English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For  August 17/2025
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2025/english.August17.25.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
Chief tax-collector, Zacchaeus receives Jesus in His House, Repents and offers the Penances
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 19/01-10/:"He entered Jericho and was passing through it. A man was there named Zacchaeus; he was a chief tax-collector and was rich. He was trying to see who Jesus was, but on account of the crowd he could not, because he was short in stature. So he ran ahead and climbed a sycomore tree to see him, because he was going to pass that way. When Jesus came to the place, he looked up and said to him, ‘Zacchaeus, hurry and come down; for I must stay at your house today.’So he hurried down and was happy to welcome him. All who saw it began to grumble and said, ‘He has gone to be the guest of one who is a sinner.’ Zacchaeus stood there and said to the Lord, ‘Look, half of my possessions, Lord, I will give to the poor; and if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I will pay back four times as much.’Then Jesus said to him, ‘Today salvation has come to this house, because he too is a son of Abraham.For the Son of Man came to seek out and to save the lost.’"

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on August 16-17/2025
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
Link to a Visionary Video Interview with Dr. Charle Chartouni on “Al-Hawiya” Website
President Aoun Inspects the Presidential Guard
‘Standard & Poor’s’ Maintains Lebanon’s Foreign Currency Rating at SD, Warns of Weak Governance
South Lebanon: Mayor of Mari Targeted by Israeli Fire
Geagea throws support behind state after Qassem's remarks
Salam slams Qassem's civil war 'threats'
Differences Between Paris and Washington Over UNIFIL’s Mandate
UNIFIL renewal talks progress as Lebanon hosts US officials: Here’s what we know
New ‘red line’ in Shebaa puts farmers, herders, and beekeepers at risk — the details
From 1993 to today: Hezbollah and the politics of protests in Lebanon
William Noun on Summons: Justice Doesn’t Scare Us, Charges Are Political
The Stages of Naim Qassem’s Grief/Johhny Kortbawi/This is Beirut/Aug 16/2025
Lebanon Reinforces Its Sovereignty as Hezbollah and Iranian Influence Decline/Amal Chmouny/This is Beirut/Aug 16/2025
Mohammad Raad and the “Paving the Sea” Project: A Political Epic of Delusion/Makram Rabah/Now Lebanon/August 16/2025
How Can We Understand Hezbollah’s Intransigence over Its Weapons?/Nadim Koteich/Asharq Al-Awsat/August 12/2025

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on August 16-17/2025
Israeli military prepares to relocate residents to southern Gaza, spokesperson says
Arab, Islamic foreign ministers condemn Netanyahu’s ‘Greater Israel’ remark
Israeli military prepares to relocate residents to southern Gaza, spokesperson says
Israel’s Netahyahu has become a ‘problem’, says Danish PM
UK must bring sick, injured children from Gaza ‘without delay,’ MPs say
Israeli army unit links Gaza journalists to Hamas to justify strikes – report
UN rights office says Israeli settlement plan breaks international law
UK to prosecute 60 people for supporting banned pro-Palestine group
Mother of missing journalist Austin Tice reveals newly declassified intelligence
Israel says its forces conducting operations on Gaza City outskirts
US suspends visas for Gazans after far-right influencer posts
Zelensky braces for perilous Trump talks in Washington on Monday
Putin says discussed Ukraine peace on ‘fair basis’ with Trump
Coalition of the Willing’ leaders to meet on Sunday
No more ‘acting’: Taliban mark fourth year in power by dropping interim titles

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources on August 16-17/2025
Question: “Can a Christian be demon possessed? Can a Christian be demonized?”/GotQuestions.org/August 16/2025
Iran Wants Negotiations for One Reason — To Survive and Strike Later/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Gatestone Institute/August 16/2025
Why food security in the Middle East is slipping even as global numbers improve/Zaira Lakhpatwala/Arab News/August 16, 2025
Tech leaders should focus on job creation, not worker displacement/Arnab Neil Sengupta/Arab News/August 16, 2025
From preventing harm to the maximization of suffering: How Europe fumbled migration/Hafed Al-Ghwell/Arab News/August 16, 2025
Israel is moving one (big) step closer to annexing Gaza/Yossi Mekelberg/Arab News/August 16, 2025
Right-wing culture warfare comes to Germany/Jan-Werner Mueller/Arab News/August 16, 2025
Freedom of Religion in Turkey: Foreign Policy Implications/Soner Cagaptay/The Washington Institute/Aug 16/2025
Selected tweets for 16 August/2025

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on August 16-17/2025
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.

Link to a Visionary Video Interview with Dr. Charle Chartouni on “Al-Hawiya” Website
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/08/146350/
August 16/2025
An objective and sovereign reading of the major problematic files confronting Lebanon’s rulers and people in light of the hallucinations and delusions of the terrorist Hezbollah, the denial of its jihadist patron Iran to acknowledge its defeat, the parrot-like and foolish rhetoric of Naim Qassem, the subversive and deceitful nature of Hezbollah, and the possibility that Israel may once again strike Lebanon.

President Aoun Inspects the Presidential Guard
This is Beirut/Aug 16/2025
The President of the Lebanese Republic, Joseph Aoun, paid a visit to the Presidential Guard company of the Internal Security Forces, where he was welcomed by the unit commander, as well as several officers and other personnel. During his tour, President Aoun inspected the company's building, inquired about the progress of the missions entrusted to the units and reviewed the vehicles and equipment used in the performance of their duties. He praised the high level of preparedness and discipline of the company's members, emphasizing the central role they play in protecting the Presidency of the Republic and their total commitment to fulfilling their duties. President Aoun reaffirmed his full support for the security institution, stressing the importance of remaining constantly prepared in the face of the difficult circumstances the country is going through.

‘Standard & Poor’s’ Maintains Lebanon’s Foreign Currency Rating at SD, Warns of Weak Governance
This is Beirut/Aug 16/2025
The international credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s has raised Lebanon’s long-term local currency rating to CCC with a stable outlook, while maintaining its foreign currency rating at SD, according to Reuters. The agency explained that the risks of Lebanon defaulting on local debt remain, due to spending pressures, limited access to markets and weak management and governance. It also noted that liquidity restrictions in the local banking system, along with an unsupportive economic environment, further increase these risks. Standard & Poor’s added that it does not expect any tangible progress in restructuring Lebanon’s debt in the near term, reflecting the ongoing challenges of the Lebanese economy and the constraints hindering its financial recovery.

South Lebanon: Mayor of Mari Targeted by Israeli Fire
This is Beirut/Aug 16/2025
The mayor of Mari, Youssef Fayad, narrowly escaped death after being hit by a barrage of Israeli fire that flew just above his head while he was accompanying an employee of the Southern Council near the Abbasiya-Majidiyeh intersection. An Israeli drone also targeted an excavator in the town of Aitaroun. Another dropped a sound bomb near farmers in Kfar Kila, while a drone dropped a similar bomb on the town of Ramya, without causing any casualties. In addition, a reconnaissance drone flew at low altitude over the Rachaya region, while others were reported over Mahmoudiya, Aichiyeh, Jarmak, Habboush, Choukin, Aaba, Jbaa, Kfar Fila, Mazraat al-Bayyada, Bssaylia (in the Nabatiyeh district), as well as in the Marjayoun region and over the Roumine riverbed, Khoureibeh, Humin, Wadi Bnaafoul and Anqoun.
Another Israeli drone dropped an incendiary bomb in the afternoon on land in the village of Chihine, in the caza of Tyre, causing a fire. Civil defense teams intervened to contain and extinguish the flames.

Geagea throws support behind state after Qassem's remarks
Naharnet/Aug 16/2025
Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea said Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem’s latest speech is “rejected in all standards.”“It represents a direct threat to the Lebanese government in the first place, to the parliamentary majority that granted this government confidence in the second place, and to all state institutions in Lebanon, topped by the Presidency and the Premiership. It is also a threat to every free Lebanese,” Geagea said in a statement. “If Sheikh Naim supposes that there are no longer free Lebanese in Lebanon, then he is mistaken, or rather very mistaken. And if he supposes that in this manner he would impose his nonexistent clout on these free Lebanese, then he is also mistaken, mistaken, mistaken,” the LF leader added. “As we represent the vast majority in Lebanon in these delicate moments of Lebanon’s history, we all stand together as free Lebanese behind our constitutional institutions, represented especially in the president and the premier, who are trying with all they have of patriotism, vigor and strength to return Lebanon to itself and to restore the actual state,” Geagea went on to say. He added: “The stage we are living is foundational par excellence and we will spare no efforts in supporting our state institutions, standing united them behind them and next them, and exerting utmost effort not to allow anyone to foil this attempt anew.”Qassem said Friday that "the government is implementing an American-Israeli order to end the resistance, even if it leads to civil war and internal strife.""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," Qassem added. He also urged the government "not to hand over the country to an insatiable Israeli aggressor or an American tyrant with limitless greed," adding the Lebanese state would "bear responsibility for any internal explosion and any destruction of Lebanon."

