Latest news with #USIntelligence
News.com.au
4 days ago
- General
- News.com.au
‘No one cares': Volodymyr Zelensky dismisses Russian ‘anger' after daring Ukrainian operation
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has declared 'no one cares' whether Vladimir Putin is 'angry' about his country's daring attack on military bases deep inside Russia, rejecting the fears, from some quarters, that it could further escalate the war. The raid, codenamed Operation Spider's Web, took 18 months to plan and execute. Ukraine smuggled drones across the Russian border, hidden in trucks, which then drove to the sites of military bases. One penetrated as far as Siberia, more than 4000 kilometres away from the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv. At a co-ordinated moment, the trucks released their drones, which then attacked while being controlled remotely. Ukraine claims to have wiped out a third of Russia's strategic bombers, a heavy blow to the capabilities of Putin's air force. Ukraine pulled off the extraordinary operation with near-total secrecy, and all its operatives successfully made it back across the border. Even the United States, whose intelligence and military aid have been vital throughout the war, was not warned beforehand. Russia has yet to justify concerns that it might escalate its own violence in response, though Russian-affiliated social media accounts have been sharing ominous quotes, supposedly from Putin himself. The statement in question, repeated verbatim by dozens of accounts, is unattributed and unverified, but may signal the stance of Russian state media. 'They proved that there can be no peaceful solution. They have prepared their own end with this action, there is no more red line, they will regret what they did,' it reads. Mr Zelensky brushed aside worries about an escalation while speaking to reporters today. 'When asked by journalists whether yesterday's operation might enrage the Russians, I responded that just a day earlier, Russia had launched a massive overnight attack on Ukraine, with over 480 drones and missiles,' Mr Zelensky said. 'They struck civilian infrastructure, residential buildings. There were casualties, people killed and injured. This happens every single day. 'Sometimes there's a short pause, and to be honest, we now call it a 'pause' if there's just no one killed that night. But even then, drones still fly, and people still get wounded. We are still talking about dozens of drones and cruise missiles. 'So no, no one cares whether Russia is angry. What matters is that Russia must move towards ending this war. And as a global community, we must do all we can to stop them.' Mr Zelensky prodded the Trump administration, saying Ukraine is 'very much awaiting strong steps from the United States'. 'We hope (Donald Trump) will support sanctions and push Putin to stop this war, or at least to take the first step towards ending it: a ceasefire,' he said. 'These are critical things.' Preliminary talks between Ukraine and Russia, which had been scheduled before Ukraine's operation, went ahead in Istanbul, Turkey as planned overnight. Mr Zelensky claimed the Russian officials sent to Istanbul 'behaved more calmly' and 'modestly' than before – implying the attack had humbled them, somewhat. However the talks delivered little substantive progress. Both sides did agree to exchange prisoners, in an agreement covering all sick and heavily wounded POWs, as well as those under the age of 25. But Russia is still rejecting Ukraine's concerted push for an unconditional 30-day ceasefire. Russia did offer a truce of two or three days across some of the war's frontline. As a condition for a full ceasefire, it demanded that Ukrainian troops withdraw entirely from four regions – Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson – which it partially occupies. Putin's representatives did also hand over a memorandum, which they framed as a blueprint for a 'lasting peace', though neither side has released details of what's in it. Ukraine said it would take a week to consider the contents. 'The Russian side continued to reject the motion of an unconditional ceasefire,' Ukraine's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergiy Kyslytsya told reporters after the talks. Russia said it had offered a limited pause in fighting. 'We have proposed a specific ceasefire for two to three days in certain areas of the front line,' top negotiator Vladimir Medinsky said, adding that this was needed to collect the bodies of dead soldiers from the battlefield. 'I was told the delegation behaved more calmly than before. But the arrogance? Well, it is what it is,' Mr Zelensky said afterwards. 'These arrogant people acted a little more modestly. Maybe a few more events like this are needed so that everyone will start behaving like decent human beings.' He did, however, accuse Putin of 'playing games' with the talks. 'The key to lasting peace is clear, the aggressor must not receive any reward for war.' Meanwhile Mr Trump, who appears to have lost patience with the peace process having promised, during last year's US election campaign, to end the war within a day of taking office, today said he was 'open' to meeting with both Mr Zelensky and Putin in Turkey, should the opportunity arise. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has proposed that Mr Trump, Mr Zelensky and Putin come together later this month in either Istanbul or Ankara. Putin has thus far refused such a meeting. But Mr Zelensky has said he is willing to do it, underlining that key issues can only be resolved at that level, given Putin's unilateral decision-making power in Russia. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Mr Trump 'is open to it, if it comes to that, but he wants both of these leaders and both sides to come to the table together'.
