Lebanese president condemns Israeli airstrikes

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun on Saturday condemned any attempts to drag Lebanon back into a cycle of violence, following an Israeli airstrike campaign on villages and towns in southern Lebanon in response to a rocket attack on the Israeli settlement of Metula.

The strike on Metula marked the first major cross-border attack since the November 2024 ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel. No group has claimed responsibility for the rocket launch.

“What occurred today in the south, and what has been happening there since February 18, regarding the failure to adhere to the precise terms of the ceasefire agreement, constitutes an ongoing aggression against Lebanon,” Aoun said in a statement, warning it could derail the national rescue plan agreed upon by Lebanese stakeholders.

He called on Lebanon’s allies to remain vigilant against “what is being plotted against Lebanon by multiple hostile parties,” and urged the monitoring committee established under the ceasefire, along with the Lebanese army, to take urgent steps to prevent further escalation.

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam also issued a warning Saturday against further military escalation on the southern border, stressing the potential consequences of renewed hostilities.

“The continuation of hostilities could lead to a new war that would only bring destruction and suffering to the Lebanese people,” Salam said.

He held phone calls with Defense Minister Michel Mounir and UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, stressing that only the Lebanese state has the authority to declare war or peace.

Salam also criticized Israel for continuing to occupy Lebanese territory in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, and urged the international community to pressure Israel to fully withdraw from all occupied areas.Earlier in the day, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz warned that any further rocket fire from Lebanon would prompt Israeli strikes on Beirut, escalating concerns of a return to full-scale conflict.

Since the ceasefire took effect in November, Lebanese officials report nearly 1,100 Israeli violations, resulting in at least 85 deaths and over 280 injuries.

Under the terms of the ceasefire, Israel was expected to fully withdraw from southern Lebanese border areas by January 26, but the deadline was extended to February 18 due to non-compliance. Israel reportedly maintains military presence at five border outposts.

United States: The True Godfather of Terrorism

Once again, Washington plays its old game: accusing others of terrorism while fueling it to serve its interests. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s recent statements in Al-Quds with Benjamin Netanyahu are part of a longstanding American policy aimed at hiding its role in destabilizing West Asia through support for terrorist groups.

This isn’t just an accusation from US rivals—it’s a reality acknowledged by American officials. In 2016, Donald Trump declared, “Obama is the founder of ISIS, and Clinton is his co-founder,” a statement backed by evidence.

During the Syrian crisis, the CIA funneled financial and logistical aid to extremist groups under the pretext of supporting “moderate opposition.” Reports from The Washington Post repeatedly exposed this strategy. John Kerry, in a leaked recording, admitted the US allowed ISIS to grow in Syria, hoping to pressure Damascus into concessions.

In 2019, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard revealed the US was directly arming al-Qaeda in Syria. Former Senator Richard Black recently reaffirmed this, exposing continued US backing of groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS. United Nations reports over the last decade confirm US support for Jabhat al-Nusra (al-Qaeda’s Syrian branch) via Turkey and Qatar to overthrow Assad.

Rubio talks about Syrian “instability” while ignoring US backing for Abu Mohammed al-Julani, leader of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra). Once on America’s terrorist list, al-Julani now controls Syria’s northwest with American support, rebranded as a "moderate opposition leader."

US media, like PBS, have even given him a platform, whitewashing his extremist history. A RAND Corporation report exposed that Washington considers him a “potential partner” — a shocking display of double standards. Al-Julani, now known as Ahmad al-Sharaa, orchestrated massacres of over 22,000 Alawites along Syria’s coast. Instead of facing justice, he receives political and media backing from the US, ensuring Syria remains unstable and under Western influence.

Rubio’s remarks can’t be separated from unwavering US support for Israel, which engages in daily state terrorism. Since the latest Gaza aggression began, Israeli forces have killed tens of thousands of civilians, including children, while destroying hospitals and schools — all with Washington’s cover.

The US shields Israel in the UN, using its veto to block resolutions condemning war crimes, making it complicit. Washington labels groups resisting Zionist occupation as “terrorists” while backing extremist factions in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, revealing its hypocrisy.

The US narrative — branding Iran a “terror sponsor” for supporting Palestinian and Lebanese resistance — is bankrupt. Is defending one’s homeland terrorism? Washington’s twisted equation labels those who fight occupation as “terrorists” and those enabling occupation as “defenders of democracy.”

This propaganda no longer fools the world. The Zionist entity’s crimes are broadcast live, and America’s ties to the terrorists it claims to fight are increasingly exposed.

If Rubio seeks the “greatest source of instability,” he needn’t look far — Washington itself fuels terrorism while pretending to oppose it. History won’t forget who created terrorism, nor will people forget who stood for justice and who conspired against them.

Lebanon told to normalize relations with Israel

Following her previous provocative statement in Beirut that Hezbollah should have no share in the government, Morgan Ortagus, the deputy presidential special envoy to the Middle East, has said the outcome of current events is ultimately a “peace” agreement between Beirut and Tel Aviv.

In an exclusive interview with the Lebanese Al-Jadeed TV channel, Ortagus said the current goal is limited to launching diplomatic negotiations between three diplomatic working groups.

According to Ortagus, the goal of these negotiations is to address pressing issues such as the release of Lebanese prisoners, determining the fate of sites occupied by Israel, and demarcating the land border, which do not require diplomatic working groups and can be secured by the Supervisory Committee for the Implementation of Resolution 1701.

Regarding the Lebanese prisoners kidnapped by the Israeli enemy, there is no point in negotiation, as Lebanon has no Israeli prisoners to negotiate over.

Steve Witkoff, Donald Trump's special envoy, had previously noted Washington’s urgency in launching peace negotiations with both Lebanon and Syria. He had also expressed optimism about the possibility of Riyadh joining Abraham Accords.

Wittkoff firmly stated that the political transformations in the region could extend to Lebanon.

Prior to the election of Lebanon’s president and in the midst of the US-led Israeli aggression on Lebanon during September and November, the American “surveillance den” (embassy) in Beirut had interrogated several candidates regarding their positions on normalization with the Israeli occupation regime and weapons in possession of the Hezbollah resistance movement.

Lisa Johnson, the US ambassador to Beirut, informed prominent Lebanese figures that they must be prepared to secure a comprehensive and permanent solution with Tel Aviv.

The American witch frequently claimed that Hezbollah had – militarily and politically – collapsed and was barely able to manage its own affairs, and would therefore be unable to rebuild what her hostile country had destroyed.

As Washington is quite sure that there are just a few independent Lebanese officials who would reject American dictates, the White House will relentlessly go ahead with its imperialist and racist agenda.

Obviously, Washington has limited the mandate of the UN’s five-member committee to monitor Israeli violations of Lebanese sovereignty, while the committee repeatedly claims that Israeli procedures are in response to the violations by Hezbollah, which has not handed over its military arsenal or the coordinates of its military installations!

