Turkish Ambassador to Cairo Congratulates Egypt on IGU Presidency Election
On Tuesday, the Turkish Ambassador to Cairo, Salih Mutlu Şen, congratulated Egypt on its election to the presidency of the International Gas Union (IGU).
The Turkish Ambassador posted on X, "I congratulate Egypt on its election to the presidency of the International Gas Union (IGU) also with Türkiye's support among others."
I congratulate Egypt on its election to the presidency of the International Gas Union (IGU) also with Türkiye's support among others.
I am confident that our cooperation, which serves our mutual interests in the fields of natural gas and LNG, will continue to deepen and expand,…
pic.twitter.com/B9ElVGYBYf
— Salih Mutlu Şen (@TurkishCairoAmb)
June 23, 2025
He added, "I am confident that our cooperation, which serves our mutual interests in the fields of natural gas and LNG, will continue to deepen and expand, gaining further strength from Egypt's IGU presidency."
read more
Gold prices rise, 21 Karat at EGP 3685
NATO's Role in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
US Expresses 'Strong Opposition' to New Turkish Military Operation in Syria
Shoukry Meets Director-General of FAO
Lavrov: confrontation bet. nuclear powers must be avoided
News
Iran Summons French Ambassador over Foreign Minister Remarks
News
Aboul Gheit Condemns Israeli Escalation in West Bank
News
Greek PM: Athens Plays Key Role in Improving Energy Security in Region
News
One Person Injured in Explosion at Ukrainian Embassy in Madrid
News
China Launches Largest Ever Aircraft Carrier
Sports
Former Al Zamalek Player Ibrahim Shika Passes away after Long Battle with Cancer
Lifestyle
Get to Know 2025 Eid Al Adha Prayer Times in Egypt
Videos & Features
Tragedy Overshadows MC Alger Championship Celebration: One Fan Dead, 11 Injured After Stadium Fall
Business
Fear & Greed Index Plummets to Lowest Level Ever Recorded amid Global Trade War
Arts & Culture
Zahi Hawass: Claims of Columns Beneath the Pyramid of Khafre Are Lies
News
Flights suspended at Port Sudan Airport after Drone Attacks
Videos & Features
Video: Trending Lifestyle TikToker Valeria Márquez Shot Dead during Live Stream
News
Shell Unveils Cost-Cutting, LNG Growth Plan
Technology
50-Year Soviet Spacecraft 'Kosmos 482' Crashes into Indian Ocean
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
See - Sada Elbalad
5 hours ago
- See - Sada Elbalad
The Jessica Radcliffe Orca Attack? 100% Fake and AI-Generated
By Ahmad El-Assasy The viral video claiming to show Jessica Radcliffe's death by an orca attack is entirely fabricated. It portrays an event featuring a marine trainer named Jessica Radcliffe at a made-up venue called Pacific Blue Marine Park, where she is supposedly killed during a performance. However, thorough investigations have debunked this video, highlighting several facts: - There is no evidence of Jessica Radcliffe's existence; no records, employment details, or credible accounts support the claim that she was a marine trainer or involved in such an incident. - The video in question is created using artificial intelligence, blending AI-generated voices with either manipulated or old footage to craft a false narrative. - It contains sensational details, such as the attack being provoked by menstrual blood, aimed at enhancing the emotional response and viral potential of the story. - This hoax draws on real-life tragedies, such as the deaths of trainers Alexis Martínez in 2009 at Loro Parque in the Canary Islands and Dawn Brancheau in 2010 at SeaWorld Orlando, which was featured in the documentary "Blackfish." These true events likely lent the video a semblance of credibility. - No credible evidence or official statements support the video's claims, underscoring its role as a stark example of how AI and social media can be used to propagate misinformation quickly. In essence, the story of Jessica Radcliffe's death is a fictional, AI-generated hoax without any factual basis, crafted to mislead and garner views by mimicking real orca attack incidents. read more Gold prices rise, 21 Karat at EGP 3685 NATO's Role in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict US Expresses 'Strong Opposition' to New Turkish Military Operation in Syria Shoukry Meets Director-General of FAO Lavrov: confrontation bet. nuclear powers must be avoided News Iran Summons French Ambassador over Foreign Minister Remarks News Aboul Gheit Condemns Israeli Escalation in West Bank News Greek PM: Athens Plays Key Role in Improving Energy Security in Region News One Person Injured in Explosion at Ukrainian Embassy in Madrid Videos & Features Story behind Trending Jessica Radcliffe Death Video News Israeli-Linked Hadassah Clinic in Moscow Treats Wounded Iranian IRGC Fighters Arts & Culture "Jurassic World Rebirth" Gets Streaming Date News China Launches Largest Ever Aircraft Carrier News Ayat Khaddoura's Final Video Captures Bombardment of Beit Lahia Business Egyptian Pound Undervalued by 30%, Says Goldman Sachs Videos & Features Tragedy Overshadows MC Alger Championship Celebration: One Fan Dead, 11 Injured After Stadium Fall Arts & Culture South Korean Actress Kang Seo-ha Dies at 31 after Cancer Battle Lifestyle Get to Know 2025 Eid Al Adha Prayer Times in Egypt Arts & Culture Lebanese Media: Fayrouz Collapses after Death of Ziad Rahbani
Daily News Egypt
6 hours ago
- Daily News Egypt
The Reoccupation of Gaza