Salam slams Qassem's civil war 'threats'
Naharnet/Aug 16/2025
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has accused Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem of making "unacceptable" threats to unleash civil war, after the Hezbollah leader vowed to confront government plans to disarm his group. In a post on X, Salam said Qassem’s remarks "constitute an implicit threat of civil war."He added that "any threat or intimidation related to such a war is totally unacceptable."Salam also hit back at Hezbollah's characterization of the government’s disarmament push as an American-Israeli effort. "Our decisions are purely Lebanese, made by our cabinet, and no one tells us what to do," he said.
"The Lebanese have the right to stability and security... without which the country will not be able to recover, and no reconstruction or investment will take place," Salam added. Earlier on Friday, Qassem had said that "the government is implementing an American-Israeli order to end the resistance, even if it leads to civil war and internal strife." "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," Qassem added.He also urged the government "not to hand over the country to an insatiable Israeli aggressor or an American tyrant with limitless greed," adding the Lebanese state would "bear responsibility for any internal explosion and any destruction of Lebanon."

Differences Between Paris and Washington Over UNIFIL’s Mandate
This is Beirut/Aug 16/2025
Al-Jadeed TV revealed on Saturday differences between the United States and France over the renewal of the mandate of the UNIFIL force operating in southern Lebanon. Washington wants a one-year renewal, which would be the last, while Paris wants a renewal without specifying a duration. Political sources told the channel that meetings held in Paris have not yet resolved this dispute, while the UN Security Council meeting scheduled to discuss the renewal issue is approaching in two weeks. Despite the US administration's dismay at the statements made by Hezbollah’s Secretary-General Naim Qassem, the same sources indicated that Washington is satisfied with Lebanon's official position and does not intend to exert pressure on the Lebanese state in this regard. While Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri awaits the results of the visit by the US delegation, which includes US special envoy to Lebanon Tom Barrack and his predecessor Morgan Ortagus, Al-Jadeed noted that “the ball is now in the Lebanese government's court,” which has already made a decision regarding its position on UNIFIL and must now determine how to proceed. The data indicates that discussions with the US delegation will not be limited to the implementation of the ceasefire agreement, but will also directly address the future of the international forces' mandate in the South, amid growing diplomatic pressure as the renewal date approaches.

UNIFIL renewal talks progress as Lebanon hosts US officials: Here’s what we know
LBCI/Aug 16/2025
On the issue of renewing the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) mandate, diplomatic contacts are intensifying between Beirut and key capitals ahead of Morgan Ortagus’ visit to Beirut on Sunday, accompanied by U.S. envoy Tom Barrack.
Lebanon plans to deliver a clear message rejecting any changes to the peacekeeping force’s mandate, insisting it remain as it was set in last year’s renewal decision. The Lebanese position is based on two factors: UNIFIL’s mission and its funding. Beirut has been in continuous contact with both the French and American sides, alongside a meeting held in Paris two days ago between the U.S. and France dedicated to discussing the renewal of UNIFIL’s mandate. France, as the “penholder” on Lebanon at the U.N. Security Council, is playing a key role. According to reports, Washington had insisted, until the Paris meeting, on introducing changes to the resolution and to UNIFIL’s tasks. It is still unclear how the United States will respond to Lebanon’s stance, though Beirut is counting on initial signs suggesting possible flexibility in Washington’s position, which could be reflected during Ortagus and Barrack’s visit. Britain, like France, supports keeping the mission unchanged. Lebanon will tell the American visitors that it is firmly committed to its position and that the Lebanese army will remain ready to work alongside UNIFIL in the south to ensure no incidents occur between the peacekeepers and local residents.
Sources confirmed to LBCI that Lebanon will emphasize three key points to the U.S. officials. The first is that UNIFIL is a vital necessity for the south and a cornerstone in implementing Resolution 1701, strengthening the Lebanese army’s deployment along the border.
The second is that the Lebanese state plans to increase troop numbers in the south by 4,500 soldiers, after having already added 1,500 earlier, bringing the total to around 10,000 by the end of this year. This expansion requires ongoing coordination with UNIFIL. The army has completed the first recruitment and training phase and is preparing for the second. The third is that UNIFIL is not only a military or security force, but also plays an essential social and humanitarian role, providing health care, education, and employment opportunities. This is especially critical after Israeli attacks destroyed most social and health centers in the south. Many Lebanese families, from the south and beyond, rely on jobs created by UNIFIL. As for funding, sources said that if Washington insists on cutting its contribution to U.N. agencies, including UNIFIL in Lebanon, Arab and European states are expected to step in and cover the shortfall. European officials have already assured all parties of their commitment to maintaining UNIFIL’s presence, mandate, and budget without any reduction.

New ‘red line’ in Shebaa puts farmers, herders, and beekeepers at risk — the details
LBCI/Aug 16/2025
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.

From 1993 to today: Hezbollah and the politics of protests in Lebanon
LBCI/Aug 16/2025
“Street protests” may be common in democratic countries, but in a politically sensitive country like Lebanon, they are far more complicated. Hezbollah leader Sheikh Naim Qassem’s remarks on Friday about postponing the idea of demonstrations served as a warning that such protests would occur—but according to the party’s timing. Since 1993, Hezbollah has taken to the streets under various banners. In September of that year, under the slogan of opposing the Oslo Accords between the Palestinian Authority and Israel, a Hezbollah-organized demonstration on the airport bridge clashed with Lebanese army forces. Gunfire during the demonstration resulted in nine casualties among protesters. In 2006, Hezbollah supporters, along with allies including the Amal Movement, the Free Patriotic Movement, and the Marada Movement, protested against then-Prime Minister Fouad Siniora’s government, demanding its resignation. They staged a sit-in in central Beirut for nearly a year and a half. Tensions escalated after the government decided to shut down the party’s private communications network and dismiss the airport security chief, Brigadier General Wafiq Choucair. The party clearly threatened to use the streets to oppose these measures. Over four days, armed clashes erupted between Hezbollah and its allies and opponents—particularly members of the Progressive Socialist Party and the Future Movement—in Beirut, the north, and the Bekaa. The confrontations left more than 100 casualties and ended with the Doha Agreement. In 2011, Hezbollah, through a gathering of dozens of young men dressed in black, sent a clear message rejecting the nomination of Saad Hariri to head the government. When the October 17, 2019, revolution began, supporters of Hezbollah and Amal Movement opposed protesters in Beirut calling for the resignation of the country’s three top leaders, including Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri. They repeatedly took to the streets, attacked demonstrators, and destroyed their tents, causing several injuries.October 14, 2021, was no ordinary day. Hezbollah and Amal Movement supporters descended near the Justice Palace to demand the dismissal of the judicial investigator in the Beirut Port explosion case, Judge Tarek Bitar. On their way back, they clashed with young men from the Ain el-Remmaneh neighborhood affiliated with the Lebanese Forces. The Lebanese army intervened. The events resulted in seven casualties among supporters of the Hezbollah-Amal Movement political duo. Earlier this year, in protest against the suspension of Iranian civil flights to Beirut, Hezbollah supporters took to the streets, organizing motorcycle rallies that reached distant areas of Beirut's southern suburbs and blocking the airport highway. The army intervened to clear the road. A similar incident occurred ten days ago after the government decided to place weapons solely under state control. Careful army measures managed to control the movements and prevent clashes or security disruptions.

William Noun on Summons: Justice Doesn’t Scare Us, Charges Are Political
This is Beirut/Aug 16/2025
The Central Criminal Investigations Department has summoned activist William Noun for questioning after a complaint was filed against him on charges of inciting sectarian strife and violating the law on dealings with Israel. In an interview, William Noun expressed surprise at being summoned based on a lawsuit filed by lawyer Hassan Ibrahim, known to be close to Hezbollah. Noun explained that the complaint stemmed from his remarks on the anniversary of the port explosion. “These accusations are pure fabrication,” he said. “The confrontation with Hezbollah did not start today; it began on August 4, 2020 — and we will carry it forward without fear, despite all pressures.”He asked, “Is describing reality now considered collaboration with the enemy?”Despite what he described as an attempt to build a new political case against him, Noun voiced strong confidence in the current judicial leadership.
Noun confirmed that he will attend the interrogation session. He concluded by emphasizing that the families of the Beirut Port blast victims will stand by him on the day of the investigation, noting that the matter has gone beyond individuals to become a collective struggle for truth and justice.

