English LCCC Newsbulletin For
Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For August 14/2025
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2025/english.August14.25.htm
News Bulletin Achieves
Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Click On
The Below Link To Join Elias Bejjaninews whatsapp group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/FPF0N7lE5S484LNaSm0MjW
اضغط
على الرابط في
أعلى للإنضمام
لكروب
Eliasbejjaninews whatsapp group
Elias Bejjani/Click
on the below link to subscribe to my youtube channel
الياس
بجاني/اضغط
على الرابط في
أسفل للإشتراك في
موقعي ع اليوتيوب
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAOOSioLh1GE3C1hp63Camw
Bible Quotations For today
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint, dill, and
cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy
and faith
Matthew 23/23-26: “‘Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe
mint, dill, and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law:
justice and mercy and faith. It is these you ought to have practised without
neglecting the others. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a
camel! ‘Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside
of the cup and of the plate, but inside they are full of greed and
self-indulgence. You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup, so that
the outside also may become clean.”
Titles For The
Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published
on August 13-14/2025
Gebran Bassil’s New Stance Against Hezbollah’s Weapons: A Pinnacle of
Hypocrisy, Opportunism, and Deadly Narcissism/Elias Bejjani/August 13/2025
Larijani’s Visit to Lebanon: A Brazen Iranian Provocation and an Insult to the
State and People/Elias Bejjani/August 12/2025
Engineer Alfred Madi: We demand the expulsion of the Iranian ambassador from
Lebanon and the severance of diplomatic relations with Iran…
Iran security chief meets Lebanese officials, vows continued 'support' for
country
President Aoun reaffirms Lebanon’s rejection of foreign interference during
talks with Iranian official
No Armed Groups Allowed in Lebanon, President Tells Hezbollah’s Ally Iran
Larijani in Beirut amid Wave of Lebanese Objections against Iranian Meddling
Lebanon President Rejects ‘Seeking Foreign Help’
Larijani says US not Iran intervening in Lebanese affairs
Report: Army chief refuses clash with Hezbollah as army prepares four-stage plan
Report: Army-Hezbollah panel to be formed to implement disarmament plan
Report: Israel, US agree to extending UNIFIL's mandate for one last time
Berri says Hezbollah 'has not ended'
How Can We Understand Hezbollah’s Intransigence over Its Weapons?/Nadim
Koteich/Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on August 13-14/2025
Israel on Alert for Potential Iranian Attack
Israeli Army Approves Plan for New Gaza Offensive as Israeli Fire Kills at Least
25
UN Says Has ‘Credible’ Evidence Israeli Forces Sexually Abused Detained
Palestinians
Controversy Over Appointment of Palestinian Figure to Run Gaza Strip
Mediators Offer Hamas Plan to Close Gaps in Gaza Truce Talks
Hamas says Israel making 'aggressive' incursions into Gaza City
Netanyahu Hints That Gaza Ceasefire Talks Now Focus on the Release of All
Hostages at Once
Syria, Jordan, US Agree to Back Ceasefire Enforcement in Sweida
Syrian Red Crescent delivers humanitarian relief to Sweida
Türkiye, Syria Sign Defense Cooperation MoU after Ankara Talks
German Chancellor Says European Leaders and Zelenskyy Had ‘Constructive’ Meeting
with Trump
What to Know About the Putin-Trump Summit in Alaska
Titles For
The Latest English LCCC analysis &
editorials from miscellaneous sources
on August 13-14/2025
Congressional Funding Increase Not Enough to Strengthen State
Department/Ben Fishman/The Washington Institute/August 13/2025
How “Day After” Governance of Gaza Can Draw from Existing Plans/James
Jeffrey/The Washington Institute/August 13/2025
Spain is an Example to the World/Omar G. Encarnación/The New York Times/Awsat/August
13/2025
The Alaska Summit: Signals and Subtexts/Emile Ameen/Asharq Al Awsat/August
14/2025
Israel, Protector of the West, Treacherously Undermined by France, UK, Canada
and Australia/Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone Institute./August 13, 2025
Selected tweets for 13 August/2025
The Latest English LCCC
Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on August 13-14/2025
Gebran Bassil’s New Stance Against Hezbollah’s Weapons: A
Pinnacle of Hypocrisy, Opportunism, and Deadly Narcissism
Elias Bejjani/August 13/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/08/146232/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1DN7AChDVU
Gebran Bassil in political life can only be described as a fraud, a hypocrite, a
chameleon, and utterly corrupt to the core. He did not enter public affairs and
politics through merit or achievement, but because he is the son-in-law of
General Michel Aoun, and because Hezbollah decided to grant him political cover
in exchange for selling Lebanon’s sovereignty and providing Christian legitimacy
to the weapons of Iran’s terrorist jihadist militia.
The U.S. administration did not place him on the Magnitsky sanctions list for
nothing. That came after investigations confirmed his involvement in political
and financial corruption, shady deals, and power-sharing arrangements at the
expense of the Lebanese people. Today, in a blatantly deceitful maneuver, he
tries to rebrand himself to Christians and Americans, claiming to stand with the
Lebanese state against Hezbollah’s weapons. Yet even in this so-called
“opposition,” he continues to tie the survival of those weapons to the falsehood
of a so-called “defense strategy” and the tired heresy of “preserving Lebanon’s
strength” through the arms of Iran’s militia.
The Dark History of Alliance with Hezbollah
The undeniable truth—untouched by any speech or press conference—is that Bassil
and his Father In law Michel Aoun entered into a strategic alliance with
Hezbollah upon signing the "Mar Mikhael Agreement", on February 6, 2006. This
agreement was a coup against Lebanon’s independence, explicitly stating:
Clause 4: “The weapons of the resistance are an honorable and necessary means of
defending Lebanon…”
Clause 5: “The future of the resistance’s weapons cannot be discussed until the
Israeli threat is gone and a capable state is established…”
This language, endorsed by Aoun and Bassil, tied the fate of Hezbollah’s arsenal
to the existence of Israel and effectively nullified any commitment to U.N.
resolutions—especially Resolution 1559, which calls for the disbanding of all
Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias. Worse still, the agreement whitewashed the
Syrian occupation of Lebanon, describing it as “an experience marred by some
mistakes,” thus absolving the Assad regime that murdered, assassinated, and
occupied Lebanon for three decades.
Complicity in Wars and Internal Coups
Aoun, with Bassil behind him, backed Hezbollah in the 2006 July War, granting it
full political cover despite the immense destruction it brought upon Lebanon. In
May 2008, when Hezbollah invaded Beirut and the Chouf Mountains, Aoun stood by
the militia against fellow Lebanese.
Most dangerously, Michel Aoun stood against the Lebanese Army, declaring more
than once that the army could not protect Lebanon and that real protection was
in Hezbollah’s hands. His brazenness peaked when Hezbollah killed Lebanese Army
pilot Samer Hanna in the south; Aoun shamelessly asked in public: “What was
Samer Hanna doing in the south where Hezbollah holds authority?” He even visited
the so-called “Resistance Museum” in Mlita alongside MP Mohammad Raad, declaring
Hezbollah the “protector of the homeland,” a clear message that the national
army was not Lebanon’s shield—Hezbollah was.
Betraying the Christians and Aligning with Murderers
Bassil frequently grandstands about Christian rights, yet in practice, he has
betrayed them at every political juncture. He allied with the criminal Assad
regime, which displaced Christians from their towns, destroyed villages, and
emptied entire areas of their population. He also supported schemes to grant
citizenship to non-entitled individuals—registered by Assad’s regime and its
Lebanese proxies—tens of thousands of whom were placed in Christian areas,
skewing demographics and weakening Christian political weight.
An Enemy of the Lebanese Diaspora
Bassil’s hostility toward Lebanese expatriates was made clear in his position on
their voting rights. He opposed allowing them to vote for all 128 MPs in their
home districts, siding with Hezbollah and Nabih Berri in the absurdity of
limiting them to electing only six MPs—an impractical and illusory scheme.
This electoral conspiracy was designed primarily to reduce the influence of
expatriates, most of whom are Christians who oppose Hezbollah and distrust
Bassil. It proves that Bassil cares neither for Christian rights nor for the
rights of Lebanese abroad, but only for the political benefits secured through
his alliances with Berri and Hezbollah.
A Shame Parliamentary Representation
Bassil’s entire parliamentary and political stature stems from Hezbollah’s
backing, not from any genuine popular mandate or national achievements. He
represents neither the conscience, identity, nor history of Lebanese Christians.
He is the epitome of the opportunistic politician who changes positions as
easily as changing clothes, in pursuit of personal and political gain—even if
the cost is selling sovereignty, betraying national partnership, and granting
Christian cover to the most destructive project Lebanon has seen in its modern
history.
Conclusion
After Gebran Bassil, along with his Father In law Michel Aoun, has been stripped
bare and their dark history of selling sovereignty, identity, and
independence—while allying with Hezbollah and the Assad regime—has been exposed,
it is baffling that any Lebanese citizens, especially in the Diaspora, still
support them. In our humble opinion, these misguided individuals should seek the
nearest clinic specialized in mental and psychological disorders.
Larijani’s Visit to Lebanon: A Brazen Iranian Provocation and an Insult
to the State and People
Elias Bejjani/August 12/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/08/146171/
In a move that represents the height of provocation, arrogance, and domination,
the Secretary-General of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Larijani,
is preparing to visit Lebanon next Wednesday. This visit is entirely unwelcome
and firmly rejected by most Lebanese at the popular, political, and official
levels—especially in light of his recent statements, which constitute blatant
interference in Lebanese internal affairs and a direct challenge to the
constitution, laws, and international resolutions.
In an openly insolent and shameless remark, Larijani declared: “Iran will not
allow Hezbollah to hand over its weapons to the Lebanese state.” This is a blunt
rejection of the Lebanese constitution, United Nations Security Council
resolutions—chief among them Resolution 1701—and the recent ceasefire agreement
between Lebanon and Hezbollah. It is also a direct insult to Lebanon’s state
institutions and its army.
The matter does not stop with Larijani. Other Iranian officials, before and
after him, have made similar remarks. Among them is the Supreme Leader’s
advisor, who recently stated: “Hezbollah’s weapons are the guarantee of
Lebanon’s strength and will not be handed over to anyone.” This statement
entrenches Tehran’s role as Lebanon’s self-appointed guardian and confirms
Hezbollah’s full alignment with the Iranian project—at the expense of the
state’s sovereignty and unity. Inside Lebanon, Hezbollah leaders have escalated
their defiant rhetoric. MP Mohammad Raad declared: “Our weapons are our honor
and our destiny, and whoever demands their removal is demanding the elimination
of our existence.” He accompanied this with Karbala-style doctrinal and suicidal
overtones in an attempt to give a false sacred character to an Iranian–military
project that is destroying Lebanon.
Why Should Larijani’s Visit Be Rejected?
Because he incites Hezbollah against the Lebanese government and legitimizes
illegal weapons that threaten national unity and civil peace.
Because he represents the security and ideological arm of Iran’s project in
Lebanon, aimed at turning it into a forward base for the IRGC.
Because his statements are a direct insult to Lebanon’s sovereignty, its
president, and its institutions—and his visit sends a clear message of defiance
to the international community and outright rejection of implementing UN
resolutions.
What Must Be Done Immediately
A clear and explicit governmental decision must be issued to refuse Larijani’s
entry into Lebanon. An official message should be sent to Tehran making it clear
that interference in Lebanese affairs is completely unacceptable. Moreover, it
has become a national necessity to sever diplomatic and political ties with Iran
until it stops supporting terrorist militias at the expense of the Lebanese
state.
The fact remains that Iran is a cancer devouring the body of Lebanon, and
Hezbollah is its deadly tool. Eradicating this cancer begins with rejecting any
political or protocol legitimization for its figures and with official and
popular action to end the Iranian occupation disguised under the false slogan
and trade of so-called “resistance.”
In conclusion, the majority of the Lebanese people seek peace, and the
restoration of their country’s sovereignty, independence, and freedom. These
aspirations will not be realized as long as the national decision is held
hostage in Tehran, as long as Hezbollah’s illegal terrorist and jihadist weapons
remain above the law, and as long as visits by Iranian officials occur as though
Lebanon were a province belonging to the mullahs’ regime.
Engineer Alfred
Madi: We demand the expulsion of the Iranian ambassador from Lebanon and the
severance of diplomatic relations with Iran…
Head of the “Other Option” Movement, Engineer Alfred Madi/Facebook/August 13,
2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/08/146210/
After the “brilliant success” Hezbollah achieved in “defending” Lebanon, which
resulted in:
The killing of all first-, second-, and third-tier leaders, along with more than
15,000 dead and wounded;
The destruction and displacement of all of South Lebanon, half of the southern
suburbs, and part of Baalbek-Hermel;
The crippling of Lebanon’s economy;
And given that Iran, with its 70 million citizens, could not stand up to Israel,
which has only 7 million citizens;
And after the statements by Araghchi, Larijani, Bagheri, Velayati, and Masjedi
rejecting the handover of Hezbollah’s weapons to the Lebanese state;
And since Hezbollah does not recognize the existence of Lebanon and instead
follows the doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih (the rule of the jurist);
The Lebanese authorities should never have allowed Larijani to enter Lebanon,
and certainly none of the pillars of the state should have received him.
I therefore call for:
The expulsion of the Iranian ambassador from Lebanon;
The severance of diplomatic relations with Iran;
The dispatch of all Hezbollah members to Iran so they can “defend” us the same
way they so successfully “defended” Lebanon!
As for us—we will take full responsibility for Lebanon’s security and
protection!
Iran security
chief meets Lebanese officials, vows continued 'support' for country
Agence France Presse/August 13, 2025
Iran's top security chief vowed in Lebanon on Wednesday that his government
would continue to provide support, after the Lebanese government ordered the
army to devise a plan to disarm Tehran-backed Hezbollah. Ali Larijani's trip to
Lebanon comes after Iran expressed opposition to a government plan to disarm
Hezbollah, which before a war with Israel last year was believed to be better
armed than the Lebanese military. "If... the Lebanese
people are suffering, we in Iran will also feel this pain and we will stand by
the dear people of Lebanon in all circumstances," Larijani, the head of the
National Security Council, told reporters after landing in Beirut. Dozens of
Hezbollah supporters gathered along the airport road to welcome Larijani. He
briefly stepped out of his car to greet them as they chanted slogans of support.
Larijani later held a one-hour meeting with President Joseph Aoun before heading
to Ain el-Tineh for talks with Speaker Nabih Berri, who is close to Hezbollah.
He is also scheduled to meet with Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and Hezbollah's
leadership. Iran has suffered a series of blows in its long-running rivalry with
Israel, including during 12 days of open war between the two countries in June.
