This is The Prophecy. The Prophecy is much more than seeing into the future. For The Prophecy sees without the limits of time. For The Prophecy sees what is, what was, and what always shall be.
11 May 04:29 UTC: First to report: VolcanoDiscovery after 12 minutes.
Earthquake details
Date & timeMay 11, 2024 04:17:44 UTC – 16 hours agoLocal timeSaturday, May 11, 2024, at 12:17 am(GMT -4)StatusdisregardedMagnitudeunknown (3?)Depth10 kmEpicenter40.7889°N / 73.1772°WNew York, United StatesSeismic antipode40.7889°S / 106.8229°EShakingIII Weak shaking near epicenterFelt1 reportPrimary data sourceVolcanoDiscovery (User-reported shaking)Weather at epicenterBroken Clouds 8.4°C (47 F), humidity: 85%, wind: 2 m/s (3 kts) from ENE
Nearby places
The closest larger town where the quake might have been felt is Brentwood, a town with 61,000 inhabitants in the United States, in 5.9 km (3.7 mi) distance west of the epicenter. People likely experienced weak shaking there. Several smaller towns and villages are located closer to the epicenter and might have experienced stronger shaking. In the capital of the United States, Washington, 391 km (243 mi) away from the epicenter, the earthquake could not be felt. The following table shows some of the places that might have been affected (or not) by the shaking
FILE – Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas addresses the 77th session of the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 23, 2022, at the U.N. headquarters. The U.N. General Assembly is expected to vote Friday, May 10, 2024, on a resolution that would grant new “rights and privileges” to Palestine and… (Associated Press)
UN assembly approves resolution granting Palestine new rights and reviving its UN membership bid | Newser
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The U.N. General Assembly voted by a wide margin on Friday to grant new “rights and privileges” to Palestine and called on the Security Council to reconsider Palestine’s request to become the 194th member of the United Nations.
The world body approved the Arab and Palestinian-sponsored resolution by a vote of 143-9 with 25 abstentions. The United States voted against it, along with Israel, Argentina, Czechia, Hungary, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau and Papua New Guinea.
The vote reflected the wide global support for full membership of Palestine in the United Nations, with many countries expressing outrage at the escalating death toll in Gaza and fears of a major Israeli offensive in Rafah, a southern city where about 1.3 million Palestinians have sought refuge.
It also demonstrated growing support for the Palestinians. A General Assembly resolution on Oct. 27 calling for a humanitarian cease-fire in Gaza was approved 120-14 with 45 abstentions. That was just weeks after Israel launched its military offensive in response to Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack in southern Israel, which killed 1,200 people.
While Friday’s resolution gives Palestine some new rights and privileges, it reaffirms that it remains a non-member observer state without full U.N. membership and the right to vote in the General Assembly or at any of its conferences. And the United States has made clear that it will block Palestinian membership and statehood until direct negotiations with Israel resolve key issues, including security, boundaries and the future of Jerusalem, and lead to a two-state solution.
U.S. deputy ambassador Robert Wood said Friday that for the U.S. to support Palestinian statehood, direct negotiations must guarantee Israel’s security and future as a democratic Jewish state and that Palestinians can live in peace in a state of their own.
Under the U.N. Charter, prospective members of the United Nations must be “peace-loving” and the Security Council must recommend their admission to the General Assembly for final approval. Palestine became a U.N. non-member observer state in 2012.
The United States considers Friday’s resolution an attempt to get around the Charter’s provisions, Wood reiterated Thursday.
Unlike resolutions in the Security Council, there are no vetoes in the 193-member General Assembly. Friday’s resolution required a two-thirds majority of members voting and got significantly more than the 118 vote minimum.
U.S. allies supported the resolution, including France, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Australia, Estonia and Norway. But European countries were very divided.
The resolution “determines” that a state of Palestine is qualified for membership — dropping the original language that in the General Assembly’s judgment it is “a peace-loving state.” It therefore recommends that the Security Council reconsider its request “favorably.”