The Stages of Naim Qassem’s Grief
Johhny Kortbawi/This is Beirut/Aug 16/2025
A clear separation is emerging between Naim Qassem and Hezbollah, or even between various factions within the party and its wider base of supporters, following the absence of a central figure like Hassan Nasrallah, which has undermined decision-making and centralized authority. Historically, Qassem played a secondary role within Hezbollah, primarily serving as a messenger when Nasrallah preferred not to intervene directly in key decisions or public statements. But the assassination of Nasrallah, along with Hashem Safieddine, the frontrunner to succeed him, placed Qassem in an unenviable position: that of the “Designated Survivor.” This term, borrowed from the US government, refers to one person kept away from major gatherings in order to assume leadership if the entire top tier is eliminated. Typically, this person is low in the hierarchy because senior figures are expected to attend key gatherings.
Naim Qassem now finds himself in a deeply uncomfortable position, in what can be described as a state of profound psychological mourning, as defined by Swiss-American psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross in her five-stage model of grief.
Hezbollah and Qassem are not immune to human responses to loss. The state of mourning since the recent war in Lebanon, from Pager’s attacks to the present, has persisted, albeit in various forms and with innovative methods — many involving motorcycle rallies.
The first stage of grief is denial. This was evident in the rallies of Hezbollah supporters who initially refused to believe Nasrallah had been assassinated, continuing to await him, as if he would one day reappear, and holding on to the belief that they had not lost the war and were still on course to liberate Jerusalem.
The government’s decision last week to monopolize all weapons under state control shattered this denial and moved Hezbollah’s supporters into the second stage: anger. This anger now manifests in motorcycle rallies and sharply escalatory rhetoric: threats, insults, and vulgarities aimed at the president, the prime minister, and any minister supporting the decision. Naim Qassem’s most recent remarks only reinforce this analysis. His words reflect a leadership and a popular base steeped in fury, framing martyrdom as the only path as if to say: “I’d rather fall in battle than surrender my cause.”
Victimhood is likely next, coinciding with parliamentary elections. Hezbollah will present itself as wronged and abandoned, lamenting that reality on the ground does not match its aspirations, and claiming it has been left to face unending crises. This narrative will serve as the backbone of an electoral campaign built atop the rubble of the last war. Depression will surface as Lebanon negotiates a truce—or even peace—with Israel. This outcome has become inevitable, even if Hezbollah tries to reject it or repackage it with phrases like “commitment to the ceasefire.”
The fifth and final stage will be acceptance. This will come only when Hezbollah, and the Shia community that supports it, acknowledges that the state’s train has already departed, and that it must board it at any cost, recognizing that the government alone can protect its community and its people.

Lebanon Reinforces Its Sovereignty as Hezbollah and Iranian Influence Decline
Amal Chmouny/This is Beirut/Aug 16/2025
In recent months, the geopolitical landscape in Lebanon has undergone a notable shift as Iran's influence, particularly through its support of Hezbollah, faces growing scrutiny and challenge. The once seemingly unassailable grip that Tehran had over Lebanese affairs is being tested, as internal tensions rise and the Lebanese government seeks to reclaim its sovereignty.
Historically, Iran's backing of Hezbollah has been seen as a source of strength. However, many now perceive this relationship as a double-edged sword. Iranian advisers such as Ali Akbar Velayati have acknowledged Hezbollah's vulnerabilities, signaling a significant shift in dynamics. Velayati’s comments, while reaffirming Iran's commitment to the so-called "Axis of Resistance," curiously highlighted the Houthis in Yemen as a “gem,” suggesting waning confidence in Hezbollah’s regional standing.
Compounding the situation, a recent visit by senior Iranian official Ali Larijani to Beirut has raised alarms about potential repercussions for Lebanon's evolving political landscape. Larijani's discussions with Lebanese leaders were perceived as an assertion of influence at a time when the government is increasingly focused on disarming Hezbollah. Observers report that Iranian officials, including Larijani, expressed dissatisfaction with these governmental initiatives, hinting at Iran's intent to counter the Lebanese drive for autonomy. This interference threatens to exacerbate existing divisions within Lebanon.
In stark contrast, Lebanon's government is gaining momentum in its push to reduce Hezbollah's military clout. The political will among state leaders to rein in the militant group has never been stronger, raising pressing questions about Hezbollah's future in Lebanon. US analysts observe that as the government's resolve strengthens, Hezbollah’s historical dominance might be increasingly at risk. A diplomatic source in Washington stated, “This shift in dynamics is significant. A weakened Hezbollah jeopardizes not only its military capabilities but also its political standing in Lebanon.” Such sentiments underline a burgeoning consensus that the image of Hezbollah as an unstoppable force is beginning to fracture amid evolving threats and internal dissent.
The Lebanese government's resolve stands out amidst this backdrop. Following a ceasefire brokered in November 2024, officials have taken pivotal steps towards disarmament, notably with a significant policy decision announced on August 7 aimed at limiting Hezbollah's military capabilities. This marks a crucial departure from years of inaction, reflecting a broader strategy to reassert authority over all armed groups within the nation.
Financial moves also highlight the government's strategic approach to undermining Hezbollah's operational strength. Lebanon's central bank has recently prohibited financial institutions from engaging in transactions with Hezbollah's Al Qard Al Hassan bank, targeting the essential financial foundations on which the group relies. A senior diplomat in Washington emphasized that the push for a monopoly on weapons is indicative of a growing consensus for legitimate state authority over armed factions.
Moreover, disillusionment among Hezbollah’s base is increasingly evident, driven by the group's failure to meet its followers’ pressing economic and security needs. Some US experts contend that this discontent is providing fertile ground for the Lebanese government's disarmament initiatives, solidifying public support for the state over the militant group. They suggest that internal dissatisfaction could significantly reshape Hezbollah's support base, elevating the stakes in ongoing disarmament discussions. Domestically, areas that were once strongholds of Hezbollah are gradually seeing a shift in public sentiment, with increasing calls for greater state authority. There is also heightened activity from civil society and local municipalities advocating for reforms to reduce Hezbollah's influence. Regionally, Tehran is closely monitoring this decline and appears to be adjusting its strategies by increasing support for Hezbollah to maintain its regional power dynamics. International dynamics further complicate the situation, with the United States stepping up support for the Lebanese government's efforts to curtail Hezbollah's influence. Washington's renewed commitment to bolster Lebanon's sovereignty aligns closely with broader US, European, and Arab interests in the region, focused on countering Iranian hegemony and promoting stability. A US expert in Middle Eastern politics pointed out, “The disarmament of Hezbollah is integral not only to Lebanon's future but also to America’s broader strategy in the region to mitigate Iran’s hegemonic aspirations.” This synchronization of interests reveals a concerted effort to revitalize Lebanese state-building, as external support aims to strengthen Lebanon's autonomy and governance.
Although the drive toward sovereignty is fraught with challenges, the shifting dynamics suggest a more complex future for Hezbollah and the regional balance of power—one that could redefine Lebanon’s political landscape for years to come.