Hezbollah's grip on power has slipped since a war with Israel ended in a
November 2024 ceasefire and the new Lebanese government, backed by the United
States, has moved to further restrain it.Hezbollah is part of Iran's so-called
"axis of resistance" -- a network of armed groups in the region, including Hamas
in Gaza and Yemen's Houthi rebels, united in their opposition to Israel. The
ouster in December of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, which long served as a conduit
for weapons deliveries between Iran and Hezbollah, cut off the supply route to
Lebanon.Iran has declared its firm opposition to the Lebanese government's bid
to disarm Hezbollah, while the group itself has slammed the decision as a "grave
sin."
President Aoun reaffirms Lebanon’s rejection of foreign
interference during talks with Iranian official
NAJIA HOUSSARI/Arab News/August 13, 2025
BEIRUT: Ali Larijani, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council,
affirmed on Wednesday Tehran’s support for the Lebanese government and its
decisions, emphasizing that his statement “expresses the official Iranian
position toward Lebanon.”However, he pointed out that “the US is the one that
came up with a proposal paper for powerful and independent countries in the
region, which do not need to take orders from across the oceans.”His statements
came during his visit to Beirut after diplomatic tensions were stirred by
statements by Iranian officials in which they declared their rejection of plans
to disarm Hezbollah. The Iran-backed group was severely weakened by the
assassination of its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, along with senior officials and
the destruction of its military infrastructure during the war with Israel. Nawaf
Salam, prime minister of Lebanon, issued a decision last week to restrict arms
to the Lebanese state and to assign to the Lebanese army the task of developing
an implementation plan to present to the Cabinet by the end of the month. He
called for the decision to be implemented before the end of the year. Larijani’s
visit was met by Lebanese officials who took a high-pitched tone against Iranian
interference in Lebanese affairs. Reiterating his country’s rejection of foreign
interference, President Joseph Aoun informed the Iranian official that “Lebanon
is willing to cooperate with Iran within the limits of sovereignty and
friendship based on mutual respect.”He noted that “the language Lebanon has
heard recently from some Iranian officials is unhelpful.”Aoun told Larijani that
the relations between the two countries should not be through one sect or one
Lebanese component, but with all Lebanese. He said that Lebanon is the “ultimate
homeland for all its citizens, whether Christians or Muslims, and the Lebanese
state, through its constitutional and security institutions, is responsible for
protecting all Lebanese components.”According to a statement from the Lebanese
presidency, Aoun said: “We reject any interference in our internal affairs from
any party, and we want the Lebanese arena to remain safe and stable in the
interest of all Lebanese without discrimination.”Referring to the decision to
disarm Hezbollah, Aoun told the Iranian official: “If, throughout Lebanese
history, some sought strength from abroad against others inside, everyone paid a
high price. The lesson learned by the Lebanese is that it is not allowed for any
party, without exception, to bear arms and use foreign backing as leverage
against another Lebanese.”
He said the constitutional institutions are the official representatives of the
Lebanese people that safeguard the interests of the state. “If the Islamic
Republic of Iran seeks to achieve its major interests, this is natural, but we
in Lebanon seek to achieve our own interests.”
The Lebanese president stressed that the unity of the Lebanese people is the
best way to overcome any challenges coming from Israel or other parties, which
affect all Lebanese, not just one group. “This is what we are working for, and
we hope to receive the necessary cooperation, especially since we will not
hesitate to accept any assistance in this regard,” Aoun said. A political source
close to Larijani in Beirut told Arab News that the Iranian official, who
arrived in Lebanon following a visit to Iraq, sought to reinforce Tehran’s
regional influence. But faced with resistance, he was compelled to stress in
Beirut that Iran now seeks equal relations between states, after years of
treating Lebanon as an extension of its regional axis.According to a statement
issued after the meeting with Aoun, Larijani informed the president of Tehran’s
desire to assist Lebanon’s postwar reconstruction efforts, proposing the
creation of a fund to rebuild areas damaged by Israeli aggression and expressing
his country’s willingness to contribute to it.
Aoun welcomed the Iranian offer of assistance but simultaneously emphasized that
such support must be channeled through Lebanese state institutions, not directed
to any specific party or sect, sources added, in reference to the direct aid
Hezbollah has received from Iran.
In a statement after his meeting with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a
Hezbollah ally and the party’s key negotiator with the US on the ceasefire
implementation mechanism with Israel, Larijani said: “Through friendly,
comprehensive, and serious dialogue within Lebanon, the country can reach sound
decisions, and through dialogue with the resistance (Hezbollah) it can make the
most appropriate decision. “The resistance has a deep sense and strong strategic
thinking, and we do not emphasize orders through which a specific timetable is
set. We advise you to preserve the resistance. Israel has become a predatory
animal, but Hezbollah stands up to it,” he added. Larijani’s arrival in Beirut
on Wednesday morning was preceded by political discontent, triggering calls for
Lebanese officials to refuse to meet with him. Ali Akbar Velayati, senior
adviser to the Iranian supreme leader, said last Saturday that Iran strongly
opposes the Lebanese government’s decision to disarm Hezbollah, considering that
its fate would be “failure, and the resistance will stand firm in the face of
these conspiracies,” Tasnim News Agency reported. Larijani’s visit included two
extensive meetings at the Iranian embassy in Beirut: the first with Lebanese
religious and political figures; and the second with Lebanese and Palestinian
parliamentary, political, and party figures, according to the Iranian embassy in
Beirut. The meeting between Larijani and Salam took
place later in the day, following a Lebanese cabinet session that lasted several
hours as ministers worked through a heavy agenda of service and administrative
items, before adjourning for a two-week suspension.
Ministers from the Amal Movement and Hezbollah attended the session, indicating
that they were not planning to resign, as previously reported, in protest
against the government’s arms control decision taken last week. Dozens of
Hezbollah supporters waited on the road to Beirut airport for Larijani’s
arrival, chanting anti-American slogans and rejecting “humiliation.”
No Armed Groups Allowed in Lebanon, President Tells
Hezbollah’s Ally Iran
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
No group in Lebanon is permitted to bear arms or rely on foreign backing, its
president told a visiting senior Iranian official on Wednesday after the cabinet
approved the goals of a US-backed roadmap to disarm the Iran-aligned Hezbollah
group. During a meeting in Beirut with Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's top
security body, Joseph Aoun warned against foreign interference in Lebanon's
internal affairs, saying the country was open to cooperation with Iran but only
within the bounds of national sovereignty and mutual respect. Larijani said the
Islamic Republic supports Lebanon’s sovereignty and does not interfere in its
decision-making. "Any decision taken by the Lebanese government in consultation
with the resistance is respected by us," he said after separate talks with
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, whose Amal movement is an ally of Hezbollah.
By "resistance", Larijani was alluding to Hezbollah, which was founded in 1982,
grew into a "state-within-a-state" force better armed than the Lebanese army and
has repeatedly fought Israel over the decades. "Iran didn't bring any plan to
Lebanon, the US did. Those intervening in Lebanese affairs are those dictating
plans and deadlines", said Larijani. He said Lebanon should not "mix its enemies
with its friends - your enemy is Israel, your friend is the resistance ... I
recommend to Lebanon to always appreciate the value of resistance." Later on
Wednesday, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said after meeting Larijani that
recent remarks on Lebanon by Iranian officials including Foreign Minister Abbas
Araghchi were totally rejected by his government. He said the comments
constituted a "violation" of the principle of mutual state sovereignty. Last
week, Araghchi said Tehran supported any decision Hezbollah made and this was
not the first attempt to strip the group of its arsenal. Ali Akbar Velayati, top
adviser to Iran's supreme leader, also criticized the Lebanese government's move
on disarmament. "If Hezbollah lays down its weapons, who will defend the lives,
property, and honor of the Lebanese?" he said. The US submitted a plan through
President Donald Trump's envoy to the region, Tom Barrack, setting out the most
detailed steps yet for disarming Hezbollah, which has rejected mounting calls to
disarm since its devastating war with Israel last year. Hezbollah has rejected
repeated calls to relinquish its weaponry although it was seriously weakened in
the war, with Israel killing most of its leadership in airstrikes and bombings.
It was the climax of a conflict that began in October 2023 when the group opened
fire at Israeli positions along Lebanon's southern frontier in support of its
Palestinian ally Hamas at the start of the Gaza war. Aoun also said recent
remarks by some Iranian officials had not been helpful, and reaffirmed that the
Lebanese state and its armed forces were solely responsible for protecting all
citizens.
Larijani in Beirut amid Wave of Lebanese Objections against
Iranian Meddling
Beirut: Caroline Akoum/Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani arrived in
Beirut on Wednesday amid a wave of objections by Lebanese officials over
Tehran’s continued “meddling” in their country’s internal affairs. Iranian
officials recently rejected the Lebanese government’s decision last week to
disarm Tehran-backed Hezbollah in what Lebanese officials viewed as foreign
interference.Larijani, flying in from Iraq, is set to meet with President Joseph
Aoun, parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam.
No meeting has been scheduled with Foreign Minister Youssef Raggi,
revealed sources from the Foreign Ministry. They told Asharq Al-Awsat that
Larijani did not ask for a meeting with Raggi and had he done so, his request
would have been rejected in wake of the “unacceptable” statements by Iranian
officials over the government’s disarmament decision.
Last week, Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior advisor to Iran's supreme leader, said
the government’s move to disarm the group “will fail”.“Iran rejects the
disarmament of Hezbollah and it has long supported the Lebanese people and their
resistance. It continues to do so today,” he added. “This is not the first time
that such ideas are floated in Lebanon, but they have failed and they will fail
again,” he stressed. “The resistance [Hezbollah] will withstand these
conspiracies.”Raggi, a vocal critic of Iran’s meddling in Lebanon, was quick to
condemn his remarks. “Some Iranian officials have gone too far in making
suspicious comments about Lebanon’s internal decisions. We will not accept these
Iranian practices,” he said.“No party has the right to speak on behalf of the
Lebanese people or claim to have authority over their sovereign decisions,” he
stated. It remains to be seen what Larijani’s visit
holds, said sources close to the president. They told Asharq Al-Awsat that Aoun
will likely repeat to his guest the “firm principled positions” he continues to
uphold. In February, Aoun met with an Iranian delegation, informing them that
“Lebanon has grown weary of others waging their wars on its territory.”
Meanwhile, Lebanese officials have criticized Larijani’s visit, with some
demanding that he be turned away. Democratic Gathering MP Bilal Abdullah said of
some foreign visitors: “They should give Lebanon a break.”“We have had enough of
others’ wars on our country,” he told local radio. In an indirect reference to
US envoy Tom Barrack’s visit to Lebanon next week, he hoped that he would urge
Israel to stop its violations of Lebanese sovereignty and end its daily
assassinations. Democratic Gathering MP Akram Chehayeb condemned in a post on X
the visits by Iranian officials and “their decision to again meddle in Lebanon
after everything that has happened.” He dismissed their remarks as “delusions”
and “unrealistic”, adding: “They don’t know when to quit.”On Monday, Lebanese
Forces leader Samir Geagea said the government “must seriously consider calling
the Arab League and Gulf Cooperation Council to hold emergency meetings to
address the Iranian threat against Lebanon.”In a statement, he also suggested
that it file a complaint to the United Nations Security Council over “Iran’s
threats to Lebanon.”Also on Monday, Kataeb leader MP Sami Gemayel expressed his
party's “categorical rejection” of remarks by Iranian officials “because they
are a violation of Lebanon’s sovereignty and its state decisions.”Hezbollah,
meanwhile, continues to defy the government by refusing to disarm. Party MP Ihab
Hamadeh said on Tuesday: “No one should worry about the resistance and its
future. Even if they try to remove the legitimacy of the weapons, these weapons
have preserved Lebanon. The resistance is the party that gives legitimacy to
others and doesn’t need legitimacy from anyone.”“Along with the army, we have
formed the golden equation, while the equation of the army, people and
resistance will remain,” he vowed.
Lebanon President Rejects ‘Seeking Foreign Help’
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun on Wednesday said seeking foreign backing against
domestic rivals was “unacceptable” and urged unity to confront regional
challenges, while Prime Minister Nawaf Salam pledged to press ahead with
rebuilding efforts and ensure the state alone controls weapons.Aoun, speaking to
student delegations from the Maronite Foundation in the World and the Beirut
Manarati Association, said his administration was working to restore trust
between citizens and the state, as well as with the international community.
“Our aim is to put the state back on the right track, continue the economic
reforms we began after winning parliament’s confidence, combat corruption,
strengthen judicial independence, reform the banking sector and lift banking
secrecy,” Aoun said. He stressed that “no one is above
the law in fighting corruption – all taboos have fallen in this regard, and the
decision has been made.”The president warned that Lebanon’s current regional
challenges could only be met with unity. “Seeking foreign help against one
another at home is unacceptable and has harmed the nation. We must learn from
past experiences,” he said. Aoun added that several reforms had already been
passed, with key issues moving in the right direction. “We will address
outstanding files calmly and through dialogue to find appropriate solutions,” he
said, urging Lebanese to prioritize national interest above all else and seize
the opportunities created by renewed Arab and international confidence in
Lebanon. “Our decision is to go towards a state that stands alone, and we are
committed to implementing that decision,” he said. Separately, PM Salam told the
Maronite Foundation delegation that Lebanon was “not where we want it to be” as
it faced political challenges, economic hardship and the legacy of years of
instability. “We are determined, government and people, to rebuild. This will
only happen through an ambitious reform agenda and ensuring the state alone has
the right to possess weapons, a process we have already begun,” he said. Salam
said the government was laying the foundations for a “respected, sovereign
state” serving all citizens at home and abroad. Rebuilding, he said, was not
limited to infrastructure and institutions but also to restoring trust between
the state and its people, and between Lebanese at home and in the diaspora. He
called for the role of the diaspora to be expanded beyond remittance-sending to
active participation in Lebanon’s political, economic and cultural life, and in
representing its voice internationally. “Your
financial support has been crucial, but you are much more than that,” Salam
said. “We want you as active partners in Lebanon’s journey to the future –
welcome to your homeland today and always.”
Larijani says US not Iran intervening in Lebanese affairs
Naharnet/August 13, 2025
Iran's Supreme National Security Council chief Ali Larijani advised the Lebanese
to preserve the resistance and accused the United States of "ordering" the
Lebanese government to implement "a foreign plan", as he met Wednesday with
President Joseph Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and Parliament Speaker Nabih
Berri. Larijani's visit to Lebanon comes after the
Lebanese government ordered the army to devise plans to disarm Hezbollah.
