1) The ITIC reports on ‘Hamas Criticism of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad Revealed in Seized Documents from the Gaza Strip’, including on the issue of shortfall missiles.
“The documents showed Hamas was troubled by the PIJ’s failed rocket attacks which killed and injured Gazans. “Ahmed” noted that in his meeting with al-Ajouri, the issue of “rockets falling on civilians” was raised, and al-Ajouri implied that Hamas was also participating in the public campaign of blaming the PIJ. However, he did not deny that the rockets fired by the PIJ had killed and wounded Gazans, but said, “We are at war, and even if a thousand are killed by friendly fire, that is the price of war.””
2) Writing at Tablet Magazine, John Spencer explains why ‘The Genocide Slur Is Not Just for Jews’.
“The most damaging move in today’s discourse is the treatment of numbers as verdicts. Civilian-to-combatant ratios are presented as legal conclusions. Counts of destroyed buildings are treated as evidence of intent. Claims about food supplies, aid convoys, and infrastructure damage are wielded as if they automatically determine whether a military is complying with international law. Context is dismissed as excuse-making. Command intent is treated as propaganda. Enemy conduct is minimized or ignored. This is not analysis. It is the conversion of war into a spreadsheet and then the conversion of that spreadsheet into a moral tribunal.”
3) Zineb Riboua and Reut Yamen discuss ‘Cyber Power, Iran, and the U.S.–China Competition’.
“Over the past decade, Tehran has expanded its cyber units, developed offensive capabilities targeting foreign infrastructure, and constructed a parallel domestic internet designed to give the state granular control over access, content, and attribution. They are part of a broader strategy to insulate the regime from pressure, manage information flows, and impose costs on adversaries while reducing Iran’s vulnerability to sanctions, surveillance, and internal unrest. This evolution reflects learning rather than improvisation and closely mirrors elements of the Chinese model.”
4) At the ICT, Dr Anan Wahabi looks at the implications of recent events in Syria.
“Backed by a Turkish-Qatari coalition that now openly supports the new interim regime in Damascus, Syria is entering a different phase of the conflict. This phase is defined less by negotiation than by consolidation. De facto autonomous spaces are being dismantled, and centralized rule is being reasserted through a mix of force, coercion, and political absorption. Rather than signaling moderation or durable stability, this process reflects the advance of an imperial Islamist vision that is regional in scope and increasingly confident in its methods.”
5) PMW reports on the Palestinian Authority’s continuing terror-related payments.
“This money avoids EU and US donor scrutiny because the PA does not pay terrorists’ families outside the country through the PA’s local Commission of Prisoners. Instead, the PA routes payments through the PLO, where donors are not demanding transparency. Donors scrutinize PA payments; donors do not scrutinize PLO payments. The PA exploits that gap.”
6) Haviv Rettig Gur hosts Matthew Levitt to discuss ‘Hezbollah’s business model’.
“The conversation dives deep into the surprising reality of Hezbollah’s diversified portfolio, including illicit operations in Latin America and Africa. As financial support from Iran has fluctuated, Levitt details how the group has used ethical justifications to lean into organized crime to sustain its activities. We explore the implications of these global networks for regional stability the precarious future of Lebanon.”
