The Breadcrumbs widget will appear here on the published site.
For 16 years, Israeli governments worked to manage the Hamas leaders in Gaza, not topple them. The Islamist group rejected Israel's existence and engaged in violence, but kept order over the territory. Better Hamas than chaos.
The carnage last weekend, when Hamas militants killed hundreds of Israeli civilians after a sophisticated breach of the border fence, has shifted official views. Now, the aim is to destroy the organization's military capability and kill its leaders. Left unsaid in Israel but widely assumed is that, when the war ends, Hamas will no longer rule in Gaza. In announcing the formation of an emergency unity government on Wednesday night, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu referred to the Islamic State organization from the previous decade, saying, "Hamas is ISIS, and we will crush and eliminate it just as the world crushed and eliminated ISIS." Lieutenant Colonel Richard Hecht, a military spokesman, told reporters on Thursday: "Right now, we are focused on taking out their senior leadership, not only the military but also their government leadership." 'Mowing Lawn' This is a change from the previous military policy of occasional invasions, harsh but limited, sometimes referred to as "mowing the lawn," meaning a task to which one is required to return repeatedly. Any operation against the militant group is destined to result in more civilian deaths and raise diplomatic dilemmas. Turkey has already signaled a shift away from the intense diplomacy that was underway to normalize ties with Israel after years of estrangement. Rulers from Saudi Arabia to the United Arab Emirates could follow if public opinion in their countriesturns increasingly hostile to Israel. A former top military officer who remains in close touch with the army, speaking on condition of anonymity, said when the war ends, Israel may set up a temporary military regime and hand Gaza over to some international force. The head of the opposition, Yair Lapid, who didn't join the new government with Benny Gantz, another opposition leader, said this week on French television, "The endgame is there will be no Hamas in Gaza." His goal, he said, is for the Palestinian Authority, which holds power in the West Bank and recognizes Israel, would take over. Requests for comment from the prime minister's office and the defense minister weren't immediately answered. Little Mercy Israeli officials are showing no mercy for ordinary Gazans in their campaign, having cut electricity, fuel and food shipments from Israel and given residents few choices of where to hide as heavy bombings continue. At least 1,350 have been killed to date. According to Elai Rettig, an expert of the geopolitics of energy and environment at Israel's Bar-Ilan University, a power cut will result in water shortages in a week or two. That's likely to hinder access to health care or drinkable water for Gaza's 2 million people, half of whom are under the age of 18. Israeli authorities are worried about a humanitarian corridor into Egypt, saying that would allow Hamas leaders to sneak out. Rettig also said Hamas has been given aid to fix and upgrade the electrical system in Gaza but hadn't done so. Hostage Fate Nearly all analysts in Israel believe ground troops are headed in after the aerial pounding. Many of the dozens of Israeli hostages and some of the soldiers seem likely to meet their deaths. And that too is quietly discussed as a price the country is willing to pay to end Hamas's hold on Gaza and send a broader message to the country's enemies, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and its Iranian sponsor. Israel's biggest deployment of reserves in its history shows its leaders are aware how difficult it might be to crush Hamas, but eliminating it from Gaza is an even bigger task. An Israeli cross-border operation into southern Lebanon to attack Iran-backed Hezbollah in 2006 ended in massive casualties following more than a month of fighting. Since Saturday's attack, Hezbollah has fired into Israel every now and then, a reminder that it may be tempted to open a new front in the war after the Gaza ground offensive begins. The direness of the rhetoric is driven by the images of inhumanity on display last Saturday and the collective memory of Jews being slaughtered in the Holocaust and in pogroms a century ago. It has made many Israelis feel this is a war for their very existence, and they must show how tough they are. Retired Major General Yaakov Amidror, who was Netanyahu's national security adviser a decade ago, said, "We cannot go back to square one. This will take a few months. How many will be killed? Many, many. It's up to Hamas, which operates from populated areas. This is the last time we allow Hamas to be strong enough to attack Israel." Asked who will rule Gaza when Israel is finished, he replied, "The people in Gaza will have to decide what is next. That is their problem." The Blog Tags Widget will appear here on the published site.
Tags:
The Recommended Content Widget will appear here on the published site.
