分类： politics

The United States Congress is preparing for a decisive Wednesday vote on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the comprehensive annual legislation that sets the Pentagon’s budget and military policy for the upcoming fiscal year. This year’s bill, spanning over 3,000 pages, authorizes a historic discretionary spending level of $900.6 billion, marking a significant increase from the previous year’s $883.7 billion allocation. The funding encompasses a vast spectrum of defense priorities, including military operations, troop compensation, recruitment initiatives, technological innovation, and the modernization of the nation’s nuclear arsenal.

A substantial portion of the NDAA is dedicated to security cooperation and policy in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. The House Armed Services Committee has explicitly described the budget as providing “unprecedented levels of support for the security of Israel.” While the precise total for all Israel-related projects is not fully itemized, the bill mandates continued substantial funding, including $200 million for the Iron Dome, David’s Sling, and Arrow missile defense systems. An additional $80 million is allocated for the US-Israel Anti-Tunnel Cooperation Program, and $70 million is designated for countering drone attacks and other aerial threats. Furthermore, a new $35 million emerging-technology cooperative program will be established between the US, Israel, and other G7 allies to advance development in artificial intelligence, quantum computing, cybersecurity, robotics, and automation.

The legislation also aims to bolster Israel’s defense industrial base, establishing a working group to deepen technological integration and consider including Israel in the exclusive US National Technology and Industrial Base (NTIB), a status currently held only by Canada, the UK, and Australia. In a significant policy directive, the bill prohibits the Department of Defense from participating in any international event where Israel is banned due to the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

Beyond Israel, the NDAA frames Iran as the “key driver of regional insecurity” and mandates intensified Pentagon monitoring and reporting to Congress on a range of threats. This includes details on Iran’s conventional weapons purchases from Russia, the status of its proxy forces like the Houthis and Hezbollah, its drone supply chain, and advancements in its ballistic missile and nuclear programs. The US intelligence community is specifically ordered to notify Congress if Iran enriches uranium beyond 60 percent or decides to produce a nuclear weapon.

The bill extends US support for the Iraqi military through 2026 but attaches a critical condition: 75% of the funds will be withheld until the Pentagon certifies that the Iraqi government has taken credible, verifiable steps to disarm and demobilize Iran-aligned militia groups not integrated into the official security forces. An allocation of $212.5 million is specified for the Counter-ISIS Train and Equip Fund (CTEF) in Iraq, with continued funding assured for Peshmerga forces in the Kurdistan Region.

A landmark provision within the NDAA is the repeal of the 2019 Caesar Act sanctions on Syria, which had devastating humanitarian consequences for the civilian population. The bill also requires the Pentagon to report on the status of ISIS detention camps, US force posture in Syria, and the feasibility of reopening the US embassy in Damascus.

Conversely, the legislation has drawn criticism from refugee advocates for omitting funding for the Enduring Welcome Act, which was removed from the draft by House Republican leadership. Advocacy group #AfghanEvac condemned the move as an “abdication of responsibility” for Afghan allies awaiting relocation to the US.

Finally, the NDAA repeals the 1991 and 2002 Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs) related to the Gulf War and Iraq invasion, which had been used to justify prolonged military operations. However, the 2001 AUMF underpinning the global war on terror remains in effect. The bill also explicitly prohibits the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, where 15 men remain held indefinitely without charge.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has escalated the political confrontation with Muslim advocacy groups by issuing an executive order on Monday that formally classifies the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist organizations. This controversial designation creates a legal framework for potential state-level prosecutions against individuals or entities alleged to be providing support to these groups.

The move aligns Florida with Texas, where Governor Greg Abbott implemented similar measures last month. CAIR, a nationwide nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting civil liberties and advocating for American Muslims, immediately denounced the order as both defamatory and unconstitutional. The organization has announced its intention to file a lawsuit against Governor DeSantis in response.

