War on Iran: Phase II: Day 19
NewsFeed The US resumes bombing Iran, hours after Trump threatened to ‘hit them hard’, with a family of three killed in Qeshm Island. Plus, fears that the war’s arena has expanded after a US-owned gas storage tanker was hit by a drone at the Damietta port in Egypt. Al Jazeera’s Mohammadfff_ has the latest. Published On 30 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
Is Pakistan ‘using India’s playbook’ in Kashmir?
Is Pakistan ‘using India’s playbook’ in Kashmir? NewsFeed Pakistan is facing accusations that its security forces have killed dozens of unarmed protesters in the past week of demonstrations in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Al Jazeera’s James Bays asked panellists on Inside Story if Islamabad is borrowing tactics from Indian-administered Kashmir. Published On 30 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
Smoke rises over southern Iran after renewed US attacks
NewsFeed A large plume of smoke was seen rising over the southwestern Iranian city of Ahvaz early on Thursday following renewed US strikes. Iranian state media reported damage to two student dormitory complexes, while power outages were reported across parts of the city. Published On 30 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
Living with fear: Inside a southern Lebanon village divided by Israel
NewsFeed Southern Lebanon’s Mansouri village is divided by Israel’s Yellow Line, a military boundary separating 6% of Lebanese territory it occupies from the rest of the country. Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr spoke to residents who say they’re living with fear. Published On 30 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
Why did Anthony Fauci invoke the Fifth Amendment? Senate hearing explained
Dr Anthony Fauci, a former top United States public health official, has declined to answer questions at a Republican-led Senate committee hearing into the origins of COVID-19 and the handling of the pandemic. The former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination on Wednesday. Recommended Stories list of 1 item list 1 of 1Fauci invokes Fifth Amendment in heated COVID-19 Senate hearing end of list Fauci was called to testify by Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who accuses him of misleading Congress and questions whether US-funded research in China played a role in the pandemic, allegations Fauci denies. Although former President Joe Biden granted Fauci a preemptive pardon in 2025, Republicans claim it does not protect him from any alleged crimes committed after it was issued, such as perjuring himself at a Senate hearing. Fauci’s lawyers advised him not to testify, arguing that anything he said under oath could expose him to new legal risks. Here is what to know: Who is Anthony Fauci? Fauci, 85, is a physician and immunologist who led the US NIAID for 38 years, advising seven presidents, both Republican and Democratic. He became the public face of the US response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, after helping lead the country’s response to health crises including HIV/AIDS, Ebola and the 2001 anthrax attacks. He became a target of conservative criticism over pandemic policies, including mask recommendations, vaccines and school closures. During his last year in government, Fauci was also chief medical adviser to Biden until he retired in 2022. During the pandemic, between 2019 and 2022, he kept more than 1,000 pages of diary entries documenting his work advising the White House and responding to the pandemic. The notes chronicle his interactions with senior officials and the media. Why is Fauci being questioned? He was subpoenaed to testify over his handling of the pandemic and its origins before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The hearing, led by Paul, focused on several issues: COVID-19’s origins: Paul has long argued that the coronavirus that causes COVID may have leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, and questioned whether US-funded research played a role in the outbreak. Gain-of-function research: Republicans say Fauci misled Congress about whether the National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, involving modifying viruses to understand how they evolve and assess pandemic risks. Fauci says the NIH did not fund research that caused COVID-19. Allegations of a cover-up: Paul accused Fauci of making false statements to Congress and concealing the NIH’s involvement in research in Wuhan. Fauci denies that. Fauci’s diary: Before the hearing, Paul released more than 1,100 pages of Fauci’s typewritten diary. Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr said the notes were government record because they were written by a federal employee on a government computer during a public health emergency and they were found on government property. Paul said the diary showed differences between Fauci’s private discussions and his public statements. Fauci’s supporters say the entries reflect the uncertainty scientists faced as they learned more about a new virus. Dr Anthony Fauci appears before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee at the Capitol on July 29, 2026 [Allison Robbert/AP] What happened at the hearing? The tense hearing lasted about three hours. After a brief opening statement, Fauci repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and declined to answer more than 100 questions. He accused committee chairman Paul of having an “obsession” with prosecuting him. Committee chairman Senator Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky [AFP] The hearing included several tense moments: Contempt vote: Paul said the committee