English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For  August 16/2025
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2025/english.August16.25.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
When they bring you before the synagogues, the rulers, and the authorities, do not worry about how you are to defend yourselves or what you are to say
Saint Luke 12/10-12/:"And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. When they bring you before the synagogues, the rulers, and the authorities, do not worry about how you are to defend yourselves or what you are to say; for the Holy Spirit will teach you at that very hour what you ought to say.’"

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on August 15-16/2025
Text and Video: Deconstructing the Deceptions, Foreign Agendas, and Terrorism in the Speech of Naim Qassem—Iran's Puppet and an Enemy of the Lebanese/Elias Bejjani/August 15/2025
Gebran Bassil’s New Stance Against Hezbollah’s Weapons: A Pinnacle of Hypocrisy, Opportunism, and Deadly Narcissism/Elias Bejjani/August 13/2025
Qassem says Hezbollah won't hand over arms 'while aggression continues'/Agence France Presse/August 15/2025
New ‘red line’ in Shebaa puts farmers, herders, and beekeepers at risk — the details
Lebanon and Syria launch push to revive trade and transport — can the lifeline be restored?
Five Arrested in Lebanon’s Vehicle Registration Scandal
Raï: Lebanon, a Lasting Project for a Civil and Just State
Larijani and the Original Sin/Johnny Kortbawi/©This is BeirutAugust 15/2025
Hezbollah: The Coup d’État/Marc Saikali/This is Beirut/August 15/2025
Hezbollah chief’s remarks stir backlash amid heightened tensions in Lebanon
Text Of Hezbollah’s Sheikh Qassem Speech: Resistance Will Never Relinquish Arms, Victory Assured
Ex-Presidents, Premiers, Back Government Position On Weapons Control
PSP Calls for International Probe into Sweida's Violence
From Kirkuk to Tripoli: Historic oil pipeline poised for comeback
MEA advises passengers of travel disruptions due to Air Canada strike on August 16

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on August 15-16/2025
Trump says no agreement on ending Russia’s war in Ukraine as Putin says there was an ‘understanding’
Trump, Putin shake hands ahead of Alaska summit
Turkiye detains Istanbul district mayor in corruption probe, state media says
Israeli far-right minister Ben Gvir threatens prominent Palestinian inmate Marwan Barghouti
20 years after its landmark withdrawal from Gaza, Israel is mired there
Thirst drives Gaza families to drink water that makes them sick
Israeli far-right minister backs contentious West Bank settlement plan
UN says at least 1,760 killed seeking aid in Gaza
With US backing, Israel moves to divide West Bank and expand settlements
UN rights office says Israeli settlement plan breaks international law
Libya to hold rare local vote in test for divided nation
Iran says 'working with China and Russia' to stop European sanctions

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources on August 15-16/2025
Hamas Has Left Netanyahu with No Option but to Occupy Gaza/Con Coughlin/Gatestone Institute/August 15/2025
A time to be bold and think big on urbanization/Richard Bush/Arab News/August 15, 2025
Rethinking development in an era of upheaval/Mohamed A. El-Erian/Arab News/August 15, 2025
How Azerbaijan-Armenia deal benefits Turkiye/Dr. Sinem Cengiz/Arab News/August 15, 2025
With an estimated 11.6 billion people expected to inhabit the planet by the end of the century, we have entered an era of unprecedented urbanization./Richard Bush/Arab News/August 15, 2025
Israel’s chokehold on US is beginning to loosen/Ray Hanania/Arab News/August 15, 2025
Selected tweets for 15 August/2025

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on August 15-16/2025
Text and Video: Deconstructing the Deceptions, Foreign Agendas, and Terrorism in the Speech of Naim Qassem—Iran's Puppet and an Enemy of the Lebanese.
Elias Bejjani/August 15/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/08/146313/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUdE7FE6pzc&t=150s
Today’s speech by Hezbollah’s Deputy Secretary-General, Naim Qassem, is a full-fledged declaration of war. It came just after the visit of the Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Larijani, to Beirut. Larijani met with President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and he heard clear, sovereign, and constitutional words from them: no weapons outside state control, decisions of war and peace are only in the hands of state institutions, No for foreign interference, and the Lebanese army is the sole guarantor of national security.
Qassem, hiding in an underground lair—perhaps in Iran or inside the Iranian embassy in Beirut—gave a recorded, rebellious speech. He confirmed he is nothing more than a trumpet and a tool for the mullahs of Iran, leaving no doubt that he was carrying out Larijani’s orders and instructions, both in letter and in spirit. In his address, Qassem issued a direct threat to the state and the army, saying: “If you decide to eliminate us, let it be clear that we will fight our battle to the end, and we will not allow a repeat of Karbala,” adding, “Either we live together on the terms of the resistance, or farewell to Lebanon.”
These statements are not just emotional rhetoric; they are a clear announcement that Hezbollah, under direct Iranian orders, will consider any attempt by the Lebanese state to impose its authority over its weapons a battle for survival, even if it’s against the Lebanese army itself. He did not stop at threats and disgusting shrieks. He also resorted to his pathological delusions of grandeur, claiming that Hezbollah “prevented Israel from achieving its goals” and that the South is “protected by the resistance’s weapons.”
The reality is quite different: in the last confrontation with Israel, Hezbollah suffered painful blows, losing most of its leaders commanders and weakening its military structure. Its weapons couldn’t even protect Hassan Nasrallah himself. This narrative of fake and false victories is meant to hide the failure and justify the continued existence of an illegitimate and non-Lebanese weapon that is an enemy of Lebanon and its people.
In an attempt to give Hezbollah’s weapons popular legitimacy, Qassem cited a “public opinion poll” that claims the majority of Lebanese support the “resistance strategy.” However, this poll was conducted by an institution affiliated with Hezbollah itself, which strips it of any scientific value or impartiality. The political, electoral, and popular facts confirm that the majority of Lebanese, including a large segment of the Shia community, reject the continued dominance, terrorism, Persian influence, and occupation by Hezbollah, as well as its control over the decision of war and peace and the dragging of the country into futile and destructive Iranian wars.
The most dangerous aspect of Qassem’s threatening speech today is that it falls directly under the articles of the Lebanese Penal Code:
Article 329: Armed threat to prevent authorities from performing their duties.
Article 314: Acts that cause public panic and threaten civil peace.
Article 315: Terrorist acts that lead to the disruption of state facilities.
By these standards, what Qassem said with brazenness, immorality, and depravity constitutes a full-fledged crime, requiring his immediate arrest and prosecution. He openly incited armed rebellion and announced the readiness of the terrorist Hezbollah to engage in a civil war if the constitution is applied.
In practice, Naim Qassem’s speech is a literal translation of Iranian orders carried by Larijani from Tehran to Hezbollah. These positions have nothing to do with Lebanese sovereignty or civil peace. Rather, it is a declaration of absolute loyalty to the authority of the mullahs, who see Lebanon merely as a battlefield for their wars and its people as sandbags, hostages, and their fuel.
The stark difference between the constitutional language of Presidents Aoun and Salam and Qassem’s response in the language of “Karbala” reveals the clear difference between those who want a state and those who want a terrorist, jihadist mini-state loyal to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.
In a reading of Naim Qassem’s words, the following eight points can be highlighted:
First: A Threatening Karbala-Style Speech Against the State and the Army
Naim Qassem’s speech, which came one day after the visit of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani to Lebanon and their meeting, clearly exposes Hezbollah’s complete subordination to Iran and its operation according to the agenda of the Revolutionary Guard. While Larijani listened to direct and explicit sovereign and independent stances from Presidents Joseph Aoun and Nawaf Salam, Qassem chose to respond with a direct threatening tone against the Lebanese government, describing its decision as the implementation of “an Israeli and American paper.” Even more dangerous is his implicit and explicit declaration that Hezbollah is ready to confront the Lebanese army with a “Karbala concept,” should the state try to implement the constitution and disarm it. Qassem’s words represent a clear declaration of rebellion against the state and a readiness to enter into a civil war if Hezbollah’s dominance is threatened.
Second: The Majority of Lebanese, Including many Shiites, Are Against Hezbollah’s Weapons
Contrary to the lies and fabricated illusions that Qassem repeats, the popular and political reality in Lebanon today is clear: the majority of Lebanese, including many from the Shia community, reject the continued existence of Hezbollah’s weapons. These weapons have caused Lebanon’s isolation, destroyed its economy, dragged it into losing wars with Israel, and held it hostage to an Iranian decision that has nothing to do with the country’s interest. The people of the South themselves have paid a heavy price with their lives and homes because of Hezbollah’s adventures, and they realize that Lebanon’s true protection lies in a strong state with its army and laws, not in a sectarian Iranian militia.
Third: The Hypocrisy of the Alleged Poll
In an attempt to polish his party’s image, Qassem cited what he called a “public opinion poll” claiming that the majority of Lebanese support Hezbollah’s weapons and the defensive strategy it proposes. These are false claims, as the poll was conducted by the “Consultative Center for Studies,” an institution directly affiliated with Hezbollah, which robs it of any credibility. The goal of these lies is to create the illusion of popular support, while the political, electoral, and street realities prove the opposite.
Fourth: The Lie of Preventing Israel from Achieving its Goals
Qassem’s claim that Hezbollah prevented Israel from achieving its goals, including establishing settlements in the South, is a distortion of history. Hezbollah itself failed in the war of support for Gaza, which it began with an Iranian order. This resulted in the assassination of most of its leaders, field commanders, the displacement of Shiite people from the South and the southern suburbs, and the destruction of their areas. Its weapons couldn’t even protect Hassan Nasrallah personally, let alone Lebanon. This defeat is part of a larger defeat that Iran suffered during the 12 days when Israel and the United States destroyed its nuclear facilities and air defense systems, and assassinated dozens of its military and political leaders and nuclear scientists. The link is clear: Iran’s defeat is Hezbollah’s defeat, because the militia is nothing but an Iranian arm in Lebanon.
Fifth: Hezbollah… The Enemy of Lebanon
It is necessary to call things by their names: Hezbollah is not the protector of Lebanon; it is Lebanon’s primary enemy. Its weapons are not for defending the borders or confronting Israel, but for dominating national decisions and maintaining the Iranian occupation of Lebanon. These weapons are a tool to impose a unilateral political will that contradicts the principles of sovereignty, the constitution, and living together.
Sixth: Illegitimate Weapons and a Rogue Iranian Gang
Since its establishment in 1982, Hezbollah has been involved in a series of crimes covered by the Lebanese Penal Code under terrorism, murder, threats, and restricting freedoms, in addition to engaging in drug trafficking and manufacturing, money laundering, and arms smuggling etc.
Seventh: The Most Dangerous Threat
Qassem said it plainly: “There is no life for Lebanon if you decide to eliminate us. Either we live together, or farewell to Lebanon.” This is an existential threat to the state and the people, and a clear message that Hezbollah considers Lebanon its private property, and that the survival of the nation is conditional on the survival of the militia.
Eighth: The Necessity of Arresting and Prosecuting Naim Qassem
Based on the content of this speech and in accordance with the articles of the laws mentioned at the beginning of the text—which include incitement to sectarian strife, direct threats to the government and the army, and brazen boasting of committing acts criminalized by Lebanese laws—the national and legal duty requires the immediate arrest of Naim Qassem and his prosecution according to the articles of the Penal Code related to terrorism and armed rebellion.

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.

Qassem says Hezbollah won't hand over arms 'while aggression continues'
Agence France Presse/August 15/2025
Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem on Friday accused the Lebanese government of "handing" the country to Israel by pushing for the group's disarmament, warning it would fight to keep its weapons. Qassem spoke in a televised address several hours after meeting Iran's top security chief Ali Larijani, whose country has long backed the Lebanese armed group. Hezbollah emerged badly weakened from last year's war with Israel, and under U.S. pressure the Lebanese government has ordered the army to devise a plan to disarm the group by the end of the year. Iran, whose so-called "axis of resistance" includes Hezbollah, has also suffered a series of setbacks, most recently in the war with Israel that saw the United States strike its nuclear sites."The government is implementing an American-Israeli order to end the resistance, even if it leads to civil war and internal strife," Qassem warned.
"The resistance will not surrender its weapons while aggression continues, occupation persists, and we will fight it... if necessary to confront this American-Israeli project no matter the cost," he said. Qassem urged the government "not to hand over the country to an insatiable Israeli aggressor or an American tyrant with limitless greed." He also said the government would "bear responsibility for any internal explosion and any destruction of Lebanon," accusing it of "leading the country to ruin."Hezbollah and its ally Amal Movement would not be organizing any street protests at this time, he said, while threatening to do so in future "across Lebanon" and "at the U.S. Embassy" in Awkar. Before the war with Israel, Hezbollah was believed to be better armed than the Lebanese military. It long maintained it had to keep its arsenal in order to defend Lebanon from attack, but critics accused it of using its weapons for political leverage. Iran's Supreme National Security Council chief Larijani was in Beirut this week, where he met Qassem as well as with President Joseph Aoun. Iran has expressed its opposition to the government's disarmament plan, and has vowed to continue to provide support. Aoun told Larijani that he rejected any interference in the country's internal affairs, branding as "unconstructive" Iran's statements on plans to disarm Hezbollah.