During a press conference, Hiba Rahim, CAIR Florida’s interim executive director, vehemently challenged the governor’s authority: “Your designation has no basis in law or fact. You do not have the constitutional authority to unilaterally declare any American or an American institution a foreign terrorist group.”

Governor DeSantis welcomed the impending legal battle, stating that litigation would grant the state discovery rights to subpoena financial records. When pressed by reporters to provide evidence of terrorist ties, DeSantis referenced CAIR’s status as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case—the largest terror financing trial in U.S. history.

This 2004 case involved five Palestinian-American men convicted of funding terrorism, though civil liberties organizations have consistently argued that the prosecution represented disproportionate targeting of Muslim charities following the 9/11 attacks. A 2009 court ruling ultimately found that the rights of Muslim groups named in the case had been violated.

CAIR maintains that the designation represents political retaliation for its Palestine advocacy, which constitutes protected speech under the First Amendment. The organization accused DeSantis of being an “Israel First politician” seeking to silence criticism of U.S. support for Israel’s military actions.

The executive order also targets the Muslim Brotherhood, despite its decentralized structure without centralized leadership. This follows President Trump’s recent executive order exploring the designation of certain Muslim Brotherhood chapters as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, specifically mentioning chapters in Lebanon, Egypt, and Jordan.

Right-wing think tanks and Trump loyalists, including Senator Ted Cruz, have long advocated for the Muslim Brotherhood’s designation. In response, the organization stated through official channels that Trump’s order lacked “any credible legal or security basis,” emphasizing that independent Muslim Brotherhood organizations in different countries are separate entities making independent decisions within their national legal frameworks.

A coalition of prominent Japanese scholars, former government officials, and legal experts has publicly demanded Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi immediately retract her controversial statements regarding China’s Taiwan region. The group warns that her parliamentary comments not only violate foundational postwar agreements but also risk reviving militaristic tendencies in Japanese policy.

The critics, speaking at a Monday news conference organized by the Association for Inheriting and Propagating the Murayama Statement, emphasized that Takaichi’s remarks represent a dramatic departure from Japan’s longstanding diplomatic position. They specifically cited violations of the 1972 China-Japan Joint Statement and postwar international agreements that have governed Tokyo-Beijing relations for decades.

International relations scholar and former diplomat Kazuhiko Togo underscored that Taiwan-related commitments in the 1972 agreement resulted from rigorous bilateral negotiations, and China has consistently expected Japanese adherence to these terms.

The Association, established in 2013 to promote reflection on Japan’s wartime aggression and colonial history, expressed particular concern through its secretary-general Takakage Fujita. He stated that Takaichi’s suggestions regarding potential Japanese military response to a ‘Taiwan contingency’ marked the first time a sitting prime minister has openly discussed wartime postures in parliament, fundamentally contradicting Japan’s postwar peace commitments.

Political economist Kazuhiko Uekusa highlighted the administration’s contradictory stance, noting that Takaichi initially claimed her November 7 remarks didn’t represent official government policy before later asserting they aligned with Japan’s established diplomatic position.

Opposition leaders have joined the criticism, with Social Democratic Party leader Mizuho Fukushima declaring the Prime Minister’s comments on ‘survival-threatening situations’ unconstitutional during a Sunday meeting in Fukushima. Fukushima demanded both retraction and resignation according to Mainichi Shimbun reports.

Experts warn that Takaichi’s security agenda—including defense budget increases for ‘enemy base strike capabilities,’ arms export rule revisions, and proposed intelligence legislation—collectively pushes Japan toward dangerous confrontation and unchecked military expansion. Professor Emeritus Masakatsu Adachi cautioned that these moves effectively strengthen domestic information control while pushing the nation ‘toward war.’

The United States Department of State has nullified more than 85,000 visas across all categories within a single year, according to a CNN report published Tuesday. This figure represents a substantial increase, more than doubling the revocation count from the previous year under the Biden administration.

An anonymous State Department official disclosed that nearly half of these revocations were linked to criminal offenses, including driving under the influence, assault, and theft. A more recent, smaller batch of visa cancellations targeted individuals who allegedly celebrated the death of right-wing political activist Charlie Kirk.

Approximately 10% of the revoked visas, totaling over 8,000, belonged to international students. A significant point of contention involves students targeted for their campus activism, particularly regarding Israel’s military operations in Gaza. This action finds its basis in a January 29 executive order that authorizes measures against “alien students” perceived as antisemitic. Notable cases include students like Ranjani Srinivasan and Rumeysa Ozturk, who faced deportation proceedings for their pro-Palestine advocacy. Critics argue such deportations violate First Amendment rights, and many students have successfully contested these actions in legal challenges.

The scope of scrutiny extends beyond current visa holders. Since June, prospective student visa applicants have reported intensified vetting of their political views. Broader immigration policy shifts include plans for enhanced screening of H1-B visa holders, re-interviewing refugees admitted under the previous administration, and expanding the list of nations subject to travel bans. Furthermore, the administration has increased H-1B visa fees to deter foreign nationals seeking U.S. employment.

These developments align with a central pillar of President Trump’s agenda, which has consistently focused on restricting immigration. Key policies include the refinement of the so-called Muslim Ban, a sharp reduction in refugee admissions, a significant drop in border entries, and accelerated deportation efforts targeting undocumented immigrants. The administration has also attempted to revoke Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for nationals from countries like Afghanistan and Syria, who were originally granted reprieve due to civil unrest or natural disasters.

The State Department did not respond to a request for comment from Middle East Eye by the time of publication.

In a significant diplomatic development, Hamas has communicated to international mediators its readiness to suspend all offensive operations against Israel for a period of up to ten years, contingent upon a complete Israeli military withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. A senior Palestinian official, speaking anonymously due to the sensitive nature of the discussions, confirmed to Middle East Eye that the proposal was formally presented to Egyptian, Qatari, and Turkish mediators during negotiations in Cairo last week.

The proposal outlines a comprehensive hudna—a long-term truce rooted in Islamic tradition—wherein Hamas commits to ceasing all weapons fire from Gaza and would physically bury its arsenal to demonstrate compliance. Mediating nations would serve as guarantors, directly supervising Hamas’s adherence to the agreement. This offer, described by the official as a ‘substantive move,’ is intended to inject momentum into the stalled ceasefire negotiations and would allow Gaza to focus exclusively on its immense reconstruction needs and internal governance after more than two years of devastating conflict, displacement, and siege.

This position marks a notable evolution from Hamas’s long-standing doctrine, which has historically insisted on retaining its weapons until the establishment of a fully sovereign Palestinian state. The current offer, however, is specifically confined to the Gaza theatre and does not address the group’s military or political activities in the occupied West Bank.

The official cited a shifting regional diplomatic landscape, particularly a perceived change in Egypt’s stance toward favoring the needs of Gazans, as a factor enabling this proposal. This includes Cairo’s insistence on the Rafah border crossing operating in both directions to allow for the return of displaced Palestinians, a move Israel has thus far blocked.

Despite a ceasefire being in effect since October, the situation remains precarious. Palestinian authorities have documented over 600 Israeli violations, including air strikes that have killed hundreds. While Israel has released thousands of detainees, it continues to hold senior Palestinian figures under conditions criticized by human rights groups.

The official acknowledged the agreement’s imperfections from Hamas’s perspective, stating, ‘Of course Hamas thinks the agreement is not good. But its first priority was to stop the war.’ He conceded the truce is in a ‘very difficult stage,’ but emphasized a strategic decision to prioritize saving Palestinian lives and dealing with other issues subsequently. The official concluded with a defiant tone, stating that ultimately, the Palestinian people depend only on themselves and their unwavering struggle to achieve their rights.