Monday, August 10, 2026

Marco ‘McCarthy’ Rubio: Wrong on Cuba & ‘Terrorism’

 Consortium News, August 10, 2026

Those who challenge and protest U.S. policies are not foreign-paid terrorists; Rubio and other Trump appointees are using “McCarthy” tactics to stop dissent, says Ann Wright.

 

Downtown Minneapolis ICE-out demonstration on Jan. 23 following ICE agent Jonathan Ross’ fatal shooting of civilian Renée Good. (Lorie Shaull /Flickr/ Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY 4.0)

By Ann Wright

Thin-skinned and heavy-handed, the Trump administration apparently feels like it is being singled out by those who dissent from its policies. As a result, Trump appointees are taking drastic “McCarthy” tactics to stop dissent.

In less than one month, alleging that dissent and protests are part of attempts of other governments “to overthrow the government of the United States,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio has sponsored two major initiatives to frighten those who oppose the Trump administration’s policies.

The first salvo was orchestrating a conference with 60 countries participating over “Threats From Left-Wing Terrorists.” The second was the report on Cuba that alleged virtually every group that has ever visited Cuba is paid by the Cuban government.

If You Are Not Outraged, You Aren’t Watching

These allegations of paid protest and travelling on the dime of another country are unfounded, untrue, and fly in the face of the history of protests in the U.S. and travel by U.S. citizens to see the effects of U.S. polices on other countries.

President Donald Trump’s erratic foreign policy, including the disastrous attacks on Iran as a favor to Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israeli war machine; attacks domestically cutting health and education; horrific treatment of migrants; daily outlandish statements on just about every subject; and disregard for facts in virtually every issue all provide good reasons for protests by outraged U.S. citizens.

I have not been paid by any country to protest U.S. policies, nor do I know anyone who has been paid.

No one needs to be paid to be outraged!!!

Dissent Is Not Illegal, Nor Paid by Other Countries

Sen. Joe McCarthy, center, confers with Roy Cohn, chief counsel for House Un-American Activities Committee, Aug. 23, 1953. (Los Angeles Times/Wikimedia Commons)

In particular, Secretary of State and National Security adviser Marco Rubio, who has authored the latest “McCarthy” report to quell opposition to illegal, immoral policies of his department and the Trump administration in general, seems to have lost his grasp on the history of dissent in the U.S.

From his 15 years in the U.S. Senate, he should remember that many of each administration’s domestic and international policies have been lawfully and non-violently protested by U.S. citizens in the U.S. Congress.

Having been a part of many protests since I resigned from the State Department in March 2003 in opposition to a war policy, President George W. Bush’s war on Iraq, I know that these protests are NOT a part of attempts of other governments to “overthrow the government of the United States,” but are legitimate shows of concern about specific policies.

Rubio’s allegations of other countries’ influence in these protests are unfounded and untrue.

I was not paid by a foreign government to resign. I resigned because I felt the war on Iraq was illegal, immoral, and a dangerous action jeopardizing the national security of the United States.

I have not been paid by any country to protest U.S. policies, nor do I know anyone who has been paid. Protest is a legitimate, time-consuming act of outrage about a policy that people use to bring attention to the policy, and hopefully effect change in the policy.

Rubio: Blame the Left, Ignore Right’s Violent Attack

The first attack against legitimate protest came in the U.S. Department of State sponsored conference on “Far-Left Terrorism” held in Washington, D,C,. in July, where Rubio and White House pit bull Stephen Miller harangued the representatives of 66 nations about terrorists from the left wanting to overthrow the U.S. government.

In his opening statement Rubio railed:

“This is a distinctive and unique evil. It has always been driven by a hatred above all else, a hatred for civilization itself. It is a revolt of the worst against the best, a revolt of the weak and the cowardly against the strong and the good.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Miller called left-wing extremism a growing threat aimed at “the overthrow of our system and form of government” that officials previously failed to sufficiently address. Miller railed:

“We must stay the course and be completely unflinching in the pursuit of justice against these enemies of civilization. If the left is allowed to use the real or actual threat of violence to destabilize our institutions, then those institutions cannot and will not succeed.”

White House press release stated,

“Under the leadership of President Donald J. Trump, far-left extremism will be treated with the same seriousness and ferocity the world has long reserved for jihadist terrorism.”

Of course, neither Rubio nor Miller mentioned President Trump’s pardon of the over 1,500 persons who did try to violently overthrow the United States electoral process on Jan. 6, 2021 as they attacked the Capitol police and broke into and destroyed many offices in the U.S. Capitol.

The attempted overthrow of the 2020 election by seeking to nullify the election results through lawsuits in 62 federal and state courts was attempted by Trump’s loyal personal lawyers including the current acting U.S. attorney general and head of the U.S. Department of Justice Todd Blanche, and disgraced and disbarred lawyer and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Their cases of election fraud were stopped by rulings in all 62 federal and state lawsuits that no election fraud had occurred.