Washington Post
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
Sweeping overhaul of Gaza aid raises questions of morality and workability
JERUSALEM — Last year, a group of former U.S. intelligence and defense officials and business executives, working in close consultation with Israel, prepared a proposal for supplying humanitarian aid to Gaza that would address Israeli government claims that assistance was being diverted by Hamas. In previously unreported internal documents, the group detailed a radically new and ambitious model: It envisioned the creation of an organization called the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) that would hire armed private contractors to provide logistics and security for a handful of aid distribution hubs to be built in southern Gaza. Under the arrangement, which would replace existing aid distribution networks coordinated by the United Nations, Palestinian civilians would have to travel to the hubs and submit to identity checks to receive rations from NGOs. Eventually, according to the plan, Palestinians would live in guarded compounds that would each house up to tens of thousands of noncombatants. But as early as November, the documents showed, the planners anticipated that the foundation could face potentially damaging questions from the public about its opaque origins, qualifications and moral legitimacy. Those concerns about possible pushback now appear prescient, with prominent humanitarian agencies and prospective donors balking, some senior officers in the Israeli military questioning the plan — and even some people who participated in the foundation's early planning distancing themselves from the project, citing moral qualms over the possibility that it would enable the forced displacement of Palestinians or misuse biometrics. The GHF's Gaza aid operation is scheduled to launch Monday. Whether it succeeds — and how it operates — holds tremendous implications for the 2 million Palestinians who are sealed in the 140-square-mile enclave and nearing the brink of famine, according to U.N. estimates. Since March 2, Israel has barred nearly all food and medical supplies from entering Gaza, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's security cabinet voted May 4 to only allow aid distribution to resume under a model resembling the GHF. But the foundation has struggled to sign on established humanitarian aid groups or major donors, with the United Nations and many aid groups saying they cannot cooperate with a model that violates their principles prohibiting the vetting of aid recipients and may not adequately feed all of Gaza. With the GHF not yet operational, Israeli officials this week allowed a modest amount of aid to cross into Gaza in response to mounting international pressure. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has taken the lead in advocating on the GHF's behalf and hosting meetings with humanitarian aid officials in hopes of reaching a compromise that would satisfy both aid groups and Israel, but talks remain deadlocked. In interviews with GHF executives and advisers, Israeli and foreign government officials, and other people familiar with the foundation, as well as a review of hundreds of pages of confidential internal documents, The Washington Post found that the project is not only facing significant hurdles — but that some of the potential pushback was anticipated by planners themselves: Many people cited in this article spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential planning efforts and conversations. In response to questions from The Post, a spokesman for the GHF said the foundation has already secured $100 million from an undisclosed donor, and that it was a 'significant feat' for the foundation to go 'from an idea to approval to getting food in the mouths of hungry people.' Early planning documents do not necessarily reflect the thinking or mission of the foundation, which was established more recently and operates as an independent entity, the spokesman said. The foundation does not consider building housing compounds or vetting aid recipients as part of its current plans, he added. 'The GHF will never participate in or support any form of forced relocation of civilians,' the spokesman said. Since early in the Gaza war, Israel has argued that the preexisting system of aid distribution, which relied on U.N. agencies and a coordinated network of NGOs to transport and deliver aid at hundreds of locations around Gaza, must be revamped. Citing intelligence assessments, Israeli officials say that Hamas has generated hundreds of millions of dollars by seizing convoys and reselling goods. But Israel has never presented evidence publicly or privately to humanitarian organizations or Western government officials to back up claims that Hamas had systematically stolen aid brought into Gaza, at least under the United Nations' system, according to interviews with more than a dozen aid officials and several current and former Western officials. Five people engaged in the planning process that produced the GHF recalled in interviews that they initially agreed it was important to develop a model for aid delivery in Gaza that Israel would support but eventually developed ethical reservations. In each case, these people said they felt uneasy about a militarized model that deployed private security forces and vetted aid recipients with biometric technology and possibly facial recognition. They also felt that the plan to build only four distribution sites in southern Gaza would require civilians to travel hours to reach them or even facilitate the Israeli military's campaign to drive Gaza's population southward — a tactic that could amount to forced displacement, a war crime. 'You have to ask: By simply engaging, are you enabling Israel pushing people to the south?' said a person who was consulted about plans for the GHF and spoke on the condition of anonymity to preserve their relationships with those involved. Many humanitarian groups want to support an effort to feed civilians but feel that the GHF model breaches their own principles, the person added: 'Getting humanitarians to agree to private security with guns — of course that was going to be a hard sell.' A GHF spokesman said the foundation was now pressing Israel to authorize additional hubs and allow the GHF to serve civilians throughout Gaza. 