Mohammad Raad and the “Paving the Sea” Project: A Political Epic of Delusion
Makram Rabah/Now Lebanon/August 16/2025
Supporters of Lebanon's Hezbollah militant group rally in cars and motorbikes to protest the government's endorsement of a plan to disarm it in Beirut's southern suburbs on August 8, 2025. Lebanon's cabinet meets on Thursday for the second time in days to discuss disarming Hezbollah after the Iran-backed group rejects the government's decision to take away its weapons. The meeting considers a US proposal that includes a timetable for Hezbollah's disarmament, with Washington pressing Beirut to take action. (Photo by Fadel Itani/NurPhoto) (Photo by Fadel Itani / NurPhoto / NurPhoto via AFP)
🔊 Listen to Post
In times of crisis, real leaders turn to reason and wisdom. In Lebanon, however, some “leaders” seem intent on drowning in an ocean of delusion. The latest remarks by Mohammad Raad, head of Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc, are not merely a political stance—they are the official launch of a new national priority: the “Paving the Sea” project. It is, apparently, the only cause Hezbollah is prepared to die for.
When Raad insists that his party will “die before handing over its weapons,” he is not defending Lebanon or its sovereignty. He is defending the exclusive privileges of an Iranian-sponsored militia. The irony is that these weapons have not liberated a single inch of occupied territory in years, they have rather invited occupation. Instead, they have liberated the Lebanese from their economy, from stability, and from any chance at a dignified life.
Hezbollah loves to cast itself as Lebanon’s protector. In reality, it is the guardian of stockpiles—stockpiles of arms and explosives buried in residential neighborhoods. From the port to the south, from the “shell warehouses” to the “banana tunnels,” the party has perfected the art of holding civilians hostage to its military agenda. When these depots explode, killing soldiers and civilians alike, responsibility is deflected—sometimes onto Israel, sometimes onto a global conspiracy, and sometimes onto a “technical error.” The obvious question—what are these weapons doing there in the first place?—is never answered in Raad’s presence.His rhetoric is not new. Hezbollah’s tired tactic of warning against civil war has become the bad joke of Lebanese politics, repeated at every critical juncture. But this time, Raad offered the Lebanese a binary choice: accept Hezbollah’s arms or start paving the sea, a term which is used to indicate the impossibility of things . Frankly, the second option sounds less destructive.
The tragic comedy is that the same party that threatens the state if it touches its weapons is also the first to beg foreign mediators for a ceasefire at the onset of any clash with Israel. Just recently, Hezbollah rushed to secure a U.S.-brokered truce. Today, it lectures the public on steadfastness and martyrdom—as if the Lebanese people suffer from collective amnesia. What is most absurd is Hezbollah’s expectation that not only should the public tolerate its armed status, but they should applaud it. The party wants the Lebanese to believe that the presence of a foreign-backed militia is not only normal but necessary. And when someone disagrees, accusations of treason and collaboration follow. This political playbook is old, and its stench has reached even parts of Hezbollah’s own base.
The “Paving the Sea” project, as Raad now envisions it, is simply the continuation of Hezbollah’s decades-old policy: wasting time, sinking the country deeper into crises, and blocking every attempt at reform. The only difference is that the sea, at least, remains beautiful even if left unpaved—while Lebanon, dragged under by Hezbollah’s arms, has hit rock bottom.
One cannot help but recall Paving the Sea, the acclaimed novel by Lebanese writer Rashid al-Daif, who depicts Beirut’s glittering façade hiding its seedy underbelly—most vividly in the “public market” for prostitution. Raad’s recent speeches resemble a guided tour of that market: the same glossy patriotic storefront concealing the same rotten merchandise. Hezbollah thrives on this deception, hiding the consequences of its actions behind curtains of slogans. If Raad insists on dying before surrendering his weapons, so be it—but the Lebanese deserve to walk out of this dark alley his party has turned into the country’s fate.Today, Lebanon faces two clear options: continue living under the mercy of an armed faction serving a foreign agenda, or put an end to the farce. Just as paving the sea is an impossible task, so too is Hezbollah’s long-term domination of the Lebanese state. No matter how long it takes, it will fail—whether under public pressure, suffocating international isolation, or simply because it has become a burden even to those who carry it. In the end, the sea will remain as it is. But Hezbollah’s weapons will fall—collapsing under their own useless weight. And when that happens, Mohammad Raad may realize that paving the sea would have been far easier than facing a people determined to live under the rule of a state, not the shadow of a militia.
**This article originally appeared in Nidaa al-Watan
**Makram Rabah is the managing editor at Now Lebanon and an Assistant Professor at the American University of Beirut, Department of History. His book Conflict on Mount Lebanon: The Druze, the Maronites and Collective Memory (Edinburgh University Press) covers collective identities and the Lebanese Civil War. He tweets at @makramrabah

How Can We Understand Hezbollah’s Intransigence over Its Weapons?
Nadim Koteich/Asharq Al-Awsat/August 12/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/08/146344/
The fate of Hezbollah’s arms is no longer a domestic dispute between advocates of sovereignty and supporters of the “resistance.” Since the 2023–2024 war with Israel, this question has been distilling into an existential crisis facing the party.
The slogan raised by the leader of Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc, Mohammad Raad, “We will die before surrendering the weapons,” reflects his awareness that his camp has no other option but to cling to what remains of its arsenal. Abandoning its arms would break Hezbollah’s political and ideological foundations. These actions are not mere reflections of political intransigence. Given its rigid ideology and uncompromising idealism, and because Iran’s regional project is in its DNA, Hezbollah is not an agile actor with the capacity to fundamentally change in nature. Moreover, it has built its power around the notion that weapons are an identity, not merely a means to an end. In truth, the Lebanese have never associated Hezbollah with a domestic political or economic project. Its engagement in public affairs has always revolved around the “resistance” and the imperatives of regional conflicts. Thus, surrendering its arms would entail redefining the party from scratch and sacrificing its raison d’etre.
Operating with these restrictive parameters, Hezbollah has dragged its feet. Its bets verge on wishful thinking: the Lebanese state remaining too weak to follow through on its commitment to disarm the party, a new episode of regional chaos that destabilizes Syria’s emerging political authorities, and the materialization of the high-level assurances it has received Tehran’s top brass regarding its survival and armament. That is, Hezbollah is betting that it will get lucky- or even awaiting miracles. The fate of these matters is totally beyond Hezbollah’s control, and external factors (that are consistently going against it) will determine how things play out.After years of collapse, Lebanon’s state institutions are steadily, albeit slowly, consolidating and enhancing their credibility in the eyes of a broadening segment of the population. This trajectory undermines the slander and vilification of the state that Hezbollah has long used to challenge the state’s legitimacy and justify its own existence.As for its wager on vacuums in Syria that would grant it more room for maneuvre, current developments on the point in the opposite direction. The political and military situation in Syria suggests that the weight of open-ended geopolitical conflicts and regional actors are declining, consolidating the new regime in Damascus.
Even Iranian support, which had constituted the cornerstone of Hezbollah’s existence for decades, is increasingly constrained. Tehran is grappling with a severe economic crisis amid volatile shifts in the internal balance of power between the different wings of the regime. Iran is preparing for a new phase, all while trying to put the military and security apparatus (that had been battered by deep Israeli strikes during the 12-day war) back together. These considerations have compelled Iran to prioritize its military and financial needs over coming to the aid of its allies, foremost among them Hezbollah.
All of that means the party is fighting for its very survival. However, while turning to politics has offered armed movements elsewhere in the world a lifeline, allowing them to maintain some influence, material conditions have left Hezbollah hostage to its weapons.
The Irish Republican Army, despite being deeply rooted in the conflict with Britain, pursued a clear, localized national cause: unifying Ireland and defending the rights of nationalist Catholics. That is why it managed to survive the shift from armed struggle to a political course that culminated in the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, which left Sinn Fein in a strong position politically.
Colombia’s Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC), despite becoming involved in the drug trade and losing some of their legitimacy as result, was nonetheless pursuing a domestic agenda to a social and economic struggle in Colombia. The FARC thereby managed to conclude a peace agreement that, despite only being partially implemented, granted them a political foothold. Hezbollah, in contrast, has never pursued a genuine domestic cause that could underpin a shift toward politics. Even its claims to defending Lebanon’s sovereignty and confronting occupation were never presented as ultimate, final objectives. These goals were presented as means for furthering regional ambitions. Its ideological link to its axis, as well as its intrinsic role in the regional power struggle, make any fundamental change to its nature nearly impossible. To give up its arms would not be to adjust its strategy; it would be to abandon the reason for its existence. Thus, the party appears bound to keep behaving this way. It will continue to vie for maintaining weapons and transnational function. Even after being put out of action, it will continue to wait for gradual decline. Its intransigence could, in turn, perpetuate the decay of Lebanon’s state institutions. If it does, the country would go from being a political battleground to being home to a failed state, with the Lebanese people paying the price many times over.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on August 16-17/2025
Israeli military prepares to relocate residents to southern Gaza, spokesperson says
Reuters/August 16, 2025
GAZA: The Israeli military will provide Gaza residents with tents and other equipment starting from Sunday ahead of relocating them from combat zones to “safe” ones in the south of the enclave, military spokesperson Avichay Adraee said on Saturday. This comes days after Israel said it intended to launch a new offensive to seize control of northern Gaza City, the enclave’s largest urban center, in a plan that raised international alarm over the fate of the demolished strip, home to about 2.2 million people. The equipment will be transferred via the Israeli crossing of Kerem Shalom by the United Nations and other international relief organizations after being thoroughly inspected by defense ministry personnel, Adraee added in a post on X. Israel’s COGAT, the military agency that coordinates aid, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether the preparations were part of the new plan.
Taking over the city of about one million Palestinians complicates ceasefire efforts to end the nearly two-year war, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu follows through with his plan to take on Hamas’ two remaining strongholds. Netanyahu said Israel had no choice but to complete the job and defeat Hamas as the Palestinian militant group has refused to lay down its arms. Hamas said it would not disarm unless an independent Palestinian state was established. Israel already controls about 75 percent of Gaza. The war began when Hamas attacked southern Israel in October 2023, killing 1,200 and taking about 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Israeli authorities say 20 of the remaining 50 hostages in Gaza are alive. Israel’s subsequent military assault has killed over 61,000 Palestinians, Gaza’s health ministry says. It has also caused a hunger crisis, internally displaced Gaza’s entire population and prompted accusations of genocide at the International Court of Justice and of war crimes at the International Criminal Court. Israel denies the accusations.