Accordingly, the shameful silence of Lebanon has made it easier for Washington to immediately jump to the stage of forming diplomatic working groups, as it claims.

These diplomatic working groups require violating the Lebanese constitution, which criminalizes any direct meeting between Lebanese diplomats and those from the Israeli colonial entity!

Naturally, the Lebanese leaders in power today must learn a lesson from the disastrous consequences of normalization for Egypt, Jordan, and even the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. At the very least, they must learn a lesson from what is happening in neighboring Syria.

Courtesy: Tehran Times

Lebanon controlled by “Eisenhower Doctrine”

The pretexts that imperialist colonial powers follow to expand their influence vary. What is happening at Beirut airport in Lebanon is nothing new. It is obvious that the US is trying to ensure its control over Lebanon’s vital facilities and airports.

It is evident that the recent expansion work undertaken by the US in Lebanon is aimed at encircling the resistance, or at the very least, exerting pressure on the Lebanese authorities to incite them against the resistance under the pretext of avoiding severe brutal sanctions.

Preventing Iranian flights from landing at Beirut airport seems to be a part of US President Donald Trump’s plan to control the world, sometimes by proposing plans to displace Palestinians and other times by occupying countries.

Washington considers controlling the northern part of the West Asia region, in addition to the southern part, especially the Persian Gulf countries, a fundamental issue in light of the conflict with competing powers, as was the case decades ago when the Soviet Union existed.

The “Eisenhower Doctrine” was implemented in the 1950s, during the era of President Camille Chamoun, when the US naval forces landed on the shores of Beirut. Their interest was focused on Beirut airport because ensuring influence lies in tightening the noose around strategic outlets such as public facilities and airports.

This is exactly what is happening today, as the US embassy in Beirut is only functioning as a military base that insults the sovereignty and prestige of the Lebanese state whenever it wants.

Since Beirut air base is the only international airport in Lebanon, it has sought to reactivate some airports, such as Rayak air base, which currently witnesses a suspicious American and British military presence, given its strategic location in the heart of the Bekaa Valley near the Syrian border.

In 2011, Rayak air base was officially opened as a military air base for the Lebanese army. Before opening, the airport underwent expansion work funded and supervised directly by the US embassy.

Recently, it underwent additional expansion work as large capacity hangars were added to it. It was equipped with modern radars and surveillance devices.

It is worth noting that the Lebanese army used Rayak air base during its battles with Jolani’s terrorist groups during the Liberation of the Bekaa Outskirts Battle in 2015, which culminated in late August 2017 with the total elimination of all terrorists in the eastern chain of Lebanon and its liberation.

The US embassy also controls Qlayaat air base on the northern coast of Lebanon as a logistical base linking them to US bases in Cyprus, Greece, and the rest of West Asia. 

It is worth noting that Qlayaat air base is close to Syria and close to the Russian air and naval bases in Tartous and Latakia, which enhances its strategic importance for the Americans.

There is also effort to establish a facility at Qlayaat air base to facilitate the entry of weapons to support their anti-Hezbollah proxies in Lebanon. 

Lebanon’s airports are small in size but large in influence, just as Lebanon itself, which is small in size but great in influence.

Courtesy: Tehran Times

Hassan Nasrallah and Iran

The massive funeral processions held for Sayyad Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut on Sunday marked the end of an era, but also the beginning of a new one. Nasrallah, who led Hezbollah for over three decades, was not only the movement’s most visible figure but also a key player in regional politics, reports Tehran Times.

Born in 1960 in a Shiite community in Beirut, Hassan Nasrallah developed a strong interest in Islam and politics, influenced by Imam Musa al-Sadr. He started in the Amal movement but joined the newly formed Hezbollah in 1982 after the Israeli invasion. His political career quickly ascended; by 1985, he was leading Hezbollah's Executive Council and joined the Shura Council. His frequent visits to Iran strengthened the alliance between Hezbollah and Iran under the Wilayat al-Faqih doctrine. 

A turning point came in 1992, when Abbas Mussawi, Hezbollah’s then-Secretary General, was assassinated in an Israeli airstrike. Nasrallah, his closest confidant, took over the movement’s leadership and adopted a more uncompromising stance toward Israel.

During Mussawi’s funeral, he delivered a speech that would define Hezbollah’s trajectory, “We will continue on this path... even if we are martyred, even if our homes are destroyed over our heads, we will not abandon the choice of Islamic Resistance.”

From that moment on, his rhetoric left no room for ambiguity. Under his leadership, Hezbollah expanded its military capabilities, increased its influence in Lebanese politics, and strengthened its alliance with Iran.

The group’s ties with Tehran were not only ideological but also operational. Nasrallah’s longstanding relationship with Tehran shaped the group’s strategy and solidified its position as a major force in West Asia. 

Despite its close ties to Tehran, Hezbollah was never merely an extension of Iranian policy in the region. The notion that the movement operates as a proxy without autonomy has been challenged both inside and outside Lebanon.

The historical connection between Lebanese Shiites and Iran dates back centuries—long before Hezbollah’s creation in the 1980s.

In the 16th century, the Safavid dynasty invited Shiite clerics from the Lebanese region of Jabal Amil to help consolidate Twelver Shiism in Iran. Over the following centuries, thousands of Lebanese students traveled to Qom to study in Islamic seminaries, forging deep familial and political ties with the Iranian Shiite community. This interconnection grew stronger in the 20th century, when figures like Imam Musa al-Sadr and Mustafa Chamran played key roles in reshaping Shiite political identity in Lebanon.

Nasrallah himself consistently rejected the idea that Hezbollah was merely an artificial creation of Iran. He noted that the movement emerged organically as a response to the 1982 Israeli invasion. Nevertheless, he openly acknowledged the influence of the Islamic Revolution and Hezbollah’s alignment with the principles of Wilayat al-Faqih.

Beyond logistics and religious affinities, what binds Hezbollah and Iran is a shared political vision. Both see resistance to Western influence as a matter of survival.

Abdallah Safieddine, Hezbollah’s representative in Iran, once stated, “What unites us is our adherence to the principles of Wilayat al-Faqih, as well as our struggle against common enemies.”

Similarly, in a 2018 speech, Nasrallah made it clear that what binds Hezbollah and Iran is not military support, but a shared political vision.

“Westerners do not believe in things like ideology. Their biggest mistake is considering the Resistance merely as Iranian mercenaries,” he stated. According to Hezbollah’s leader, the West fails to understand that the Resistance does not operate under a logic of subordination but rather one of ideological harmony.

Nasrallah, who studied in the Shiite holy city of Najaf, Iraq, had long held the belief that the world is locked in a constant struggle between the oppressed (mostazafin) and the oppressors (mostakberin). When Hezbollah published its founding manifesto in 1985, the defense of the oppressed against the oppressors was one of its fundamental principles.

