Sunday, January 18, 2026

Stoltenberg: I cannot ‘promise’ the US will remain in NATO


I cannot ‘promise’ the US will remain in NATO – Stoltenberg
RT



Former NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has said he cannot promise that the US will remain in the bloc in a recent interview with Der Spiegel. He added that European countries must take Washington seriously when it says it wants to take over Greenland.

US President Donald Trump has recently renewed his push to annex the mineral-rich Arctic island, and has refused to rule out withdrawing the US from NATO if the bloc opposes his ambitions, escalating tensions with European allies and calling into question the future unity of the organization.

Stoltenberg welcomed the European response, pointing to joint statements from the Nordic countries, Germany, and other European states backing Copenhagen and reaffirming that Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark. He added that respecting the sovereignty of NATO allies is essential.

”We must engage with the United States, which also means speaking up when we disagree,” the former NATO chief said.

Denmark insists the island is not for sale and that its future must be decided by its residents, who voted in 2008 to retain their autonomy within the Danish realm, which includes the right to regulate mining.

Trump claims that only US sovereignty can protect the island from being taken over by China or Russia – an allegation dismissed by both countries.

He warned on Friday that he could impose tariffs on US trading partners that refuse to support his push to acquire Greenland.

After meetings in Washington last week, Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen acknowledged a “fundamental disagreement” but said he hoped a newly established bilateral working group would help resolve the issue.

France has warned Washington that any attempt to seize Greenland would be ‘crossing the line’ and threaten economic ties with the EU, the Financial Times reported this week.

Denmark has teamed up with France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, and the UK to send small contingents of troops to the island ahead of the bloc’s Arctic Endurance exercises later next week.

The Gaza peace plan’s missing piece: Who will actually dismantle Hamas?





Another important detail should not be overlooked. The new framework is designed to bypass what many involved see as the ineffective and frustrating role of the United Nations in Gaza.


What the White House statement did not address is the central question of Hamas. Will the terrorist organization be disarmed and prevented from continuing to rule the Strip? Who guarantees the senior figures appointed by the White House that Hamas will accept such a decree without responding violently? Just yesterday, senior Hamas officials declared, ‘We have 10,000 new volunteers. They are just waiting for us to recruit them.’ Hamas spokesman in Gaza Hazem Qassem said that once the new Palestinian governing body enters the Strip, the existing government would disperse. He went even further by calling for accelerating the establishment of a technocratic committee made up of Palestinians who do not live in Gaza.


But this is the critical caveat. Despite the enthusiastic statements, Hamas has not agreed to disarm. 

There is not even a hint, not the faintest signal, that it intends to relinquish control. Under those conditions, how does anyone move forward? Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded cautiously, describing the initiative as largely declarative and one that does not change the security reality. Netanyahu set two unequivocal demands: the return of the body of Ran Gvili and the dismantling of Hamas’ military capabilities. 

In closed-door discussions, officials in President Trump’s administration say they are examining the possibility of declaring Hamas disarmed and storing its weapons, though it is unclear where. Who ensures that Hamas would agree to such a move?


Disarming Hamas is a complex challenge. It is unclear whether anyone, no matter how senior, is capable of confronting the organization’s sophistication. Even if Hamas agreed to give up part of its weapons and commit to storing others, none of the members of the ‘peace committee’ or its affiliated bodies have the knowledge or capacity to deal with realities on the ground.

In the meantime, the terrorist organization continues to operate without pause, constantly recruiting new volunteers. Given the severe living conditions in Gaza, the cold and the hunger, it is not hard to understand why. Many would be willing to do almost anything to support their families. According to available information, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad currently have about 30,000 armed fighters in Gaza.

On the other side, Netanyahu insists that the Israel Defense Forces will not withdraw from key positions in the Strip, including the Philadelphi Corridor, until full demilitarization is achieved. After all, a surprise move could occur at any moment.

The prevailing assumption is that Hamas will not surrender its weapons voluntarily. 
Who will force it to do so? Members of the committees have no security experience. 
Review the names across the three bodies one by one. There is no shortage of goodwill and hope, 
but there is zero combat experience. It should not be forgotten that Hamas has not abandoned its core 
mission as a so-called liberation movement fighting Israel. That slogan remains deeply ingrained in 
Netanyahu’s thinking. Hamas is prepared to continue fighting. The larger question is whether it would 
also declare war on representatives of the Palestinian Authority in order to drive them out of Gaza.


In first, Trump appears to call for end of ‘sick man’ Khamenei’s rule in Iran


In first, Trump appears to call for end of ‘sick man’ Khamenei’s rule in Iran



US President Donald Trump, for the first time, appeared to call on Saturday for the end of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s rule in Iran.

“It’s time to look for new leadership in Iran,” Trump told Politico.

The comments are the closest Trump has come yet to calling for regime change in Iran, though he seemed to direct his ire in the interview at the supreme leader personally, and not at the broader Islamic Republic system.

The US president’s remarks come after he indicated on Friday that he had moved away from the idea of striking Iran, after the regime had allegedly agreed to cancel the planned executions of 800 protesters.