New ‘red line’ in Shebaa puts farmers, herders, and beekeepers at risk — the details
LBCI/August 15/2025
In the Shebaa region, Israeli forces moved the Blue Line and established a new “red line” that farmers, beekeepers, and herders are prohibited from crossing. Two days ago, Israeli forces dropped leaflets warning people not to cross the newly designated line, effectively creating a buffer zone in addition to the occupied points and other buffer areas established since the ceasefire agreement took effect. According to local residents, the “red line” buffer zone extends from Birkat al-Naqar and the Sadana hills to the road between Kfarchouba and Shebaa, covering a large area that now poses significant risks to anyone entering it. Herders entering the area have reportedly faced gunfire and stun grenades multiple times to prevent access to pastures and livestock. Since June, Israeli forces have reinforced their positions and fortifications near Shebaa Farms. The new “red line” buffer zone has also impacted beekeepers, with several losing hives, and some farms near Birkat al-Naqar being cleared. Previously, the Israeli army issued a notice instructing beekeepers in the Bayader area to relocate their hives to northern Shebaa. Along the farms’ line, a buffer zone in Bastra has similarly affected herders and beekeepers, resulting in lost income, hives, and grazing land. Videos show significant damage to agricultural structures and property belonging to both herders and beekeepers. The buffer zone in Shebaa and Bastra add to other buffer areas along the Odaisseh-Kfarkela route and in Dhayra, as well as the five occupied points, the occupied Hadab site in Aita al-Shaab, and the newly established site in Khillat al-Mahafir in Odaisseh.

Lebanon and Syria launch push to revive trade and transport — can the lifeline be restored?
LBCI/August 15/2025
Between Beirut and Damascus, transportation has never been just about crossing the border. It has long served as a vital lifeline, connecting Lebanon to Arab markets, carrying goods and passengers in both directions. In recent years, however, that lifeline has dwindled under the weight of high fees, complicated procedures, and political and security pressures. Now, new agreements aim to restart it by facilitating the movement of goods and passengers between the two countries.Under the agreements, Lebanese and Syrian trucks, as well as public transport vehicles from both countries, will be exempt from any fees when entering or leaving the other’s territory. The two sides also agreed to implement the International Road Transport, or transit, agreement in line with the 1977 Arab Convention, and to reduce transit fees for Lebanese trucks passing through the Al-Qaim crossing from 10% to 2%.
Regarding the entry of empty trucks and vehicles and loading for a third country, Syria promised to consider allowing Lebanese trucks to transport goods to countries inaccessible to Syrian trucks. Damascus also asked Lebanon to study the possibility of allowing empty Syrian buses to enter Lebanon to transport passengers, with Beirut pledging to coordinate with the relevant authorities on the condition that these buses do not operate within Lebanese territory. The understandings also call for both sides to work with their respective authorities to reduce customs clearance fees, grant an exemption for trucks carrying steel rolls weighing up to three tons, and explore reactivating the “Orange Card” related to the unified compulsory insurance system. A direct communication unit will also be established to allow immediate coordination in resolving any problems faced by transport vehicles or trucks, whether at the border or inside either country. These agreements are not new, but rather a revival of an accord dating back to 1993 — one that has seen periods of activity and stagnation and is now returning to the forefront in an effort to breathe new life into transportation and trade between Lebanon and Syria.

Five Arrested in Lebanon’s Vehicle Registration Scandal
This is Beirut/August 15/2025
The Ministry of Interior and Municipalities announced on Friday the arrest of two employees and three transaction brokers on charges of bribery and forgery at the Vehicle and Motor Registration Department. The case began after the department’s administration received information that an employee, identified by his initials (A.M.), was allegedly accepting bribes in exchange for overlooking vehicle modifications during inspections. Under surveillance and in coordination with the Information Branch of the Internal Security Forces, A.M. was caught in the act and arrested on August 5, 2025. During questioning, he confessed to the charges and to working in coordination with another employee (D.H.), as well as selling sale contracts to transaction brokers and inspecting vehicles without their presence at the department. D.H. was subsequently arrested, along with brokers (B.D.), (M.A.) and (J.D.). Efforts are underway to apprehend the remaining suspects under the supervision of the competent judiciary.

Raï: Lebanon, a Lasting Project for a Civil and Just State
This is Beirut/August 15/2025
Maronite Patriarch Beshara Rai has called for a sustained effort to move beyond the politics of power-sharing, obstruction, and isolation, urging the adoption of a unifying national vision that brings people together rather than divides them.He emphasized that Lebanon remains a “durable project for a civil, just, capable, and effective state, respecting the Constitution, enforcing the laws, and guaranteeing the rights and dignity of all.”Delivering his sermon in Diman on the occasion of the Feast of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, the patriarch highlighted that Lebanon, though wounded by successive crises and collapses, retains remarkable potential and resilience. He called on all leaders to cultivate genuine national awareness, setting aside personal interests to serve the country and uphold the dignity of its people.Patriarch Rai also stressed the need for the engagement of all, both residents and the diaspora, to rebuild the country with determination and hope. “By humbly acknowledging its past and following a path of remembrance and neutrality, Lebanon can move from collapse to stability, from chaos to reconstruction,” he added.

Larijani and the Original Sin
Johnny Kortbawi/©This is BeirutAugust 15/2025
Ali Larijani, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, is among the closest officials to the Supreme Leader Khamenei and a successor to figures like Qassem Suleimani, who shaped Iran’s regional security and political influence. Larijani’s latest visit to Lebanon, coming after recent Lebanese government decisions and strikes by Israel and the United States against Iran, sharply differs from his previous trips. Yet Iran, much like Hezbollah in Lebanon, continues a posture of unprecedented denial. Despite clear messages from the Lebanese President and Prime Minister rejecting Iranian interference and insisting on state control of weapons, Larijani attempted to sidestep these positions, emphasizing the “right of resistance” and Israeli withdrawal. Lebanon’s response was firm and unambiguous, aligned with the government’s stance and the Thomas Barrack paper ratified by Beirut. Beyond protocol, Lebanon’s handling of Larijani signals the beginning of its liberation from Iranian control. Years ago, when Iranian officials claimed influence over four Arab capitals, including Beirut, Lebanese authorities remained silent, fearing any response that might provoke Hezbollah. Today, Lebanon directly and firmly confronted Larijani, forcing him to alter his travel route after Syria closed its airspace, signaling the broader collapse of Iran’s regional network. For the first time, Iran received a clear message: engagement with Lebanon must follow formal diplomacy rather than dealings with a single military faction. Two developments highlight the shift. First, the meager turnout of a few dozen Hezbollah supporters on motorcycles, a far cry from the days when the party’s presence dominated the capital. The second is Finance Minister Yassine Jaber’s sovereign-centered approach, particularly his statement advocating full state control of weapons, which sparked Hezbollah’s anger. Together, they underscore how far Lebanese politics have shifted and how much influence Iran and its allies have lost in the current balance of power. The question now is how this shift will play out in the upcoming elections if the Shia political arena remains firmly under the control of Amal and Hezbollah. The possibilities are many.

Hezbollah: The Coup d’État
Marc Saikali/This is Beirut/August 15/2025
In Lebanon, some speeches go beyond conveying information, they amount to declarations of war. On Friday, Hezbollah’s Secretary-General delivered a statement so incendiary it pushed the nation to the edge. “The army is incapable of protecting the nation,” he declared. “The government is selling the country to Israel and the US.” “Civil war is looming.” And the ultimate warning: should the authorities dare confront the pro-Iranian militia, “there will be no life left in Lebanon.”To underline his warning, he brandished an obscure poll asserting that “the majority of Lebanese support the resistance.” One cannot help but question the credibility of such a sample. It is a blatant fiction, easily dismissed by anyone, even a taxi driver idling at a red light. In this kind of rhetoric, facts matter little; repetition is the weapon. Repeat the falsehood enough times, and it begins to masquerade as consensus. Make no mistake: this is an ultimatum. No tanks need to rumble through Beirut to execute a coup; all that is required is a microphone, a militia, and a narrative declaring the state dead unless Hezbollah assumes control. The pledge to “defend Lebanon” is no act of patriotism, it is a claim to a monopoly on force, and by extension, a monopoly over the country itself.The tragic irony is that Lebanon is still called a Republic. But what remains of republicanism when a militia leader can assert that the legitimate government exists only by his tolerance, that civil peace hinges on his goodwill, and that the people revere him… all because a poll, handpicked and manipulated by him, says so? In any other country, this would be recognized as mafia-style intimidation, and it would be subject to prosecution.

Hezbollah chief’s remarks stir backlash amid heightened tensions in Lebanon
NAJIA HOUSSARI/Arab News/August 15, 2025
BEIRUT: Lebanese Justice Minister Adel Nassar accused Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem of contradicting himself following a speech in which the latter threatened escalation if the government attempted to confront or disarm the Iran-backed group.
Nassar said Qassem had previously accepted the ceasefire agreement with Israel and endorsed the ministerial statement affirming the Lebanese state’s exclusive control over arms. However, in a speech on Friday at a religious ceremony in Baalbek, Qassem openly rejected the disarmament of Hezbollah, calling it “unacceptable” and accusing the government of implementing an “American-Israeli order to eliminate the resistance, even if that leads to civil war and internal strife.”Speaking to Arab News, Nassar said: “Qassem says he doesn’t want a civil war, but he’s threatening to take to the streets to defend his weapons and holding the state responsible for any clash with the army.”The justice minister stressed that “the party outside the legitimacy that refuses to surrender its weapons to the state bears responsibility for this.”Nassar said that either all parties in Lebanon build the state together and stand in solidarity, or engage in a destructive military confrontations. “Hezbollah wants to take us down to a destructive path,” he warned. The minister reiterated that Qassem’s speech clashed with the interests of the Lebanese state, which wants to control arms in the country in line with a US-backed plan following Israel’s military campaign against Hezbollah.The Lebanese Cabinet last week tasked the military with confining weapons only to state security forces, a move that has outraged Hezbollah. Nassar condemned Qassem’s statements as “totally rejected,” noting that such inflammatory speech from an armed group raised concerns within the Lebanese Armed Forces. “This is one of the most important reasons that prompted the government to take the decision to restrict the possession of weapons. Attempting to monopolize decision-making and plunge Lebanon into wars is a logic that does not align with the logic of the state,” Nassar said. Iranian official Ali Larijani visited Lebanon earlier this week and said Tehran does not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, but supports resistance movements.
Nassar criticized the statements as a threat to Lebanon’s security.
In his speech, Qassem thanked Iran for “supporting us with money, weapons, capabilities, and media and political positions.”He said Hezbollah and the Amal Movement, its Shia Muslim ally, had decided to delay any street protests while there was still scope for talks.
“There is still room for discussion, for adjustments, and for a political resolution before the situation escalates to a confrontation no one wants,” Qassem said. “But if it is imposed on us, we are ready, and we have no other choice ... At that point, there will be a protest in the street, all across Lebanon, that will reach the American Embassy.”He held “the Lebanese government fully responsible for any internal strife that might occur,” adding that “we do not want it, but there are those who work for it.”Qassem said there would be “no life” in Lebanon if the government sought to confront or eliminate the group. “This is our nation together. We live in dignity together, and we build its sovereignty together — or Lebanon will have no life if you stand on the other side and try to confront us and eliminate us,” he said in his speech. “Lebanon cannot be built except with all its components.”
A government source told Arab News that Qassem’s “escalating rhetoric” does not concern Lebanon, but rather represents a dialogue between Iran and the US through Hezbollah.
“The Iranians feel that they are no longer part of any settlement in the region they used to control and are now being completely ignored,” the source said.
Qassem’s remarks drew widespread backlash from ministers, lawmakers, and political leaders. Industry Minister Joe Issa Khoury said: “The decision to go to war is not written in the ink of a sect, but rather signed by the entire nation. The national charter protects it from becoming a tool of one sect over the others. Whoever turns it into a tool of blackmail empties it of its meaning.”MP George Okais stressed that the ceasefire agreement with Israel was approved by the entire Cabinet, including ministers from Hezbollah and Amal. “Decisions that affect all Lebanese cannot be made without their consultation, nor imposed under any form of duress,” he added. MP Raji Al-Saad warned against Qassem’s threat of internal strife, saying his statements represent “a dangerous turning point and constitute a rejection of the establishment of the state and an insistence on keeping Lebanon an arena for Iranian projects.” MP Ghiath Yazbek said Qassem is “verbally fighting Israel and practically destroying Lebanon after the war paralyzed his party, rendered it ineffective, and turned it into a mere vocal phenomenon.”He pleaded with the group’s leader to have “mercy on Lebanon.”Former minister and MP Ashraf Rifi warned Hezbollah against repeating threats of civil war. In a statement, he said the only solution was the state, telling Qassem: “Return to your homeland and end your subservience to Iran, which has begun to collapse in every arena it has entered, based on a historical illusion that has long since passed.”Beirut MP Ibrahim Mneimneh questioned whether Qassem was being honest with his base. “Does Naim Qassem dare to tell his supporters that disarmament is already underway, and that Hezbollah itself no longer denies it? Enough with gambling with the country and its people,” he said. Beirut MP Waddah Al-Sadig said: “Civil peace is not a matter of blackmail or sectarian tension, and the lives of the Lebanese are not in the hands of any party, faction, or sect.”He stressed that moving forward, Lebanon’s lives, security, and prosperity are in the hands of the state. “Civil peace is a national will to protect the people, the army, and the state,” he said.