When former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon executed his unilateral withdrawal plan from the Gaza Strip on September 11, 2005, the main selling point was clear: 'Protecting the settlers in the Strip is too costly.' Under this plan, Israel dismantled its military bases in Gaza, withdrew all soldiers, and evacuated over 9,000 Israeli settlers from 25 settlements. In reality, the unilateral pullout served as a calculated strategy to relocate several thousand illegal settlers from Gaza to other equally illegal settlements in the West Bank, while effectively sealing off the entire Strip from the outside world—a blockade that endures to this day. Now, nearly two decades later, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears to be turning back the clock, following the Israeli Security Cabinet's decision to reoccupy Gaza. In truth, however, this move is a leap into the unknown—an unpredictable gamble at a time when the humanitarian crisis within the enclave has reached catastrophic levels, with consequences that may spiral out of control. From a military standpoint, senior Israeli commanders have openly rejected the plan, deeming it both operationally exhausting and perilous—not only for soldiers but also for the remaining hostages still held by Hamas. Of the 251 people abducted on October 7, 2023, 50 remain in captivity. Given that 75% of Gaza is already under Israeli control, and to avoid further political-military fractures, the likely outcome is a hybrid strategy: neither a full siege nor a complete reoccupation. Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir, who voiced strong reservations about the plan, has instead advocated for fortifying the areas already under IDF control and launching targeted strikes from those positions to wear down and exhaust Hamas. These attack lines would lie west of the buffer zone, which is currently being cleared of tunnels and Hamas infrastructure. Zamir warned that reoccupation would erode both regular and reserve forces, drain resources, and overextend armored units, whose maintenance is already costly and logistically demanding. Military assessments suggest that fully occupying Gaza City and the central refugee camps could take years, not months, as some political leaders assume—with the longer timeline inevitably translating into higher casualties, deeper financial strain, and further deterioration of Israel's already tarnished global image, as accusations of genocide mount. Moreover, any attempt to seize the remainder of Gaza could result in the execution of all remaining hostages, making Netanyahu liable for an inevitable political showdown with their families. In fact, during the Cabinet meeting that approved reoccupation, Zamir urged the removal of 'hostage recovery' from the official objectives, warning that Hamas would kill them the moment Israeli troops re-enter the Strip. Reoccupation would also require calling up 250,000 reservists—a massive economic and social burden—and would drag Israel deeper into the Gaza quagmire, with the likelihood of more casualties among an already war-weary military entering its third year of sustained engagement on at least three fronts. According to Maariv, the psychological toll is intensifying, with suicide rates rising among soldiers who see no end in sight to a war that has failed to achieve any of its stated goals—neither freeing the hostages nor dismantling Hamas's military capacity. Another looming challenge is the question of supplying and feeding over two million displaced and unemployed Gazans—a responsibility the IDF is ill-equipped to bear. Zamir has categorically opposed assigning this burden to the military. Domestically, the relationship between political decision-makers and the military leadership has broken down, with each side blaming the other for the hostage crisis. The generals accuse Netanyahu of assuming a prisoner exchange was imminent, thereby holding back the military from delivering a decisive blow to Hamas. Netanyahu, in turn, claims the army failed both to prevent the October 7 attack and to defeat Hamas afterward. Adding to this internal friction is the opposition's exploitation of Netanyahu's crisis in a bid to collapse his coalition government—an outcome that could trigger early elections, a scenario that Israel can ill afford in its current predicament, as the political and diplomatic fallout could prove disastrous, resetting the conflict to square one. Regionally, Egypt has categorically rejected any large-scale ground invasion of Gaza, warning that such a move would threaten Egyptian national security and could jeopardize the 1979 Camp David peace treaty. Cairo is likely to view reoccupation as an attempt to impose a new status quo in Gaza—one that 'will not go unanswered' diplomatically and could prompt a reassessment of bilateral agreements with Tel Aviv. Meanwhile, another front is simmering: Lebanon—specifically Hezbollah—which has been trying to regroup after sustaining heavy losses since October 8, 2023. The Lebanese government has recently endorsed a policy to disarm the group and place all weapons under state control. Hezbollah's Deputy Secretary-General, Naim Qassem, has warned that if Israel intensifies operations against the movement, it will resume rocket fire into Israeli territory. For Hezbollah, the reoccupation of Gaza could provide a powerful pretext to re-enter the conflict, reshuffle the strategic deck, and improve its negotiating position—particularly now that it has little left to lose. The American role in this equation remains opaque. President Biden has publicly opposed the reoccupation plan, yet continues to grant Israel the necessary assurances—both in arms supplies and in ready-to-use UN Security Council vetoes. Some policy circles in Washington are increasingly embracing the view that Gaza's 'next phase' begins with force, not diplomacy—treating the Strip as rebellious territory that must first be subdued militarily before being rebuilt politically and securely. Global opposition to the plan, coupled with eroding domestic support, may ultimately force Netanyahu to abandon the illusion of reoccupation in favor of a single comprehensive deal—ending the war outright and withdrawing from most of Gaza in one stroke. This would require Hamas to be ready for such an agreement. The lingering question is: Does Netanyahu have an exit strategy? History suggests he usually finds one—but only for himself. The deeper problem is that no one in Israel's political or military leadership seems to have a viable plan for navigating the political, military, and humanitarian impasse. For now, everyone is simply waiting. Dr. Hatem Sadek – Professor at Helwan University
