IMRA Middle East News Updates

Weekly Commentary: Never Forget: Sovereignty Trumps Guarantees

Fri, 17 Jul 2026 10:04:34 -0400

Weekly Commentary: Never Forget: Sovereignty Trumps Guarantees
Dr. Aaron Lerner 17 July 2026

Never forget: once a sovereign state exists it remains a sovereign state
even if it renounces whatever commitments it made to receive that status.

If you corner a serious Palestinian state promoter on the point they won't
deny it.

They will only argue that Israel and/or third parties would be strong enough
to keep the Palestinian state in check.

Let's be clear:

No one knows who or what will rule in Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, TURKEY,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, etc. in the coming years, let along coming
decades.

So the sky is the limit on how a sovereign Palestinian state and its allies
could exploit that status to bring about our destruction.

Does this mean ultimately, in the absence of a sovereign Palestinian state,
a "one state solution" given the favorable Jewish birth rate?

Within the national camp some of the most fervent supporters for Jewish
communities in Judea and Samaria are adamant that Israel does not annex any
area which also includes Arabs.

If that position prevails, we may end up with some workable form of autonomy
on a municipal or regional level.

But it won't certainly be a sovereign Palestinian state.

Because: Once a sovereign state exists it remains a sovereign state even if
it renounces whatever commitments it made to receive that status.
________________________________________
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus on
Arab-Israeli relations

Website: www.imra.org.il

Weekly Commentary: Trump Doesn't Require Turkish S-400 - Patriot Swap Before F-35s Supplied

Wed, 08 Jul 2026 16:38:45 -0400

Weekly Commentary: Trump Doesn't Require Turkish S-400 - Patriot Swap Before
F-35s Supplied
Dr. Aaron Lerner 8 July 2026

Turkey ultimately chose to purchase the Russian S-400 air defense system
after negotiations to acquire the American Patriot broke down over Ankara's
insistence on extensive technology transfer and production in Turkey.

Turkey was not merely seeking permission to assemble Patriots or manufacture
selected components under American supervision. It wanted a far broader
transfer of technology that would enable its defense industry to acquire the
know-how needed to produce and sustain advanced air defense systems with far
less dependence on the United States.

Russia also declined to provide Turkey with the extensive technology
transfer it sought. Nevertheless, Ankara proceeded with the S-400 purchase
rather than returning to the United States to buy Patriots.

Patriots returned to the headlines today when President Donald Trump
announced that the United States would license Ukraine to manufacture
Patriot missiles.

"We're going to give a license to you to make Patriots. That's pretty cool.
This way, you can't complain that we're not giving 'em enough," Trump said
during a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the NATO
summit in Ankara.

The scope of the proposed license has not yet been made public. It almost
certainly will involve some transfer of manufacturing technology. But there
is an important distinction: a license to manufacture under American
authorization does not necessarily provide the comprehensive technology
transfer or long-term industrial independence that Turkey sought when it
negotiated to purchase the Patriot system.

President Trump also indicated in Ankara that he was prepared to restore
Turkey's access to the F-35 fighter program. Significantly, however, he did
not publicly link such a move to Turkey first relinquishing its Russian
S-400 system in exchange for Patriots, even though Congress previously
prohibited F-35 transfers to Turkey while it retains the S-400 because of
concerns that the Russian system could compromise sensitive F-35 technology.
________________________________________
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus on
Arab-Israeli relations

Website: www.imra.org.il

Prof Kobi Michael of INSS responds to Palestinian Sovereignty Dilemma

Wed, 08 Jul 2026 15:52:03 -0400

Prof Kobi Michael of INSS responds to Palestinian Sovereignty Dilemma Question

Sent: Monday, July 6, 2026
From: Dr. Aaron Lerner
To: Prof Kobi Michael
RE: Question relating to "Time to Break the Strategic Limbo: Israel's Core Challenge"

Dear Prof. Kobi Michael,

I read "Time to Break the Strategic Limbo: Israel’s Core Challenge" (INSS Insight No. 2163, July 5, 2026) with great interest.
http://www.inss.org.il/publication/strategic-limbo/

How do you see addressing the challenge that the moment that a sovereign Palestinian state with delineated borders truly gains international status as a sovereign state that it retains that status even if it openly reneges on the commitments and arrangements which lead to it receiving this status.

