The Palestinian question is not only a humanitarian issue. It is a strategic issue. It is not only about Gaza and the West Bank.

It is about the future of our region and the rules of the world. So what must be done? It is not enough to express concern. It is not enough to issue a statement. It is not enough to mourn.

We need a coordinated strategy of action, legal, diplomatic, economic, and security-based, rooted in the principles of international law and collective responsibility.

We call for comprehensive and targeted sanctions against Israel, including an immediate arms embargo, the suspension of military and intelligence cooperation, restrictions on officials, and banning trade.

We need a credible political horizon grounded in law. The international community must affirm the end of occupation, the right of return and compensation in accordance with international law, and the establishment of a unified and independent Palestinian state, with al-Quds al-Sharif (Jerusalem) as its capital.

This is not about confrontation. It is about preventing the region from being reshaped by force.

Let no one miscalculate. A region cannot be kept stable by allowing one actor to act above the law. The doctrine of impunity will not produce peace. It will produce wider conflict.

The path to stability is clear. Justice for Palestine. Accountability for crimes. An end to occupation and apartheid. And a regional order built on sovereignty, equality, and cooperation.

We are on the right side of history when we defend a State pact against the climate emergency, just as we were when we recognized the State of Palestine, and just as we are now when we tell tech oligarchs to keep their dirty hands off our children’s mobile phones.

Why do they want to control mobile phones? They want to control phones because they want to know what we read and what we see so that later they can know, and control, what we vote for.

That is why, when we have made proposals that are simply common sense, with nothing ideological about them, proposals to give extra protection to children under 16 from all that vulgarity, those lies, that disinformation, that hatred and violence that so often appear on phones and digital devices—the response from those tech oligarchs has been hatred, lies, and more vulgarity.

We are going to take the dirty hands of the tech oligarchs off our children’s phones.

We will do it with the strength of reason, the law, and democracy.

We cannot allow our young people, and not-so-young people, to live in a digital world where there is no law, only violence, lies, and disinformation.

We must lead this battle, not surrender. And we must lead it both in Europe and in the world.

It is bad for your children to let them spend hours and hours in front of violent video games that condition them to violence.

There are video games that are not violent. We can interact, we play online, we will develop skills. So there are video games that sometimes even have an educational aspect that are good.

But it is clear that there are violent video games that create excitement and dependency, where young people and adolescents spend hours and hours and sometimes do not sleep. So we see sleep disorders and other problems.

That is what I say to families first: your role is to pay attention to your children and your teenagers; do not let them spend so much time.

AI is transforming our relationship to reality, because it creates a permanent doubt: is this real, or was it made with AI?

There is a solution to this: making AI labeling mandatory in our rules.

The idea is simple: content circulates everywhere, but content like this must clearly state at the bottom, “made with AI.”

If that is not the case, then the person who disseminates it bears responsibility.

I believe in innovation. I believe in artificial intelligence and in what it can allow us to do to live better.

But only if it serves humans. If it is not under control, then it is bad.

In the AI agents we find the chats mimic the human behavior in a way.

We have many young people who talk to AI, whether on ChatGPT or on WhatsApp, like to a friend, to whom they confide secrets they do not confide to another human being.

That leads to withdrawal and isolation, and it can also lead to serious abuses that we have already seen in some extremely severe cases.

Today, this is not regulated at all.

Yesterday’s negotiations focused solely on the nuclear file. The Americans did not raise any other issues.

Zero enrichment is outside the scope of negotiations for us. Enrichment is a guaranteed right for us and must continue.

We are ready to reach an agreement that reassures others that enrichment in Iran is peaceful.

As for the missile issue, this is a purely defensive matter for us and is not negotiable — neither now nor in the future.

Regional issues belong to the region and are not related to countries outside it.

The possibility of war is always present, and we are prepared for it. I told the American negotiators yesterday that they have two options for us: war and diplomacy.

Our choice is diplomacy, but we are prepared for both options, even more so than before. We hope that America will choose diplomacy.

If the United States launches an attack against us, we do not have the capability to attack its territory. Therefore, we will attack the American bases in the region, and this will draw the entire region into war.

We are not attacking neighboring countries, but rather the American bases. There is a big difference between the two.

Troubling is Harvard's partnership with our adversaries.

Campus research programs have partnered with the Chinese Communist Party.

University leadership encouraged a campus environment that celebrated Hamas, allowed attacks on Jews, and still promotes discrimination based on race in violation of Supreme Court decisions.

DEI was literally founded at Harvard.