Text Of Hezbollah’s Sheikh Qassem Speech: Resistance Will Never Relinquish Arms, Victory Assured
Marwa Haidar/Al-Manar English Website/August 15, 2025
Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem affirmed on Friday that the Resistance will never relinquish arms as long as the Israeli occupation and aggression is continuous. In a televised speech on Arbaeen of Imam Hussein a.s. (an occasion marking 40 days on martyrdom of Imam Hussein), Sheikh Qassem said the Resistance will fight a Karbala fight of necessary, voicing confidence of victory. His eminence warned the Lebanese Government against the “dangerous” decision to disarm the Resistance, taken earlier this month, noting that the government is implementing the Israeli-US order to end the Resistance.“The Lebanese Government bears full responsibility for any internal strife and for abandoning its duty to defend the land of Lebanon,” Sheikh Qassem addressed crowds in the eastern city of Baalbeck.He warned: “Either Lebanon stands and we stand united or events will erupt beyond anyone’s control, and you alone will bear the responsibility.”
Occasion of Arbaeen
Sheikh Qassem started his speech by talking about the occasion. He stressed that the Muslim nation is “on the path of salvation, thanks to the jihad and revolution of Imam Hussein a.s.”.He noted that people “at every milestone have to choice either to be with Imam Hussein (a.s.) or to be with Yazid.”Talking about the recent history, Sheikh Qassem said: “In the living memory, our choice is to stand with the Hussein of our era, represented by the contributions and stances of Imam Khomeini, followed by Imam Khamenei,” referring to the founder of the Islamic Revolution Imam Sayyed Rohullah Khomeini and the Supreme Leader Imam Sayyed Ali Khamenei.
Arbaeen Baalbeck
Mass rally in the eastern city of Baalbeck to mark Arbaeen of Imam Hussein a.s. (Friday, August 15, 2025). In this context, Sheikh Qassem praised late Hezbollah leaders Sheikh Ragheb Harb, Sayyed Abbas Al-Moussawi and Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, saying they “walked the same path of Imam Khomeini and Imam Khamenei.”Talking more about confronting tyranny, Sheikh Qassem said: “We are for the liberation of Palestine and against the Yazid of the era represented by the US and Israeli tyrants.”“The Resistance today is an outgrowth of Karbala,” the Hezbollah S.G. stressed.
2006 Victory Anniversary
As Arbaeen this year coincides with the nineteenth anniversary of 2006 July War, Sheikh Qassem said that the victory “was one of the blessings of Mohammadi-Alawite support, because Allah helped us despite the large number of the enemy.”“The 2006 victory deterred the enemy for 17 years and prevented it from launching an aggression for fear of the Resistance,” his eminence stated. The Hezbollah leader thanked Iran, saying that the “Islamic Republic is still on our side and will remain so, just as the flag of Resistance will remain raised.”
Lebanon and Resistance Disarmament
Shifting into the Lebanese affairs, Sheikh Qassem offered condolences over martyrdom of Lebanese Army soldiers in an explosion of Israeli war leftover munitions near the southern town of Zibqin. “The martyrs are those of the Resistance, the Army and the entire nation.”
Meanwhile, Sheikh Qassem affirmed that the “Resistance needs no warrants,” noting that “there is no Lebanese sovereignty without the Resistance which prevent Israeli invasion and settlements as well as the naturalization of the Palestinian people in Lebanon.”
In this context, the Hezbollah S.G. addressed anti-resistance parties in Lebanon: “We must ask those who don’t resist “where have you been on the Israeli aggression and occupation?”.
He pointed to the facilitations the Resistance has offered so that the Lebanese Army could deploy across south Lebanon. Citing a poll by the Consultative Center for Studies and Documentation earlier this week, Sheikh Qassem stressed that the majority of Lebanese support the resistance and its continuity. Hezbollah Sheikh Naim Qassem blame the Lebanese Government on decision to disarm resistance in a speech on August 15. 2025
He lashed out at the Lebanese Government saying it “implements the US-Israeli order to end the Resistance” and “serves the Israeli scheme.”“The Lebanese Government decision on August 5th was to strip the Resistance, the people, and Lebanon of their defensive weapons during the aggression. It should have extended its control and expelled the Israelis from Lebanon.” “It’s the Government’s duty to build the country rather than handing it over to the Israeli and US enemies.”Sheikh Qassem stated that the Government “made a dangerous decision violated coexistence, and exposed the country to major crisis.”
He affirmed that the Resistance “will never surrender its weapons while the aggression continues,” vowing that “we’ll fight a Karbala battle if necessary and we are confident that we’ll be victorious.”Sheikh Qassem warned that the Lebanese Government “bears full responsibility for any internal strife and for abandoning its duty to defend the land of Lebanon.”“Either Lebanon stands and we stand united or events will erupt beyond anyone’s control, and you alone will bear the responsibility,” Sheikh Qassem concluded his speech.

Ex-Presidents, Premiers, Back Government Position On Weapons Control
This is Beirut/August 15/2025
Two former Lebanese presidents, Amin Gemayel and Michel Sleiman, along with three former prime ministers, Najib Mikati, Fouad Siniora and Tammam Salam, issued a joint statement on Friday backing the government’s position over the state’s exclusive control of weapons.
The leaders praised the government’s efforts to restore full state authority over Lebanon’s territory and institutions, including the decision to task the Lebanese Armed Forces with preparing a plan for implementing exclusive state control of arms, in line with United Nations Resolution 1701. They described this step as crucial for ensuring national security, stability and sovereignty. The statement expressed strong support for positions taken by President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam in defending Lebanon’s sovereignty. It also expressed concerns over Hezbollah’s Secretary-General Naim Qassem’s rejection of the government’s plan, which the leaders said could complicate efforts to reestablish full state authority. The former leaders also called for calm political discourse, careful implementation of state authority, and greater Arab and international support to strengthen Lebanon’s governance, facilitate reconstruction and protect citizens’ economic interests. Additionally, the statement addressed ongoing regional tensions, condemning “continued aggressive practices by Israeli forces in Lebanon and Palestine.”The leaders noted that these actions violate the agreements reached on November 27, 2024, and called on the international community to ensure Israel respects its commitments and prevents further escalation.

PSP Calls for International Probe into Sweida's Violence
This is Beirut/August 15/2025
The Progressive Socialist Party (PSP) called on Friday for an international investigation into the recent violence in Sweida, the Druze heartland of southern Syria, where hundreds were killed. Rejecting what it described as “rumors and claims” about its stance, the PSP reiterated its demands for justice, urgent relief for the embattled city and a path toward reconciliation to safeguard Syria’s unity. Formerly led by Walid Joumblatt, the party outlined a three-step vision to help the country overcome its ongoing crisis. First, it urged a transparent, internationally led probe into the events, to hold all perpetrators accountable, “regardless of who they are.” It also called for the immediate release of all abductees, disclosure of the fate of the missing and measures to “rebuild trust among Syrians in a just state.”Second, the PSP stressed the importance of delivering urgent aid to Sweida’s residents, restoring communication lines and maintaining essential services. It appealed to countries committed to Syria’s stability to launch a comprehensive reconstruction plan to rebuild infrastructure, compensate losses and revive the economy through cooperation with the Syrian government. Third, once the investigation is complete, the party said there must be “responsible, rational dialogue” between Sweida’s communities, neighboring areas and the Syrian government, paving the way for inclusive reconciliation. This process, it added, should have Arab and regional sponsorship and remain free from the agendas of “disguised actors” seeking to divide Syria. The PSP said it remains in contact with all relevant stakeholders, both inside and outside Syria—particularly Arab and regional partners—to secure clear agreements that ensure the country’s safety, stability and future, with the people of Sweida at the forefront.

From Kirkuk to Tripoli: Historic oil pipeline poised for comeback
LBCI/August 15/2025
The U.S. Caesar Act, which imposed sanctions on Syria, had delayed efforts to revive the Iraqi oil pipeline running from Kirkuk in northern Iraq to Baniyas in Syria and then to Tripoli in northern Lebanon. The lifting of U.S. sanctions has now put the project back on track, driven by Iraq’s interest in supporting Lebanon and expanding its oil exports to the Mediterranean and onward to Europe, particularly amid disputes with Turkey over exports from the Turkish port of Ceyhan.Work on the pipeline began 95 years ago by the Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC). In 1940, the Tripoli refinery was established to process imported crude oil. In the 1950s, a new line was added to the Tripoli route, with a capacity of about 400,000 barrels per day. Sources told LBCI that a technical inspection of the pipeline showed minor damage from Kirkuk to the Baniyas refinery inside Syria, while more significant damage was found between Baniyas and the Al-Buqai’a border crossing between Lebanon and Syria in the Wadi Khaled area. The remaining section from Al-Buqai’a to Tripoli requires replacement, and the Iraqi side is prepared to consider financing this work.The information also indicates that Lebanon — which has hosted two Iraqi technical delegations in the past three months — is ready to work on this file with both Iraq and Syria, fully aware of the economic benefits it would gain if the pipeline were reactivated and a modern refinery built. The Iraqi side is also studying the possibility of constructing a new pipeline from Basra in southern Iraq to Kirkuk, connecting it to the existing line to Tripoli.Before 1984, Lebanon collected transit fees on Iraqi oil, amounting to about $1 per barrel, and Iraq allocated a quantity of oil for Lebanese domestic consumption at preferential prices. The renewed oil cooperation could bring major benefits, especially if the planned Tripoli economic zone — designed to produce all types of petroleum products — is completed. As global competition intensifies over oil and gas fields, export routes, and diverse trade corridors, Lebanon’s strategic geographic location could allow it to play an influential and productive role — provided it approaches the matter away from political polarization and, crucially, free from corruption.

MEA advises passengers of travel disruptions due to Air Canada strike on August 16
LBCI/August 15/2025
Due to the strike announced by Air Canada starting Saturday, August 16, 2025, and the cancellation of all its flights to and from Europe on that date, Middle East Airlines announces that it will be unable to accept any passengers departing from Beirut and continuing their travel with Air Canada on Saturday, August 16, 2025.
For more information, please contact the MEA Call Center at the following numbers:
* Landline: 01-629999
* Hotlines: 1320 and 1330 from any landline or mobile phone, free of charge
* Mobile lines: 81-477905 / 906 / 907 / 908 – 76-680444 – 76-680777
Or via email at callcenter@mea.com.lb or on the company’s website www.mea.com.lb