The renewed push for full Palestinian membership in the U.N. comes as the war in Gaza has put the more than 75-year-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict at center stage. At numerous council and assembly meetings, the humanitarian crisis facing the Palestinians in Gaza and the killing of more than 34,000 people in the territory, according to Gaza health officials, have generated outrage from many countries.
Before the vote, Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian U.N. ambassador, told the assembly in an emotional speech that “No words can capture what such loss and trauma signifies for Palestinians, their families, communities and for our nation as a whole.”
He said Palestinians in Gaza “have been pushed to the very edge of the strip, to the very brink of life” with Israel besieging Rafah.
Mansour accused Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of preparing “to kill thousands to ensure his political survival” and aiming to destroy the Palestinian people.
He welcomed the resolution’s strong support and told AP that 144 countries have now recognized the state of Palestine, including four countries since Oct. 7, all from the Caribbean.
Israel’s U.N. Ambassador Gilad Erdan vehemently opposed the resolution, accusing U.N. member nations of not mentioning Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack and seeking “to reward modern-day Nazis with rights and privileges.”
He said if an election were held today, Hamas would win, and warned U.N. members that they were “about to grant privileges and rights to the future terror state of Hamas.” He held up a photo of Yehya Sinwar, the mastermind of the Hamas attack on Israel, saying a terrorist “whose stated goal is Jewish genocide” would be a future Palestinian leader.
Erdan also accused the assembly of trampling on the U.N. Charter, putting two pages that said “U.N. Charter” in a small shredder he held up. .
The original draft of the resolution was changed significantly to address concerns not only by the U.S. but also by Russia and China, three Western diplomats said, speaking on condition of anonymity because negotiations were private.
The first draft would have conferred on Palestine “the rights and privileges necessary to ensure its full and effective participation” in the assembly’s sessions and U.N. conferences “on equal footing with member states.” It also made no reference to whether Palestine could vote in the General Assembly.
According to the diplomats, Russia and China, which are strong supporters of Palestine’s U.N. membership, were concerned that granting the rights and privileges listed in an annex could set a precedent for other would-be U.N. members — with Russia concerned about Kosovo and China about Taiwan.
Under longstanding legislation by the U.S. Congress, the United States is required to cut off funding to U.N. agencies that give full membership to a Palestinian state, which could mean a cutoff in dues and voluntary contributions to the U.N. from its largest contributor.
The final draft that was voted on dropped the language that would put Palestine “on equal footing with member states.” And to address Chinese and Russian concerns, it decided “on an exceptional basis and without setting a precedent” to adopt the rights and privileges in the annex.
It also added a provision in the annex clarifying that it does not give Palestine the right to vote in the General Assembly or put forward candidates for U.N. agencies.
What the resolution does give Palestine are the rights to speak on all issues not just those related to the Palestinians and Middle East, to propose agenda items and reply in debates, and to serve on the assembly’s main committees. It also allows Palestinians to participate in U.N. and international conferences convened by the United Nations, but without the right to vote.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas first delivered the Palestinian Authority’s application for U.N. membership in 2011. It failed because the Palestinians didn’t get the required minimum support of nine of the Security Council’s 15 members.
They went to the General Assembly and succeeded by more than a two-thirds majority in having their status raised from a U.N. observer to a non-member observer state. That opened the door for the Palestinian territories to join U.N. and other international organizations, including the International Criminal Court.
In the Security Council vote on April 18, the Palestinians got much more support for full U.N. membership. The vote was 12 in favor, the United Kingdom and Switzerland abstaining, and the United States voting no and vetoing the resolution.
Russian President Vladimir Putin made a veiled threat to use nuclear weapons against Western states during a commemoration of Russia’s World War II victory in Moscow Thursday.