Following his arrival in Beirut, Larijani vowed that his government would
continue to provide support, after it expressed opposition to the disarmament
plan.
The senior Iranian official said his country rejected the plan and that any
proposal to disarm Hezbollah should be part of an internal dialogue between the
government and the Iran-backed group. He called on the Lebanese people to
preserve "the resistance," saying that Iran will stand by Lebanon in case of any
Israeli escalation and if Lebanon asks for help. "We
respect any decision taken by the Lebanese government in coordination and
cooperation with Lebanon's factions ... and consider Lebanon's unity to be very
important but we don't support the foreign orders through which a certain
timetable is specified," Larijani said after his meetings, in reference to a
paper submitted by U.S. envoy Tom Barrack to Lebanese officials. The proposal
includes a timetable for Hezbollah's disarmament.Larijani said that no foreign
power should give orders to Lebanon, adding that it was not Iran but the United
States that was intervening.
Aoun had earlier told Larijani that he rejected any interference in the
country's internal affairs, branding as "unconstructive" Iran's statements on
plans to disarm Hezbollah. "The one who interferes in
Lebanese affairs is the one who plans for you, gives you a timetable from
thousands of kilometers away. We did not give you any plan," Larijani said.
He added that Iran currently has "the best relations with Lebanon" and
lauded the role that Aoun is playing "in bolstering national unity and unifying
ranks inside all Lebanese sects and with all components."
Report: Army chief refuses clash with Hezbollah as army
prepares four-stage plan
Naharnet/August 13, 2025
Army Commander General Rodolph Haykal has told Speaker Nabih Berri that he does
not want to clash with Hezbollah, in a meeting Tuesday at Ain el-Tineh,
pro-Hezbollah al-Akhbar newpaper reported. Al-Akhbar said Wednesday that it has
learned from prominent sources that the meeting with Berri was "positive" and
that Haykal has told both Berri and Hezbollah that Hezbollah's disarmament
requires dialogue and understanding and that the disarmament plan "cannot be
implemented by force."The Lebanese government had ordered the army to devise
plans by the end of 2025 to disarm Hezbollah. "The problem is with the authority
not with the army," Haykal reportedly told Berri, describing Hezbollah as a
"fundamental Lebanese component."According to the daily's sources, the army has
begun preparing a four-stage plan, targeting heavy missile weapons. This plan
intersects with an American proposal of a four-stage plan starting from the area
between the Litani and Awali rivers, followed by the Bekaa, Beirut's southern
suburbs, and Greater Beirut, al-Akhbar said.
Report: Army-Hezbollah panel to be formed to implement disarmament plan
Naharnet/August 13, 2025
Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal is likely to take part in the cabinet
session that will be held in late August to present the details of the arms
monopolization plan, which will be based on “positive understanding rather than
confrontation, through a gradual course for addressing the file of arms,”
informed sources said. The plan “will be based on the formation of a joint
liaison committee between the army and Hezbollah to locate the positions of arms
depots and document them technically in preparation for handing them over to the
military institution, without resorting to force,” the sources told the Nidaa
al-Watan newspaper. The weapons “will be either returned to Iran or disposed of
as the party decides,” the sources said. The focus will then move to “the file
of Palestinian arms inside and outside (refugee) camps, a file that has been
historically sensitive seeing as it involves security, political and regional
aspects,” the sources added.
Report: Israel, US agree to extending UNIFIL's mandate for
one last time
Naharnet/August 13, 2025
Israel and the U.S. have agreed to the one-year renewal of UNIFIL’s mandate for
one last time, but under “strict conditions, including granting these forces
powers similar to those mentioned in Chapter VII (of the U.N. Charter), such as
staging raids, arresting individuals and erecting checkpoints,” al-Akhbar
newspaper quoted unnamed sources as saying. The
ceasefire monitoring committee meanwhile held an urgent meeting Tuesday in Ras
al-Naqoura, the first since June 26. The meeting followed the Lebanese
government’s decision to disarm Hezbollah by year end and in the wake of the
blast that killed Lebanese troops during the dismantlement of Hezbollah weapons
in Zibqin.Informed sources told the daily that the two-hour meeting was a “waste
of time,” seeing as “the Lebanese Army delegation did not receive any serious
answers regarding its requests related to boosting its deployment in the
southern border posts and specifying a date for the withdrawal of Israeli
occupation forces from Lebanese territory.” “The enemy’s army delegation spoke
in an arrogant manner, refusing to discuss the issues of its withdrawal from the
occupied and buffer zones and the army’s deployment on the border, while noting
that Tel Aviv is not obliged to hear any Lebanese demands until the Lebanese
Army completes the Hezbollah disarmament plan,” the sources added.
Berri says Hezbollah 'has not ended'
Naharnet/August 13, 2025
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has stressed that “Iran is a friend of Lebanon
and will remain so based on its active role in the region.”“Hezbollah has not
ended and remains one of the biggest parties in Lebanon despite everything it
has suffered,” Berri added, in an interview with An-Nahar newspaper.
“Things cannot be run this way with a political component and a major sect in
the country,” the Speaker said. Saying he was not surprised by “this attack” on
Larijani and the rejection of his visit “based on a foreign order implemented by
a domestic lobby,” Berri said “if the opponents can prevent his arrival, let
them try.”“If there is opposition to the Iranian statements based on the notion
that they harm Lebanese sovereignty, we call for looking very well into the
statements of U.S. officials and others,” the Speaker added. Denying that he had
agreed to the government’s decision on Hezbollah’s disarmament plan, Berri told
An-Nahar: “All I asked for was postponing the first cabinet session from Tuesday
to Thursday, but they did not listen.”
How Can We Understand Hezbollah’s Intransigence over Its Weapons?
Nadim Koteich/Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
The fate of Hezbollah’s arms is no longer a domestic dispute between advocates
of sovereignty and supporters of the “resistance.” Since the 2023–2024 war with
Israel, this question has been distilling into an existential crisis facing the
party. The slogan raised by the leader of Hezbollah’s
parliamentary bloc, Mohammad Raad, “We will die before surrendering the
weapons,” reflects his awareness that his camp has no other option but to cling
to what remains of its arsenal. Abandoning its arms would break Hezbollah’s
political and ideological foundations.These actions are not mere reflections of
political intransigence. Given its rigid ideology and uncompromising idealism,
and because Iran’s regional project is in its DNA, Hezbollah is not an agile
actor with the capacity to fundamentally change in nature. Moreover, it has
built its power around the notion that weapons are an identity, not merely a
means to an end. In truth, the Lebanese have never
associated Hezbollah with a domestic political or economic project. Its
engagement in public affairs has always revolved around the “resistance” and the
imperatives of regional conflicts. Thus, surrendering its arms would entail
redefining the party from scratch and sacrificing its raison d'etre.
Operating with these restrictive parameters, Hezbollah has dragged its
feet. Its bets verge on wishful thinking: the Lebanese state remaining too weak
to follow through on its commitment to disarm the party, a new episode of
regional chaos that destabilizes Syria’s emerging political authorities, and the
materialization of the high-level assurances it has received Tehran’s top brass
regarding its survival and armament. That is,
Hezbollah is betting that it will get lucky- or even awaiting miracles. The fate
of these matters is totally beyond Hezbollah’s control, and external factors
(that are consistently going against it) will determine how things play out.
After years of collapse, Lebanon’s state institutions are steadily,
albeit slowly, consolidating and enhancing their credibility in the eyes of a
broadening segment of the population. This trajectory undermines the slander and
vilification of the state that Hezbollah has long used to challenge the state’s
legitimacy and justify its own existence. As for its
wager on vacuums in Syria that would grant it more room for maneuvre, current
developments on the point in the opposite direction. The political and military
situation in Syria suggests that the weight of open-ended geopolitical conflicts
and regional actors are declining, consolidating the new regime in Damascus.
Even Iranian support, which had constituted the cornerstone of
Hezbollah’s existence for decades, is increasingly constrained. Tehran is
grappling with a severe economic crisis amid volatile shifts in the internal
balance of power between the different wings of the regime. Iran is preparing
for a new phase, all while trying to put the military and security apparatus
(that had been battered by deep Israeli strikes during the 12-day war) back
together. These considerations have compelled Iran to prioritize its military
and financial needs over coming to the aid of its allies, foremost among them
Hezbollah.
All of that means the party is fighting for its very survival. However, while
turning to politics has offered armed movements elsewhere in the world a
lifeline, allowing them to maintain some influence, material conditions have
left Hezbollah hostage to its weapons.
The Irish Republican Army, despite being deeply rooted in the conflict with
Britain, pursued a clear, localized national cause: unifying Ireland and
defending the rights of nationalist Catholics. That is why it managed to survive
the shift from armed struggle to a political course that culminated in the 1998
Good Friday Agreement, which left Sinn Fein in a strong position politically.
Colombia’s Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC), despite becoming involved in the
drug trade and losing some of their legitimacy as result, was nonetheless
pursuing a domestic agenda to a social and economic struggle in Colombia. The
FARC thereby managed to conclude a peace agreement that, despite only being
partially implemented, granted them a political foothold. Hezbollah, in
contrast, has never pursued a genuine domestic cause that could underpin a shift
toward politics. Even its claims to defending Lebanon’s sovereignty and
confronting occupation were never presented as ultimate, final objectives. These
goals were presented as means for furthering regional ambitions. Its ideological
link to its axis, as well as its intrinsic role in the regional power struggle,
make any fundamental change to its nature nearly impossible. To give up its arms
would not be to adjust its strategy; it would be to abandon the reason for its
existence. Thus, the party appears bound to keep
behaving this way. It will continue to vie for maintaining weapons and
transnational function. Even after being put out of action, it will continue to
wait for gradual decline. Its intransigence could, in turn, perpetuate the decay
of Lebanon’s state institutions. If it does, the country would go from being a
political battleground to being home to a failed state, with the Lebanese people
paying the price many times over.
The
Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on August 13-14/2025
Israel on Alert for Potential Iranian Attack
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
Israel’s military staged surprise drills this week to prepare for a possible
attack by Iran and its ally Hezbollah, a day after Defense Minister Israel Katz
threatened to repeat a deadly June strike in Tehran and target Supreme Leader
Ali Khamenei. Iran’s armed forces chief Major General Abdolrahim Mousavi said on
Tuesday the country was at full combat readiness to counter any new aggression
with a “stronger and more decisive” response. “The US and the Zionist entity
have a history of breaking promises,” he told reporters.
Army commander Amir Hatami accused Washington and Israel of violating
international law during recent attacks on the country, saying they used “all
their capabilities” but failed to achieve their objectives. “Their defeat in the
face of Iranian missile strikes forced them to request a ceasefire,” he said.
Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh said Iran had responded “firmly and powerfully”
to Israel “in accordance with its legitimate right,” to the point that “the
enemy requested a ceasefire through certain mediations, which we accepted to
prevent escalation.”
“We are closely monitoring enemy movements and remain ready for any new
adventure,” he added. The three senior Iranian commanders made their remarks in
separate meetings with General Rudzani Maphwanya, chief of South Africa’s
National Defense Force, who is visiting Tehran. Israel’s Maariv daily said
Israel’s military and security establishments were bracing for the possibility
of a sudden, severe Iranian strike on multiple fronts.
Monday’s unannounced drill, led by Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir, carried two
messages: “to Iran and Hezbollah that Israel sleeps with one eye open,” and to
test the highest alert levels of the army, Mossad and Shin Bet, reported Maariv.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not rule out a surprise Iranian
attack “as a form of revenge,” saying: “This requires total vigilance. We are
ready for every scenario. The Iranians are preparing for different scenarios; I
will not elaborate.”Maariv said Israeli officials fear Iran may attempt a swift
strike in the near future, possibly before a new military operation in Gaza, to
shape a “new narrative” on the war’s end. It said the conflict had changed
Hezbollah’s standing in Lebanon and altered the Iranian regime’s position at
home, pushing both to prove they have not lost.
Israel, it added, is watching for signs Tehran may rebuild its nuclear
infrastructure, resume ballistic missile production, and intensify efforts to
detect Israeli intelligence infiltration. Iran is also challenging Israel with
daily cyberattacks. The Mossad and Shin Bet are
processing a surge in warnings about planned attacks on Israelis and Israeli
targets worldwide, while military planners remain wary of potential new fronts
from Syria and Jordan, as well as Houthi provocations from Yemen.
Defense Minister Israel Katz renewed his threats against Khamenei after
channels linked to the Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force published a
Hebrew-language graphic listing top Israeli officials as assassination targets,
labelling Katz “minister of terror.”“I suggest to Iranian dictator Khamenei that
when he leaves his hideout, he occasionally lift his eyes to the sky and listen
carefully to every buzz,” Katz wrote on X, apparently referring to Israeli drone
activity. The image echoed Israeli army graphics announcing the killing of
Iranian military leaders, listing them in hierarchical order. Katz told Khamenei
“participants in the ‘Red Wedding’ are waiting for him,” referring to the June
13 Israeli strike in Tehran that killed a large number of senior Iranian
commanders, including armed forces chief Mohammad Bagheri, Revolutionary Guards
commander Hossein Salami, missile unit head Amir Ali Hajizadeh, and operations
chief Gholam Ali Rashid. Katz has made similar threats throughout the war. US
President Donald Trump said at the time he knew Khamenei’s exact location, but
had not authorized Israel or US forces to kill him.
Israeli Army Approves Plan for New Gaza Offensive as
Israeli Fire Kills at Least 25
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
The Israeli military said Wednesday it had approved the "framework" for a new
offensive in the Gaza Strip, days after the security cabinet called for the
seizure of Gaza City. Armed forces chief Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir "approved
the main framework for the IDF's operational plan in the Gaza Strip," a
statement released by the army said. Prime Benjamin Minister Netanyahu's
government has not provided a precise timetable for when Israeli troops will
enter the territory's largest city, where thousands have taken refuge after
fleeing previous offensives. Israeli gunfire killed at least 25 people seeking
aid in Gaza on Wednesday, health officials and witnesses said, while Netanyahu
said Israel will "allow" Palestinians to leave during an upcoming military
offensive in some of the territory's most populated areas. Netanyahu wants to
realize US President Donald Trump’s vision of relocating much of Gaza’s
population of over 2 million people through what he refers to as "voluntary
migration" — and what critics have warned could be ethnic cleansing.
"Give them the opportunity to leave! First, from
combat zones, and also from the Strip if they want," Netanyahu said in an
interview aired Tuesday with Israeli TV station i24 to discuss the planned
offensive in areas including Gaza City, where hundreds of thousands of displaced
people shelter. "We are not pushing them out but allowing them to leave."