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on August 15-16/2025
Trump says no agreement on ending Russia’s war in Ukraine as Putin says there was an ‘understanding’
AP/August 16, 2025
JOINT BASE ELMENDORF-RICHARDSON, Alaska: President Donald Trump said he and Vladimir Putin didn’t reach a deal to end Russia’s war in Ukraine after meeting on Friday, though Putin suggested they had hammered out “an understanding” as both provided scant details but offered effusive praise of the other. Speaking moments later, Trump said he planned to speak with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders soon to brief them on the discussions.“There’s no deal until there’s a deal,” Trump said. He said that while there were many points where agreement was reached, they fell short on others. The two leaders met for about 2 1/2 half hours on Friday at a summit in Alaska that started with a handshake, a smile and a ride in the presidential limousine — an unusually warm reception for a US adversary responsible for launching the largest land war in Europe since 1945. They planned to hold a joint news conference after talking together with top advisers behind closed doors on efforts to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. When they greeted each other, they gripped hands for an extended period of time on a red carpet rolled out at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage. As they chatted, Putin grinned and pointed skyward, where B-2s and F-22s — military aircraft designed to oppose Russia during the Cold War — flew overhead.
Reporters nearby yelled, “President Putin, will you stop killing civilians?” and Russia’s leader put his hand up to his ear as though to indicate he couldn’t hear them. Trump and Putin then shared the US presidential limo known as “The Beast” for a short ride to their meeting site, with Putin offering a broad smile as the vehicle rolled past the cameras. It was the kind of reception typically reserved for close US allies and belied the bloodshed and suffering in the war Putin started in Ukraine. Although not altogether surprising considering their longtime friendly relationship, such outward friendliness before hours of closed-door meetings is likely to raise concerns from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders, who fear that Trump is primarily focusing on furthering US interests and not pressing hard enough for Ukraine’s.
Zelensky and European leaders were excluded from Trump and Putin’s discussions, and Ukraine’s president was left posting a video address in which he expressed his hope for a “strong position from the US”“Everyone wants an honest end to the war. Ukraine is ready to work as productively as possible to end the war,” he said, later adding, “The war continues and it continues precisely because there is no order, nor any signals from Moscow, that it is preparing to end this war.”The summit was a chance for Trump to prove he’s a master dealmaker and peacemaker. He likes to brag about himself as a heavyweight negotiator and has boasted that he could easily find a way to bring the slaughter to a close — a promise he’s been unable to keep so far. For Putin, it was an opportunity to try to negotiate a deal that would cement Russia’s gains, block Kyiv’s bid to join the NATO military alliance and eventually pull Ukraine back into Moscow’s orbit.
Not meeting one-on-one anymore
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said shortly before Air Force One touched down that the previously planned one-on-one meeting between Trump and Putin was now a three-on-three discussion including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff. Putin was joined by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov. The change seemed to indicate that the White House was taking a more guarded approach than it did during a 2018 meeting in Helsinki, where Trump and Putin met privately with their interpreters and Trump then shocked the world by siding with the Russian leader over US intelligence officials on whether Russia meddled in the 2016 campaign. The two leaders began their meeting Friday by sitting with their aides in front of a blue backdrop printed with “Alaska” and “Pursuing Peace.” The pair are expected to hold a joint press conference at the end of the summit. There are significant risks for Trump. By bringing Putin onto US soil — America bought Alaska from Russia in 1867 for roughly 2 cents per acre — the president is giving him the validation he desires after his ostracization following his invasion of Ukraine 3 1/2 years ago. Zelensky’s exclusion is also a heavy blow to the West’s policy of “nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine” and invites the possibility that Trump could agree to a deal that Ukraine does not want.
Any success is far from assured, meanwhile, since Russia and Ukraine remain far apart in their demands for peace. Putin has long resisted any temporary ceasefire, linking it to a halt in Western arms supplies and a freeze on Ukraine’s mobilization efforts, which are conditions rejected by Kyiv and its Western allies. Trump said earlier in the week there was a 25 percent chance that the summit would fail, but he also floated the idea that if the meeting succeeds he could bring Zelensky to Alaska for a subsequent meeting with himself and Putin. He said during an interview on Air Force One that he might walk out quickly if the meeting wasn’t going well, but that didn’t happen. Trump said before arriving in Alaska that he would push for an immediate ceasefire while expressing doubts about the possibility of achieving one. He has also suggested working for a broad peace deal to be done quickly. Russia has long favored a comprehensive deal to end the fighting, reflecting its demands, and not a temporary halt to hostilities.
Trump has offered shifting explanations for his meeting goals
Trump previously characterized the sit-down as ” really a feel-out meeting.” But he’s also warned of “very severe consequences” for Russia if Putin doesn’t agree to end the war. Trump said his talks with Putin will include Russian demands that Ukraine cede territory as part of a peace deal, and that Ukraine has to decide on those — but he also suggested Zelensky should accept concessions. “I’ve got to let Ukraine make that decision. And I think they’ll make a proper decision,” Trump told reporters traveling with him to Anchorage.
Trump said there’s “a possibility” of the United States offering Ukraine security guarantees alongside European powers, “but not in the form of NATO.” Putin has fiercely resisted Ukraine joining the trans-Atlantic security alliance, a long-term goal for Ukrainians seeking to forge stronger ties with the West. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, NATO’s supreme allied commander Europe, is also in Alaska to provide “military advice” to Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, according to a senior NATO military official who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity.Grynkewich’s presence is likely to be welcomed by European leaders who have tried to convince Trump to be firm with Putin and not deal over Kyiv’s head.
War still raging
Foreign governments are watching closely to see how Trump reacts to Putin, likely gauging what the interaction might mean for their own dealings with the US president, who has eschewed traditional diplomacy for his own transactional approach to relationships.
The meeting comes as the war has caused heavy losses on both sides and drained resources. Ukraine has held on far longer than some initially expected since the February 2022 invasion, but it is straining to hold off Russia’s much larger army, grappling with bombardments of its cities and fighting for every inch on the over 600-mile (1,000-kilometer) front line. Alaska is separated from Russia at its closest point by just 3 miles (less than 5 kilometers) and the international date line.Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson was crucial to countering the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It continues to play a role today, as planes from the base still intercept Russian aircraft that regularly fly into US airspace.

Trump, Putin shake hands ahead of Alaska summit
AP/August 15, 2025
JOINT BASE ELMENDORF-RICHARDSON, Alaska: President Donald Trump and Russia’s Vladimir Putin shook hands warmly at the start of their Alaska summit on Friday before heading into hours of discussions that could reshape the war in Ukraine and relations between Moscow and Washington. The leaders greeted each other on the tarmac at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, where officials erected a special stage, with a large “Alaska 2025” sign flanked by parked fighter jets and red carpets. Uniformed military members stood at attention nearby. B-2s and F-22s — military aircraft designed to oppose Russia during the Cold War — were flying over to mark the moment.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the previously planned one-on-one meeting between Trump and Putin is now a three-on-three meeting that will include Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff. Putin will be joined by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov. The change indicates that the White House is taking a more guarded approach than it did during a 2018 meeting in Helsinki, when Trump and Putin first met privately just with their interpreters for two hours.
Putin and Trump are expected to hold a joint press conference at the end of the summit. The sit-down gives Trump a chance to prove to the world that he is both a master dealmaker and a global peacemaker. He and his allies have cast him as a heavyweight negotiator who can find a way to bring the slaughter to a close — something he used to boast he could do quickly. For Putin, a summit with Trump offers a long-sought opportunity to try to negotiate a deal that would cement Russia’s gains, block Kyiv’s bid to join the NATO military alliance and eventually pull Ukraine back into Moscow’s orbit. Despite having so much at stake, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders aren’t invited. There are significant risks for Trump. By bringing Putin onto US soil — America bought Alaska from Russia in 1867 for roughly 2 cents per acre — the president is giving him the validation he desires after his ostracization following his invasion of Ukraine 3 1/2 years ago. Zelensky’s exclusion from Trump and Putin’s first meeting is a heavy blow to the West’s policy of “nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine” and invites the possibility that Trump could agree to a deal that Ukraine does not want. Any success is far from assured because Russia and Ukraine remain far apart in their demands for peace. Putin has long resisted any temporary ceasefire, linking it to a halt in Western arms supplies and a freeze on Ukraine’s mobilization efforts, which are conditions rejected by Kyiv and its Western allies.
“HIGH STAKES!!!” Trump posted shortly before he boarded Air Force One.
On his way to the meeting, Putin stopped in Magadan, in Russia’s Far East, where he visited a factory producing omega-3 fish oil capsules, according to Russian state news agency RIA Novosti. Putin used the flight to review materials on Ukraine, tensions with the US, economic cooperation and global affairs, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in an interview with Russian state TV. Trump said earlier in the week there was a 25 percent chance that the summit would fail, but he also floated the idea that if the meeting succeeds he could bring Zelensky to Alaska for a subsequent, three-way meeting.
Trump has offered shifting explanations for his meeting goals
Trump has also expressed doubts about getting an immediate ceasefire, but he has wanted a broad peace deal done quickly. That seemingly echoes Putin’s longtime argument that Russia favors a comprehensive deal to end the fighting, reflecting its demands, not a temporary halt to hostilities. Trump previously characterized the sit-down as ” really a feel-out meeting.” But he’s also warned of “very severe consequences” for Russia if Putin doesn’t agree to end the war. Trump said Friday that his talks with Putin will include Russian demands that Ukraine cede territory as part of a peace deal. He said Ukraine has to decide, but he also suggested Zelensky should accept concessions. “I’ve got to let Ukraine make that decision. And I think they’ll make a proper decision,” Trump told reporters traveling with him to Alaska. Trump said there’s “a possibility” of the United States offering Ukraine security guarantees alongside European powers, “but not in the form of NATO.” Putin has fiercely resisted Ukraine joining the trans-Atlantic security alliance, a long-term goal for Ukrainians seeking to forge stronger ties with the West.
Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, NATO’s supreme allied commander Europe, is in Alaska to provide “military advice” to Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, according to a senior NATO military official who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity. His presence is likely to be welcomed by European leaders who have tried to convince Trump to be firm with Putin and not deal over Kyiv’s head. On his way to Alaska, Trump sat for an interview on Air Force One with Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier. In a clip posted online, he said he thought the meeting would “work out very well — and if it doesn’t, I’m going to head back home real fast.”
“I would walk, yeah,” he added, after a follow up question.
Zelensky has time and again cast doubts on Putin’s willingness to negotiate in good faith. His European allies, who’ve held increasingly urgent meetings with US leaders over the past week, have stressed the need for Ukraine to be involved in any peace talks.
Foreign governments will be watching closely to see how Trump reacts to Putin, likely gauging what the interaction might mean for their own dealings with the US president, who has eschewed traditional diplomacy for his own transactional approach to relationships.
The meeting comes as the war has caused heavy losses on both sides and drained resources. Ukraine has held on far longer than some initially expected since the February 2022 invasion, but it is straining to hold off Russia’s much larger army, grappling with bombardments of its cities and fighting for every inch on the over 600-mile (1,000-kilometer) front line.
The summit could have far-reaching implications
While some have objected to the location of the summit, Trump has said he thought it was “very respectful” of Putin to come to the US instead of a meeting in Russia. Sergei Markov, a pro-Kremlin Moscow-based analyst, observed that the choice of Alaska as the summit’s venue “underlined the distancing from Europe and Ukraine.”Being on a military base allows the leaders to avoid protests and meet more securely, but the location carries its own significance because of its history and location. Alaska is separated from Russia at its closest point by just 3 miles (less than 5 kilometers) and the international date line. Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson was crucial to countering the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It continues to play a role today, as planes from the base still intercept Russian aircraft that regularly fly into US airspace.

Turkiye detains Istanbul district mayor in corruption probe, state media says
Reuters/August 15, 2025
ISTANBUL: Turkish police detained 40 people including the mayor of Istanbul’s central Beyoglu district as part of a corruption investigation, state broadcaster TRT Haber said on Friday, the latest wave in a crackdown on the opposition.
Beyoglu Mayor Inan Guney from the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) was the 16th mayor to have been taken into custody in the crackdown, in which a total of more than 500 people have been detained in less than a year. Among those currently in prison is Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu, President Tayyip Erdogan’s main political rival, who is being investigated on charges of corruption and links to terrorism. The CHP denies the charges and calls them an attempt to eliminate a democratic alternative, a charge the government rejects. TRT Haber said those held in the latest operation are suspected of involvement in fraudulent activities at companies linked to the Istanbul municipality. Arrest warrants were issued for a total of 44 people, including the 40 detained, it said. On Thursday, CHP mayor Ozlem Cercioglu from the western city of Aydin joined Erdogan’s ruling AK Party, citing disagreements with the CHP administration. CHP leader Ozgur Ozel told reporters, without providing evidence, that AKP officials had threatened Cercioglu with legal investigations into her municipality and arrest unless she joined the ruling party. AKP deputy chair Hayati Yazici called Ozel’s allegation “completely untrue.” Cercioglu also rejected the claim.

Israeli far-right minister Ben Gvir threatens prominent Palestinian inmate Marwan Barghouti
AFP/August 15, 2025
JERUSALEM: Israel’s far-right national security minister Itamar Ben Gvir published a video on Friday in which he confronts the most high-profile Palestinian detainee in Israeli custody in his prison cell. Marwan Barghouti, a leading member of the Palestinian Fatah party, has spent more than 20 years behind bars after being sentenced for his role in anti-Israeli attacks in the early 2000s. In the clip published by Ben Gvir on X, the minister and two other individuals, including a prison guard, surround Barghouti in a corner of his cell. “You will not defeat us. Whoever harms the people of Israel, whoever kills children, whoever kills women... we will erase them,” Ben Gvir says in Hebrew. Barghouti tries to respond but is interrupted by Ben Gvir, who says: “No, you know this. And it’s been the case throughout history.”The video does not specify where Barghouti is currently being held. Contacted by AFP, sources close to Ben Gvir said the meeting took place “by chance” in Ganot prison in southern Israel during an inspection visit by the minister, but they would not say when the footage was filmed. “This morning I read that various ‘senior officials’ in the Palestinian Authority didn’t quite like what I said to arch-terrorist Marwan Barghouti – may his name be erased,” Ben Gvir said in the post accompanying the video on Friday morning. “So I will repeat it again and again, without apology: whoever messes with the people of Israel, whoever murders our children, whoever murders our women – we will wipe them out. With God’s help.”Barghouti, who is now in his sixties, was arrested in 2002 by Israel and sentenced to life in 2004 on murder charges. Israel considers him a “terrorist” and convicted him over his role in the second intifada, or uprising, from 2000-2005. He often tops opinion polls of popular Palestinian leaders and is sometimes described by his supporters as the “Palestinian Mandela.” In a statement released by the official Palestinian news agency Wafa, the Palestinian Authority’s foreign ministry denounced “an unprecedented provocation” and described the confrontation as “organized state terrorism.”