The Breadcrumbs widget will appear here on the published site.
The release of Israeli hostages being held captive by Hamas militants will have no effect on the IDF’s plans in Gaza, according to journalist Suleiman Maswadeh, who on Saturday cited an anonymous “political source” within the Israeli government.
During last year’s October 7 attack on Israeli territories near Gaza, Hamas militants killed some 1,200 people and took another 250 hostage. Since then, a number of the captives have been released but around 130 are still being held in the Palestinian enclave. Writing on his X account, Maswadeh cited his source as stating that “contrary to publications, Israel will under no circumstances agree to the end of the war as part of an agreement to release our abductees.” Furthermore, the unnamed official claimed that the Jewish state’s “political echelon” has decided that “the IDF will enter Rafah and destroy the remaining Hamas battalions there – whether or not there will be a temporary respite for the release of our hostage.” The city of Rafah, located in southern Gaza near the border with Egypt, is currently home to an estimated 1.4 million Palestinians who have fled the northern reaches of the enclave. Aside from carrying out repeated airstrikes against what Israel claims are Hamas targets within the city, the Israeli government has also threatened to launch a ground invasion of the area, despite objections from the US and UN. Maswadeh’s reporting coincides with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s statements earlier this week, when he stated that IDF troops will enter Rafah regardless of whether a ceasefire and hostage-release deal with Hamas is achieved. “The idea that we will stop the war before achieving all of its goals is out of the question,” Netanyahu said in a statement from his office. “We will enter Rafah and we will eliminate Hamas’ battalions there – with or without a deal, to achieve total victory.” Meanwhile, Netanyahu’s political rival and war cabinet minister Benny Gantz, has urged “official sources and all other decision-makers” to “act with restraint” and to wait for official updates, and “not to become hysterical due to political reasons.” At the same time, Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz had previously promised to “suspend the operation” in exchange for the release of the captives. Last week, Israel officially sent Hamas a ceasefire proposal which suggests a temporary cessation of hostilities to facilitate an exchange of several dozen hostages for Palestinian prisoners being held in Israeli jails. The proposal has been described as “extraordinarily generous” by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who has urged Hamas to “decide quickly” and “make the right decision.” Hamas, meanwhile, has demanded a permanent ceasefire and the withdrawal of all Israeli troops from the besieged Palestinian enclave. The Blog Tags Widget will appear here on the published site.
Tags:
The Recommended Content Widget will appear here on the published site.
The Breadcrumbs widget will appear here on the published site.
“We must be clear about the fact that our Europe today is mortal,” French President Emmanuel Macron said in a speech this week. “She can die, and it depends only on our choices. But these choices are to be made now.”
What Macron portrays as an urgent need to resuscitate the EU comes after he himself has spent nearly seven years in power, having even been president of the Council of the European Union in 2022. He’s been credited for the nomination and confirmation of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, described by Forbes last year as the world’s most powerful woman. Or, as some might say, an unelected, omnipotent bureaucrat whose supranational authoritarianism supersedes the democratic process of member states. Or, as others might now say after Macron’s address, the Nurse Ratched at the EU’s deathbed. Macron’s interminable speech should have been one big mea culpa on behalf of the EU’s establishment class. Tell us how you screwed up. At least then we’d know that there was hope for an actual course correction rather than just more of the same. Instead, Macron argued that the EU hasn’t ever been a vassal of Washington. Saying that you’re not a vassal is exactly like having to tell people you’re not a prostitute. It’s not something that one has to go around saying if the optics aren’t already glaring. Queen Ursula is basically America’s viceroy in Europe at this point, and Macron himself can’t seem to manage to carve out any positions independent of the US that last longer than the time it takes for Uncle Sam to reach over and administer a transatlantic spanking. Macron’s speech was a fascinating blend of delusion and insecurity. He chose Paris’ Sorbonne University as the venue. The theme? “Stocktake of European action.” Sure, tell us what’s really going on as though you had a clue – and an actual strategy and vision that wasn’t subjected to the constant whims and trends of the moment or any given election cycle. Macron gave a similar speech at the Sorbonne in September 2017. Why there? Because as Macron said last time, “living collectively was the ideal of Robert de Sorbon” – the theologian who founded the university. It just so happens that circling the drain collectively is what the EU is really all about right now, thanks to the special brand of iron-fisted incompetence of those in charge. There’s a European