Why California Politicians Will Keep Drawing Their Own Election Districts

BY SAMEEA KAMAL

SACRAMENTO (CAL MATTERS

IN SUMMARY

Gov. Newsom vetoed the most sweeping bill to require cities and counties to create independent redistricting commissions. He cited budget concerns, but the bill’s supporters aren’t convinced.

California’s push to have independent panels — not politicians — draw election districts has floundered into a more piecemeal approach.

Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed the most ambitious bill passed by state lawmakers, Assembly Bill 1248, which called for independent redistricting commissions in every city and county across the state with more than 300,000 residents, and every school or community college district with more than 500,000.

He also blocked Senate Bill 52, requiring independent panels in large charter cities, which would have applied to the scandal-plagued Los Angeles City Council. It appoints some members of the existing redistricting commission, and last year, a leaked recording revealed city councilmembers strategizing, in a conversation packed with racist comments, about how to get lines drawn in their favor.

Newsom did sign two less sweeping redistricting bills that authors put forth in case the broader effort failed, but supporters were still bitterly disappointed.

“In Los Angeles we need an independent and unbiased commission to help mend the lack of trust between the community and its government,” Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, a Culver City Democrat and author of AB 1248, and Sen. María Elena Durazo, a Los Angeles Democrat and author of SB 52, said in a joint statement. “We will continue to do work to keep communities whole and allow communities to choose their elected representatives, rather than the elected officials choosing their voters.”

In his Oct. 7 veto message for AB 1248, Newsom said he shared the “goal of ensuring community control over the redistricting process.”

But he cited budget uncertainty, saying the bill would create a “state-reimbursable mandate in the tens of millions and should therefore be considered in the annual budget process.”

Common Cause, a good government group and sponsor of AB 1248, noted in a press release, however, that the bill’s cost wouldn’t be a factor in the state budget until closer to the next census in 2030, which kicks off the next round of redistricting.

“We’re deeply confused and frustrated, why the governor would choose to veto a proven democracy reform that provided California an opportunity to not just eliminate gerrymandering in the state but also lead the nation in pro-democracy reform,” Jonathan Mehta Stein, executive director for California Common Cause, told CalMatters. “It’s an enormous missed opportunity.”

Newsom did sign AB 764, the fail-safe measure also introduced by Bryan and sponsored by Common Cause that seeks to address ambiguities in current redistricting laws regardless of who does the mapping, such as explicitly banning consideration of incumbency, and increasing standards for public engagement.

He also signed SB 314, by Sacramento Democratic Sen. Angelique Ashby, that establishes a citizens redistricting commission for the Sacramento County board of supervisors, and AB 34, by Anaheim Democratic Assemblymember Avelino Valencia, that creates a similar commission in Orange County.

The two counties join a handful of others that are either required by previous state laws or have chosen to do redistricting through an independent panel. In Los Angeles, there’s also an effort by a city council committee to establish an independent redistricting commission through a measure on the November 2024 ballot. And in San Francisco, where chaos over map drawing was brought on by what some called a “toxic political culture,” there’s an effort to bring the city’s independent redistricting commission — established prior to the state version — up to date with best practices.

Redistricting is the process of redrawing election maps after every Census to make sure each district has about the same number of people, ensuring no one’s vote gets diluted. A statewide independent commission has drawn state Senate, state Assembly and U.S. House districts since 2010, taking that power from the Legislature, so they could no longer draw their own districts. But bringing independent panels to local redistricting has been a start and stop process.

In 2019, Newsom vetoed a bill by Redondo Beach Democratic Sen. Ben Allen that would have required counties with more than 400,000 residents to set up independent redistricting commissions. His reason for vetoing the bill then was that local jurisdictions were already allowed to establish independent commissions, and that it should be considered in the budget process.

“We are left just flabbergasted that the governor continues to make this baffling choice,” Mehta Stein said.

“The forces that have been fighting against voting rights and against redistricting reform have been pouring money into that effort for decades. And the pro-democracy side of the argument has to be willing to put its money where its mouth is. We can’t build a better, more inclusive democracy for free. It will cost money and it’s worth it.”

But for some, the veto of AB 1248 was a win.

The California State Association of Counties, Rural County Representatives of California and Urban Counties of California opposed the bill unless amended, because they were concerned about the resources the bill would require.

Patrick Blacklock, president and CEO of the Rural County Representatives of California said the mandate should only happen with a corresponding budget allocation.

“Without this kind of support, we are concerned that counties will be set up for failure, and such a failure would only serve to validate public distrust in the redistricting process and in our democratic systems that are already under intense public scrutiny,” Blacklock said in a statement to CalMatters.

Michael Li, senior counsel for the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program, said that the veto wasn’t necessarily surprising since redistricting can be a controversial and sensitive subject — especially at the local level. But he did find Newsom’s reason for the veto surprising.

Still, while the lawmakers and sponsors haven’t said whether they’ll try to reintroduce the bills next session, Li noted that it took multiple tries to get an independent redistricting commission at the state level, too.

“Independent commissions are the wave of the future,” he said. “Even though these bills failed, I don’t think this will be the end of efforts to mandate stronger, better systems.”

“California has provided a lot of evidence that, if they’re well designed, they do work and do improve representation and results for voters — particularly for voters who haven’t had a seat at the table.”

-----------------CAL MATTERS

French Troops Are Starting To Withdraw From Niger And Junta Leaders Give UN Head 72 Hours To Leave

FILE - With the headquarters of the ruling party burning in the back, supporters of Niger’s ruling junta demonstrate in Niamey, Niger, on July 27, 2023. The French troops being forced out of Niger were seen as a key line of decadelong defense amid efforts led by the West, particularly U.S. and France, to fight against jihadi violence in Africa’s hard-hit Sahel region.. (AP Photo/Fatahoulaye Hassane Midou, File)

BY SAM MEDNICK

COTONOU, BENIN (AP) — French troops have started leaving Niger more than two months after mutinous soldiers toppled the African country’s democratically elected president, the military said Wednesday.

More than 100 troops left in two flights from the capital Niamey on Tuesday in the first of what will be several rounds of departures between now and the end of the year, said French military spokesman, Col. Pierre Gaudilliere. All are returning to France, he said.

Niger’s state television broadcast images of a convoy leaving a base in Ouallam in the north, saying it was bound for neighboring Chad, to the east.

The departure comes weeks after French President Emmanuel Macron announced that France will end its military presence in Niger and pull its ambassador out of the country as a result of the coup that removed President Mohamed Bazoum in late July. Some 1,500 French troops have been operating in Niger, training its military and conducting joint operations.

Also Tuesday, the junta gave the United Nations resident coordinator in Niger, Louise Aubin, 72 hours to leave the country, according to a statement from the Foreign Ministry. The junta cited “underhanded maneuvers” by the U.N. secretary-general to prevent its full participation in last month’s General Assembly in New York as one of the reasons.

