Gaza crisis

Following the violent escalation on October 7, 2023, attributed to the actions of the Israeli regime in Gaza, a series of substantial measures have been implemented by international legal, judicial, and political organizations in support of the Palestinian cause and the resistance movement. These actions have involved key international bodies, such as the Security Council, the General Assembly, and judicial institutions including the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC), as well as various countries and influential global experts. In this context, the international community has witnessed a historical and unprecedented series of judicial opinions, resolutions, and legal positions condemning the actions of the Israeli occupying forces in Gaza. Moreover, the recent focus on obligations to prevent genocide and end the occupation and violence in Palestine is unparalleled in its intensity and global consensus. These measures provide substantial and authoritative evidence supporting the legitimacy of the Palestinian cause, while simultaneously imposing binding legal responsibilities on states, international organizations, and in particular, the General Assembly and Security Council, to ensure the protection of Palestinian rights and the cessation of occupation and violence in the region. The present study adopts a descriptive-analytical methodology, utilizing documentary and library research approaches to critically analyze the nature and substance of these legal instruments and resolutions. In doing so, it aims to inform national, regional, and international executive bodies, while fostering academic dialogue and public awareness on the critical need for implementation of these judicial decisions. This research underscores the transformative legal, judicial, and diplomatic developments following October 7, 2023, developments that are crucial to the future trajectory of Gaza and Palestine, and which must be taken into account when formulating policies and strategies for the region's future.

This research seeks to address whether the European Union (EU) has successfully maintained its strategic autonomy in managing key global issues and crises, a critical element in its decision-making process and a fundamental aspect of the institution itself. The study's conceptual framework centers on the notion of the EU's strategic autonomy, which is analyzed through three case studies: Iran's nuclear issue, the war in Ukraine, and the Gaza crisis. The hypothesis posits that the EU's responses to Iran's nuclear program and the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza reveal a deficiency in its strategic autonomy. Iran's nuclear issue, after two decades of extensive negotiations and agreements that ultimately failed, represents a key instance where the EU's inability to assert strategic autonomy is most evident. Moreover, the EU's handling of the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts, marked by inconsistencies in its application of soft power and moral-value-based leadership, has further cast doubt on the Union's strategic autonomy. The research findings, derived from these case studies, suggest that without political coherence and a unified diplomatic and political strategy—critical elements of strategic autonomy—the EU will continue to be perceived as a dependent and subordinate actor. This condition is commonly referred to in the academic literature as a "strategic autonomy deficit" or a "political and military sovereignty deficit." The methodology of this research is descriptive and analytical, utilizing data collected from a range of sources, including books, peer-reviewed journal articles, online databases, and authoritative expert opinions.

Following the end of World War II and the onset of the Cold War between East and West in the Middle East, the United States gravitated toward supporting Israel as a means to realize its vision of global hegemony, ultimately establishing Israel as a strategic ally in the region. Washington’s support for Tel Aviv is rooted in shared values, beliefs, and the security of mutual interests. This article aims to provide an insightful and accurate understanding of the United States’ strategic reorientation in response to the Gaza crisis. Thus, the research seeks to address the question: What direction will the future of U.S.-Israel relations take in light of the Gaza crisis? The study examines the hypothesis that the future of U.S.-Israel relations could evolve into a form of limited cooperation, characterized by a reduction in Israel’s economic, political, and military dependency on the United States and a shift toward Tel Aviv’s self-reliance. This research is grounded in constructivist theory. Using a futures studies methodology, it explores U.S.-Israel relations in connection with developments in Gaza. The findings demonstrate that the Gaza crisis and the security threats faced by Israel have introduced a new phase of convergence between the two nations. However, this convergence may take the form of limited cooperation due to fundamental challenges, including the decline of the U.S.'s global position, the rise of new powers, and regional challenges.

This research examines how Eastern European countries balance NATO commitments and independent policies in response to the Gaza crisis, with special attention to Iran's role in this equation. The findings of this study show reveal that Eastern European countries, despite structural limitations, maintain significant autonomy in their foreign policy. These countries have shown diverse responses to the Gaza crisis, reflecting a combination of security considerations, economic interests, domestic political constraints, and historical and cultural influences. Iran's role as a key regional actor in the Middle East represents an important variable in the foreign policy calculations of these countries. Comparative analysis of official positions and diplomatic actions reveals a significant gap between discourse and practice. The pattern of Eastern European countries' responses to Gaza crises provides a deeper understanding of foreign policy dynamics in the region and offers a framework for future analyses that incorporate the "Iran factor" in Eastern European foreign policy calculations.