Middle East and Terrorism

Thursday, July 2, 2026

Why Negotiating With Terrorist Regimes Such as Hamas and Iran Is a Terrible Idea - Khaled Abu Toameh

by Khaled Abu Toameh

Needed: Unconditional Surrender, as After World War II

The Trump Administration is making a big mistake by engaging in negotiations with Hamas — as well as Iran.
Instead of weakening the Iran-backed terrorist group and its sponsors, these negotiations legitimize them as political actors and, for Hamas, only strengthen their standing among Palestinians; and for Iran's rulers, among countries that might have been hoping to move toward the West.
Discussions have reportedly stalled over disputes concerning which weapons the terrorist group Hamas would be permitted to retain. Instead of debating whether Hamas should disarm, negotiators now appear to be debating how much of its military capability it should be allowed to keep.
In short, Hamas, while remaining fully armed, continues to dictate conditions.
Meanwhile, intelligence assessments from Israeli and Western security officials paint an alarming picture.
This approach also sends a disastrous message to every terrorist organization in the Middle East: massacre civilians, survive military retaliation, refuse to disarm, and eventually the United States will sit down and negotiate with you.
That is precisely the opposite lesson to the one Washington ought to be sending.
Terrorist organizations do not usually disarm through diplomacy. They do not abandon power because mediators ask politely. They relinquish power only when they are no longer capable of exercising it.
The failure of the Palestinians' June 26 protests demonstrates that Hamas remains capable of ruling the Gaza Strip through fear. Intelligence reports show that it remains capable of rebuilding its military machine. The latest negotiations show that it remains determined to dictate terms rather than accept them.
If deals are struck, no one is expecting Iran or Hamas to abide by them anyway — so that even winning a deal would mean losing.
Instead of legitimizing terrorist groups that openly seek Israel's and America's destruction, the United States should insist on the full implementation of its own peace plans -- each with a firm deadline -- beginning with Hamas's unconditional disarmament and removal from power, as well as the immediate implementation of whatever the US needs in the Islamabad MOU.
Anything less merely strengthens the very terrorist organizations negotiations are supposedly designed to defeat.

The Trump Administration is making a big mistake by engaging in negotiations with Hamas — as well as Iran.

Instead of weakening the Iran-backed terrorist group and its sponsors, these negotiations legitimize them as political actors and, for Hamas, only strengthen their standing among Palestinians; and for Iran's rulers, among countries that might have been hoping to move toward the West.

Reports that senior US officials have been holding direct meetings with Hamas representatives come at a troubling time. The reports surfaced only days after Hamas successfully crushed anti-Hamas uprising in the Gaza Strip on June 26, thereby demonstrating that the terrorist group remains firmly in control and has no intention of surrendering power.

The failure of the so-called Gazan "June 26 Revolution," and the uprising by Iranian citizens on January 8-9 in Iran, should have served as a wake-up call to Washington.

Thousands of Palestinians and Iranians must have prayed that their protests would force Hamas and Iran's regime to disarm and relinquish control of the Gaza Strip and change Iran to a civilian administration. Instead, both Hamas and Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) responded with overwhelming force.

According to further reports from the Gaza Strip, Hamas and its allies in Palestinian Islamic Jihad deployed armed operatives throughout the coastal territory, threatened suspected organizers with execution, converted hospitals into interrogation centers, confiscated mobile phones, and intimidated civilians through religious decrees branding protesters as "agents of the occupation."

Fear, as well as public support for Hamas, apparently prevented the planned protests from gaining momentum.

Against this backdrop, news that the Trump Administration has been conducting direct talks with Hamas sends precisely the wrong message.

According to Israeli reports, Trump administration adviser Aryeh Lightstone recently met with senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya as part of discussions aimed at persuading Hamas to disarm. Previous direct meetings reportedly involved US envoy Steve Witkoff.

Although the stated objective is to convince Hamas to surrender its weapons, there is no evidence that the terrorist group has moved even one centimeter toward that goal. On the contrary, Hamas has adopted an even tougher negotiating position.

Discussions have reportedly stalled over disputes concerning which weapons the terrorist group Hamas would be permitted to retain. Instead of debating whether Hamas should disarm, negotiators now appear to be debating how much of its military capability it should be allowed to keep.

That is exactly how terrorist organizations manipulate diplomacy.

The latest Hamas delegation to Cairo, headed by Zaher Jabarin, arrived not to announce its surrender but to present new demands. Hamas officials insist that Israel completely withdraw from the Gaza Strip, allow unrestricted reconstruction, rebuild infrastructure, and implement political arrangements leading to a Palestinian state before discussing the terrorist group's future.

In short, Hamas, while remaining fully armed, continues to dictate conditions. This is not the behavior of an organization preparing to lay down its weapons. It is the behavior of a movement convinced that time is on its side.