The military rulers had wanted Niger’s former ambassador to the United Nations, Bakary Yaou Sangare, who was made foreign minister after the coup, to speak on its behalf at the General Assembly. However, Bakary did not receive credentials to attend after the deposed Nigerien government’s foreign minister sent the world body a letter “informing of the end of functions of Mr. Bakary as permanent representative of Niger to the United Nations,” said U.N. spokesman, Stephane Dujarric.

The U.N. did not immediately respond about the junta’s demand for Aubin to leave.

Since seizing power, Niger’s military leaders have leveraged anti-French sentiment among the population against its former colonial ruler and said the withdrawal signals a new step towards its sovereignty.

The United States has formally declared that the ousting of Bazoum was a coup, suspending hundreds of millions of dollars in aid as well as military assistance and training.

Niger was seen by many in the West as the last country in Africa’s Sahel region — the vast expanse south of the Sahara Desert — that could be partnered with to beat back a growing jihadi insurgency linked to al-Qaida and the Islamic State group. French troops have already been ousted by military regimes in neighboring Mali and Burkina Faso, which are seeing a surge in attacks.

Analysts warn that France’s withdrawal will leave a security vacuum that extremists could exploit.

“French forces might not have defeated these groups, but at least disrupted and limited their activities, said said Rida Lyammouri, senior fellow at the Policy Center for the New South, a Moroccan-based think tank.

With the French out of the picture, these will likely “expand to areas where French forces were providing support to Nigerien forces, especially on the borders with Mali and Burkina Faso,” Lyammouri said.

Violence has already spiked since the coup. In the month after the junta seized power, violence primarily linked to the extremists soared by more than 40%, according to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project.

Jihadi attacks targeting civilians quadrupled in August, compared with the month before, and attacks against security forces spiked in the Tillaberi region, killing at least 40 soldiers, the project reported.

Associated Press writer Angela Charlton in Paris contributed to his report.

Spicy Food Might Burn In The Moment, But It Likely Won’t Harm Your Health In The Long Term

BY PAUL D. TERRY

Everyone has a different tolerance for spicy food — some love the burn, while others can’t take the heat. But the scientific consensus on whether spicy food can have an effect — positive or negative — on your health is pretty mixed.

In September 2023, a 14-year-old boy died after consuming a spicy pepper as part of the viral “one chip challenge.” The Paqui One Chip Challenge uses Carolina Reaper and Naga Viper peppers, which are among the hottest peppers in the world.

While the boy’s death is still under examination by health officials, it has gotten some of the spicy chips being used in these challenges removed from stores.

As an epidemiologist, I’m interested in how spicy food can affect people’s health and potentially worsen symptoms associated with chronic diseases like inflammatory bowel disease. I am also interested in how diet, including spicy foods, can increase or decrease a person’s lifespan.

The allure of spicy food

Spicy food can refer to food with plenty of flavor from spices, such as Asian curries, Tex-Mex dishes or Hungarian paprikash. It can also refer to foods with noticeable heat from capsaicin, a chemical compound found to varying degrees in hot peppers.

As the capsaicin content of a pepper increases, so does its ranking on the Scoville scale, which quantifies the sensation of being hot.

Capsaicin tastes hot because it activates certain biological pathways in mammals – the same pathways activated by hot temperatures. The pain produced by spicy food can provoke the body to release endorphins and dopamine. This release can prompt a sense of relief or even a degree of euphoria.

In the U.S., the U.K. and elsewhere, more people than ever are consuming spicy foods, including extreme pepper varieties.

Hot-pepper-eating contests and similar “spicy food challenges” aren’t new, although spicy food challenges have gotten hotter – in terms of spice level and popularity on social media.

Short-term health effects

The short-term effects of consuming extremely spicy foods range from a pleasurable sensation of heat to an unpleasant burning sensation across the lips, tongue and mouth. These foods can also cause various forms of digestive tract discomfort, headaches and vomiting.

If spicy foods are uncomfortable to eat, or cause unpleasant symptoms like migraines, abdominal pain and diarrhea, then it’s probably best to avoid those foods. Spicy food may cause these symptoms in people with inflammatory bowel diseases, for example.

Spicy food challenges notwithstanding, for many people across the world, consumption of spicy food is part of a long-term lifestyle influenced by geography and culture.

For example, hot peppers grow in hot climates, which may explain why many cultures in these climates use spicy foods in their cooking. Some research suggests that spicy foods help control foodborne illnesses, which may also explain cultural preferences for spicy foods.

Lack of consensus

Nutritional epidemiologists have been studying the potential risks and benefits of long-term spicy food consumption for many years. Some of the outcomes examined in relation to spicy food consumption include obesity, cardiovascular disease, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, heartburn and ulcers, psychological health, pain sensitivity and death from any cause – also called all-cause mortality.

These studies report mixed results, with some outcomes like heartburn more strongly linked to spicy food consumption. As can be expected with an evolving science, some experts are more certain about some of these health effects than others.

For example, some experts state with confidence that spicy food does not cause stomach ulcers, whereas the association with stomach cancer isn’t as clear.

When taking heart disease, cancer and all other causes of death in a study population into consideration, does eating spicy food increase or decrease the risk of early death?

Right now, the evidence from large population-based studies suggests that spicy food does not increase the risk of all-cause mortality among a population and may actually decrease the risk.

However, when considering the results of these studies, keep in mind that what people eat is one part of a larger set of lifestyle factors – such as physical activity, relative body weight and consumption of tobacco and alcohol – that also have health consequences.

It’s not easy for researchers to measure diet and lifestyle factors accurately in a population-based study, at least in part because people don’t always remember or report their exposure accurately. It often takes numerous studies conducted over many years to reach a firm conclusion about how a dietary factor affects a certain aspect of health.

Scientists still don’t entirely know why so many people enjoy spicy foods while others do not, although there is plenty of speculation regarding evolutionary, cultural and geographic factors, as well as medical, biological and psychological ones.

One thing experts do know, however, is that humans are one of the only animals that will intentionally eat something spicy enough to cause them pain, all for the sake of pleasure.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Why More School Counselors And Psychologists Alone Won’t Solve America’s Mental Health Crisis Among Students

THE CONVERSATION

One-on-one time with school counselors and psychologists can be hard to come by in schools with high student-to-counselor ratios. 10'000 Hours

BY JONI WILLIAMS SPLETT

Of all the challenges that threaten the well-being of America’s schoolchildren, one of the most serious and severe is the lack of school counselors and school psychologists. Despite the increased demand for their services, there’s simply not enough professionals in these fields to go around.

For instance, the American School Counselor Association recommends that there be one school counselor for every 250 students. However, in the 2021-22 school year – the most recent year for which data are available – the ratio of school counselors to students was one for every 408 students.

Similarly, the National Association of School Psychologists recommends one school psychologist for every 500 students. But the ratio of school psychologists to students stands at just one for every 1,127 students.

