We have no right to accuse a specific party without evidence.

But we have every right to ask the questions that remain unanswered.

Saying that the case is “old” is not an answer.

Saying that “Gaddafi is gone” is not an answer.

Saying that “the case is still under investigation” is not an answer.

Truth does not expire.

And justice does not become less important simply because 48 years have passed.

If anything, the opposite is true.

Every year that passes without the truth makes the question even more urgent:

Who wants this case to remain open without a conclusion?

And has the continued disappearance of Imam al-Sadr become, for certain forces, more useful than knowing the truth about what happened to him?

This is not a sectarian issue.

It is a question of the state, national dignity, and Arab collective memory.

And those who raise the Imam’s picture every August 31, only to return to silence the next day, should ask themselves:

Do we really want the truth? Or do we simply want to remember the man without demanding that the truth about what happened to him be uncovered?

After 48 years, what is needed is no longer more words.

What is needed is to open the archives, disclose the documents, question surviving witnesses and officials, follow every lead, and hold accountable anyone whose responsibility is established.

For Imam Musa al-Sadr and his two companions to remain nothing more than photographs raised every year, while the truth remains buried somewhere, is not loyalty to their cause.

That is precisely what we must refuse to accept.

🇱🇧 Imam al-Sadr is not merely a memory.

He is a case that remains unresolved.

And the question will remain:

Who benefits from keeping the truth hidden?


☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5

🇵🇸🇱🇧 As for Gaza and Lebanon… they are Erdoğan’s moral and political test.

If Erdoğan believes that Israel is committing genocide, if Fidan describes Netanyahu as an “enemy of humanity,” and if Turkey wants to build a regional power capable of protecting the security of the region’s states, then it is only natural for people to ask:

When will this rhetoric be transformed into real political and military capability?

No one is asking Turkey to declare war tomorrow.

But if the words remain powerful while the actions remain limited, then the Mecca Agreement itself could become nothing more than a larger version of Erdoğan’s rhetoric:

Strong in statements, weak when tested.

But if it develops into a genuine defense architecture, if Egypt—and perhaps other countries—join, if their armed forces begin meaningful coordination, and if they develop shared defense industries, intelligence capabilities, and a credible deterrent, then dismissing the alliance would be a serious mistake.

Only then would we be witnessing a genuine geopolitical transformation.

Therefore, the question is not:

Is Erdoğan a hypocrite or a sincere leader?

The more precise question is:

Can Erdoğan transform his rhetorical influence into an independent regional power?

The Mecca Agreement will provide the answer.

And Gaza and Lebanon will be the first real test.

Because the Middle East does not need another leader who excels at rhetoric.

It needs someone capable of turning rhetoric into power.

☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5

💰🚨 SAUDI ARABIA IS BORROWING AGAIN — THE $8 BILLION WARNING BEHIND VISION 2030

Bloomberg reports that Saudi Arabia’s National Debt Management Center (NDMC) is in talks with international and regional banks to arrange at least $8 billion in new syndicated loans, while Saudi Aramco is separately seeking additional financing.

The numbers tell a more complicated story than the glossy Vision 2030 narrative:

🔻 $8 billion — new syndicated loans being sought
🔻 $9.1 billion — Saudi Arabia’s Q2 budget deficit
🔻 25% — contraction in the oil sector during Q2
🔻 $6 billion — bonds already raised by the NDMC this year
🔻 $4 billion — raised by Aramco
🔻 $7 billion — raised by the Public Investment Fund
🔻 $13 billion — previous 7-year syndicated loan arranged by the NDMC

And this is happening despite Brent averaging around $87 a barrel.

That matters.

Saudi Arabia is attempting one of the most ambitious state-led economic transformations in the world while simultaneously carrying enormous spending commitments, including mega-projects under Vision 2030, and facing the costs of regional instability.

The conflict environment matters too. Disruption around Red Sea shipping routes, attacks involving Yemen, and wider confrontation involving Iran have increased security, defense and trade costs while exposing the vulnerability of Gulf economies to geopolitical shocks.

🇸🇦 The real question is not whether Saudi Arabia can borrow. It can.

The question is whether Riyadh can finance its transformation without repeatedly relying on debt, oil revenues and sovereign balance sheets to compensate for the gap between ambition and economic reality.