20 years after its landmark withdrawal from Gaza, Israel is mired there
AP/August 15, 2025
TEL AVIV: Twenty years ago, Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip, dismantling 21 Jewish settlements and pulling out its forces. The Friday anniversary of the start of the landmark disengagement comes as Israel is mired in a nearly 2-year war with Hamas that has devastated the Palestinian territory and means it is likely to keep troops there long into the future. Israel’s disengagement, which also included removing four settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, was then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s controversial attempt to jump-start negotiations with the Palestinians. But it bitterly divided Israeli society and led to the empowerment of Hamas, with implications that continue to reverberate today. The emotional images of Jews being ripped from their homes by Israeli soldiers galvanized Israel’s far-right and settler movements. The anger helped them organize and increase their political influence, accounting in part for the rise of hard-line politicians like National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich. On Thursday, Smotrich boasted of a settlement expansion plan east of Jerusalem that will “bury” the idea of a future Palestinian state. For Palestinians, even if they welcomed the disengagement, it didn’t end Israel’s control over their lives. Soon after, Hamas won elections in 2006, then drove out the Palestinian Authority. Israel and Egypt imposed a closure on the territory, controlling entry and exit of goods and people. Though its intensity varied over the years, the closure helped impoverish the population and entrenched a painful separation from Palestinians in the West Bank.Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians claim all three territories for a future independent state. A unilateral withdrawal enhanced Hamas’ stature. Israel couldn’t justify the military or economic cost of maintaining the heavily fortified settlements in Gaza, explained Kobi Michael, a senior researcher at the Misgav Institute and the Institute for National Security Studies think tanks. There were around 8,000 Israeli settlers and 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza in 2005. “There was no chance for these settlements to exist or flourish or become meaningful enough to be a strategic anchor,” he said. By contrast, there are more than 500,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank, most living in developed settlement blocs that have generally received more support from Israeli society, Michael said. Most of the world considers the settlements illegal under international law.
Because Israel withdrew unilaterally, without any coordination with the Palestinian Authority, it enhanced Hamas’ stature among Palestinians in Gaza. “This contributed to Hamas’ win in the elections in 2006, because they leveraged it and introduced it as a very significant achievement,” Michael said. “They saw it as an achievement of the resistance and a justification for the continuation of the armed resistance.”Footage of the violence between Israeli settlers and Israeli soldiers also created an “open wound” in Israeli society, Michael said. “I don’t think any government will be able to do something like that in the future,” he said. That limits any flexibility over settlements in the West Bank if negotiations over a two-state solution with the Palestinians ever resume.“Disengagement will never happen again, this is a price we’re paying as a society, and a price we’re paying politically,” he said.
Palestinians doubt Israel will ever fully withdraw from Gaza again
After Israel’s withdrawal 20 years ago, many Palestinians described Gaza as an “open-air prison.” They had control on the inside – under a Hamas government that some supported but some saw as heavy-handed and brutal. But ultimately, Israel had a grip around the territory.
Many Palestinians believe Sharon carried out the withdrawal so Israel could focus on cementing its control in the West Bank through settlement building. Now some believe more direct Israeli occupation is returning to Gaza. After 22 months of war, Israeli troops control more than 75 percent of Gaza, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks of maintaining security control long term after the war. Amjad Shawa, the director of the Palestinian NGO Network, said he doesn’t believe Netanyahu will repeat Sharon’s full withdrawal. Instead, he expects the military to continue controlling large swaths of Gaza through “buffer zones.”The aim, he said, is to keep Gaza “unlivable in order to change the demographics,” referring to Netanyahu’s plans to encourage Palestinians to leave the territory.Israel is “is reoccupying the Gaza Strip” to prevent a Palestinian state, said Mostafa Ibrahim, an author based in Gaza City whose home was destroyed in the current war.
Missed opportunities
Israeli former Maj. Gen. Dan Harel, who was head of the country’s Southern Command during the disengagement, remembers the toll of protecting a few thousand settlers. There were an average of 10 attacks per day against Israeli settlers and soldiers, including rockets, roadside bombs big enough to destroy a tank, tunnels to attack Israeli soldiers and military positions, and frequent gunfire. “Bringing a school bus of kids from one place to another required a military escort,” said Harel. “There wasn’t a future. People paint it as how wonderful it was there, but it wasn’t wonderful.”Harel says the decision to evacuate Israeli settlements from the Gaza Strip was the right one, but that Israel missed crucial opportunities.ost egregious, he said, was a unilateral withdrawal without obtaining any concessions from the Palestinians in Gaza or the Palestinian Authority.He also sharply criticized Israel’s policy of containment toward Hamas after disengagement. There were short but destructive conflicts over the years between the two sides, but otherwise the policy gave Hamas “an opportunity to do whatever they wanted.”
“We had such a blind spot with Hamas, we didn’t see them morph from a terror organization into an organized military, with battalions and commanders and infrastructure,” he said.

Thirst drives Gaza families to drink water that makes them sick
AP/August 15, 2025
DEIR AL-BALAH: After waking early to stand in line for an hour under the August heat, Rana Odeh returns to her tent with her jug of murky water. She wipes the sweat from her brow and strategizes how much to portion out to her two small children. From its color alone, she knows full well it’s likely contaminated.
Thirst supersedes the fear of illness.
She fills small bottles for her son and daughter and pours a sip into a teacup for herself. What’s left she adds to a jerrycan for later. “We are forced to give it to our children because we have no alternative,” Odeh, who was driven from her home in Khan Younis, said of the water. “It causes diseases for us and our children.”Such scenes have become the grim routine in Muwasi, a sprawling displacement camp in central Gaza where hundreds of thousands endure scorching summer heat. Sweat-soaked and dust-covered, parents and children chase down water trucks that come every two or three days, filling bottles, canisters and buckets and then hauling them home, sometimes on donkey-drawn carts.
Each drop is rationed for drinking, cooking, cleaning, or washing.
Some reuse what they can and save a couple of cloudy inches in their jerrycans for whatever tomorrow brings — or does not. When water fails to arrive, Odeh said, she and her son fill bottles from the sea. Over the 22 months since Israel launched its offensive, Gaza’s water access has been progressively strained. Limits on fuel imports and electricity have hindered the operation of desalination plants, while infrastructure bottlenecks and pipeline damage have restricted delivery to a trickle. Gaza’s aquifers became polluted by sewage and the wreckage of bombed buildings. Wells are mostly inaccessible or destroyed, aid groups and the local utility say. Meanwhile, the water crisis has helped fuel the rampant spread of disease, on top of Gaza’s rising starvation. UNRWA — the UN agency for Palestinian refugees — said that its health centers now see an average of 10,300 patients a week with infectious diseases, mostly diarrhea from contaminated water. Efforts to ease the water shortage are underway, but for many, the prospect remains overshadowed by the risk of what may unfold before a new supply arrives.
And the thirst is only growing as a heat wave bears down, with humidity and temperatures in Gaza soaring on Friday to 35 degrees Celsius (95 degrees Fahrenheit). Mahmoud Al-Dibs, a father displaced from Gaza City to Muwasi, dumped water over his head from a flimsy plastic bag — one of the vessels used to carry water in the camps. “Outside the tents, it is hot, and inside the tents, it is hot, so we are forced to drink this water wherever we go,” he said. Al-Dibs was among many who said they knowingly drink non-potable water. The few people still possessing rooftop tanks cannot muster enough water to clean them, so what flows from their taps is yellow and unsafe, said Bushra Khalidi, an official with Oxfam, an aid group working in Gaza. Before the war, the coastal enclave’s more than 2 million residents got their water from a patchwork of sources. Some was piped in by Mekorot, Israel’s national water utility. Some came from desalination plants. Some was pulled from high-saline wells, and some was imported in bottles.Palestinians are relying more heavily on groundwater, which now accounts for more than half of Gaza’s water supply. The well water has historically been brackish, but still serviceable for cleaning, bathing, or farming, according to Palestinian water officials and aid groups. The effects of drinking unclean water don’t always appear right away, said Mark Zeitoun, director general of the Geneva Water Hub, a policy institute. “Untreated sewage mixes with drinking water, and you drink that or wash your food with it, then you’re drinking microbes and can get dysentery,” Zeitoun said. “If you’re forced to drink salty, brackish water, it just does your kidneys in, and then you’re on dialysis for decades.”Deliveries average less than three liters per person per day — a fraction of the 15 liters that humanitarian groups say is needed for drinking, cooking, and basic hygiene. In February, acute watery diarrhea accounted for less than 20 percent of reported illnesses in Gaza. By July, it had surged to 44 percent, raising the risk of severe dehydration, according to UNICEF, the UN children’s agency. Early in the war, residents said deliveries from Israel’s water company Mekorot were curtailed — a claim that Israel has denied.
Airstrikes destroyed some of the transmission pipelines as well as one of Gaza’s three desalination plants.
Bombardment and advancing troops damaged or cut off wells to the point that today only 137 of Gaza’s 392 wells are accessible, according to UNICEF. Water quality from some wells has deteriorated, fouled by sewage, the rubble of shattered buildings and the residue of spent munitions. Fuel shortages have strained the system, slowing pumps at wells and the trucks that carry water. The remaining two desalination plants have operated far below capacity or ground to a halt at times, aid groups and officials say. In recent weeks, Israel has taken some steps to reverse the damage. It delivers water via two of Mekorot’s three pipelines into Gaza and reconnected one of the desalination plants to Israel’s electricity grid, Deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel told The Associated Press. Still, the plants put out far less than before the war, said Monther Shoblaq, head of Gaza’s Coastal Municipalities Water Utility. That has forced him to make impossible choices. The utility prioritizes delivering water to hospitals and to the public. However, that means sometimes withholding water needed for sewage treatment, which can lead to neighborhood backups and increase health risks. Water hasn’t sparked the same global outrage as limits on food entering Gaza. But Shoblaq warned of a direct line between the crisis and potential loss of life. “It’s obvious that you can survive for some days without food, but not without water,” he said. Water access is steadying after Israel’s steps. Aid workers have grown hopeful that the situation will not worsen and could improve. Southern Gaza could get more relief from a desalination plant just across the border in Egypt. The plant wouldn’t depend on Israel for power, but since Israel holds the crossings, it will control the entry of water into Gaza for the foreseeable future. But aid groups warn that access to water and other aid could be disrupted again by Israel’s plans to launch a new offensive on some of the last areas outside its military control. Those areas include Gaza City and Muwasi, where a significant portion of Gaza’s population is now concentrated. In Muwasi’s tent camps, people line up for the sporadic arrivals of water trucks. Hosni Shaheen, whose family was also displaced from Khan Younis, already sees the water he drinks as a last resort. “It causes stomach cramps for adults and children, without exception,” he said. “You don’t feel safe when your children drink it.”

Israeli far-right minister backs contentious West Bank settlement plan
Agence France Presse/August 15, 2025
Israel's finance minister has backed plans to build 3,400 homes in a particularly contentious area of the occupied West Bank, calling for the territory's annexation in response to several countries' plans to recognize a Palestinian state. The United Nations chief warned that building Israeli homes in the area would "put an end to" hopes for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israel has long had ambitions to build on the sensitive parcel of land east of Jerusalem known as E1, but the plan has been frozen for decades amid international opposition. Israeli settlements in the West Bank are considered illegal under international law, while critics and the international community have warned construction on the roughly 12 square kilometers would undermine hopes for a contiguous future Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as its capital. The site sits between the ancient city and the Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim, near routes connecting the north and south of the Palestinian territory. There are also separate, frozen plans to expand Israel's separation barrier to envelop the area.
"Those who want to recognize a Palestinian state today will receive a response from us on the ground... Through concrete actions: houses, neighborhoods, roads and Jewish families building their lives," said Bezalel Smotrich, Israel's finance minister, who was speaking at a pro-settlement event on the advancement of plans for the E1 parcel. "On this important day, I call on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to apply Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, to abandon once and for all the idea of partitioning the country, and to ensure that by September, the hypocritical European leaders will have nothing left to recognize," the far-right figurehead added, using the Biblical term for the West Bank, which Israel has occupied since 1967. Britain and France are among several countries to announce in recent weeks plans to recognize a Palestinian state later this year, saying they wanted to keep the two-state solution alive.
'Breach of international law'
Stephane Dujarric, the spokesman for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, said "If this went ahead -- which we call on the Israeli government not to do... it would sever the northern and southern West banks." He added that "it would put an end to the prospects of a two-state solution".The Palestinian foreign ministry condemned the plans and called for "genuine international intervention and the imposition of sanctions on the occupation to compel it to halt the implementation". "Colonial construction in the E1 area is a continuation of the occupation's plans to destroy the opportunity for the establishment of a Palestinian state," it added. The European Union's chief diplomat, Kaja Kallas, said the plan "further undermines the two-state solution while being a breach of international law" and called on Israel "to desist".
Germany said it "strongly objects" to the plan and called on the Israeli government to "stop settlement construction", while Saudi Arabia also condemned the move "in the strongest possible terms".Israeli NGO Peace Now, which monitors settlement activity in the West Bank, denounced the E1 plan as "deadly for the future of Israel and for any chance of achieving a peaceful two-state solution". The NGO said the final approval hearing would be held next Wednesday by a technical committee under the defense ministry that has already rejected all objections to the proposals. After the bureaucratic steps are completed, "infrastructure work in E1 could begin within a few months, and housing construction within about a year", Peace Now said. The West Bank is home to around three million Palestinians, as well as about 500,000 Israeli settlers.