Meanwhile, intelligence assessments from Israeli and Western security officials paint an alarming picture. Since the ceasefire went into effect late last year, Hamas has reportedly rebuilt sections of its tunnel network, resumed manufacturing explosives, anti-tank weapons and rocket-propelled grenades, recruited thousands of new operatives, restored much of its command structure, and begun incorporating lessons from the war into preparations for its next confrontation with Israel.

Far from disarming, Hamas is rearming. Far from dissolving, it is rebuilding. Far from abandoning terrorism, it is preparing for another war.

Iran's regime, for its part, according to retired US Army General Jack Keane, has removed the rubble sealing tunnels where, before the hostilities, it had hidden around 2,000 ballistic missiles and their launchers. The regime took advantage of the ceasefire -- which President Donald Trump reportedly halted just two weeks before degrading Iran's military capability — to place them back around the country.

Washington nevertheless continues to negotiate. These negotiations carry consequences far beyond Iran and the Gaza Strip.

For many Palestinians, direct American contacts with Hamas amount to political recognition. They signal that the United States views Hamas as a legitimate interlocutor and potentially as a future partner in determining Gaza's political and security future.

America's approach strengthens Hamas politically at the expense of Palestinians who reject its Islamist dictatorship and its strategy of endless war.

This approach also sends a disastrous message to every terrorist organization in the Middle East: massacre civilians, survive military retaliation, refuse to disarm, and eventually the United States will sit down and negotiate with you.

That is precisely the opposite lesson to the one Washington ought to be sending.

Trump's 20-point peace plan for Gaza already calls for Hamas's demilitarization and removal from power. If that remains American policy, why continue endless negotiations with a terrorist organization that has repeatedly rejected disarmament?

Every additional round of talks just buys Hamas more time to manufacture weapons, rebuild tunnels, recruit fighters, strengthen its grip on Gaza, and prepare for its next massacre in Israel.

History offers little hope that Hamas will voluntarily surrender its weapons. Terrorist organizations do not usually disarm through diplomacy. They do not abandon power because mediators ask politely. They relinquish power only when they are no longer capable of exercising it.

The failure of the Palestinians' June 26 protests demonstrates that Hamas remains capable of ruling the Gaza Strip through fear. Intelligence reports show that it remains capable of rebuilding its military machine. The latest negotiations show that it remains determined to dictate terms rather than accept them.

The Trump administration should draw the obvious conclusion: negotiating with Hamas and Iran has failed. If deals are struck, no one is expecting Iran or Hamas to abide by them anyway — so that even winning a deal would mean losing.

Instead of legitimizing terrorist groups that openly seek Israel's and America's destruction, the United States should insist on the full implementation of its own peace plans -- each with a firm deadline -- beginning with Hamas's unconditional disarmament and removal from power, as well as the immediate implementation of whatever the US needs in the Islamabad MOU.

Anything less merely strengthens the very terrorist organizations negotiations are supposedly designed to defeat.

Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter)

Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22670/negotiating-with-terrorist-regimes

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

U.S. tries to talk Iran out of tolls as talks resume in Doha - Barak Ravid

by Barak Ravid

The parties gave themselves 60 days to reach a comprehensive nuclear deal, but two weeks into that window they're still arguing over the terms of the memorandum of understanding they already signed. Currently, the collapse of that initial deal looks more likely than agreement on a final one.

Ships in the Strait of Hormuz last week. Photo: Hassan Ghaedi/Anadolu via Getty

U.S. and Iranian negotiators are in Doha for talks focusing primarily on the Strait of Hormuz, with the Trump administration making the case that Iran stands to gain much more from a nuclear deal than it could generate from tolls in the strait.

Why it matters: The parties gave themselves 60 days to reach a comprehensive nuclear deal, but two weeks into that window they're still arguing over the terms of the memorandum of understanding they already signed. Currently, the collapse of that initial deal looks more likely than agreement on a final one.

After several exchanges of fire, the U.S. and Iran did reach an understanding Sunday on de-escalating the situation in the strait for a week. That means new clashes could erupt right after the 4th of July celebrations.
"We have reached an understanding that we will keep things quiet for the coming week, so progress on all aspects of the MOU can be worked on in a productive environment, without missiles flying," a U.S. official told Axios.
"The President has been clear that every time they shoot, we will shoot more — and at targets that further degrade their position in the Strait," the U.S. official added.

The latest: Vice President Vance said Wednesday that the U.S. technical team "is sitting down with the Iranians, with the Qataris, and with others in Doha... ensuring that we continue to make the progress," adding: "It's still pretty early, but talks are going well."

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, who is heading the Iranian technical team, denied after the conclusion of Wednesday's meetings that there'd been any direct talks, and said all negotiations took place via the Qatari and Pakistani mediators.