The Biden administration is well aware of the shortage and has taken action to close the gap.

For instance, in 2021, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy issued an advisory that calls for, among other things, expanding the mental health workforce in schools by using federal, state and local funds.

President Joe Biden released a Mental Health Strategy in 2022 that seeks to provide mental health care to more children. And in May 2023, the Biden administration announced US$286 million for 264 grantees to train and hire school mental health professionals – a move that grantees say will enable them to prepare more than 14,000 new mental health professionals for America’s schools. That’s a significant number, but schools would need to hire more than five times that amount to meet recommended ratios.

As a professor of school psychology – and as a recipient of one of those grants – I also know that as important as it is to train more school counselors and school psychologists, increasing their numbers alone is not enough to change the course of the rising mental health needs among America’s children and youth. That is, doubling staffing of mental health professionals in schools doesn’t guarantee they will be used effectively or appropriately. Without accompanying changes to school systems and priorities, I fear the mental health needs among our youth will continue to accelerate, as it did during the pandemic.

To address this challenge, I see three areas where schools need to revamp the way they meet students’ mental health needs.

1. Free up school counselors and school psychologists


Research, including my own, shows that school-based mental health professionals are overwhelmed with job duties that are outside the scope of supporting students’ mental health. For instance, school counselors also serve as the testing coordinators in most schools.

School psychologists report being overloaded with evaluations to determine if students are eligible for special education services. About one-third of those responding to a recent membership survey of the National Association of School Psychologists indicated they don’t provide mental health interventions and services at all.

These school counselors and school psychologists report that about 25% to 50% of their day is consumed with paperwork and other miscellaneous duties. Constantly working outside their areas of expertise and desired practice is leading to burnout that leads many to leave the field.

To alleviate the situation, schools could search for ways to shift tasks that don’t require specialized knowledge, such as test coordination and certain types of paper work, to staff with less extensive and expensive training.

This would allow current school mental health practitioners – and the additional 14,000 the Biden administration hopes to bring into the field – to engage in the wider range of services their students need. This could be a way to better align their practice with the recommendations of their professional associations and potentially lead to more job satisfaction and less burnout.

2. Make time for mental health in schools

In my work with school districts across the Southeast, mental health professionals are being hired but then restricted to working with kids only during the student’s lunchtime or certain classes, such as art, music or physical education. Although I don’t advocate for children missing class, I also don’t think it’s a good idea for children to work on self-regulation strategies or investigate negative belief patterns while eating a hot dog or missing their favorite extracurricular. It also limits the number of students any one professional can support during a school day.

Some schools around the world have extended the school day. Some in the U.S. have moved to a year-round schedule with positive effects, such as improved achievement scores for students from low-income and minority backgrounds. Perhaps by rethinking the school day and the school year, more school time could be made for mental health professionals to take a holistic approach to all the areas a child may need instruction and support.

3. Prioritize prevention

Prioritizing prevention includes promoting a positive school climate and teaching healthy habits for maintaining one’s mental well-being to all youth. A positive school climate – including social, emotional and physical safety, respectful behavior, an emphasis on learning, and social connectedness with peers and teachers – is shown to reduce risky behaviors and aggression. It also increases positive mental health outcomes and academic success.

Teaching life skills, like being aware of one’s own and other people’s emotions, what’s causing the emotions, how to manage them in healthy ways and where to seek help, has also been shown to prevent the development and escalation of mental illness among children and youth.

There are evidence-based curricula that schools can use to teach and reinforce these skills. For example, Positive Action is designed to teach pre-K-to-12th grade students how their thoughts, feelings and behaviors are related. It is taught in classrooms by teachers for about 15 minutes, three to four days each week, for an entire school year.

There is evidence of large to moderate effects of Positive Action in elementary schools on student mental health, behavior and academic achievement. If these prevention strategies were prioritized in policy and funding, I believe America’s schools and school mental health professionals would be better positioned to more systematically address the unrelenting rise of children’s mental health needs.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

The Gaza Strip − Why The History Of The Densely Populated Enclave Is Key To Understanding The Current Conflict

BY MAHAR NASAR

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR 

SCHOOL OF MIDDLE EASTERN AND NORTH AFRICAN STUDIES

UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

The focus on conflict in the Middle East has again returned to the Gaza Strip, with Israel’s defense minister ordering a “complete siege” of the Palestinian enclave.

The military operation, which involves extensive bombing of residences, follows a surprise attack on Oct. 7, 2023, by Hamas militants who infiltrated Israel from Gaza and killed more than 900 Israelis. In reprisal airstrikes, the Israel military has killed over 800 Gazans. And that figure could escalate in the coming days. Meanwhile, an order to cut off all food, electricity and water to Gaza will only worsen the plight of residents in what has been called the “world’s largest open-air prison.”

But how did Gaza become one of the most densely populated parts of the planet? And why is it the home to militant Palestinian action now? As a scholar of Palestinian history, I believe understanding the answers to those questions provides crucial historical context to the current violence.

A brief history of Gaza

The Gaza Strip is a narrow piece of land on the southeastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea. Roughly twice the size of Washington, D.C., it is wedged between Israel to its north and east and Egypt to its south.

An ancient trade and sea port, Gaza has long been part of the geographic region known as Palestine. By the early 20th century, it was mainly inhabited by Muslim and Christian Arabs who lived under Ottoman rule. When Britain took control of Palestine following World War I, intellectuals in Gaza joined the emergent Palestinian national movement.

During the 1948 war that established the state of Israel, the Israeli military bombed 29 villages in southern Palestine, leading tens of thousands of villagers to flee to the Gaza Strip, under the control of the Egyptian army that were deployed after Israel declared independence. Most of them and their descendants remain there today.

Following the 1967 Six-Day War between Israel and its Arab neighbors, the Gaza Strip came under Israeli military occupation. The occupation has resulted in “systematic human rights violations,” according to rights group Amnesty International, including forcing people off their land, destroying homes and crushing even nonviolent forms of political dissent.

Palestinians staged two major uprisings, in 1987-1991 and in 2000-2005, hoping to end the occupation and establish an independent Palestinian state.

Hamas, a Palestinian Islamist militant group centered in Gaza, was founded in 1988 to fight against the Israeli occupation. Hamas and other militant groups launched repeated attacks on Israeli targets in Gaza, leading to Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2005. In 2006, Palestinian legislative elections were held. Hamas beat its secular rival, Fatah, which had been widely accused of corruption. Elections haven’t been held in Gaza since 2006, but polling from March 2023 found that 45% of Gazans would back Hamas should there be a vote, ahead of Fatah at 32%.

After a brief conflict between Hamas and Fatah militants in May 2007, Hamas took complete control of the Gaza Strip. Since then, Gaza has been under the administrative control of Hamas, even though it is still considered to be under Israeli occupation by the United Nations, the U.S. State Department and other international bodies.

Who are the Palestinians of Gaza?