'There is no limit on the amount of sites the GHF could open, or where,' the spokesman said. 'We expect to launch four sites by the end of the month and are actively planning additional sites throughout Gaza.' The GHF's contractors have begun construction of the hubs, and its armed personnel have already arrived in Israel. It remains unclear who would provide and distribute the aid. Several nongovernmental aid agency officials said that the question of the United States 'reclaiming' humanitarian food and other items, previously purchased by them with U.S. government aid funds for Gaza but not yet distributed there because of Israel's blockade, had arisen in conversations with U.S. officials. That reclaimed assistance could be distributed by the GHF in addition to goods that had previously been provided directly by the U.S. Agency for International Development but not yet distributed. On the morning of Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas militants and hundreds of their supporters surged across the Gaza barrier into southern Israel, attacking IDF positions, massacring Israeli civilians and abducting more than 250 hostages before withdrawing to Gaza. Almost immediately, the IDF launched a ferocious counteroffensive, and within days, Israeli military officials, geospatial analysts, consultants and international humanitarian executives began to huddle at the Kirya, the Israeli military's headquarters in central Tel Aviv, to discuss what to do about the large numbers of Palestinians who would inevitably be displaced. Although the Israeli government initially insisted that all humanitarian aid to Gaza should be stopped until Hamas was vanquished and the hostages released, the Biden administration pressured Israel to allow Gazans to be fed. Israeli officials broadly agreed, a person in the meetings recalled. Some officials, particularly those politically aligned with Netanyahu and other hard-liners, argued there was a strategic imperative to ensure that Hamas, which governed the Gaza Strip, could not mingle with noncombatants or enrich itself from aid convoys. By late 2023, the Israeli Defense Ministry unit that manages aid in Gaza, the Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories, or COGAT, began formulating plans for 'humanitarian bubbles' that would confine Palestinian civilians inside safe zones while the IDF fought Hamas militants outside. Even though the early planning was led by the Israeli military, two Israeli technology investors played an influential role in shaping discussions as they progressed, according to six Israeli and American individuals familiar with the GHF's origins. One was Liran Tancman, an entrepreneur and reservist in the IDF's 8200 signals intelligence unit, who called for using biometric identification systems outside the distribution hubs to vet Palestinian civilians. Another was Michael Eisenberg, an American Israeli venture capitalist who argued that existing U.N. aid distribution networks were sustaining Hamas and needed to be overhauled. Tancman did not respond to messages seeking comment. Eisenberg declined to comment. In mid-2024, Israeli officials shared their plans with a group of private-sector American consultants led by Phil Reilly, a retired CIA paramilitary officer and former agency station chief in Afghanistan. Reilly's group, said five of the Israeli and American individuals, took over the planning and determined that a new company led by Reilly, named Safe Reach Solutions, would be the future subcontractor that would provide security and logistics for the hubs. Tancman, based in Tel Aviv, often served as an intermediary between the American executives and Israeli officials. By November, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation was taking shape. One of the documents seen by The Post, an executive summary prepared for the Israeli think tank Tachlith, did not address the specifics of aid that would be distributed, which was to be handled by NGOs that signed on. Instead, the plan focused on the number of security personnel, weapons and armored vehicles required, the design of communications systems and basic schematics for four distribution hubs where civilians could come pick up aid. The plan called for building a remote operations center that would monitor activities in Gaza around-the-clock with cameras and drones, and in its final phase, developing guarded residential zones, dubbed 'Humanitarian Transition Areas,' where Gazans would live. The planners wrote that it was important to assure Gazans that they would eventually return to their homes once it was safe, and drew up lists of Instagram and X influencers from the Arab world whom the GHF should cultivate as part of a social media campaign to build popular support for the project. To gain diplomatic support, the plan proposed that the GHF court Western countries such as Germany and 'persuade France' — which has been relatively critical of Israel — 'to not politically interfere in Gaza and the GHF operations for the next year.' The planners also sought to downplay their connection to the Israeli government. Although they enjoyed a 'strong partnership' with Israeli officials and obtained input from Israeli military and intelligence, the document said, the GHF should avoid appearing as a 'stooge (proxy) of the Israeli government' but be prepared to answer questions about how 'a never before heard-of NGO has obtained unique approvals from the Government of Israel.' Any perception of Israeli control might 'deter' collaboration, the document said. This February, it was an Israeli agency, COGAT, that first contacted NGOs to present the idea of the new privately run hubs. U.N. and NGO employees who met with COGAT described the Israeli position as cordial but firm, suggesting the new model had already been decided. 'We thought it was a negotiation and were told there was room to listen to our concerns,' recalled a U.N. official. 