Video: Marco Rubio during his visit to the Gaza command center / Credit: CONTACT

The new headquarters is being set up at a rapid and impressive pace. The Americans, as it happens, know how to improvise on the dime just as capably as the Israelis. Their leaders' determination to closely follow developments is the reason for their aerial convoy to the site – not to provide Israeli babysitting, as critics suggest.

"There has never been anything like this," Secretary of State Marco Rubio said while visiting the place two days ago. Indeed, there never has been. An international blend of Israelis, Americans, French, Germans, Canadians, Cypriots, Greeks, and others moves through the enormous hangars. I even thought I spotted a United Arab Emirates flag in the corner.

Nevertheless, it's uncomfortable to report that at this preliminary stage, the crowds of soldiers, officers, and civilians don't precisely know what to do with themselves yet. Before Rubio's arrival, they didn't even trouble themselves to sit at their computer workstations. Only when he neared the work stations did someone issue instructions to occupy the chairs to generate the appearance of "quiet, working." I was present to observe it.

The hundreds of dedicated people who arrived to serve at the location don't know what to do, for the straightforward reason that everything remains in organizational phases. Nobody possesses plans yet – even unclear ones – for where to proceed from here, only good intentions. The war halted abruptly, and this represents a tremendous international accomplishment. Nevertheless, the practical path forward is extremely complicated, and its execution will prove more challenging.

Here's what's absent: A unified international force, certainty regarding the nations that will comprise it, coordination methods between the different armies that will function within it, work plans, schedules, orderly directives, guidelines on what occurs in problematic scenarios, and evidently also a Security Council resolution without which the force – which obtained the acronym ISF – won't be established whatsoever. This is likely not the entire list.

Pressure on Hamas

Preparing each of these stages will require time, especially if the Security Council intervenes midway. Consequently, even though the Americans and the Israelis assisting them are all functioning at Trump speed, in the optimal scenario, weeks will elapse before the ISF commences dismantling Hamas from its armaments, demolishing the tunnels, and demilitarizing Gaza. In the less favorable and more probable scenario, months will elapse.

Those already thoroughly exploiting the transitional period are Hamas murderers. It's been five days they haven't returned the deceased hostages, signifying they're flagrantly violating the ceasefire agreement. Hamas is re-establishing its regime in the half of the Strip that remained under its control. It can be assumed that the organization is also restoring terror infrastructure at an expedited pace. That's what it exists for, ultimately.

Hamas' restoration while the ISF organizes is hazardous to Israel, naturally, but equally important – it jeopardizes Trump's plan. Every day that elapses without someone mowing the terror lawn will render the ISF's future work more challenging, perhaps even unfeasible. We've witnessed in the past the West's struggles in eradicating terror in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Because ultimately – this is at minimum the intention – a moment will come when the international force will need to confront Hamas terrorists directly. Following two years of war, the organization is presently at the peak of its weakness. Trump's interest ought to be that this situation continues. Nevertheless, time plays into the terrorists' advantage. Like a phoenix, they're reconstructing themselves afresh in Gaza's dunes – construction that opposes the interests of both the US and Israel. Trump himself, and also Rubio on Friday, once more emphasized they're committed to eliminating Hamas.

What, consequently, must be accomplished so the 20-point plan's objectives don't evaporate? The answer is that the transitional period until the ISF begins work must be exploited in a manner that won't undermine the plan. How? The US must permit Israel to do in Gaza precisely what it authorizes IDF forces to do in Lebanon. Specifically, not allow terror to rear its head. No, this doesn't jeopardize the ceasefire. The Israelis don't desire the war's renewal either. They overwhelmingly endorsed the plan the president presented.

Nevertheless, there are intermediate situations where there's no full war, but also not sitting with zero activity facing strengthening terror. This is what's occurring in Lebanon, in Judea and Samaria, and also in various theaters where the US functioned for many years and justifiably against terror.

Allow the IDF to operate

Trump's plan was and remains beneficial for Israel, the region and peace. Nevertheless, until the international community advances to its subsequent sections, and so the force will possess the capability to do so, the IDF must be permitted to operate also in Gaza's western side.

Trump believes, rightfully, in "peace through strength." The most precise implementation of this principle is cutting down the emerging terror in recent days inside Gaza. This is the method to guarantee the ISF will have easier work, meaning its success in maintaining peace in the future will be greater.