Daily News Egypt
6 hours ago
- Daily News Egypt
Gaza at the Crossroads of Reoccupation: The Challenges of a Humanitarian Catastrophe
At the heart of the Middle East, the Gaza Strip today stands at a pivotal crossroads amidst escalating discussions about the potential reoccupation of parts of the territory nearly two decades after Israel's unilateral withdrawal in 2005. This step, which Israel justifies on security grounds, comes amid a fragile political and security context and a worsening humanitarian crisis that threatens to spiral into a large-scale catastrophe, jeopardizing regional stability. On the ground, indicators show that the crisis in Gaza is neither transient nor isolated; rather, it constitutes a collective calamity demanding urgent international attention. Over two million residents are suffering from acute shortages of food and potable water, while healthcare institutions, already debilitated, are overwhelmed by mounting casualties and a severe lack of medicines and medical supplies. Critical infrastructure—including roads, residential buildings, power stations, and water networks—has been severely damaged by ongoing bombardments and military operations, turning daily life into a constant struggle for survival. The humanitarian crisis transcends statistics; it reflects a genuine tragedy of families displaced from their homes, children deprived of their basic rights to education and recreation, and youth facing an uncertain future overshadowed by despair. Additionally, widespread internal displacement has overcrowded shelters and refugee camps, exacerbating health and social conditions and increasing the risk of disease outbreaks. Politically, the complexity is heightened by the repercussions of Israel's actions on the regional environment. Egypt, a key mediator, has expressed deep concern about any large-scale military escalation that might threaten its national security and destabilize its southern borders. The 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty, a cornerstone of regional stability, is now under critical strain, compelling Cairo to navigate a delicate balance between maintaining stability and protecting its national interests. In Lebanon, political factions—particularly Hezbollah—are closely monitoring developments in Gaza, viewing any escalation as an opportunity to reposition themselves strategically. Such dynamics risk opening a new front in northern Israel, further complicating the security landscape and potentially igniting a broader regional conflict. The international community, led by the European Union, faces a multifaceted challenge in balancing support for Israel's security rights with the protection of Palestinian civilians caught in the conflict's crossfire. European positions have been cautious and nuanced, urging an immediate cessation of hostilities and the establishment of safe humanitarian corridors, while emphasizing the necessity of a political solution based on a two-state framework. France has voiced fears of a humanitarian catastrophe; Germany has called for restraint and respect for international humanitarian law, while Spain and Ireland have insisted on independent international investigations into alleged violations, reaffirming the importance of accountability. These positions reflect Europe's recognition that military measures alone cannot secure lasting stability; continued conflict only deepens civilian suffering and undermines prospects for peace. As such, Europe's role must center on upholding human protection and fostering the resumption of political dialogue that addresses the conflict's root causes. However, the reality is clear: humanitarian aid, though essential and impactful, is insufficient without a comprehensive vision for Gaza's reconstruction and socioeconomic recovery. The population endures extreme poverty and high unemployment, fueling social tensions and internal strife that impede prospects for reconciliation and a ceasefire. Thus, long-term strategies must prioritize rehabilitating critical infrastructure, enhancing healthcare and education services, strengthening local institutions, and supporting sustainable development efforts, alongside robust human rights protections and rule-of-law initiatives. This will require coordinated international cooperation to restore hope and dignity to Gaza's residents. Simultaneously, Gaza's crisis serves as a litmus test for the international community's commitment to humanitarian principles and international law. In times when complex realities challenge principles, decisions must be grounded in humanity, rather than narrow political or security calculations. Civilian protection, respect for human rights, and adherence to international humanitarian law are not luxuries but binding obligations that define the legitimacy of global action. Achieving sustainable calm in Gaza requires more than military force; it calls for sincere, inclusive dialogue among all stakeholders, based on mutual respect and a readiness for meaningful concessions. Courageous leadership is necessary to prioritize civilian lives over political calculations, supporting peace initiatives that guarantee the Palestinian people's right to dignity and security alongside Israel's legitimate defense concerns. This critical juncture reminds us that true peace transcends the mere absence of conflict; it entails constructing resilient societies where individuals can access opportunities for growth and prosperity. Such an outcome depends on the international community's ability to transcend parochial interests and embrace a holistic vision grounded in justice, humanity, and mutual respect. In conclusion, Gaza is not merely a battleground but a profound humanitarian and ethical challenge that demands collective responsibility to uphold peace, protect life, and envision a better future for coming generations. The voice of reason and compassion must rise above the din of war, calling on all of us to be partners in shaping a legacy of hope and stability. Dr. Marwa El-Shinawy – Academic and Writer
