BOARD OF PEACE – Part 1

Donald Trump presents himself as a peacemaker for Gaza – through the creation of a so-called “Board of Peace.” But behind the humanitarian rhetoric lies a far more disturbing reality.
In Part 1 of this three-part series, I dismantle the origins, historical backdrop, and legal contradictions of this initiative. When those who enabled destruction suddenly claim to deliver peace, the claim itself demands scrutiny.
This first installment exposes why the “Board of Peace” is not a solution, but a structural continuation of power, impunity, and geopolitical coercion. Parts 2 and 3 will reveal who stands to gain – and why Gaza is merely the test case.

THE HEIST THEY CALL “PEACE”

by Michael Hollister
Exclusive published at Michael Hollister on February 01, 2026

4.510 words * 24 minutes readingtime

This analysis is made available for free – but high-quality research takes time, money, energy, and focus. If you’d like to support this work, you can do so here:

Alternatively, support my work with a Substack subscription –
from as little as 5 USD/month.
Let’s build a counter-public together.

Part 1: The Exposure

I. OPENING: PERVERSITY HAS A NAME

Imagine Jack the Ripper founding a women’s shelter. He appoints himself chairman for life. He decides which women may find refuge and which may not. He determines the house rules. He controls the budget. He owns the construction company that builds the building. He owns the bank that finances it. He provides the security guards. And he calls the whole thing: “House of Protection.”

This isn’t satire. This is the precise analogy for the “Board of Peace” that Donald Trump founded for Gaza on January 16, 2026.

A man whose country, in 250 years of existence, has waged war in all but 16 to 20 years. A man who in January 2026 bombed Venezuela and kidnapped its president—80 dead, triple breach of international law. A man who had Iranian nuclear facilities bombed without Iran having attacked the United States. A man who publicly announced he would “take” Greenland—”one way or another, the good way or the bad way”—and ordered his Pentagon to draft invasion plans. This man now presents himself as peacemaker for Gaza.

The perversity has three dimensions.

First dimension: The U.S. first allowed Gaza to be destroyed. 26 months of war. 80,000 dead civilians. 86 to 90 percent of all buildings razed to the ground. With U.S. weapons. With U.S. support. With U.S. veto in the UN Security Council against every ceasefire.

Second dimension: Trump openly announced in February and March 2025 that he would “take” Gaza. Literally: “We don’t need to buy it, we have it.” And: “Gaza would be owned by the United States.” CNN summarized on February 26, 2025: “The American president has proposed displacing 2.1 million Palestinians from Gaza and transforming the enclave into a ‘Riviera’ that would be owned by the United States.”

Third dimension: Eleven months later, on January 16, 2026, the Board of Peace is founded. Let’s look at who sits there: Steve Witkoff, one of the largest real estate developers and construction contractors in the U.S. Marc Rowan, CEO of Apollo Global Management, managing $650 billion. Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, real estate investor. Yakir Gabay, Israeli real estate billionaire. People who will profit directly from reconstruction.

This isn’t a peace initiative. This is the administrative structure for an annexed territory. This is colonial land grab in the 21st century, packaged as humanitarian mission.

This article does three things.

First: It documents who the United States really is—a country that has spent 93 to 94 percent of its existence at war and has committed three massive breaches of international law in the last 18 months alone, without any consequences.

Second: It analyzes the structure of the Board of Peace based on the primary source—the White House statement of January 16, 2026. Four levels of control. Zero Palestinian self-determination. American, Israeli, and Gulf investors as “peacemakers.”

Third: It shows why this doesn’t just affect Gaza. Gaza is the test run. The precedent. The model for Iran, Panama, Venezuela. What works here goes global: breach of international law without consequences, “peace” narrative as cover, economic exploitation as “reconstruction.”

The method of this article is simple: primary sources, facts, international law. No speculation. No conspiracy theories. Only what is documented, citable, and verifiable. Trump himself provides the evidence. The White House provides the structure. International law scholars provide the legal classification. Palestinians provide the reality on the ground.

At the end of this three-part series stands one question: When a country bombs another, displaces its population, annexes the territory, and installs a colonial administration—and the world remains silent—what distinguishes this from robbery?

The answer is: Nothing. Except the word they use for it.