Arab, Islamic foreign ministers condemn Netanyahu’s ‘Greater Israel’ remark
Arab News/August 16, 2025
RIYADH: The foreign ministers of Arab and Muslim nations on Saturday denounced statements about a “Greater Israel” that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was reported to have made in the wake of pronouncements by his far-right allies to annex Palestinian territories. In a joint statement the ministers said the pronouncements by Netanyahu and his ministers were “a blatant and dangerous violation” of international law. “They also constitute a direct threat to Arab national security, to the sovereignty of states, and to regional and international peace and security,” said the statement carried by the Saudi Press Agency. Signatories of the document included the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Chad, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Gambia, Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Turkiye, the UAE, and Yemen. Also included were the secretaries-general of the League of Arab States, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, and the Gulf Cooperation Council. The ministers stressed that “while their states reaffirm their respect for international legitimacy and the Charter of the UN, particularly article 2, paragraph 4 which prohibits the use of force or the threat thereof, they will adopt all policies and measures that preserve peace, in a manner that serves the interests of all states and peoples in achieving security, stability, and development, away from illusions of domination and the imposition of power by force.”The ministers pushed back against Israeli minister Bezalel Smotrich’s approval of the settlement plan in the E1 area of the West Bank, along with his statements rejecting the establishment of a Palestinian state. European nations are also alarmed at the move and have called on the Israeli government to halt its plans, with Germany warning that the E1 settlement plan and the expansion of Maale Adumim would further restrict the mobility of the Palestinian population in the West Bank by splitting it in half and cutting the area off from East Jerusalem.The statement said Israel’s plan would constitute a “blatant violation of international law and a flagrant assault on the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to realize their independent, sovereign state on the lines of June 4, 1967, with occupied Jerusalem as its capital.” It warned of Israel’s blatant disregard for the rights of Palestinians and its neighbors as the international community as a whole “directly fuel cycles of violence and conflict and undermines prospects for achieving just and comprehensive peace in the region.”Ministers “reiterated their rejection and condemnation of Israel’s crimes of aggression, genocide, and ethnic cleansing” and reaffirmed the need for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip “ensuring unconditional humanitarian access to end the policy of systematic starvation that Israel is pursuing as a weapon of genocide.”More than 61,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since Hamas’ attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Israel has also continued to block international humanitarian agencies from delivering food to starving people in the enclave.

Israeli military prepares to relocate residents to southern Gaza, spokesperson says
Reuters/August 16, 2025
GAZA: The Israeli military will provide Gaza residents with tents and other equipment starting from Sunday ahead of relocating them from combat zones to “safe” ones in the south of the enclave, military spokesperson Avichay Adraee said on Saturday. This comes days after Israel said it intended to launch a new offensive to seize control of northern Gaza City, the enclave’s largest urban center, in a plan that raised international alarm over the fate of the demolished strip, home to about 2.2 million people. The equipment will be transferred via the Israeli crossing of Kerem Shalom by the United Nations and other international relief organizations after being thoroughly inspected by defense ministry personnel, Adraee added in a post on X. Israel’s COGAT, the military agency that coordinates aid, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether the preparations were part of the new plan.
Taking over the city of about one million Palestinians complicates ceasefire efforts to end the nearly two-year war, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu follows through with his plan to take on Hamas’ two remaining strongholds. Netanyahu said Israel had no choice but to complete the job and defeat Hamas as the Palestinian militant group has refused to lay down its arms. Hamas said it would not disarm unless an independent Palestinian state was established. Israel already controls about 75 percent of Gaza. The war began when Hamas attacked southern Israel in October 2023, killing 1,200 and taking about 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Israeli authorities say 20 of the remaining 50 hostages in Gaza are alive. Israel’s subsequent military assault has killed over 61,000 Palestinians, Gaza’s health ministry says. It has also caused a hunger crisis, internally displaced Gaza’s entire population and prompted accusations of genocide at the International Court of Justice and of war crimes at the International Criminal Court. Israel denies the accusations.

Israel’s Netahyahu has become a ‘problem’, says Danish PM
AFP/August 16, 2025
COPENGAGEN: Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said Saturday that Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu has become a “problem,” adding she would try to put pressure on Israel over the Gaza war as her country currently holds the EU presidency. “Netanyahu is now a problem in himself,” Frederiksen said in an interview with the Jyllands-Posten daily, adding that the Israeli government was going “too far.”The center right leader slammed the “absolutely appalling and catastrophic” humanitarian situation in Gaza and new settlement project in the occupied West Bank. “We are one of the countries that wants to increase pressure on Israel, but we have not yet obtained the support of EU members,” she said. Frederiksen added that she wanted to consider “political pressure, sanctions, whether against settlers, ministers, or even Israel as a whole,” referring to trade or research sanctions. “We are not ruling anything out in advance. Just as with Russia, we are designing the sanctions to target where we believe they will have the greatest effect,” added Frederiksen, whose country is not among those who have said they will recognize the Palestinian state. The Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Gaza’s Hamas rulers resulted in the deaths of 1,219 people, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally of official figures. Israel’s retaliatory offensive has killed more than 61,430 Palestinians, mainly civilians, according to figures from Gaza’s Hamas-run health ministry which the United Nations considers reliable.

UK must bring sick, injured children from Gaza ‘without delay,’ MPs say
Arab News/August 16, 2025
LONDON: The British government must bring sick and injured Palestinian children from Gaza to the UK “without delay,” a group of MPs has said. The cross-party group of 96 parliamentarians made the appeal in a letter to senior government ministers, the BBC reported. Children in the Palestinian enclave are at risk of imminent death, and any barriers preventing their evacuation to Britain must be removed, they said. Responding to Gaza’s “decimated” healthcare system requires adequate funding and a detailed timeline for child evacuations, the MPs added. UN children’s charity UNICEF has said that more than 50,000 Palestinian children have been killed or injured since the beginning of the Gaza war in late 2023. The medical and humanitarian catastrophe in the enclave has reached “horrific proportions,” said the MPs’ letter, which was coordinated by Dr. Simon Opher, a Labour MP and GP. Signatories to the letter, addressing the health, home, and foreign secretaries, said they were working with Medecins sans Frontieres to expedite the evacuation of injured and ill Palestinian children to Britain. The children and their families must be allowed to claim asylum after their treatment is completed, the letter said. The UK Home Office previously said that biometric checks would be carried out before Palestinian children and their carers travel to the UK, a decision that was questioned by the letter’s signatories. Plans to evacuate seriously ill or injured children from Gaza were being carried out “at pace,” the government said earlier in August. A spokesperson said: “We are accelerating plans to evacuate children from Gaza who require urgent medical care, including bringing them to the UK for specialist treatment where that is the best option.”Several hundred Palestinian children are expected to be evacuated as part of the scheme. Since late 2023, the UK has channeled funding toward the treatment of injured and seriously ill Palestinians in hospitals across the Middle East. Liz Harding, of MSF’s UK branch, welcomed the MPs’ letter and called on the government to waive its biometric visa requirement. Britain must “urgently act on its commitment by creating a dedicated, publicly funded pathway based on clinical need, not bureaucracy,” she added.

Israeli army unit links Gaza journalists to Hamas to justify strikes – report
Arab News/August 16, 2025
LONDON: Israel’s military has operated a covert intelligence unit tasked with discrediting Palestinian journalists by falsely linking them to Hamas in an effort to justify their targeting, a magazine report claims. The revelations, published by Israeli-Palestinian outlet +972 Magazine and based on accounts from three intelligence sources, suggest the existence of a so-called “legitimization cell” that was created following the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks. The unit was established to deflect growing international criticism over Israel’s targeting of media workers in Gaza and to preserve global support, particularly by ensuring continued US weapons supplies that sustain its military campaign. The report follows Israel’s recent killing of Al Jazeera correspondent Anas Al-Sharif and three of his colleagues in a targeted airstrike on their makeshift newsroom. Israel claimed Al-Sharif was a Hamas commander, but failed to substantiate the claim with credible evidence. The killing sparked global outcry, with press freedom groups accusing Israel of deliberately targeting journalists and weaponizing unverified intelligence to manufacture legitimacy. Before his death, Al-Sharif called for protection and warned that Israel’s accusation that linked him to Hamas, frequently repeated by Israeli officials since his reporting on famine in Gaza gained global attention, were attempts to justify his killing. The Committee to Protect Journalists said more than 180 media workers have been killed in Israeli attacks since late 2023, describing 26 of those deaths as targeted killings and “murders.”According to the report, the unit was not established for national security purposes, but rather to provide diplomatic and public relations cover for Israeli operations in Gaza, especially when journalists were among the casualties. The sources said the unit’s purpose was not intelligence gathering in the conventional sense but rather to collect information that could be declassified and circulated to neutralize criticism. Whenever media scrutiny of Israel’s actions intensified, the cell would be tasked with finding a journalist who could be framed as having links to militant activity, even if such evidence was weak or misleading.“If the global media is talking about Israel killing innocent journalists, then immediately there’s a push to find one journalist who might not be so innocent, as if that somehow makes killing the other 20 acceptable,” one of the sources told the magazine. Foreign media have been barred from entering Gaza. As a result, Palestinian journalists remain the primary source of on-the-ground reporting. These journalists have faced increasing threats, including direct accusations from Israeli officials and smear campaigns that blur the lines between civilian press and combatant. Human rights organizations and press freedom advocates have repeatedly accused Israel of deliberately targeting media workers in an effort to silence independent reporting and conceal alleged atrocities in Gaza. They have called for independent investigations into attacks on journalists, many of whom have been killed while visibly reporting in press-marked gear or inside known media offices.