From this perspective, the relationship between Hezbollah and Iran is not based on a patron-client dynamic – as the West likes to portray – but on a political convergence. The concept of Wilayat al-Faqih—the authority of the leader of the Islamic revolution over the community—extends beyond the framework of the nation-state. For followers of this doctrine, Iran is not merely a country but the epicenter of an Islamic political-revolutionary project intended to serve as a model for the entire umma (Muslim community). This is why Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei is not seen solely as Iran’s leader but as a political authority beyond its borders.

Nasrallah has repeatedly asserted that Hezbollah does not operate under Tehran’s directives, “Alliance does not mean obedience. It does not mean that when one party makes a decision, others follow without questioning its motivations. That would be coercion, not alliance.” This independence is crucial to understanding the dynamics between both actors.

One of the most revealing episodes of this autonomy occurred during the Syrian war. According to Esmail Kowsari, a parliamentarian and member of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC), it was Hezbollah that told Iran the two countries needed to enter the fight against Daesh terrorists.

Iranian General Hossein Hamedani confirmed in his memoirs that Nasrallah orchestrated the Resistance’s strategy in Syria and that even operations involving the IRGC were designed by Hezbollah.

Furthermore, various estimates suggest that even if Iran were to withdraw its support, Hezbollah could continue to operate independently. This demonstrates that the movement has built a self-sustaining structure and a financial network that extends beyond Iranian backing.

Labeling Hezbollah as a mere extension is reductive. The group is not simply an arm of Iran’s policies but an actor with its own decision-making and operational capabilities. Their relationship is better described as symbiotic, while they share strategic objectives and a common worldview, Hezbollah maintains autonomy in its decision-making.

The funeral of Nasrallah and Hashem Safi al-Din was not only a farewell for the Hezbollah leaders but also a politically significant event. It marked a pivotal moment for the Resistance in Lebanon amid escalating tensions with Israel.

It will provide an opportunity for the Lebanese people to demonstrate unity in an increasingly complex regional landscape. The message is clear: the Resistance remains steadfast and will not yield to external pressures.

At the funeral ceremony on Sunday, Hezbollah's fourth secretary-general, Sheikh Naim Qassem, repeated remarks previously delivered by Nasrallah 32 years ago at his predecessor's funeral. “Resistance has not ended. A new era of Resistance has just begun,” he said to a sea of mourners.

 

Lebanon: Saad Hariri’s promising return

In February 2005, the young man, Saad Hariri, who was grieving the loss of his father, Rafik Hariri was not knowledgeable enough in the muzzy maze of Lebanese politics; by capitalizing on his experiences, he has now reemerged seriously to lead the Sunni public and is approaching his fellow compatriots.

Upon Hariri’s instructions, Martyrs Square in the center of Beirut was overcrowded with his supporters who waved the national flag without the Future Movement’s flag, the largest Sunni movement.

“I will remain with you. Everything will be fine in its time,” he said, hinting at his intention to contest the municipal elections scheduled for May 2025 and the parliamentary elections in May 2026.

“I bow before all the martyrs from our people in the South, the Bekaa, Beirut, the southern suburb and all the regions,” Hariri said, describing the recent US-backed Israeli war on Lebanon as “crazy and criminal” targeting “our country”. 

He said, “It killed our people. It destroyed their homes, institutions, crops and society.”

Hariri’s rational speech has foiled the relentless efforts to put Sunnis and Shiites against each other; he also praised his popular base’s solidarity with the displaced as they confirmed – in action and not in words – that “Lebanon is one and the Lebanese are one body.” 

During the recent September-October 2024 Israeli war on Lebanon, the mainstream Arab media refused to say how those Sunnis welcomed the displaced Shiites in their own homes. Instead, they repeated the claim driven by Israel’s secretive cyber warfare unit 8200 that Hezbollah was involved in the assassination of his Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. 

Further, Hariri pointed to the responsibility of rebuilding the destroyed areas. “This is everyone’s responsibility, just as it is their responsibility to solve the economic crisis and restore development in all regions. Today, after electing a new president and a prime minister, we have a golden opportunity,” he stressed.

Hariri addressed his “partner”, the Shiite duo, without explicitly naming it, saying: “You are partners in this opportunity, and without you it cannot be achieved.”

“You are partners in opening bridges of relations with our Arab brothers and partners in reconstruction. Most importantly, you are strong partners in restoring the prestige of the state, which alone, with its army, security forces and institutions, protects all Lebanese,” he maintained.

Saad Hariri, who served as the prime minister of Lebanon from 2009 to 2011 and 2016 to 2020, added, “We are with the state and our national army. We support every effort they make to impose the implementation of the ceasefire and Resolution 1701 in full, with the withdrawal of the Israeli occupation from all the villages it still occupies.”

Besides, Hariri announced his support for the choices of the Syrian people and his rejection of the settlement of Palestinian refugees.

Since Hariri’s absence, the active role of the Sunni component has declined in favor of rogues selected and oriented by the US embassy in Beirut and suspicious NGOs funded by George Soros.

Those have neither a popular base nor a comprehensive national discourse that is keen on Lebanon’s sovereignty, which contributed to the dispersion of the Sunnis as reflected during the formation of the current government, as Nawaf Salam was imposed from the outside and does not represent the Sunnis’ national agenda.

Relentlessly, those pro-US renegades have spared no efforts to pave the way for the decentralization of Sunni leadership, separating the premiership from the leadership of the Sunni component.

It is worth noting that 3 out of 27 Sunni MPs are affiliated with the Shiite duo. The rest are distributed among the National Consensus Bloc, headed by MP Faisal Karami, and the National Moderation Bloc, which was absent from the new government for the first time since the 1990s.

Hariri’s national speech reconfirmed that there is no victor or vanquished in Lebanon, but rather a crucible with diverse identities that requires concessions, cooperation, and thwarting the Israeli conspiracy threatening the people and the state.

Amid the sensitive situation that Lebanon is going through, activating the moderate Sunni presence is an urgent Lebanese need, given Hariri’s extensive relations both regionally and internationally. 

 

Hezbollah and Amal agree to join Salam

Before the end of the 60-day Lebanon-Israel ceasefire agreement, and a week after Judge Nawaf Salam was assigned to form a new cabinet, meetings with parliamentary blocs are intensifying to dispel any obstacles, one of which is the Lebanese Forces’ insistence on monopolizing the ministries of foreign affairs and energy.

Reportedly, Samir Geagea, head of the Lebanese Forces (4 ministries), has also sent MP Melhem Riachi to meet Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam and know the details of the cabinet lineup. 

Salam informed Riachi that he was determined to strengthen his relationship with Nabih Berri, Speaker of the Parliament, based on a promising future and putting national interests above anything else.