They call it “peace.”

II. THE ARSONISTS AS FIRE BRIGADE: 250 YEARS OF WAR

Before we come to the Board of Peace, we need context. Who are the United States? What is their history? What qualifies them to act as “peacemakers”?

The answer is simple and brutal: nothing.

The United States of America was founded in 1776. In 2026, they are exactly 250 years old. Of these 250 years, they have waged no war for between 16 and 20 years. That means: 93 to 94 percent of their entire existence, the U.S. has been at war.

This isn’t coincidence. This isn’t bad luck. This isn’t “defending freedom.” This is business model. This is strategy. This is identity.

The U.S. was founded on annexed land—through systematic genocide of the indigenous population. An estimated 10 to 15 million people lived on the territory of today’s United States before European colonization. By 1900, there were 250,000 left. This isn’t “discovery” of a continent. This is annihilation of a civilization. The methods: Biological warfare with smallpox viruses on blankets. Massacres of unarmed village communities. Systematic destruction of food sources through extermination of buffalo herds. Forced relocations to barren land—the “Trail of Tears” alone killed 4,000 Cherokee on the march.

What followed after consolidation in their own territory was export of this model. The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 declared the entire Western Hemisphere a U.S. sphere of influence. What sounds elegant means: Latin America as backyard. As resource source. As laboratory for interventions.

Since 1945—that is, since the end of World War II, in which the U.S. presented itself as liberator—the United States has bombed the following countries:

China (1945-46, 1950-53), Korea (1950-53), Guatemala (1954, 1960, 1967-69), Indonesia (1958), Cuba (1959-61), Belgian Congo (1964), Peru (1965), Laos (1964-73), Vietnam (1961-73), Cambodia (1969-70), Lebanon (1983-84), Grenada (1983), Libya (1986, 2011), El Salvador (1980s), Nicaragua (1980s), Iran (1987, 1988, 2025), Panama (1989), Iraq (1991-2011, 2014-present), Kuwait (1991), Somalia (1993, 2007-present), Bosnia (1994-95), Sudan (1998), Afghanistan (1998, 2001-2021), Yugoslavia/Serbia (1999), Yemen (2002-present), Pakistan (2004-present), Syria (2014-present).

These aren’t abstract country names. These are people. These are numbers.

Korea: 3 million dead. 20 percent of the North Korean population exterminated. More bombs dropped than in the entire Pacific War against Japan.

Vietnam: 3 to 3.8 million dead. 58,000 dead U.S. soldiers are mourned to this day. The 3 million dead Vietnamese, Laotians, and Cambodians appear in U.S. history books as a footnote. Agent Orange still poisons soils and causes birth defects in the third generation.

Laos: 2 million tons of bombs on a country that never attacked the United States. Laos remains the most heavily bombed country in history—per capita. 80 million cluster bombs were dropped. 30 percent did not explode. Children still die today when they play in fields.

Iraq: Two Gulf Wars and 13 years of sanctions. Madeleine Albright, U.S. Secretary of State, was asked in 1996 whether the sanctions, which cost 500,000 Iraqi children their lives, were “worth it.” Her answer: “We believe it was worth the price.” After the 2003 invasion: estimates between 500,000 and over 1 million dead. The justification—weapons of mass destruction—was a lie. Documented. Proven. Consequences: none.

Afghanistan: 20 years of war. 176,000 dead. $2.3 trillion spent. Result: The Taliban are back in power. Exactly the same Taliban who were overthrown in 2001. What did the war achieve? Profits for defense contractors. Destabilization of a region. Millions of refugees.

Libya: 2011, NATO bombing under U.S. leadership. Justification: “Protection of civilians” (UN Resolution 1973). Result: Gaddafi dead, country destroyed, open slave markets in Libya, migration crisis to Europe, destabilization of the entire Sahel zone. Barack Obama later called it his greatest foreign policy failure—not the bombing itself, but that there was no “plan for afterwards.”

Syria: Bombed since 2014. Without invitation from the Syrian government. Without UN mandate. Breach of international law. U.S. troops still occupy Syrian oil fields in the northeast today. Donald Trump said literally: “We took the oil.” This isn’t conspiracy theory. This is official U.S. policy, spoken by the president.