Untruthful Report About Cuba & Paid Protesters

Prisoners of the C.I.A,-backed Brigade 2506, after they were captured in the Bay of Pigs invasion, 1961. (Miguel Vinas / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

The most recent and most ludicrous allegations of left-wing violence and protests being funded by other countries is in Secretary of Rubio’s 10- page report on “Cuba: the Capital of 21st Century Communism.”

Rubio accuses the National Network on Cuba, National Lawyers Guild, CODEPINK: Women for Peace, the People’s Forum, IFCO/Pastors for Peace, and the Democratic Socialists of America of being paid by the Cuban government whose goal, the report states, has been for 60 years the overthrow of the U.S. government.

Talk about turning the facts on their heads. As is well-documented, 13 successive U.S. presidential administrations since 1959 — Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, Obama (first term, when C.I.A. policies were still in effect, but changing in Obama’s second term with diplomatic recognition), Trump 1, Biden, and Trump 2 — have attempted to overthrow the Cuban government in the 60-plus years of its existence.

The current attempt of overthrow is centered on the U.S. brutal and total blockade of fuel going to Cuba, which has left Cuban citizens without electricity for operations in hospitals, for food preparation, and for the conduct of normal life.

Making life so miserable for the Cuban citizenry that they overthrow their government would fulfill the longstanding hopes of Cuban-American Rubio.

Rubio Dishonest About Cuban American Background

Marco Rubio has been less than forthright about his heritage as a Cuban American in his quest for the overthrow of the Cuban government.

Rubio, “Mr. Righteous against birthright citizenship,” is a “birthright citizen” born in the U.S. of noncitizen parents who had immigrated in 1956 from Cuba under the Batista dictatorship, not under the 1959 revolutionary government.

Rubio, “Mr. Tough on illegal immigrants,” ignores that his own grandfather entered the U.S. illegally and was ordered to be deported but was saved from deportation by an amnesty during the Cuban missile crisis.

Rubio, “Mr. Kill the Boat Drug Runners of the Caribbean,” disregards that his own brother-in-law was convicted of drug running and his sister implicated but never charged.

Rubio, “Mr. I Know All About Cuba Because I Am Cuban American,” has been to Cuba only once — where in Cuba did he go? A few hours at the U.S. prison on the U.S. Naval base at Guantánamo.

No doubt, more will come in the next two years as Rubio, Miller, and others in the administration seem to think they can get away with outrageous bullying of individuals and organizations that do not agree with them and that challenge them in non-violent ways, in contrast to the Jan. 6 gang.

In particular, there are always protests against the horrific effects of brutal sanctions that the U.S. government uses to make life so difficult for citizens of other countries that they will overthrow their own governments, whether it be Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, or Nicaragua.

Israel’s Paid Influence Seems OK With Rubio

 Rubio and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivering joint statements in Jerusalem on Feb. 16, 2025. (State Department/ Freddie Everett)

However, Rubio must be thinking that since his buddies in the Netanyahu government have paid Trump’s former campaign manager, Brad Parscale, millions of dollars in a specific program to influence U.S. public opinion to stop the massive decline in Israel’s “likability,” that other countries have paid off U.S. persons to work clandestinely on the same scale.

Parscale’s firm was hired by Israel for $6 million in September 2025 and then signed a $15 million contract with Israeli firm Havas to conduct a digital campaign on behalf of the State of Israel, according to the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

Parscale and his team sent conservative influencers suggested positive language about Israel for posts on social media sites such as X, Instagram, and TikTok. The influencers are then compensated based on how many “likes” each post gets from readers.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government has dramatically increased spending on influence operations. Earlier this year, Israel increased by four times its “public diplomacy” influence budget from $150 million in 2025 to $730 million in 2026.

But even The Times of Israel says it’s too late for a “face lift” as a Pew Research Center poll reported that 60 percent of Americans now view Israel unfavorably, up seven points in a single year, with only 37 percent viewing it favorably after Israel has committed genocide of Palestinians in Gaza; pillaged and plundered homes, farms, animals in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian West Bank; destroyed southern Lebanon; and got the Trump administration up to its neck in the war on Iran.

Keep Challenging Illegal, Immoral & Criminal Policies

The two recent major attempts of the Trump administration to quell dissent show how serious challenging illegal, immoral, and criminal policies has become and how important it is that we push back hard against these attempts to intimidate citizens to silence their dissent.

Despite these brutal, heavy-handed attempts, dissent is spreading to regular citizens. In a recent letter to the editor of my hometown newspaper Honolulu Star Advertiser, which serves a large U.S. military population, a resident of Hawaii summarized the challenge very well:

“The true domestic enemy includes those who monopolize political and economic power. The real enemy includes individuals who misinform, threaten, and disenfranchise the less powerful. The true enemy are those who are antidemocratic, have little or no concern regarding the welfare of others, and enrich themselves, family, and a few friends at the expense of the general population.”