Parliament election coming up, and the populists are surging in the polls right now. The first step to recovery is admitting that there’s a problem. Macron, however, apparently feels compelled to do the opposite of that, and talk about all of the EU’s failures as though they’re successes. Like counterterrorism, for instance. France has made such great progress on that front that the country is now back on the highest alert just days before it's slated to host the Paris Olympics, including an open air Opening Ceremony along the Seine. It barely seems to have ever been downgraded from high alert; the initially white terror warning signs have been turning yellow from years of light exposure in the windows of buildings where they’re now permanent fixtures. Macron, however, highlighted the role of a new bureaucratic entity called the ECOFIN Council. Because nothing deters terrorists more than meetings. In addressing Africa, Macron underscored the importance of another meeting: the “European Union - Africa Summit” held two years ago. The sparse content in the Africa section of Macron’s talk could be explained by minor details like French troops being drop-kicked back across the Mediterranean by African countries after French stability missions resulted in coups (which are kind of the opposite of stability). Clearly not deterred by any inconvenient discrepancies between reality and projected fantasy, Macron’s speech also celebrated addressing the migration challenge, which the EU has basically paid to outsource to countries like Türkiye, Tunisia, Mauritania and Egypt. The last I checked, none of these countries were actually in Europe. But the EU has outsourced almost everything else by this point, so they may as well. Macron talked about the EU leading the ecological and environmental transition. To what, exactly? Poverty, probably. Just ask the farmers straitjacketed by Brussels' climate change diktats, their farmland being spied on by satellites to ensure compliance, how great that is. He brought up the EU’s energy sovereignty and reindustrialization. Not so fast; Germany in particular is still busy going in the opposite direction and de-industrializing. So it might be a while before the EU’s economic engine comes out on the flip side. The Blog Tags Widget will appear here on the published site.
Tags:
The Recommended Content Widget will appear here on the published site.
The Breadcrumbs widget will appear here on the published site.
Max Verstappen's sheer domination of Formula One could continue for another two years until the new regulations take place.
Verstappen became the first driver this century to start the season with five consecutive pole positions in qualifying for last Sunday’s Chinese Grand Prix. He went on to crush the opposition for a fourth win in five. The Red Bull star has won every race he has finished so far in 2024. Remarkably, since Verstappen beat Lewis Hamilton to the 2021 drivers championship in Abu Dhabi, the 26-year-old has won 38 of the 49 races staged and is seemingly on his way to a fourth title in as many seasons. Speaking at Louvre Abu Dhabi on Saadiyat Island for the launch of the 2024 Etihad Airways Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, Coulthard said it is inevitable the Dutchman will be toppled but suggested that might not happen until rule changes are implemented in 2026. Formula One today is actually closer than it has ever been in terms of the front to the rear of the grid – after Max Verstappen, which if you're a Max Verstappen fan you are loving. History would suggest that when you have periods of dominance in sport, whether it is in soccer or Formula One, it never lasts forever. There's always going to be that cycle and that change, and big regulation changes are normally a catalyst for that. In 2026 we have major rule changes in Formula One, the configuration of the engines and the set-up of the cars, and a lot of the teams are very much focused on that as their opportunity to take a step forward. One of the teams seeking to overhaul Red Bull is Ferrari, who will attempt to do so with seven-time world champion Hamilton in their ranks from next season. It's said the 39 year old's switch from Mercedes had “shocked” him but praised Hamilton for his bravery. I think it's incredibly brave, I think it's incredibly exciting, maybe incredibly disappointing for Mercedes, but that stimulates them to look to the future. Saif Rashid Al Noaimi, CEO of organisers Ethara, announced early-bird packages are now on sale for this year's Abu Dhabi Grand Prix. British band Muse were confirmed among the headliners for this year's after-race concerts. Coulthard started his F1 career at Williams in 1994 and would also represent McLaren and Red Bull, winning 13 grands prix. He retired in 2008, one year before Abu Dhabi hosted its first race, and the Scot reflected how he could "never have imagined" back then the impact the race would have on the F1 calendar. When I look back at when my journey started in Formula One in 1994, I could never have imagined that we would be coming and having what will be the 16th event here in Abu Dhabi. When the plans were announced, I remember very well the scale model that was brought to the paddock. It looked so futuristic. It looked like this was dreaming beyond what would actually be delivered, but it was delivered, and it has delivered an incredible experience for the drivers. The Blog Tags Widget will appear here on the published site.