The more than 2 million inhabitants of the Gaza Strip are part of the 14 million-strong global Palestinian community. About one third of Gaza’s inhabitants trace their family’s roots to land inside the Gaza Strip. The remaining two-thirds are refugees from the 1948 war and their descendants, many of whom hail from towns and villages surrounding Gaza.

The Palestinians of Gaza trend young: nearly half the population is under 18. The enclave is also very poor, with a poverty rate that stands at 53%.

Despite this grim economic picture, education levels are quite high. Over 95% of Gazan children ages 6-12 are in school. The majority of Palestinian students in Gaza graduate from high school, and 57% of students at the prestigious Islamic University of Gaza are female.

But because of the circumstances of their surroundings, young Palestinians in Gaza find it difficult to live fulfilling lives. For graduates between the ages of 19 and 29, the unemployment rate stands at 70%. And a World Bank survey earlier this year found 71% of Gazans show signs of depression and high levels of PTSD.

There are several factors that contribute to these conditions. A major factor is the crippling, 16-year blockade that Israel and Egypt – with U.S. support – have imposed on Gaza.

Years of blockade

Shortly after the 2006 elections, the Bush administration tried to force Hamas from power and bring in a rival leader from the Fatah party who was considered friendlier to Israel and the U.S. Hamas preempted the coup and took full control of Gaza in May 2007. In response, Israel and Egypt – with U.S. and European support – closed the border crossings into and out of the Gaza Strip and imposed a land, air and sea blockade.

The blockade, which is still in effect, limits the import of food, fuel and construction material; limits how far Gaza’s fishermen can go out to sea; bans almost all exports; and imposes strict limitations on the movement of people into and out of Gaza. In 2023, Israel has allowed only around 50,000 people a month to exit Gaza, according to U.N. figures.

The years of closure have devastated the lives of Palestinians in Gaza. Inhabitants there don’t have enough water for drinking and sanitation. They face electricity cuts that run 12 to 18 hours each day. Without adequate water and electricity, Gaza’s fragile health care system is “on the brink of collapse,” according to the medical rights group Medical Aid for Palestine.

These restrictions hit the young and the weak of Gaza particularly hard. Israel routinely denies sick patients the permits they need to receive medical care outside of Gaza. Bright students with scholarships to study abroad often find that they are unable to leave.

U.N. experts say this blockade is illegal under international law. They argue that the blockade amounts to a collective punishment of the Palestinians of Gaza, a violation of the Hague Convention and the Geneva Conventions that form the backbone of international law.

No end to the suffering

Israel says that the blockade on Gaza is necessary to secure the safety of its population and will be lifted when Hamas renounces violence, recognizes Israel and abides by previous agreements.

But Hamas has consistently rejected this ultimatum. Instead, militant fighters stepped up the firing of homemade rockets and mortars into populated areas surrounding the Gaza Strip in 2008, seeking to pressure Israel to lift the blockade. They have sporadically attacked Israel in this way in the years since.

Israel has launched four major military assaults on Gaza – in 2008-09, 2012, 2014 and 2021 – in efforts to destroy Hamas’ military capabilities. Those wars killed 4,000 Palestinians, more than half of whom were civilians, along with 106 people in Israel.

During that time, the U.N. estimates that there has been more than $5 billion worth of damage to Gaza’s homes, agriculture, industry, electricity and water infrastructure.

Each of those wars ended in a fragile cease-fire but no real resolution to the conflict. Israel seeks to deter Hamas from launching rockets. Hamas and other militant groups say that even when they have upheld previous cease-fires, Israel has continued to attack Palestinians and has refused to lift the blockade.

Hamas has offered a long-term truce in exchange for Israel ending the blockade on Gaza. Israel has refused to accept the offer, sticking to its position that Hamas must first end violence and recognize Israel.

In the months leading up to the latest escalation, conditions in Gaza have deteriorated even further. The International Monetary Fund reported in September that Gaza’s economic outlook “remains dire.” Conditions became more dire when Israel announced on Sept. 5, 2023, that it was halting all exports from a key Gaza border crossing.

Without an end in sight to the suffering caused by the blockade, it appears that Hamas has decided to upend the status quo in a surprise attack on Israelis, including civilians. Israel’s reprisal airstrikes and its imposition of a “complete siege” on the strip have heaped even further suffering on ordinary Gazans.

It is a tragic reminder that civilians bear the brunt of this conflict.

Liberian President George Weah Seeks A Second Term In A Rematch With His Main Challenger From 2017

Liberia President George Weah arrives to attend the Paris Peace Forum in Paris, France, Nov. 11, 2021...(AP Photo/Chrostophe Ena, File)

BY MARK N. MENGONFIA AND CHINEDU ASADU

MONROVIA, LIBERIA (AP) — Liberian President George Weah is seeking a second term in office Tuesday, hoping that his efforts to pave roads, build hospitals and bring electricity to more areas will win votes despite growing economic hardships in the West African nation.

He faces a crowded field of 19 challengers, led by his main rival from the last election in 2017, Joseph Boakai, who served as vice president under Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Africa’s first democratically elected female leader.

Weah, 57, a former international soccer star, cast his ballot with his wife and son at an elementary school in Paynesville city.

“Liberians are exercising their democracy rights. ... It is the Liberian people’s election and they will decide who becomes their president,” he said.

Boakai has campaigned on promises to rescue Liberia from what he calls Weah’s failed leadership, dubbing himself and his running mate “Rescue 1” and “Rescue 2.”

“We are all excited and optimistic about what is now a national call to rally citizens of this great country for a rescue mission to reverse the hardships so many Liberians and their families have been subjected to,” Boakai said during a recent stop at the Antoinette Tubman Stadium.

Weah has been accused of not living up to key campaign promises that he would fight corruption and ensure justice for victims of the country’s brutal back-to-back civil wars that killed an estimated 250,000 people between 1989 and 2003.

He obtained 61.5% of the total votes cast in 2017, while Boakai received 38.5% though it remains to be seen whether the incumbent can coast to a similar victory this time. Liberia’s 2.47 million eligible voters are also casting ballots for legislative elections Tuesday.

“Weah’s political position going into the vote is not assessed as being stronger than it was in 2017, given the mixed performance during his first tenure,” said Zoe McCathie, a political and security analyst at Africa-focused Signal Risk Consulting. “While some policies such as free higher education for public universities have proven popular, Weah has largely failed to effectively combat corruption and improve the economy, as he had promised when first elected, causing some support to wane.”

Already election-related violence has claimed two lives in Foya, located in Lofa county. Ruling party and opposition candidates have blamed each other for the Sept. 29 clashes.

Liberia began as a settlement for freed slaves from the United States in 1822, but declared itself an independent nation 25 years later. Liberia’s flag, constitution, form of government and many laws are modeled on those of the U.S. The capital is named in honor of America’s fifth president, James Monroe, who was in power when the freed slaves were repatriated.