Ann Wright served in the U.S. Army/Army Reserves for 29 years and retired as a colonel. She was also a U.S. diplomat for 16 years and served in U.S. embassies in Nicaragua, Grenada, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Sierra Leone, Micronesia, Afghanistan and Mongolia.  She is the co-author of Dissent: Voices of Conscience.  She has been with the Gaza Freedom Flotilla Coalition since 2010, has been put in Israeli prison twice for attempting to break the illegal Israeli naval blockade on Gaza and has been on segments of flotillas in 2011, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2018 and 2024.

As Trump Shows ‘Desperation,’ Iran Says Strait of Hormuz Will Not Open ‘Until America Corrects Its Behavior’

 

Trump-targeting banner displayed in Tehran's Azadi Square

A banner depicting US President Donald Trump and bearing messages was displayed in front of the Zolfaghar and Zolghadr ballistic missiles exhibited at Azadi Square in Tehran, Iran’s capital, on August 2, 2026.

(Photo by Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images)

As it becomes clear that there is “no escalatory military path out of this war,” Iran is demanding an even steeper toll for Trump to pull out.

Stephen Prager, Common Dreams, Aug 09, 2026

President Donald Trump is now quietly conceding that he’s willing to walk away from his Iran war without meeting all of his demands if they agree to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. But Iran won’t let him back out of the quagmire without a steep price.

Iran is in the process of negotiating a limited reopening of the critical waterway with Oman. But Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said on Saturday that “until America corrects its behavior, the Strait of Hormuz will not open.”

RECOMMENDED…

Ships sail near the Strait of Hormuz off the eastern coast of the United Arab Emirates

Trump Revives Iran Blockade, Demands 20% Toll for US ‘Guarding’ Strait of Hormuz

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held a meeting in Tehran

Iranian Foreign Minister: Trump ‘Absolutely Right’ About Guarding Strait of Hormuz—But Iran Will Charge ‘Fair’ Price

He outlined a list of demands on Saturday, even harsher than those Trump walked away from when he abandoned the “memorandum of understanding” negotiated in June.

Zolghadr said the US must permanently end its war and naval blockade against Iran, and withdraw military forces from the region. He also said the US must fully compensate Iran for damages from the war, lift sanctions, and unfreeze assets abroad.

This demand for an end to US “aggression” applies not just to Iran, but to its allies in the region: Zolghadr also demanded an end to Israel’s attacks on Palestinians and a withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon, as well as an end to US and Israeli attacks against the Houthis in Yemen.

The Trump administration, which is not known to be in direct talks with Iran, has not yet responded to the demands. Trump told Axios on Sunday that “We are low-keying it” and “only semi-negotiating with Iran,” claiming that it was “in very bad shape” economically.

It’s clear, however, that the Iranians believe they have enough of an upper hand to make Trump grovel, especially as news emerges that the US has burned through nearly all its available stocks of long-range precision weapons, making the war increasingly costly, though the administration has denied this.

Domestic concerns are also weighing on Trump. Over the past month, as the war heated up again, average gas prices in the US have shot back up above $4 a gallon, a major liability for Republicans heading into a midterm election cycle in which many voters say the cost of living is a top concern.

Approval of Trump among Americans has fallen to a new all-time low of 34% according to a YouGov poll late last month. And just 28% of Americans say they approve of his handling of the war, according to an Associated Press/NORC poll.

As the Wall Street Journal reported, Trump has privately signaled a willingness to declare victory if Iran opens the strait, even without getting any sort of nuclear agreement, which was purportedly the reason he launched the war in the first place.

Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, said Trump was “showing his desperation for a deal before it is completed, so Iran predictably demand[ed] major new concessions,” adding that it was a “masterclass in how not to negotiate.”

“As time passes, Tehran appears increasingly confident that the pressure is shifting onto Washington,” said the Israeli national security analyst Danny Citrinowicz. “Iranian leaders seem to believe that the United States is now more eager than Iran to bring the confrontation in the Strait of Hormuz to an end, and, crucially, that Washington has few attractive military options for changing that equation.”

Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told CNN, “At this point, it is absolutely clear that there is no escalatory military path out of this war.”

“It’s been tried in several different variations, and it has not ended up particularly well,” Parsi said. “In fact, the US’s position has been weakened, in my view, by additional military action. And as a result, I think there needs to be a full dedication to the diplomatic pathway.”

He added that for the Iranians, “the promise and the credibility of sanctions relief will carry far more weight than threats of further bombings.”

Hamas reaffirms commitment to completing 2nd phase of Trump’s Gaza plan

MEM, August 9, 2026 

 

US President Donald Trump at the White House in Washington, D.C., United States, on July 14, 2026. [Mehmet Eser - Anadolu Agency]

US President Donald Trump at the White House in Washington, D.C., United States, on July 14, 2026. [Mehmet Eser – Anadolu Agency]

Palestinian group Hamas reaffirmed Sunday its commitment to a roadmap agreed with mediators and the Board of Peace to complete the second phase of US President Donald Trump’s plan for Gaza, Anadolu reports.