UN rights office says Israeli settlement plan breaks international law
Arab News/August 16/2025
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.”

UK to prosecute 60 people for supporting banned pro-Palestine group
AFP/August 17, 2025
LONDON: At least 60 people will be prosecuted for “showing support” for the recently proscribed Palestine Action group, in addition to three already charged, London’s Metropolitan Police said. “We have put arrangements in place that will enable us to investigate and prosecute significant numbers each week if necessary,” the Met said in a statement. More than 700 people have been arrested since it was banned as a terrorist group in early July, including 522 people arrested at a protest last weekend for displaying placards backing the group — thought to be the highest ever recorded number of detentions at a single protest in the UK capital. “The decisions that we have announced today are the first significant numbers to come out of the recent protests, and many more can be expected in the next few weeks,” said Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Parkinson. “People should be clear about the real-life consequences for anyone choosing to support Palestine Action,” said Parkinson. The first three people were charged earlier this month with offenses under the Terrorism Act for backing Palestine Action, after they were arrested at a July demonstration. According to police, those charged for such offenses could face up to six months imprisonment, as well as other consequences. “I am proud of how our police and CPS (prosecution) teams have worked so speedily together to overcome misguided attempts to overwhelm the justice system,” Met Police Commissioner Mark Rowley said. In a statement following the latest mass arrests, Interior Minister Yvette Cooper defended the Labour government’s decision, insisting: “UK national security and public safety must always be our top priority.”“The assessments are very clear — this is not a nonviolent organization,” she added. The government outlawed Palestine Action on July 7, days after it took responsibility for a break-in at an air force base in southern England that caused an estimated £7.0 million ($9.3 million) of damage to two aircraft. The group said its activists were responding to Britain’s indirect military support for Israel amid the war in Gaza. Britain’s Interior Ministry has insisted that Palestine Action was also suspected of other “serious attacks” that involved “violence, significant injuries and extensive criminal damage.” Critics, including the UN, Amnesty International, and Greenpeace, have criticized the proscription as an overreach of the law and warned that the ensuing arrests threaten free speech. The UK’s Liberal Democrat party said that it was “deeply concerned about the use of terrorism powers against peaceful protesters.”

Mother of missing journalist Austin Tice reveals newly declassified intelligence
Arab News/August 16, 2025
WASHINGTON: The mother of missing American journalist and former US Marine Austin Tice has shared new details from recently declassified intelligence documents, saying the files contain information that could help locate her son. Speaking at a press conference marking 13 years since her son vanished outside Damascus, Debra Tice said the documents suggested that US agencies had near-daily information on his condition and captivity during the years following his disappearance in the Syrian Arab Republic. The files were shared earlier this year by US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard following long-standing requests from the family to access raw intelligence material related to the case. “When he had something (wrong) about his teeth, they took him to a dentist. When he had some stomach issues, they took him to the doctor,” Debra Tice was quoted as saying in The Washington Post. She did not specify dates or locations. Tice, a freelance journalist covering the Syrian conflict for The Washington Post and other US outlets, was abducted on the outskirts of Damascus in August 2012. A video released shortly after his disappearance showed him blindfolded and held by armed men. US officials have long suspected the Syrian government was behind his disappearance, but Damascus has consistently denied involvement. Debra Tice said she was repeatedly told by officials in past administrations that no new information existed. But she said the files revealed otherwise, reinforcing her belief that her son is alive and can still be found. She alleged that the Syrian government had attempted to return her son shortly after his disappearance by reaching out to then-US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “The Syrian government reached out to Hillary Clinton and wanted her to come and get Austin in ... August of 2012, and she declined,” she said, reported The Washington Post. However, the publication quoted former US officials with knowledge of the case denying such an offer was made, saying that the Syrian regime never acknowledged holding Tice and “vigorously denied any knowledge of Austin right to the end.”US officials have blamed the lack of progress on obstruction by the Bashar Assad regime and the highly secretive nature of Syria’s detention network. Since the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, the CIA has reportedly adopted a “low confidence” assessment that Tice is likely dead — an evaluation the family strongly rejects. Debra Tice said she remains confident her son is alive and that the release of thousands of detainees from collapsed Syrian prisons has yet to yield any definitive information about his case. The Tice family’s access to intelligence files was granted following lobbying efforts. Debra Tice said the newly declassified information had strengthened her resolve to keep pressure on the US authorities to resolve the case. “We know Austin is alive. We need to find him,” she said. Tice’s case remains one of the longest unresolved abductions of an American journalist in the Middle East. Rights groups and press freedom advocates have repeatedly urged the US government to prioritize the search for him and ensure accountability for his captors.

Israel says its forces conducting operations on Gaza City outskirts
Agence France Presse/August 17, 2025
The Israeli military has said its troops are conducting a range of operations on the outskirts of Gaza City, ahead of a new major offensive to capture the sprawling municipal area. The announcement came a week after Israel's security cabinet approved the capture of the Palestinian territory's largest city following 22 months of war that have created dire humanitarian conditions. "Over the past few days, IDF troops have been operating in the Zeitoun area, on the outskirts of Gaza City," said the statement released by the Israeli military. "The troops are operating to locate explosives, eliminate terrorists, and dismantle terrorist infrastructure above and below ground. As part of their activity, the troops struck and dismantled a booby-trapped structure that stored weapons."The military said that its troops had also been targeted by insurgents firing an anti-tank missile, but said that no personnel were injured during the incident. On Wednesday, the Israeli military chief of staff said the blueprint for the new offensive had been approved. In recent days, Gaza City residents have told AFP of an intensifying number of air strikes hitting residential areas, while earlier this week Hamas lambasted "aggressive" Israeli ground incursions in the area. The Israeli government's plans to expand the war have triggered a wave of international condemnation as well as domestic protests. Hamas' 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.

US suspends visas for Gazans after far-right influencer posts
AFP/August 17, 2025
WASHINGTON: The US government said Saturday it is suspending visitor visas for Gazans after a far-right influencer with the ear of President Donald Trump complained that wounded Palestinians had been allowed to seek medical treatment in the United States.The announcement came one day after a series of furious social media posts by Laura Loomer, who is known for promoting racist conspiracy theories and claiming that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were an inside job.“All visitor visas for individuals from Gaza are being stopped while we conduct a full and thorough review of the process and procedures used to issue a small number of temporary medical-humanitarian visas in recent days,” the State Department, which is led by Marco Rubio, wrote on X. In a series of posts on X Friday, Loomer called on the State Department to stop giving visas to Palestinians from Gaza who she said were “pro-HAMAS... affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood and funded by Qatar,” without providing evidence.Loomer’s target was the US-based charity HEAL Palestine, which said last week it had helped 11 critically wounded Gazan children — as well as their caregivers and siblings — arrive safely in the US for medical treatment.
It was “the largest single medical evacuation of injured children from Gaza to the US,” the charity said on its website. “Truly unacceptable,” Loomer wrote in another X post. “Someone needs to be fired at @StateDept when @marcorubio figures out who approved the visas.”
“Qatar transported these GAZANS into the US via @qatarairways,” she said. Qatar is “literally flooding our country with jihadis,” she added. Loomer said she had spoken to the staff of Republican Tom Cotton, who chairs the Senate intelligence committee, adding that they were “also looking into how these GAZANS got visas to come into the US.”Republican Congressman Randy Fine explicitly commended Loomer after the visa change was announced, in a sign of her sway over some US policy. “Massive credit needs to be given to @LauraLoomer for uncovering this and making me and other officials aware. Well done, Laura,” Fine wrote on X. The Palestine Children’s Relief Fund, a US-based charity, called on the Trump administration to “reverse this dangerous and inhumane decision.” Over the last 30 years the charity has evacuated thousands of Palestinian children to the US for medical care, it said a statement.
“Medical evacuations are a lifeline for the children of Gaza who would otherwise face unimaginable suffering or death due to the collapse of medical infrastructure in Gaza.”Though Loomer holds no official position, she wields significant power, and is reported to have successfully pushed for the dismissal of several senior US security officials she deemed disloyal to Trump. In July, Loomer took aim at a job offer made to a highly qualified Biden-era official for a prestigious position at the West Point military academy. The Pentagon rescinded the offer one day later. Trump also fired the head of the highly sensitive National Security Agency, Timothy Haugh, and his deputy Wendy Noble in April at the apparent urging of Loomer, after she met with the president at the White House. “No other content creator or journalist has gotten as many Biden holdovers fired from the Trump admin!” Loomer posted on X Saturday.