Weah rode into power six years ago in the first democratic transfer of power in the West African nation since the end of the civil wars amid high hopes brought by his promise to fight poverty and stir infrastructural development in Africa’s oldest republic. His goal, he had said in 2017, was to push Liberia from a low-income country to a middle-income one.

But his government is perceived by many to have performed below expectations, especially in the management of the economy, which contracted in two of the six years he has been in office, with the rate of economic growth in decline since 2021.

It’s been “turmoil”, to create business, said Seah J. Trustmo, a voter. “It has been hard, very, very hard,” she said.

Corruption continues to stifle Liberia’s growth and many people will look to use the vote to show their concerns, analysts say. Research network Afrobarometer’s 2023 surveys found that large numbers of Liberians say corruption in the country has increased during the past year and the government is doing a poor job of fighting it.

In a country where at least one in two citizens are in poverty according to multiple measures, Weah faces accusations of mismanaging government funds. Between November and December last year, he was out of the country for seven weeks touring several countries, including Qatar where he watched his son play in the U.S. football team at the World Cup.

Protests have also been rampant under Weah and analysts have raised concerns about the likelihood of another round of demonstrations if the electoral process is flawed. While the campaigns have been largely peaceful, there have been pockets of violence — including this week when violent clashes between opposition and ruling parties’ supporters marred the close of Weah’s campaign rally.

“This popular dissatisfaction (of the government’s performance) will likely be utilized by opposition parties to renew demonstrations in the event of a victory for Weah,” Signal Risk’s McCathie said, before pointing out that political violence following the election is, however, unlikely to pose any risk to Liberia’s political stability.

Weah is still the only African to have won the Ballon d’Or. He played as a forward for Paris Saint-Germain, AC Milan, Chelsea and Manchester City during an 18-year club career. His final appearance for Liberia was in September 2018 when he made a surprise appearance in an exhibition game against Nigeria at the age of 51, a year after he’d been elected president. His 23-year-old son, Tim, now plays for Serie A club Juventus and the U.S. national team.

Asadu reported from Lagos, Nigeria. Associated Press writer Krista Larson in Dakar, Senegal, contributed.

US Begins Delivering Munitions To Israel As The American Death Toll Rises To 11 In Hamas Attacks

Israeli soldiers are seen in a staging ground near the Israeli Gaza border, Southern Israel, Monday, Oct. 9, 2023. (AP Photo/Ohag Zwingenberg)

BY MATTHEW LEE AND TARA COPP

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. has already begun delivering critically needed munitions and military equipment to Israel, and the Pentagon is reviewing inventories to see what else can be sent quickly to boost its ally in the three-day-old war with Hamas, a senior Defense Department official said Monday.

Planes have already taken off, said the official, who declined to provide details on the weapons. The official, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive shipments, also warned that the U.S. is closely watching Hezbollah and other Iranian-backed groups, noting that the decision to shift American ships in the region was to deter any of them from entering or expanding the conflict against Israel.

The weapons movement came as President Joe Biden announced that the U.S. death toll in the war has gone up to 11.

The official said the U.S. is “flooding the zone” with calls and other messages so that extremist groups and other nations know they should not question America’s commitment to supporting the defense of Israel. The official, however, would not comment on whether U.S. military forces would be used at all.

While the official said the U.S. has the ability to support weapons needs in Ukraine and Israel and maintain security for America, the rapid delivery of munitions to the new war has raised concerns.

Congress must pass more funding quickly for the U.S. to be able to give both Israel and Ukraine the weapons and munitions they both now need, Army Secretary Christine Wormuth said Monday.

“The intent is to lean forward in support of Israel,” she said. “But in particular with munitions and the ability to support Israel and Ukraine simultaneously, additional funding is needed to increase our capacity to expand production and then also pay for the munitions themselves.”

It is clear the administration is now facing potentially competing requests from Israel and Ukraine for additional weaponry. And while there is strong bipartisan support in Congress for aid to Israel, the next steps are uncertain, with the House lacking a leader after the ouster of the Republican speaker and the Senate out of town until next week.

Also uncertain is whether the debate over further assistance to Ukraine, which is opposed by a group of hard-right Republicans, will complicate efforts to pass assistance for Israel.

Wormuth, speaking at the annual Association of the United States Army conference in Washington, said the administration is still “in the early stage of the process of evaluating our ability to support what the IDF needs,” referring to the Israel Defense Forces. She did not provide details, but Doug Bush, the Army’s assistant secretary for acquisition, told reporters at the conference that conversations are underway about what the U.S. can provide. He said it likely will be a wide range of equipment, from small arms to sophisticated munitions.

Most of the weaponry sent already to help Ukraine has come from Army stocks and defense contractors at a rate that has challenged the global supply chain, and while the Army has recently ramped up production of some critical lines, such as 155 mm ammunition for howitzers, they are not yet at full speed.

With a new ground offensive in Gaza imminent following the Saturday surprise attack by Hamas, Army officials said Monday they were concerned about the ability to meet additional demand for ground munitions and that Congress needed to act quickly to provide help in time.

In addition to the 11 American citizens whose deaths Biden confirmed, an undetermined number of remain unaccounted for. It was not yet clear if the missing are dead, in hiding, or had been taken hostage.

Biden said the U.S. believes it is likely that American citizens may be among those being held hostage by Hamas, but officials are working to confirm that.

“I have directed my team to work with their Israeli counterparts on every aspect of the hostage crisis, including sharing intelligence and deploying experts from across the United States government to consult with and advise Israeli counterparts on hostage recovery efforts,” Biden said in a statement.

The attack by Hamas and Israel’s response have left more than 1,100 dead and thousands wounded on both sides.

In the aftermath of the Hamas attack, the White House has asked Senate leaders to fast track confirmation of President Joe Biden’s nominee to be the next ambassador to Israel, former Obama-era Treasury Secretary and White House chief of staff Jack Lew, according to a U.S. official who was not authorized to comment publicly and requested anonymity. The White House has received assurances that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will push forward hearings for Lew, the official added.

The U.S. is currently without an ambassador after the departure of Ambassador Tom Nides in July. Biden nominated Lew in September.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Sunday he has ordered the Ford carrier strike group to sail to the Eastern Mediterranean to be ready to assist Israel. The USS Gerald R. Ford, the Navy’s newest and most advanced aircraft carrier, and its approximately 5,000 sailors and deck of warplanes will be accompanied by cruisers and destroyers in a show of force that is meant to be ready to respond to anything, from possibly interdicting additional weapons from reaching Hamas and conducting surveillance.

The senior Defense Department official said worries about Hezbollah opening a second front of violence against Israel was the main reason for moving the ships to the Eastern Mediterranean. The official said the U.S. is deeply concerned Hezbollah and other Iranian-backed groups will make the wrong decision to try to “pile on” and widen the war.