In a statement, the movement said it remains serious about “responsibly engaging” on implementing the 15-point plan and establishing a clear timetable for it.

“The priority at this stage must be to ensure the implementation of all phases and obligations of the agreement,” Hamas said.

It added that the process should lead to a complete ceasefire, an end to Israeli attacks, the completion of Israel’s withdrawal, the reopening of crossings, the entry of humanitarian aid and shelter supplies, the start of reconstruction and enabling the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza to begin its duties.

Hamas called on the mediators, guarantors and the Board of Peace to “shoulder their responsibilities,” ensure that all parties comply with the agreement and prevent violations that could obstruct its implementation or undermine the ceasefire.

The group said it will continue to engage “positively and responsibly” with efforts aimed at completing the deal’s implementation, ending the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza and “protecting their rights and national interests.”

​​​​​​​Early Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Natanyahu rejected the 15-point plan approved by the Board of Peace for Gaza, insisting that Israeli forces will not withdraw from the Palestinian territory until Hamas is disarmed.

Pentagon Drafting New Nuclear Strategy To Expand Options for Tactical Nuclear Weapons Use

The strategy is being overseen by Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon’s policy chief, who has long called for the US to prepare to fight a “limited nuclear war”

by Dave DeCamp, Antiwar. com, August 9, 2026

The Pentagon is reportedly drafting a new nuclear strategy that’s expected to emphasize the use of tactical nuclear weapons to give the president more “options” in a potential nuclear conflict.

The strategy, first reported by NBC News, is being drafted by the Pentagon’s policy chief, Elbridge Colby, who has for more than a decade called for the US to develop additional capabilities to fight a “limited nuclear war.”

The idea would be to shift the US nuclear strategy away from the focus on using strategic nuclear weapons to wipe out an adversary’s nuclear capabilities and focus more on the possibility of using smaller, tactical nuclear weapons in a “regional” conflict.

Elbridge Colby, undersecretary of defense for policy, during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing in Washington, DC, on March 3, 2026. (Photo by Craig Hudson/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect)

“If you actually want extended deterrence to be credible, you have to provide the nation’s political leadership with nuclear capabilities that common sense indicates you could actually use,” a source told NBC. “Otherwise you’re reducing our leadership’s options to extreme choices that the adversary won’t find credible.”

While the potential strategy would be carried out in the name of deterrence and preventing war, arms control advocates have strongly warned against the idea of developing more tactical nuclear weapons to prepare for a potential limited nuclear conflict over concerns that it would make nuclear war much more likely and that any nuclear exchange would likely lead to a global catastrophe.

“Without a firm rejection of the option to use nuclear weapons first in a conflict, by building and fielding more tactical nuclear weapons the administration is signaling its intention to use them against enemy forces and industrial infrastructure in a conflict,” the Arms Control Association said in response to the NBC report.

The ACA said that it “strongly opposes the administration’s decision to build more tactical nuclear weapons to supplement the options that exist” and pointed to the fact that the US already has at least two types of tactical nuclear weapons, including B61-12 gravity bombs, which are deployed in Europe, and the W76-2 low-yield warhead for the Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missile.

The ACA said the US Navy is also “acquiring a new nuclear-capable sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM-N) that may be available at the end of the decade for possible use in conflict with China.”

Breaking Defense reported that Colby announced on August 5 that the Pentagon was reviewing the US nuclear posture and repeatedly emphasized the term “options” in a speech he delivered that has not been made public.

Colby has been one of the leading voices in Washington’s policy circles advocating for the US to prepare for limited nuclear war. In a 2015 paper for the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) titled “A Nuclear Strategy and Posture for 2030,” Colby said the US “should make a special effort to develop the platforms and weapons, doctrine, planning capacity, and other capabilities needed to fight a limited nuclear war more effectively than plausible adversaries.”

He said that the ideal US nuclear force is “one that is not only highly survivable and able to issue a devastating blow against any adversary under any scenario but that is also capable of conducting effective limited nuclear operations in a controlled fashion while maintaining the ability to escalate to full-scale war if necessary.”

Colby made a similar argument in a 2018 piece written in Foreign Affairs titled “If You Want Peace, Prepare for Nuclear War,” published just a few months after he left the first Trump administration, where he led the development of the 2018 National Defense Strategy.

“Washington’s task is clear. It must demonstrate to Moscow and Beijing that any attempt to use force against US friends and allies would likely fail and would certainly result in costs and risks well out of proportion to whatever they might gain,” Colby wrote. “This requires conventional military power, but it also means having the right strategy and weapons to fight a limited nuclear war and come out on top.”