Witnesses and staff at Nasser and Awda hospitals, which received the bodies,
said people were shot dead on their way to aid distribution sites or while
awaiting convoys entering Gaza. Israel did not immediately respond to a request
for comment.
Efforts to revive ceasefire talks
Efforts to revive ceasefire talks have resumed after apparently breaking down
last month. Hamas and Egyptian officials met Wednesday in Cairo, according to
Hamas official Taher al-Nounou. Israel has no plans to send its negotiating team
to talks in Cairo, the prime minister’s office said. Israel's plans to widen its
military offensive against Hamas to parts of Gaza it does not yet control have
sparked condemnation at home and abroad, and could be intended to raise pressure
on Hamas to reach a ceasefire. The fighters still hold 50 hostages taken in the
Oct. 7, 2023, attack that sparked the war. Israel believes around 20 are alive.
Families fear a new offensive endangers them. Netanyahu was asked by i24 News if
the window had closed on a partial ceasefire deal and he responded that he
wanted all hostages back, alive and dead. Egyptian Foreign Ministry Badr
Abdelatty told reporters that Cairo is still trying to advance an earlier
proposal for an initial 60-day ceasefire, the release of some hostages and an
influx of humanitarian aid before further talks on a lasting truce. Hamas says
it will only release the remaining hostages in return for the release of
Palestinians imprisoned by Israel, a lasting ceasefire and an Israeli withdrawal
from Gaza. The group has refused to disarm.
South Sudan calls reports of resettlement talks baseless Israel and South Sudan
are in talks about relocating Palestinians to the war-torn East African nation,
The Associated Press reported Tuesday. The office of Israel’s Deputy Foreign
Minister, Sharren Haskel, said she was arriving in South Sudan for meetings in
the first visit there by a senior government official, but she did not plan to
broach the subject of moving Palestinians. South Sudan’s ministry of foreign
affairs in a statement called reports that it was engaging in discussions with
Israel about resettling Palestinians baseless. The AP previously reported that
US and Israel have reached out to officials of three East African governments to
discuss using their territories as potential destinations for Palestinians
uprooted from Gaza.
Killed while seeking aid
Among those killed while seeking aid were 14 Palestinians in the Teina area
approximately 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from a food distribution site run by the
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, according to staff at Nasser hospital. Hashim
Shamalah said Israeli troops fired toward them as people tried to get through.
Many were shot and fell while fleeing, he said. Israeli gunfire killed five
other Palestinians while trying to reach another GHF distribution site in the
Netzarim corridor area, according to Awda hospital and witnesses. GHF said there
were no incidents at or near its sites Wednesday. The US and Israel support the
GHF, an American contractor, as an alternative to the United Nations, which they
claim allows Hamas to siphon off aid. The UN, which has delivered aid throughout
Gaza for decades when conditions allow, denies the allegations. Aid convoys from
other groups travel within 100 meters (328 feet) of GHF sites and draw crowds.
An overwhelming majority of violent incidents over the past few weeks have been
related to those convoys, the GHF said.
Israeli fire killed at least six other people waiting for aid trucks close to
the Morag corridor, which separates parts of southern Gaza, Nasser hospital
said.
Palestinian fatally shot in West Bank violence
An Israeli settler shot dead a Palestinian on Wednesday in the occupied West
Bank, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry. The Israeli military said
dozens of Palestinians hurled rocks toward an off-duty soldier and another
person carrying out "engineering works" near the village of Duma, lightly
wounding them. It said the soldier initially fired warning shots, then opened
fire in self-defense. The Health Ministry identified the deceased as Thamin
Dawabshe, 35, a distant relative of a family targeted in a 2015 firebombing in
the village by a settler. That attack killed a toddler and his parents. The
attacker was convicted and handed three life sentences. The West Bank has seen a
rise in settler violence as well as Palestinian attacks since the start of the
war in Gaza, and the Israeli military has carried out major military operations
there. Rights groups and Palestinians say the military often turns a blind eye
to violent settlers or intervenes to protect them.
Starvation at highest levels of the war
Gaza's Health Ministry says 106 children have died of malnutrition-related
causes during the war and 129 adults have died since late June. The UN says it
and humanitarian partners still face significant delays and impediments from
Israeli authorities who prevent the delivery of food and other essentials at the
scale needed. The 2023 Hamas-led attack abducted 251 people and killed around
1,200 people, mostly civilians. Israel’s air and ground offensive has since
displaced most of Gaza’s population, destroyed vast areas and pushed the
territory toward famine. The offensive has killed more than 61,700 Palestinians,
according to Gaza's Health Ministry, which does not say how many were fighters
or civilians but says around half were women and children. The ministry is part
of the Hamas-run government and staffed by medical professionals. The UN and
independent experts consider it the most reliable source on war casualties.
Israel disputes its figures but has not provided its own.
UN Says Has ‘Credible’ Evidence Israeli Forces Sexually Abused Detained
Palestinians
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
The UN chief warned Israel that the United Nations has “credible information” of
sexual violence and other violations by Israeli forces against detained
Palestinians, which Israel’s UN ambassador dismissed as “baseless
accusations.”Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said in a letter to Ambassador
Danny Danon that he is “gravely concerned” about reported violations against
Palestinians by Israeli military and security forces in several prisons, a
detention center and a military base. Guterres said he
was putting Israeli forces on notice that they could be listed as abusers in his
next report on sexual violence in conflict “due to significant concerns of
patterns of certain forms of sexual violence that have been consistently
documented by the United Nations.”Danon, who circulated the letter and his
response Tuesday, said the allegations “are steeped in biased publications.”“The
UN must focus on the shocking war crimes and sexual violence of Hamas and the
release of all hostages,” he said. Danon was referring to the group's surprise
attack in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, where some 1,200 people were killed
and about 250 taken hostage. Israeli authorities said women were raped and
sexually abused. The Hamas attack triggered the
ongoing war in Gaza, which has killed more than 61,400 Palestinians, according
to Gaza’s Health Ministry, which does not say how many were fighters or
civilians but that about half were women and children.
Danon stressed that “Israel will not shy away from protecting its citizens and
will continue to act in accordance with international law.” Because Israel has
denied access to UN monitors, it has been “challenging to make a definitive
determination” about patterns, trends and the systematic use of sexual violence
by its forces, Guterres said in the letter. He urged
Israel’s government “to take the necessary measures to ensure immediate
cessation of all acts of sexual violence, and make and implement specific
time-bound commitments.”
The secretary-general said these should include investigations of credible
allegations, clear orders and codes of conduct for military and security forces
that prohibit sexual violence, and unimpeded access for UN monitors. In March,
UN-backed human rights experts accused Israel of “the systematic use of sexual,
reproductive and other gender-based violence.”The Commission of Inquiry on the
Occupied Palestinian Territory said it documented a range of violations
perpetrated against Palestinian women, men, girls and boys and accused Israeli
security forces of rape and sexual violence against Palestinian detainees.
At the time, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lashed out at the
UN Human Rights Council, which commissioned the team of independent experts, as
an “anti-Israel circus” that “has long been exposed as an antisemitic, rotten,
terrorist-supporting, and irrelevant body.” His statement did not address the
findings themselves.
Controversy Over Appointment of Palestinian Figure to Run Gaza Strip
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
A report published by the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper on Tuesday said
conversations held by US-Jewish NGO, Shomrim, reveal behind-the-scenes efforts
to appoint a Palestinian figure, businessman Samir Hulileh, to run the Gaza
Strip. While the Palestinian presidency denied the report, Hulileh said that the
proposal to appoint him as a governor for post-war Gaza had gained momentum in
recent weeks, but did not yield any results.
Responding to Hulileh’s comments, the Palestinian presidency warned that “any
engagement with other arrangements is a deviation from the national position and
aligns with Israel’s aim to separate Gaza from the West Bank and displace its
residents,” affirming that Gaza is an inseparable part of Palestinian territory.
Hulileh told the Palestinian radio station Ajyal that several months ago, he was
contacted by a Canadian contractor working with the US administration with a
goal at the time to identify figures who could serve as a “point of contact”
between Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Egypt and other key players in
the region. “I discussed the matter directly with Palestinian President Mahmoud
Abbas,” Hulileh said, without specifying the President’s position on that
matter. Hulileh affirmed he has no direct contacts with Hamas. “If the
Palestinian Authority says ‘take charge,’ I will take charge,” he added,
describing his role as someone “who will be used to manage the project.”
Hamas did not comment on the report. In another interview with Nasradio, Hulileh
said he received an offer from the White House to run Gaza when the war ends,
adding that he had discussed the matter with the Palestinian Authority. “My name
came up to govern the Strip because I am politically independent,” he said.
The Plan
According to the Yedioth Ahronoth report, conversations held by Shomrim with
people involved in the initiative, as well as documents submitted to the US
Department of Justice, reveal a plan to bring in a figure acceptable to both
Israel and the United States and help lay the groundwork for post-war Gaza. It
said Hulileh’s candidacy is being promoted in part by lobbyist Ari Ben-Menashe,
a former Israeli now based in Canada. Ben-Menashe says the initiative has gained
momentum in recent weeks following meetings in the US and Hulileh’s contacts in
Egypt. Ben-Menashe’s filings in the US outline a broader proposal: stationing US
and Arab forces in Gaza, securing UN recognition of a special status for the
territory, leasing land from Egypt for an airport and seaport in Sinai,
obtaining gas drilling rights off Gaza’s coast and more. Speaking from Amman,
Hulileh said the essential first step is a permanent ceasefire and an end to the
war. He said law and order would also need to be restored, with authority in
Gaza “neither from the Palestinian Authority nor from Hamas” but respected by
residents. The territory, he stressed, could not remain awash in weapons from
“remnants of Hamas or Islamic Jihad.”Nothing, he emphasized, will move forward
until the war ends, though he noted signs of optimism. A Ramallah resident and
trained economist, Hulileh is a well-known political and business figure in the
Palestinian Authority. His resume includes senior PA posts and extensive
business ties. In 2005, he served as secretary-general of the Palestinian
government and later as deputy minister of economy and trade, chairman of the
board at the Palestine Economic Policy Research Institute, board member of the
Palestine Trade Center, CEO of PADICO - Palestine’s largest holding company -
and chairman of the Palestinian Stock Exchange. He is considered close to
Palestinian-American billionaire Bashar al-Masri, the developer of the West Bank
city of Rawabi, known for his ties to US President Donald Trump’s
administration.
Mediators Offer Hamas Plan to Close Gaps in Gaza Truce Talks
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
Egypt on Tuesday launched a fresh initiative to restart stalled talks on a
60-day Gaza truce, frozen since late July after the United States and Israel
withdrew from negotiations in Doha, as a Hamas delegation arrived in Cairo for
consultations. Diplomatic and security sources told Egypt’s state-owned Al
Qahera News that senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya was leading the
delegation, which will discuss a ceasefire and ways to speed humanitarian aid
into the besieged Palestinian enclave. Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty
said Cairo was working with Qatar and the US to revive the original proposal, a
two-month halt to fighting, the release of some Israeli hostages and Palestinian
prisoners, and unrestricted delivery of humanitarian and medical supplies. He
said the plan included interim administration of Gaza by 15 Palestinian
technocrats under Palestinian Authority oversight for six months.
The initiative comes as Israel’s Kan broadcaster reported that mediators
had floated a broader package to Hamas: the release of all Israeli captives,
alive or dead, in exchange for Palestinian security prisoners, alongside a
phased Israeli withdrawal supervised by Arab and US monitors. The proposal would
require Hamas to freeze and eventually dismantle its armed wing under
international guarantees, including from Türkiye. Talks have been at a
standstill since late July, when US and Israeli negotiators pulled out for
consultations.
Abdelatty told reporters on Monday that a “comprehensive deal to end the Gaza
war” was possible if both sides showed goodwill and political will. Khaled
Okasha, head of the Egyptian Center for Strategic Studies, said the plan aimed
to close gaps that derailed previous rounds, including sequencing of hostage
releases, return of bodies, and timelines. He said Washington’s pressure on
Israel could open the way for a broader accord, including a reworked Israeli
force deployment plan and significantly increased aid flows.
Palestinian analyst Ayman al-Raqab said the Cairo meetings could start
with a partial truce but evolve into a full agreement if talks mature, pointing
to likely compromises to bridge past differences. Diaa Rashwan, head of Egypt’s
State Information Service, urged Hamas to respond swiftly to the proposal,
warning against delays that had derailed earlier efforts.
Israeli media reported divisions within Israel’s negotiating team over
the prospects of even a partial deal. Haaretz, citing political sources, said
Israel could cancel or delay a planned offensive on Gaza City if Hamas offered
major concessions, though chances of resolving disputes remained slim. Okasha
predicted Hamas could show flexibility given its limited options, while Raqab
said agreement was possible with clear US guarantees to end the war — otherwise,
talks could collapse and Israel might move to fully reoccupy Gaza.
Hamas says Israel making 'aggressive' incursions into Gaza
City
Agence France Presse/August 13/2025
A Hamas official said Wednesday that Israeli forces were making "aggressive"
incursions into Gaza City, after the military approved the framework for a new
offensive in the territory. "The Israeli occupation
forces continue to carry out aggressive incursions in Gaza City," Ismail
Al-Thawabta, director general of the Hamas government media office in Gaza, told
AFP. "These assaults represent a dangerous escalation aimed at imposing a new
reality on the ground by force, through a scorched earth policy and the complete
destruction of civilian property."
Netanyahu Hints That Gaza Ceasefire Talks Now Focus on the Release of All
Hostages at Once
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday hinted that ceasefire
efforts in Gaza are now focused on a comprehensive deal that would release the
remaining hostages all at once, rather than in phases. Arab officials told The
Associated Press last week that mediators Egypt and Qatar were preparing a new
framework for a deal that would include the release of all remaining hostages in
one go in return for a lasting ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli forces.
The long-running indirect talks appeared to break down last month. But a Hamas
delegation arrived in Cairo for ceasefire talks on Tuesday, Egypt’s state-run
Qahera news channel reported, a sign that efforts have not been abandoned after
22 months of war. Israel has threatened to widen its
military offensive against Hamas to the areas of Gaza that it does not yet
control, and where most of the territory’s 2 million residents have sought
refuge. Those plans have sparked international
condemnation and criticism within Israel, and could be intended to raise
pressure on Hamas to reach a ceasefire. The fighters still hold 50 hostages
taken in the Oct. 7, 2023, attack that sparked the war. Israel believes around
20 of them are alive.
