This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Israeli military forces carried out a strike on a vehicle in central Gaza City, resulting in multiple casualties. [Mohammed Asad/Middle East Monitor]Israeli military forces carried out a strike on a vehicle in central Gaza City, resulting in multiple casualties. [Mohammed Asad/Middle East Monitor]Israeli military forces carried out a strike on a vehicle in central Gaza City, resulting in multiple casualties. [Mohammed Asad/Middle East Monitor]
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.Orcas discuss rotting brain, front Orca says Sundown Syndrome is a dead givaway and he wishes someone would Lock Him Up
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
US President Donald Trump addresses a meeting with Gulf leaders of the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) in Riyadh on May 14, 2025. [Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images]
The suspension and redesign of Trump’s plan to reopen Hormuz showed that the Arab states of the Persian Gulf still need the United States, but they are no longer willing to pay, unconditionally, the price of a war they did not start.
When Donald Trump spoke of “Project Freedom” to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the plan was supposed to be a display of restored American deterrence: an operation meant to prove that Washington could still open the world’s energy artery with its military fleet and its network of regional bases. Yet the rapid suspension of the project, after Saudi Arabia’s initial opposition to the use of its bases and airspace, carried a deeper meaning. This was not merely an operational disagreement.
“Project Freedom” showed that the Persian Gulf security order has entered a new phase: Arab states have not turned their backs on America, but they are no longer willing, without calculation, to serve as the launchpad for Washington’s war with Iran.
The significance of this shift became even clearer with the interim agreement between the United States and Iran. The framework, which is reportedly expected to lead to the reopening of Hormuz, ease pressure on the energy market, and begin a sixty-day period for nuclear negotiations, was not simply the product of military pressure. It was also the result of the constraints America faced on the regional battlefield. Washington could send more warships, but it could not be certain that all of its Arab partners would stand with it in every escalation scenario.
For decades, the relationship between Washington and the Arab governments of the Persian Gulf rested on a simple formula: oil, bases, and political alignment in exchange for security. Arab states provided access and alignment; in return, they expected protection. But the 2019 attacks on Aramco created the first serious crack in that mindset. Riyadh expected a decisive response, yet America’s reaction remained limited. From that moment, a hard question began to take shape: in a moment of danger, would America really enter a costly war to defend its allies?
The Hormuz crisis revived that question, but this time with greater urgency. The Arab states of the Persian Gulf know that any overt participation in an American military operation against Iran could turn them into direct targets of missile, drone, or maritime attacks. Their refineries, ports, and coastal cities are vulnerable, while the decision for war is made in Washington. From the perspective of Riyadh and Kuwait, the danger is not only Iran; the danger is being trapped in a war designed by others, while its geographic and economic costs fall on the Persian Gulf.
For this reason, the initial opposition to “Project Freedom” should not be read as a Saudi or Kuwaiti break with America. It was not an ideological “no”; it was a conditional and calculating “no.” Riyadh and Kuwait did not say they would no longer cooperate with the United States. They said they were not prepared to turn their territory into part of the theater of operations without clear guarantees about the consequences of war. Even later reports that Saudi Arabia and Kuwait had eased restrictions on U.S. military access did not erase the core issue. The significance of the episode was not that the restrictions were permanent; it was that such restrictions were imposed at all.
Some argue that because the restrictions were later reduced, no structural change has occurred. This argument sees part of the reality, but it misses the political meaning of hesitation. In regional politics, the pause itself matters.
If a plan that was supposed to display American authority became, from the very beginning, dependent on the consent of Riyadh and Kuwait, it means that American military power alone is no longer enough to produce political obedience. This is precisely the point at which strategic dependence remains, but automatic compliance begins to erode.
This shift cannot be separated from Saudi Arabia’s internal transformations either. Saudi Arabia today is not the Saudi Arabia of the early years of the Yemen war. Mohammed bin Salman needs stability in order to attract investment, expand tourism, and reduce dependence on oil. “Vision 2030” makes sense with the image of a safe country, not with the spectacle of a battlefield exchanging missiles and drones. Recent analyses of the consequences of a Hormuz war have also shown that the crisis made Saudi Arabia’s strategic vulnerability—and its need for safer energy routes—even more visible.
From this perspective, de-escalation with Iran is not a sign of weakness; it is part of a new rationality of survival. The Tehran-Riyadh agreement mediated by China, and the effort to preserve channels of communication with Tehran, can be understood within this same framework.
Arab countries know that Iran is not a neighbor that can be erased. They can compete with Tehran, but they cannot change geography. America can change its priorities; the Persian Gulf, however, must live with the consequences of every war in that same region.
Trump’s policy made this reality even more visible. On the one hand, he spoke in the language of threats, sanctions, and displays of power; on the other, he tried to avoid an all-out war, one that could endanger the energy market, the elections, and America’s focus on China. The result of this contradiction was the transfer of risk to allies. Arab states felt that Washington wanted to use their territory to pressure Iran, without offering a clear guarantee that it would bear the heavy costs of defending them. This is where security trust begins to erode from within.
Nor has the interim agreement between the United States and Iran ended this problem; rather, it has revealed it in a different form. If this agreement keeps Hormuz open on a durable basis, Arab governments will breathe a sigh of relief. Reports of oil tankers carrying Iranian crude once again passing through the route of America’s naval blockade are a sign of reduced tensions. But if the negotiations fail and Trump returns to the military option, the same question will return: should the Persian Gulf be the main arena for Iran’s retaliation?
“Project Freedom,” then, was not merely a plan to escort ships through Hormuz. It was a test of the Persian Gulf security order. And that test showed that America remains the region’s superior military power, but it can no longer count on the unconditional cooperation of its Arab partners. Arab allies still need Washington’s security umbrella, but they want distance between their own security and America’s costly adventures.