Tags:
The Recommended Content Widget will appear here on the published site.
The Breadcrumbs widget will appear here on the published site.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz appeared to have secured Chinese support for the Ukraine peace summit when he was in Beijing this week, though it is still not clear if Xi Jinping will attend.
China is among more than 100 nations invited to Switzerland for the conference in June to discuss how to end the war, which has dragged on for more than two years. While China has yet to confirm its attendance, it has been pushing for Russia to take part, with special envoy Li Hui lobbying in European capitals last month.Observers say Li’s trip achieved little, but that China – aiming to be a peace broker – has seen an opportunity to push for direct talks between Russia and Ukraine, with the Swiss summit the first step. Björn Alexander Düben, an international relations lecturer at Jilin University in northeast China, said Li was sent to Europe because Beijing saw an “opportune moment” to sway Kyiv and Brussels to make concessions amid “shaky” Western support and Ukraine’s recent setbacks on the battlefields. Russia is expanding gains in eastern Ukraine after it took control of Avdiivka, in Donetsk Oblast, in February, and is now trying to seize the strategic city of Chasiv Yar. Ukraine, meanwhile, is running out of soldiers and ammunition amid stalled support from the US. Düben said China’s efforts in Europe could also be seen as “signalling” to the Global South that it is a responsible power. “The most cynical interpretation might be, China just wants to be seen as a peacemaker … when the US is perceived by more people around the world as not so much of a responsible actor in the context of what’s happening in Gaza,” he said. China has sought to expand its influence in the Global South amid an intensifying rivalry with the United States. It also wants to be a global peacemaker, brokering a rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran last year and calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. The US is meanwhile under pressure over the military funding and support it provides to Israel. In Europe, special envoy Li would have stressed the urgency of negotiations on the Ukraine war given the potential return of Donald Trump to the White House, according to Victor Gao, vice-president of the Centre for China and Globalisation, a think tank in Beijing. Trump has reportedly said he will cut off US aid to Ukraine if he is re-elected in November and has threatened to end the war “in 24 hours” – unsettling many European Union countries including France and Germany, which have made more long-term security commitments to Ukraine. “Now the West or Nato, led by the United States, does not have a unified and consistent position” on support for Ukraine, said Gao, also a chair professor at Soochow University in eastern China. He said Li would have tried to leverage this during his talks in Europe. Li was also on a mission to prevent further “spillover” of the conflict – especially after French President Emmanuel Macron floated the possibility of involving Nato troops, according to Wang Yiwei, a European affairs specialist at Renmin University in Beijing. Germany and Nato rejected Macron’s idea, and US President Joe Biden said he would not involve American troops. Back in Beijing, Li said the “large gap” between the involved parties had made mediation difficult, but they had agreed that the conflict would ultimately be resolved through peace talks. Moscow has said it is open to talks with Kyiv, but Ukraine insists it will not start negotiations until Russian troops are withdrawn from its territory – a condition Moscow does not accept. Li’s trip was met with scepticism in Europe, with some officials in Brussels saying he was just repeating “Moscow’s talking points”. Li had told EU officials no discussion on Ukraine’s territorial integrity would take place until the violence stops, the Post reported earlier, citing people familiar with the talks. He said that could only happen when the EU stopped sending weapons to Ukraine. Beijing claims to be neutral in the conflict, but has drawn criticism for providing economic support to Moscow amid international sanctions. It has not condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine nor called on Moscow to withdraw its troops. China’s push for immediate peace talks without calling for Russian troops to withdraw is also “highly unpopular” in Ukraine, according to Iliya Kusa, an international relations expert at the Ukrainian Institute for the Future in Kyiv. “I would say that there are no high expectations from China’s role and that people tend to think that China will not do anything real to pressure Russia to help Ukraine,” he said. Chinese analysts say the West has overestimated Beijing’s influence on Moscow, which will not withdraw its troops when it appears to have gained the upper hand in the war. Russia now occupies nearly one-fifth of Ukraine’s territory, including Crimea and parts of the four provinces in the east. Gao from the Beijing think tank said China’s peace proposal was “realistic”. He also defended China’s neutrality in the conflict, saying it has never recognised Crimea and the four eastern Ukrainian states as parts of Russia, and has stressed that the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all countries are protected by the UN Charter. China called for the charter to be upheld in a 12-point position paper on Ukraine released last February, which also says legitimate security concerns should be properly handled.“China’s logic is very pragmatic,” Gao said. “First to have a truce, then draw a line of actual control and cease hostility along that, to gain time to solve these [territorial] problems.”. Russia has justified its invasion of Ukraine as a response to the eastward expansion of Nato, which Kyiv wants to join, and President Vladimir Putin has said that “Russia will fight for its interests to the end”. The Blog Tags Widget will appear here on the published site.