For his part, President Joseph Aoun, despite announcing that he is not seeking any ministry for his team, insists on granting him the power to place a “veto” on the names nominated for the sovereign ministries of foreign affairs, defense and interior.

According to sources, the prime minister-designate is in talks with figures who are supposed to have chances to hold ministerial positions; they say he is seeking to form a “technocratic-political” cabinet.

Salam insists on not excluding any political stakeholders, so he intends to appoint representatives of these factions to ministerial portfolios, provided that they: 1) do not hold senior positions in these factions and 2) sign a pledge not to run in the upcoming parliamentary elections.

Given that the Interior Ministry is the Sunni share, there is a deep disagreement between Sunni figures in this regard, especially as the minister will supervise the upcoming parliamentary elections, scheduled for May 2026. 

Although Salam did not make any promise to appoint any Shiite figure outside the circle of the Hezbollah-Amal duo, he did not contact any of the so-called “Shiite opposition”, who saw an opportunity to find a foothold in the government. However, following the two meetings that brought Salam together with the duo, their US-prompted dream has faded.

The prime minister-designate further met with Mohammad Raad, head of the Loyalty to the Resistance bloc; Hussein Khalil, the political assistant to the Hezbollah Secretary-General, and MP Ali Hassan Khalil, a representative of the Amal Movement. 

During the two meetings, Salam spoke at length about the Lebanese political system since independence from the French occupation in the early fifties, until the Taif Agreement, which ended the 1975-1990 civil war, stressing his view not to exclude any political component. 

The duo expressed their objection to the violations that accompanied his nomination, but showed their willingness to overcome that in order to preserve Lebanon's interests during this critical period.

In addition to the Ministry of Finance, the duo demanded a significant service ministry, such as the Ministry of Public Works or the Ministry of Health, expressing their complete readiness to cooperate with Salam.

Meanwhile, it is not clear whether the duo will be the ones to propose the names of the five ministers for the prime minister-designate to choose from or vice versa, knowing that the duo’s priority is the mechanism for governance and addressing urgent issues in the next phase.

Since the signing of the Taif Agreement, successive governments have made it a priority for the ministerial statement to clearly state the right of the Lebanese to resist and liberate the occupied territories. Therefore, one of the duo’s priorities is for the current ministerial statement to stipulate the righteousness of the resistance.

In light of the anti-Hezbollah team’s biased interpretations of UN Resolution 1701, the duo is keen for the ministerial statement to express the government’s commitment that President Joseph Aoun would conduct a comprehensive national dialogue regarding the Resistance movement’s weapons along the general national defense strategy.

 

Lebanon: Growing Mistrust

The stance of those who have deliberately thwarted Hezbollah’s political victory in the presidential race and who openly declare their absolute loyalty to Washington is not shocking. What is shocking, however, is the stance of Hezbollah’s so-called allies, who have shamefully submitted to the higher foreign orders.

According to the Tehran Times, this same team has expressed its concern about the anti-Hezbollah team's relentless attempt to drag Lebanon into a “civil conflict”. Hence, they have communicated with the Shiite duo in a bid to reach an understanding on forming a national cabinet capable of running Lebanon until the parliamentary elections scheduled for May 2026.

They further warned Judge Nawaf Salam, the prime minister-designate, to avoid “being manipulated as a tool of confronting the Shiites or the resistance (movement), and to take the initiative to expand the circle of trust in his upcoming government.”

The Saudi-American orders have dictated the renunciation of the “January 09 National Understanding” that secured the election of Gen. Joseph Aoun as president after pledging not to violate political balances.

Sources confirmed that Walid Bukhari, the Saudi ambassador to Beirut, met Fouad Makhzoumi (the founder of the National Dialogue Party and a member of the Renewal Bloc in the Lebanese Parliament) ordering him to withdraw from his candidacy. The meeting made it clear that the nomination of MPs Makhzoumi and Ashraf Rifi was nothing but a poor play.

President Aoun has been reportedly quoted as saying, “I found myself before an international and Arab opportunity to carry out a major rescue operation. The understanding was a way to facilitate matters. As for now, I do not know how things will go.  Nevertheless, I will do my best with the prime minister-designate so that the government is not formed in a way that threatens the stability of the country.”

“We regret those who want to spoil the consensual beginning of the presidential term. It is our right to demand a ‘constitutional government’. We will monitor the steps. We are waiting – with all wisdom – and we will see their efforts to ‘expel Israel and return the prisoners’,” said Mohammad Raad, the chief of Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc. Raad intended to reassure the people, amidst the growing threats, that any “rebellion” will be met with unexpected retribution that will hinder the reconstruction of what was destroyed by the US-backed Israeli aggression.

Undeniably, Lebanon’s political dilemma has reached a dangerous peak. The selection of Judge Nawaf Salam to form the upcoming cabinet was nothing but a deception that the Hezbollah and Amal Movement duo were subjected to, especially since the anti-Hezbollah team wanted this entitlement as a political gain for Washington after its aggression failed to eliminate the resistance movement.

Seemingly, this team will not stop at excluding the legitimate representatives of the Shiites from the cabinet. It will take revenge on the very existence of the Shiites in the country, simply because of their anti-imperialism stance.

 

Syria: Others Deciding Future

Key Arab and international figures gathered in Riyadh for critical meetings on the future of Syria, focusing on humanitarian and political support one month after the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime.

Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan chaired the Arab foreign ministers’ meeting, which included the Arab League Secretary-General, the Gulf Cooperation Council Secretary-General, and top diplomats from Egypt, Syria, Qatar, the UAE, Jordan, Oman, Lebanon, and Bahrain.

Western foreign ministers and the UN special envoy to Syria are set to join the discussions later, alongside the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock highlighted the opportunity for unified international action to rebuild Syria, calling for a Syrian-led political process.

Speaking to reporters, she said, "A united effort for fair dialogue and reconstruction offers hope for the Syrian people."

British Foreign Secretary David Lammy emphasized his country’s support for Syria's transitional government. Lammy stressed the need for inclusive governance, humanitarian aid, and measures to counter chemical weapons and ISIS threats.

"The international community must unite to back the Syrian people as they build a democratic and diverse nation," he said, announcing plans to meet with Prince Faisal bin Farhan and other regional leaders.

Saudi officials reiterated their commitment to supporting Syria, stating that the aid bridge will remain open until humanitarian stability is achieved, under the guidance of the Saudi leadership.

This meeting follows the December summit in Aqaba, Jordan, where the Ministerial Contact Committee affirmed their commitment to standing by the Syrian people during this transformative period.

Lebanon: Army chief elected president

Lebanese parliament elected Army Chief Joseph Aoun head of state on Thursday, filling the vacant presidency with a general who has US support and showing the weakened sway of the Iran-backed Hezbollah group after its devastating war with Israel, reports Reuters.