 

Sunday, August 09, 2026

Israel's West Bank endgame: Settlers, soldiers, and the state move as one

What happened in the Nablus-area town of Tell lays bare a land war designed to make Palestinian permanence impossible.

Mohammad al-Ayoubi, The Cradle, AUG 4, 2026


Photo Credit: The Cradle

In the Palestinian town of Tell, southwest of Nablus, residents attempted to repel an armed settler assault. Their response was quickly used to justify collective punishment. The army sealed the roads while settlers attacked homes and property, each advancing the same campaign of dispossession. The assault on Tell exposed a campaign already underway across the occupied West Bank.

Abdullah Abu Rahma, director of popular action at the Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission, tells The Cradle that the violence belongs to a plan unfolding according to a set timetable:

“It is true that attacks have increased markedly in recent days in terms of the number of martyrs, the demolition of property, and restrictions on movement, but they fall within a broader plan drawn up years ago. The events in Tell gave [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu’s government the political and media pretext to accelerate what had already been planned, exploiting them as justification before its domestic audience to create the impression that its actions against the Palestinians are warranted.”

The figures bear out the scale of that campaign. The Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission recorded 11,074 attacks by Israeli forces and settlers during the first half of 2026. Of these, 3,488 were carried out by settlers, including assaults on villages, arson, shootings, land seizures, and the establishment of settlement outposts. The commission says settler attacks killed 17 Palestinians during that period.

The occupied West Bank is also being broken into ever smaller enclaves. As of December 2025, OCHA had documented 925 movement obstacles, including 89 permanently staffed checkpoints, 218 partial checkpoints, and 232 road gates.

An Oxfam analysis of UN data found that 1,244 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces or settlers between 2023 and the end of 2025. Nearly 46,000 Palestinians were forcibly displaced over the same three years, compared with just over 13,000 during the previous 14 years combined.

For Dr Mohammad Halsa, a specialist in Israeli affairs, the violence cannot be understood as a chain of isolated reactions:

“It is one element of a comprehensive ideological agenda governing the ruling right, which views all Palestinian land as the exclusive property of Jews and considers the present moment the most suitable opportunity to move from ‘managing the conflict’ to ‘resolving it’ once and for all, thereby correcting a ‘historic mistake’ committed by Ben-Gurion in 1948 when several thousand Palestinians were allowed to remain.”

Tell and the anatomy of a land grab

Suleiman Bisharat, director of the Yabous Center, and Abu Rahma both reject the idea that Tell represents a sudden turn. They place it within a pattern of settlement violence that has intensified across the occupied West Bank since 2024.

Community activist Ahmad Ayyash goes further, telling The Cradle:

“What is happening is not ‘settler attacks under army protection,’ as it is portrayed, but attacks carried out in partnership with the army, not under its protection. The partnership between the two operates in a state of extremely close coordination. The settlers and the Israeli army are not separate actors, but two arms of the same project.”

For Ayyash, Tell may nevertheless prove significant as “a turning point in resisting attacks by settlers and the army, or the beginning of the use of new means to confront the occupation,” particularly as Palestinians face forms of violence that many communities had not previously experienced at this intensity.

Regarding one recent incident, Abu Rahma is equally direct, asserting that “what happened was self-defense, the videos show the dead were killed by army fire or by the settlers themselves, and that seizing the weapon was a fleeting moment rather than a planned act.”

Reuters reported that the confrontation began after armed settlers approached the village and that footage appeared to show a Palestinian seizing a rifle before being shot.

Erasing the resistance model

The ferocity of the Israeli response, Ayyash argues, was intended to ensure that Tell would not become a precedent for other Palestinian towns facing settler terror. The occupation could not allow a community’s defense of itself to be seen as a model capable of deterring future attacks.

“Even before 7 October, the occupation was trying to destroy the Palestinian model and the model of the resistance fighter, as previously occurred in the Nour Shams, Tulkarem, and Jenin camps, where the geography was altered, the environment sustaining the resistance was blown apart, and even memorials to the martyrs were destroyed.”

The collective punishment imposed on Tell carried a warning to other Palestinian communities: resisting settler incursions would bring the full weight of the occupation down upon them. Such resistance threatens the conditions under which settlement expansion has been allowed to proceed largely unchallenged.

Making Palestinian life impossible

Ayyash describes this process as demographic engineering, but its methods differ between Gaza and the occupied West Bank. In Gaza, he argues, the occupation has reordered daily life by controlling not only how much enters the strip, but also which goods are admitted or withheld.

Reporting in January 2026 documented shortages of beef, poultry, hygiene products, and other basic supplies caused by Israeli import restrictions. The effect reaches beyond hunger, reshaping how families obtain food and the conditions under which everyday life can continue.

In the occupied West Bank, Ayyash says, the same logic is being applied through systematic displacement. He dates the acceleration of the campaign to 2024, eight months after the war on Gaza began, and recalls advertising and media messages along bypass roads declaring, “There is no future in Palestine.”