The pattern becomes visible: Regime-change operations. Resource control. Destabilization of states that don’t fit into the U.S. world order. The justifications change—communism, terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, human rights, drug trafficking. The method remains the same: bombs.

The costs? The Watson Institute at Brown University calculated the costs of the “War on Terror” since 2001: $8 trillion. 900,000 direct war deaths. 38 million displaced persons and refugees. These are conservative estimates.

Who profits? The military-industrial complex. Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman. The five largest U.S. defense contractors had revenues of over $200 billion in 2023. Their business model is war. No war, no revenue. No revenue, no shareholder returns. No coincidence that the U.S. spends more on military than the next ten countries combined.

Dwight D. Eisenhower, U.S. president and five-star general, warned in his 1961 farewell address: “We must guard against the entanglements of the military-industrial complex. The potential for the catastrophic rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

That was 65 years ago. Since then, the system hasn’t changed. It has perfected itself.

Now, January 2026, we add the most recent breaches of international law. And here it becomes particularly relevant—because these breaches occur under the same president who now founds the Board of Peace for Gaza.

Venezuela, January 3, 2026:

U.S. forces bomb Caracas in the early morning hours. At least 80 people die. President Nicolás Maduro and his wife are kidnapped from the presidential palace. Not arrested—kidnapped. There is no international arrest warrant. There is no UN mandate. There is no invitation from the Venezuelan government. U.S. soldiers attack the capital of a sovereign state, kill dozens of people, and abduct the head of state.

This isn’t an arrest warrant. This isn’t extradition. This is military aggression with subsequent kidnapping.

Three breaches of international law in one operation:

  1. Prohibition of force (Article 2(4) UN Charter): “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.”
  2. Violation of sovereignty: Venezuela was not attacked. The U.S. was not threatened. There was no imminent danger. No Article 51 of the UN Charter (self-defense) is applicable.
  3. Illegal abduction of a head of state: This is unprecedented in international law in modern history. Not even during the Cold War did the U.S. or Soviet Union kidnap sitting heads of state of other countries.

The U.S. justification: Maduro is a “drug lord.” This is cynical. The U.S. has financed and supported dictators, torturers, and actual drug traffickers worldwide for decades—as long as they represent their interests. But an elected president of an oil-rich country who resists U.S. hegemony is declared a “drug lord” and kidnapped.

Consequences? None. No UN Security Council condemning this (because the U.S. would veto). No sanctions against the U.S. No international outrage beyond diplomatic statements.

Iran, June 2025:

U.S. forces bomb Iranian nuclear facilities. Iran had not attacked the United States. There was no UN mandate. There was no imminent threat to American territory. The justification: Iran is working on nuclear weapons.

Even if that were true—and the last IAEA report did not confirm it—that doesn’t legitimize bombing. Israel has nuclear weapons. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. India has nuclear weapons. North Korea has nuclear weapons. The U.S. doesn’t bomb these countries.

Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits the use of force. Article 51 permits self-defense only in case of armed attack. Iran had not attacked the United States.

This is a war of aggression. This is illegal. Period.

Consequences? None.

Tanker Seizures, January 2026:

At least five oil tankers are seized by U.S. forces in international waters. The ships were transporting Iranian or Venezuelan oil. The U.S. claims they are “enforcing U.S. sanctions.”

Here’s the problem: U.S. sanctions are U.S. law. Not international law. The U.S. does not have the right to seize ships of third countries in international waters transporting goods between third countries just because the U.S. doesn’t like it.

The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) regulates this clearly: Seizure in international waters is illegal. It is piracy in the legal sense under international law.

Consequences? None.

Threats Against Colombia, Cuba, Nicaragua:

Marco Rubio, U.S. Secretary of State, says literally in January 2026: “If I were sitting in Cuba’s government, I’d be seriously worried.”

This isn’t diplomacy. This is a threat. A threat of force.

Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits not only the use of force but also the threat of force. Rubio is openly threatening a sovereign state—as Secretary of State of the United States.

Colombia is threatened because it criticized Maduro’s kidnapping. Nicaragua is threatened because it doesn’t submit to the U.S. agenda. Cuba has been fought with embargo and destabilization for 65 years—because it dared to take a different path.

Consequences? None.