“Russia will do everything to prevent a global clash,” Putin said. “But at the same time, we will not allow anyone to threaten us.”
“Our strategic forces are always in a state of combat readiness,” the Russian leader added, referencing his country’s most powerful nuclear weapons. The comments came just days after Russia announced it would conduct military exercises to prepare for the use of “tactical” nuclear weapons, which are designed for attacks on soldiers rather than population centers.
The announcement set off alarm bells in Washington, which has sought to carefully avoid any escalation to a direct NATO-Russia war. The State Department called the move “reckless” but soothed some nerves by saying the U.S. did not anticipate any short-term use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine.
Putin’s latest moves are nonetheless part of a notable increase in Russian belligerence toward the West this past week, which Moscow claims is a response to Western efforts to rush weapons to Ukraine.
The situation increasingly resembles an escalation spiral, an international relations term for when two sides inch closer to direct war through gradual moves aimed at deterring the other party. As the war has dragged on, hawkish elements in the West and Russia have each succeeded in pressing their leaders to take steps that were once viewed as likely to result in further escalation.
Fearing a potential Ukrainian defeat, western Europe and the U.S. have increasingly signaled that the proverbial gloves are off. Britain recently declared that it had no issue with Ukraine using British weapons to strike Russian territory. “Just as Russia is striking inside Ukraine, you can quite understand why Ukraine feels the need to make sure it’s defending itself,” British Foreign Minister David Cameron said last week.
And Cameron is right in a narrow, moral sense. But the practical wisdom of that greenlight is unclear given Russia’s predictable response, which was to threaten retaliation against U.K. military targets if any British weapons did indeed strike Russian territory.
Even if Britain had no intention of being dragged into the war, Russia’s threat took British views out of the picture entirely. It is now up to Ukraine — a country facing long odds in a desperate, defensive war — to decide whether it can stomach the risk of further escalation.
The U.S. is more attuned to the risks inherent to Britain’s approach. While Washington did quietly give Kyiv long-range missiles, the Biden administration also made clear that the weapons could only be used against targets inside of Ukrainian territory, a restriction aimed at threading the needle between Russia’s red lines and Ukraine’s needs.
French President Emmanuel Macron has been less careful. Macron responded to Ukraine’s battlefield struggles by suggesting that France could send its own troops into the fight, raising the specter of direct war between two nuclear-armed states.
In this case, Russia shot back at Macron by promising to attack any French troops that show up at the frontline. “If the French appear in the conflict zone, they will inevitably become targets for the Russian armed forces,” said a spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry Wednesday.
From Russia’s perspective, all of these recent moves are likely about restoring deterrence. But that doesn’t make them any less terrifying to us in the West. And Russia feels the same when we respond to that fear with our own efforts to restore deterrence.
This should all serve as a reminder that the potential of a broader Russia-NATO war never went away. We’ve simply gotten used to living in a time of great danger. In practice, the chance of a cataclysmic mistake is growing more and more likely by the day.
In other diplomatic news:
— Following a meeting with Macron Monday, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for an international truce during the Olympic Games this summer, according to Politico. Macron thanked Xi for signing onto his idea of an Olympic truce and hinted that the pause could provide an opening to push for peace talks in Ukraine. “Maybe this could be an opportunity to work toward a sustainable resolution [of conflicts] in the full respect of international law,” the French leader said. Xi will have a chance to pitch the idea to Putin directly later this month when the Russian leader is scheduled to visit China.
— The only way to end the Ukraine war is through a temporary truce followed by peace talks, Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto said Monday, according to Reuters. Crosetto brushed off the idea that Putin hasn’t actually shown a desire to negotiate, saying “that is a good reason for us to try harder.” “We mustn’t give up any possible path of diplomacy, however narrow,” he argued, adding that Western sanctions and weapons had failed to deliver a decisive battlefield victory.