‘I want all of them’
In an interview with Israel’s i24 News network broadcast Tuesday, Netanyahu was
asked if the window had closed on a partial ceasefire deal. Egyptian Foreign
Ministry Badr Abdelatty told reporters that Cairo is still trying to advance an
earlier proposal for an initial 60-day ceasefire, the release of some hostages
and an influx of humanitarian aid before further talks on a lasting truce. “I
think it’s behind us,” Netanyahu replied. “We tried, we made all kinds of
attempts, we went through a lot, but it turned out that they were just
misleading us.”
“I want all of them,” he said of the hostages. “The release of all the hostages,
both alive and dead — that’s the stage we’re at.” He added, however, that
Israel's demands haven't changed, and that the war will end only when all
hostages are returned and Hamas has surrendered. He has said that even then,
Israel will maintain open-ended security control over the territory. Hamas has
long called for a comprehensive deal but says it will only release the remaining
hostages in return for the release of Palestinians imprisoned by Israel, a
lasting ceasefire and an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. The group has refused to
lay down its arms, as Israel has demanded.
UN warns about starvation, malnutrition
The United Nations on Tuesday warned that starvation and malnutrition in Gaza
are at the highest levels since the war began. UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric
reported the warning from the World Food Program and said Gaza’s Health Ministry
told UN staff in Gaza that five people died over the last 24 hours from
malnutrition and starvation. The ministry says 121 adults and 101 children have
died of malnutrition-related causes during the war. “Against this backdrop,
humanitarian supplies entering Gaza remain far below the minimum required to
meet people’s immense needs,” Dujarric said. The UN and its humanitarian
partners are doing everything possible to bring aid into Gaza, he said, but
still face significant delays and impediments from Israeli authorities that
prevent the delivery of food and other essentials at the scale needed.
Hamas-led fighters abducted 251 people and killed around 1,200 people, mostly
civilians, in that 2023 attack. Most of the hostages have been released in
ceasefires or other deals. Israel’s air and ground
offensive has since displaced most of Gaza’s population, destroyed vast areas
and pushed the territory toward famine. It has killed more than 61,400
Palestinians, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, which does not say how many
were fighters or civilians but says around half were women and children.
The ministry is part of the Hamas-run government and staffed by medical
professionals. The UN and independent experts consider it the most reliable
source on war casualties. Israel disputes its figures but has not provided its
own. Israel says it struck fighters disguised as aid workers. In a separate
development, the Israeli military said it recently struck a group of fighters in
Gaza who were disguised as aid workers and using a car with the logo of
international charity World Central Kitchen. The army said it carried out an
airstrike on the men after confirming with the charity that they were not
affiliated with it and that the car did not belong to it. World Central Kitchen
confirmed that the men and the vehicle were not affiliated with it. “We strongly
condemn anyone posing as World Central Kitchen or other humanitarians, as this
endangers civilians and aid workers,” it said in a statement.
The military shared video footage showing several men in yellow vests
standing around a vehicle with the charity's logo on its roof. The military said
five of the men were armed. The charity, founded in
2010, dispatches teams that can quickly provide meals on a mass scale in
conflict zones and after natural disasters. In April, an Israeli strike killed
seven World Central Kitchen workers in Gaza. Israel quickly admitted it had
mistakenly killed the aid workers and launched an investigation. In November, an
Israeli strike killed five people, including a World Central Kitchen worker who
Israel said was part of the Hamas attack that sparked the war. The charity said
at the time that it was unaware the employee had any connection to the attack.
Syria, Jordan, US Agree to Back Ceasefire Enforcement in
Sweida
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
Syria, Jordan and the United States agreed on Tuesday to form a joint task force
to support Damascus’ efforts to uphold a ceasefire in the Sweida province in
southern Syria and end the crisis there, the three countries said in a joint
statement. The agreement was reached during talks in Jordan between Syrian
Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani, his Jordanian counterpart Ayman Safadi, and
US special envoy to Syria Tom Barrack, the statement said.
The meeting discussed ways to help rebuild Syria “on foundations that
guarantee its security, stability, sovereignty, unity and non-interference in
its internal affairs.”Jordan and the United States welcomed Damascus’ steps,
including “full investigations and holding all perpetrators of crimes and
violations in Sweida accountable” and its readiness to cooperate with relevant
UN agencies in the probe, the Syrian foreign ministry said.
They also praised Syria’s moves to expand humanitarian aid access to all
areas of Sweida, restore disrupted services, start community reconciliation, and
promote civil peace. Both countries reiterated their
“full solidarity” with Syria’s security, stability, sovereignty and territorial
integrity. Sweida and its communities were an “integral part of Syria” whose
residents’ rights must be preserved in the rebuilding process, the statement
said. The three sides agreed to meet again in the
coming weeks to continue Tuesday’s discussions.
Barrack said on X: “Syria remains steadfastly committed to a united process that
honors and protects all its constituencies, fostering a shared future for the
Syrian people despite intervening forces seeking to disrupt and displace its
communities.” “Delivering justice and ending impunity
are paramount to achieving lasting peace,” he stressed. “The Syrian government
has pledged to utilize all resources to hold perpetrators of the Sweida
atrocities accountable, ensuring no one escapes justice for violations against
its citizens,” he added. “Syria will fully cooperate with the UN to investigate
these crimes.”During a meeting with Shaibani, Safadi reaffirmed Jordan’s
rejection of foreign interference in Syria and its support for the country’s
security, sovereignty and territorial integrity, according to a Jordanian
foreign ministry statement. The FMs condemned repeated Israeli air strikes and
incursions into Syria, calling them a “flagrant violation of international law”
that threatened regional stability. They discussed efforts to cement the Sweida
truce, agreed last month after violence between armed groups in the mainly Druze
province killed hundreds. On X, Shaibani said Syria
was committed to protecting Sweida’s Druze, Bedouin and Christian residents and
to countering any sectarian or inciting rhetoric. “Our Druze people are an
integral part of Syria... we reject any attempt to marginalize them under any
pretext,” he said. He pledged accountability for all violations in Sweida
“regardless of the party involved,” saying justice was essential to building a
state governed by law.
Syrian Red Crescent delivers humanitarian relief to Sweida
Arab News/August 13, 2025
LONDON: The Syrian Arab Red Crescent delivered humanitarian relief to the
southern governorate of Sweida via the Bosra Al-Sham crossing, as part of
efforts to assist vulnerable families in addressing humanitarian and livelihood
challenges. Twenty-one trucks delivered medical supplies, assistance and fuel to
Sweida, including food baskets, bottled water, flour, petroleum derivatives and
seven kidney dialysis machines to support the health sector.
SARC received contributions from its Lebanese counterpart, the UN
Children’s Fund, the World Food Programme and the UN High Commissioner for
Refugees, the SANA news agency reported. Separately, SARC provided humanitarian
assistance to vulnerable families in several villages throughout the Sweida
countryside, with support from UNHCR, the Qatari Red Crescent and the Danish Red
Cross.
Türkiye, Syria Sign Defense Cooperation MoU after Ankara Talks
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
The defense ministers of Türkiye and Syria signed a memorandum of understanding
on military training and consultancy after talks in Ankara on Wednesday,
Türkiye's defense ministry said. The neighbors had been negotiating a
comprehensive military cooperation agreement for months, after the ousting of
Bashar al-Assad in December. Also, speaking at a news
conference in Ankara with Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani, Turkish
Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan accused Israel and the Kurdish Syrian Democratic
Forces, or SDF, of undermining the country’s efforts to reestablish itself after
more than a decade of civil war. He said Israel had “fueled certain
difficulties” in Syria and warned that Israeli security "cannot be achieved
through undermining the security of your neighbors."“To the contrary, you should
make sure your neighboring countries are prosperous and secure. If you try to
destabilize these countries, if you take steps to that end, this could trigger
other crises in the region.” Most recently, hundreds were killed in clashes in
the southern province of Sweida between government forces and local Bedouin
tribesmen on one side and fighters from the Druze minority on the other.
German Chancellor Says European Leaders and Zelenskyy Had
‘Constructive’ Meeting with Trump
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had a
“constructive” discussion with US President Donald Trump on Wednesday, two days
ahead of Trump’s planned meeting in Alaska with Russian President Vladimir
Putin, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said. Speaking alongside Zelenskyy, Merz
said after the videoconference that “important decisions” could be made in
Anchorage, but stressed that “fundamental European and Ukrainian security
interests must be protected” at the meeting. Merz
convened the virtual meetings in an attempt to make sure European and Ukraine’s
leaders are heard ahead of the summit, where Trump and Putin are expected to
discuss a path toward ending Moscow's war in Ukraine. Zelenskyy and the
Europeans have been sidelined from that summit. German government spokesperson
Steffen Meyer said the intention of Wednesday's meetings was to “make clear the
position of the Europeans.” Zelenskyy is due to meet with European leaders
first, in preparation for a virtual call with Trump and Vice President JD Vance
about an hour later. A call among leaders of countries involved in the
“coalition of the willing” — those who are prepared to help police any future
peace agreement between Moscow and Kyiv — will take place last. The Ukrainian
leader on Wednesday said his government has had over 30 conversations with
partners ahead of the summit in Alaska, but reiterated his doubt that Putin
would negotiate in good faith. Writing on his official Telegram channel,
Zelenskyy said there was “currently no sign that the Russians are preparing to
end the war,” and urged Ukraine's partners in the United States and Europe to
coordinate efforts and "force Russia to peace.” "Pressure must be applied on
Russia for an honest peace. We must take the experience of Ukraine and our
partners to prevent deception by Russia,” Zelenskyy said.
The stakes for Europe
Trump has said he wants to see whether Putin is serious about ending the war,
now in its fourth year, describing Friday's summit as "a feel-out meeting” where
he can assess the Russian leader's intentions. Yet Trump has disappointed allies
in Europe by saying Ukraine will have to give up some Russian-held territory. He
has also said Russia must accept land swaps, although it was unclear what Putin
might be expected to surrender. European allies have pushed for Ukraine’s
involvement in any peace talks, fearful that discussions that exclude Kyiv could
otherwise favor Moscow. Trump on Monday ducked repeated chances to say that he
would push for Zelenskyy to take part in his discussions with Putin, and was
dismissive of Zelenskyy and his need to be part of an effort to seek peace.
Trump said that following Friday's summit, a meeting between the Russian and
Ukrainian leaders could be arranged, or that it could also be a meeting with
“Putin and Zelenskyy and me.” The Europeans and Ukraine are wary that Putin, who
has waged the biggest land war in Europe since 1945 and used Russia’s energy
might to try to intimidate the European Union, might secure favorable
concessions and set the outlines of a peace deal without them.
The overarching fear of many European countries is that Putin will set his
sights on one of them next if he wins in Ukraine. Land concessions a non-starter
for Kyiv Zelenskyy said Tuesday that Putin wants Ukraine to withdraw from the
remaining 30% of the Donetsk region that it still controls as part of a
ceasefire deal, a proposal the leader categorically rejected. Zelenskyy
reiterated that Ukraine would not give up any territory it controls, saying that
would be unconstitutional and would serve only as a springboard for a future
Russian invasion.
He said diplomatic discussions led by the US focusing on ending the war have not
addressed key Ukrainian demands, including security guarantees to prevent future
Russian aggression and including Europe in negotiations. Three weeks after Trump
returned to office, his administration took the leverage of Ukraine’s NATO
membership off the table — something that Putin has demanded — and signaled that
the EU and Ukraine must handle security in Europe now while America focuses its
attention elsewhere. Senior EU officials believe that Trump may be satisfied
with simply securing a ceasefire in Ukraine, and is probably more interested in
broader US geostrategic interests and great power politics, aiming to ramp up
business with Russia and rehabilitate Putin. Russian advances in Donbas Russian
forces on the ground in Ukraine have been closing in on a key territorial grab
around the city of Pokrovsk, in the eastern Donbas region comprises Ukraine’s
eastern industrial heartland that Putin has long coveted. Military analysts
using open-source information to monitor the battles have said Ukraine's ability
to fend off those advances could be critical: Losing Pokrovsk would hand Russia
an important victory ahead of the summit and could complicate Ukrainian supply
lines to the Donetsk region, where the Kremlin has focused the bulk of military
efforts. Meanwhile, Ukrainian forces struck an oil pumping station in Russia’s
Bryansk region overnight on Wednesday, according to a statement from Ukraine’s
General Staff. Ukrainian drones struck the Unecha station which supplies the
Russian army, the statement said, adding that damage and a large fire was
reported in the area around the pumping station. Unecha transports oil to two
pipelines with an annual capacity to pump 60 million tons. The operation was
carried out by units of the Unmanned Systems Forces of Ukraine’s army and the
Main Intelligence Directorate of the Defense Ministry, the statement said.
What to Know About the Putin-Trump Summit in Alaska
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
The US-Russia summit in Alaska is happening where East meets West — quite
literally — in a place familiar to both countries as a Cold War front line of
missile defense, radar outposts and intelligence gathering. Whether it can lead
to a deal to produce peace in Ukraine more than 3 1/2 years after Moscow's
invasion remains to be seen. Here’s what to know about the meeting between
Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, the first summit
in four years: When and where is it taking place? The summit will take place
Friday at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson outside Anchorage, according to a
White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal
planning. It played a key role in the Cold War in monitoring and deterring the
Soviet Union. It's Putin’s first trip to the US since 2015 for the UN General
Assembly in New York. Because the US isn't a member of the International
Criminal Court, which in 2023 issued a warrant for Putin on war crimes
accusations, it's under no obligation to arrest him. Is Zelenskyy going? Both
countries confirmed a meeting between only Putin and Trump, despite initial
suggestions that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy might take part. The
Kremlin has long pushed back against Putin meeting Zelenskyy -– at least until a
peace deal is reached by both sides and is ready to be signed. Putin said last
week he wasn't against meeting Zelenskyy "but certain conditions need to be
created" and were "still a long way off." That raised fears about excluding
Ukraine from negotiations. Kyiv and its European allies stressed that peace
cannot be achieved without Kyiv’s involvement. Zelenskyy was in Berlin for
virtual meetings Wednesday with Trump and European leaders to try to ensure
Ukraine and its allies are heard before the summit. The Ukrainian president told
the group Putin "is bluffing" about his military might and the effectiveness of
sanctions, and "is trying to apply pressure ... on all sectors of the Ukrainian
front" to try to show that Russia is "capable of occupying all of Ukraine." In
reality, sanctions are "hitting Russia’s war economy hard," Zelenskyy said.
What's Alaska's role in Russian history? It will be the first visit by a
Russian leader to Alaska, even though it was part of the czarist empire until
1867, the state news agency Tass said. Alaska was
colonized by Russia starting from the 18th century until Czar Alexander II sold
it to the United States in 1867 for $7.2 million. When it was found to contain
vast resources, it was seen by Russians as a naïve deal that generated remorse.