Tags:
The Recommended Content Widget will appear here on the published site.
The Breadcrumbs widget will appear here on the published site.
In times of conflict or war, nations often undergo a significant transformation in their economic structures, transitioning towards what is commonly known as a "war economy."
This economic model is characterized by a reorientation of resources, industries, and policies to prioritize military production and defence. While such measures may be deemed necessary for national security, the consequences of a war economy can have profound impacts on both regular citizens and the countries as a whole. A war economy refers to an economic system that is heavily geared towards supporting and sustaining the efforts of a nation during times of war or conflict. In a war economy, resources, industries, and policies are mobilized to prioritize military production, defense, and logistics over other sectors of the economy. Impact on Regular People One of the most immediate and tangible consequences of a war economy is its impact on regular citizens. As resources are diverted towards military needs, shortages of consumer goods and everyday necessities can occur. Rationing may be implemented to ensure equitable distribution, leading to reduced access to essential items for ordinary people. In addition, the disruption of labor markets due to mobilization for military service or diversion to defense industries can result in unemployment and economic hardship for individuals and families. Moreover, the psychological toll of living in a state of war, with its uncertainty and fear, can lead to anxiety, stress, and trauma among the civilian population.
Impact on Countries War economies can also have far-reaching consequences for the countries involved. The significant increase in military spending can strain national finances, leading to budget deficits and debt accumulation. This economic strain may persist long after the conflict has ended, creating challenges for economic recovery and reconstruction. Moreover, countries heavily reliant on defense industries may become dependent on continued military spending for economic growth, making it difficult to transition to peacetime economies. Socially, war economies can exacerbate inequalities and divisions within society, as certain groups may benefit disproportionately from wartime contracts and opportunities, while others bear the brunt of economic hardship and sacrifice.
In conclusion, war economies represent a fundamental reorientation of a nation's economic priorities towards military production and defence. While such measures may be deemed necessary for national security during times of conflict, the consequences for regular people and countries can be profound and long-lasting. From economic hardship and social disruption to psychological trauma and dependency on military spending, the impacts of war economies are multifaceted and complex. As such, it is essential for policymakers to consider not only the short-term imperatives of war, but also the long-term consequences for the well-being and prosperity of their citizens and nations. The Blog Tags Widget will appear here on the published site.
Tags:
The Recommended Content Widget will appear here on the published site.
The Breadcrumbs widget will appear here on the published site.
Hamas was founded in Gaza in December 1987 and it has been substantially controlling the area since June 2007.