Zelensky braces for perilous Trump talks in Washington on Monday
Reuters/August 16, 2025
LONDON/KYIV: Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky flies to Washington on Monday under heavy US pressure to agree a swift end to Russia’s war in Ukraine but determined to defend Kyiv’s interests — without sparking a second Oval Office bust-up with Donald Trump.
The US president invited Zelensky to Washington after rolling out the red carpet for Vladimir Putin, Kyiv’s arch foe, at a summit in Alaska that shocked many in Ukraine, where hundreds of thousands have died since Russia’s 2022 invasion. The Alaska talks failed to produce the ceasefire that Trump sought, and the US leader said on Saturday that he now wanted a rapid, full-fledged peace deal and that Kyiv should accept because “Russia is a very big power, and they’re not.”The blunt rhetoric throws the onus squarely back on Zelensky, putting him in a perilous position as he returns to Washington for the first time since his talks with Trump in the Oval Office in February descended into acrimony. The US president upbraided him in front of world media at the time, saying Zelensky did not “hold the cards” in negotiations and that what he described as Kyiv’s intransigence risked triggering World War Three. Trump’s pursuit of a quick deal defies intense diplomacy by the European allies and Ukraine to convince him that a ceasefire should come first and not — as sought by the Kremlin — once a settlement is agreed. A source familiar with the matter told Reuters that European leaders had also been invited to Monday’s meeting between Trump and Zelensky, though it was unclear who would actually attend. Trump briefed Zelensky on his talks with Putin during a call on Saturday that lasted more than an hour and a half, the Ukrainian leader said. They were joined after an hour by European and NATO officials, he added. “The impression is he wants a fast deal at any price,” a source familiar with the conversation said. The source said Trump told Zelensky that Putin had offered to freeze the front lines elsewhere as part of a deal, if Ukraine fully withdrew its troops from the eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions, something Zelensky said was not possible.
Trump and US envoy Steve Witkoff told the Ukrainian leader that Putin had said there could be no ceasefire before that happened, and that the Russian leader could pledge not to launch any new aggression against Ukraine as part of an agreement. Kyiv has publicly dismissed the idea of withdrawing from internationally recognized Ukrainian land as part of a deal, and says the industrial Donetsk region serves as a fortress holding back Russian advances deeper into Ukraine. Oleksandr Merezhko, head of the Ukrainian parliament’s foreign affairs committee, told Reuters by phone that Trump’s emphasis on a deal rather than a ceasefire carried great risks for Ukraine. “In Putin’s view, a peace agreement means several dangerous things – Ukraine not joining NATO, his absurd demands for denazification and demilitarization, the Russian language and the Russian church,” he said. Any such deal could be politically explosive inside Ukraine, Merezhko said, adding he was worried that Putin’s ostracism in the West had ended.
SECURITY GUARANTEES
Avoiding a repeat of the Oval Office row is critical for Zelensky to preserve relations with the US, which still provides military assistance and is the key source of intelligence on Russia’s military activity. For Ukraine, robust guarantees to prevent any future Russian invasion are fundamental to any serious settlement. Two sources familiar with the matter said Trump and the European leaders discussed potential security guarantees for Ukraine similar to the transatlantic NATO alliance’s mutual support pledge during their call. It says, in effect, that an attack on one is treated as an attack on all. One of the two sources, who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, said European leaders were seeking details on what kind of US role was envisaged. Zelensky has repeatedly said a trilateral meeting with the Russian and US leaders is crucial to finding a way to end the full-scale war launched by Russia in February 2022. Trump this week voiced the idea of such a meeting, saying it could happen if his talks in Alaska with Putin were successful. “Ukraine emphasizes that key issues can be discussed at the level of leaders, and a trilateral format is suitable for this,” Zelensky wrote on social media on Saturday. Putin’s aide Yuri Ushakov told the Russian state news agency TASS a three-way summit had not been discussed in Alaska.

Putin says discussed Ukraine peace on ‘fair basis’ with Trump
AFP, Moscow/16 August/2025
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday said he discussed ways of ending the conflict in Ukraine “on a fair basis” at his meeting with US President Donald Trump. Speaking to top officials in Moscow a day after the talks in Alaska, Putin also said the summit with Trump had been “timely” and “very useful,” according to images published by the Kremlin.

Coalition of the Willing’ leaders to meet on Sunday
Reuters/16 August/2025
“Coalition of the Willing” leaders will meet via video conference on Sunday afternoon ahead of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to Washington on Monday, the French presidency office said on Saturday. The meeting will be co-presided by French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the office said.

No more ‘acting’: Taliban mark fourth year in power by dropping interim titles
MODASER ISLAMI/Arab News/August 16, 2025
KABUL: Mullah Hibatullah Akhundzada, the supreme leader of the Taliban, has ordered his ministers to remove the “acting” designation from their titles, a move experts say indicates the establishment of a permanent Afghan government. Weeks after the Taliban took control of Afghanistan in August 2021, the group formed a caretaker government consisting almost entirely of senior figures and without female representation, which has remained in place ever since. As Afghanistan marks the fourth anniversary on Friday since the Taliban takeover of the country, the group’s reclusive chief, who rules largely from Kandahar, told his officials to stop using “caretaker” in their roles. “All ministers and the cabinet of the Islamic Emirate should not use the word caretaker in their titles,” Akhundzada said in a statement.When the Taliban first announced a caretaker administration it was framed as a temporary set-up before the country established an official and inclusive government that included women and members of Afghanistan’s diverse ethnic groups. Afghans were expecting a voting system to establish a permanent government that would include their voices, whether it was in the form of elections or a “loya jirga,” a grand assembly traditionally held to reach a consensus on important political issues. “But now that the supreme leader (has) instructed that the current government is official, from a legal perspective the supreme leader’s decree constitutes a law for the Taliban government, replacing the constitution,” Abdul Saboor Mubariz, board member of the Center for Strategic and Regional Studies in Kabul, told Arab News. “The political implication of this decision could be that there is no hope for major change in the present form of government.”The initial announcement of a caretaker government, he added, was in the hope of gaining official recognition by the international community. With the exception of Russia in July, no other nation has formally recognized Taliban rule since the group seized power in 2021. “But now they (have) realized that no big progress has been made in that regard so they want to make the current government permanent,” Mubariz said. Naseer Ahmad Nawidy, a political science professor at Salam University in Kabul, said the removal of “caretaker” in ministerial titles could mean higher authority for Taliban officials. “(It’s) something positive. The ministries in Kabul need to have (a) free hand and more authority in their relevant tasks considering the expertise required for each sector,” he told Arab News. The Taliban also used the term initially to mean that “the ministers were only temporary and that the actual authority was only with the supreme leader in Kandahar,” Nawidy added. “It also has another message to the executive officials: that no one should be above obeying and all decrees of the leader must be implemented without any questions,” he said. “The new announcement is an indication that the Islamic Emirate wants to show that the government is fully established.”

The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources on August 16-17/2025
Question: “Can a Christian be demon possessed? Can a Christian be demonized?”
GotQuestions.org/August 16/2025
Answer: While the Bible does not explicitly state whether a Christian can be possessed by a demon, related biblical truths make it abundantly clear that Christians cannot be demon possessed. There is a distinct difference between being possessed by a demon and being oppressed or influenced by a demon. Demon possession involves a demon having direct/complete control over the thoughts and/or actions of a person (Matthew 17:14-18; Luke 4:33-35; 8:27-33). Demon oppression or influence involves a demon or demons attacking a person spiritually and/or encouraging him/her into sinful behavior. Notice that in all the New Testament passages dealing with spiritual warfare, there are no instructions to cast a demon out of a believer (Ephesians 6:10-18). Believers are told to resist the devil (James 4:7; 1 Peter 5:8-9), not to cast him out.
Christians are indwelt by the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:9-11; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19). Surely the Holy Spirit would not allow a demon to possess the same person He is indwelling. It is unthinkable that God would allow one of His children, whom He purchased with the blood of Christ (1 Peter 1:18-19) and made into a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17), to be possessed and controlled by a demon. Yes, as believers, we wage war with Satan and his demons, but not from within ourselves. The apostle John declares, “You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the One who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world” (1 John 4:4). Who is the One in us? The Holy Spirit. Who is the one in the world? Satan and his demons. Therefore, the believer has overcome the world of demons, and the case for demon possession of a believer cannot be made scripturally.
With the strong biblical evidence that a Christian cannot be demon possessed in view, some Bible teachers use the term “demonization” to refer to a demon having control over a Christian. Some argue that while a Christian cannot be demon possessed, a Christian can be demonized. Typically, the description of demonization is virtually identical to the description of demon possession. So, the same issue results. Changing the terminology does not change the fact that a demon cannot inhabit or take full control of a Christian. Demonic influence and oppression are realities for Christians, no doubt, but it is simply not biblical to say that a Christian can be possessed by a demon or demonized.
Much of the reasoning behind the demonization concept is the personal experience of seeing someone who was “definitely” a Christian exhibiting evidence of being controlled by a demon. It is crucially important, though, that we do not allow personal experience to influence our interpretation of Scripture. Rather, we must filter our personal experiences through the truth of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Seeing someone whom we thought to be a Christian exhibiting the behavior of being demonized should cause us to question the genuineness of his/her faith. It should not cause us to alter our viewpoint on whether a Christian can be demon possessed / demonized. Perhaps the person truly is a Christian but is severely demon oppressed and/or suffering from severe psychological problems. But again, our experiences must meet the test of Scripture, not the other way around.