This challenge may not trouble Israeli “checker players” pleased with the excellent security arrangements in place as the Prime Minister of Israel and the head of Palestine sign an agreement for mutual recognition of the two sovereign states on the White House lawn.

But the Palestinian “chess players” would patiently pick away at these arrangements and prepare, with their allies, for the day that Palestinian sovereignty is ultimately exploited to bring about the destruction of Israel.

Best regards,
Dr. Aaron Lerner – IMRA
PS: I would like to share your reply on IMRA – you can reply in Hebrew if you prefer and I will translate it.

Sent: Monday, July 6, 2026
From: Kobi Michael
To: Dr. Aaron Lerner
Subject: Re: Question relating to "Time to Break the Strategic Limbo: Israel's Core Challenge"

Dear Dr. Lerner,

There is a very long way until reaching an independent Palestinian state if at all. I reject the Palestinian demands and definitions regarding their statehood and independence and I believe there is no need and ripeness to deal with that at this stage. I was talking about initiating moves that will improve the current situation that will be a sort of strategic compass and will enable the Saudis to return to the normalization process as part of a broad regional vision where the Palestinian issue will make the Arab states responsible to it and it will not be left only as an Israeli concern. They created the problem so they have the responsibility to be part of the solution, the burden should not remain on the ISRAELI SHOULDERS ONLY.
Kobi

________________________________________
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus on Arab-Israeli relations

Website: www.imra.org.il

Act to Amend the Basic Law: Instead of a Constitutional Crisis: Revising the “For the Sake of Justice” Clause

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 07:04:16 -0400

Act to Amend the Basic Law: Instead of a Constitutional Crisis: Revising the “For the Sake of Justice” Clause
Dr. Aaron Lerner 7 July 2026

Section 15(c) of the 1984 Basic Law: The Judiciary states that the High Court of Justice is authorized to hear “matters in which it deems it necessary to grant relief for the sake of justice.”

The law was enacted during the Likud government of Yitzhak Shamir, when Moshe Nissim served as Minister of Justice, and its wording has been considered relatively broad and unusual.

Over the years, this clause has been used as a basis for an expansive interpretation of the High Court’s powers in cases where the Court believed it necessary to grant relief on grounds of justice, even when such authority did not clearly arise from the written legislation itself.

In certain cases, such as the current disputed ruling, this has created situations in which rulings do not conform to the intent of the legislature or to the explicit language of the law.

Therefore, instead of calling for noncompliance with court rulings, the proper course in a democracy is to amend the Basic Law: The Judiciary so that it is explicitly clarified that the authority to grant “relief for the sake of justice” does not permit rulings that contradict the provisions of written law or the intent of the legislature as established in legislation.

________________________________________
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus on Arab-Israeli relations

Website: www.imra.org.il

Weekly Commentary: Lebanon Must Declare State of Emergency To Facilitate Sweeping Searches

Wed, 01 Jul 2026 13:19:28 -0400

Weekly Commentary: Lebanon Must Declare State of Emergency To Facilitate
Sweeping Searches
Dr. Aaron Lerner 1 July 2026

As of this writing, the Lebanese Army does not have the legal authority to
conduct the kind of sweeping searches for weapons in private properties
which are required to get the job done.

Under Lebanese law, a citizen's home is constitutionally inviolable.

This legally limits the Lebanese Army to conduct searches of specific
locations which received judicial authorization based on intelligence
relating to those specific locations.

That's a gaping hole.

We don't have that kind of granular information.

In fact, sometimes we miss huge weapons stores and only find them when we
are at the site ourselves.

YNET reports, for example, that Israel Air Force Intelligence was certain
that the large Hezbollah underground complex in the village of Majdal Zoun
was abandoned and empty.