MBS has undeniably transformed Saudi society, expanded non-oil revenues and reduced the power of the religious establishment.

But economic modernization is a different test.

NEOM, diversification and global economic supremacy require sustained foreign investment, institutional confidence and fiscal sustainability — not simply enormous state spending.

The $8 billion borrowing push is therefore more than a financing story.

It is a reminder that Vision 2030 is still a high-stakes gamble, and geopolitical instability can expose its financial vulnerabilities very quickly.


☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5

🔴

Afghanistan Sells Its Wealth to Escape Isolation… and Washington Knows How to Exploit Weakness

In a move that exposes the depth of Kabul’s predicament, the Taliban has announced its willingness to open Afghanistan’s doors to U.S. companies for investment in mining, infrastructure, agriculture, and trade, at a time when it is seeking relief from U.S. sanctions and the release of frozen Afghan assets.

Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi said that Kabul welcomes U.S. investment.

The problem is that Washington does not view Afghanistan as an equal partner, but rather as a country possessing what Western markets increasingly need: vast and strategically valuable mineral resources.

💰 Afghanistan’s untapped mineral resources are estimated to be worth more than $1 trillion, including copper, lithium, cobalt, gold, and other minerals.

And this raises the harder question:

Is the Taliban genuinely seeking international investment, or is it prepared to offer up the country’s wealth as the price for escaping isolation?

Washington, for its part, is not entering this arena out of charity. Given the history of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, it is difficult to treat American economic engagement as simply “investment.” The United States understands the value of Afghanistan’s strategic geography and critical resources. It also understands a basic rule of international politics: the weaker the economic and political position of the party sitting across the negotiating table, the higher the price it is likely to pay.

More troubling still, the Taliban itself appears to be handing Washington an additional bargaining chip.

Instead of building a genuinely diversified economic policy based on multiple partners — including China, Russia, Iran, Central Asian states, and others — Kabul appears willing to knock on the door of the very power that played a major role in freezing Afghan assets and contributing to the country’s economic isolation.

This is not full economic sovereignty.

It is a survival strategy under pressure.

At the same time, Trump’s interest in Afghanistan appears highly selective. He has not rushed toward comprehensive normalization with Kabul. Instead, he has focused on the demand to regain access to Bagram Air Base, a proposal the Taliban rejects.

The equation is therefore becoming increasingly clear:

🇺🇸 Washington wants influence, strategic access, and resources.

🇦🇫 The Taliban wants recognition, sanctions relief, and access to frozen assets.

And caught between them is a poor and isolated country sitting on enormous natural wealth.

But the Taliban needs to understand a basic lesson in geopolitics:

If you enter negotiations with the United States from a position of desperate dependence, you cannot expect the deal to be an equal one.

If Afghanistan wants to develop its resources, it should open its doors to the world — but on Afghan terms, through genuine competition among multiple international partners, not by handing the keys to its national wealth to a single power in exchange for sanctions relief.

Otherwise, Afghanistan may discover years from now that its enormous natural wealth did not liberate it from dependency…

It merely reproduced dependency in a new form.

Source: Financial Times


☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5

🔴 🔴 Unprecedented Escalation by the Iraqi Judiciary Against the Iraqi Resistance: Lengthy Prison Sentences Issued

📍 Baghdad

Iraq’s judicial scene has witnessed an unprecedented escalation against the resistance, following the issuance of a series of harsh judicial rulings, including 15-year prison sentences against several resistance fighters.

The Central Criminal Court in Baghdad sentenced Karrar Hashim Falih Shaheen and Abbas Sattar Karim Hussein to 15 years in prison, under the Anti-Terrorism Law, on charges of carrying out a rocket attack targeting the U.S. Embassy in the Green Zone last March.

In a related development, another 15-year prison sentence was handed down against resistance fighter Amir Rahim Jabbar over his involvement in the kidnapping of American journalist Shelley Renee Kettleson in the capital.

The rulings have been met with widespread rejection and condemnation, amid assertions that these operations were fundamentally carried out in response to violations of Iraqi sovereignty and attacks on Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) headquarters. There have also been serious calls not to remain silent over these harsh sentences issued against members of the resistance.


☑️ Our website

🖋@observer_5