— Britain moved to expelRussia’s defense attache in London over allegations that the officer was using his military post for spying, according to AP News. The announcement came alongside new restrictions on diplomatic visas for future Russian envoys. Russia promised to respond “in kind.”
— Russian authorities arrested an American soldier in Vladivostok on charges of theft in early May, according to the New York Times. While U.S. officials have not formally designated the soldier as wrongfully detained, the arrest led to speculation that Russia is seeking further bargaining chips for prisoner swaps with the United States.
U.S. State Department news:
In a Wednesday press conference, State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller strongly discouraged Americans from traveling to Russia given the risk of wrongful arrest. “Russia has detained Americans for not legitimate law enforcement reasons but because it wants to hold them essentially as hostage,” Miller said. “Americans should not, for any reason, travel to Russia.
Mani Shankar Aiyar stated that the government can talk tough to Pakistan if it wants to, but if it doesn’t respect the neighbouring country, it may have to pay a heavy price.
Senior Congress leader Congress Mani Shankar Aiyar warns India of Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities
Mani Shankar Aiyar advocates dialogue with Pakistan
Warns of Pakistan’s nuclear retaliation if India flexes military muscles
Accuses PM Modi of not working to resolve issues
Congress veteran Mani Shankar Aiyar courted controversy after saying that India should engage in dialogue with Pakistan and not flex its military muscles as it may irk Islamabad into deploying nuclear weapons against New Delhi.
Aiyar, a former diplomat and vocal advocate of normalising India-Pakistan relations, stated that the government can talk tough to Islamabad if it wants to, but if it doesn’t respect the neighbouring country, it may have to pay a heavy price.
“They have atom bombs. We have them too, but if a ‘madman’ decides to drop a bomb on Lahore, it won’t take 8 seconds for the radiation to reach Amritsar,” he warned.
“If we respect them, they will remain peaceful. But if we snub them, what happens if a ‘madman’ comes up and decides to launch bombs [at India]?” Aiyar asked.
In a veiled dig at Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Aiyar said, “In order to become the vishwaguru, no matter how serious our issues with Pakistan are, we have to show that we are working hard to resolve them. But in the last 10 years, there has been no hard work [to this end].”
The Congress was quick to distance itself from Aiyar’s remarks, stating that they did not reflect the party’s stance. It also accused the BJP of deliberately raking up an old interview of Aiyar’s to score political points.
“Indian National Congress dissociates itself completely from and disagrees totally with some remarks made by Mr Mani Shankar Aiyar few months back which have been revived today by the BJP in its attempt to deflect attention from Prime Minister Modi’s daily goof ups. Mr Aiyar does not speak for the party in any capacity whatsoever,” Congress leader Pawan Khera tweeted.
In the wake of the Prime Minister’s salvo, other senior BJP leaders have also dialled up the anti-Pakistan rhetoric. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh asserted that Pakistan-Occupied-Kashmir (PoK) “was, is, and will remain ours”, but India won’t have to capture it with force because its people, on their own, would want to be part of India.
Former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah reminded Rajnath Singh that Pakistan is a nuclear power. “Remember, they (Pakistan) are also not wearing bangles. It has atom bombs, and unfortunately, that atom bomb will fall on us,” he warned.
By Kathleen Magramo, Leinz Valez, Sophie Tanno, Rob Picheta and Elise Hammond, CNN
Updated 10:32 PM ET, Fri May 10, 2024
What we covered here
The Biden administration said Friday it is “reasonable to assess” that US weapons have been used by Israeli forces in Gaza in ways that are inconsistent with international humanitarian law – but the highly anticipated report stopped short of officially saying Israel violated the law.