Their purpose, he argues, was to convince Palestinians that a dignified life on their land was no longer possible and that they must look elsewhere.

The pressure has fallen especially heavily on Bedouin and herding communities. OCHA reported that settler attacks and related access restrictions displaced 6,200 Palestinians across 119 communities between January 2023 and June 2026, including more than 3,600 people from 46 communities that were completely emptied.

Ayyash says these pressures are now driving internal migration from isolated areas and villages near settlements toward Area A and the main urban centers.

Movement restrictions are compounded by settler raids, the theft of livestock and crops, and the destruction of roads and other infrastructure. This daily attrition cuts communities off from the resources needed to remain on their land. As those conditions deteriorate, targeted areas are emptied and opened to seizure.

Poll
What is driving Israel’s accelerated takeover of the West Bank?
A long-planned annexation strategy
Settler expansion backed by the army
The absence of meaningful international pressure
All of the above

19 votes, 1 days and 14 hours left

Two arms of the same project

Abu Rahma describes a division of labor between the state and the settler militias. The official apparatus supplies legislation, courts, police, and military force. Settlers receive funding, transport, and weapons, while their crimes are ignored or actively enabled.

A UN inquiry published in June found that Israeli authorities had facilitated settler violence through financial, military, and legal support, with security forces frequently accompanying or protecting settlers during attacks.

The state demolishes homes and chokes Palestinian movement with checkpoints. Settlers torch property and drive residents from their land. Resistance is met with arrest and fines. Step by step, the ground is cleared for annexation.

Halsa identifies two purposes behind this constant friction. The first is to terrorize Palestinians until they leave their land voluntarily. The second is to provoke them into defending themselves, allowing a far more violent response to be justified through an inverted account in which the attackers become the victims.

The commission’s 3,488 recorded settler attacks during the first half of 2026 amount to an average of more than 19 each day, although its methodology counts a wider range of violations than OCHA’s incident-based monitoring.

By 20 July, OCHA had recorded 18 Palestinian deaths linked to settler attacks, a figure that already exceeded the total for all of 2025. What was once treated as fringe violence has become a central method of territorial control.

Outposts without pretexts

Settlement expansion does not depend on Tell or any other single confrontation. Ayyash says the occupation uses every available opportunity to accelerate construction and seize land, but requires no particular pretext. Had the events in Tell not occurred, the outposts would have expanded for another stated reason, or without one.

In the wake of the confrontation, Netanyahu pledged to accelerate settlement construction in the area. Halsa warns that “every inch that is vacated creates room for a Zionist Talmudic foothold, and the hands of the clock do not move backward.”

Extremist Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has announced plans for 763 housing units in Eli, a project expected to triple the settlement’s size. In July, Israel’s security cabinet also approved 1.3 billion shekels for 34 new West Bank settlements, including newly established sites and existing outposts slated for retroactive legalization.

An election fought over Palestinian blood

The escalation is also feeding an Israeli election campaign ahead of the vote scheduled for 27 October 2026. Halsa describes the political field as “wide open,” with ministers competing to adopt the most hardline position and turning Palestinian land and holy sites into campaign material.

Ayyash offers a more severe reading. He argues that extremism is embedded in the Israeli political mainstream and that Israeli society is aggressive and “enamored of killing and destruction,” invoking the racist maxim, “The only good Arab is a dead Arab.”

Political currents compete for votes at the expense of Palestinian lives, each seeking to appear more violent toward Palestinians and more committed to settlement expansion than the next.

That contest leaves little room for the familiar claim that a meaningful Israeli camp remains committed to peace. Bisharat cautions, however, that elections are an accelerant rather than the root cause.

The electoral contest operates within an ideological horizon reaching back to 1948, when Jewish armed groups were deployed to empty Palestinian villages through arson and the killing of civilians.

Today’s settler militias perform a comparable function for the state. Their violence may be presented as spontaneous or unauthorized, but it advances policies that the government later formalizes through military orders, planning decisions, and annexation measures.

Annexation at wartime speed

Abu Rahma says the project was already established before Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, but the regional war gave Israel the space to execute it at an unprecedented pace. Plans once expected to take 10 years are now being carried out in three or four, aided by an international community that has normalized crimes against Palestinians through silence and inaction.

That rush has also alarmed parts of Israel’s own security establishment. Nearly 600 former military, intelligence, police, and diplomatic officials warned US President Donald Trump that settler violence could produce consequences “even more catastrophic” than those of 7 October.

Yet electoral and ideological calculations continue to outweigh even the national security concerns raised by figures who spent their careers defending the occupation state.

Across the occupied West Bank, supposedly temporary measures are hardening into facts on the ground. Roads remain closed long after the army arrives, while settler outposts spread across village grazing land under military protection. Cut off from their land and neighboring communities, families are pushed toward urban centers.