The post The US-led Gaza force is not working; Trump must let Israel act appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Earlier this week saw Kabul and an eastern market were targeted by alleged Pakistani bombing operations, according to Afghan authorities, though Islamabad has not claimed responsibility, AP reported. Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told a press conference that 30 additional Pakistani personnel sustained wounds during the fighting. "The situation on all official borders and de facto lines of Afghanistan is under complete control, and illegal activities have been largely prevented," Mujahid stated, according to AP. Pakistani officials offered no immediate casualty confirmation.

Previous Pakistani strikes on Afghan locations targeted suspected hideouts in mountainous regions, but Saturday night's intense clashes underscore deepening bilateral tensions. Afghan Defense Ministry officials characterized the operations as "retaliatory and successful," warning that "If the opposing side again violates Afghanistan's territorial integrity, our armed forces are fully prepared to defend the nation's borders and will deliver a strong response," according to AP. Both the Torkham and Chaman border crossings, which serve as primary trade routes, remained closed Sunday, turning away Afghan refugees and other travelers.

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif condemned the assault before Afghan casualty claims emerged, stating the military "not only gave a befitting reply to Afghanistan's provocations but also destroyed several of their posts, forcing them to retreat," AP reported. Pakistani security personnel shared unverified videos allegedly showing destroyed Afghan checkpoints, though media access restrictions prevented independent confirmation.

Regional powers intervened diplomatically, with Saudi Arabia's Foreign Ministry urging "restraint, avoidance of escalation and the adoption of dialogue and wisdom to help de-escalate tensions and maintain the security and stability of the region." The kingdom recently finalized a mutual defense pact with Pakistan following Israel's attack on Qatar, apparently extending nuclear protection. Qatar also expressed concern regarding the escalating situation.

Afghanistan has never recognized the 2,611-kilometer (1,622-mile) Durand Line border separating the nations. Pakistan accuses Afghan authorities of harboring Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan members who conduct attacks within Pakistani territory, though Kabul denies permitting its territory for cross-border operations. An anonymous Pakistani security official told AP that Afghan forces opened fire across multiple Khyber Pakhtunkhwa districts, with Pakistani troops responding with heavy weaponry near Tirah and across the Nangarhar province frontier.

The post Afghan forces claim 58 Pakistani troops killed in border clashes appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at his side was much more focused, even statesmanlike, and the gap between them was evident. It is hard to imagine Trump persuading Saudi Arabia, Egypt, or even Jordan to sign onto Netanyahu's version.

Video: Trump and Netanyahu on Sept. 30, 2025 / Credit: Reuters

And yet, behind this American-Israeli scene hides another stage, Doha, Qatar. A place that already knows how to close deals that appear impossible on paper.

It is very possible that this chapter in the Middle Eastern saga was already quietly closed in the corridors of a department in a hospital in Doha, where perhaps the foreign leadership of Hamas has been hospitalized since the failed assassination attempt. When also considering the strange anecdote about Netanyahu's apology, there are those who see this as no more than a complementary move to a grand bargain finalized in Qatar.

It is hard not to recall another Trumpist agreement that was also signed in Doha – only with a different kind of enemy, "Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan." The agreement with the Taliban, February 2020, looked then like a historic breakthrough. Mutual commitments, withdrawal of American forces on an almost military timeline, commitments by the Taliban to sever ties with al-Qaida and to open dialogue with the Kabul government – there was grand language of peace there.

It took less than a month for that bubble to burst. The Taliban returned to attacking the Afghan army, al-Qaida ties were not severed, and the talks with the central government sputtered until they disappeared. The agreement turned from golden yellow to a resounding farce.

Trump got from the Taliban a technical ceasefire against the Americans, and in return later handed the country to the Taliban.

Here comes the obvious question, is "Doha 2.0," with Hamas this time on stage, looking different? Or is it again grains of sand that will scatter in the desert wind?

Optimism with a trap

For Israel, on the face of it, this is a peak of achievements. An American administration that adopts most of the Israeli version and promises full backing is not taken for granted in an era of hostile international public opinion and diplomatic pressures from all sides. Israel succeeded in bringing the optimal combination, a diplomatic-security plan that touches the heart of Israel's declared war goals, while receiving a rubber stamp from the White House. The question of whether this will really translate on the ground is much less clear.

Hamas holds the cards tightly in its hands, the hostages. To demand blanket release in 72 hours, without the organization remaining with any bargaining chip, is almost a fantasy. Even if Trump and Bibi think there is a document that obligates this, the people of Gaza will always find a way to evade, "The hostage is held by a rogue clan"; "We need time to locate the hostages"; or a modern version of "The computer fell out of our bag." The procrastination will be a built-in part of the strategy.