East Coast Earthquake Preparedness By By BEN NUCKOLS Posted: 08/25/2011 8:43 am EDT WASHINGTON — There were cracks in the Washington Monument and broken capstones at the National Cathedral. In the District of Columbia suburbs, some people stayed in shelters because of structural concerns at their apartment buildings. A day after the East Coast’s strongest earthquake in 67 years, inspectors assessed the damage and found that most problems were minor. But the shaking raised questions about whether this part of the country, with its older architecture and inexperience with seismic activity, is prepared for a truly powerful quake. The 5.8 magnitude quake felt from Georgia north to Canada prompted swift inspections of many structures Wednesday, including bridges and nuclear plants. An accurate damage estimate could take weeks, if not longer. And many people will not be covered by insurance. In a small Virginia city near the epicenter, the entire downtown business district was closed. School was canceled for two weeks to give engineers time to check out cracks in several buildings. At the 555-foot Washington Monument, inspectors found several cracks in the pyramidion – the section at the top of the obelisk where it begins narrowing to a point. A 4-foot crack was discovered Tuesday during a visual inspection by helicopter. It cannot be seen from the ground. Late Wednesday, the National Park Service announced that structural engineers had found several additional cracks inside the top of the monument. Carol Johnson, a park service spokeswoman, could not say how many cracks were found but said three or four of them were “significant.” Two structural engineering firms that specialize in assessing earthquake damage were being brought in to conduct a more thorough inspection on Thursday. The monument, by far the tallest structure in the nation’s capital, was to remain closed indefinitely, and Johnson said the additional cracks mean repairs are likely to take longer. It has never been damaged by a natural disaster, including earthquakes in Virginia in 1897 and New York in 1944. Tourists arrived at the monument Wednesday morning only to find out they couldn’t get near it. A temporary fence was erected in a wide circle about 120 feet from the flags that surround its base. Walkways were blocked by metal barriers manned by security guards. “Is it really closed?” a man asked the clerk at the site’s bookstore. “It’s really closed,” said the clerk, Erin Nolan. Advance tickets were available for purchase, but she cautioned against buying them because it’s not clear when the monument will open. “This is pretty much all I’m going to be doing today,” Nolan said. Tuesday’s quake was centered about 40 miles northwest of Richmond, 90 miles south of Washington and 3.7 miles underground. In the nearby town of Mineral, Va., Michael Leman knew his Main Street Plumbing & Electrical Supply business would need – at best – serious and expensive repairs. At worst, it could be condemned. The facade had become detached from the rest of the building, and daylight was visible through a 4- to 6-inch gap that opened between the front wall and ceiling. “We’re definitely going to open back up,” Leman said. “I’ve got people’s jobs to look out for.” Leman said he is insured, but some property owners might not be so lucky. The Insurance Information Institute said earthquakes are not covered under standard U.S. homeowners or business insurance policies, although supplemental coverage is usually available. The institute says coverage for other damage that may result from earthquakes, such as fire and water damage from burst gas or water pipes, is provided by standard homeowners and business insurance policies in most states. Cars and other vehicles with comprehensive insurance would also be protected. The U.S. Geological Survey classified the quake as Alert Level Orange, the second-most serious category on its four-level scale. Earthquakes in that range lead to estimated losses between $100 million and $1 billion. In Culpeper, Va., about 35 miles from the epicenter, walls had buckled at the old sanctuary at St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church, which was constructed in 1821 and drew worshippers including Confederate Gens. Robert E. Lee and J.E.B. Stuart. Heavy stone ornaments atop a pillar at the gate were shaken to the ground. A chimney from the old Culpeper Baptist Church built in 1894 also tumbled down. At the Washington National Cathedral, spokesman Richard Weinberg said the building’s overall structure remains sound and damage was limited to “decorative elements.” Massive stones atop three of the four spires on the building’s central tower broke off, crashing onto the roof. At least one of the spires is teetering badly, and cracks have appeared in some flying buttresses. Repairs were expected to cost millions of dollars – an expense not covered by