Holding the ground

Despite the overwhelming imbalance of force, Palestinians remain the principal obstacle to this project. In Gaza and during the intifadas of 1987 and 2000, they demonstrated an ability to frustrate displacement plans, even at an immense human cost.

Bisharat asks whether Palestinians can continue reshuffling the political deck long enough to benefit from the international shift now troubling Israel. Support for the occupation state has declined, while public backing for the Palestinian cause has risen amid the war of extermination in Gaza. The question is whether that change can be converted into pressure on the governments still arming and protecting Tel Aviv.

Halsa argues that the minimum response must combine organized, peaceful popular action, including guard groups and community gatherings, with a sustained media and diplomatic campaign capable of exposing Israel’s version of events. Tell, he says, should immediately have been followed by press conferences laying out how the confrontation unfolded and documenting the army’s role.

He also calls for Palestinian efforts to build on dissent inside Israel, including the letter signed by nearly 600 former security officials, while exploiting contradictions within the occupation state. That requires converting the shift in western public opinion into influence over international decision-making, an outcome he says Israel deeply fears.

Tell has exposed how military power, settler violence, and state policy are being used to dispossess Palestinians without a formal annexation decree.

International organizations may continue counting the dead, displaced, checkpoints, attacks, and outposts. But documentation without consequence leaves the map to be redrawn while the reports accumulate.

The outcome will be decided on the ground, where Palestinian refusal to leave remains the main barrier to Israel’s West Bank endgame.

Saturday, August 08, 2026

CIA launches Cuba task force amid new sanctions and UN warnings of a “silent Gaza"

Andrea Lobo, WSWS, 8 Aug 2026
 
US Embassy in Havana [Photo: US Department of State]

Announcing a new round of sanctions against Cuba on Thursday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that President Donald Trump’s “resolve is ironclad: the United States will not tolerate a rogue state harboring hostile foreign military, intelligence, and terror operations just 90 miles from the American homeland.”

The threat was issued against a country whose electrical grid collapsed twice within 24 hours this week, whose hospitals operate without reliable power and whose population is being deprived of food, medicine and fuel by a deliberate US energy blockade. 

On Thursday, United Nations human rights rapporteurs condemned the US measures and warned of a “silent Gaza” unfolding on the island, declaring that food “must never be used as an instrument of political pressure,” and that measures knowingly depriving a population of the means to survive strike at the most basic guarantees of the right to life.

What the Trump administration is carrying out is an undeclared war of extermination against nearly 10 million people, criminal under international law and aimed at driving an entire society back a century in order to turn it into a colony.

The sanctions announced Thursday target five Cuban entities and eight individuals, including subsidiaries of the military conglomerate GAESA, Revolutionary Armed Forces Minister Álvaro López Miera, Chief of the General Staff Roberto Legrá Sotolongo and Cuba’s military attachés to Russia and China.

They came one day after the New York Times revealed that the CIA has secretly established a Cuba task force, adding case officers who recruit and manage spies, intelligence analysts, cyber-operations personnel and specialists in covert influence operations. According to the officials speaking anonymously to the Times, the task force seeks to create fissures among the Cuban political elite in the hope of replacing “hard-liners” with leaders more amenable to Trump’s demands.

The Times also revealed that the Trump administration has revised the National Intelligence Priorities Framework to designate Cuba a “Priority 1” target, alongside China, Iran and Russia. This has led the National Security Agency, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and others to dedicate more intelligence collection assets, including satellites, toward the island.

The Times states plainly what this is for: the intelligence “will help the U.S. military update its options for potential military action against Cuba.”

These operations coincide with a sweeping reorganization of the US military across the hemisphere. At midnight on Monday, Southern Command retired Joint Task Force-Southern Spear—responsible for 63 strikes on fishing boats accused of carrying drugs in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific that have killed 221 people in eleven months—and replaced it with Joint Task Force-Western Hemisphere. 

SOUTHCOM commander Gen. Francis Donovan announced that the new command, “the action arm of US Southern Command,” would “apply total systemic friction on these networks,” operating alongside “our 18 other nations” in the Americas Counter Cartel Coalition. Its purpose is to extend joint strikes from international waters onto the sovereign territory of Latin American states. Cuba will figure among its principal targets, together with the coordination of repression against social opposition throughout the region.

With the debacle in the war against Iran and social anger mounting over ICE raids, healthcare cuts and the cost of living, an operation against Cuba is being contemplated as an “October surprise.” Some of Trump’s advisers believe the Cuban government “could be gone by the time of the midterm election in the United States in November,” according to the Times.  

Such a move would not be aimed at boosting popularity for the Republican Party—only 15 percent of Americans support a war against Cuba. It would provide the pretext to manipulate or even cancel the 2026 elections and criminalize opposition.