Along with the Ford, the U.S. is sending the cruiser USS Normandy and destroyers USS Thomas Hudner, USS Ramage, USS Carney, and USS Roosevelt, and the U.S. is augmenting Air Force F-35, F-15, F-16, and A-10 fighter aircraft squadrons in the region.

The Norfolk, Virginia-based carrier strike group already was in the Mediterranean. Last week it was conducting naval exercises with Italy in the Ionian Sea. The carrier is in its first full deployment.

Senior officials from the Pentagon and

Senior officials from the Pentagon and State Department briefed senators Sunday night, and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said they were assured that the United States was giving Israel “everything they need.”

Associated Press writer Seung Min Kim contributed to this report.

What Went Wrong? Questions Emerge Over Israel’s Intelligence Prowess After Hamas Attack

Palestinians transport a captured Israeli civilian, center, from Kibbutz Kfar Azza into Gaza Strip on Saturday, October 7, 2023. (AP Photo/Hatem Ali, File)

BY TIA GOLDENBERG

TEL AVIV, ISRAEL (AP) — For Palestinians in Gaza, Israel’s eyes are never very far away. Surveillance drones buzz constantly from the skies. The highly-secured border is awash with security cameras and soldiers on guard. Intelligence agencies work sources and cyber capabilities to draw out a bevy of information.

But Israel’s eyes appeared to have been closed in the lead-up to an unprecedented onslaught by the militant Hamas group, which broke down Israeli border barriers and sent hundreds of militants into Israel to carry out a brazen attack that has killed hundreds and pushed the region toward conflict.

Israel’s intelligence agencies have gained an aura of invincibility over the decades because of a string of achievements. Israel has foiled plots seeded in the West Bank, allegedly hunted down Hamas operatives in Dubai and has been accused of killing Iranian nuclear scientists in the heart of Iran. Even when their efforts have stumbled, agencies like the Mossad, Shin Bet and military intelligence have maintained their mystique.

But the weekend’s assault, which caught Israel off guard on a major Jewish holiday, plunges that reputation into doubt and raises questions about the country’s readiness in the face of a weaker but determined foe. Over 48 hours later, Hamas militants continued to battle Israeli forces inside Israeli territory, and dozens of Israelis were in Hamas captivity in Gaza.

“This is a major failure,” said Yaakov Amidror, a former national security adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “This operation actually proves that the (intelligence) abilities in Gaza were no good.”

Amidror declined to offer an explanation for the failure, saying lessons must be learned when the dust settles.

Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, the chief military spokesman, acknowledged the army owes the public an explanation. But he said now is not the time. “First, we fight, then we investigate,” he said.

Some say it is too early to pin the blame solely on an intelligence fault. They point to a wave of low-level violence in the West Bank that shifted some military resources there and the political chaos roiling Israel over steps by Netanyahu’s far-right government to overhaul the judiciary. The controversial plan has threatened the cohesion of the country’s powerful military.

But the apparent lack of prior knowledge of Hamas’ plot will likely be seen as a prime culprit in the chain of events that led to the deadliest attack against Israelis in decades.

Israel withdrew troops and settlers from the Gaza Strip in 2005, stripping it of a close handle on the happenings in the territory. But even after Hamas overran Gaza in 2007, Israel appeared to maintain its edge, using technological and human intelligence.

It claimed to know the precise locations of Hamas leadership and appeared to prove it through the assassinations of militant leaders in surgical strikes, sometimes while they slept in their bedrooms. Israel has known where to strike underground tunnels used by Hamas to ferry around fighters and arms, destroying miles (kilometers) of the concealed passageways.

Despite those abilities, Hamas was able to keep its plan under wraps. The ferocious attack, which likely took months of planning and meticulous training and involved coordination among multiple militant groups, appeared to have gone under Israel’s intelligence radar.

Amir Avivi, a retired Israeli general, said that without a foothold inside Gaza, Israel’s security services have come to rely increasingly on technological means to gain intelligence. He said militants in Gaza have found ways to evade that technological intelligence gathering, giving Israel an incomplete picture of their intentions.

“The other side learned to deal with our technological dominance and they stopped using technology that could expose it,” said Avivi, who served as a conduit for intelligence materials under a former military chief of staff. Avivi is president and founder of Israel Defense and Security Forum, a hawkish group of former military commanders.

“They’ve gone back to the Stone Age,” he said, explaining that militants weren’t using phones or computers and were conducting their sensitive business in rooms specially guarded from technological espionage or going underground.

But Avivi said the failure extends beyond just intelligence gathering and Israel’s security services failed to put together an accurate picture from the intelligence they were receiving, based on what he said was a misconception surrounding Hamas’ intentions.

Israel’s security establishment has in recent years increasingly seen Hamas as an actor interested in governing, seeking to develop Gaza’s economy and improving the standard of living of Gaza’s 2.3 million people. Avivi and others say the truth is that Hamas, which calls for Israel’s destruction, still sees that aim as its priority.

Israel in recent years has allowed up to 18,000 Palestinian laborers from Gaza to work in Israel, where they can earn a salary about 10 times higher than in the impoverished coastal enclave. The security establishment saw that carrot as a way to maintain relative calm.

“In practice, hundreds if not thousands of Hamas men were preparing for a surprise attack for months, without that having leaked,” wrote Amos Harel, a defense commentator, in the daily Haaretz. “The results are catastrophic.”

Allies who share intelligence with Israel said security agencies were misreading reality.

An Egyptian intelligence official said Egypt, which often serves as a mediator between Israel and Hamas, had spoken repeatedly with the Israelis about “something big,” without elaborating.

He said Israeli officials were focused on the West Bank and played down the threat from Gaza. Netanyahu’s government is made up of supporters of Jewish West Bank settlers who have demanded a security crackdown in the face of a rising tide of violence there over the last 18 months.

“We have warned them an explosion of the situation is coming, and very soon, and it would be big. But they underestimated such warnings,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to discuss the content of sensitive intelligence discussions with the media.

Israel has also been preoccupied and torn apart by Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul plan. Netanyahu had received repeated warnings by his defense chiefs, as well as several former leaders of the country’s intelligence agencies, that the divisive plan was chipping away at the cohesion of the country’s security services.

Martin Indyk, who served as a special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations during the Obama administration, said internal divisions over the legal changes was an aggravating factor that contributed to the Israelis being caught off guard.

“That roiled the IDF in a way that was, I think, we discovered was a huge distraction,” he said.

Associated Press writers Samy Magdy in Cairo and Aamer Madhani in Washington contributed to this report.

Hamas Assault Echoes 1973 Arab-Israeli War – A Shock Attack And Questions Of Political, Intelligence Culpability

A member of the security forces walks past an Israeli police station in Sderot on Oct 8, 2023. Ronaldo Schemidt/AFP via Getty Images

BY DOV WAXMAN

The parallels were striking – and surely not coincidental.

Exactly 50 years and a day after being taken completely off guard by a coordinated military attack by its neighbors – Egypt and Syria – Israel was again caught by surprise.