insurance. “Every single portion of the exterior is carved by hand, so everything broken off is a piece of art,” Weinberg said. “It’s not just the labor, but the artistry of replicating what was once there.” The building will remain closed as a precaution. Services to dedicate the memorial honoring Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. were moved. Other major cities along the East Coast that felt the shaking tried to gauge the risk from another quake. A few hours after briefly evacuating New York City Hall, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the city’s newer buildings could withstand a more serious earthquake. But, he added, questions remain about the older buildings that are common in a metropolis founded hundreds of years ago. “We think that the design standards of today are sufficient against any eventuality,” he said. But “there are questions always about some very old buildings. … Fortunately those tend to be low buildings, so there’s not great danger.” An earthquake similar to the one in Virginia could do billions of dollars of damage if it were centered in New York, said Barbara Nadel, an architect who specializes in securing buildings against natural disasters and terrorism. The city’s 49-page seismic code requires builders to prepare for significant shifting of the earth. High-rises must be built with certain kinds of bracing, and they must be able to safely sway at least somewhat to accommodate for wind and even shaking from the ground, Nadel said. Buildings constructed in Boston in recent decades had to follow stringent codes comparable to anything in California, said Vernon Woodworth, an architect and faculty member at the Boston Architectural College. New construction on older structures also must meet tough standards to withstand severe tremors, he said. It’s a different story with the city’s older buildings. The 18th- and 19th-century structures in Boston’s Back Bay, for instance, were often built on fill, which can liquefy in a strong quake, Woodworth said. Still, there just aren’t many strong quakes in New England. The last time the Boston area saw a quake as powerful as the one that hit Virginia on Tuesday was in 1755, off Cape Ann, to the north. A repeat of that quake would likely cause deaths, Woodworth said. Still, the quakes are so infrequent that it’s difficult to weigh the risks versus the costs of enacting tougher building standards regionally, he said. People in several of the affected states won’t have much time to reflect before confronting another potential emergency. Hurricane Irene is approaching the East Coast and could skirt the Mid-Atlantic region by the weekend and make landfall in New England after that. In North Carolina, officials were inspecting an aging bridge that is a vital evacuation route for people escaping the coastal barrier islands as the storm approaches. Speaking at an earthquake briefing Wednesday, Washington Mayor Vincent Gray inadvertently mixed up his disasters. “Everyone knows, obviously, that we had a hurricane,” he said before realizing his mistake. “Hurricane,” he repeated sheepishly as reporters and staffers burst into laughter. “I’m getting ahead of myself!” ___ Associated Press writers Sam Hananel in Washington; Alex Dominguez in Baltimore; Bob Lewis in Mineral, Va.; Samantha Gross in New York City; and Jay Lindsay in Boston contributed to this report.
Thursday, 09 May 2024 11:35 PM [ Last Update: Thursday, 09 May 2024 11:35 PM ]
File photo of a warplane belonging to the Israeli air force’s “aggressor squadron”
Iraq’s Islamic Resistance has announced striking the airbase housing the Israeli air force’s “aggressor squadron,” which acts as the opposing force in wargames partaken by the occupying regime.
The resistance, which is an umbrella group of anti-terror fighters, made the announcement on Thursday after conducting the strike, which it said it had carried out “using drones.”
It specified the target as the regime’s Ovda Airbase, which lies in the southern part of the occupied territories, around 40 kilometers (24 miles) north of the port of Eilat.
The operation, the group said, came “in support of our people in Gaza, and in response to the massacres committed by the usurping entity against Palestinian civilians, including children, women, and the elderly.”
The coalition was referring to the Israeli regime’s October-present war against the Gaza Strip.
At least 34.904 Palestinians, mostly women and children, have been killed so far during the war, which began following al-Aqsa Storm, a retaliatory operation by the coastal sliver’s resistance groups.
The Iraqi resistance vowed to continue “striking the enemy’s strongholds.”
The group has conducted numerous such strikes against the occupied territories since the beginning of the war.
Most recently, it said it had conducted a pro-Palestinian drone attack agianst a “vital” target in Eilat on Tuesday evening.