would vote next week on whether to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress over his refusal to answer questions, threatening “consequences for refusing to answer”. Lawyer removed: Paul directed Capitol Police to remove Fauci’s lawyer, David Schertler, after he tried to speak without being recognised by the committee. “This testimony is from Anthony Fauci. This is not a game with his lawyers,” Paul said. Schertler later described the hearing as an “obsessive vendetta”. Democrats defend Fauci: Democratic senators said the hearing was politically motivated. Senator Gary Peters called it “a partisan exercise” designed to support “a predetermined conclusion” rather than offering legitimate oversight. Closing the hearing, Paul asked rhetorically: “Did [Fauci’s] actions lead to the largest man-made plague in history?” Why did Fauci invoke the Fifth Amendment? Fauci said he invoked the Fifth Amendment on the advice of his lawyers because he believed his answers could expose him to new legal risks. He argued that Paul was trying to build a criminal case against him rather than conduct legitimate congressional oversight. Although Biden’s pardon protects Fauci from prosecution for actions before January 2025, Republicans say any false statements made under oath during this hearing could still expose him to perjury charges. The Fifth Amendment protects people from being forced to give evidence that could incriminate them in a criminal case. Invoking it is a constitutional right and does not imply guilt. What do scientists believe about COVID-19’s origins? Most scientists believe COVID-19 likely spread naturally from animals to humans, known as zoonotic spillover, pointing to a wildlife market in Wuhan as the most likely place where it first spread. Fauci has consistently said he believes that scientific evidence points to a natural origin, while remaining open to other possibilities. Notes from his diary detail a January 2020 call with 11 top virologists and evolutionary biologists – only two were convinced the virus had a natural origin, while the rest debated whether it could have been engineered. Today, most scientists favour a natural origin, while the US intelligence community is divided. The FBI said in 2023 that a laboratory-related incident is the most likely origin of the pandemic. The CIA reached the same conclusion in 2025, but with low confidence. Other agencies and the National Intelligence Council continue to favour
Dramatic sea rescue as firefighters die on the Greek island of Crete
Dramatic sea rescue as firefighters die on the Greek island of Crete NewsFeed The Greek Coast Guard is rescuing people trapped by rapidly spreading wildfires on the island of Crete. Two firefighters were killed battling the blaze. A third died on the mainland. Published On 30 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
US and Israeli leaders expected ‘swift outcome’ in Iran
NewsFeed New details are emerging of how US and Israeli officials seemed to believe the war on Iran would be straightforward and short-lived. NYT reporter Maggie Haberman says Benjamin Netanyahu presented regime change scenarios to Donald Trump, while Lindsey Graham described a timeline of weeks. Published On 29 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
Indian student in Russia says he’s been wrongly charged over Bihar protests
Indian student in Russia says he’s been wrongly charged over Bihar protests NewsFeed An Indian student from Bihar says he has been charged over ‘Cockroach’ protests despite being in Russia for the last four months. Hundreds of students across India have faced arrest for participating in the youth-led demonstrations. Published On 29 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)
Why Saudi Arabia holds the key to Palestinian statehood
Nearly eight decades after the establishment of Israel, the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state remains the defining question of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Wars have been fought, peace treaties signed and diplomatic initiatives launched, yet this central strategic issue remains unresolved. Today, Saudi Arabia is at the forefront of the efforts to establish a Palestinian state and deliver a lasting peace arrangement with Israel. Its commitment to the issue is made clear by its decision to cosponsor the creation of the Global Alliance for the Implementation of the Two-State Solution in 2024, which is currently meeting in Rome. King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman are following in the footsteps of successive Saudi monarchs. For more than half a century, the kingdom has maintained a remarkably consistent position. The question has never been whether peace with Israel is possible, but whether the political conditions required to make such a peace comprehensive, legitimate and irreversible were present. Within that framework, recognition of Israel and the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state are parallel components of a single settlement. Neither is intended to precede the other. That doctrine originated under King Faisal, who made Palestinian self-determination a central pillar of Saudi national security policy. His successors preserved the principle while adapting its diplomatic expression to changing regional realities. The objective remained constant even as the diplomatic environment evolved. The Fahd Plan of 1981 – named after King Fahd – translated that doctrine into a formal peace proposal calling for Israeli withdrawal from occupied Arab territories and recognition of Palestinian national rights. Two decades later, the Crown Prince and later King Abdullah expanded the same strategic