The Middle East today is not witnessing America’s complete withdrawal. It is witnessing the end of a political habit. The old habit was that whenever Washington decided to escalate pressure against Iran, the Arab states of the Persian Gulf would line up behind it without hesitation. Now they have become too cautious, and too vulnerable, to take such a decision lightly.
This is the main message of “Project Freedom”: America’s Arab allies still say “yes” to Washington, but that “yes” is no longer automatic, cheap, or unconditional.
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.Orcas discuss rotting brain, front Orca says Sundown Syndrome is a dead givaway and he wishes someone would Lock Him Up
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Children cling to life by playing despite harsh living conditions in the west of Khan Yunis, Gaza, on January 27, 2026. [Hani Alshaer – Anadolu Agency]
Israel was responsible for the highest number of verified grave violations against children in the occupied Palestinian territories in 2025, according to a new UN report, which recorded a sharp rise in abuses against children in conflict zones worldwide.
The report, titled Children and Armed Conflict 2025 and prepared by UN Secretary-General António Guterres, found that grave violations against children increased by 34 per cent compared with the previous year.
According to the 47-page report, parties to armed conflicts committed a record number of grave violations against children in 2025, marking “the highest number of children affected since the establishment of the Children and Armed Conflict mandate”.
The UN documented 38,558 grave violations against children worldwide during 2025.
These violations included killing and maiming, recruitment and use of children, abduction, rape and other forms of sexual violence, attacks on schools and hospitals, and the denial of humanitarian access.
The report said the UN verified a total of 12,445 grave violations against children linked to Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, including 12,436 cases in the occupied Palestinian territories and nine in Israel.
Of these, 5,452 violations were recorded in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and 6,984 in the Gaza Strip.
The report said Israeli forces were responsible for 9,465 grave violations against children, while 326 additional violations were attributed to Israeli settlers seeking to seize Palestinian land.
According to the report, Israeli forces detained 981 Palestinian children in 2025, including 973 boys and eight girls. It said 180 children were held without charge or trial, while 66 reported being subjected to physical violence and other forms of ill-treatment during detention.
The report also recorded the death of one Palestinian child in detention and said the UN had verified three cases in which Israeli forces used children as human shields in Gaza and the West Bank.
It added that 2,223 children were injured in the Gaza Strip and 2,921 others in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, by Israeli forces and Israeli settlers seeking to take over Palestinian land.
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.Orcas discuss rotting brain, front Orca says Sundown Syndrome is a dead givaway and he wishes someone would Lock Him Up
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Israeli army continue attacks on the El-Halayil Bedouin community, forcing 11 Palestinian families to leave their homes in Ramallah, West Bank on February 21, 2026. [Issam Rimawi – Anadolu Agency]
The Independent Commission for Human Rights (ICHR) said Israel’s settlement expansion and military restrictions have led to the displacement of 50 Palestinian Bedouin and herding communities since late 2023.
According to the official Palestinian news agency WAFA, the findings were contained in a special survey on Bedouin and herding communities in the occupied West Bank conducted by the ICHR in cooperation with the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics.
The survey found that around 300 violations targeting individuals and institutions in these communities were recorded in April 2025 alone.
The results were presented on Wednesday during a conference attended by representatives of government institutions, relevant ministries, international and UN organisations, and civil society groups, WAFA reported.
Speaking at the event, ICHR Director-General Ammar Dweik called for the adoption of a national plan for Bedouin and herding communities based on a comprehensive development and human rights approach.
He stressed the need for greater investment in these communities across the occupied West Bank, alongside legal protection, on-the-ground support, and access to essential services.
Dweik said such measures were necessary to strengthen the communities’ ability to remain on their land amid Israeli policies and practices, including home demolitions, repeated demolition orders, the seizure of land and grazing areas, movement restrictions, settler violence, and the undermining of livelihoods.
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.Orcas discuss rotting brain, front Orca says Sundown Syndrome is a dead givaway and he wishes someone would Lock Him Up
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
A screen grab from a video shows Hezbollah Secretary General Naim Qassem in Beirut, Lebanon on October 30, 2024. [Stringer – Anadolu Agency]
Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem said on Wednesday that the resistance had succeeded in “thwarting the Greater Israel project” and protecting what he described as Lebanon’s existence from plans of “extermination and displacement”.
In a recorded speech, Qassem said that the basis of any negotiations with Israel should be “mutual security”, reiterating the group’s firm rejection of any proposal to disarm Hezbollah. He described such proposals as an “Israeli prescription” that would not be accepted.
He called on the Lebanese authorities and political forces to engage in internal dialogue to organise national affairs away from external dictates or any direct negotiations, stressing Hezbollah’s readiness to cooperate on efforts to protect Lebanon’s sovereignty.
Discussing the conflict, Qassem said developments since 1948 reflected what he described as Israeli expansionist ambitions, which he said reached their peak with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcement of what he called the “Greater Israel” project.
He added that the issue was not about future intentions but rather “an ongoing aggression and continuous crimes against civilians”, claiming that women and children were being targeted under international cover.
Qassem said the Israeli project aimed to eliminate Hezbollah militarily, culturally and socially, arguing that this would amount to “the destruction of a large segment of Lebanese society”. He added: “We are not fighting only for land, but in defence of our existence and our future.”
He also reviewed what he described as the resistance’s achievements against Israeli occupation, saying they had helped prevent Israel from achieving stability or expanding its influence in the region.
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.Orcas discuss rotting brain, front Orca says Sundown Syndrome is a dead givaway and he wishes someone would Lock Him Up