The Islamic Resistance in Iraq says it has conducted a new retaliatory attack on an Israeli position in the occupied lands.
Staging its most daring attack since the onset of the Israeli military onslaught on Gaza, the coalition carried out a series of strikes, including against the regime’s spy agency of Mossad’s “Glilot” intelligence center in Tel Aviv on Friday, using advanced “al-Aqrab” cruise missiles.
Published May 9, 2024Updated May 10, 2024, 5:23 p.m. ET
Displaced Palestinian families evacuate Rafah, the southernmost city in Gaza, amid the threat of an Israeli ground invasion.Reuters
Palestinians heeding Israel’s warning to evacuate Rafah, southern Gaza.Mohammed Salem/Reuters
Israeli protesters blocked a road near Mitzpe Ramon, southern Israel, and scattered rocks to prevent aid trucks from entering the Gaza Strip.Tzav 9/Reuters
High-level hostage negotiations in Cairo were put on hold Thursday, according to officials briefed on the negotiations and Egyptian state media, with one official saying that anger had flared among participants over Israel’s incursion into the southern Gazan city Rafah.
The pause is a setback given that some people watching the negotiations closely had seen signs that an agreement might be in reach this week. Still, one official briefed on the talks said that negotiators did not believe Hamas or Israel were leaving the negotiations permanently and were interpreting the suspension as a temporary pause rather than a derailment.
William J. Burns, the C.I.A. director and top American negotiator, and other senior officials departed Cairo, according to multiple officials. The officials all spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss diplomatic negotiations.
Mr. Burns, who has been involved in daylong negotiating sessions, had extended his trip, moving between Egypt and Israel on Wednesday to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel in an effort to persuade Israel not to dismiss Hamas’s most recent cease-fire counterproposal and to continue negotiating over it.
While midlevel Egyptian, Qatari and American officials remain in Cairo for discussions, both Hamas and Israeli delegations left on Thursday, Hamas and Israeli officials said. A senior Egyptian official told state-owned television that mediation efforts were still underway to bridge the difference between the most recent proposals by Israel and Hamas.
American officials said they believed that the differences between Hamas and Israel still could be resolved, at least enough to begin the first phase of hostage negotiations. One proposal called for Hamas to free hostages in return for a 42-day cease-fire and the release of a much larger number of Palestinian prisoners. That would be the first of three phases of reciprocal actions from each side.
On Thursday, Matthew Miller, a State Department spokesman, said that work was continuing to finalize the text of an agreement, but that it was “incredibly difficult.”
Egyptian and Hamas negotiators have been enraged by Israel’s military operations in Rafah. And the United States has argued that the military operation is threatening the hostage talks. The Biden administration announced it would withhold 3,500 bombs from Israel until it ended military operations in Rafah.
The Israeli ambassador to Washington, Michael Herzog, said on Thursday that Mr. Biden’s decision to withhold some weapons from Israel “sends the wrong message to Hamas and to our enemies in the region.” He added, “It puts us in a corner.”
Speaking in a public conversation hosted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, Mr. Herzog said, “It will be impossible to establish a postwar government in Gaza unless Hamas is completely vanquished. He added, “Nobody presented to me or to us a strategy of defeating Hamas without dealing with Rafah.”
On Monday, Israeli tanks and troops seized the border crossing in the Gazan city, shutting off the flow of aid from Egypt. American officials had hoped the incursion was not the start of a larger ground invasion in Rafah, where hundreds of thousands of displaced civilians are crammed into tent cities and temporary shelters in the city.
The United States believes that such an operation would weaken Israel’s position in cease-fire negotiations and diminish its international standing, Mr. Miller said on Thursday. The United States also believes that the operation, “in addition to all the harm it would cause to the Palestinian people, actually weakens Israel’s security,” he added.
Israeli officials have reacted with defiance, saying the invasion is necessary to dismantle Hamas as a fighting force in Rafah.