Greenland:

Donald Trump declares publicly in January 2026 that he “needs” Greenland. “We will have it, one way or another—the good way or the bad way.”

Read that again: “One way or another—the good way or the bad way.”

This is an invasion threat. Against Greenland. Which belongs to Denmark. Denmark is a NATO member. The U.S. is threatening a NATO partner with invasion.

Trump orders the Pentagon to draft invasion plans for Greenland. This isn’t rhetoric. These are military preparations.

Consequences? None. Denmark protests. The EU is “concerned.” Germany remains silent. No one takes consequences.

A pattern becomes abundantly clear: Breach of international law, impunity, repetition. The U.S. systematically, openly breaches international law without any justification that would stand under international law. And the world watches.

This is the context in which Donald Trump founds the “Board of Peace” for Gaza on January 16, 2026.

A country that waged war for 93 percent of its existence. A country that has bombed over 30 countries since 1945. A country that has committed three massive breaches of international law in the last 18 months alone—Venezuela, Iran, tankers. A country currently threatening other countries—Colombia, Cuba, Nicaragua. A country threatening a NATO partner with invasion.

This country, represented by this president, now steps up and says: “We bring peace to Gaza.”

This isn’t hypocrisy. Hypocrisy would presuppose a discrepancy between claim and reality that is supposed to be hidden. Here there is no concealment. Trump publicly announced in February 2025 that he would “take” Gaza. The international community protested. And eleven months later, he implements it.

A violator of international law as peacemaker. An arsonist as fire brigade. Jack the Ripper founds the women’s shelter.

The question is no longer: Is this cynical? The question is: Why does the world allow this?

III. “WE’RE JUST TAKING IT”—TRUMP’S GAZA ANNOUNCEMENT

To understand what the Board of Peace really is, we must go back. February 2025. Donald Trump has been in office for four weeks. Gaza lies in ruins after 16 months of war. 80,000 civilians are dead. 86 to 90 percent of all buildings are destroyed. 2.3 million people have no home.

And at this moment, Donald Trump posts an AI-generated video.

The images:

  • A golden Trump statue, monumental size, towers over Gaza
  • Text displayed: “Trump Gaza is finally here!”
  • Elon Musk, bare-chested, dancing on the beach
  • Money raining from the sky like confetti
  • Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump sitting in deck chairs, drinking cocktails, laughing
  • Palestinian children—recognizable by their clothing—running through rubble fields
  • In the background, gleaming high-rises, hotels, luxury resorts rise up
  • Song lyrics dubbed in: “Donald’s coming to set you free”

The video is not satire. It’s not a deepfake by a Trump critic. It’s officially posted on Trump’s social media channels. On February 26, 2025.

CNN reports the same day: “The American president has proposed displacing 2.1 million Palestinians from Gaza and transforming the enclave into a ‘Riviera’ that would be owned by the United States.”

Let that sink in. The U.S. president posts a video showing:

  1. Himself as a golden statue over destroyed land
  2. Palestinian children running through rubble (created by U.S. weapons)
  3. “Salvation” in the form of luxury hotels and resorts
  4. Himself and Netanyahu celebrating this

This isn’t a political statement. This is colonialism as marketing video.

In the weeks before, February and March 2025, Trump had already verbally outlined his Gaza plans. The quotes:

“We don’t need to buy it, we have it.”

“There’s nothing to buy—it’s Gaza.”

“Gaza would be owned by the United States.”

“This is a war-torn area. The United States would simply take Gaza, revive it, and turn it into a diamond.”

Read these sentences again. Slowly. Sentence by sentence.

“We don’t need to buy it, we have it.”

How do you have something without buying it? You take it. You conquer it. You annex it. This is the logic of a thief. Or a colonial master.

“There’s nothing to buy—it’s Gaza.”

Gaza is not uninhabited land. Gaza is not ownerless territory. Gaza is home to 2.3 million people. But in Trump’s logic, there’s “nothing to buy.” Why? Because the people who live there don’t count. Because their property rights, their right to exist, their right to their land doesn’t exist in his calculation.

“Gaza would be owned by the United States.”

Not: “Gaza would belong to the Palestinians.” Not: “Gaza would govern itself.” Not even: “Gaza would be under international administration.” But: “the United States.”