UN says at least 1,760 killed seeking aid in Gaza
AFP/August 15, 2025
JERUSALEM: The UN human rights office said Friday that at least 1,760 Palestinians had been killed while seeking aid in Gaza since late May, a jump of several hundred since its last published figure at the beginning of August. “Since 27 May, and as of 13 August, we have recorded that at least 1,760 Palestinians have been killed while seeking aid; 994 in the vicinity of GHF (Gaza Humanitarian Foundation) sites and 766 along the routes of supply convoys. Most of these killings were committed by the Israeli military,” the agency’s office for the Palestinian territories said in a statement. That compares with a figure of 1,373 killed the office reported on August 1. The update came as Gaza’s civil defense agency said at least 38 people were killed by Israeli fire on Friday, including 12 who were waiting for humanitarian aid.
The Israeli military said its troops were working to “dismantle Hamas military capabilities,” adding its forces were taking precautions “to mitigate civilian harm.”Media restrictions in Gaza and difficulties accessing swathes of the territory mean AFP is unable to independently verify the tolls and details provided by the civil defense agency and the Israeli military. On Wednesday, the chief of staff of the Israeli military said plans had been approved for a new offensive in Gaza, aimed at defeating Hamas and freeing all the remaining hostages. The military intends to take control of Gaza City and nearby refugee camps, some of the most densely populated parts of the territory, which has been devastated by more than 22 months of war. In recent days, Gaza City residents have told AFP of more frequent air strikes targeting residential areas, while earlier this week Hamas denounced “aggressive” Israeli ground incursions in the area. On Friday, the Israeli military said its troops were conducting a range of operations on the outskirts of the city. The Israeli government’s plans to expand the war have sparked an international outcry as well as domestic opposition. UN-backed experts have warned of widespread famine unfolding in the territory, where Israel has drastically curtailed the amount of humanitarian aid it allows in. Hamas’s October 2023 attack which triggered the war resulted in the deaths of 1,219 people, according to an AFP tally based on official figures. Israel’s offensive has killed at least 61,827 Palestinians, according to figures from the health ministry in Hamas-run Gaza which the United Nations considers reliable.

With US backing, Israel moves to divide West Bank and expand settlements
LBCI/August 15, 2025
With full U.S. support, the Israeli government is moving forward with a plan considered the most dangerous yet for derailing the Palestinian state project. The government is expected to give final approval next week for construction plans in the E1 area. The plan would divide the West Bank into two sections, separating the north from the south, forming the backbone of efforts to eliminate the idea of a Palestinian state. The government’s approval comes after years of delays due to international pressure and the dramatic, irreversible implications for the future of the territories under Israeli occupation. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich promoted his settlement plan, stating that a key condition of his coalition is to impose full Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank and link settlement activity there with Gaza.

UN rights office says Israeli settlement plan breaks international law
Arab News/August 15, 2025
The UN human rights office said on Friday an Israeli plan to build to build thousands of new homes between an Israeli settlement in the West Bank and near East Jerusalem was illegal under international law, and would put nearby Palestinians at risk of forced eviction, which it described as a war crime. Israeli far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich on Thursday vowed to press on a long-delayed settlement project, saying the move would “bury” the idea of a Palestinian state. The UN rights office spokesperson said the plan would break the West Bank into isolated enclaves and that it was “a war crime for an occupying power to transfer its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”About 700,000 Israeli settlers live among 2.7 million Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Israel annexed East Jerusalem in 1980, a move not recognized by most countries, but has not formally extended sovereignty over the West Bank. Most world powers say settlement expansion erodes the viability of a two-state solution by breaking up territory the Palestinians seek as part of a future independent state. The two-state plan envisages a Palestinian state in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza, existing side by side with Israel, which captured all three territories in the 1967 Middle East war. Israel cites historical and biblical ties to the area and says the settlements provide strategic depth and security and that the West Bank is “disputed” not “occupied.”

Libya to hold rare local vote in test for divided nation
AFP/August 15, 2025
TRIPOLI: Libya is set to hold rare municipal elections on Saturday, in a ballot seen as a test of democracy in a nation still plagued by division and instability. Key eastern cities — including Benghazi, Sirte and Tobruk — have rejected the vote, highlighting the deep rifts between rival administrations. The UN mission in Libya, UNSMIL, called the elections “essential to uphold democratic governance” while warning that recent attacks on electoral offices and ongoing insecurity could undermine the process. “Libyans need to vote and to have the freedom to choose without fear and without being pressured by anyone,” said Esraa Abdelmonem, a 36-year-old mother of three. “These elections would allow people to have their say in their day-to-day affairs,” she said, adding that it was “interesting to see” how the areas affected by the clashes in May would vote.Since the 2011 NATO-backed uprising that toppled longtime leader Muammar Qaddafi, Libya has remained split between Tripoli’s UN-recognized government, led by Prime Minister Abdulhamid Dbeibah and its eastern rival administration backed by military strongman Khalifa Haftar. Khaled Al-Montasser, a Tripoli-based international relations professor, called the vote “decisive,” framing it as a test for whether Libya’s factions are ready to accept representatives chosen at the ballot box. “The elections make it possible to judge whether the eastern and western authorities are truly ready to accept the idea that local representatives are appointed by the vote rather than imposed by intimidation or arms,” he said. Nearly 380,000 Libyans, mostly from western municipalities, are expected to vote. Elections had originally been planned in 63 municipalities nationwide — 41 in the west, 13 in the east, and nine in the south — but the High National Elections Commission (HNEC) suspended 11 constituencies in the east and south due to irregularities, administrative issues and pressure from local authorities.In some areas near Tripoli, voting was also postponed due to problems distributing voter cards. And on Tuesday, the electoral body said a group of armed men attacked its headquarters in Zliten, some 160 kilometers east of Tripoli. No casualty figures were given, although UNSMIL said there were some injuries. UNSMIL said the attack sought to “intimidate voters, candidates and electoral staff, and to prevent them from exercising their political rights to participate in the elections and the democratic process.”National elections scheduled for December 2021 were postponed indefinitely due to disputes between the two rival powers. Following Qaddafi’s death and 42 years of autocratic rule, Libya held its first free vote in 2012 to elect 200 parliament members at the General National Congress. That was followed by the first municipal elections in 2013, and legislative elections in 2014 that saw a low turnout amid renewed violence. In August that year, a coalition of militias seized Tripoli and installed a government with the backing of Misrata — then a politically influential city some 200 kilometers east of Tripoli — forcing the newly elected GNC parliament to relocate to the east. The UN then brokered an agreement in December 2015 that saw the creation of the Government of National Accord, in Tripoli, with Fayez Al-Sarraj as its first premier, but divisions in the country have persisted still. Other municipal elections did take place between 2019 and 2021, but only in a handful of cities.

Iran says 'working with China and Russia' to stop European sanctions
Agence France Presse/August 15, 2025
Iran said Thursday it was working with China and Russia to prevent the snapback of European sanctions over Tehran's nuclear program after Britain, France and Germany threatened to reimpose them. "We will try to prevent it," Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said in an interview with state TV. "We are working with China and Russia to stop it. If this does not work and they apply it, we have tools to respond. We will discuss them in due course."The trio of European powers, known as the E3, told the United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Wednesday that they were ready to reimpose sanctions on Tehran if no diplomatic solution was found by the end of August. All three were signatories to a 2015 deal that lifted sanctions in return for curbs on Iran's nuclear program. The agreement, which terminates in October, includes a "snapback mechanism" allowing sanctions to be restored. "We have made clear that if Iran is not willing to reach a diplomatic solution before the end of August 2025, or does not seize the opportunity of an extension, E3 are prepared to trigger the snapback mechanism," the group's foreign ministers said in the letter. "If Iran continues to violate its international obligations, France and its German and British partners will reimpose the global embargoes on arms, nuclear equipment and banking restrictions that were lifted 10 years ago at the end of August," French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot posted on X on Wednesday. Araghchi said the return of sanctions would be "negative" but that the predicted economic effects "have been exaggerated".
'Legally justified' -
The 2015 deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, effectively collapsed after US President Donald Trump withdrew from it in 2018 during his first term and restored crippling sanctions. European countries attempted to keep the deal alive, while Iran initially stuck to the terms before later ramping up its uranium enrichment. Earlier this year, the United States joined Israel in bombing Iran's nuclear facilities. Israel launched its attacks while Washington and Tehran were still pursuing nuclear talks, which have not since resumed. Western powers have long accused Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons, a charge the Iranian government strongly denies. Even before Israel attacked Iran, they had raised concerns about the lack of access given to inspectors from the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency. Iran halted all cooperation with the IAEA after the strikes. Last month, Araghchi sent a letter to the U.N. saying the European countries did not have the legal right to restore sanctions. The European ministers called the claim "unfounded". They insisted that, as JCPOA signatories, they would be "clearly and unambiguously legally justified in using relevant provisions" of UN resolutions "to trigger UN snapback to reinstate UNSC resolutions against Iran which would prohibit enrichment and re-impose U.N. sanctions."