Early on Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas militants invaded southern Israel by land, sea and air, and fired thousands of rockets deep into the country. Within hours, hundreds of Israelis were killed, hostages taken and war declared. Fierce Israeli reprisals have already taken the lives of hundreds of Palestinians in Gaza, and many more will surely be dead by the time this war is over.

Because war it is. After the Hamas attacks began and the Israeli death toll grew, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared the country is at war, just as it was 50 years ago.

And that is not where the parallels end.

Both wars began with surprise attacks on Jewish holy days. In 1973, it was Yom Kippur, a day of atonement for Jews. This time it was Simchat Torah, when Jews celebrate reading the Torah.

Hamas, the Palestinian militant group in control of the densely populated Gaza Strip that adjoins Israel, seemingly hopes to send the same message that Egypt and Syria delivered in October 1973: They will not accept the status quo, and Israel’s military might will not keep Israelis safe.

The 1973 war proved to be a watershed moment not only in the Arab-Israeli conflict but also for the politics of Israel. Will this war be the same?

Caught flat-footed both times

Certainly, the sudden outbreak of war has again left Israelis deeply shocked, just as it did 50 years ago. This war, like the one in 1973, is already being framed as a colossal intelligence failure.

Although Israeli military intelligence had warned the government that the country’s enemies believed Israel vulnerable, the intelligence establishment did not expect Hamas to attack.

Rather, the intelligence assessment was that Hamas was most interested in governing the Gaza Strip and didn’t want to have a war with Israel, at least not for a while.

The assumption was that Hamas would be deterred from carrying out major attacks in Israel out of fear of Israel’s potential disproportionate retaliation bringing more devastation to Gaza. The enclave, home to 2 million Palestinians, many living in poverty, has still not recovered from the last major round of fighting in May 2021.

Instead, the intelligence establishment, and many analysts, believed that Hamas preferred to export Palestinian violence to the Israeli-occupied West Bank, where it could help to undermine the already weak and unpopular Palestinian Authority, led by Hamas’ political rival.

Their intelligence assessment has proved to be terribly wrong, just as it was prior to the outbreak of the 1973 war. Then, as now, Israel’s adversaries were not deterred by its military superiority.

Israeli intelligence not only misjudged the willingness of adversaries to go to war, but it also failed – both in 1973 and now – to recognize their enemy’s preparations.

This time, that failure is even more glaring given Israel’s extensive and sophisticated intelligence gathering capabilities. Hamas must have been carefully planning this attack for many months, right under Israel’s nose.

This is undoubtedly Israel’s worse intelligence failure since the 1973 war.

But it is not only an intelligence failure, it is also a military failure. The Israel Defense Forces, or IDF, was clearly not prepared for an attack of this magnitude – indeed, most IDF units were deployed in the West Bank.

It is true that IDF’s top brass had repeatedly warned Netanyahu Netanyahu that its military readiness had been diminished by the wave of Israeli reservists refusing to serve in protest of the government’s attempted judicial overhaul. Nonetheless, the IDF was confident that its defensive fortifications – especially the expensive hi-tech barrier that had been built around the Gaza Strip – would prevent Hamas militants from entering Israel, as they had previously done in a May 2021 raid.

But just as the so-called Bar-Lev defensive line along the Suez Canal failed to stop Egyptian soldiers from crossing the canal in 1973, the Gaza barrier did not stop Hamas militants. It was simply circumvented and bulldozed through.

The blame game begins

There will surely be the same blame game after this war as there was after the 1973 war. A commission of inquiry will probably be established, as happened after the 1973 war – the Agranat Commission – which published a scathing report, pointing the finger of blame firmly in the direction of Israel’s military and intelligence establishment.

But it is not Israel’s military and intelligence establishment that deserves most of the blame for this war. It is Israel’s political establishment – above all, Netanyahu, who has led the country since 2009, save for a one-year exception between 2021-2022.

The 1973 war was also due to a political failure, not only an intelligence failure. In fact, it was Israel’s political leadership, chiefly Prime Minister Golda Meir and her defense minister Moshe Dayan, that was primarily to blame because in the years before the war they had spurned diplomatic overtures from Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. The Israeli government was determined to retain parts of the Sinai peninsula – which Israel had captured in the 1967 war – even at the price of peace with Egypt.

Similarly, Netanyahu has ignored recent Egyptian efforts to broker a long-term truce between Israel, Hamas and fellow militant group Palestinian Islamic Jihad. And Israel’s current far-right government prefers to retain the occupied West Bank rather than pursue the possibility of peace with the Palestinians.

Moreover, the Netanyahu government has been preoccupied with its widely unpopular attempt to reduce the power and independence of Israel’s Supreme Court, a move seemingly aimed at removing a potential obstacle to a formal annexation of the West Bank. The domestic turmoil and deep divisions that the proposed judicial overhaul have created in Israel is almost certainly one reason why Hamas decided to attack now.

More broadly, with the latest attack it is clear that Netanyahu’s strategy to contain and deter Hamas has failed catastrophically. It has been catastrophic for Israelis, especially those living in the south of the country, and even more so for Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

Maintaining a blockade of Gaza for 16 years, crippling its economy and effectively imprisoning its 2 million residents, has not brought Hamas to its knees.

Rather, Hamas’ control over Gaza, sustained by repression, has only tightened. Innocent civilians on both sides of the border have paid a high price for this failure.

In the wake of the 1973 war, Meir was forced to resign, and a few years later, the ruling Labor Party – which had been in power, in various guises, since the country’s founding in 1948 – was defeated by Menachem Begin’s right-wing Likud Party in the 1977 general election. This was a watershed moment in Israeli domestic politics that was brought about in large part by the public’s loss of confidence in the then-dominant Labor Party as a result of the 1973 war.

Will history repeat itself this time around? Will this war finally spell the end for Netanyahu and Likud’s long dominance of Israeli politics? Most Israelis have already turned against Netanyahu, repelled by the mix of corruption scandals that surround him, his attempts to downgrade the power of the judiciary and the lurch to the right that his ruling coalition represents.

More Israelis may now do so because this devastating surprise attack surely contradicts any claim by Netanyahu of being Israel’s “Mr. Security”.

Whatever the outcome of this new war and its political repercussions in Israel, it is already clear that its outbreak will be long remembered by Israelis with great sadness and anger, just like the 1973 war still is.

Indeed, it will probably be even more traumatic for Israelis than that war was because while in 1973 it was members of the military bearing the brunt of the surprise assault, this time it is Israeli civilians who have been captured and killed, and on sovereign Israeli territory. In this crucial respect, then, this war is unlike the one in 1973.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

The Israel-Hamas War: No Matter Who Loses, Iran Wins

BY AARON PILKINGTON

There will be only one winner in the war that has broken out between Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas. And it is neither Israel nor Hamas.