After the USSR's collapse, Alaska was a subject of nostalgia and jokes for
Russians. One popular song in the 1990s went: "Don’t play the fool, America ...
give back our dear Alaska land." Sam Greene of King’s College London said on X
the symbolism of Alaska as the site of a summit about Ukraine was "horrendous —
as though designed to demonstrate that borders can change, land can be bought
and sold." What's the agenda? Trump has appeared increasingly exasperated with
Putin over Russia's refusal to halt the bombardment of Ukraine. Kyiv has agreed
to a ceasefire, insisting on a truce as a first step toward peace.
Moscow presented ceasefire conditions that are nonstarters for Zelenskyy, such
as withdrawing troops from the four regions Russia illegally annexed in 2022,
halting mobilization efforts, or freezing Western arms deliveries. For a broader
peace, Putin demands Kyiv cede the annexed regions, even though Russia doesn’t
fully control them, and Crimea, renounce a bid to join NATO, limit the size of
its armed forces and recognize Russian as an official language along with
Ukrainian. Zelenskyy insists any peace deals include robust security guarantees
to protect Ukraine from future Russian aggression. Putin has warned Ukraine it
will face tougher conditions for peace as Russian troops forge into other
regions to build what he described as a "buffer zone." Some observers suggested
Russia could trade those recent gains for territory under Ukrainian control in
the four annexed regions annexed by Moscow.
Zelenskyy said Saturday that "Ukrainians will not give their land to the
occupier."
But Trump said Monday: "There’ll be some land swapping going on. I know that
through Russia and through conversations with everybody. To the good, for the
good of Ukraine. Good stuff, not bad stuff. Also, some bad stuff for
both."Zelenskyy said Tuesday that Putin wants Ukraine to withdraw from the
remaining 30% of the Donetsk region it still controls as part of a ceasefire
deal, a proposal the Ukrainian categorically rejected. Kyiv won't give up
territory it controls, he added, saying that would be unconstitutional and would
serve only as a springboard for a future Russian invasion.
He said discussions led by the US on ending the war have not addressed
key Ukrainian demands, including security guarantees to prevent future Russian
aggression and including Europe in negotiations. French President Emmanuel
Macron said Wednesday that Trump was "very clear" in a virtual meeting with
European leaders and Zelenskyy that the US wants to achieve a ceasefire. Macron
added that Trump had been clear that "territorial issues relating to Ukraine ...
will only be negotiated by the Ukrainian president."What are expectations? Trump
said Wednesday there will be unspecified "very severe consequences" if Putin
does not agree to stop the war after the summit. Putin sees a meeting with Trump
as a chance to cement Russia’s territorial gains, keep Ukraine out of NATO and
prevent it from hosting any Western troops so Moscow can gradually pull the
country back into its orbit.
He believes time is on his side as Ukrainian forces are struggling to stem
Russian advances along the front amid swarms of Moscow's missiles and drones.
The meeting is a diplomatic coup for Putin, isolated since the invasion. The
Kremlin sought to portray renewed US contacts as two superpowers looking to
resolve various global problems, with Ukraine being just one. Ukraine and its
European allies are concerned a summit without Kyiv could allow Putin to get
Trump on his side and force Ukraine into concessions. "Any decisions that are
without Ukraine are at the same time decisions against peace," Zelenskyy said.
"They will not bring anything. These are dead decisions. They will never work."
European officials echoed that. "As we work towards a
sustainable and just peace, international law is clear: All temporarily occupied
territories belong to Ukraine," European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas
said. "A sustainable peace also means that aggression cannot be rewarded."
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said Sunday he believed Trump was "making sure
that Putin is serious, and if he is not, then it will stop there.""If he is
serious, then from Friday onwards, the process will continue. Ukraine getting
involved, the Europeans being involved," Rutte added. Since last week, Putin
spoke to Chinese leader Xi Jinping, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi,
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and North Korean leader Kim Jong
Un, as well as the leaders of South Africa, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Belarus and
Kyrgyzstan, the Kremlin said. That suggested Putin perhaps wanted to brief
Russia’s most important allies about a potential settlement, said pro-Kremlin
analyst Sergei Markov.
German Chancellor Says
European Leaders and Zelenskyy Had ‘Constructive’ Meeting with Trump
Asharq Al Awsat/August 13/2025
European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had a
“constructive” discussion with US President Donald Trump on Wednesday, two days
ahead of Trump’s planned meeting in Alaska with Russian President Vladimir
Putin, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said. Speaking alongside Zelenskyy, Merz
said after the videoconference that “important decisions” could be made in
Anchorage, but stressed that “fundamental European and Ukrainian security
interests must be protected” at the meeting. Merz convened the virtual meetings
in an attempt to make sure European and Ukraine’s leaders are heard ahead of the
summit, where Trump and Putin are expected to discuss a path toward ending
Moscow's war in Ukraine. Zelenskyy and the Europeans have been sidelined from
that summit. German government spokesperson Steffen Meyer said the intention of
Wednesday's meetings was to “make clear the position of the Europeans.”
Zelenskyy is due to meet with European leaders first, in preparation for a
virtual call with Trump and Vice President JD Vance about an hour later. A call
among leaders of countries involved in the “coalition of the willing” — those
who are prepared to help police any future peace agreement between Moscow and
Kyiv — will take place last. The Ukrainian leader on Wednesday said his
government has had over 30 conversations with partners ahead of the summit in
Alaska, but reiterated his doubt that Putin would negotiate in good faith.
Writing on his official Telegram channel, Zelenskyy said there was “currently no
sign that the Russians are preparing to end the war,” and urged Ukraine's
partners in the United States and Europe to coordinate efforts and "force Russia
to peace.” "Pressure must be applied on Russia for an honest peace. We must take
the experience of Ukraine and our partners to prevent deception by Russia,”
Zelenskyy said.
The stakes for Europe
Trump has said he wants to see whether Putin is serious about ending the war,
now in its fourth year, describing Friday's summit as "a feel-out meeting” where
he can assess the Russian leader's intentions. Yet Trump has disappointed allies
in Europe by saying Ukraine will have to give up some Russian-held territory. He
has also said Russia must accept land swaps, although it was unclear what Putin
might be expected to surrender. European allies have pushed for Ukraine’s
involvement in any peace talks, fearful that discussions that exclude Kyiv could
otherwise favor Moscow. Trump on Monday ducked repeated chances to say that he
would push for Zelenskyy to take part in his discussions with Putin, and was
dismissive of Zelenskyy and his need to be part of an effort to seek peace.
Trump said that following Friday's summit, a meeting between the Russian and
Ukrainian leaders could be arranged, or that it could also be a meeting with
“Putin and Zelenskyy and me.” The Europeans and Ukraine are wary that Putin, who
has waged the biggest land war in Europe since 1945 and used Russia’s energy
might to try to intimidate the European Union, might secure favorable
concessions and set the outlines of a peace deal without them.
The overarching fear of many European countries
is that Putin will set his sights on one of them next if he wins in Ukraine.
Land concessions a non-starter for Kyiv
Zelenskyy said Tuesday that Putin wants Ukraine to withdraw from the remaining
30% of the Donetsk region that it still controls as part of a ceasefire deal, a
proposal the leader categorically rejected. Zelenskyy reiterated that Ukraine
would not give up any territory it controls, saying that would be
unconstitutional and would serve only as a springboard for a future Russian
invasion. He said diplomatic discussions led by the US focusing on ending the
war have not addressed key Ukrainian demands, including security guarantees to
prevent future Russian aggression and including Europe in negotiations. Three
weeks after Trump returned to office, his administration took the leverage of
Ukraine’s NATO membership off the table — something that Putin has demanded —
and signaled that the EU and Ukraine must handle security in Europe now while
America focuses its attention elsewhere. Senior EU officials believe that Trump
may be satisfied with simply securing a ceasefire in Ukraine, and is probably
more interested in broader US geostrategic interests and great power politics,
aiming to ramp up business with Russia and rehabilitate Putin.
Russian advances in Donbas
Russian forces on the ground in Ukraine have been closing in on a key
territorial grab around the city of Pokrovsk, in the eastern Donbas region
comprises Ukraine’s eastern industrial heartland that Putin has long coveted.
Military analysts using open-source information to monitor the battles have said
Ukraine's ability to fend off those advances could be critical: Losing Pokrovsk
would hand Russia an important victory ahead of the summit and could complicate
Ukrainian supply lines to the Donetsk region, where the Kremlin has focused the
bulk of military efforts.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian forces struck an oil pumping station in Russia’s Bryansk
region overnight on Wednesday, according to a statement from Ukraine’s General
Staff. Ukrainian drones struck the Unecha station which supplies the Russian
army, the statement said, adding that damage and a large fire was reported in
the area around the pumping station. Unecha transports oil to two pipelines with
an annual capacity to pump 60 million tons. The operation was carried out by
units of the Unmanned Systems Forces of Ukraine’s army and the Main Intelligence
Directorate of the Defense Ministry, the statement said.
The Latest English LCCC analysis &
editorials from miscellaneous sources
on August 13-14/2025
Congressional Funding Increase Not Enough to Strengthen State Department
Ben Fishman/The Washington
Institute/August 13/2025
American assistance to the Middle East apparently won’t be cut back as
drastically as the Trump administration hoped, but questions abound regarding
the diluted department’s capacity to actually use the restored funds
effectively.
Before leaving for the summer recess on July 23, the U.S. House Appropriations
Committee passed a $44.7 billion budget bill for the State Department—$13
billion less than the previous year’s budget, but much higher than the Trump
administration’s $27.5 billion request. Assuming the full House and Senate vote
in a similar direction, it would mark a significant break from the White
House—particularly given that the operations, management, and security portions
of the bill are similar to the administration’s request, meaning that most of
the restored billions are on the programs and policy side. Regardless of the raw
budget numbers, however, extensive personnel cuts and the dissolution of the
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) will make implementing the
bill extremely challenging even if it passes.
Country-Specific Impact in the Middle East
Under the proposed State Department budget, U.S. assistance related to various
countries in the region would remain mostly consistent with previous years,
though several differences and nuances stand out:
Jordan. The administration requested just $200 million in State-administered
Foreign Military Financing for Jordan (down from $425 million last year) and did
not specify any economic assistance. Yet the new bill states that Amman will
receive no less than $475 million in FMF and “$845.1 million in direct budget
support”—an eye-opening statement given that no other country except Ukraine has
received the latter type of transfer. The direct budget support would constitute
6 percent of Jordan’s total revenues if passed, reflecting consistent bipartisan
congressional support for the kingdom whenever cuts are proposed.
The bill also mandates increased funding for private sector development and job
creation in Jordan, as well as $5 million toward “evidence-based programs that
assess the implementation of peace agreements and peace accords.” The U.S.
International Development Finance Corporation has worked in Jordan since 2017
and could assume a greater role in expanding the private sector now that USAID
is defunct. Egypt. The bill calls for no less than $1.45 billion in FMF,
including the $75 million withheld by the Biden administration for human rights
violations. This assistance does not include any preconditions related to
Cairo’s policies toward Gaza. Another $40 million is allocated toward
scholarships for Egyptians. Yet implementing such programs will be challenging
now that the State Department’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and
grantmaking experience have been gutted, while embassies lack the capacity to
handle such initiatives without USAID. Israel. No significant changes have been
made to Israel’s $3.3 billion in FMF; rather, committee members expressed strong
support for the country’s military accomplishments and cited anti-Israel bias to
justify cuts to UN organizations. Once the proposal advances to the full House
and Senate, however, opponents of the Gaza war will no doubt aim to cut funding
for Israel’s weapons systems. Palestinians. Both the House committee and the
administration have proposed restrictions that indicate they are not ready to
support Palestinian reform efforts or Gaza reconstruction. If the U.S.-funded
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation gains traction, it may receive funding at a later
stage of the appropriations process through other funding mechanisms.
Iran. The committee made an extensive policy statement about the continued
availability of funds to counter Tehran’s proliferation and terrorist
activities. Yet it also emphasized the need to restore $55 million to the Near
East Regional Democracy fund, which supports internet freedom in Iran and
similar activities.
Bahrain. The bill provides $4 million to Bahrain to increase membership in the
Comprehensive Security Integration and Prosperity Agreement, following the
United Kingdom’s decision to formally join the framework. Although the new
funding is minimal compared to the billions in private sector money envisioned
under C-SIPA, it signals congressional support for expanding the agreement.
Lebanon. The committee’s approach to the Lebanese Armed Forces remains
ambiguous. Despite a longstanding record of skepticism toward and restrictions
on the LAF, Congress has consistently granted the force $100-150 million
annually. Yet neither the administration’s request nor the House bill mentions
funding the LAF in the next fiscal year, even though the force is now playing a
more active role in maintaining the Hezbollah ceasefire with Israel. Syria. The
future of U.S. funding for post-Assad Syria was not addressed in the new bill,
apart from a statement endorsing the administration’s removal of sanctions.
Iraq. No funds were appropriated to Iraq aside from those supporting military
operations against the Islamic State, despite Washington’s expectation that
Baghdad do more to curtail the various pro-Iranian, U.S.-designated terrorist
militias in the Popular Mobilization Forces (as Secretary of State Marco Rubio
emphasized in a July 22 call with Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani).
General Provisions
The bill restores billions of dollars to international organizations,
peacekeeping operations, and the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law
Enforcement Affairs (INL), which the administration nearly zeroed out. But
there’s a catch—it still permits the administration to reassign as much as $1.7
billion to the discretionary “America First Opportunity Fund,” thereby
inhibiting any State Department planning for the originally intended use of the
funds. Most surprisingly, the committee restored $315 million to the National
Endowment for Democracy and $345 million to the Democracy Fund, both of which
conduct substantial work in the Middle East. Although the Trump administration’s
“America First” agenda directly opposes democracy advocacy, the committee noted
its strong belief “that defending democracy and human rights is fundamental to
United States national security.”
Funding Increases Can’t Replace Capacity or Know-How
The fundamental problem with the bill is that some of the employees, posts, and
bureaus needed to effectively use the restored funds are no longer around. While
one could certainly argue that the State Department’s overall size has ballooned
unnecessarily over the years, more than 3,000 employees were either suddenly
laid off or took early retirement in recent months, and additional reductions
are likely as administration officials begin their review of embassies and
consulates. Inevitably, many of these cuts have resulted in the loss of crucial
know-how and administrative capacity.