This isn’t conspiracy-theoretical interpretation of these statements. These are verbatim quotes. Documented. On video. In official statements. In interviews with CNN, FOX News, in press briefings.

The reactions were not long in coming.

International Bar Association (IBA), March 2025:

The IBA is the worldwide association of lawyers and bar associations. It represents over 80,000 lawyers and 190 bar associations in more than 170 countries. When the IBA speaks on international law, the global legal community speaks.

Sara Elizabeth Dill, Co-Vice Chair of the IBA War Crimes Committee, stated on March 12, 2025:

“The notion that permanent displacement would do anything positive for people in Gaza is an absolute farce and totally contrary to international law.”

Kirsty Sutherland, Co-Chair of the same committee:

“The international community cannot accept that state authorities destroy a foreign territory—people’s homes, hospitals—and then sell it or facilitate its ‘purchase’ by another state, as this would create an intolerable precedent.”

The IBA identifies specific legal violations of Trump’s plan:

  • Rome Statute Article 7(1)(d): Prohibition of mass displacement as crime against humanity
  • Rome Statute Article 8(2): Prohibition of appropriation of property in occupied territories as war crime
  • Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 13(2): “Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.”
  • Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 49: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies” and “Forcible transfers of protected persons from occupied territory […] are prohibited, regardless of their motive.”

This isn’t “criticizable.” This isn’t “outside international norms.” This is: illegal. These are crimes for which the International Criminal Court (ICC) has jurisdiction.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres stated on March 5, 2025, Trump’s plans carry the “risk of ethnic cleansing.”

Ethnic cleansing. That’s not a diplomatic euphemism. That’s a legal term. Ethnic cleansing means the systematic displacement of an ethnic or religious group from an area. The Rome Statute categorizes this as a crime against humanity.

The UN Secretary-General is thus saying: What Trump is planning is a crime against humanity.

UN experts published a joint statement on February 28, 2025:

“Shocking threats to ‘take over’ Gaza would shatter fundamental rules of the international order. It is manifestly illegal to occupy and annex a foreign territory by force and forcibly deport its population.”

“Manifestly illegal”—not “problematic,” not “concerning,” not “should be reviewed.” But: illegal.

The global reactions, February and March 2025, speak volumes:

Saudi Arabia: King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman release a categorical rejection at 04:00 AM—an unusual time for official statements. Saudi Arabia, normally a close U.S. ally, publicly distances itself.

Egypt: President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi cancels his state visit to Washington scheduled for March. Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty declares: “Any plans to displace Palestinians are unacceptable and will never be supported by Egypt.”

Jordan: King Abdullah II publicly rejects Trump’s plan. Jordan, which already took in hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees in 1948 and 1967, makes clear: No further Nakba.

Turkey: President Erdoğan calls Trump’s plan “neocolonialist” and “a disgrace to humanity.”

France: Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot: “This is a grave breach of international law. France will never accept forced displacement of civilian population.”

Germany: Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, normally restrained in criticism of the U.S.: “Unacceptable and contrary to international law.”

Even North Korea—a country largely isolated internationally—comments through its UN representation: “Robbery.” The irony: Of all countries, North Korea, labeled a rogue state by the West, calls a robbery by its name.

The only substantial support for Trump’s plan came from Israel.

Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Prime Minister, on February 27, 2025: “This could change history.”

Yes. It could. The question is: in which direction.

What Netanyahu means: The final solution to the “Palestinian question” through displacement. What international law scholars mean: The precedent for annexation without consequences.

Let us establish this:

  • Trump announces in February and March 2025 that he will annex Gaza
  • He uses formulations like “we have it” and “it would belong to us”
  • He posts an AI video that stages displacement as “liberation”
  • The international community—with the exception of Israel—rejects it
  • International law scholars identify it as illegal
  • UN experts warn of ethnic cleansing
  • The UN Secretary-General warns of crimes against humanity

And then, eleven months later, on January 16, 2026, Trump founds the “Board of Peace.”

No apology. No retraction. No correction of plans. No consideration of international criticism. But: implementation.

What was considered a shocking announcement in February becomes institutionalized reality in January.

But before we come to the structure of the Board, we must hear what the people say who should actually be at the center: the Palestinians.