In an operation coined “the Al-Aqsa Storm,” Hamas, whose formal name is the Islamic Resistance Movement, fired thousands of rockets into Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad fighters infiltrated Israel by land, sea and air. Hundreds of Israelis have been killed, more than 2,000 injured, and many taken hostage.

In response, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared war on Hamas and launched airstrikes in Gaza. In the first day of reprisals, close to 400 Palestinians were killed, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry.

In the weeks ahead, the Israeli military will surely retaliate and kill hundreds more Palestinian militants and civilians. As an analyst of Middle East politics and security, I believe that thousands on both sides will suffer. But when the smoke settles, only one country’s interests will have been served: Iran’s.

Already, some analysts are suggesting that Tehran’s fingerprints can be seen on the surprise attack on Israel. At the very least, Iran’s leaders have reacted to the assault with encouragement and support.

The champion of Palestine

The decisive factor shaping Iran’s foreign policy was the 1979 overthrow of the U.S.-friendly, repressive Shah of Iran and the transfer of state power into the hands of a Shiite Muslim revolutionary regime. That regime was defined by stark anti-American imperialism and anti-Israeli Zionism.

The revolution, its leaders claimed, was not just against the corrupt Iranian monarchy; it was intended to confront oppression and injustice everywhere, and especially those governments backed by the United States – chief among them, Israel.

For Iran’s leaders, Israel and the United States represented immorality, injustice and the greatest threat to Muslim society and Iranian security. The enduring hostility felt toward Israel is in no small part due to its close ties with the shah and Israel’s role in his sustained oppression of the Iranian people. Together with the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, Israel’s intelligence service, the Mossad, helped organize the shah’s secret police and intelligence service, the SAVAK. This organization relied on increasingly harsh tactics to put down dissenters during the shah’s last two decades in power, including mass imprisonment, torture, disappearances, forced exile and killing thousands of Iranians.

Support for Palestinian liberation was a central theme of Iran’s revolutionary message. The 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon – in retaliation for Lebanon-based Palestinian attacks against Israel – provided Iran an opportunity to live up to its anti-Zionist rhetoric by challenging Israeli soldiers in Lebanon and checking U.S. influence in the region.

Subsidizing conflict

To that end, Iran sent its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – a branch of Iran’s military, usually known as the “Revolutionary Guard” – to Lebanon to organize and support Lebanese and Palestinian militants. In Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley, Revolutionary Guardsmen instructed Shiite resistance fighters in religion, revolutionary ideology and guerrilla tactics, and provided weapons, funds, training and encouragement. Iran’s leadership transformed these early trainees from a ragtag band of fighters into Lebanon’s most powerful political and military force today, and Iran’s greatest foreign policy success, Hezbollah.

Since the early 1980s, Iran has maintained support for anti-Israeli militant groups and operations. The Islamic Republic has publicly pledged millions of dollars of annual support to groups and provides advanced military training for thousands of Palestinian fighters at Revolutionary Guard and Hezbollah bases in Iran and Lebanon.

Iran runs a sophisticated smuggling network to funnel weapons into Gaza, which has long been cut off from the outside world by an Israeli blockade.

Via the Revolutionary Guard and Hezbollah, Iran has encouraged and enabled Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas violence, and these Palestinian fighters now represent a crucial element in what foreign affairs analysts call Iran’s “Axis of Resistance” against Israel and the United States, which constitutes Iran’s chief purpose.

But Iran cannot risk confronting either state directly.

Iranian weapons, funds and training enable surges in Palestinian militant violence against Israel when frustrations boil over, including during the Palestinian uprisings known as the first and second intifadas.

Israeli-Palestinian conflicts and death tolls have escalated steadily since 2020. Palestinians are outraged by increased evictions and destruction of property, and how Israel allows Israeli nationalists and settlers to violate a long-standing agreement preventing Jewish prayer at the Al-Aqsa Mosque – a site holy to both Muslims and Jews. In fact, a recent incursion by settlers into Al-Aqsa was specifically cited by Hamas as a justification for the Oct. 7 attack.

Attacking normalization

That is not to say that Iran ordered Hamas’ attack on Israel, nor that Iran controls Palestinian militants – they are not Iranian puppets. Nevertheless, Iran’s leaders welcomed the attacks, the timing of which serendipitously works in Iran’s favor and plays into the Islamic republic’s regional battle for influence.

“What took place today is in line with the continuation of victories for the anti-Zionist resistance in different fields, including Syria, Lebanon and occupied lands,” according to Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Nasser Kanani.

The week before the Hamas attack, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman denied reports that Saudi Arabia had paused its recent efforts to normalize relations with Israel, which includes a formal declaration of Israel’s right to exist and increased diplomatic engagement. “Every day we get closer,” he said, an assessment praised and echoed by Netanyahu.

Israeli-Saudi normalization would represent the pinnacle of achievement thus far in U.S. diplomatic efforts, including the Abraham Accords, signed by Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco in 2020. The accords aimed to normalize and build peaceful relations between Israel and Arab countries across the Middle East and in Africa.

Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei lambasted Arab states for signing the Abraham Accords, accusing them of “treason against the global Islamic community.”

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah praised Saturday’s violence against Israel and echoed Khamenei’s sentiments, warning that the attacks sent a message, “especially to those seeking normalization with this enemy.”

Israel’s expected heavy-handed response is likely to complicate Saudi Arabia’s normalization with Israel in the near term, furthering Iran’s aims. Netanyahu said that Israel’s retaliatory operation seeks three objectives: to eliminate the threat of infiltrators and restore peace to attacked Israeli communities, to simultaneously “exact an immense price from the enemy” in Gaza, and to reinforce “other fronts so that nobody should mistakenly join this war.” This last objective is a subtle but clear warning to Hezbollah and Iran to stay out of the fight.

Israeli troops have already mobilized to secure its borders, and airstrikes have hit Gaza. In all likelihood, Palestinian attackers will be killed or arrested in a matter of days. Israeli troops and air forces will target known or suspected rocket launch, manufacturing, storage and transportation sites, along with the homes of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad members. But in the process, hundreds of civilians will likely also lose their lives.

I believe that Iran expects and welcomes all of this.

How Iran wins

There are at least three possible outcomes to the war, and they all play in Iran’s favor.

First, Israel’s heavy-handed response may turn off Saudi Arabia and other Arab states to U.S.-backed Israeli normalization efforts. Second, if Israel deems it necessary to push further into Gaza to eradicate the threat, this could provoke another Palestinian uprising in East Jerusalem or the West Bank, leading to a more widespread Israeli response and greater instability.

Lastly, Israel could achieve its first two objectives with the minimal amount of force necessary, foregoing usual heavy-handed tactics and reducing chances of escalation. But this is unlikely. And even if this occurred, the underlying causes that led to this latest outbreak of violence, and the enabling role Iran plays in that process, have not been addressed.

And when the next round of Israeli-Palestinian violence occurs – and it will – I believe Iran’s leaders will again congratulate themselves for a job well done.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE