بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Occupation Without Armies: How Six Arab States Handed Over Their Military Keys to Washington and Tel Aviv
https://www.alwaie.org/archives/article/20012
(Translated)
Al Waie Magazine Issue No. 471
Thirty-Ninth Year, Jumada I 1447 AH corresponding to October 2025 CE
A study of a Washington Post report on October 11, 2025, entitled, “Arab states expanded cooperation with Israeli military during Gaza war, files show.”
Amid the bloodshed and intermittent media silence, a joint investigative report by The Washington Post and ICIJ revealed to the world a secret military and security cooperation network linking ‘Israel’ and six Arab states despite these Arab entities' public condemnation of the Gaza aggression in a “security” deal that the Americans called the “Regional Security Construct.” (The Washington Post)
A Washington Post investigation, conducted in collaboration with the ICIJ and published on the newspaper's website under the title: “Arab states expanded cooperation with Israeli military during Gaza war, files show.”
The report confirmed the existence of a military-security cooperation structure led by USCENTCOM (US Central Command) and including the occupying Jewish entity along with six Arab states, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Bahrain, and the UAE). This structure, which secretly expanded during the Gaza war under the umbrella of the Regional Security Construct, encompasses joint planning, information sharing, and increasing integration in air defense. This occurred while these same Arab states publicly condemned the massacre in Gaza!
What we will do in this explanation is not merely recount the reports published by The Washington Post, but delve deeper into the contexts and motivations, scrutinize the evidence, and ask: Why this cooperation? And what is the price for the people, for Islam, and for morality?
The moral stance: This is not a matter of “political balancing.” it is blatant complicity with the machinery of annihilation, a condemnation that must be upheld before Allah (swt), the Ummah, and history.
States and Partners: Who participated and who was on the sidelines?
The documents clearly indicate the participation of the Jewish entity and the following Arab states: Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Bahrain, and the UAE. Kuwait and Oman are listed as “potential partners” in the documents.
Frameworks and Mechanisms: How was coordination carried out? A reading between the lines: Regional Security Construct.
This term appeared in internal PowerPoint presentations of the US Central Command (USCENTCOM) between 2022 and 2025. The documents show that the presentations were distributed to the capitals of partner countries, and in some cases, also to the Five Eyes, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand.
The documents insist that this cooperation is not a new public alliance, and that meetings should be held “in confidence”.
Defense and Radar Integration:
Internally, it is mentioned that “six countries” receive a partial air picture via U.S. defense systems. This means that each country sends data from its own radars or sensors, which is then integrated with the data from the other countries via a central platform. Some countries also share their own radars, according to the reports, “two countries were sharing their own radar data through a U.S. Air Force squadron.” (The Washington Post)
This integration provides “Israel” and its partners with a broad intelligence window, without any official acknowledgment.
What is exchanged? Participating countries send real-time data from their radars and early warning systems: the locations of aerial objects, aircraft and drone flight paths, missile launch signals, and interception points, in addition to “friend or foe” identification data to avoid clashes between allies. This data is integrated into a central U.S. platform, enabling a regional air picture.
Its military significance: This imagery enables the Jewish entity and the US command to view the airspace stretching from the Gulf to the eastern Mediterranean in real time, allowing them to detect any Iranian, Yemeni, or Palestinian movement minutes before it occurs and redirect defense systems to intercept it. It also grants the “Israeli” Air Force greater planning and safer flight capabilities within Arab airspace without direct detection.
The strategic objective: To build a joint shield linking Arab and “Israeli” defense systems under Washington’s supervision to counter the alleged Iranian threat, while simultaneously protecting “Israeli” air superiority and ensuring the continuation of its operations in Gaza and Syria without surprises.
The danger: This integration transforms some Arab radars into the eyes of the occupying army, revealing resistance movements and providing logistical cover for airstrikes. This prolongs the war, undermines the sovereignty of participating states, and destroys their people's confidence in their own security decisions.
Joint training and “tunnel warfare” workshops:
Some documents show that training focused on detecting, destroying, and securing underground tunnels, a specialization Hamas has employed in Gaza. One documented meeting, held in 2025 at Fort Campbell, Kentucky (USA), included representatives from partner countries who received training to destroy underground tunnels.
What is happening in these exercises? Officers and engineering and intelligence units from participating countries are being trained in tunnel detection, penetration, and destruction techniques using ground-penetrating radar, vibration and acoustic sensors, and small robots equipped with cameras and guided explosive devices. Methods for sealing underground openings and securing surrounding areas to prevent their reuse are also being taught.
Its military significance: “Tunnel warfare” is central to Hamas and the Palestinian resistance’s defensive tactics and has repeatedly proven a major obstacle for the Jewish army in Gaza. Therefore, this training aims to transfer the Jewish army’s expertise to Arab forces through direct American supervision, developing units capable of operating in highly complex underground environments. This will strengthen the field intelligence cooperation network and increase the effectiveness of operational coordination.
The strategic goal: To build Arab capabilities compatible with the Jewish combat doctrine in confronting tunnel warfare and armed groups, paving the way for integrating these armies into the “regional security” order led by Washington and benefiting Tel Aviv. In other words, the training transforms from a mere exchange of expertise into a unification of field doctrine.
The danger: This type of training normalizes the enemy in the Arab military consciousness, and transforms experience gained in shedding blood of the people of Palestine into shared educational material. It also weakens the moral and political stance of the participating countries, as it makes them indirectly contribute to enhancing the occupation’s ability to dismantle one of the most important tools of Palestinian resistance.
Information operations and the partner narrative:
Among the proposals is a plan for an “Information Fusion Center.” The Washington Post stated, “Centcom personnel also led planning meetings to launch information operations to counter Iran’s narrative that it is the regional protector of Palestinians and, according to a 2025 document, to “propagate [a] partner narrative of regional prosperity and cooperation.” This means there is a coordinated effort to craft a media narrative that supports the intelligence and political legitimacy of this cooperation.
What is happening in the information operations and the narrative of the “partners”? A coordinated campaign of messages and content is being designed to shape regional and international public opinion that justifies and normalizes security cooperation between the Jewish states and Arab states. The methods include creating visual materials and analytical articles supported by selected facts, using networks of fake accounts, bots, to amplify content, promoting interviews with “independent experts” who appear to support the narrative, and launching paid advertising campaigns targeting specific audiences based on age, location, and interests. Local and regional social media are also being utilized, and repetitive messages about “prosperity” and “cooperation” are being introduced as a substitute for narratives of resistance or Palestinian rights.
What is being exchanged or manipulated? Centrally prepared messages, target lists, prepared media materials, including short videos, infographics and opinion pieces, and audience databases are disseminated for targeted advertising, along with intelligence data on public opinion to craft the most effective messages. These materials are shared via a secure coordination platform among partners.
Its military and political significance: Information operations work to create a political and public climate conducive to legitimizing military and security measures. In terms of media, they mitigate the impact of scandals involving covert cooperation by shifting the discussion to a “dialogue on stability” “the Iranian threat,” and “regional security needs.”
Politically, they create public and diplomatic cover that reduces pressure on governments and increases the acceptability of surrendering certain aspects of security to a joint Western-Arab-“Israeli” system.
The strategic objective: To construct an alternative narrative that shifts attention from the suffering of Palestinian civilians to the vocabulary of security, prosperity, and external threats. This effectively legitimizes, both politically and practically, any military or logistical cooperation that supports the Jewish entity, or strengthens its position on the ground. In subsequent years, this narrative becomes the reference point upon which foreign policy pragmatism and security decisions are based.
The danger and moral impact: Misleading the public:
Concealing or reshaping facts distorts the popular will and undermines public awareness. Suppressing counter-narratives: Undermining free civic space by discrediting activists or targeting dissenting voices with smear tactics. Distorting historical truth: Producing an “alternative truth” prolongs the life of unjust policies and prevents accountability. Employing harmful technologies: Relying on bots, fake accounts, online trolls, and potentially deepfakes spreads distrust in the media and generates deeper societal polarization.
Summary: The information operations here are not fleeting propaganda campaigns. Instead they are part of a strategic system aimed at protecting and prolonging the military and political operations that support them. It turns war into a media-driven issue, making it appear acceptable or necessary to the public—the most dangerous thing a media machine allied with security and international agencies can do.
A Secure Communication Platform and a Combined Cyber Center:
Documents indicate that “Partner nations were also being onboarded to a U.S.-run secure chat system so that they could communicate with each other and the U.S. military” and linked to a joint intelligence platform. Plans within the slides outline “the creation of a “Combined Middle East Cyber Center” by the end of 2026,” tasked with cyber defense and coordination among partner countries.
What is happening at the communication platform and the cyber center? Participating countries are included in a secure messaging system operated by the U.S. Air Force, enabling real-time communication between Arab and Jewish operations rooms and U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM). This platform enables the exchange of real-time field intelligence data: early warnings, missile launch sites, drone activity, and unit movements, within an encrypted communications channel that does not pass through networks. For local national security, a unified regional cyber center, a “Combined Middle East Cyber Center,” is being established, expected to be operational by 2026, to coordinate cyber defense and counter alleged Iranian cyberattacks.
Its military significance: The platform and center represent the backbone of the Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence (C4I) network in the region. They directly connect Arab and Jewish command centers, enabling rapid decision-making and the execution of interceptions or strikes within seconds, bypassing traditional national decision-making structures. The cyber center also provides an infrastructure for exchanging data analysis tools and artificial intelligence for tracking and cyber penetration, enhancing security integration to a supranational level.
The strategic goal: To unify the digital defense infrastructure in the Middle East under permanent American supervision, effectively making Arab military systems subservient to the American-Zionist operational network. The flow of sensitive information would be controlled within a single, reliable system serving Washington and Tel Aviv’s objectives of monitoring and deterrence.
The danger: This project transfers the keys to cybersecurity and electronic control from the hands of individual Arab states to a foreign command center. This means that critical decisions, interception, targeting, and surveillance, could be made outside of national sovereignty. It also grants the Jewish entity indirect access to Arab communication and monitoring infrastructure, threatening the privacy of defenses and transforming them into tools for dual surveillance. Thus, technical cooperation becomes a form of digital sovereignty subjugation, entrenching an irreversible security dependency in the future.
Countering Iranian missiles: Radar rings and mass interception
On April 13–14, 2024, Iran launched more than 300 drones and missiles toward the Jewish entity. The vast majority were shot down by a joint defense umbrella involving the United States, Britain, France, and Jordan, according to multiple professional reports.
Reuters estimated that U.S. forces destroyed approximately 80 drones and six missiles themselves during the attack, highlighting the depth of the U.S. operational role in leading the interception network.
The Wall Street Journal reported on how Washington had coordinated a fragile regional alliance for years, enabling the exchange of early warnings, flight paths, and overlapping radar tracking to provide a practical test of the region's integrated air defense architecture.
Reuters reported that domestically, Jordan faced public anger after shooting down “dozens” of drones over its airspace, but justified the action as necessary to protect its sovereignty and the safety of its civilians.
Impact on the Jewish Entity’s Capabilities: The Washington Post revealed that regional cover raised the probability of interception to unprecedented levels, reduced the impact of long-range attacks, and granted the Jewish entity greater time and autonomy to continue its operations in Gaza.
Preparing the Ground for Jewish Strikes Against Iran (The Enabling Environment):
Even if Arab capitals did not explicitly grant permission for offensive overflights, the monitoring and warning-interception network in which Arab states participated, along with U.S. support from forward bases, created an enabling environment for Jewish operations against Iran and its allies, made of early warning, deconfliction routes, aerial refueling, and sharing of aerial imagery. The Wall Street Journal reported “the centerpiece of the construct, an air-defense plan to combat Iran’s missiles and drones, moved from theory to reality over the past three years” and was a cornerstone for deterring the April attack and preventing wider regional fragmentation.
The Washington Post / ICIJ documents themselves confirm the existence of a shared partial air picture, fed by partner radars and secure, US-managed communication platforms, allowing for real-time coordination.
The bottom line: Opening up the operational information domain to the “Israeli” Air Force reduced the risks and costs of any direct confrontation with Iran and solidified the Jewish entity’s ability to maintain the momentum of the war in Gaza.
Detection and Interception of Houthi Drones and Missiles:
Since late 2023, the Houthis have waged an intensive campaign in the Red Sea and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait against shipping linked to or supporting “Israel.” The United States and Western partners have led interception operations and preemptive strikes, with Arab states engaging politically and logistically in the overall maritime security architecture, as per a UN Security Council report.
USCENTCOM data shows successive interceptions, such as the March 23, 2024 statement on the downing of six drones over the Red Sea. These operations reduce the Houthis’ ability to deliver direct strikes against the Jewish entity and relatively secure its maritime supply lines, as per USCENTCOM.
Impact: Neutralizing a significant portion of the Houthi threat has preserved a minimum level of trade and energy flow for the Jewish entity, despite a nearly 90% decline in activity at the Port of Eilat, according to another Washington Post report.
The “Land Bridge” to Supply the Jewish Entity with Food and Raw Materials
With the escalating risks in the Red Sea, a silent land corridor has been activated from the Gulf to Israel, passing through the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the King Hussein Bridge, and Haifa-Ashdod.
Several professional reports, including an investigative report of 14 February 2024 titled “Houthi bypass: Quietly, goods forge overland path to Israel via Saudi Arabia, Jordan” by the Times of Israel, Bloomberg, VOA, The New Arab, and Middle East Monitor have documented the growth of this land route since early 2024. Logistics companies, such as Trucknet, have played a role in reducing transit times to four days from Jebel Ali to Haifa for certain sensitive shipments, fresh produce, industrial inputs, and perishable goods.
The Washington Institute for Near East Study, in an article of 21 April 2025, entitled, “Is the Houthi Threat a Checkmate for U.S Military Logistics?” explicitly mentioned the “Another option is the UAE-‘Israel’ land corridor, a trade route that runs from ‘Israel’s’ Haifa port through Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates, reaching the Persian Gulf by avoiding the Red Sea entirely.”
Impact: This “land alternative” kept food and commercial stockpiles in the Jewish entity closer to normal compared to the disruption of the Red Sea, and contributed to reducing domestic pressure on the government and economy, thus prolonging the ability to continue the war, according to The New Arab.
The Role of US Bases in Conflict Management (Forward Operating Bases):
Al Udeid in Qatar, a forward CENTCOM headquarters, Al Dhafra in Emirates, Muwaffaq Salti/Jordan, and others form a network of bases linking ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance) aircraft, fighter-interceptor aircraft, aerial refueling support, and naval Patriot-Aegis systems; this provides the backbone for command and control of regional air defense operations. Reuters, British parliamentary reports, and official US agencies document this role specifically in deterring the April 2024 attack. (Reuters, researchbriefings.files., parliament.uk)
The bottom line: Without this baseline network, the level of interception seen in April 2024 against Iran, or the execution of naval-air strikes against Houthi platforms, would have been impossible. It is the center of gravity facilitating Arab-Jewish cooperation under the auspices of US command, according to USCENTCOM.
Intelligence-Training Integration: Tunnels, Secure Chats, and the “Partners’ Narrative”: Washington Post/ICIJ documents reveal workshops and training exercises on tunnel warfare, including meetings at Fort Campbell, linking Arab states to secure chat platforms operated by US forces. The Washington Post article stated, “Centcom personnel also led planning meetings to launch information operations to counter Iran’s narrative that it is the regional protector of Palestinians and, according to a 2025 document, to “propagate [a] partner narrative of regional prosperity and cooperation.””
Summary Analysis: We are witnessing a series of overlapping collaborations: monitoring, early warning, interception, ground and food logistics, information warfare, and tactical training, all contributing to prolonging Israel's ability to continue the war despite the political cost.
Assessing the “Scale of Support” and its Impact as a Quick Numerical Summary: More than 300 Iranian drones or missiles were shot down on April 13–14, 2024; the majority were intercepted in a coordinated US-Israeli-Western operation with Jordanian participation, as according to Reuters. Approximately 80 drones and 6 missiles were shot down by US forces alone, according to Reuters, as a preliminary estimate. Eilat port activity declined by 90% due to the Houthis; however, the “land bridge” facilitated the supply of perishable goods, food and raw materials, via the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan.
Radar Links, Secure Communications, and Tunnel Training:
Leaked Slides Documented to the Washington Post provide unequivocal indictment. The secret coordination with the occupying army during the massacre, ethnic cleansing, and genocide from intercepting enemy missiles to securing its food and supplies through Arab lands is a blatant betrayal of the blood of Gaza and a misuse of Arab capabilities to protect the executioner instead of the victim. Holding these entities accountable, exposing these networks, and dismantling these complicity networks is a Shariah and moral duty incumbent upon the Islamic Ummah through the dismantling of these regimes mired in subservience and treachery.
The Extent of Cooperation and its Impact on the Gaza War and Ongoing Agreements:
From Theory to Implementation: While Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and others condemned the Zionist campaign in the media, extensive military and intelligence activity was taking place behind the scenes. Documents reveal that between 2022 and 2024, several countries were linked to joint air defense systems, which practically translates into sharing radar and electronic data. According to the Washington Post, radar cooperation with ‘Israel’ and Arab capitals enabled the parties to see a more comprehensive “air picture,” a tremendous intelligence gain.
The incident that exposed the vulnerability: The Doha strike of September 9, 2025. Despite this defensive link, the system failed to protect Qatar from an Israeli airstrike, announced by Tel Aviv, targeting Hamas leaders in Doha. Documents and data indicate that American systems did not detect the strike beforehand, even though they were monitoring its radars and airborne surveillance. Later, Netanyahu apologized to Qatar, and it announced that the strike will not be repeated after American pressure. It is likely that the intelligence cooperation excluded Qatar from information sharing, presenting Netanyahu with a victory image of eliminating Hamas leaders in Qatar in one fell swoop, a shared Zionist-American objective.
In the context of the ceasefire agreement and the Gaza monitoring force: Amid negotiations for a ceasefire and prisoner exchange, it was announced that 200 American soldiers would be sent to ‘Israel’ as part of the monitoring framework. According to the Washington Post, “Even as key Arab states condemned the war in the Gaza Strip, they quietly expanded security cooperation with the Israeli military, leaked U.S. documents reveal.” The Washington Post added, “In a joint statement, five of the six Arab countries said that they supported the establishment of a mechanism that “guarantees the security of all sides,” but they have stopped short of publicly committing to deploy military forces.”
Analysis of Strategic Motives Between Stakes and Risks:
The Central Objective: Countering Iranian Influence: All documents position Iran and its “Axis of Resistance” as the primary enemy of this partnership. As we explained previously, this narrative was chosen to mask the true cooperation and partnership, which is based on subservience and betrayal. It aims to provide the public with a narrative that mitigates the severity of the betrayal. Some documents describe the partisan and allied fields as the “Axis of Evil,” an expression that denotes a directed ideological unity. Fear of Iranian missiles, drones, and militias in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen are all motives buried within this structure.
Disguised Political Normalization: Since the Abraham Accords between Jewish entity, the UAE, and Bahrain, there has been an American desire to translate political normalization into a joint military structure. The Washington Post article states, “U.S. military officials have publicly acknowledged the existence of the partnership but have not spoken about the extent of Israeli-Arab cooperation in those efforts. In 2022, Gen. Kenneth “Frank” McKenzie, then Centcom’s commander, described the partnership in congressional testimony as an effort “building on [the] momentum of the Abraham Accords,” the agreement establishing diplomatic ties between ‘Israel’ and Morocco, the UAE and Bahrain.” In other words, the secret cooperation between these Arab entities and the Zionist entity was intended to solidify normalization into a military and security dimension, not limited to diplomatic and trade relations.
The Risk of Losing Internal Legitimacy: Every Arab regime faces a dangerous equation, if these partnerships are exposed, it will lose ground on the street, especially in countries with strong sensitivity to the issue of Palestine. Therefore, the documents were careful to include a clause prohibiting photography or media access to the meetings. The Washington Post articles states, “The conference also highlighted the diplomatic sensitivities inherent in these gatherings. A heading reading “MUST NOT DO” informed participants that they should not take photographs or provide access to the media.”
What’s happening in the “disguised political normalization”?: Following the Abraham Accords (2020), diplomatic and trade relations between ‘Israel’ and some Arab states transformed into a launching pad for security coordination that extends beyond the public eye. This is disguised normalization because it doesn't stop at economic or tourism crossings but seeks to weave a security-military network built on the momentum of those agreements. General Kenneth “Frank” McKenzie indicated in his testimony before Congress that regional efforts are “building on [the] momentum of the Abraham Accords,” a phrase that reflects the transformation of normalization into a security platform employed for joint intelligence and military relations.
Expected responses and pressing questions: From analysts, Emile Hokayem, and concerns about fragmentation: The Washington Post stated, “Emile Hokayem, director of regional security at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a think tank, said the United States has long hoped that military cooperation would bring about political normalization between Israel and the Arab states. However, while quietly working with the countries’ military leaders may dodge thorny political discussions, this approach also “obscures or hides the reality” of the tensions between the parties, he said. Those tensions, Hokayem said, were on full display after the Israeli strike in Qatar. “A key member of the American effort has attacked another, with America seen as complacent, complicit or blind,” he said. “The resulting distrust will mar American efforts for years to come.””
Open questions that the investigation did not answer: Are there arms contracts between “Israel” and the Arab states involved in this construction? Who are the local intermediaries within those countries who signed the memoranda of understanding or allowed access to the radars and systems? Did military personnel from those countries participate in actual operations on the ground or in Gaza? Has any official been held accountable or reported to parliaments or oversight bodies? Does this constitute a new form of “direct occupation”?
Brief Legal-Strategic Assessment: In the narrow legal sense of the law of occupation, as per Hague Regulations 1907, Article 42 and the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 42 states, “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation applies only to the territory where such authority is established, and in a position to assert itself.” So, occupation is defined as the imposition of effective, non-consensual authority by a foreign state over a territory over which it has no sovereignty. This authority is exercised on the ground and can be enforced and administered civilly and in terms of security. This form of occupation is called “effective control.”
This generally requires a physical presence that allows the foreign ruler to enforce his decisions on the territory and the population, a criterion established in the literature of the International Committee of the Red Cross based on the “effective control” test. Therefore, hosting American bases or participating in command-and-control networks is not sufficient in itself to constitute a “belligerent occupation” in the literal sense, unless effective control over the territory and its civil administration is achieved. However, what the leaked documents reveal about centrally managed American command-and-control networks include secure chat platform run by Washington, a “regional air picture” integrated from Arab radars, a regional cyber center under construction, the formulation of the official narrative on which the conflict is managed and its marketing to the domestic audience, and the rest of the components and forms of this cooperation”, with the operational decision being made in real time through American operations rooms and bypassing national and media channels, secrecy of meetings, practically approaches a picture of functional digital occupation of the security sovereignty sector. All this is the usurpation of the function of security, decision-making, and information and its transfer outside the borders, so that the authority to determine the threat, arrange priorities, and set the pace of interception-strike operations is exercised from the heart of American operations centers, while the Jewish entity is granted the privilege of a forward military base within this system. This is a pattern of domination through empowerment and invitation, described in the literature as “Empire by Invitation.” There are no boots and tanks on the ground, but there is a firm grip on the keys to sovereignty, including airspace, cyberspace, narrative, and intelligence, which places effective security decisions outside the national sphere.
“Empire by Invitation:” is a term in political thought and international relations that refers to a pattern of domination in which a major power exercises control over other states based on a “request” or “voluntary invitation” from those states themselves from official bodies within those states, not from the people. That is, not through military invasion, but through the voluntary acceptance of protection, or a security partnership, that effectively transforms into dependency. In other words, dependent states willingly surrender their sovereignty in exchange for a sense of security or economic gains, so that they come under the administration of the dominant state, without direct occupation.
The analytical conclusion: Legally, we are not facing a classic military occupation due to the absence of direct territorial control; however, strategically and politically, we are dealing with a “functional occupation” of decision-making and information control fields. This creates sovereign dependency and allows the Jewish entity to continuously benefit as an operational agent within the network. This pattern extends the control test from the ground to the decision-making infrastructure both control-and-command (C2) as well as Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence (C4I), producing effective foreign control without direct civilian administration. This justifies its popular, and moral, description as “colonialism without guns,” managing decisions from abroad and prolonging the war thanks to communications infrastructure, radars, and a narrative managed from Washington and serving Tel Aviv.
Practical indicators of “functional control,” according to available evidence: A secure, US-managed communications platform linking Arab and Jewish operations rooms, directing immediate decision-making to a foreign center. Integration of national radars into a centrally managed and distributed “regional air picture.” A regional cyber center coordinates electronic defense and information. Secrecy is mandated, and media documentation is prohibited to shield the infrastructure from public scrutiny. Taken together, these elements demonstrate a complete foreign takeover of security functions, undermining the actual independence of national decision-making.
A crime against Islam and Muslims: When some regimes publicly condemn the Jewish entity’s war in Gaza, then secretly open the floodgates of support, this is not merely a wavering stance; it is a systematic betrayal of all those who were outraged by the nighttime bombs in Qatari streets or Yemeni cities. To hold the radar controls, while pointing a finger at the bombing war machine, is the ultimate scandal, to provide support to the enemy of the people with words, and hidden bloodshed.
Conclusion: A time of upheaval, and accountability: This revelation, regardless of its security and military repercussions, is fundamentally a moment of accountability. It is not enough to simply read the documents. We must translate them into a comprehensive popular and political movement for change, presenting them to the capitals and the public.
It is also necessary to publish the full files, form investigative committees in the relevant Arab countries, and hold accountable the rulers and military commanders who facilitated this behind-the-scenes cooperation, including ministers of defense, security, or intelligence. None of them could have carried out an operation of this magnitude without the complicity of the highest levels of the state and military leadership.
Selected References:
Washington Post + ICIJ: “Arab states expanded cooperation with Israeli military during Gaza war, files show” 11 October 2025. Creation of the Regional Security Network
Wall Street Journal: “How the U.S. Forged a Fragile Middle Eastern Alliance to Repel Iran’s Israel Attack” 15 April 2024. It details early warning, coordination, and interception.
Reuters/The Guardian/Atlantic Council: Interception Numbers, Jordan's Role, and Domestic Implications
CENTCOM (Official Data): Israel’s Defense Updates and Red Sea interceptions
CENTCOM The “land bridge” route: Times of Israel, Bloomberg, VOA, The New Arab, MEMO — covering the Emirati-Saudi-Jordanian connection to Israeli ports and its impact on fresh produce. Middle East Monitor, The Times of Israel, Bloomberg.