Jonathan Sacerdoti

For months, Israel has faced a relentless barrage of criticism over its conduct in Gaza – from western governments, UN agencies, and media outlets that once claimed to be her allies. Central to the condemnation are the humanitarian circumstances: civilian suffering, limited aid access, and Israel’s temporary obstruction of some relief efforts. What has gone largely unreported, however, is that the bold new strategy in place may now be altering that equation entirely – a direct aid delivery mechanism, led by American contractors, that is not only reaching civilians more effectively but also weakening Hamas from within. You would never have guessed from the way some world leaders have condemned it. For years, aid to Gaza flowed through Hamas-linked channels.

The murder last night of two young Israeli embassy staffers, Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim, on a street in Washington, DC was horrifying, but not surprising. The couple was gunned down outside the Capital Jewish Museum. A suspect then walked into the building, accepted water from those who thought he was a victim, and began chanting “Free Palestine.” He pulled a red keffiyeh from his pocket and invoked the old rallying cry: “There is only one solution. Intifada revolution.” The man now in custody, Elias Rodriguez, was once associated with the Party for Socialism and Liberation, a hard-left political group whose slogans echo in anti-Israel demonstrations across the country. In the hours before the shooting, the group posted: “End the genocide. Israel out of Gaza now.

When I was a schoolboy, on the rare occasions I was required to line up against the wall to be picked for a football team, I would be picked last. It was fair enough: my abilities matched my interest level – zero. Not much has changed in the intervening decades, and thanks to my lack of any real knowledge or ability in the game, I would be most unlikely to comment on the World Cup or the Euros. But when it comes to coverage of Israel and the Middle East, I’ve spent enough time on the ground amassing knowledge, sources, and experience that this publication entrusts me to explain it to others.

By any standard, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is in crisis. But the revelations in The Wall Street Journal – detailing explosive allegations of non-consensual sexual acts and abuse of office against its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan – have not just shaken the court’s credibility. They have obliterated it. The Journal reported that Khan faces “multiple allegations of coerced sexual intercourse,” based on documents, testimony and interviews with ICC officials. At the heart of the Journal’s investigation is a horrifying accusation: that Khan, while leading the most controversial prosecution in the ICC’s history, was allegedly engaged in a sustained pattern of sexual abuse against a junior female lawyer on his team.

The arrest of eight men – seven of them Iranian nationals – across the United Kingdom in two separate counter-terrorism operations is a chilling reminder that the Islamic Republic of Iran is not a distant threat. It is here, embedded within our cities, probing the limits of our law, our patience and our willingness to defend our democratic integrity. Scotland Yard has revealed only sparse details: a suspected plot to target a ‘specific premises’, and a parallel but unrelated investigation into national security threats. But while the particulars remain classified, the pattern is anything but new.

In any sane world, it would be dismissed as grotesque fantasy: Hamas – the Iranian-backed terror group responsible for the 7 October massacre – petitioning British courts to lift its designation as a terrorist organisation. But this is one of those times it seems the entire world has gone mad.  For here we are, in Great Britain, witnessing Hamas, aided by British lawyers, seeking to launder its blood-soaked record under the false banners of ‘liberation’ and ‘resistance’. This is not mere absurdity. It is a direct assault on the integrity of British democracy – and on very survival of western civilisation.

Before the facts had even settled, western media outlets rendered their verdict: Israel was guilty. Guilty of deliberately targeting ambulances. Guilty of murdering humanitarian workers. Guilty because in the court of international opinion, Israel’s guilt is the default setting. Only later did the complicated reality emerge. Israeli forces near Rafah, acting on intelligence that Hamas operatives were exploiting ambulances for military purposes, opened fire on a suspicious convoy. People were killed, including members of the Palestinian Red Crescent and Civil Defence.