The question of the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel was raised after the Eilat incident and its aftermath when six Egyptian border police were killed by Israel. In response to public opinion, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces had to consider whether or not to cancel the treaty, or amend it in the light of the events on the border between the two countries. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also announced that his country was ready to discuss amending the treaty.

Generally opposed to any amendments in the past, when Israel needed to increase the number of its troops in areas adjacent to the Gaza Strip it sought separate agreement not amendment. Appendix I of the treaty concerns the "protocol on the withdrawal of Israel and security arrangements".

In response to the threat made to him by the Turkish foreign minister that he is about to face the same fate of Saddam Hussein or Qaddafi, Syria's President promised to put a quick end to the violence perpetrated by his security and army forces against his own people. Bashar Assad also promised to announce a package of essential constitutional reforms "soon". With his credibility at its lowest ever level, the people of Syria do not take such promises seriously. Internationally, he is not viewed as being capable of reforming his regime.

After the violence of recent weeks, especially the massacre in the first week of Ramadan, the people of Syria will not be content with anything less than the complete overthrow of the Assad regime. Meanwhile, Assad hopes to buy more time, with confusion in the international community and hesitation by Turkey and the Arab states, enabling him to defeat the popular movement for reform and return to the pre-March status quo.

The recent reference by the United Nations Educational, Science and Culture Organisation (UNESCO) to the occupied city of Jerusalem as the "capital of Israel" was both surprising and contrary to previous decisions of the organisation itself. The latter have emphasised that Jerusalem is an occupied Arab city in accordance with international law and Security Council resolutions.

The step was provocative, not only for the Arab Palestinian people, but for all Arabs, Muslims and right-minded people around the world. At a stroke, it undermined the historical and religious rights of the Palestinian people. Why was it allowed to happen, and why at this moment in time?

There is a combination of factors, first and foremost of which has to be the lack of any credible Arab role in international bodies such as UNESCO, and the correspondingly very active role played by Zionists and Zionist sympathisers.

If we want to know why the British government decided to arrest Sheikh Raed Salah, we need to look at his pivotal role in the Islamic Movement inside Israel ("the 1948-occupied Palestinian territories"), which is a cause for great concern for the Israeli authorities and security services in the Zionist state. This stems from the rise and growing effectiveness of the Palestinian Islamic Movement inside Israel and the exceptional respect for Sheikh Raed Salah amongst the people.

From this angle, it becomes clear that the arrest of Sheikh Salah in London did not come out of thin air. It was part of the well-known incitement against him by Israel whose propagandists present the Sheikh as an "Islamist extremist" who threatens the national security of each country he visits.