He said the parties decided to establish "an emergency communication channel by tomorrow" in order to address violations of the MOU. He added that the expenditure of Iran's frozen funds in Qatar was discussed and "it was agreed that, based on Iran's stated needs, the required goods would be purchased and delivered to Iran."

Driving the news: President Trump's envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner met in Doha on Tuesday with the prime minister of Qatar and other Qatari officials who are mediating between the U.S. and Iran. On Wednesday, they met with the Qatari emir.

The envoys hoped to reach understandings that would allow negotiations between the U.S. and Iranian technical teams to begin.
Two regional sources said the meetings went well and paved the way for the technical talks. It's unclear if Witkoff and Kushner had any direct engagement with Iranian officials.
The main issues discussed in Doha were the situation in the strait, Iran's frozen assets, and the ceasefire in Lebanon, the sources said.

Between the lines: The main impetus for Iran's attacks against several commercial ships last week was the establishment of a new shipping route in the Strait of Hormuz close to the Omani coast, which infuriated the Iranians.

The Iranians are publicly insisting they have joint sovereignty over the strait, along with Oman, and that both countries will administer it and request passage fees after the 60-day term of the MOU ends.
The U.S. interpretation of the MOU is that any new arrangements in the strait, which is an international waterway, must also be endorsed by the Gulf countries. The Iranian interpretation is that the strait is in their territorial waters, so the Gulf countries can express their opinions but the final decision is in their hands.
The dispute was a key issue in the talks Secretary of State Marco Rubio had with his counterparts from six Gulf countries in Bahrain last week.
"The Gulf is currently in discussions about how the Strait should be managed after [the MOU expires] and those discussions are converging" with the U.S.-Iran negotiations, a U.S. official said.

Behind the scenes: Witkoff and Kushner have been trying to convey to the Iranians that their demand for tolls could blow up a U.S.-Iran deal that would ultimately be far more lucrative for Iran.

"The U.S. message to Iran was 'Think bigger,'" a U.S. official said.
The official claimed the sums Iran could generate from developing and selling oil and other resources freely — if the U.S. lifted all sanctions under a deal — "would be 100 times more valuable to them than using a gangster tactic to try and charge a toll."
"We are pushing them to think bigger about their potential in the context of a broader nuclear and regional non-intervention deal," the U.S. official said.

What he's saying: On Wednesday, Trump said the U.S. has had "very good meetings" with Iran and claimed "it is all going well."

When asked, Trump also pushed back on the idea that he might resume the war soon. But a source who spoke to the president in recent days said he'd been very frustrated by the Iranian attacks in the strait last week.
The source and another U.S. official confirmed Trump even asked to be briefed on military options, but eventually was convinced to let the negotiations play out.
The Wall Street Journal first reported on the military briefing Trump received.

The intrigue: Al-Arabiya reported Wednesday that during the talks in Doha, the U.S. and Iran reached an understanding about releasing the first tranche of frozen Iranian funds held in Qatar.

A regional source confirmed that and said the $3 billion would not be transferred to Iran in cash, but the Iranian central bank would be able to use it for buying humanitarian goods, at least some of which are to come from the U.S. market.
However, U.S. officials denied such an understanding had been reached and said no funds had been released.

What to watch: During the talks in Doha, U.S. negotiators conveyed to the Iranians their intention to continue to restrain Israel and make sure it abides by the ceasefire in Lebanon, according to a regional source.

The source said the U.S. stressed that the Israeli withdrawal from two pilot zones in southern Lebanon is a first step and, if properly implemented, could lead to further withdrawals.
"POTUS has committed the U.S. to muzzling its pets in Tel Aviv. If they ignore their master, Iran will school them," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi posted on X on Wednesday.

Barak Ravid

Source: https://www.axios.com/2026/07/01/iran-talks-doha-tolls-strait-hormuz

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Socialist movement spreading from New York to Colorado poses 'threat' at federal level: Evans - Katherine Pugh

by Katherine Pugh

Democratic socialist Melat Kiros defeated longtime House incumbent Diana DeGette in Colorado’s primary congressional election on Tuesday.

The United States’ primary elections are revealing that Democratic socialism is on the rise across the country, from New York to Seattle, and now, Colorado. Rep. Gabe Evans, R-Colo., is attributing the movement to young voters and corruption within the education system.

Evans told the Just the News, No Noise TV show on Wednesday that “the socialists have taken over the Democrat Party.” This takeover, according to Evans, began in New York and has moved on to Seattle and now Colorado.

Democratic socialist Melat Kiros defeated nearly 30-year House incumbent Diana DeGette in Colorado’s congressional primary election on Tuesday.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson, who both officially took office on Jan. 1, are known for their radical, progressive socialist policies and stances.

Evans thinks socialism at the local level — Mamdani and Wilson, for example — is one thing, but socialism at the federal level is another, and has bigger implications: he sees it as a “threat.”