The last time the CIA established a Cuba task force was 1960. Its members oversaw the April 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, in which some 1,400 CIA-organized and financed exile mercenaries landed on the island. The operation was crushed by Cuban forces. When it failed, the Joint Chiefs of Staff drafted Operation Northwoods, a since-declassified proposal to stage false-flag terrorist bombings in American cities and hijackings of US aircraft to manufacture a pretext for invasion.

The Venezuelan precedent shows a more recent example. In October 2025, Trump publicly confirmed he had authorized the CIA to conduct covert and potentially lethal operations inside Venezuela. Three months later, on January 3, US Special Forces seized President Nicolás Maduro and his wife without suffering a single casualty—his location known, his defenses mapped, the political ground prepared for Delcy Rodríguez and her brother to preside over a US protectorate that has handed Washington control over Venezuelan oil, finances and foreign policy.

Who infiltrated whom

On July 20 the State Department published a 100-page report, “Cuba: the capital of 21st century communism,” which it has promoted on social media several times a week since. Its thesis is that Havana has spent six decades infiltrating agents into American social movements and the US state itself—that the civil rights movement, the opposition to the Vietnam War, the protests following the police murder of George Floyd and the present movements against ICE and the Gaza genocide were, in substantial measure, directed from Cuba. 

Rubio told Fox News last week that Cuba is “a true superpower” of espionage and influence, and that of the recent protest movement, “there’s nothing organic about it.”

This week’s revelations establish the real direction of state penetration. American case officers, cyber-operatives and influence specialists are actively being inserted into Cuba, with satellites re-tasked overhead and military options under preparation.

The historical record admits of no ambiguity. Washington imposed its partial embargo in 1960, made comprehensive in 1962. In March 1960 the CIA bombed the La Coubre in Havana harbor, timing the charges in succession so that rescue workers responding to the first blast would be caught by the second; over 100 died. Cuban counterintelligence documented 638 separate schemes to kill Castro. Luis Posada Carriles, trained by the CIA at Fort Benning, organized the 1976 bombing of Cubana Flight 455, killing all 73 aboard, including the national junior fencing team. Researchers place the toll of US-directed and US-linked terrorism against Cuba since 1959 at more than 3,000 killed. Not one perpetrator has been prosecuted.

ince Trump’s declaration of a national emergency over Cuba in January, US aggression has turned genocidal. Washington has imposed an energy embargo threatening punitive tariffs against any country selling the island oil, along with successive sanctions packages freezing the assets of dozens of Cuban entities and officials. 

In May, the US Department of Justice indicted the 94-year-old Raúl Castro on charges arising from the 1996 downing of two aircraft operated by CIA-linked provocateurs. Combined with a military buildup in the Caribbean and now covert operations on the ground, the indictment is a patently fabricated pretext to justify a military attack.

Havana’s answer: a country for sale

Confronted with this onslaught, the Cuban government has appealed not to the working class but to the American ruling elite.

On May 14, it received CIA Director John Ratcliffe in Havana, where he demanded “fundamental changes” in a meeting with senior Cuban officials, including Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro, the former president’s grandson. Havana has since announced the most radical economic restructuring since 1959—privatizations, the stripping of labor protections and open-ended invitations to foreign capital.

The character of these appeals is unmistakable. Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Fernández de Cossío told the New York Times that Havana would not oppose a Trump-branded resort on Cayo Santa María: “If he wants to do it peacefully, we see no specific reason to exclude him… If it is the Trump administration, in principle, we have no reason to refuse.” 

Deputy Foreign Trade Minister Carlos Luis Jorge Méndez told The National: “We want American businesspeople to know and understand that Cuba is a country open to investment… in sectors ranging from mining and tourism to real estate, banking and finance.”

The regime that survived 66 years of CIA terror campaigns and provocations now negotiates the terms of its own submission with the CIA’s director and offers the island back to the US oligarchy that ran it as a casino and brothel under Batista.

This is the dead end of bourgeois nationalism. Neither Havana nor the “left” governments of Mexico, Brazil and Colombia—complicit throughout in the fuel blockade—will defend the Cuban people.

The only force capable of halting this crime is the international working class. Dockworkers, transport, oil and logistics workers in the United States and internationally must refuse to enforce the blockade and demand its immediate end, along with the delivery of the fuel, food and medicine Cuba requires. The threat of war against Cuba, the buildup of dictatorship at home and the persecution of socialists are a single process and must be answered by the industrial and political mobilization of workers everywhere against war and fascism, on the basis of a socialist program.

𝐋𝐞𝐛𝐚𝐧𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐨𝐥𝐥 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐈𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥𝐢 𝐚𝐠𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝟒,𝟑𝟑𝟓

The Dawn, 8 Aug 2026

Lebanon’s Health Ministry says the death toll from the latest Israeli aggression against the country has risen to 4,335, IRNA reports.

According to a statement by the ministry, carried by Lebanon’s Al Manar news network, at least 4,335 people have been killed since the Israeli aggression began on March 2, 2026.

The statement put the number of injured at 12,27