Days earlier, Trump had threatened to strike if Iran killed protesters, urging the latter group to “take over institutions” and assuring that “help is on its way.”

But his satisfaction with the regime’s move on Friday suggested that his threat regarding protester deaths only referred to planned executions, and not killings that reportedly took place during the regime’s crackdown on the demonstrations, where the death count was said to be in the thousands. Trump had insisted some of those deaths were caused by stampedes.

In a speech broadcast by state television to mark a religious holiday, Khamenei on Saturday said the protests had left “several thousand” people dead — the first indication from an Iranian leader of the extent of the casualties from the wave of protests that began December 28.

Asked about the scope of a potential military strike in Iran, Trump told Politico on Saturday that “the best decision [Khamenei] ever made was not hanging more than 800 people two days ago.”

Trump spoke to Politico shortly after Khamenei, 86, posted a series of tweets blaming the US president for the unrest in Iran.

“We find the US president guilty due to the casualties, damages and slander he inflicted upon the Iranian nation,” Khamenei wrote.

Iranian authorities have repeatedly blamed the US for the mass demonstrations they have called “riots” and “terrorist” operations.

Responding to the posts, Trump told Politico: “What he is guilty of, as the leader of a country, is the complete destruction of the country and the use of violence at levels never seen before.”

“In order to keep the country functioning — even though that function is a very low level — the leadership should focus on running his country properly, like I do with the United States, and not killing people by the thousands in order to keep control,” the US president said.

“Leadership is about respect, not fear and death,” Trump added.

More...


Report: When he asked Trump not to strike Iran, Netanyahu said Israel not fully ready to defend itself

When he lobbied US President Donald Trump not to strike Iran last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reasoned that Israel is not fully prepared to defend against Tehran’s retaliation, The Washington Post reports, citing an unnamed source close to the White House.

An American official reportedly says a key factor was the absence of singificant US military presence in the region, which Jerusalem relied on to help intercept Iran’s ballistic missiles during the 12-day war in June.

The report also says Trump’s top advisers had at one point around Wednesday last week believed a strike was imminent, before a text message from Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to Trump’s Mideast Adviser Steve Witkoff “kind of also defused the situation.”



Saturday, January 17, 2026

Israel fumes at Gaza oversight panel makeup as Trump invites Erdogan to peace board


Israel fumes at Gaza oversight panel makeup as Trump invites Erdogan to peace board



Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said Saturday that the White House’s unveiling of a key international oversight panel for Gaza “was not coordinated with Israel and contradicts its policy,” in a rare break with US President Donald Trump’s administration.

Netanyahu appeared to be taking issue with the makeup of a new body called the executive board, which will include senior officials from Qatar and Turkey — two countries that have been highly critical of Israel’s prosecution of the war in Gaza.

While it will technically operate beneath the Board of Peace — which is headed by Trump and made up of world leaders — the executive board will be more directly involved in overseeing the postwar management of Gaza, playing a critical role as opposed to the more symbolic Board of Peace.

Netanyahu’s office said in a statement that the premier had instructed Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar to raise Israeli opposition to the executive board’s makeup with his US counterpart, Marco Rubio. Sa’ar has largely been kept away from direct involvement in Israel-US relations, which have run through Netanyahu’s office and his top advisers.

The White House unveiled the makeup of the executive board on Friday, with Turkey to be represented by its Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and Qatar to be represented by its senior diplomat Ali Thawadi. They will be joined by Egyptian intelligence chief Hassan Rashad, UAE International Cooperation Minister Reem Al-Hashimy, former UK prime minister Tony Blair, US special envoy Steve Witkoff, top Trump aide Jared Kushner, Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan, Israeli-Cypriot businessman Yakir Gabay, former UN humanitarian coordinator Sigrid Kaag, and former UN envoy to the Mideast Nickolay Mladenov.

Mladenov, who will effectively head the panel, was given the title of high representative for Gaza, and will act as the on-the-ground link between the Board of Peace and the panel of Palestinian technocrats running daily affairs in the Strip.

The White House has dubbed that Palestinian body the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), and it will effectively be subservient to the Board of Peace and the mid-tier executive board.

The 15-member NCAG is headed by former Palestinian Authority deputy planning minister Ali Shaath, and held its first meeting in Cairo with Mladenov on Saturday.

A source familiar with the matter said Israel did not aggressively push back against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s inclusion on the Board of Peace, recognizing that the more consequential panel is the executive board.

More....


Islamic Republic of Iran vows mass executions of protesters


Islamic Republic of Iran vows mass executions of protesters
Our response is firm, deterrent and swift. A large number of cases have now led to indictments and have been sent to court.”

The president would have done well to have acquainted himself with the Shi’ite doctrine of taqiyya, and its importance in the dealings of the Islamic Republic with other states. But many people around him would likely have dismissed such an idea as “Islamophobic” and counterproductive to the imperative of making a deal.

Instead, he repeated Iranian claims credulously:

More...