He recalled the 2018 rise to power of Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., who was seen as “kind of on the extreme fringes” at the time. Now, socialism is becoming the “main line” of the Democratic Party, Evans said.

The congressman thinks these socialists’ success is driven by young voters and corruption within the education system. He pointed out that the Colorado Education Association — the largest union of teachers in the state — passed a resolution in 2023 that condemned capitalism, saying it exploits children, land, labor, public schools and resources, and opposes addressing issues such as climate change, education inequality, income inequality, patriarchy and systemic racism.

K-12 Colorado teachers are “steeping our young kids” in the same socialist ideas that the resolution promotes, Evans continued. The children then grow up and go to college, where professors are promoting the same ideas: he cited University of Colorado tenured professor Ward Churchill’s belief that America deserved the 9/11 terrorist attacks, conveyed in an essay and book. This stance ultimately got him fired from the university.

Those same children then ultimately end up voting for socialist candidates.

“This has been building for several decades, and now we're finally seeing it, seeing the results in the electoral results in New York, and places like Colorado,” Evans said.

He mentioned that the state’s Working Families Tax Cut is “one way we’re pushing back” because it ensures children are at the forefront of education once again — not bureaucrats nor a political agenda.

There were many educational choice options baked into the bill, according to Evans, meaning school districts and schooling options that are doing a good job of educating kids in terms of teaching basics like reading, writing, math and history will be rewarded.

“We are making those generational investments in good education and educational choice and educational freedom, so that we can keep America going for another 250 years,” the congressman continued.

Katherine Pugh is a reporter for Just the News. Follow her on X for more coverage.

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/socialist-movement-spreading-new-york-colorado-poses-threat-federal-level

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Democratic Socialist candidates expand appeal, some Democrats see potential obstruction, chaos - Steven Richards

by Steven Richards

Just as many saw the Freedom Caucus of hard-right legislators as a "splinter" group from traditional Republicans, the now growing cohort of Democratic Socialists can wield outsized influence in a narrowly divided House of Representatives. Centrist Democrats are worried about their party being hijacked.

It may not be a wave yet, but Democratic Socialists are slowly advancing within the broader Democratic Party, even outside their new stronghold of New York City.

As a result, the core bloc of socialist candidates likely to win seats in the House of Representatives in the upcoming midterm elections will be in a position to exert significant influence over Democratic establishment leaders, much like a core group of leadership-skeptic Republicans have sometimes halted the legislative process under Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.

"The Dirty Break": Socialists free-riding off Democratic Party

Some Democrats say there is a danger of the same kind of obstruction and chaos that has often plagued the Republican Party in recent years as its leadership manages a narrow majority in the House chamber.

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)—a separate entity from the Democratic Party—has adopted a strategy known as the “dirty break,” or running candidates on the Democratic Party ballot line “while building the infrastructure and base of supporters necessary to one day run our candidates independently,” Just the News previously reported.

After the midterms, at least six members of the House would now be affiliated with the DSA. In exchange for the socialist organization’s endorsement, the candidates are expected to uphold its political platform, which includes Medicare for all, defunding the police, increasing taxes on the rich, and reducing border enforcement.

Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and many of his caucus in the House, appear to be uneasy with the growing influence of the left-wing in their party. Some of them have promised to stand against the socialist influence in the party. But others are rushing to accommodate their newly minted comrades.

Some old-line Democrats are courting the DSA

As a sign of the socialists’ growing influence, Kamala Harris, who is thought to be considering another White House bid in 2028, reportedly called New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who is widely considered a leader among the faction, after a slate of DSA-backed candidates sailed to victory in the New York City primaries last week.

The call, which was reported by Axios, centered on the future of the Democratic Party.

Harris was not alone. New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a Democrat, said on C-SPAN that the success of the younger, newer DSA-backed candidates is “a very good trend for nationwide elections,” because it shows that voters are engaged. Rep. Ro Khanna of California said the elections represent a "beginning of a new, bold, strong Democratic Party."

The Democratic Socialists are emboldened by those victories. They now cite the latest election upset by DSA-backed Melat Kiros against a 15-term incumbent in urban Denver as evidence that the party’s appeal can carry beyond the progressive stronghold of New York City.

“New York City, we think, is really reflecting where the whole country is going at this point, so we’re very excited, and we want to keep building from it,” Ashik Siddique, co-chair of the DSA, told The Hill. “Increasingly, we’re showing that candidates running on strong platforms like these can win in red or purple states, in the Midwest and the South.”

Should Democrats reclaim the House in November, even a small cluster of democratic socialists could wield leverage far out of proportion to its population on the Hill. Roughly five DSA members or endorsees have already won primaries in safe-blue seats — among them Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and newcomers Darializa Avila Chevalier, D-N.Y., Claire Valdez, D-N.Y., Chris Rabb, D-Pa., and Melat Kiros, D-Colo. — with more contests still to come. Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a current incumbent representing Michigan’s 12th District, is expected to win re-election.

Socialists declare war on Hakeem Jeffries

After a redistricting battle this year, the chamber is expected to be more narrowly divided than ever, where a cohesive left bloc willing to withhold votes could extract concessions from leadership much like the House Freedom Caucus has disciplined Republican speakers over the past decade.

One of the candidates, Kiros in Colorado, has already said that she will not vote for Jeffries for speaker if Democrats secure a majority in the midterm elections. “If the day comes to vote, and he continues taking corporate PAC money, I won’t be voting for him,” Kiros said in an interview ahead of her primary victory.

The pressure would fall first on Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who would need near-unanimity to advance an agenda and present a unified front against the Republican-controlled executive branch. Under Republican Speaker Mike Johnson and his predecessor Kevin McCarthy, the House Freedom Caucus and other small blocs of Republican members have regularly disrupted votes to protest leadership decisions or extract concessions.

Some Democrats see the danger of repeating the dysfunction

“That’s why we have the most unproductive Congress right now. And the Republicans are all disorganized because of that. We shouldn’t be that. We want to be the opposite of that [...] That’s not who we should be, so I hope by looking at their example, we’re not trying to be what they are; you got to be something different,” Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., told The Hill.

Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., who is a progressive, said that these new members are expected to pursue the policies that they were elected on, not to moderate their views at the request of leadership.

“I think a lot of times people come into office, and particularly I would say at the leadership levels, there’s this call to moderate because we’re a big tent. But if the big tent is representing people, no matter what district you’re from, that wants universal healthcare, that wants a higher minimum wage, that wants universal childcare, all of those things, then we shouldn’t be moderating, we should be going for those big policies and helping people to see that that is actually really popular in districts across the country,” she said.

Steven Richards

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/congress/socialist-candidates-expand-appeal-some-democrats-see-potential-obstruction

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

After Supreme Court decision, birth tourism now in crosshairs as battles rage on Capitol Hill - Amanda Head

by Amanda Head

Democrats have consistently downplayed the criminal toll of illegal immigration on communities, dating back to the Obama presidency.

In the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling Tuesday on birthright citizenship, two aggressive dynamics reveal the toll of illegal immigration on the nation: a congressional hearing that pitted a Democrat and Republican as loved ones of victims of illegal immigration sobbed in the gallery, and Border Czar Tom Homan promising to ramp up efforts to target and investigate crimes related to birth tourism.

"Now we step up enforcement," Homan said Tuesday. "Even though we're doing record amounts of enforcement now, we need to do more. And not only that, we need to buckle down on birth tourism. We have many investigations into birth tourism, but we need to triple, quadruple down on this."

His comments came hours after the Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship, upholding the interpretation that the 14th Amendment guarantees that children born on U.S. soil are citizens.

Up in arms in the House

Simultaneously, a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on so-called "sanctuary" city policies and victims of crimes by undocumented immigrants turned chaotic.

Families of victims, including the mother of 18-year-old Sheridan Gorman (allegedly killed in Chicago by a Venezuelan national without legal status), testified about the human cost of such policies limiting local-federal cooperation in detaining and deporting illegal migrants.

The flashpoint was a heated shouting match between Reps. Mike Lawler, a New York Republican, and Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat

Lawler, introducing Gorman’s mother, accused Democrats of showing more sympathy for U.S. citizens killed by immigration agents (citing Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minnesota this past winter) than for victims like Gorman and Laken Riley, murdered in 2024 by a Venezuelan in the U.S. illegally.

He told Raskin he “should be ashamed” for downplaying risks in sanctuary cities, in which local police will not detain illegal aliens in jail until Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents can get them.

Raskin attempted to push back, defending the policies and telling Lawler to “get the hell out” amid attempts by the chairman to restore order.

Democrats have consistently downplayed the criminal toll of illegal immigration on communities, dating back to the Obama presidency.

A Boston Globe investigation found that 30% of 323 criminal aliens released in New England between 2008 and 2012 committed new crimes, including rape, robbery, and murder. The recidivism rate was determined to be much higher than what ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and the Obama administration had reported.

Since then, in Texas alone, from June 2011 to May 2026, over 335,000 illegal aliens were booked into jails and charged with more than 600,000 criminal offenses.

These resulted in over 227,000 convictions, including 614 homicides, 3,951 sexual assaults, 29,599 assaults, 5,506 burglaries, 29,144 drug convictions, 1,996 robberies, and 2,515 weapon convictions.

Historical full criminal histories for these individuals show even higher totals: 912 homicide convictions and 5,397 sexual assault convictions.

Older USGAO (Government Accountability Office) analysis found criminal aliens averaging seven arrests and 12-13 offenses each, with hundreds of thousands incarcerated federally and in states.