The issue of disarming Hamas is perhaps the central landmine in the future agreement. Israel can insist, the US can commit, Trump can promise in a hoarse voice, but for Hamas this is a matter of survival. The last weeks revealed a new reality in Gaza, the dense population is moving south despite the organization's threats, its authority is slipping, and above all – the greatest fear is not Iron Dome or the paratrooper brigade, but the local clans: Those strong families, who, when the regime loses grip, will try to settle personal scores and perhaps also take over Hamas' bloated cash box. Here lies the real threat from the perspective of the leadership in Gaza. Israel is a clear and stable enemy, but chaos is an existential danger.

Days of upheavals are ahead of us. It is possible that the first conditions for releasing some of the hostages will be set already this week. It is possible that the effect will be delayed, that the familiar Palestinian evasion campaign will continue. It is not impossible that we will discover that even before the cameras flashed at the White House, the most important chapter was already written in Doha. And if history teaches anything, even a deal signed in glittering ceremonies can dissipate in the sounds of explosions coming from hospitals, mosques, and neighborhoods in southern Gaza.

Hamas will not rush to give up all its bargaining cards within 72 hours.

We all hope that the agreement will take shape and materialize and the hostages will return home. However, the common denominator between the two "Doha agreements," that of the Taliban and this one brewing against Hamas, is the temptation to embrace an illusion, that a publicized text and detailed wording are enough to change a complex political and social reality. In reality, deep dynamics are stronger and more consistent than any document. Trump perhaps looked tired in front of the cameras, but the real fatigue is that of the whole world in the face of the repetitiveness of this tragic comedy.

The post The Trump plan – and the clause that could doom Hamas appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The diplomatic milestone occurred during Thursday's meeting between Muttaqi and Russian Ambassador Dmitry Zhirnov in Kabul, where Zhirnov officially transmitted his government's recognition of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Muttaqi characterized the development as marking "a new phase of positive relations, mutual respect, and constructive engagement," emphasizing that this precedent would serve as an "example" for other nations to follow.

Since reclaiming power in August 2021, the Taliban have actively pursued international legitimacy and foreign investment opportunities, even as human rights violations continue to escalate throughout the country. The regime has faced widespread international condemnation from Western governments and humanitarian organizations, particularly regarding its implementation of Sharia law that severely restricts women's and girls' basic freedoms.

During the four years since the Taliban's return, women have been completely excluded from secondary and tertiary education systems, prohibited from leaving their residences without male accompaniment, and forced to comply with increasingly stringent dress requirements. Recent "virtue and vice" legislation has reached new extremes by forbidding women from speaking in public spaces.

International observers, including the United Nations, have characterized these policies as constituting "gender apartheid," while documenting instances of public corporal punishment and violent persecution of former government personnel. The UN Security Council responded in 2021 by implementing comprehensive sanctions against Afghanistan, including the freezing of approximately 9 billion dollars (30 billion shekels) in national assets.

The post From Russia with love: Moscow recognizes Taliban regime appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Just a week ago, at least 46 people were killed and six injured in Pakistan's airstrikes in Afghanistan's eastern Paktika Province. The Taliban government condemned the attack, claiming most victims were refugees from Waziristan, and vowed retaliation. Meanwhile, Pakistani security officials, speaking anonymously to the AP, said the operation aimed to dismantle a training facility and eliminate insurgents in the area.

For those unfamiliar with the shared history of Afghanistan and Pakistan, the recent attack might seem like an isolated security incident. However, the reality is far more complex. The tensions between these two nations have deep historical roots, and the current escalation is merely the surface of a long-standing rivalry divided by a contentious border.

"To understand the roots of the conflict, we must start with geography—the foundation of everything," wrote geopolitical expert Eyal Hashkes in a post on X (formerly Twitter). "Afghanistan and Pakistan share a massive 2,640-kilometer border. This mountainous area is home to many tribes, making it difficult for any state authority to exert control. On the Pakistani side, the tribes have partial autonomy under what is called the 'Federally Administered Tribal Areas.'"

On the Afghan side, understanding the Taliban and their power is crucial. The Taliban emerged in 1994 when a group of clerics and students from Islamic schools (madrassas) exploited Afghanistan's chaos to organize. By 1996, they had seized control of most of the country.

"The Taliban's rise was built on Islamic, nationalist, and tribal sentiments prevalent in Afghanistan," Hashkes explains. "But it's doubtful they could have succeeded without Pakistan's active support." From its inception, Pakistan provided the Taliban with extensive aid, including weapons, funding, and recruits. The goal? "Pakistan aimed to weaken Afghanistan's stability so it would not pose a threat."

In simpler terms, a strong and stable Afghanistan posed a strategic risk for Pakistan, as it could ally with Pakistan's archrival, India, to the south. Supporting the Taliban seemed like a way to undermine Afghanistan. Historically, however, this strategy backfired. Strengthening the Taliban inadvertently empowered an organization that would eventually become a direct adversary.

Before returning to the present, one pivotal moment must be revisited: following the 9/11 attacks in 2001 and the Taliban's harboring of al-Qaida, the US intervened in Afghanistan. It supported the Northern Alliance, a coalition of anti-Taliban militias, to oust the Taliban. For the next two decades, efforts were made to establish a Taliban-free Afghan state and military.

"Even during those years, Pakistan provided refuge to the defeated Taliban," Hashkes notes. "One of the most crucial factors aiding insurgencies is safe haven, and indeed, the Taliban gradually regained strength, retaking Afghan territories. The US withdrawal in 2021 allowed the Taliban to easily overrun the rest of Afghanistan and establish one of the world's most extreme Islamist regimes."

If you thought today's Taliban is the same group from the 1990s, think again. "This is the Pakistani Taliban—a network of Islamist militias with no organizational ties to the Afghan Taliban," Hashkes clarifies. "While the Afghan Taliban focused on ruling Afghanistan, the Pakistani Taliban seeks to overthrow Pakistan's government and establish an extremist Islamic regime."

Since the Afghan Taliban regained control of Afghanistan in 2021, they have failed to curb the Pakistani Taliban's activities as Pakistan had hoped. On the contrary, they are likely supplying weapons left behind after the US withdrawal. As a result, Pakistan has endured a surge in terror attacks by the Pakistani Taliban, alongside a Baluchi minority uprising and a severe economic crisis.

"This is a supreme irony," Hashkes remarks in his post. "Pakistan gave the Afghan Taliban sanctuary to regain strength and reclaim Afghan territories—now the Afghan Taliban provides sanctuary to Pakistan's enemy, the Pakistani Taliban." Over the past 10 months alone, more than 1,500 people have died in terror attacks in Pakistan.

The escalating tensions prompted Pakistan to take drastic action: the 4 million Afghan refugees who fled decades of war—from the 1979 Soviet invasion to the Taliban's resurgence—were ordered to leave. Over 700,000 undocumented Afghan refugees have already been expelled.

"Pakistan extended registered refugees' permits by a year," Hashkes explains, "but the handling of undocumented refugees has created one of the world's worst humanitarian crises. This issue has worsened the nations' tensions and now escalated into direct combat."

While the fighting is far from Israel's borders, its repercussions could ripple beyond Central Asia to the Middle East.

"I'll end with a quote to British media from a senior Taliban figure that encapsulates the mindset," Hashkes concludes in his post. "'We don't care if Pakistan has nuclear weapons—we have faith, and Allah is on our side.' This is likely not the outcome Pakistan envisioned when it elevated the Taliban."

The post Afghanistan and Pakistan on the brink of war appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took the stand Tuesday in his long-running corruption trial, revealing stark disagreements with then-President Barack Obama administration over Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional influence – disputes he described as central to his tenure during the period covered by the indictment.

In nearly three hours of testimony in the Tel Aviv District Court,  Netanyahu pushed back against prosecutors' portrayal of him as a leader preoccupied with media coverage and luxury gifts. Instead, he detailed high-stakes diplomatic confrontations that he said shaped Israel's security landscape.

"Obama made it clear to me that US policy was going to take a sharp turn against the ideas I believed in,"  Netanyahu testified, recounting his earliest interactions with the former US president. "He saw Iran not as a threat but as an opportunity and saw a vital need for us to return to the '67 lines and establish a Palestinian state here."

The testimony offered a rare glimpse into the diplomatic tensions that marked US-Israel relations during that period. Netanyahu recounted a particularly pointed exchange with then-Secretary of State John Kerry over security arrangements in the West Bank. According to his testimony,  Kerry dismissed Israeli security concerns by citing American training of Palestinian forces. "Kerry explained to me that my fear of placing security in Judea and Samaria in Palestinian forces' hands was unfounded because the Americans were training Palestinian forces and we could withdraw. Obama suggested I make a secret visit to Afghanistan to see how American forces were training local forces. I told him the moment you leave Afghanistan, these forces will collapse under Islamist forces, and that's exactly what happened."

During his testimony, Netanyahu described what he characterized as an ongoing battle with prevailing media narratives in Israel. "My positions forced me to be in constant struggle with the prevailing opinions in Israeli media and public discourse," he said. "To such an extent that they claimed Iran was just a whim – 'Netanyahu's spin.'"

Netanyahu added that he could have gained favorable media coverage by simply "moving a few steps to the left" but chose instead to maintain positions he believed were "essential to ensure our existence."

The corruption trial has taken on additional significance as it unfolds against the backdrop of Israel's war with Hamas. "A few days ago, something cataclysmic happened here," Netanyahu told the court, referring to the toppling of the regime in Syria. "It's an earthquake that hasn't occurred in a hundred years."

The court session also centered on his alleged lavish lifestyle, which allegedly violated Israel's laws against accepting gifts. "Absolute lies," Netanyahu said in response to allegations about asking for a constant supply of luxury items such as champagne and cigars. "I work 17-18 hours a day... It's around-the-clock work into the early hours of the night. There's almost no time to see family. I didn't see the children, and that's a hefty price to pay," he added, noting that his rare leisure time was spent reading history and economics books.

"I waited eight years for this moment," Netanyahu said at the outset. "To tell the truth. The truth, as I remember it, is important for justice's sake. There is no justice without truth."

Speaking about his motivation for public service, Netanyahu emphasized, "I'm not concerned with my future but with the future of the State of Israel. The mission I inherited from my grandfather, father, and brother – these are the things that have guided me."

"I'm managing a country and leading the State of Israel and the Israeli military at war," Netanyahu told the court, addressing the unusual timing. "I thought and still think that both things can be done in parallel... I believed that in the overall scheme of things, a balance could be found between the needs of the trial, which I recognize, and the needs of the state."

The post In court, Netanyahu shares dramatic interaction with Obama on Iran appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

On Saturday night, amid a large-scale aerial strike by the Israeli military on Iranian targets, the Iranian regime faced another attack on its forces. Though the incident was relatively contained, the number of Iranian casualties reportedly exceeded those from the Israeli strikes.

Ten Iranian border guards were killed in an assault in Sistan and Baluchestan province. According to Iranian claims, these border guards died in combat on a local road against members of Jaish ul-Adl (Army of Justice), a Sunni terrorist group seeking independence for the Baluchi minority. This organization frequently ambushes and plants explosives targeting Iranian and Pakistani security forces.

Sistan and Baluchestan is a persistent trouble spot within Iran, a hotspot of internal conflicts. Just a week before, the area made headlines due to a violent incident in which hundreds of people were killed: Iranian border guards reportedly opened fire on Afghan refugees attempting to cross from Pakistan into Iran, killing approximately 250 people, according to reports.

Initially, Iran denied the incident's occurrence, which had been reported by local human rights organizations. Yet afterwards, Tehran's ambassador to Kabul stated that taking "lawful" action against illegal entry is a legitimate right of all nations, and that border guards are mandated to prevent the entry of unauthorized foreigners. Given that the casualties were Afghan citizens, the Taliban government in Kabul launched an investigation, and the United Nations also sought to look into the incident. UN special rapporteur for human rights in Afghanistan, Richard Bennett, expressed concern about its implications.

These two events highlight some of Iran's challenges along its eastern border, particularly at the tri-border area with Afghanistan and Pakistan. This isn't the first incident of Iranian border guards opening fire on refugees trying to cross the border this month. Tehran doesn't publicize these incidents, often denying them outright, but various reports indicate that at least 13 migrants were killed along the border, in this exact same area.

The issue of Afghan refugees is a sensitive one in Iran. Many have fled Taliban rule in recent years, with estimates suggesting over a million have entered Iran since the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. Overall, Iran claims to host around six million Afghan refugees, many of whom have escaped war, poverty, and hardship over decades. Even the UN refugee agency estimates about four million Afghans are currently in Iran.

These refugees place a significant strain on Iran, whose economy is already burdened by international sanctions and struggling with internal challenges. Iran also diverts substantial resources to support armed militias and terrorist organizations across the Middle East and beyond. This international support strains local resources, especially with the added burden of feeding millions more.

To address the refugee issue, Iran is not only taking border measures against migrants but actively deporting refugees back to Afghanistan. Reports indicate that only in September, Iran expelled over 100,000 people. Many refugees report being beaten, denied basic access to food and water, and detained in special camps by Iranian authorities.

Taliban officials claim that since the beginning of the year, nearly half a million refugees have entered Afghanistan from Iran, with the rate increasing. Iran has now set an ambitious target to deport two million undocumented Afghan refugees within six months.

However, Iran is not alone in this approach. Both Turkey and Pakistan are also expelling Afghan refugees despite the humanitarian consequences and global outcry. Concerns over the dangers awaiting these refugees back in Afghanistan—economic hardship and potential Taliban persecution—haven't deterred authorities in Tehran, Ankara, or Islamabad from taking these measures. Iran's planned mass deportation program is moving forward, forcibly sending refugees back without judicial oversight or international intervention.

Regional conflict with Pakistan

In the border regions with Pakistan and Afghanistan, Iran also faces threats from ethnic separatist movements like the one responsible for killing Iranian border guards on Saturday.

The Jaish ul-Adl terrorists represent Iran's Baluchi minority, around three percent of the country's population. Alongside Kurds, Sunni Baluchis are among the most persecuted minorities in Iran, which is governed by a Shiite majority. They live in Sistan and Baluchestan in severe poverty, with high unemployment and limited access to basic infrastructure and essential resources such as food and water. Many locals turn to smuggling goods, such as fuel or food, and some are involved in drug trafficking. The conditions in this region have been likened to certain impoverished areas in Africa.

Jaish ul-Adl is perhaps the primary voice of Baluchi dissent and terrorism within Iran. Tehran accuses Pakistan and Saudi Arabia in supporting the organization, with hints of Israeli backing as well. This organization has a bloody history with Iranian security forces: in 2019, for example, Jaish ul-Adl killed 13 officers of Iran's Revolutionary Guards in Zahedan, following up with other attacks on Iranian targets.

As recently as September, the group claimed responsibility for two attacks on Iranian police, killing three people. In June, they kidnapped nine individuals linked to the Revolutionary Guards, and in April, they carried out five coordinated attacks on Iranian military bases and other sites.

These escalations prompted Iran to intensify its response. The Iranian military launched drones and missiles into Pakistani territory, targeting what it claimed were extremist training camps linked to Israel. In retaliation, Pakistan carried out a nearly identical strike on Iranian "terrorist targets," resulting in seven Iranian deaths.

This confrontation led to diplomatic repercussions: Pakistan expelled the Iranian ambassador and withdrew its own representative from Tehran, temporarily downgrading relations. Ten days later, however, the crisis was resolved, with both countries restoring diplomatic ties, and Pakistan even inviting Iran's then-Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian for a visit.

Despite this, the diplomatic incident doesn't appear to have soured Pakistan's overall stance towards Iran. Following Israel's airstrikes on Iranian targets, Pakistan's Foreign Ministry issued a harsh condemnation, accusing Israel of full responsibility for escalating regional tensions.

A broader regional and global trend

After its unsuccessful efforts to stem terrorism or mass migration from Afghanistan through attacks on its neighbors, Iran is now taking another approach. Since mid-month, Iran has resorted to crackdowns on refugees and initiated the construction of physical barriers to control its border.

The new initiative began last January, when Iran started building a border fence, wall, and other obstacles along its long eastern border. The project began in Baluchestan with a four-meter-high wall spanning 300 kilometers of Iran's vast border with Pakistan and Afghanistan. The plan aims to cover 1,000 kilometers on each border, with Iran spending an estimated $3 billion on construction, expected to be completed within three years.

According to Iranian military officials, the wall aims to control border crossings and stop Afghan refugees from entering. Commentators suggest that the wall represents a shift in Iran's security strategy, emphasizing defensive measures to manage cross-border threats without escalating to open conflicts, as seen in its recent clashes with Pakistan.

This trend of constructing physical barriers aligns with similar measures worldwide. While modern threats like drones or rockets often bypass physical defenses, walls still provide protection against terrorism, illegal migration, and trafficking. Pakistan, for instance, is considering similar initiatives along its borders with Iran, just as it has along its Afghan border.

Though countries like Israel and the US have faced criticism for building such barriers, this trend continues to grow globally. Despite high costs, walls help control sprawling borders and prevent crises from escalating into broader conflicts.

This situation also underscores Iran's need to manage threats on multiple fronts beyond its ongoing tensions with Israel, including resource demands on defense, personnel, and weapons. Iran recently announced a 200% increase in its defense budget—a huge rise reflecting the complex priorities it must balance amid escalating international sanctions and its nuclear ambitions. With rising pressures, Tehran may soon need to make strategic choices on its long-term focus and capabilities.

Elie Klutstein is a researcher at the Misgav Institute for National Security. 

The post Trouble on all fronts: Iran shoots refugees, deports millions, and builds border wall appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The Taliban has begun employing female spies to enforce harsh new restrictions on women's behavior in Afghanistan, according to reporting by The Telegraph. These informants are tasked with monitoring social media and patrolling public spaces to catch women violating the regime's strict rules.

"They are needed to handle other women," said an official from the Ministry for the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (MPVPV), the state agency in charge of implementing Islamic law. The ministry has hired women to monitor Instagram pages and report instances where women post pictures with uncovered faces. "You know how Instagram works ... they can hide their pages so no one can see them, but we have women who are our eyes."

Some women are coerced into this role, while others are paid for their work, which also includes accompanying male Taliban members on street patrols. "Some women were arrested and released only on the condition that they inform the ministry of any illegal activity they observe from the women they follow," the official explained.

"Just as education for girls is banned, questioning it is also banned" —Taliban Minister of Education.

Afghanistan is ruled by sharia law under Taliban!
pic.twitter.com/Z5VxD45HoL

— Azat (@AzatAlsalim) September 1, 2024

 One such informant, identified as Golnesa, spends her days monitoring and reporting on her fellow Afghan women. The 36-year-old patrols the city looking for those who do not adhere to the rules of chastity and visits locations to find women violating the dress code.

"I go to busy supermarkets and women's clothing shops," Golnesa told The Telegraph. When she spots a woman with an uncovered face, visible ankles, or laughing with shopkeepers, she contacts male officers who arrive with rifles. "It's their job to handle the situation with these women, and many of them are taken to police stations," she said. Golnesa defends her role, stating, "I don't support women who protest in the streets and claim to represent all women. They don't represent me or many other Muslim women who are tired of seeing indecency."

Afghanistan's breakdancer Manijeh Talash, who hopes to return to her homeland and live in freedom, tearfully urged Afghan girls not to surrender to Taliban tyranny. Her brave #FreeAfghanWomen message on her cape cost her the Olympics. pic.twitter.com/aF06ZkQmx3

— Habib Khan (@HabibKhanT) September 2, 2024

 However, Dr. Zahra Haqparast, a former protester now based in Germany, condemns the practice. "We always knew that the Taliban would eventually use women against other women," she told The Telegraph. "There were girls who infiltrated our WhatsApp groups posing as activists, and they assisted the Taliban in arresting many of the protesters."

Dr. Haqparast, who lost her job as a dentist when the Taliban returned to power, was herself arrested due to information provided by a female informant. She criticizes women who work for the Taliban, saying, "We protested and sacrificed everything for our fellow women. Yet, some women do everything they can to harm others of the same gender. I can only tell them, shame on you."

The post Taliban employs female spies to rat on dissidents appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Afghan women are uploading videos of themselves singing in defiance of new restrictions imposed by the Taliban that order them to be silent in public, reports The Telegraph. Women from both inside Afghanistan and abroad have joined the movement.

The online protest campaign challenges the Taliban's recently announced vice and virtue laws. On Wednesday, the Taliban issued restrictions requiring women to conceal their faces, bodies, and voices outside the home. Women are prohibited from singing or reciting the Koran in public, and their clothing must not be thin, tight, or short. They have also been ordered not to speak loudly inside their homes in case their voices are heard outside.

Afghan women are boldly countering Taliban's New Draconian law by singing out louder than ever !#MyVoiceIsNotForbiden #UntiedAgainstGenderApartheid pic.twitter.com/50g6qvXkHx

— Nilofar Ayoubi (@NilofarAyoubi) August 27, 2024

 In one video, a woman in Afghanistan sings with her face and body fully covered. "You placed the stamp of silence on my mouth until further notice," she says. "You will [not] provide me with bread and food until further notice. You've imprisoned me inside the house for the crime of being a woman."

The lyrics appear to reference restrictions the Taliban imposed on the basic rights and freedoms of women and girls shortly after seizing back control of the country three years ago. Among the rules was a ban on school attendance and higher education, which they said would last "until further notice."

Free Afghan Women

A woman from inside Afghanistan shared a video, she singing her voice in poetry:

"You have silenced my voice until further notice. You have imprisoned me in my home for the crime of being a woman."#WomenRights #Afghanistan #Freedom #UN pic.twitter.com/1BuXg3x46R

— Jahanzeb Wesa (@JahanzebWesa) August 27, 2024

 Another clip features a woman who left Afghanistan for Germany after the Taliban's return to power. She sings about the role of women in shaping history: "If I don't exist, who are you? Where are the true men among you? Without Ameneh and Rudabeh, where would Mohammad, Rostam, and Sohrab be?" The song references the mothers of the Prophet of Islam and famous male figures from Persian literature.

Volker Turk, the United Nations human rights chief, called on the Taliban to immediately repeal the "egregious" laws, which he said were attempting to turn women into shadows. Roza Otunbayeva, the head of the UN's Afghanistan mission, described the restrictions as providing a "distressing vision" for Afghanistan's future.

In response to global outrage against the laws, Taliban minister for vice and virtue, Khaled Hanafi, claimed on Tuesday that the international community lacked the authority to comment on Afghanistan. He emphasized that the Taliban would engage with other nations only within the framework of "Islamic laws."

Dr. Zahra Haqparast, a Germany-based women's activist who started a campaign against the new laws, said they were "the final bullet to the forehead of Afghan women." She added, "I started the campaign, and soon many more protesting girls joined. The Taliban should face sanctions. The world must not negotiate with them."

Haqparast, who lost her job as a dentist in Afghanistan after the Taliban returned to power in 2021, said, "Our voices are so loud, they're making them deaf. I want to sing a female revolutionary song so that my voice will deafen the ears of the terrorists. I want women to unite and raise their voices for their rights."

Women inside Afghanistan said the online protest was part of efforts to claim their right to be heard and to preserve their cultural identity amid the escalating restrictions on their freedoms. A former university lecturer in western Herat said, "The Taliban cannot silence our voices; we are half of this society, and they cannot even imagine how powerful we are."

The post Afghan women defy Taliban with singing protest appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Afghanistan's Taliban government has officially codified a comprehensive set of morality rules this week, the Justice Ministry announced. The regulations, which range from requiring women to cover their faces to prohibiting car drivers from playing music, are based on a decree issued by the Taliban's supreme spiritual leader in 2022.

Justice Ministry spokesperson Barakatullah Rasoli confirmed that the 35-article morality law was officially enacted and published on Wednesday after being ratified by Supreme Spiritual Leader Haibatullah Akhundzada. The rules, promoted as being in line with Islamic sharia law, will be enforced by the Ministry for the Prevention of Vice and Propagation of Virtue.

"According to this law, the Ministry is obligated to promote good and forbid evil in accordance with Islamic Sharia," the Justice Ministry said in a statement.

The new regulations mandate that women wear attire fully covering their bodies and faces, while men are prohibited from shaving their beards. Other rules include bans on skipping prayer and religious fasts. Penalties for violations range from verbal warnings to detention for up to three days in public jails.

The Morality Ministry has already been enforcing similar requirements and reports detaining thousands of people for violations. It remains unclear whether the publication of these rules will lead to stricter enforcement.

This move has drawn sharp criticism from rights groups and many foreign governments, claiming this is a further restriction on women's rights and freedom of expression since the Taliban resumed control of Afghanistan in 2021.

"Day by day, they are trying to erase women from society," said Halema, a 37-year-old housewife in Kabul. "The silence of the international community regarding the actions of the Taliban is encouraging them to create new laws and restrictions every day."

Western capitals, led by Washington, have stated that formal recognition of the Taliban government is largely contingent on reversing course on women's rights and reopening high schools to girls. The Taliban, however, maintain that they respect women's rights in accordance with their interpretation of Islamic law and local customs.

The newly codified laws also instruct drivers not to transport women without a male guardian and require media to abide by sharia law, banning the publication of images containing living beings.

Heather Barr, Associate Director of Human Rights Watch's Women's Rights Division, commented on the situation: "A lot of these rules were in place already but less formally, and now they are being formalized. I think this is a sign of what we've been seeing over the last three years which is a steady and gradual escalation of the crackdown."

The morality ministry reported detaining over 13,000 people in the past year for alleged offenses, with approximately half of the detentions lasting 24 hours. The ministry did not provide a breakdown of the alleged offenses or the gender of the detainees.

Since taking control in 2021 as foreign forces withdrew, the Taliban suspended Afghanistan's previous constitution and declared they would rule the country according to sharia law. The Justice Ministry stated that this week's morality laws represent the seventh set of codified laws, with others relating to property, financial services, and the prevention of begging.

The post Taliban orders Afghan women to cover faces in public appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.