The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources on August 15-16/2025
Hamas Has Left Netanyahu with No Option but to Occupy Gaza
Con Coughlin/Gatestone Institute/August 15/2025
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21831/hamas-israel-occupy-gaza
Hamas's terrorist leadership has demonstrated unequivocally it has no interest in agreeing to a ceasefire in Gaza.
One of the main sticking points in the Qatar talks was Hamas's insistence that it remains in control of Gaza, despite a number of Arab states issuing a joint declaration for the terrorist organisation to disband and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority.
Hamas's terrorist leadership was encouraged to adopt this hard-line position after a succession of naive Western leaders announced their intention to recognise a Palestinian state at next month's meeting of the UN Security Council, even though there is actually no such Palestinian state in existence.
The pitfalls of this completely unnecessary diplomatic grandstanding, which may well effectively cause the murder of the remaining 50 hostages who might still to be alive, were clearly evident when Hamas responded to Starmer's pledge by publicly hailing it as a "victory."
It is unclear how recognizing a terrorist state committed to obliterating its neighbour will bring about any kind of "peace."
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, alluding to the novel Frankenstein, responded to Macron's declaration: "Macron's unilateral 'declaration' of a 'Palestinian' state didn't say WHERE it would be. I can now exclusively disclose that France will offer the French Riviera & the new nation will be called 'Franc-en-Stine.'"
Hamas's intransigence has left Netanyahu with little option but to maintain military operations in Gaza until Israel has achieved its ultimate objective in the war -- namely the complete destruction of the terrorist organisation's military and political infrastructure in Gaza.
Hamas's terrorist leadership was encouraged to reject a ceasefire in Gaza after a succession of naive Western leaders announced their intention to recognise a Palestinian state next month. Basem Naim, a member of the Hamas political bureau and the terror organisation's former Gaza "Health Minister", said that UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer's move meant that "victory and liberation are closer than we expected", and that "international support for Palestinian self-determination shows we are moving in the right direction." Pictured: Naim in Istanbul on February 8, 2025. (Photo by Ozan Kose/AFP via Getty Images)
The international condemnation Israel has received after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced his plan to assume control of Gaza overlooks one critical fact. Netanyahu has no option other than to embark on this course of military action because Hamas's terrorist leadership has demonstrated unequivocally it has no interest in agreeing to a ceasefire in Gaza.
From the moment he returned to the White House in January, US President Donald Trump had made resolving the Gaza crisis one of his key foreign policy objectives. To this end, his negotiating team, led by special envoy Steve Witkoff, engaged in lengthy and extensive discussions in the Gulf state of Qatar with the express intention of implementing a lasting ceasefire.
As recently as early July, hopes were running high that a deal might be possible, especially after the Trump administration indicated that Israel had agreed to the "necessary conditions" to finalise a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump said the US would "work with all parties to end the War".
"I hope, for the good of the Middle East, that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better — IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE."
Trump's optimism, though, proved short-lived. It was not long before Hamas once again showed its true colours by showing no genuine interest in a deal, prompting the US to abruptly cut short its involvement by withdrawing its negotiating team from the Qatar talks.
Witkoff made his displeasure known, remarking that Hamas's response to the ceasefire deal "shows a lack of desire" to reach a deal.
"While the mediators have made a great effort, Hamas does not appear to be coordinated or acting in good faith. We will now consider alternative options to bring the hostages home and try to create a more stable environment for the people of Gaza."
One of the main sticking points in the Qatar talks was Hamas's insistence that it remains in control of Gaza, despite a number of Arab states issuing a joint declaration for the terrorist organisation to disband and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority.
Hamas's response was to issue its own declaration, insisting that it would not disarm until a Palestinian state had been created and recognised. Rejecting suggestions made by Witkoff that the terror group had "expressed its willingness" to lay down its arms, the leadership of Hamas, which is a proscribed terror group in the US, UK and EU, issued a statement claiming its right to remain the de facto ruler in Gaza.
Hamas issued a statement arguing that it could not yield its right to "resistance and its weapons" unless an "independent, fully sovereign Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital" was established.
As Netanyahu has been consistently clear that he will not tolerate Hamas remaining in Gaza in any shape or form, the terrorists' intransigence has effectively brought efforts to implement a ceasefire in Gaza to a standstill.
Furthermore, it now transpires that Hamas's terrorist leadership was encouraged to adopt this hard-line position after a succession of naive Western leaders announced their intention to recognise a Palestinian state at next month's meeting of the UN Security Council, even though there is actually no such Palestinian state in existence.
French President Emmanuel Macron has been particularly vocal on the subject, being the first Western leader to publicly declare his intention to recognise a Palestinian state next month.
In a post on X, Macron wrote:
"Consistent with its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognize the State of Palestine."
It is unclear how recognizing a terrorist state committed to obliterating its neighbour will bring about any kind of "peace."
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, alluding to the novel Frankenstein, responded to Macron's declaration:
"Macron's unilateral 'declaration' of a 'Palestinian' state didn't say WHERE it would be. I can now exclusively disclose that France will offer the French Riviera & the new nation will be called 'Franc-en-Stine.'"
Other Western leaders soon followed suit. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer attempted to blackmail Israel by suggesting the UK will recognise a Palestinian state if Israel does not end its military operations in Gaza. Meanwhile, Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney joined the growing clamour among naive Western leaders to recognise a non-existent Palestinian state, and, this week, Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, as well.
The pitfalls of this completely unnecessary diplomatic grandstanding, which may well effectively cause the murder of the remaining 50 hostages who might still to be alive, were clearly evident when Hamas responded to Starmer's pledge by publicly hailing it as a "victory."
Basem Naim, a member of the Hamas political bureau and the terror organisation's former Gaza "Health Minister", said that Starmer's move meant that "victory and liberation are closer than we expected", and that "international support for Palestinian self-determination shows we are moving in the right direction."
Apart from encouraging Hamas to refuse to accept the ceasefire terms negotiated by the Trump administration, the rush among Western leaders to acknowledge Palestinian statehood was also condemned by the governments of the US and Israel, and by former Israeli hostages who denounced the initiative as moral blackmail and rewarding terrorism.
Emily Damari, a British-Israeli hostage freed earlier this year after 471 days in captivity, directly accused Starmer of "rewarding terror".
"This move does not advance peace – it risks rewarding terror. It sends a dangerous message: that violence earns legitimacy," she said.
"By legitimising a state entity while Hamas still controls Gaza and continues its campaign of terror, you are not promoting a solution; you are prolonging the conflict. Recognition under these conditions emboldens extremists and undermines any hope for genuine peace. Shame on you."
Hamas's intransigence has left Netanyahu with little option but to maintain military operations in Gaza until Israel has achieved its ultimate objective in the war -- namely the complete destruction of the terrorist organisation's military and political infrastructure in Gaza.
**Con Coughlin is the Telegraph's Defence and Foreign Affairs Editor and a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
© 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.

A time to be bold and think big on urbanization
Richard Bush/Arab News/August 15, 2025
There is a global quest for urban innovation that enables cities to grow in ways that optimize space, enhance livability, and reduce the pressure on natural resources. Society is now acutely aware of major global environmental challenges. Climate change, pollution, desertification, and deforestation and biodiversity loss are topics frequently discussed worldwide. However, less commonly recognized are the profound implications of the thousands of new cities we will need to construct this century to accommodate the projected surge in the global population.
The regions most significantly impacted by this will include Africa, China, India and the Middle East. With an estimated 11.6 billion people expected to inhabit the planet by the end of the century, we have entered an era of unprecedented urbanization. Humanity is creating what urbanists Greg Clark and Borane Gille describe as a “planet of cities.”UN modeling projects that by 2100, the global urban population will increase from 2.6 billion to 9.6 billion. The number of cities with more than a million residents will grow from 275 to about 1,600. This equates to constructing more than 1,000 major cities in the next 75 years.
Whether nature can withstand this burden remains uncertain and is a matter of growing concern.The impact extends beyond how people live in cities: commuting, eating, cooling and cooking. The very process of building these cities will likely become one of the largest contributors to climate change. The construction and operation of urban spaces form a major global industry, encompassing real estate, infrastructure, utilities, transport, technology, and an array of associated goods and services.
Construction activities currently account for approximately 40 percent of annual global energy consumption and 36 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. The production of essential materials — steel, aluminum, cement, concrete and plastic — is energy-intensive and generates considerable pollution. The UN Environment Program underlines the fact that decarbonizing materials is vital for reducing emissions throughout the life cycle of buildings.
Overall, evidence shows that we are building and operating cities beyond safe environmental limits. Given the rapid pace of urban development, the challenge is to do better; to achieve sustainability standards that not only protect the environment but ideally restore resilience for future generations.
Solving the problem of sustainable cities is both a wicked challenge and a tremendous opportunity. The scale, complexity and urgency are daunting but the potential for innovation is enormous.Addressing this will unleash new technologies and usher in a green, smart economy.
In 2022, I learned that Saudi Arabia was constructing the world’s first sustainable city: NEOM, a transformative, giga-scale project on the northern Red Sea coast.
This city is envisioned as carbon-neutral, car-free, nature-positive, powered by renewable energy, and built with advanced technologies to meet bold environmental standards. Such ambition, vision and scale are precisely what the current era requires.
Projects such as NEOM inspire visionary leadership and the scaling of innovation necessary to move beyond incremental change and open the door to transformational progress.
During my three years as chief environment officer in this project, I witnessed NEOM already changing the supply of construction materials and goods, helping international companies and construction sectors transition toward clean manufacturing, renewable energy, and circular-economy principles.

Rethinking development in an era of upheaval
Mohamed A. El-Erian/Arab News/August 15, 2025
For many developing countries, the global economic landscape has shifted dramatically in recent years. Lower growth, disrupted supply chains, reduced aid flows and heightened financial market volatility represent significant headwinds. Underpinning these changes is a fundamental restructuring, driven by the developed world, of the postwar economic and financial order. Against this background, a handful of factors are becoming critically important for the current and future well-being of developing countries — and for the fate of multilateral institutions. For much of the period following the Second World War, the global economic and financial order operated as a core-periphery construct, with the US at its center. The US provided global public goods, led multicountry policy coordination and acted as a crisis manager, in accordance with a widely accepted set of rules and standards. The end goal was eventual convergence, securing an ever more integrated and prosperous world economy.
But three factors undermined this order. First, insufficient attention was paid to increasingly destabilizing distributional outcomes, leading to widespread alienation and marginalization within politically influential segments of society. Instead of continuing to influence politics, economics became subservient to it.
Second, the existing order struggled to integrate rapidly expanding large developing countries. The most notable example is China, whose immense economy but relatively low per capita income created a persistent misalignment between its domestic development priorities and its new global responsibilities. The world could no longer smoothly absorb the external consequences of China’s economic strategy, generating tensions that international governance structures have struggled to resolve.
There is nothing to replace the traditional core-periphery model, resulting in a bumpy journey toward an unclear destination
The third factor was the transformation of the US from a stabilizing force to a source of volatility. Contributing to this development were the 2008 global financial crisis (which originated in the US), the weaponization of tariffs against China in 2018 and the increasing use of payment system sanctions. It accelerated in recent years with the failure to ensure the equitable global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, the “uber-weaponization” of tariffs against friends and foes alike, the dismantling of America’s foreign aid system, and continued indifference to devastating humanitarian crises and repeated violations of international law. While the traditional core-periphery model is inherently ill-equipped to handle all this, there is nothing to replace it, resulting in a bumpy journey toward an unclear destination. Despite this, developing countries have navigated the changing landscape relatively well so far. Their success can be attributed largely to hard-won policy achievements, including the strengthening of macroeconomic frameworks and institutions in recent decades.
But to maintain this positive trajectory in an increasingly challenging external environment, developing countries must affirm four key policy priorities. The first is to preserve macroeconomic stability while aggressively addressing any structural and financial vulnerabilities, including shallow domestic financial markets, weak regulatory frameworks and governance deficits.
The second priority is to strengthen international links that boost resilience, improve agility and expand optionality. This requires coordinated, multiyear efforts to harmonize regulations, foster regional financial integration and build trade infrastructure.
Multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and regional development banks have a crucial role to play
Third, developing countries should prepare themselves to exploit the new opportunities created by innovations — from productivity enhancements in traditional sectors to improvements in social sectors where investment in human capital has the highest returns. Artificial intelligence, in particular, holds immense potential to revolutionize medicine, education and agriculture, which could help these countries leapfrog traditional development stages. Building a supportive ecosystem requires investing in digital infrastructure, cultivating a skilled workforce and developing an innovation-friendly regulatory environment.
Lastly, with many US assets appearing overvalued and US Treasuries becoming more volatile, the small but strategically important subgroup of developing countries with high levels of foreign reserves and substantial financial wealth in dollars is being pushed to reconsider their holdings’ traditional US overweight. This process will inevitably be protracted and complex and will require careful asset disaggregation, revised asset-allocation methodologies and new investment mindsets that look beyond conventional safe havens.
Multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and regional development banks have a crucial role to play in helping their members pursue such an approach. To become trusted advisers, these institutions must get better at compiling and disseminating best practices for new and evolving technologies that can improve health, educational and productivity outcomes, and they must do more to promote these technologies’ uptake. For example, their staff must be equipped to answer questions about interacting with AI agents, leveraging innovations to deliver essential services and managing the attendant risks.
Multilateral institutions should also encourage regional links and projects that facilitate trade, expand cross-border infrastructure and promote shared resource management. And in a world shaped increasingly by frequent shocks, there is an urgent need to enhance contingency funding facilities, such as by strengthening risk-sharing tools. Of course, this should not undermine the essential work that these institutions perform in fragile countries. Given the overwhelming evidence that traditional development models struggle in countries with such serious governance and security challenges, this, too, is an area that requires more out-of-the-box thinking. AI and other emerging technologies provide developing countries with a rare opportunity to unlock new pathways to inclusive economic growth. But exploiting this historic opportunity is far from automatic. Unless developing countries create the conditions necessary for the efficient and equitable diffusion of such innovations throughout their economies — starting, crucially, with the health and education sectors — they risk falling further behind, causing inequalities within and between countries to deepen and accelerating the fragmentation of the global order.
• Mohamed A. El-Erian, President of Queens’ College at the University of Cambridge, is a professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, an adviser to Allianz, and Chair of Gramercy Fund Management.
This commentary is based on the author’s keynote presentation at the 2025 Annual Bank Conference on Development Economics.
© Project Syndicate