The Court supercharged birth tourism

The "conventional" interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause – that essentially anyone born on U.S. soil is automatically a citizen, has "created a constitutional loophole that has supercharged a multi-billion-dollar birth tourism industry, and has turned American citizenship into a commodity for sale," the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which advocates for low immigration numbers, said in April when the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the issue.

Another argument against so-called birthright citizenship is that once such children reach adulthood, they can sponsor their non-citizen parents for green cards—igniting chains of family-based immigration—while also acquiring the right to vote and, eventually, to run for any public office in the country, including the presidency.

Researchers estimate 5,000 to 26,000 babies born annually from birth tourism.

Key Prosecutable Crimes in Birth Tourism Schemes

While the general practice of birth tourism remains legal following the Supreme Court's decision, a number of actions often committed in the process of birth tourism are prosecutable crimes.

Visa fraud is the most common charge. It covers knowingly making false statements on visa applications, to consular officers during interviews, or to Customs and Border Protection at ports of entry. Typical misrepresentations include claiming the purpose of travel is tourism, business, or a short visit when the primary intent is to give birth and stay for weeks or months; understating the length of stay; or concealing pregnancy.

Wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud are also common charges, used when schemes involve interstate or international wire communications (e.g., emails, phone calls) to further the fraud.

Money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering are common in commercial operations in birth tourism. Clients pay tens of thousands of dollars (often via international wire transfers) for “packages” that include housing in maternity apartments/hotels, medical arrangements, transportation, and document assistance. Prosecutors have traced millions in such transfers.

Making materially false statements in any matter within federal jurisdiction is also a broadly applicable charge.

In some schemes, operators or participants have submitted improper Medicaid or other insurance claims, or left substantial unpaid hospital bills that shift costs to U.S. taxpayers or providers, which leads to healthcare fraud-related charges.

Identity theft-related charges also often apply, involving unlawful use of means of identification in connection with the schemes.

Amanda Head

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/white-house/after-birthright-decision-illegal-immigrant-toll-front-and-center-probes

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Hillary Clinton urges federal employees to “refuse to share information with Pulte” - Just the News Staff

by Just the News Staff

Former Secretary of State Clinton called Pulte “very dangerous” and a “loose cannon.” She also called his appointment “deeply insulting to the intelligence community,” noting Pulte has no intelligence experience.

Hillary Clinton said that people should be “worried about everything” regarding Acting Director of National Intelligence Bill Pulte.

The former first lady and secretary of state went on the Democracy Docket podcast with host Marc Elias. He asked her about what her concerns were about President Donald Trump’s choice of Pulte to replace Tulsi Gabbard, who announced she was leaving the job last month.

Former Secretary of State Clinton called Pulte “very dangerous” and a “loose cannon.” She also called his appointment “deeply insulting to the intelligence community,” noting Pulte has no intelligence experience.

"The DNI has access to everything, everything that they want to see," said Clinton. "I mean, I hope there are career and even political appointees in various of the agencies that are slow-walking or refusing to share information with Pulte."

Just the News Staff

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/security/hillary-clinton-urges-federal-employees-refuse-share-information-pulte

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Five killed in central Damascus explosion - Israel National News

by Israel National News

Syrian media are reporting an explosion in a cafe near the Palace of Justice in central Damascus, Syria. Initial reports tell of numerous casualties at the scene.

Syrian media are reporting an explosion in a cafe in central Damascus, Syria.

According to Syrian health officials, five people were killed, and at least 16 were injured in the blast.

Al-Arabiya reported that the source of the explosion was an explosive device.

The explosion occurred near the Syrian Supreme Court, known as the Palace of Justice, in a cafe said to be frequented by many lawyers.

Israel National News

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/429541

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Anthropic's Fable 5 is back online - Madison Mills, Ina Fried

by Madison Mills, Ina Fried

Fable is available to all customers, Anthropic said, though queries it deems to pose security or safety risks may be routed to less powerful models.

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Stock: Getty Images

Anthropic's Fable 5 model came back online for users on Wednesday, after the Trump administration lifted an export control late Tuesday.

Why it matters: It's the most powerful publicly available AI tool — so capable that the U.S. government decided Anthropic had to add further safety measures in order to make it broadly available.

Driving the news: Fable is available to all customers, Anthropic said, though queries it deems to pose security or safety risks may be routed to less powerful models.

For the most part, customers who want to use Fable will have to do so outside of any subscription plan, paying for the tokens they use.
Anthropic says that, until July 7, subscribers can tap Fable for up to half of their included data usage, though it warns Fable will burn through tokens faster than other models.

The big picture: While Fable is once again available, its blockage by the U.S. government has raised significant questions over how and when the Trump Administration will step in to block future frontier model releases.