In a speech to the chamber, Aoun, 60, vowed to work to ensure the state has the exclusive right to carry arms, drawing loud applause as lawmakers from Hezbollah, which runs its own military forces, sat still.

He promised to rebuild south Lebanon and other parts of the country he said had been destroyed by Israel, and also to prevent Israeli attacks on Lebanon, which was mired in deep economic and political crises even before the latest conflict. "Today, a new phase in the history of Lebanon begins," he said.

His election reflected shifts in the power balance in Lebanon and the wider Middle East, with Shi'ite Muslim Hezbollah badly pummeled from last year's war, and its Syrian ally Bashar al-Assad toppled in December 2024. It also indicated a revival of Saudi influence in a country where Riyadh's role was eclipsed by Iran and Hezbollah long ago.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar congratulated Lebanon, saying on X he hoped Aoun's election would contribute towards stability and good neighborly relations.

US ambassador Lisa Johnson, attending the session, told Reuters she was "very happy" with Aoun's election.

The presidency, reserved for a Maronite Christian in Lebanon's sectarian power-sharing system, has been vacant since Michel Aoun's term ended in October 2022, with deeply divided factions unable to agree on a candidate able to win enough votes in the 128-seat parliament.

Joseph Aoun fell short of the 86 votes needed in a first round vote, but crossed the threshold with 99 votes in a second round, after lawmakers from Hezbollah and its Shi'ite ally the Amal Movement backed him.

Hezbollah lawmaker Mohammed Raad said that by delaying their vote for Aoun, the group had "sent a message that we are the guardians of national consensus".

Momentum built behind Aoun on Wednesday as Hezbollah's long preferred candidate, Suleiman Frangieh, withdrew and declared support for the army commander, and as French and Saudi envoys shuttled around Beirut, urging his election in meetings with politicians, three Lebanese political sources said.

A source close to the Saudi royal court said French, Saudi, and US envoys had told Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a close Hezbollah ally that international financial assistance - including from Saudi Arabia - hinged on Aoun's election.

"There is a very clear message from the international community that they are ready to support Lebanon, but that needs a president, a government," Michel Mouawad, a Christian lawmaker opposed to Hezbollah who voted for Aoun, told Reuters.

"We did get a message from Saudi of support," he added.

The Saudi king and crown prince congratulated Aoun.

 

Lebanon: Who should elect the president?

Amidst the ongoing concerns about the future of Syria and before the expiration of the sixty-day truce, Lebanon is witnessing a session to elect the President of the Republic on Thursday. There is no internal consensus on the candidate, but external pressure is mounting to elect Lebanese Army Commander General Joseph Aoun.

Amos Hochstein, the US presidential envoy, who met with Nabih Berri, Speaker of the Parliament, in Beirut said that the Israeli withdrawal from the south will continue until the “deployment of the Lebanese Army in the south, reaching the Blue Line” is complete.

Hochstein pointed out that the process is difficult, but it is an opportunity “to not think about external forces, but to focus on rebuilding the economy and implementing the necessary reforms that will allow investment and return the country to prosperity.”

Accompanied by Lisa Johnson, US Ambassador to Beirut, and US General Jasper Jeffers, the head of the Quintet Committee (United States, France, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Qatar), Hochstein also met with caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati at the Grand Serail.

Hochstein called the meeting with Mikati was very constructive, saying, “I think Mikati has shown great leadership in getting to this point … We talked about what the government needs to do to continue to implement this agreement and make sure that the country can benefit from it, and reach prosperity and stability.” 

Hochstein also visited Naqoura, where he chaired a third meeting on the mechanism of the Quintet Committee’s work. He discussed “technical military plans for the gradual withdrawal of the Israeli army from the entire area south of the Litani.”

Yazid bin Farhan, an advisor on Lebanon affairs at the Saudi Foreign Ministry, had also visited Lebanon, calling for the election of General Joseph Aoun, as agreed upon by the members of the committee.

It is worth noting that Yazid bin Farhan was present at Hochstein’s meeting with Faisal bin Farhan, the Saudi Foreign Minister, in Riyadh, where they discussed “regional developments, especially in Lebanon.”

The Saudi envoy’s meeting with Speaker Nabih Berri was described as “tense,” during which he confirmed that “Riyadh supports the nomination of the army commander.”

Berri did not hide his anger, informing bin Farhan that this proposal contradicted what he had agreed upon with the committee, demanding “support for the candidate that the Lebanese agree upon, rather than for the outside world.”

Berri said it is impossible to secure sufficient votes to amend the constitution to elect the army commander. Additionally, he said, there is a lack of agreement among Christians on it. 

Berri recalled Aoun’s rigid relationship with many political forces and the difficulty of reaching an understanding with him as was evident from his unsteady relations with the defense ministers who succeeded each other while he was in command of the army. 

Saudi envoy Yazid bin Farhan also met with Samir Geagea, leader of the Lebanese Forces, stressing his country’s intention to re-engage in Lebanon’s political arena “on the condition that there is a legitimate president [elected by consensus] who is strong and qualified to rule [official institutions] and form a government whose [policy] is in line with him.”

Bin Farhan continued, “Saudi Arabia is interested in Lebanon; the Lebanese must seize the opportunity because the world will be preoccupied with Syria.”

Geagea frankly told the Saudi envoy that he does not support the election of General Aoun. 

“We have approached him more than once, but he did not respond,” Geagea stated, recalling that Hezbollah, the Amal Movement, and the Free Patriotic Movement also oppose his election, which means that “he will not be able to obtain the 86 votes needed to be elected.”

According to sources, Geagea fears any way out during Thursday’s session that would result in the election of a president “that does not fit the requirements of the stage” or the availability of consensus on the army commander.

For this reason, Geagea asked his loyal MPs to be vigilant and to keep all options on the table, including withdrawing from the session or dismantling its quorum.

Meanwhile, Hajj Mohammad Raad, head of the “Loyalty to the Resistance” parliamentary bloc, had met with Berri, reaffirming the “complete understanding” between Hezbollah and the Amal Movement, and the “unity of position regarding all internal files and political entitlements.”

During a press conference held at the site of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s martyrdom, Wafiq Safa, head of Hezbollah’s Liaison and Coordination Unit, underscored that “Hezbollah’s only veto” would be on “the election of Samir Geagea because he is a project of sedition and war” and not on any candidate agreed upon by the parliamentary blocs.

For his part, Hussein Hajj Hassan, a Hezbollah MP, explained that this position does not mean that Hezbollah has backed down from its only declared candidate, namely Suleiman Franjieh, head of the Marada Movement, nor does it mean that it supports or rejects the army commander.

It is worth noting that Geagea declared, during one of the internal sessions, that after the Israeli war destroys Hezbollah, we will negotiate with him on the presidency of the republic after he becomes weak. 