Anushka Patil and Michael Crowley contributed reporting.
China is expanding and diversifying its nuclear capabilities in both civilian and military sectors, boosting its global dominance in nuclear energy and weapons.
In the realm of civilian nuclear activity, China began construction of four new nuclear reactors in 2024. The Standing Committee of China’s State Council, its chief administrative authority, approved the construction of two Hualong One reactors at the Taipingling and the Jinqimen sites. Chinese Premier Li Qiang chairs China’s Standing Committee.
China General Nuclear runs the Taipingling nuclear power plant in the coastal southeast province of Guangdong. This is where Units 3 and 4 will be built. Units 1 and 2 will be constructed at the China National Nuclear Corporation-operated Jinqimen nuclear power plant in Zhejiang. The eastern coastal province is located along the East China Sea.
Unit 1 is scheduled to commence production in 2025. The plant will eventually host six nuclear reactors. The Jinqimen plant is still in the pre-construction stage and will eventually host six units.
Considering these numbers as a critical indicator, China and Russia seem set to boost their dominance in the global nuclear power sector. After all, it is the most vital key to future energy security. This concurrently will usurp their influence multifariously in global geopolitics.
In the realm of military nuclear activity, China’s official line regarding its nuclear capability is “maintaining nuclear capabilities at the minimum level required to safeguard national security.” But such a claim stands completely exposed.
This confirms an earlier account by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). The steep rise in China’s nuclear arsenal was a key SIPRI observationper itsJune 2023 annual assessment of the world’s nuclear forces. Most of the new nuclear warheads to have entered the arsenals of any major military power from 2022 to 2023 were those of China.
SIPRI’s estimate of the size of China’s nuclear arsenal has increased from 350 warheads in January 2022 to 410 in January 2023. And it is expected to keep growing. These warheads are assigned to its operational land- and sea-based ballistic missiles and to nuclear-configured aircraft.
Over the coming decade, the number of Chinese intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) is likely to reach or perhaps even exceed the numbers held by either Russia or the US. China’s air-delivered, land-based, and sea-based nuclear weapons constitute the three legs of its nascent nuclear triad. The total number of Chinese ICBM launchers exceeds 450. These include training launchers, new launchers under construction, and operational launchers. Approximately 142 of these are thought to be operational.
It remains unclear how China ultimately plans to operate its new silos. Whether they will all be filled, how many warheads each missile would carry, and whether a portion of them could potentially have conventional strike roles. China has four basic types of ICBMs. Namely, they are the DF-4, the DF-5, the DF-31, and the DF-41, with variants of each type. Most have a single warhead. However, a smaller but growing number of its ICBMs are capable of delivering multiple warheads.
An earlier version (2022) of the Pentagon’s report to the US Congress on Chinese military and security developments projected that China might field a stockpile of roughly 1,500 warheads by 2035. This projection relied on several assumptions about China’s future force posture and plutonium production.
This decade is set to witness how China aims to expand, modernize, and diversify its nuclear capabilities, in the military and civilian sectors. Compared to the past decade, China’s nuclear modernization has grown multifold, both in scale and complexity. This has caused much anxiety to its Asian neighbors.
TEHRAN, May 09 (MNA) – Iran could be pushed into changing its nuclear doctrine if its existence is threatened, an adviser to Leader of Islamic Revolution has told foreign media.
“We have no decision to build a nuclear bomb but should Iran’s existence be threatened, there will be no choice but to change our military doctrine,” said Kamal Kharrazi, an adviser to the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told Al Jazeera on Thursday.
“In the case of an attack on our nuclear facilities by the Zionist regime, our deterrence will change,” he was reported as saying by local Iranian media.
Kharrazi also answered questions about the war on Gaza and said that the Israeli regime would continue its aggression with or without a deal with Hamas resistance movement.
The Prophecy Blog 