'But it turned out to be: 'This is how it's going to work.'' As pushback from NGOs mounted, some Israelis involved in the plan privately argued that the United States, rather than Israel, should take center stage in pitching the GHF and were relieved when the Trump administration became its face, a person familiar with the planning process said. In public, Israeli officials downplayed Israel's involvement. The distribution centers 'will be run by the fund and led by the U.S.,' the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, told reporters. On May 9, Mike Huckabee, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, announced to the media that a new endeavor, which he described as a U.S. initiative that did not involve Israel, would begin to provide aid in Gaza. Meanwhile, Aryeh Lightstone, a U.S. official who now works with Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff and once served as an aide to former U.S. ambassador to Israel David Friedman, helped lead meetings with NGO officials to answer questions about the GHF's feasibility and ethics. When pressed by U.N. officials at a May 14 meeting in Tel Aviv, Lightstone and David Burke, the GHF's chief operating officer, 'admitted that they didn't have a plan,' but that 'they were under pressure from the president to produce something,' said a U.N. official briefed on the meeting. Humanitarian officials who attended the meetings said Burke and Lightstone distanced themselves from some of the more controversial aspects of the model that was described by Israeli officials to aid organizations and officially approved by Israel on May 4. They promised the GHF would not provide the Israeli government with the biometric data of Palestinians who come to retrieve aid and pledged to add two more distribution hubs in the north of Gaza without specifying when. A person who assisted the GHF effort accused the United Nations of being uncooperative and said its officials were more interested in attacking Israel than feeding Gazans. 'They would rather let the food sit and go bad,' the person said. After the GHF announced its formation on May 14 as a Switzerland-registered nonprofit, Israel and the United States publicly championed the plan. But behind the scenes, people with knowledge of the GHF said, the rollout was rushed and chaotic, and the organization seemed to overstate its support to sway reluctant backers. Israeli officials and people close to the GHF spread word that prominent humanitarian groups such as the World Central Kitchen and the United Nations had joined, even though those organizations quickly issued public statements saying they had not. One member of GHF's board of advisers recalled that Reilly, the former CIA official who led the planning process but has no publicly stated affiliation with the GHF, reached out roughly three weeks ago to say that the plan was moving ahead. 'This came together relatively quickly, in the last seven to 10 days, I'd say,' the board member said Tuesday. Reilly did not respond to requests for comment. In memos it circulated, the GHF touted David Beasley, a former governor of South Carolina and a Nobel Peace Prize-winning head of the World Food Program, as a potential adviser. But Beasley remains undecided and has many questions about the plan that have not been addressed by Israel and the United States, a person familiar with Beasley's position told The Post. Beasley did not respond to requests for comment. 'If he says this won't work, he can't be jumped over,' the person said. 'He has credibility that he doesn't want to lose.' The plan, the person added, 'seems to be morphing by the hour. What is the plan? What, exactly, is this foundation? Who is financing it?' Questions about funding remain unanswered. One of the key funders listed in the foundation's planning documents, the United Arab Emirates, has so far declined to sign on, while this week, more than 20 countries from Europe and Asia — including potential donors such as Germany, Britain and the European Union — issued a statement criticizing the GHF plan. Even within the Israeli security establishment, questions have swirled about the plan's feasibility, and its strategic and legal implications. Since last year, current and former IDF officials say, the military has been deeply divided over the question of whether to occupy Gaza, which would require Israel to take care of its civilians under international law; to withdraw from the enclave; or to pursue an option, like the GHF, that may allow Israel to control the territory but transfer responsibility of Palestinian civilians to a third party. As recently as mid-May, the IDF chief of staff, Lt Gen. Eyal Zamir, admitted in private conversations that he did not know what exactly would be the respective responsibilities of the American contractors and the IDF but remained committed to carrying out the plan that was approved by Israel's civilian leadership; and other officers overseeing Gaza have questioned the role of external parties in the aid effort, people with knowledge of the matter said. In recent days, the IDF and GHF agreed that Israeli troops would be positioned no closer than 1,000 meters away from the hubs, another person said. One former Israeli military official who was involved in drafting the plan acknowledged deep divisions within the military and criticized IDF officers who he said 'wanted to see it fail' due to ideological reasons. 'There are unfortunately people in the IDF who don't want this to work and would rather have the current situation as it is,' the former military official said, referring to the U.N.-led distribution system. 'But people need to understand, this is the plan. It is being prepared. It is decided by the cabinet.' Tamir Hayman, a former chief of Israeli military intelligence who has been briefed on the plans, said neither scenarios envisaged under the GHF plan were feasible. Requiring Gazans to travel long distances to a distribution hub to pick up a 40-pound bag of food several times a week 'maybe, maybe would work on a golf course, but not in Gaza,' said Hayman, who now leads the Institute for National Security Studies, a think tank. He also pushed back on the idea of establishing semipermanent residential zones. 'Set aside the humanitarian issues, the moral issues, simply the logistics of transferring people to a permanent location — it's a huge transfer of people who have already been moved once,' Hayman said. 'It's not going to work.' Brown and DeYoung reported from Washington. Tim Carman in Washington contributed to this report.