For example, the department’s democracy and education bureaus were virtually
eliminated during President Trump’s first few months in office, including the
grant specialists needed to sustain the programs that the House committee is
attempting to restore. Hence, if the administration decides it wants to
participate in a major regional initiative like rebuilding Gaza, it no longer
has the expertise to design and execute such a process, since the State
Department stabilization office and USAID have both been axed.
Appropriating funds to restore programs is one way to influence the State
Department. But if officials have already eliminated the requisite program
staff, then the extra money may wind up serving little purpose. Accordingly,
Congress should hold consultations or hearings about whether the department has
the number and quality of personnel needed to execute the proposed budget.
**Ben Fishman is the Steven D. Levy Senior Fellow in The Washington Institute’s
Rubin Program on Arab Politics.
How “Day After” Governance of Gaza Can Draw from Existing
Plans
James Jeffrey/The Washington Institute/August 13/2025
NGOs and foreign officials have already outlined many of the most crucial
transitional governance and security issues that will arise during and after
Israel’s eventual withdrawal—and all of them will require some degree of
oversight and leadership from the Trump administration. In announcing their
August 8 decision to temporarily “take over” all of Gaza, Israeli officials
issued a set of principles for how Arab states could oversee governance of the
Strip after Israel’s presence ends. Although these principles provided few
details and no timeline, they clarified several important points, such as
Israel’s desire to exercise some sort of security oversight, bar Hamas or the
Palestinian Authority from governing Gaza, and demilitarize the territory. These
conditions are not new, of course—Israelis have worked with Arab and American
interlocutors on various “day after” models for over eighteen months, and some
of these models have been discussed with Palestinian officials. Yet this is the
first time that the Israeli government has taken a formal position on governance
and linked it to a commitment to withdraw all of its forces. The most crucial
issues that any Gaza governance plan would need to address have already been
discussed to varying degrees by three of the previous “day after” models:
A proposed plan worked out by American and Israeli experts, published by the
Wilson Center in early 2024, and shared with Israeli officials. (Disclosure: The
author was involved in formulating the Wilson plan during his tenure as chair of
the center’s Middle East Program.)
A RAND Corporation plan released this year and widely briefed within the U.S.
government.
A set of principles issued by the United Arab Emirates and deemed a likelier
candidate than other Arab plans given Abu Dhabi’s more realistic proposals and
its closer relations with Israel. Above all, experts involved in past
discussions have generally agreed that a leading U.S. diplomatic and oversight
role will be absolutely essential to any transitional governance plan,
particularly if the Trump administration intends to avoid committing substantial
American military and financial resources to Gaza.
Composition, Authorization, and Missions
The Wilson plan—the most comprehensive of the three regarding composition
issues—proposes an Arab-led “Multi-National Authority” (MNA) that would include
European elements and possibly UN entities. This authority would be overseen by
an international contact group with many of the same members, though with the
addition of the G7 members and a leading role for the United States (informal if
necessary). In addition, the plan calls for the MNA to oversee an international
“policing force.” The MNA’s main missions would be to temporarily administer
Gaza, establish security, remove Hamas control of civil governance, initiate
physical and social reconstruction, and provide better conditions for the people
of Gaza. The plan would culminate in a transition to local Palestinian
governance and security along lines established by a “charter” of some type (see
below). Yet drafting and agreeing on this charter must not hold up the urgent
process of standing up the MNA.
The RAND study takes a similar approach, proposing an “interim multinational
security force” drawn from Western and Arab militaries, with support from a
vetted and trained Palestinian security force. The UAE proposal calls for a
“temporary international mission,” offering few details on its composition but
clearly outlining a transition to Gazan self-governance at minimum—the end state
envisioned by all three plans. Responsibility. Each plan notes that the
governing entity must be in charge of every aspect of Gaza’s transition and
reconstruction, and that it must remain open to U.S. guidance. This is a tall
order given the role to be played by the UN and various aid NGOs. Yet there are
successful precedents, including the Bosnian arrangements outlined in the Dayton
Accords and formalized in Security Council Resolution 1031.
Carrots-sticks linkage. Senior Israeli and U.S. officials expressed appreciation
when previous plans firmly and formally conditioned the provision of Gaza
assistance on Palestinian adherence to the security provisions of the “charter”
establishing the governance structure. This is critical to avoid the problems
seen with Lebanon’s postwar settlement after 2006, when major UN, European, and
U.S. reconstruction efforts were not conditioned on disarming Hezbollah or
meeting other key provisions of Security Council Resolution 1701. In contrast,
the Dayton Accords and paragraph 10 of Resolution 1031 established strict
linkage. Legal authority. The temporary international takeover of governance in
Gaza could be based on any of several legal alternatives, though the first two
would likely be diplomatically problematic: (1) the PA ceding temporary
responsibility; (2) the UN Security Council drafting a sturdy resolution under
Chapter VII that gives the governing authority a one-time, non-renewable mandate
with no direct UN management role (analogous to Resolution 1546, which
authorized the U.S.-led multinational force to govern Iraq in 2004); (3) Israel
taking responsibility for Gaza as an occupying power under international law and
then transferring its authority to the MNA pursuant to a memorandum of
understanding; or (4) the international authority establishing its own charter
as a coalition of the willing.
American roles. The Wilson and RAND plans call for a major U.S. role in
choreographing the establishment of both the MNA and the contact group. One
option is to fold the U.S. government-supported Gaza Humanitarian Foundation
into the MNA (see the next section for more on the security aspects of the U.S.
role). Washington would also have to facilitate efforts to meet civilian needs
beyond direct aid provision, such as helping to reestablish the local
Palestinian institutions now in disarray. (The RAND plan outlines these steps.)
Specific Issues
Hamas and the transition. All plans assume some prior resolution of the
Hamas-Israel conflict based on a ceasefire. As noted above, this ceasefire deal
would include a “charter” covering the deployment and operational ground rules
of an international presence, agreed to by whatever is left of Hamas. None of
the plans detail the contents or modalities of such a deal, but all assume that
foreign forces would not seek to combat Hamas, but rather to conduct normal
policing activities and defend themselves if necessary.
Relatedly, while the prospect of Israel fully eliminating Hamas’s insurgent
military capabilities seems impossible, certain Israeli actions could have
positive effects. For instance, continuing some degree of military pressure,
separating insurgents from the bulk of the population, and blocking weapons
flows could all push Hamas into a weaker position, perhaps making the group more
amenable to a deal in which it agrees to tolerate transitional international
governance in return for Israel withdrawing.
As for the terms of a Hamas deal—whether with Israel or the international
authority—a ceasefire along the lines of the recent negotiations led by Egypt
and Qatar is the most likely scenario. During the transition, the group’s status
in Gaza could resemble the posture of the Republika Srpska (Bosnian Serb) forces
after the Dayton Accords, the type of leadership departure seen when Yasser
Arafat left Lebanon in 1982, or the current Hamas situation in the West Bank.
What it must not resemble is the 2006 Lebanon ceasefire, after which Hezbollah
ignored international provisions and threatened peacekeepers. Whatever the
arrangement, all parties should be clear on one principle—that eliminating
Hamas’s ability to militarily threaten Israel or contest governance in Gaza is a
prerequisite for Israel to withdraw and for an international presence to go in.
Palestinian Authority role. Although Israeli interlocutors advised the drafters
of the Wilson plan to avoid specific references to a PA governance role, some of
these interlocutors acknowledged that the PA would probably have to play some
administrative role given its legal status and its many remaining employees in
Gaza. The PA would also have to green-light—and probably participate in—any
formal Arab role in Gaza. The UAE plan emphasizes a leading role for the PA,
though unlike other Arab plans, it also notes that PA reform is a prerequisite
for this role. The Wilson and RAND plans both envision an eventual transition to
Gazan governance and primary security, without spelling out relationships to the
PA. Relationship to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Wilson plan does not
link Gaza stabilization with progress toward wider Israeli-Palestinian
peacemaking, and the Israeli government has made clear that these two issues are
separate. Yet the RAND and UAE approaches directly link them. Presumably, these
incompatible positions can be negotiated to a compromise, but that would almost
certainly require a U.S. role.
Israeli security. Israel correctly insists that it will need to play a security
oversight role in Gaza post-withdrawal, presumably including the right to take
military action against immediate threats. Given the territory’s small size,
coordinating such action with the international force would be essential.
UN role. Whether UN bodies formally authorize the international presence or not,
the Security Council and General Assembly will no doubt insist on various
oversight roles, which the United States will need to manage carefully given
Israel’s legitimate sensitivity about UN politicization. On the technical level,
UN agencies can provide unparalleled expertise, and Arab participants will
likely demand their involvement. Israel has ample cause to demand that one of
these organizations—the UN Relief and Works Agency—leave Gaza. If so, the UN
High Commissioner for Refugees will need to work with various NGOs and foreign
government agencies to backfill UNRWA’s missions, as seen already with the World
Food Programme, Anera, and other organizations.
Depoliticization. Israeli interlocutors have emphasized the need for any
transitional authority to keep anti-Israel hate messaging out of Gaza schools,
cultural organizations, and official media. This is obviously a delicate
undertaking, but nevertheless obligatory if Gazans are to live side by side with
Israel in the long term. Of course, the first step in this process would be to
reestablish destroyed schools and other civil society institutions.
U.S. military role. None of the plans envisions a significant, direct role for
U.S. troops in Gaza security, but Washington does have some essential roles to
play in this regard and should begin preparing accordingly. First, it could
expand the private security forces it has already supported as part of the Gaza
Humanitarian Foundation, integrating them into the international security force.
Second, the Office of the U.S. Security Coordinator (USSC) is still working with
Palestinian security forces in the West Bank and could assist efforts to stand
up Gazan security elements. Third, the U.S. military could operate a liaison
headquarters in Egypt, Israel, or offshore to support international forces,
providing command-and-control capabilities, staff, logistics, intelligence, and,
in extremis, direct assistance (e.g., medevac; quick reaction forces;
counterterrorism operations).
Early recovery, reconstruction, and economic development. The Wilson and RAND
plans cover this crucial element in detail. The cost will be staggering
(estimated at more than $50 billion by the World Bank), but the international
community has the means, experience, and motivation to succeed if all of the
above organizational, security, and political arrangements are effectively
implemented. This element will also require careful negotiation and planning of
education and healthcare needs, as well as the complex considerations involved
in reconstruction (as laid out in the RAND plan).
**James Jeffrey recently rejoined The Washington Institute as the Philip Solondz
Distinguished Fellow. His distinguished government career has included service
as U.S. special envoy to Syria and ambassador to Turkey and Iraq.
Spain is an Example to the World
Omar G. Encarnación/The New York Times/Awsat/August 13/2025
Spain is having a moment bucking Western political trends. The country has
recently recognized Palestine as a state, resisted President Trump’s demand that
NATO members increase their defense spending to 5 percent of gross domestic
product and doubled down on D.E.I. programs. But there’s no better example of
Spain going its own way than immigration. At a time when many Western
democracies are trying to keep immigrants out, Spain is boldly welcoming them
in. The details are striking. In May, new regulations went into effect that
eased migrants’ ability to obtain residency and work permits, and the Spanish
Parliament began debating a bill to grant amnesty to undocumented immigrants.
These reforms could open a path to Spanish citizenship to more than one million
people. Most of them are part of a historic immigration surge that between 2021
and 2023 brought nearly three million people born outside the European Union to
Spain. Demand has something to do with it: Like many Western democracies, Spain
needs more people. Last year the national birthrate was 1.4, the second lowest
in the European Union and well below the 2.1 threshold needed to maintain the
country’s population level of around 48 million people. Spain also has a big
economy — the fourth largest in the EU — fueled by a travel and tourism industry
that is brimming with jobs that most Spaniards do not want.
But unlike in other countries, backlash has been strikingly muted. That’s partly
because some of these pro-migrant measures stem from society at large. The push
for the undocumented immigrants’ amnesty did not originate with the government,
tellingly, but with a popular petition that garnered 600,000 signatures and was
endorsed by 900 nongovernmental organizations, business groups and even the
Spanish Conference of Bishops. The government, in turn, has designed a humane
and pragmatic approach, offering an example for other countries to emulate.
There are, to be sure, some very Spanish reasons for the exception. Because of
its vast overseas empire, Spain was for centuries a mass exporter of people.
During the Spanish Civil War and the four-decades-long dictatorship of Gen.
Francisco Franco, some two million people were forced to leave the country,
fleeing famine, violence and political repression. Up until the 1970s, Spain
provided migrant laborers to farms and factories across Europe. After the 2008
financial crisis, which sent unemployment soaring to 25 percent, thousands of
professionals left Spain for jobs abroad.
This rich and complex history helps explain the relatively high level of
tolerance for immigration among Spaniards. In 2019, a Pew survey found that
Spain had by far the most positive attitude toward immigrants in Europe. This
was no outlier. A 2021 study of polls going back about 30 years showed that
“Spain has consistently maintained more open attitudes toward immigration than
the European average, with less rejection and a greater appreciation of its
contributions to society and the economy.”
Spain’s fragmented sense of national identity is another important factor. The
strength of regional nationalism in places like Catalonia, the Basque Country
and Galicia makes it harder for right-wing politicians to mobilize the public
against immigration through nationalist appeals and xenophobic arguments. A
Spanish version of “France for the French,” the doctrine of Marine Le Pen’s
National Rally, would be absurd in Spain. It took until 2019 for an explicitly
anti-migrant party, the far-right Vox, to even enter the Spanish
Parliament.Ultimately, however, Spain’s immigration politics owe most to the
administration of Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, one of the last exponents of
social democracy in Europe. Although decidedly liberal, Mr. Sánchez’s approach
is far from an experiment with open borders. Instead, it’s as pragmatic as it is
deliberate. It’s true he has built-in advantages not shared by other European
leaders. But by marrying practical solutions to an uplifting message, he has
provided a case study in how to build support for progressive immigration
policies.
For starters, the government smartly prioritized immigrants from Latin America,
allowing them to apply for citizenship after just two years. Fluent in Spanish
and overwhelmingly Catholic, Latin American immigrants blend with the local
culture even in the least cosmopolitan parts of Spain. A case in point are
Venezuelans, who are now barred from entering the United States, thanks to Mr.
Trump. To enter Spain, they need only a plane ticket and a valid passport. In
the first three months of the year, 25,000 took up the opportunity.