In addition to Gaza, Hamas is present in refugee camps in the West Bank and has a strong base in East Jerusalem, considered part of the West Bank and, therefore, of the Palestinian territories, under international law. The group supplies funding to and therefore buys the loyalty of young men who believe in violent resistance to the Israeli occupation. At dawn on Oct. 7, Hamas, whose full name means “Islamic Resistance Movement,” started its latest operation against Israel. The scope and scale of it was broad, and it was a big surprise that Hamas managed to break through the border fence surrounding the Gaza Strip and enter Israel, breaching its security. In addition, the number of hostages taken by Hamas — 199 according to the Israeli Defense Forces — was the highest ever. Israel, on its part, is preparing to launch an invasion into Gaza by air, land and sea. The operation is expected to be a heavy assault in response to the atrocities committed by Hamas, which have prompted Israeli cries for an invasion of Gaza. Judging by what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said, the aim is to obliterate the Palestinian group. It was anticipated that the Israeli ground offensive might start last weekend as, on Friday, Israel issued an evacuation notice urging 1.1 million residents of northern Gaza to move south within 24 hours. However, the deadline of 5 a.m. the following day was pushed back, and the Israeli Defense Forces issued a statement that they would allow Palestinians safe passage on approved routes between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. on Saturday. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians have left their homes. In parallel to the attacks and counter attacks between Israel and Hamas, diplomatic efforts have been continuing to avoid the already dire humanitarian crisis from precipitating further. The Israeli military said that it carried out counter-terrorism operations in the West Bank on Saturday night, arresting 49 suspects, 33 of whom were members of Hamas. This could be evidence that Hamas' presence in the West Bank is also strong, and that Israel intends to try and end Hamas not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank. Two of the organization’s top leaders in the Gaza Strip have styled a so-called “zero problem” foreign policy. The intention is to emphasize Hamas’ partnership with countries that share its anti-Israel stance: Hamas is careful not to let its relationships with Arab states deteriorate because that would strengthen the Israeli position. This is one signal that tells us that Hamas, notwithstanding its brutal tactics, is a rational actor whose approach is also based on pragmatism. Another example of this is the way violence is controlled based on public sentiments in Gaza. Although Hamas has launched missiles targeting Israel many times before, it has respected ceasefires when these have been adopted. This shows that Hamas judges when it is suitable to conduct assaults against Israel also based on its interpretation of people’s sentiments. The most recent aggression was prompted by a few factors. The first stems from the asymmetric power structure that has dominated the relationship between Israel and Palestine for nearly 70 years. As stated in the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice presented in June 2004 with regards to Israel’s construction of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Israel is “the occupying power” and Palestine is “the occupied (territory).” In these circumstances, no one can deny that there is a historical complaint against and dissatisfaction toward the Israeli occupation, which since 1967 has imposed itself on land that Palestinians regard as their own. Second, as the occupation has continued over time, the importance of the Palestine problem for regional as well as international actors has drastically diminished. Once, it was essential for Arab leaders to commit to the Palestinian cause politically and militarily because it was an important symbol and a way of obtaining support from their peoples. However, since the Second Intifada (or “uprising”) broke out in September 2000, a recognition that the Middle East peace process had failed became dominant. These events also pushed Israel away from the negotiating table with Palestine. Even though the Obama administration in the U.S. made efforts to revive negotiations, recognizing that the resolution of the Palestinian conflict is core to stability in the Middle East, the outbreak of the Arab Spring in the early 2010s changed the regional security environment and impacted the priorities of Arab leaders — which shifted toward their national interests and away from their involvement in the Palestinian issue. As part of this turn, in the absence of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, some Arab leaders pursued normalization of ties with Israel, backed by the Trump administration. It is useful to understand Hamas’ aggression as a warning as to the Palestinians’ current situation. This includes their exclusion from regional peace efforts and their demand that international society, including Arab and Islamic countries, not forget their existence and aspirations. On another level, the political impasse in the Palestinian political arena should not be underestimated. Hamas has been excluded from the Palestinian Authority founded on the Oslo Accords of 1993, even though it won Palestinian legislative elections in 2006. International society declined to accept the result and boycotted a new cabinet consisting only of Hamas. Since June 2007, when Hamas took control of Gaza, the political struggle between Hamas and Fatah, which dominates the Palestinian Authority and is recognized as a negotiating partner by international actors, has deepened. Although both parties have tried to reconcile several times through efforts mediated by Egypt, Türkiye and Russia, among others, national unity governments have never survived for long and Hamas' predicaments, such as the blockade of the Gaza Strip by Israel and Egypt, have continued. (It should be noted that, in the past, Hamas has tried bargaining with Israel and other parties — including by taking hostages — to ease the blockade.) On top of this, the President of the State of Palestine, Mahmoud Abbas, postponed elections that were meant to be held in April 2021, a decision criticized by Hamas. It is said that one of the reasons for the delay is that Abbas feared a Hamas win. Hamas recognizes that the possibility of it being recognized as a legitimate political actor in Palestine has been prevented not only by the international community but also by Palestinian leaders, mainly belonging to Fatah. These factors could be regarded as the root of Hamas’ dissatisfaction. In addition, given that support for the group seems to persist in the West Bank, Hamas expects that the increasing international, regional and local attention it is receiving in the present crisis will strengthen its influence in the Palestinian political arena. To the point where the pressure to hold new elections at a later date will likely increase. The Blog Tags Widget will appear here on the published site.