LBCI
21-05-2025
- Politics
- LBCI
US intel suggests Israel preparing strike on Iran's nuclear facilities: CNN
New intelligence obtained by the United States suggests that Israel is making preparations to strike Iranian nuclear facilities, CNN reported on Tuesday, citing multiple U.S. officials familiar with the intelligence. It was not clear whether Israeli leaders have made a final decision and there was disagreement within the U.S. government about whether the Israelis would ultimately decide to carry out strikes, CNN added, citing the officials. One source familiar with the intelligence told CNN the likelihood of an Israeli strike on an Iranian nuclear facility "has gone up significantly in recent months." The person added that the chance of a strike would be more likely if the U.S. reached a deal with Iran that did not remove all of the country's uranium, CNN added. Reuters
Malay Mail
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Malay Mail
US intel suggests Israel preparing strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, CNN reports
TEL AVIV, May 21 — New intelligence obtained by the United States suggests that Israel is making preparations to strike Iranian nuclear facilities, CNN reported yesterday, citing multiple US officials familiar with the intelligence. It was not clear whether Israeli leaders have made a final decision and there was disagreement within the US government about whether the Israelis would ultimately decide to carry out strikes, CNN added, citing the officials. Reuters could not immediately confirm the report, which contributed to a rise in oil prices by more than 1 per cent on concern such a strike might upset Iranian flows. The National Security Council did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Israeli Embassy in Washington, the Israeli Prime Minister's Office and the Israeli military did not immediately respond to requests for comment. One source familiar with the intelligence told CNN the likelihood of an Israeli strike on an Iranian nuclear facility 'has gone up significantly in recent months.' The person added that the chance of a strike would be more likely if the US reached a deal with Iran that did not remove all of the country's uranium, CNN added. President Donald Trump's administration has been conducting negotiations with Iran aimed at achieving a diplomatic deal over its nuclear programme. The new intelligence was based on the public and private communications from senior Israeli officials as well as intercepted Israeli communications and observations of Israeli military movements that could suggest an imminent strike, CNN reported. CNN cited two sources saying that among the military preparations the US had observed were the movement of air munitions and the completion of an air exercise. Earlier yesterday, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said US demands that Tehran stop enriching uranium are 'excessive and outrageous,' state media reported, voicing doubts over whether talks on a new nuclear deal will succeed. — Reuters
Al Arabiya
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Al Arabiya
US intel suggests Israel preparing strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, CNN reports
New intelligence obtained by the United States suggests that Israel is making preparations to strike Iranian nuclear facilities, CNN reported on Tuesday, citing multiple US officials familiar with the intelligence. It was not clear whether Israeli leaders have made a final decision and there was disagreement within the US government about whether they would ultimately decide to carry out strikes, CNN added, citing the officials. Reuters could not immediately confirm the report. The National Security Council did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Israeli Embassy in Washington did not immediately respond, nor did the Israeli Prime Minister's Office, which was contacted after hours. One source familiar with the intelligence told CNN the likelihood of an Israeli strike on an Iranian nuclear facility 'has gone up significantly in recent months.' The person added that the chance of a strike would be more likely if the US reached a deal with Iran that did not remove all of the country's uranium, CNN added. President Donald Trump's administration has been conducting negotiations with Iran aimed at achieving a diplomatic deal over its nuclear program. The new intelligence was based on the public and private communications from senior Israeli officials as well as intercepted Israeli communications and observations of Israeli military movements that could suggest an imminent strike, CNN reported. CNN cited two sources saying that among the military preparations the US had observed were the movement of air munitions and the completion of an air exercise. Earlier on Tuesday, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said US demands that Tehran stop enriching uranium are 'excessive and outrageous,' state media reported, voicing doubts over whether talks on a new nuclear deal will succeed.