A lot of strategic thinking has gone into using immigration to alleviate some of
Spain’s biggest problems. Labor shortages in technology, hospitality,
agriculture and elderly care, for example, are being addressed by granting
international students work permits. Immigrants have also been incentivized to
settle in so-called Empty Spain, those parts of the country where the population
has dried up. Some of the 200,000 Ukrainian refugees who have settled in Spain
since 2022 have brought new life to villages and towns on the brink of
extinction. Most important, perhaps, Mr. Sánchez has excelled at framing the
case for immigration. He has emphasized its economic benefits, including
bringing younger workers into the social security system and filling jobs
unwanted by Spaniards. An expanding economy is adding authority to these
arguments. Since the pandemic, the Spanish economy has outperformed its European
counterparts. Last year, while Germany, France and Italy experienced modest
growth or even a contraction, Spain grew a healthy 3.2 percent.
Even so, Mr. Sánchez has not shied away from speaking in moral terms, drawing on
Spain’s history as a nation of migrants and refugees. “We have to remember the
odysseys of our mothers and fathers, our grandfathers and grandmothers in Latin
America, in the Caribbean and Europe,” he told Parliament last year. “And
understand that our duty now, especially now, is to be that welcoming, tolerant,
supportive society that they would have liked to find.” How long Spain will
continue to extend the welcome mat is an open question. Polls show that concerns
about immigration among Spaniards are rising, driven in part by the
sensationalist coverage of the arrival of African refugees. Thousands have
drowned in recent years attempting to reach Spain, and those who manage to enter
the country are generally deported. Right-wing parties, especially Vox, are
exploiting this humanitarian crisis. Should Vox manage to enter government after
the next election, which must be held before August 2027, a turn against
immigration will certainly follow.For now, though, Spain is proving an important
point: A generous immigration policy is not a threat to the nation or to a
thriving economy. More than that, it is a resource for growth and renewal that
Spain’s peers spurn at their cost.
The Alaska Summit: Signals and Subtexts
Emile Ameen/Asharq Al Awsat/August 14/2025
“We will meet in the great state of Alaska,” President Donald Trump announced,
choosing his words carefully. The connotation was hardly lost on Vladimir Putin,
who seems to have gotten into his head the idea of reclaiming a territory that
had belonged to Russia until it was sold to the United States in 1867. Alaska,
in this sense, is more than a geographic territory. To this day, it remains a
symbol of the countries’ shared history. Russia’s legacy has not disappeared,
not as a legend of the distant past, but as part of the fabric of Alaska’s local
identity. Why, then, did both Washington and Moscow so quickly agree to hold
this meeting? By all accounts, it seems that Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff has
played his hand effectively. Pragmatism, more than anything else, will shape the
encounter. The two sides are expected to discuss terms for ending a war that has
dragged on for over three years, squandering lives and resources without
achieving anything. Putin, for his part, is eager to ease tensions with
Washington. He wants the sanctions and economic strains fueling discontent at
home removed. Nonetheless, skeptics suspect he is simply running out the clock,
buying time to gain leverage in negotiations with Ukraine.
Witkoff has reminded the Kremlin of an old truth: great powers must define their
spheres of influence. Yalta underscored this axiom in 1945, when Roosevelt and
Churchill met Stalin to redraw the map of Europe after the war. But does that
mean Trump will simply accept the terms Putin has long set out for ending the
war? His demands are well known: recognition of Russian sovereignty in eastern
Ukraine, an explicit commitment to preventing Kyiv from ever joining NATO,
restriction on Ukraine's army, and assurances that Kyiv will remain friendly to
Russia. Witkoff, however, has suggested that a more limited bargain could be
within reach: Russia consolidates its control over Crimea and the Donbas, but
tacitly abandons claims to Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. For Moscow, such a step
would mark a retreat from the maximalist positions it had insisted on
previously.
Trump sees opportunity. A negotiated end to the Ukraine conflict, following his
success in brokering peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan, would strengthen his
case for a Nobel Peace Prize, securing a seat at the table of great American
presidents. Most importantly, perhaps, Trump wants to end the specter of a wider
nuclear clash. At home, a peace deal would allow his administration to focus on
economic priorities. It would also allow the United States to focus on its
longstanding military and economic rivalry with China. Not surprisingly, the
notion of a US-Russia bargain unsettles US allies. Vice President JD Vance has
already flown to London seeking to build common ground ahead of Friday’s
meeting. It is no secret that Europe agrees with US former National Security
Advisor John Bolton: the Alaska summit is, in itself, already a diplomatic win
for Putin.
History continues to unsettle humanity, and geography remains the arena in which
interests and ambitions are furthered. Europeans are particularly haunted by the
idea that concessions in Alaska could echo Neville Chamberlain’s missteps with
Nazi Germany in 1938, offering Moscow a chance to catch its breath before
pressing further into Ukraine or the Baltic states.
Success in Alaska, then, is far from guaranteed. If Putin insists on a skewed
deal and Trump balks, the summit could end as abruptly as Reagan’s meeting with
Gorbachev in Reykjavik, when he abruptly left as he had been seeking an end to
the cold war.
Even if terms are agreed, another question looms over the talks: would Volodymyr
Zelensky, his mandate having already ended, accept to cede territory? Such a
decision would require a referendum that puts the question to his people.
Hegel’s notion of the “cunning of history” is in the air in Alaska. The Russians
feel its presence particularly strongly. Putin still believes that the Soviet
Union’s collapse was the greatest geopolitical disaster of the 20th century, and
he seems convinced that the West intends to subject Russia to the same soon. For
now, speculation abounds. But Friday is not far off. Let us wait and see.
Israel, Protector of the West, Treacherously Undermined by France, UK, Canada
and Australia
Lawrence A. Franklin/Gatestone Institute./August 13, 2025
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21826/israel-protector
Macron's announcement to recognize a
fantasy "Palestinian state" not only demolished the negotiations that were
reportedly nearing completion for a ceasefire and the return of the 50 remaining
hostages; it also might cause the death by starvation, shooting or explosives
possibly strapped to them, of the 20 hostages believed to be alive.
The Druze -- a small ethnically Arab religious minority that originated as a
breakaway from the Ismaili sect of Shia Islam -- do not consider themselves
Muslim. Therefore, the other Arabs in Syria do not consider them Muslim either.
For months, regime "security forces" have been slaughtering them. Islamic
terrorists believe that they are obligated to slaughter anyone not Muslim, based
on passages in the Qur'an.
Something appears wrong with this picture. Al-Sharaa promised Trump that he
would protect Syria's minorities; so far, he seems to be doing everything but
that.
In the latest of these opposition demonstrations, on July 21, dozens of
protestors in Gaza shouted "Hamas Out." There is still strong reason to doubt,
however, however, if Gazans would be more favorably inclined toward Israel if
Hamas were gone.
Israel is already over-extended in defending virtually every minority in the
region – while receiving nothing but opprobrium from most of the insensate media
and many in Europe. They seem not to realize that they are the beneficiaries of
Israel's actions, even as they keep on giving away their continent to newcomers
who seem intent on replacing Europe's values with their own.
The question remains, however, if Syria's al-Sharaa in is not still just a
terrorist, but in a suit and tie.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's pledge to protect the Druze in Syria
represents the finest dimension of Jewish ethical principles. Israel is already
over-extended in defending virtually every minority in the region – while
receiving nothing but opprobrium from most of the insensate media and many in
Europe. Israel has not only been protecting virtually every persecuted minority
in the Middle East; it has, with the help of US President Donald J. Trump, also
been protecting the West itself. Has anyone heard a breath of gratitude? On the
contrary, many leaders in the West -- most prominently President Emmanuel Macron
of France, Prime Minister Keir Starmer of the United Kingdom and Prime Minister
Mark Carney of Canada, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of Australia, followed
closely by Prime Minister Micheal Martin of Ireland and Prime Minister Jonas
Gahr Støre of Norway -- have doubled down on the side of terrorists, this time
Hamas.
Macron's announcement to recognize a fantasy "Palestinian state" not only
demolished the negotiations that were reportedly nearing completion for a
ceasefire and the return of the 50 remaining hostages; it also might cause the
death by starvation, shooting or explosives possibly strapped to them, of the 20
hostages believed to be alive. In so doing, they are betraying not only the sole
tiny country that is sacrificing its own people to protect them, but their own
increasingly abused citizens as well.
Israel's suppression of terrorist entities that, directed by Iran to destroy the
Jewish State, has created an additional challenge for the already overburdened
Israelis. Not only is Israel now expected to feed the Gazans -- human-shield
victims of the Hamas terrorist group now trying to destroy Israel -- but the
Israelis have also undertaken to defend the Druze minority in Syria. The Druze
-- a small ethnically Arab religious minority that originated as a breakaway
from the Ismaili sect of Shia Islam -- do not consider themselves Muslim.
Therefore, the other Arabs in Syria do not consider them Muslim either. For
months, regime "security forces" have been slaughtering them. Islamic terrorists
believe that they are obligated to slaughter anyone not Muslim, based on
passages in the Qur'an:
"And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by
which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them
whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows."
— Qur'an 8:60-Sahih International.
"[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, 'I am with you, so strengthen
those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who
disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every
fingertip.'"
— Qur'an 8:12, Sahih International.
"Kill them wherever you come upon them and drive them out of the places from
which they have driven you out."
— Qur'an 2:191, Sahih International.
This directive also appears to include Muslims who are not Muslim enough, or not
Muslim in the "right way," such as the Ahmadiyya, the Alawites, and historically
how Sunnis and Shiites view each other.
The Druze in Syria have been under attack from the forces of Syria's new
strongman, Ahmed al-Sharaa, formerly an Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist with a $10
million bounty on his head. Now that he wears a suit and tie, Saudi Arabia's
Crown Prince Mohamad bin Salman apparently asked US President Donald J. Trump,
during his visit to the kingdom, to give al-Sharaa a chance to govern Syria – a
request to which Trump appeared uncomfortably to agree.
Something appears wrong with this picture. Al-Sharaa promised Trump that he
would protect Syria's minorities; so far, he seems to be doing everything but
that (here, here and here).
Israel, meanwhile, still the region's "strong horse," has been acting to protect
the Druze in neighboring Syria from relentless savage assaults.
Recent Israeli airstrikes on the terrorist regime in Syria persuaded Damascus,
at least temporarily, to end its support for the mid-July mass murder of Syrian
Druze in and around the city of Suweida at the hands of Bedouins and other local
tribes. So much ethnic violence -- also against Christians and Alawites in Syria
– reveals a genocidal intent of the new al Sharaa regime. It has apparently
sponsored ongoing attacks all along the roads from Damascus to Suweida. These
efforts at ethnic cleansing have inspired some Druze leaders to ask Israel for
protection, and even annexation.
Israel, under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has emerged as the historic
hero of the Druze people, of whom about 150,000 live in Israel. Israel is
already favorably disposed to the Druze: they are the only Arab community in the
country whose people are drafted into the IDF, willingly.
The IDF takedown of Hamas in Gaza has enabled those Gazan civilians who are
opposed to the terrorist group's repressive rule to publicly protest. Sporadic
attempts to reject Hamas have taken place in the past; the largest was staged in
March. Hundreds of Gazans demanded that Hamas step down from power. In the
latest of these opposition demonstrations, on July 21, dozens of protestors in
Gaza shouted "Hamas Out." There is still strong reason to doubt, however,
however, if Gazans would be more favorably inclined toward Israel if Hamas were
gone.
Last autumn's IDF's defeat of another once-vaunted Iranian proxy, Hezbollah, and
its military machine, helped to restore the sovereignty of Lebanon. IDF military
action was initially designed to permit tens of thousands of evacuated Israelis
the ability to return to their homes in northern Israel. Israel's victory over
Hezbollah also had unplanned helpful consequences. The many Catholic Christian
Maronite villages in southern Lebanon, which Hezbollah terrorists had
deliberately occupied and where they had dug a large network of tunnels, are no
longer occupied by Islamic terrorists. Now the government in Beirut finally,
after decades, may have a chance again to govern the entirety of the country,
long terrorized by Hezbollah. For many years, Hezbollah had a more powerful
military than the Lebanese Armed Forces.
Similarly, the Kurds of Syria, another embattled minority, are under the gun of
al-Sharaa's backer, Turkey. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has ruled Turkey since
2002, appears to have ambitions to restore the Ottoman Empire with himself as
sultan, has also repeatedly tested US patience by targeting the Syrian
Democratic Forces (SDF), composed mostly of Kurds who inhabit northeast Syria.
The Erdogan regime asserts that the SDF's Kurds are allied with the Kurdish
Workers Party (PKK), considered by Turkey a terrorist group. Presently, the
approximately 2,000 US military personnel deployed in Syria help protect the SDF,
which is guarding prison camps that hold tens of thousands of Islamic State
(ISIS) terrorists.
US President Donald Trump has intimated on occasion that he might withdraw US
forces from Syria – a really terrible idea. The vacuum will simply be filled by
groups that are no friends of the US or the West. If Trump follows through with
a withdrawal, this would provide a need for someone else to safeguard the
existence of the Kurds. Would Israel step up to defend Syria's Kurds as well?
There is still another tiny victimized Middle East minority, the much-abused
Yazidi people, also in northern Syria.
Israel is already over-extended in defending virtually every minority in the
region – while receiving nothing but opprobrium from most of the insensate media
and many in Europe. They seem not to realize that they are the beneficiaries of
Israel's actions, even as they keep on giving away their continent to newcomers
who seem intent on replacing Europe's values with their own.
Netanyahu's recent pledge, after the atrocities committed against the Druze by
Syria-supported terrorist thugs:
"We have set forth a clear policy: demilitarization of the region to south of
Damascus, from the Golan Heights and to the Druze Mountain area. That's rule
number one. Rule number two is protecting the brothers of our brothers, the
Druze at the Druze Mountain."
Netanyahu's pledge represents the finest dimension of Jewish ethical principles,
which should be saluted by those all those who value virtue, and which should
solidify Israel's occupation of the moral high ground.
The question remains, however, if Syria's al-Sharaa in is not still just a
terrorist, but in a suit and tie.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21826/israel-protector
*Dr. Lawrence A. Franklin was the Iran Desk Officer for Secretary of Defense
Rumsfeld. He also served on active duty with the U.S. Army and as a Colonel in
the Air Force Reserve.
© 2025 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No
part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied
or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
Selected tweets for 13
August/2025
Walid Abu Haya
The Palestinian Islamic terrorist organization Hamas is inciting its operatives
and supporters in Judea and Samaria and elsewhere to ignite fires across Israel,
exploiting the current extreme weather conditions. There is no end to the
"creativity" in employing various forms of terror, and yet the world is silent,
and some western countries moves on in promoting recognition of a Palestinian
state!
Elias Youssef Bejjani
Jobran Bassil is an opportunist and a mere enemy to all that is Lebanon and
Lebanese. No body should believe a word that he utters. One of the worst
politicians in Lebanon's recent history.