When we reached the site, we were stunned to find that the 200-meter-long
tunnel buried more that 25 meters underground was full of weapons,
explosives, rockets, anti-tank missiles, and drones.

But there is a work-around.

The declaration of a formal state of emergency.

And there is precedent for such a move.

The day after the August 4, 2020 Beirut port explosion, the Council of
Ministers declared a state of emergency, which Parliament subsequently
approved. That step dramatically expanded the legal authorities available to
the security forces.

A similar declaration, even if limited to the designated pilot zones of
Zawtar al-Gharbiya and Froun, could provide the legal basis for systematic
area-wide searches there rather than operations limited to sites identified
through prior intelligence.

Such a process would require authorization of sweeping searches by Military
Prosecutor Judge Claude Ghanem after the declaration of the state of
emergency .

It is noteworthy that Judge Ghanem is already prosecuting Hezbollah members
on illegal weapons charges.

If the Government of Lebanon is serious about disarming Hezbollah, they have
the votes to do this.

Declaring a state of emergency requires a two-thirds majority in the
24-member cabinet - 16 votes. Hezbollah and Amal control only four seats, so
only 16 of the remaining 20 cabinet members need to vote for the state of
emergency.

A simple majority of the Lebanese Parliament is needed to approve the state
of emergency. The Hezbollah-Amal bloc has only 30 seats, so only a fraction
of the other 98 MPs need to support the move for it to pass.

So the choice is clear: a farcical "hear-no-evil see-no-evil" operation or a
serious program of boots on the ground performing intensive and ongoing
broad searches to locate and destroy both the weapons now in place as well
as weapons which might be smuggled in in the future.

The pilot zones are thus far more than a test of the army's operational
capability.

They are a critical test of whether the Lebanese state is prepared to truly
assert sovereign authority in its own territory.

________________________________________
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus on
Arab-Israeli relations

Website: www.imra.org.il

Trump's Warning: Turkey supports enemy (F-35s to support Iran?)

Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:23:21 -0400

Trump's Warning: Turkey supports enemy (F-35s to support Iran?)
Dr. Aaron Lerner 25 June 2026

President Donald Trump may have delivered the clearest warning yet to
American policymakers regarding Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and
Turkey's future regional posture.

In Oval Office remarks on June 25, 2026, Trump praised Erdogan in highly
personal terms: "I like him, he is my friend. Erdogan is a great leader, a
very strong person. Everything I've ever asked from him, he's done." But
Trump then made a far more consequential statement. Referring to the recent
conflict involving Iran, Trump said Erdogan "was a prime candidate to go
into the war with Iran - maybe on the Iran side, because he's not a big fan
of Israel," before adding: "I asked him to stay out of it, and he stayed
out."

The significance of the remark is not the praise itself. It is Trump's
explanation for why Turkey allegedly refrained from acting against American
and Israeli interests. Trump did not describe Erdogan's restraint as the
product of NATO commitments, shared strategic interests, deterrence, or
alliance structures. Instead, he explicitly framed it as a personal favor to
him.

That distinction matters enormously.

If Erdogan's restraint depends primarily on his personal relationship with
Trump, then Trump's own statement implies that the restraint could disappear
the moment Trump leaves office. In effect, Trump publicly suggested that
Turkey's current behavior should not necessarily be viewed as reflecting
stable alignment with American strategic interests, but rather as a
temporary accommodation tied to one personal relationship.

For American policymakers that should be a flashing warning sign.

Long-term security planning cannot assume that personal rapport between
leaders is a durable substitute for converging national interests.

If Trump himself is correct that Erdogan stayed out "because I asked him,"
then Washington must also consider the obvious corollary: what happens when
there is no longer a Trump to ask?

It most certainly does not support US interests to supply strategic F-35's
to a country which may very well use them in the defense of Iran after Mr.
Trump leaves the White House!
________________________________________
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus on
Arab-Israeli relations

Website: www.imra.org.il