The daughter-in-law of the US Vice President contributes to raising $11 million for the Palestinians

New York: Ella Emhoff , daughter-in-law of US Vice President Kamala Harris, contributed to raising donations worth more than $11 million as part of a campaign for the Palestinian Children’s Relief Fund (PCRF).

The funds collected by the campaign organized for Palestinian children amounted to 11 million and 47 thousand dollars.

Emhoff contributed to raising money for the campaign by sharing it on her social media accounts.

Emhoff, 24 years old and a model, posted details of the campaign on her personal Instagram account.

She drew attention to the fact that the campaign is directed at children affected by the violent attacks by the Israeli army on Gaza since October 7.

PCRF revealed that it had raised its previously announced aid goal for the children of Gaza from $10 million to $20 million.

She stated that “360,483 people, including Ella Emhoff,” donated more than 11 million and 47 thousand dollars to the ongoing campaign.

The organization did not say how much Emhoff personally donated to the campaign.

In November, Republican Rep. Jeff Van Drew criticized Kamala Harris' stepdaughter for sharing a campaign link to support children in Gaza, saying: "This is a huge concern and I find it disgusting."

321,000 people follow Ella Emhoff’s Instagram page, and she lists the aid campaign titled “Supporting Emergency Aid for Children in Gaza” on her personal page, and identifies herself only as an “artist.”

Unlike her father, who is Jewish, Ella announced through her social media manager, Joseph David Viola, that she is not Jewish and “doesn’t want to talk about it.”

The Times: A war in the Red Sea challenges America's ability to fight and aims to expel it from the Middle East

London - The Times newspaper published an article by commentator Roger Boyes, in which he said that building the first advanced naval forces in the Age of Empires was to highlight imperial ambition, secure maritime trade, and intimidate pirates.

Today, as Houthi rebels fire missiles and drones at commercial ships trying to cross from the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean, the naval mission looks somewhat similar.

 On the face of it, Boyes says, the Houthis are behaving like pirates of yesteryear, and the rebel force has secured Iranian support that ensures the tribesmen have the firepower they need to break America's nose and make it bleed.

What is happening is the beginning of a small war with global implications. It is a war that challenges America's ability to fight at sea against a guerrilla force whose ultimate goal is to drive the United States out of the Middle East

The writer says that the solution, according to the American security community's reckless calculations, is that the conflict in the Red Sea is settled through the use of usual methods such as throwing bombs or bribery. Either the United States will be forced to bomb Houthi bases along the Yemeni coast, depleting their arsenal of drones and missiles, or they will be bought out. But this is also old-fashioned thinking. It downplays the depth of strategic planning taking place in Tehran.

He adds that what is happening is the beginning of a small war with global implications. It is a war that challenges America's ability to fight at sea against a guerrilla force whose ultimate goal, led by Iran, is to drive the United States out of the Middle East.

The United States is not ready for this. Houthi drones, which cost about $2,000 each, are shot down by American missiles , which can cost up to $2 million each. Sooner rather than later, the destroyers will have to return to the American weapons dock to reload 90 or more missile tubes. Not only does this cost money, it leaves carrier strike groups exposed when supporting warships abandon them.

The writer says that American calculations at the present time are that it is worth bearing these expenses. If a single civilian container ship is hit and loses its cargo, the bill will be higher. If a Western warship is disabled, American military power will be called into question around the world. The United States will not be able to fulfill its self-proclaimed goal of protecting freedom of navigation on trade routes.

Boyes believes that the matter is not limited to the Red Sea only, but there are other seas with narrow passages, including the Turkish Strait that connects the Mediterranean Sea to the Black Sea, the Strait of Hormuz on the Persian Gulf, the Straits of Malacca that connect the Persian Gulf to the Asian regions, and the disputed Taiwan Strait. The Panama Canal, which connects Asia to the West, is currently suffering from drought.

Houthi drones, which cost about $2,000 each, are shot down by American missiles that can cost up to $2 million each.

If the Suez Canal and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait are closed for a longer period, there will be serious disruption to the supply chain, oil and liquefied natural gas tankers will take at least a week longer to reach Europe, and container traffic will be more vulnerable. Prices will rise, inflation targets will be met, and there will be global shortages. Insurance premiums are rising. The already unstable Egyptian economy will suffer from the loss of transit fees through the canal.

 The writer believes that there is a reason for the visit of Ismail Haniyeh, leader of the Hamas movement, to Cairo, which is that Egypt, which is increasingly desperate, must make more efforts to reach an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.

Consequently, Houthi drone pilots have been recruited to increase the risks. Iran is creating a “pincer movement,” with Hezbollah in the north, the Houthis in the south, and the Revolutionary Guard in Syria, pointing to the killing of one of Tehran’s senior military advisers in an apparent Israeli airstrike outside Damascus last Monday. Hezbollah at this moment is nothing more than a nuisance to the Israeli forces. This could change quickly, but Iran may want to keep Hezbollah, with its massive combat-trained army, in reserve for now, serving as a safety cushion for Iran in the event of a direct attack.

The writer believes that the Houthis, who pioneered the 2019 drone attack on Saudi oil facilities, bring three characteristics to the proxy war waged by Iran: a gift for asymmetric warfare; The fact that they are Zaidi Shiites and therefore trust Tehran in a way that Sunni Hamas does not; Over the course of eight years of conflict against Saudi Arabia and the UAE, they have shown that they are able to stand their ground.

Iran often denies that the Houthis are its proxies, which is Tehran's default position for all foreign forces working on its behalf.

Michael Knights of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy says Iran and the Houthis cannot be separated, although they still enjoy some autonomy. He says the Houthis are like “a non-nuclear North Korea, an isolated, aggressive, well-armed, anti-American player sitting on a key geographic territory.”

He says that intelligence information from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is what alerted the Houthis to the targeted ships, even if they have Israeli links.

The ship ownership path is so complex that it requires smart clients to work on it. This is Iran's work. The same applies to organizing and equipping spy sailboats. The known Houthi missile base is located near Sanaa in Yemen, about 1,800 kilometers from the Israeli port of Eilat. The missiles - all of which were intercepted - have been launched towards and near Eilat since October 19.

If the Suez Canal and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait are closed for a longer period, the already unstable Egyptian economy will suffer from the loss of transit fees through the canal.

So what weapon can fly that far? The pictures show something very similar to the Iranian Qadr ballistic missile, which has a maximum range of 1,950 kilometers.

The writer wonders: “Will the Iranians intervene to improve Houthi targeting by modifying navigation systems?” Will they provide electro-optical search heads for the suicide marches provided by Tehran?

According to Western assessments, this appears to be the case. Iran is working to ignite a war on three fronts against Israel and its protectors. American hard-liners, such as John Bolton, who formerly worked in the Trump administration, say that Western restraint toward Iran is interpreted in Tehran as a sign of America's civilizational decline, and perhaps they are right.