Following the fall of the Bashar al-Assad government, Geagea foolishly thought that the “victory” of his American-Israeli ally would achieve his only chance to become president, even if he was forced as his predecessor Bashir Gemayel did. Nevertheless, his Saudi allies frustrated him by announcing their support for the election of the army commander.

On August 23, 1982, during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, Gemayel was elected President of the Republic. However, he was assassinated on September 14 before he could assume office, by the resistance fighter Habib Al-Shartouni because of his crimes during the civil war and his deep relationship with Israel.

At the moment, all that Geagea cares about is to thwart Thursday’s session until Trump’s inauguration, as he bets on three variables: escalating pressure on Hezbollah; resuming aggression against Lebanon; and launching an aggression against Iran. 

Geagea hopes to postpone the presidential elections that have been pending since 2022 and hold early parliamentary elections that will end what he calls Amal and Hezbollah’s “monopoly” over the Shiite seats, which will facilitate the election of an alternative to Speaker Berri. This will tip the balance in his favor. Hence, his presidential dream will come true.

As a reminder, during the 2022 elections, Hezbollah won the 347,171 preferential votes, an increase of 3,951 votes compared to the 2018 elections. MP Mohammad Raad won the highest number of preferential votes in all of Lebanon: 48,543 votes, followed by his fellow MP Sayyed Hassan Fadlallah: 43,235 votes, then Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri with 42,091 votes.

Courtesy: Tehran Times

Israel occupies vast land of Syria

According to the Hebrew media Israeli military has occupied more than 370 square kilometers of Syria that is larger than the besieged Gaza Strip. 

On Tuesday, it was reported that Israeli infantry was advancing in some neighborhoods of the city of Hader in Quneitra province, southwestern Syria.

The Israeli news television channel i24 NEWS stated that Israeli ground forces destroyed Syrian army military sites and assets in southern Syria.

The Israeli news outlet indicated that the activity was approved by the necessary levels and carried out with the assistance of armored battalions deployed in the region and infantry fighters.

According to the Israeli military correspondent Yinon Shalom Yitah, the operation targeted military infrastructure belonging to the Syrian army.

Since the fall of the Syrian president, the Israeli army continues to seize territory, after occupying Jabal Sheikh (Mount Hermon) and the buffer zone in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights.

The occupation forces are now only 15 kilometers away from the international highway between Damascus and Beirut.

They have also seized the most significant freshwater sources in southern Syria, located along the Yarmouk River. 

For decades, a large portion of Syrian households and businesses have relied on these basins along the Yarmouk River for sanitized water supplies. 

The Israeli occupation continues its attacks on military positions to neutralize Syria’s combat capability. 

The Israeli army claimed that its attacks over the past few days have “severely damaged Syria’s air defense system,” destroying “more than 90% of strategic surface-to-air missiles.”

Meanwhile, Israeli occupation forces continue a ground invasion into southern Syria, expanding its control over new Syrian villages along the border with Lebanon.

Israeli occupation forces have brought in engineering equipment towards the slopes of Jabal Sheikh (Mount Hermon) in a bid to dig trenches and prevent any potential connection with Lebanese territories.

A prospective US war with Iran is pending

United States interference, at the behest of Netanyahu’s far-right Israel, has left the Middle East in ruins, with over a million dead and open wars raging in Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine, and with Iran on the brink of a nuclear arsenal.

The story is simple, in stark violation of international law, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers claim the right to rule over seven million Palestinians. When Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands leads to militant resistance, Israel labels the resistance “terrorism” and calls on the US to overthrow the Middle East governments that back the “terrorists.” The US, under the sway of the Israel Lobby, goes to war on Israel’s behalf.

The fall of Syria this past week is the culmination of the US-Israel campaign against Syria that goes back to 1996 with Netanyahu’s arrival to office as Prime Minister. The US-Israel war on Syria escalated in 2011 and 2012, when Barack Obama covertly tasked the CIA with the overthrow of the Syrian Government in Operation Timber Sycamore. That effort finally came to “fruition” this week, after more than 300,000 deaths in the Syrian war since 2011.

Syria’s fall came swiftly because of more than a decade of crushing economic sanctions, the burdens of war, the US seizure of Syria’s oil, Russia’s priorities regarding the conflict in Ukraine, and most immediately, Israel’s attacks on Hezbollah, which was the key military backstop to the Syrian Government. No doubt Assad often misplayed his own hand and faced severe internal discontent, but his regime was targeted for collapse for decades by the US and Israel.

Since 2011, the US-Israel perpetual war on Syria, including bombing, jihadists, economic sanctions, US seizure of Syria’s oil fields, and more, has sunk the Syrian people into misery.

In the immediate two days following the collapse of the government, Israel conducted about 480 strikes across Syria, and completely destroyed the Syrian fleet in Latakia. Pursuing his expansionist agenda, Prime Minister Netanyahu illegally claimed control over the demilitarized buffer zone in the Golan Heights and declared that the Golan Heights will be a part of the State of Israel “for eternity.”

Netanyahu’s ambition to transform the region through war, which dates back almost three decades, is playing out in front of our eyes. In a press conference on December 09, 2024 the Israeli prime minister boasted of an “absolute victory,” justifying the on-going genocide in Gaza and escalating violence throughout the region.

The long history of Israel’s campaign to overthrow the Syrian Government is not widely understood, yet the documentary record is clear. Israel’s war on Syria began with US and Israeli neoconservatives in 1996, who fashioned a “Clean Break” strategy for the Middle East for Netanyahu as he came to office.

The core of the “clean break” strategy called for the Israel (and the US) to reject “land for peace,” the idea that Israel would withdraw from the occupied Palestinian lands in return for peace. Instead, Israel would retain the occupied Palestinian lands, rule over the Palestinian people in an Apartheid state, step-by-step ethnically cleanse the state, and enforce so-called “peace for peace” by overthrowing neighboring governments that resisted Israel’s land claims.

The Clean Break strategy asserts, “Our claim to the land—to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years—is legitimate and noble,” and goes on to state, “Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which the US can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon…”

In his 1996 book Fighting Terrorism, Netanyahu set out the new strategy. Israel would not fight the terrorists; it would fight the states that support the terrorists. More accurately, it would get the US to do Israel’s fighting for it.

 

As he elaborated in 2001, the first and most crucial thing to understand is this: There is no international terrorism without the support of sovereign states.… Take away all this state support, and the entire scaffolding of international terrorism will collapse into dust.

Netanyahu’s strategy was integrated into US foreign policy. Taking out Syria was always a key part of the plan. This was confirmed to General Wesley Clark after 9/11.

He was told, during a visit at the Pentagon, that “we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.”