OpenAI has said it is withholding broad release of its latest model, GPT 5.6, while it consults with the government, which requested the delay.

Madison Mills, Ina Fried

Source: https://www.axios.com/2026/07/01/anthropic-fable-5-back-online-trump-export-controls-lifted

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Wednesday, July 1, 2026

Washington Handed Iran the Paper and Kept the War - Pierre Rehov

by Pierre Rehov

Iran negotiated the Islamabad MOU and believed it had won the war. It discovered that the Trilateral Framework, the only binding document, the one with mechanisms, was written to ensure the opposite.

The Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding tells Iran that Hezbollah survives and Israel leaves. The Trilateral Framework says that Hezbollah disarms and that, until it does, Israel stays in Lebanon.
The negotiations with Iran were led by Vice President JD Vance, who never wanted this war and made no secret of his wish to end it cheaply. He produced the Islamabad MOU, the paper Iran's regime wanted to hear. The Trilateral Framework was created by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has spent his career treating Iran's proxy network as a threat to be dismantled rather than soothed.
Iran negotiated the Islamabad MOU and believed it had won the war. It discovered that the Trilateral Framework, the only binding document, the one with mechanisms, was written to ensure the opposite.

Iran negotiated the Islamabad MOU and believed it had won the war. It discovered that the Trilateral Framework, the only binding document, the one with mechanisms, was written to ensure the opposite. The negotiations with Iran were led by Vice President JD Vance, who never wanted this war and made no secret of his wish to end it cheaply. He produced the Islamabad MOU, the paper Iran's regime wanted to hear. The Trilateral Framework was created by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has spent his career treating Iran's proxy network as a threat to be dismantled rather than soothed. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

Great powers, losing patience, sign a document and persuade themselves that it is strategy. The Islamic Republic of Iran has watched this habit in Western capitals for over 40 years and learned to feed on it. What it had not yet absorbed is that an administration can run two contradictory instruments at once, letting the weaker one absorb the enemy's hopes while the stronger one quietly sets the terms.

That is the situation today in Lebanon. Within nine days, the United States put its name to two texts pointing in opposite directions. The first is the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, signed remotely by the US and Iran on June 17, its name inherited from the failed talks in Pakistan. Its 14 points open with a demand for the immediate end of hostilities, explicitly including Lebanon, and the restoration of Lebanese sovereignty. Iran's regime intended this opening clause as a deed of eviction: Israel out of southern Lebanon, Hezbollah preserved, the situation frozen in the Islamist militia's favor. The second document, the Trilateral Framework Agreement signed by the US, Lebanon and Israel at the State Department on June 26, says something Iran's mullahs cannot accept and apparently did not see coming.

A memorandum of understanding is, in diplomatic practice, a statement of intent. It binds no one. It announces a direction and leaves the obligations for later, which is why exhausted powers reach for it, buying the language of peace at the price of nothing concrete. Iran understood this and pocketed the first clause as a guarantee. What it could not foresee was that the operational follow-on would be drafted by a different hand, answering to a different policy, and that the second text would gut the first without ever formally repudiating it.

The Trilateral Framework signed in Washington is not a memorandum. It is an implementation accord among Israel, Lebanon, and the United States, with Washington as guarantor of a sequenced and verifiable process. Where the Islamabad MOU treated Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon as the precondition, the Trilateral Framework inverts the order. The Lebanese Armed Forces will assume control of two pilot zones; Hezbollah is to be disarmed and its infrastructure dismantled; only upon verified disarmament does Israel progressively redeploy. A Military Coordination Group, facilitated by the United States, will supervise the mechanism. Hezbollah is not a party to any of it. Its weapons and infrastructure are the objects.

Consider what each document asks of the same actor. The Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding tells Iran that Hezbollah survives and Israel leaves. The Trilateral Framework says that Hezbollah disarms and that, until it does, Israel stays in Lebanon. The Washington framework carries a verification schedule, a coordination body, and an American signature on the operational page. The Islamabad MOU was the consolation Iran was permitted to believe and has no mechanism behind it at all.

A division of labor inside the Trump administration was deployed, and not concealed. The negotiations with Iran were led by Vice President JD Vance, who never wanted this war and made no secret of his wish to end it cheaply. He produced the Islamabad MOU, the paper Iran's regime wanted to hear. The Lebanon framework was created by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has spent his career treating Iran's proxy network as a threat to be dismantled rather than soothed. One man offered Iran the vocabulary of relief. The other wrote the document that conditions every concession on the disarmament of Iran's most valuable proxy.

Hezbollah understood the trap faster than its patron. The day after the Washington signing, Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem declared the framework null and void, and insisted that the first article of the Islamabad MOU (Israel's withdrawal) be implemented in its place. No amount of trilateral architecture, Qassem argued, could override the text Iran had secured. The terrorist militia that called the MOU a "gift of honour, dignity, and strength" now calls the Lebanon framework "a 'humiliating' and 'shameful' surrender" -- the most candid judgment the document has drawn.