How Azerbaijan-Armenia deal benefits Turkiye
Dr. Sinem Cengiz/Arab News/August 15, 2025
A long-standing impasse in the South Caucasus is finally beginning to break. After three decades, the borders between Azerbaijan and Armenia, as well as Turkiye and Armenia, are closer to reopening than ever before. When that day arrives, it will be a game-changer for the region. Armenia and Azerbaijan last week signed a peace framework in Washington. The two neighbors, long divided by territorial disputes, agreed to end hostilities, normalize relations and respect each other’s territorial integrity.
Besides the signatories, no other country will likely be more pleased with the peace declaration between Yerevan and Baku than Turkiye. As a close ally of Azerbaijan, Turkiye has also been engaged in normalization talks with Armenia in recent years. This process of normalization could now gain significant momentum. Ankara welcomed the peace declaration between Azerbaijan and Armenia and said it hoped a planned strategic transit corridor, which could boost its exports of energy and other resources through the South Caucasus, will open soon. The new agreement replaces the original Zangezur Corridor plan with the “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity.”
This marks the beginning of a new era in the South Caucasus, which has long been vulnerable to instability and tension
I see this as far more than just a strategic or a political development. It holds deep significance for the three nations and their people. It marks the beginning of a new era in the South Caucasus, which has long been vulnerable to instability and tension. The small states of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia are encircled by larger neighbors, namely Turkiye, Iran and Russia, each of which have critical stakes in the region. The challenge in the South Caucasus lies in the involvement of multiple actors, both regional and nonregional. Moreover, a range of material and nonmaterial issues have long complicated the situation in the region, making it an equation with several intersecting issues. Brokered by US President Donald Trump, the peace framework is a significant step toward solving many of these issues. However, there is a long path ahead that is fragile, given that this agreement and its outcomes do not align with the interests of all regional actors. As several analysts have noted, Russia and Iran are seen as the losers of Trump’s peace victory. Both have responded to the deal in a similar tone. While they “welcomed” the US-brokered peace agreement, they also warned against “foreign interference” — the US — that could further complicate the already-fragile situation in the South Caucasus.
Russia has long been a key player in the Azerbaijan-Armenia talks. However, in recent years, the relationships between both nations and the Kremlin have experienced a significant decline. Perhaps it was not surprising to see that the breakthrough was not brokered in Moscow. While much credit is given to the US mediation of this deal, the souring of Moscow’s relations with both Baku and Yerevan was certainly the major driver. The road to the Azerbaijan-Armenia deal passed through Abu Dhabi, Istanbul and Washington. The UAE’s involvement highlights the growing influence of the Gulf states in the South Caucasus, while Turkiye has emerged as a key player, especially as Iranian and Russian influence has faded. Here, the most significant point is that Turkiye’s growing role in the South Caucasus is fully aligning with US interests.
Ankara was in close coordination with Washington during the latter’s efforts to finalize this peace framework. Even when the possibility of escalation flared up in April between Azerbaijan and Armenia, it was Turkiye that stepped in to prevent further conflict. Again, it was Ankara that leveraged its influence over Azerbaijan, pushing the parties toward this deal. Turkiye was concerned that any change in Armenia’s leadership could tilt the regional balance back in Russia’s favor.
The most significant point is that Turkiye’s growing role in the South Caucasus is fully aligning with US interests
Dr. Sinem Cengiz
This deal has three main significant gains for Turkiye. Firstly, its relations with the US and the EU. Turkiye’s soured relations with Armenia were long a point of contention in Washington, where Armenian lobby groups have played a significant role. These lobbies have long been influential on issues related to Turkiye and Azerbaijan and they have historically had a strong influence on US politics. This influence even contributed to the tensions in Turkish-American relations during the 1980s. Turkiye was also butting heads with Brussels over its relations with Armenia. So, one of the most contentious issues between Turkiye and its Western allies is coming to an end with this deal.
The second gain is predominantly economic, which is what brings all these nations on the table. The deal creates an opportunity to establish a new equation of regional cooperation. The corridor will link these nations to Europe via Turkiye and, as Ankara says, it will be “a very beneficial development” for regional connectivity. Besides Turkiye, Armenia will keep legal control of the corridor, but it will gain from investment and transit revenue. Azerbaijan will gain faster, cheaper export routes for oil, gas and manufactured goods to the Turkish and European markets.
Thirdly, the benefit to Turkiye’s own normalization track with Armenia. Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Vahan Kostanyan stated that this deal will create an “important milestone” for normalization with Turkiye. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who called Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan following the signing of the deal, has also noted that the atmosphere for the implementation of agreements between Ankara and Yerevan is more favorable than ever. Last year, during a discussion with Kostanyan on the sidelines of a regional summit, he said Turkiye and Armenia had never come this close to normalization. He is absolutely right. As a scholar who has been part of the Turkish-Armenian efforts, I believe the current context strongly favors both Ankara and Yerevan.
• Dr. Sinem Cengiz is a Turkish political analyst who specializes in Turkiye’s relations with the Middle East. X: @SinemCngz

With an estimated 11.6 billion people expected to inhabit the planet by the end of the century, we have entered an era of unprecedented urbanization.
Richard Bush/Arab News/August 15, 2025
There are encouraging signs that NEOM and other giga-projects across the Middle East — such as Red Sea Global, Diriyah, Qiddiya, and Murrabba — are making a global impact, as highlighted by reports from the likes of the World Economic Forum and the G20’s Urban 20 initiative.
NEOM’s influence is driven by its massive scale, aggressive timelines, and the high expectations set by its leadership for climate, decarbonization, environmental and livability standards, nature conservation, and operational efficiency — which are achievable only through systemic change.
When a giga-project such as NEOM solves a problem, the global construction industry benefits, future cities benefit and, ultimately, all of society benefits. This demonstrates why large, ambitious projects are essential if we are to achieve both human progress and environmental sustainability in coming decades.
So, where will we find the inspiration, strategy and commitment to drive the construction industry’s transition to sustainability? Who will be involved and who will take responsibility? Business will be central to driving the sustainability transition for one good reason: it promises a competitive advantage in a rapidly changing marketplace. Conservative economists and seasoned business leaders alike are reading the situation and moving quickly to adapt. Demand for green goods and services is experiencing substantial growth that is expected to continue for many decades based on current forecasts.
Sustainability credentials are emerging as strong market differentiators, partly because of new regulations and standards set by governments that will not tolerate environmentally damaging industries and, more importantly, the conscious choice of customers, such as NEOM, who prioritize sustainability along with cost and quality. As citizens, we can all play a role in supporting and influencing businesses and governments to make the right choices when it comes to sustainability. There are encouraging signs of progress on a global scale, according to recent reports from leading organizations such as the WEF, UN Environment Programme, World Building Council, and U20. For example, the First Movers Coalition, established by the WEF, brings together global companies leveraging collective purchasing power to create a credible demand signal for change. Similarly, the First Suppliers Hub is a global repository of innovative and emerging products needed for decarbonization by 2050 in sectors such as aluminum, cement, concrete, steel, aviation, shipping and transport.
These examples demonstrate alternatives to the old business rules of competition and counterproductive isolationism, making way for new types of strategic collaboration founded on a shared interest in addressing sustainability. Saudi Arabia is showing its willingness to lean into the global challenge of building a sustainable future with courage, creativity, determination and proactive collaboration. Hopefully this example will inspire action. On a personal level, it was exciting to be part of NEOM and to work alongside some of the greatest minds and change-makers. It has given me confidence that we will find a sustainable path as we navigate the rise of cities and urbanization.
• Richard Bush is the former chief environment officer of NEOM and is recognized for his work across policy, science and innovation in the field of sustainable development.

Israel’s chokehold on US is beginning to loosen
Ray Hanania/Arab News/August 15, 2025
Has Israel’s government finally gone too far? Ever since it was founded in 1948, Israel has engaged in violence against Palestinians and used its support in America as a shield to prevent it from being punished at the UN. To ensure that America’s support never wavers, pro-Israel groups have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into manipulating the American political system, influencing election results and ensuring members of Congress shy away from questioning its misconduct. But ever since Israel’s government launched its war of vengeance against the Palestinians in Gaza in response to the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, its excessive violence, war crimes, genocide and even the murder of a handful of Americans have seemed to tilt the balance of support in the US. Recent polling shows that the American public has started to react to Israel’s excesses, with 60 percent now opposing Tel Aviv’s military action in Gaza. Israel’s violence, pushed by the influence of far-right religious extremists who control the government of right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has pushed open a door of judgment that it might not be able to close. Even worse for Israel is that its excessive military response has sparked a seismic political tremor that has started to reverberate among some Republican conservatives and mainstream Democrats, who for generations could be counted on to close their eyes to Israel’s extrajudicial killings, collective punishment and contempt for the international rule of law. We are starting to see the powerful chokehold that Israel has long had over American politics start to loosen. We have always seen the Democratic Party mildly slap Israel on the wrist for its violent excesses, but mainstream Democrats like Rep. Mike Quigley are now questioning Israel’s military actions and even calling for the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Israel’s excessive violence, war crimes and genocide have seemed to tilt the balance of support in the US
We have long heard those on the far left in the Democratic Party scream and stamp their feet with no impact on American society. They have excoriated Israel’s government for its hypocritical discriminatory policies against Christians and Muslims.
Meanwhile, the Republicans and evangelical Christian movements have always stood by Israel, giving it a shield against any form of criminal prosecution, even when its victims have been Americans. Conservatives may have winced at Israel’s abuses, but they never crossed the line to demand accountability or judgment.
Until now.
The tipping point came because Americans have begun to experience a weakening economy. Not only has inflation pushed the price of commodities like groceries, cars and clothing to new heights, but the costs of essentials like insurance, healthcare and property taxes have also risen dramatically. Many Americans are now struggling financially. The US also has a record national debt of more than $37 trillion, which is driving inflation and pushing the cost of products to unaffordable new heights. That economic reality is trumping America’s love affair with Israel, causing many Americans to ask: “Why?”
One of the strongest voices leading the backlash is a core member of President Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. The Republican from Georgia has started to question why America sacrifices so much for Israel.
Greene, a staunch, unapologetic champion of Trump, is the face of the new movement that is challenging Israel’s dominion over America and directly challenging Israel’s political powerbase in the US, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. This group has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on donations to the campaign coffers of hundreds of US politicians in order to ensure their subordination and subservience to Israel’s needs and demands.
Today’s economic reality is trumping America’s love affair with Israel, causing many Americans to ask: ‘Why?’
Greene is demanding that America stop giving Israel foreign aid. The US sends $4 billion in aid to Israel every year and it has also provided $18 billion in military assistance for Tel Aviv’s war on Gaza. She has the audacity to ask why. Why is America giving Israel so much money, which could instead be given to Americans who are suffering financially?
She posted on X this week: “AIPAC is trying to paint my America First message as ‘antisemitic’ because I don’t want to keep sending billions to the secular government of nuclear-armed Israel.”Greene has expanded her call to end all foreign aid — a call to arms that is being embraced by other mainstream MAGA Republicans like Rep. Thomas Massie. What is happening is a political revolution being driven by a worsening economy and by Israeli arrogance. In her post this week, Green concluded: “With $37 TRILLION in debt, I’m unapologetically America ONLY at this point. My loyalty is to the American people and my children’s generation. The people I was elected to represent. NOT ANY FOREIGN COUNTRY.”The growing criticism of Israel’s policies, combined with the financial pain many Americans are experiencing and the arrogance of foreign lobbyists who believe they can politically suffocate mainstream congressional antagonists, is undermining Israel’s grip over the American people. The changes may look small, but with the criticisms gaining momentum, at some point they will become unstoppable. There is an American idiom often used in politics that says, “give someone enough rope and they will hang themselves.” Israel is today tightening the noose around its own moral profligacy.
• Ray Hanania is an award-winning former Chicago City Hall political reporter and columnist. He can be reached on his personal website at www.Hanania.com. X: @RayHanania

Selected tweets for 15 August/2025
Mira/@MiraMedusa
To all who still value humanity, freedom, and human rights:
Sweida continues to bleed. Today, Nada Adel Amer was killed by Julani’s terrorists after they opened fire on cars crossing the humanitarian corridor from Sweida to Daraa at Al-Kaheel.
Another crime in broad daylight amid a month-long siege marked by ethnic cleansing, kidnappings, and systematic terror… including the recent abduction of Red Crescent staff and civilians. The tragedy deepens: Nada’s daughter, Rahaf Nofal, remains critically injured, denied medicine under the same siege that claimed her mother’s life. Silence is complicity. The world’s inaction stains humanity. We urge the international community, human rights organizations, and the Red Cross to act immediately: stop these crimes, break the siege, and protect civilians.

Einav Halabi
@EinavHalabi
Tom Barrack is a diplomatic disaster.
The Trump pick for US Ambassador to Turkey & Syria envoy has:
– Prioritized Gulf/Islamist interests over US values
– Enabled Julani & jihadist atrocities in #Syria
– Ignored intel on Druze massacre in Sweida
He must go. #save_sweida

Zéna Mansour
Sweida is under siege& attacks. Nada was killed by terrorists in a humanitarian corridor. Civilians, including Red Crescent staff, have been kidnapped by terrorists. The int community must act to stop these crimes, break the siege& protect civilians.

wassim Godfrey
Needs a patriotic brutal blunt descent leader to take the lead and a decision maker to change the mafiocrat system like Bukele or bachir or chamoun no mercy with corruption or terrorists militias whomever brings a brother hood project must be met by force and fire

American Alliance for Democratic Syria
Dear @AlinaHabba
You know what it means when jihadis rule an Arab country and move to wipe out Christian, Druze, and Alawite communities in the Middle East. You know the danger to our national security if al-Qaeda tightens its grip on Syria. Tell President Trump: Do not empower al-Qaeda’s Syria founder — and do not let him set foot in New York this September.

Lebanese Forces - USA
The Khomeinists of Lebanon seem to be determined to continue dragging Lebanon on the same suicidal path. Naim Qasem promised a delusional Karbala battle if the government tries to collect the weapons of Hezbollah. The rest of the Lebanese, the vast majority at this point, will not accept these threats anymore. We all stand behind the Lebanese government and trust in the wisdom of its leaders to navigate the country to safe harbors with the least bloodshed and damages.