Iraq would be first, then Syria, and the rest. (Netanyahu’s campaign for the Iraq War is spelled out in detail in Dennis Fritz’s new book, Deadly Betrayal. The role of the Israel Lobby is spelled out in Ilan Pappé’s new book, Lobbying for Zionism on Both Sides of the Atlantic). The insurgency that hit US troops in Iraq set back the five-year timeline, but did not change the basic strategy.

The US has by now led or sponsored wars against Iraq (invasion in 2003), Lebanon (US funding and arming Israel), Libya (NATO bombing in 2011), Syria (CIA operation during 2010’s), Sudan (supporting rebels to break Sudan apart in 2011), and Somalia (backing Ethiopia’s invasion in 2006).

A prospective US war with Iran, ardently sought by Israel, is still pending.

Syria: Insurgents Enter Aleppo

Insurgents breached Syria’s largest city Friday and clashed with government forces for the first time since 2016, in a surprise attack that sent residents fleeing and added fresh uncertainty to a region reeling from multiple wars.

The advance on Aleppo followed a shock offensive launched by insurgents Wednesday, as thousands of fighters swept through villages and towns in Syria’s northwestern countryside. Residents fled neighborhoods on the city’s edge because of missiles and gunfire, according to witnesses in Aleppo. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which monitors the country’s unresolved civil war, said dozens of fighters from both sides were killed.

The attack injected new violence into a region already experiencing wars in Gaza and Lebanon involving Israel, and other conflicts, including the Syrian civil war that began in 2011.

Aleppo has not been attacked by opposition forces since they were ousted from eastern neighborhoods in 2016 following a grueling military campaign in which Syrian government forces were backed by Russia, Iran and its allied groups.

But this time, there was no sign of a significant pushback from government forces or their allies. Instead, reports emerged of government forces melting away in the face of advances, and insurgents posted messages on social media calling on troops to surrender.

Robert Ford, who was the last US ambassador to Syria, said the attack showed that Syrian government forces are “extremely weak.” In some cases, he said, they appear to have “almost been routed.”

This week’s advances were among the largest in recent years by opposition factions, led by the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group, or HTS, and represent the most intense fighting in northwestern Syria since 2020, when government forces seized areas previously controlled by the opposition.

 

Damages caused by Hezbollah are heavy

The western media publishes news indicating Israeli attacks causing huge losses in Lebanon. Today, allow us to share some of the losses western media and Israel are shy in admitting.

Hezbollah has retaliated to the latest Israeli aggression by bombarding Haifa with missiles and rockets overnight on Saturday and Sunday. It attacked a group of military bases in Haifa and the Carmel region.

These included:

1- Haifa Technical Base (affiliated with the Israeli Air Force, housing a training college for preparing Air Force technicians).

2- Haifa Naval Base (affiliated with the Israeli Navy, housing a fleet of missile boats and submarines).

3- Stella Maris Base (a strategic base for maritime surveillance and control along the northern coastline).

4- Tirat Carmel Base (housing the regiment and battalion of the northern region’s transport and a logistical naval base).

5- For the first time, Nesher Base (a gas station affiliated with the “Israeli” military).

Footage shows widespread devastation in the industrial Israeli hub. The Israeli military reported a number of casualties. 

The Hezbollah attacks also led to a power outage in the city. Verified videos circulating on social media show several areas of Haifa in the dark without electricity. 

Israeli media reported a massive missile strike launched from southern Lebanon towards Haifa and its surroundings making direct impact with air raid sirens blaring non-stop. 

On Sunday, Hezbollah waged more operations “in support of the steadfast Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip, backing their valiant and honorable resistance, and in defense of Lebanon and its people.” 

These included: “Operations targeting Israeli attempts to advance along the Lebanese-Palestinian borders, intercepting enemy drones and warplanes, and striking Israeli military sites, bases, deployments, and settlements in northern and deep occupied Palestine.”

Hezbollah struck the Israeli enemy gatherings with rockets on the outskirts of Khiam as the occupation forces (IOF) failed once again in their attempts to advance. 

Footage purportedly showed smoke rising from vehicles belonging to the Israeli occupation forces igniting on fire during clashes in Wati al-Khiam, east of the town of Khiam in southern Lebanon.

Hezbollah announced an Israeli army gathering was attacked on the southern outskirts of Khiam town with a rocket barrage.  

There Israeli Merkava tanks were spotted, being forced to withdraw from the outskirts of Khiam at high speed. 

The IOF reportedly reached its deepest point in Lebanon since the attempted ground invasion in late September before pulling back after fierce battles with Hezbollah fighters.

Troops temporarily took control of a strategic hill in the southern Lebanese village of Chamaa, five kilometers from the border, the state-run National News Agency said.

The agency noted the IOF was later pushed back from the position.

Hezbollah announced its fighters targeted an Israeli Merkava tank on the eastern outskirts of Chamaa with a guided missile, causing it to burn and resulting in casualties among its crew.

Meanwhile, the resistance targeted the “Krayot area north of the occupied city of Haifa with a rocket barrage” on Sunday. 

Hezbollah also attacked the Ma’aleh Golani Barracks (the headquarters of the Hermon Brigade 810) with a rocket barrage.  

Despite the heavy Israeli bombardment of the Lebanese border region in the south, Hezbollah is launching more long-range missiles. 

 

 

Who is Sheikh Naim Qassem?

Hezbollah’s Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem has been elected as the new chief of the Lebanese resistance movement after his predecessor Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah was martyred in an Israeli strike on southern Beirut last month.

On Tuesday, Hezbollah's Shura Council, the group's central decision-making body, appointed the 71-year-old cleric to the post.

“Based on faith in Allah Almighty…, adherence to Hezbollah’s principles and goals, and following the established procedure for the election of the Secretary-General, Hezbollah’s Shura Council has elected His Eminence Sheikh Naim Qassem as Secretary-General of Hezbollah, entrusting him with the blessed banner on this journey. We pray to the Almighty to grant him success in this honorable mission of leading Hezbollah and its Islamic resistance,” the council said in a statement, Press TV reported.

The statement also pledged to the fallen victims, fighters of the Islamic resistance as well as well the steadfast and loyal Lebanese nation that Hezbollah will stand by its principles, goals and path to keep the flame of resistance alive and its banner held high until final victory.

Sheikh Qassem is a veteran figure in Hezbollah, having served as deputy secretary general of the Lebanese resistance group since 1991.

He was appointed deputy secretary general under Hezbollah’s late secretary general, Abbas al-Musawi, who was killed by an Israeli helicopter attack in 1992, and remained in the role when Nasrallah became leader.

His political activism began in the Lebanese Amal Movement, founded in 1974. He left Amal in 1979, in the wake of Iran’s Islamic Revolution, which shaped the political thinking of many young Lebanese activists.

He took part in meetings that led to the formation of Hezbollah in 1982.