Tags:
The Recommended Content Widget will appear here on the published site.
The Breadcrumbs widget will appear here on the published site.
What are the risks with Bitcoin? Bitcoin is the first and most valuable cryptocurrency and it has seen massive growth in 2017. But many people are warning about the risks associated with Bitcoin. A number of high-profile investors regard Bitcoin as a ‘bubble’ or ‘mirage’, and expect the market to crash, like the dot-com bubble. Others highlight that cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin help to enable financial crime and funding of terrorism, due to the level of anonymity that digital currencies can provide to technologically adept criminals.
It seems like everybody is talking about cryptocurrencies at the moment. With apps like Coinbase making it possible to buy and trade cryptocurrencies at the tap of a button, thousands of people – from political idealists to economic opportunists – have been jumping on the crypto investment bandwagon. Cryptocurrencies are creeping into the mainstream, with even Goldman Sachs recently announcing their plans to start trading Bitcoin. 2017 saw the asset value of Bitcoin boom, amidst growing confidence in the first and most important cryptocurrency. Many cryptocurrency investors have seen the growth of Bitcoin as a win-win situation for all concerned. But are crypto-investors inadvertently paying into a system that is making the world less safe, and putting us all at risk? Since its early days, Bitcoin has had its share of ties with criminal activity. With the increased level of anonymity that it provided, Bitcoin was a popular currency on the darknet marketplace the ‘Silk Road’, where it was used chiefly to trade illegal drugs, as well as other contraband. As it crawls towards the mainstream, Bitcoin has certainly shaken off some these negative associations. But the fact remains that crypto transactions continue to afford criminals with a veil of anonymity, enabling them to evade justice – and enabling the financing of all manner of malicious activities. The problem is that, unlike conventional currencies, cryptocurrencies are decentralized, and therefore not subject to the same regulations, reviews, and monitoring as in financial institutions or banks. This means that potential criminal transactions that are processed in cryptocurrency bypass the regulatory controls that banks are legally required to perform. Jargon buster Bitcoin – a digital cryptocurrency and payment system. It is a decentralized digital currency, as it operates independently of a central bank. Cryptocurrency – a digital asset designed to function as a medium of exchange. Encryption techniques are used to regulate the generation of units of currency and verify the transfer of funds. Bitcoin is the first, and, at present, the most valuable cryptocurrency. Blockchain – an encrypted ledger which records the history of cryptocurrency transactions Bitcoin and terrorist funding Amongst the criminal organizations that are benefitting from unregulated cryptocurrency transactions are ISIS. In a PDF circulated on social media, entitled “Bitcoin and the Charity of Violent Physical Struggle”, one ISIS supporter explains, “This system has the potential to revive the lost sunnah of donating to the mujahideen, it is simple, easy, and we ask Allah to hasten it’s (sic) usage for us”. As academics from Macquarie University have highlighted, the utility of crypto for helping to fund ISIS terrorist operations is significant. Ghost Security Group, a hacktivist and anti-terrorism group, claimed to have identified a chain of transactions to Bitcoin wallets believed to be owned by ISIS which contained funds between $4.7m and $15.7m – between one to three percent of their estimated annual income. The group stated to news network NewsBTC that ISIS is “extensively using Bitcoin for funding their operations”. In 2015, German media company Deutsche Welle reported that one Bitcoin wallet believed to belong to ISIS received around $23m within a single month. The Blog Tags Widget will appear here on the published site.
Tags:
The Recommended Content Widget will appear here on the published site.
|
Archives
May 2024
Categories
All
|
5/8/2024
0 Comments