Wassel Abu Yousuf, member of the PLO Executive Committee, February 2025:

“This is a clown gag. There will be no resorts, no Riviera in the Middle East. What Trump wants to do, he should do elsewhere, but not on the backs of the Palestinian people. This is the land of our ancestors and parents, and much blood has been shed to defend it.”

Hamas Government Media Office, February 28, 2025:

“By portraying Gaza as if it were a land without people, this desperate attempt aims to legitimize the ongoing ethnic cleansing conducted by the Israeli occupation with clear American support.”

Dr. Mustafa Barghouti, Secretary-General of the Palestinian National Initiative, March 2025:

“Trump treats Gaza like a piece of real estate he can buy or sell. But Gaza doesn’t belong to him. Gaza doesn’t belong to the U.S. Gaza doesn’t belong to Israel. Gaza belongs to the Palestinians who have lived there for centuries. What Trump proposes is theft. Robbery. Colonialism in the 21st century.”

These voices were heard. And ignored.

The reality in Gaza when Trump posts his AI video, February 2025:

  • 80,000 dead civilians since October 2023
  • 86-90% of all buildings destroyed or heavily damaged
  • All universities destroyed
  • 80% of all schools destroyed
  • All hospitals out of operation or heavily damaged
  • No functioning water or sewage system
  • No electricity except generators
  • 2.3 million people without permanent shelter
  • Humanitarian crisis: famine, epidemics, no medical care

Over this rubble field, over these dead children, over these desperate families, Trump posts a video with a golden statue of himself and the song lyrics: “Donald’s coming to set you free.”

This isn’t politics. This is perversion.

And eleven months later, on January 16, 2026, this perversion is institutionalized: The Board of Peace is founded.

In the next part, we’ll look at who sits on this Board—and who profits from it.

This analysis is made available for free – but high-quality research takes time, money, energy, and focus. If you’d like to support this work, you can do so here:

Alternatively, support my work with a Substack subscription –
from as little as 5 USD/month.
Let’s build a counter-public together.

Michael Hollister is a geopolitical analyst and investigative journalist. He served six years in the German military, including peacekeeping deployments in the Balkans (SFOR, KFOR), followed by 14 years in IT security management. His analysis draws on primary sources to examine European militarization, Western intervention policy, and shifting power dynamics across Asia. A particular focus of his work lies in Southeast Asia, where he investigates strategic dependencies, spheres of influence, and security architectures. Hollister combines operational insider perspective with uncompromising systemic critique—beyond opinion journalism. His work appears on his bilingual website (German/English) www.michael-hollister.com, at Substack at https://michaelhollister.substack.comand in investigative outlets across the German-speaking world and the Anglosphere.

SOURCE LIST – PART 1: THE EXPOSURE

Primary Sources:

1. Trump AI Video & Gaza Statements (February/March 2025):

2. International Bar Association (IBA) – Legal Assessment:

International Law Foundations:

3. UN Charter:

4. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court:

5. Fourth Geneva Convention:

6. Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Secondary Sources & Analyses:

7. U.S. War History:

8. Venezuela Attack (January 3, 2026):

9. Iran Bombing (June 2025):

  • Contemporary reporting (specific links referenced in article)

10. UN Reactions:

11. Global Reactions:

12. Palestinian Voices:

  • Wassel Abu Yousuf (PLO Executive Committee) – Statement February 2025
  • Hamas Government Media Office – Statement February 28, 2025
  • Dr. Mustafa Barghouti (Palestinian National Initiative) – March 2025

13. Board of Peace – White House Official Statement: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2026/01/statement-on-president-trumps-comprehensive-plan-to-end-the-gaza-conflict/


© Michael Hollister — All rights reserved. Redistribution, publication or reuse of this text requires express written permission from the author. For licensing inquiries, please contact the author via www.michael-hollister.com.

Newsletter

🇩🇪 Deutsch: Verstehen Sie geopolitische Zusammenhänge durch Primärquellen, historische Parallelen und dokumentierte Machtstrukturen. Monatlich, zweisprachig (DE/EN).

🇬🇧 English: Understand geopolitical contexts through primary sources, historical patterns, and documented power structures. Monthly, bilingual (DE/EN).

PDF 📄