The Israeli reading was equally direct. At the signing, Israel's Ambassador to the US, Yechiel Leiter, compressed the whole maneuver into a line: in this performance-based framework, Iran is out, Hezbollah is out, and the road between Israel and Lebanon is open. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was blunter, saying that Israel will remain in the security zone in southern Lebanon until Hezbollah is disarmed and the threat it poses to Israel is removed. His message to Iran was that it will have no foothold in Lebanon, neither it nor its proxy militia. That is not the language of a power that has agreed to leave.

None of this means the matter is settled. A framework is a sequence, not a fact, and sequences in Lebanon have a long record of stalling at the first zone. A report in the Jerusalem Post makes plain how modest the initial withdrawal is and how much depends on the Lebanese Armed Forces being tasked with disarming a militia that is stronger than the state. Hezbollah retains the power to make the "pilot zones" ungovernable, and Iran retains the power to reopen the file the moment American attention drifts. The contradiction between the two papers has not been resolved. It has been postponed, on terms favorable to Jerusalem.

The structure of the arrangement deserves to be seen plainly because it explains why the satisfaction in Iran curdled so quickly. Iran negotiated the Islamabad MOU and believed it had won the war. It discovered that the Trilateral Framework, the only binding document, the one with mechanisms, was written to ensure the opposite. This was not a single masterstroke and should not be sold as one. It was the older and colder craft of letting an adversary invest its hopes in the weaker instrument while the stronger one is prepared in the next room.

Whether this holds will be decided not in Washington but in the Lebanese villages south of the Litani River, where a terrorist militia that answers to Iran is being told to surrender the weapons that are its reason for existing. The framework can be enforced, or it can be evaded. What can no longer be claimed is that the United States agreed to Iran's terms. It agreed to a paper that said so, and signed another that did not, and handed the second to the man who meant it.

Pierre Rehov, who holds a law degree from Paris-Assas, is a French reporter, novelist and documentary filmmaker. He is the author of six novels, including "Beyond Red Lines", "The Third Testament" and "Red Eden", translated from French. His latest essay on the aftermath of the October 7 massacre " 7 octobre - La riposte " became a bestseller in France. As a filmmaker, he has produced and directed 17 documentaries, many photographed at high risk in Middle Eastern war zones, and focusing on terrorism, media bias, and the persecution of Christians. His latest documentary, "Pogrom(s)" highlights the context of ancient Jew hatred within Muslim civilization as the main force behind the October 7 massacre.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22661/iran-mou-lebanon-framework

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Israel sanctions IRGC-linked crypto accounts funneling millions to Hezbollah, other proxies - Jerusalem Post Staff

by Jerusalem Post Staff

These funds, totaling approximately NIS 24 million, were used to fund various Iranian terror proxies, including Hezbollah.

An illustrative image of Iran and Hezbollah's flags.

(photo credit: hapelinium/Shutterstock)

Defense Minister Israel Katz has issued sanctions against 37 cryptocurrency wallets associated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, his office announced on Wednesday.

These funds, totaling approximately NIS 24 million, were used to fund various Iranian terror proxies, including Hezbollah. Further investigation uncovered the fact that tens of millions of dollars were funneled to terror organizations through these crypto wallets over the past several years.

"The campaign against Iran is not only being waged on the battlefield - but also in the fight for the money that drives terrorism," Katz said.

"Every dollar that is kept from the IRGC is a dollar that will not reach Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis and Iran’s terrorist proxies. We will continue to target all the financing routes of the Iranian terrorist axis, everywhere and by any means.”

US imposes sanctions targeting Iran's covert 'shadow banking' financial network

This comes several weeks after the US launched Operation Economic Fury, which aimed to disrupt Iran's shadow banking networks and has frozen nearly half a billion dollars' worth of cryptocurrency linked to Iran's regime.

Defense Minister Israel Katz attends a conference at Binyanei HaUma (Jerusalem International Convention Center) in Jerusalem, June 17, 2026. (credit: OREN BEN HAKOON/FLASH90)

Iranian "shadow banking" networks allow the regime to evade sanctions, despite the US "maximum pressure" campaign against the Islamic Republic, according to the US State Department.

Most US Treasury sanctions are imposed on individuals, companies, and other entities that are added to its Specially Designated Nationals List, which contains tens of thousands of designees that are cut off from the dollar-based financial system and see assets frozen. Anyone who transacts with designated entities risks being sanctioned themselves.

"To sharpen national security outcomes, Treasury is tailoring our sanctions program for the 21st century. We are reviewing outdated and obsolete designations to help financial institutions focus on the most sophisticated terrorist financing and sanctions evasion schemes," US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Reuters in May.