logic through the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative. Israel was offered comprehensive peace and normal relations with the Arab world in return for withdrawal from the territories occupied in 1967 and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. The current Saudi leadership therefore inherits an established strategic doctrine rather than an unresolved policy debate. Their responsibility is to determine whether today’s diplomatic environment can finally satisfy conditions that have remained fundamentally unchanged for decades. That continuity also reflects a broader question of state legitimacy. For the Saudi monarchy, support for Palestinian statehood has never been solely a matter of foreign policy. It has become one of the enduring pillars of the kingdom’s political and religious legitimacy, rooted in the monarch’s role as Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques and reinforced by the kingdom’s longstanding position within both the Arab and Islamic worlds. The significance of that continuity became clearer after the Abraham Accords of 2020. By establishing diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, later joined by Morocco and Sudan, the accords demonstrated that Arab-Israeli normalisation could advance without progress on Palestinian statehood. They reshaped regional diplomacy, but they neither resolved the Palestinian question nor completed the wider peace process. Successive US administrations have regarded Saudi participation as the decisive missing element. The Abraham Accords could expand without Riyadh, but they could not acquire their full strategic significance without the kingdom’s participation. The Trump administration has once again placed Saudi-Israeli normalisation at the centre of its regional diplomacy. But this diplomatic push has to be evaluated in the larger post-October 7 context. The war in Gaza created an entirely new diplomatic environment. The subsequent ceasefire initiative and the establishment of the Board of Peace introduced a framework intended to end the conflict, stabilise the territory and begin reconstruction. Their significance lies not in replacing a political settlement, but in creating conditions under which one might become possible. For the kingdom, however, the essential political requirement remains unchanged: the actual and irreversible establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state. That position rests upon mutually reinforcing political, religious and economic foundations. The monarch governs not only as head of state but also as Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, a responsibility carrying religious authority throughout the Islamic world. Any decision concerning recognition of Israel would therefore require both political approval and broad religious legitimacy. Such legitimacy could not credibly rest upon promises of future negotiations. It would require the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state. The kingdom’s wider influence reinforces that position. It is by far the Arab world’s largest economy, representing about one-third of total Arab economic output. The kingdom is the only regional member of the G20, one of the world’s leading energy superpowers and the world’s leading crude oil exporter. It is also the Middle East’s principal economic engine. Combined with its religious standing, these factors give Saudi decisions consequences extending far beyond bilateral diplomacy. The implications would reach well beyond the kingdom itself. Several major Arab states, including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Algeria, have not recognised Israel. Their decisions are sovereign, but a Saudi-Israeli settlement founded upon Palestinian statehood would nevertheless transform the political environment in which those decisions are made. Lebanon illustrates the point. Washington is encouraging Beirut to move towards formal relations with Israel as part of a broader effort to stabilise the Israeli-Lebanese frontier. The domestic political cost of such a decision, however, would look fundamentally different after a Saudi-backed settlement based upon Palestinian statehood than before one. The same logic extends across the wider Muslim world. Major influential countries such as Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Malaysia have withheld recognition of Israel because the Palestinian question remains unresolved. A settlement accepted by the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques and accompanied by the establishment of a Palestinian state would compel those governments to follow. It would remove the principal political and religious obstacles to reconsidering their positions. This is what ultimately distinguishes Saudi Arabia from the earlier Abraham Accords. Saudi Arabia’s participation would be different in kind, not merely in scale, carrying political, economic and religious significance across the Arab and Muslim worlds. Whether the current diplomatic process can ultimately reach that point remains uncertain. Israel, the Palestinians, the United States, the European Union and certain regional governments all have indispensable roles to play. The final Saudi decision,
Iran rejects Trump frozen funds plan, warns ships of Hormuz transit ban
Iran rejects Trump frozen funds plan, warns ships of Hormuz transit ban NewsFeed Iran rejected US President Donald Trump’s claim that ships damaged by Iran in the Gulf would be compensated from frozen Iranian funds. IRGC spokesperson Ebrahim Zolfaghari warned that any vessel taking such money will be banned from transiting the Strait of Hormuz. Published On 28 Jul 2026 Adblock test (Why?)