Sheikh Qassem has long been one of the leading spokesmen for Hezbollah, conducting many interviews with foreign media.

He was born in 1953 in Beirut’s Basta Tahta district, and his family originally hails from Kfar Fila town in Lebanon’s southern Nabatieh province.

 

Saudi Arabia convenes Arab Islamic Summit

Saudi Arabia has announced to hold a joint Arab-Islamic follow-up summit in the Kingdom on November 11, 2024 to discuss the continued Israeli aggression on the Palestinian territories and Lebanon, in addition to the current developments in the region.

This is in line with the directives of Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman and in continuation of the efforts made by Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) in coordination with leaders of other Arab and Islamic countries. The summit will be held as an extension of the joint Arab-Islamic summit held in Riyadh on November 11, 2023.

Saudi Arabia reaffirmed its condemnation and denunciation of the crimes and violations that are being perpetrated by the Israeli occupation authorities against the Palestinian people, apart from the continuing Israeli attacks and violations against the people of Lebanon.

This is in light of the Kingdom's follow-up of the current developments in the region, as well as the continued sinful Israeli aggression on the occupied Palestinian territories, and its expansion to include the Lebanese Republic in an attempt to undermine its sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the serious repercussions of this aggression on the security and stability of the region, the Saudi Press Agency said in a statement.

Indonesia urges recognition of Palestine State

Indonesia has called on East Asian nations to officially recognize the state of Palestine and urged the international community to uphold international law and principles of humanity.

Speaking at the East Asia Summit in Laos, Indonesian Vice President Ma'ruf Amin warned that failure to adhere to international law could lead to the emergence of new conflicts.

“As leaders, we must take a stance and side with international law and humanity. Do not be selective in implementing international law. If this continues, I am afraid that many new conflicts will emerge,” Amin said, as reported by Antara News.

Amin also urged countries that have yet to recognize Palestine to do so immediately, stressing the importance of universal respect for international law without exceptions.

Currently, 146 countries recognize the state of Palestine, with recent additions including Spain, Norway, Ireland, and several Caribbean nations.

His remarks come amidst ongoing Israeli military actions in Gaza. Despite a UN Security Council resolution calling for an immediate cease-fire, the conflict has claimed the lives of over 42,000 people, mostly women and children.

 

Israel with US fends off massive Iranian attack

Iran fired more than 180 missiles at Israel in retaliation for Israeli attacks that killed Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in July and Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah last week.

White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters on Tuesday that the attack "appears to have been defeated and ineffective." 

"We do not know of any deaths in Israel," he said. "We do not know of any damage to aircraft or strategic military assets in Israel."

Pentagon press secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said at a briefing after the attack that Israel was able to intercept the majority of the incoming missiles and that there was minimal damage on the ground.

Ryder added that two US Navy destroyers helped shoot down the missiles, and fired around a dozen interceptors. 

The attack marked a significant escalation in the conflict between Israel and Iran, Ryder and Sullivan said.

Tehran previously attacked Israel in April in an attack defeated by the US and Israel, along with allied forces in the region.

Israeli military spokesperson Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari said there were a "small number" of hits in central and southern Israel, but the "majority of the incoming missiles were intercepted."

"Iran's attack is a severe and dangerous escalation. There will be consequences," he said in a video address. "We will respond wherever, whenever, and however we choose."

Vice President Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, told reporters "I condemn this attack unequivocally."

"I'm clear eyed. Iran is a destabilizing, dangerous force in the Middle East, and today's attack on Israel only further demonstrates that fact," she said.

The Iranian attack comes after Israel began limited ground operations in Lebanon against the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militant group, which has been severely degraded by Israeli attacks in the past two months, including a strike last week that killed Nasrallah.

 

Israel has fought Hezbollah for nearly a year after the militant group began firing over the border following the October 07, 2023 attacks by Iranian-backed militant group Hamas, which sparked war in the Gaza Strip.

While the war in Gaza is still raging, Hamas's presence has been reduced over the past year, freeing up resources for Israel to move north and try to push Hezbollah back from the border to return some 60,000 residents displaced by the fighting there.

The US has pushed for a diplomatic agreement to resolve the Lebanon crisis, but Ryder indicated the Pentagon supported limited Israeli border attacks, saying the US "fully understands" the need to protect civilians, though Washington is asking questions about the operation.

Before the Tuesday attack, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday appealed directly to Iranians, saying in a video message he supported efforts for regime change in Iran.

After the attack, Netanyahu said at a Security Cabinet meeting that Israel has the momentum and the axis of evil is in retreat, referring to Iran.

"This evening, " he said, "Iran made a big mistake – and it will pay for it."

Israel brings the world to a ghastly war

The assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, alongside Iranian General Ali Nilforushan, has escalated tensions in the Middle East to dangerous levels, potentially triggering a regional conflict involving numerous proxies. Some analysts now even refer to the United States as an Israeli proxy.

On Friday, a large-scale Israeli strike in Beirut resulted in the death of Nasrallah, the Secretary-General of Hezbollah. Given Nasrallah’s pivotal role in Lebanese politics, regional geopolitics, and Hezbollah’s position as a central figure in the 'Axis of Resistance,' his assassination is poised to send shockwaves throughout the Middle East.

Since October 7, 2023, Hezbollah has been exchanging fire with Israel following Hamas’s armed incursion into Israeli territory. In the ensuing weeks, Israel has intensified its operations inside Lebanon, launching a brutal bombing campaign that, as of Monday, has claimed hundreds of lives and displaced tens of thousands of people. Israeli forces have been systematically targeting key Hezbollah commanders for months, with Nasrallah’s killing being the most significant blow to the movement.

While Israel may have secured a tactical victory with Nasrallah’s assassination, it risks unleashing a cycle of violence that could spiral out of control. This echoes the assassination of Abbas Musawi, Nasrallah’s predecessor, by Israel in 1992, which, despite Musawi’s death, only strengthened Hezbollah. Under Nasrallah’s leadership, the group became one of the most formidable armed non-state actors in the region, playing a key role in ending Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon in 2000.

Similarly, Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was assassinated by Israel in 2004, yet his organization remains a powerful political and military force within the Palestinian territories. Israel’s strategy of targeted killings has repeatedly backfired, as these movements often emerge more resilient, committed to retaliation.

While Hezbollah may be reeling from this latest loss, the group remains defiant. In a statement, they vowed to continue “confronting the enemy.” Iran’s Supreme Leader has also pledged continued support for Hezbollah and Lebanon, pushing the region into highly volatile territory.

Israel’s actions, including its unrelenting bombing campaign in Gaza and the targeted killings of Nasrallah and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, suggest it is seeking a broader confrontation with Iran and its allies. Moreover, some argue that Israel is attempting to drag the United States—its staunchest ally—into the conflict.

Israel’s aggressive posture has now brought the world to the edge of a major war.