Iran Wants Negotiations for One Reason — To Survive and Strike Later
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Gatestone Institute/August 16/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/08/146354/
This is the same regime that has built its entire political identity around hatred for America, branding the U.S. the "Great Satan" and chanting "Death to America" at every major gathering.
Some of Iran's leading scientists and engineers, who were driving its nuclear weapons effort, have been eliminated. This is not the position of strength from which Iran prefers to negotiate. This is the position of a regime struggling to keep its most prized military project afloat.
In such a position, the leadership in Tehran is willing to agree to almost any terms if it means securing breathing space, lifting sanctions and accessing funds to rebuild. They know that negotiations can give them exactly what they need: relief from "maximum pressure" without actually abandoning their nuclear ambitions.
The culmination of America's empowerment of Iran was the October 7, 2023 Hamas massacre of Israelis. When you give the Iranian regime financial relief, you are funding terrorism.
The worst mistake the West could make right now is to relieve the pressure at the very moment it has started to work. Just as in 2015, a deal will not defang this regime — it will recharge it.
The Iranian regime has another game in mind, and that game ends with Iran as a stronger, more dangerous enemy. This is not the moment to sit at the table. It is the moment to stand unbudgeably firm.
The Iranian regime, long marked by hostility and defiance toward the United States and its allies, is suddenly portraying itself as eager to talk. This is the same regime that has built its entire political identity around hatred for America, branding the U.S. the "Great Satan" and chanting "Death to America" at every major gathering.
The Iranian regime, long marked by hostility and defiance toward the United States and its allies, is suddenly portraying itself as eager to talk.
Reports confirm that Tehran is now negotiating with the EU3 — France, the United Kingdom and Germany — and has even stated that it is open to discussions with the United States. This is the same regime that has built its entire political identity around hatred for America, branding the U.S. the "Great Satan" and chanting "Death to America" at every major gathering. It is the same ruling elite that has repeatedly vowed to export its Islamist revolution far beyond the Middle East, aiming especially to destabilize and infiltrate Western nations. The question then becomes: why would such a fanatical and ideologically rigid regime suddenly want to sit at the table with its sworn enemies?
The answer is not goodwill, reform or a sudden change of heart. It is weakness. The reality is that Iran has been dealt a series of crushing blows in recent months, and now a drought.
U.S. and Israeli strikes severely damaged Iran's nuclear program — damage so extensive that even Iranian officials admit that key infrastructure has been disrupted. Facilities, centrifuges and stockpiles have been degraded or destroyed. Some of Iran's leading scientists and engineers, who were driving its nuclear weapons effort, have been eliminated. This is not the position of strength from which Iran prefers to negotiate. This is the position of a regime struggling to keep its most prized military project afloat.
In such a position, the leadership in Tehran is willing to agree to almost any terms if it means securing breathing space, lifting sanctions and accessing funds to rebuild. They know that negotiations can give them exactly what they need: relief from "maximum pressure" without actually abandoning their nuclear ambitions. As history has shown, they can sign agreements, pocket the benefits, and secretly continue advancing toward a nuclear weapon, just as they did after the 2015 JCPOA "nuclear deal."
Another critical factor is the Iran's military and political vulnerability after the recent 12-day war. That adventure inflicted enormous costs on Iran's military assets, its regional network of proxies, and even its core leadership. Key facilities were struck. Commanders and operatives were killed. The regime emerged battered. For the first time in years, the ruling elite must have felt that if another wave of strikes were unleashed, their survival could be at stake. That is why Tehran is now putting on a diplomatic smile and speaking of negotiating. It is a calculated survival strategy. By appearing cooperative, they hope to buy time to repair their military capabilities, rebuild their networks, and, once they are in a stronger position, exact revenge. Their goal is not to make peace — it is to live to continue fighting.
On the economic front, the picture is equally dire for the regime. Iran's economy is collapsing under the weight of U.S. sanctions, international isolation, and structural corruption. The national currency has been in freefall, eroding the savings and salaries of ordinary Iranians. The regime is desperate for hard currency and access to the global financial system. That is most likely is why they see no risk in sitting down for talks that could repair their damaged nuclear program.
A deal that results in the expiration of UN sanctions and the lifting of U.S. measures would flood the regime with money. As history has shown, this money will not go to the Iranian people — it will go to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Hezbollah, Hamas and other terror groups. We have seen this movie. When the Obama administration signed the JCPOA, pallets of cash and billions of dollars in sanctions relief flowed into Tehran's coffers. The IRGC used this windfall to expand its regional influence, arm its proxies, and escalate attacks on the U.S. and its allies. From 2021 until 2025, Iran attacked more than 350 U.S assets in the Middle East.
The culmination of America's empowerment of Iran was the October 7, 2023 Hamas massacre of Israelis. When you give the Iranian regime financial relief, you are funding terrorism.
That current talks are not a two-way street; they are just a one-way gift to the Iranian regime, which is the only party that benefits. By negotiating now, the U.S. would give Iran the oxygen it needs to recover from its military losses, repair its nuclear program and rearm its proxies. In return, the U.S. gets nothing but airy empty promises and unverifiable pledges. The Iranian regime has proven time and again that once it gets what it wants, it will cheat, conceal and violate any agreement. Negotiating now would be throwing a lifeline to a drowning enemy.
The sudden eagerness of the Iranian regime to engage in nuclear talks is just a sign of deception and desperation. The worst mistake the West could make right now is to relieve the pressure at the very moment it has started to work. Just as in 2015, a deal will not defang this regime — it will recharge it. The Obama-era JCPOA nuclear agreement taught us this lesson in blood and betrayal. If we empower Iran now with talks and deals, they will simply return with greater vengeance, better weapons and more aggressive proxies.
The Iranian regime has another game in mind, and that game ends with Iran as a stronger, more dangerous enemy. This is not the moment to sit at the table. It is the moment to stand unbudgeably firm.
**Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, is a political scientist, Harvard-educated analyst, and board member of Harvard International Review. He has authored several books on the US foreign policy. He can be reached at dr.rafizadeh@post.harvard.edu
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21833/iran-wants-negotiations-to-survive
**Follow Majid Rafizadeh on X (formerly Twitter)
© 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.

Why food security in the Middle East is slipping even as global numbers improve
Zaira Lakhpatwala/Arab News/August 16, 2025
DUBAI: Global hunger edged down last year, but not in the Middle East. That divergence — driven by conflict, inflation, currency stress, and a heavy reliance on imports — is reshaping food security across Western Asia and North Africa, even as other regions recover.
According to “The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World” report published recently by five UN agencies, 8.2 percent of the global population experienced hunger in 2024, down from 8.5 percent in 2023. But the headline hides widening regional gaps. In Africa, more than 20 percent of people — 307 million — faced hunger in 2024. In Western Asia, which includes several Middle Eastern countries, 12.7 percent of the population, or more than 39 million people, were affected. The contrast with other parts of Asia is striking. “Improvements in South-Eastern and Southern Asia were largely driven by economic recovery, better affordability of healthy diets, and stronger social protection systems,” David Laborde, director of the Agrifood Economics Division at the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, told Arab News. That rebound has not reached the Middle East evenly. He noted that while “high income countries” like the UAE or Saudi Arabia are exempt from any major food insecurities, “the rest of the region and particularly conflict-affected countries (like Lebanon and Syria) are contributors to the rising hunger trend due to displacement, disrupted supply chains, and economic vulnerability.”Nowhere is the food crisis more acute than Gaza, where war has devastated basic systems. A recent assessment by FAO and the UN Satellite Centre found that only 1.5 percent of cropland is currently available for cultivation, down from 4.6 percent in April 2025. Put differently, 98.5 percent of cropland is damaged, inaccessible, or both — a staggering figure in a territory of more than 2 million people. Palestinian agricultural engineer Yusef Abu Rabie, 24, tends to his plants on July 18, 2024, at a makeshift nursery he built next to the rubble of his home in Beit Lahia in northern Gaza, that was destroyed during Israeli bombardment, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas. (AFP)
The data, published in July, landed amid warnings from UN agencies of an impending famine. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification reported that two of the three official indicators used to determine famine conditions were present in parts of the strip.
FAO, the World Food Programme, and UNICEF have cautioned that time is rapidly running out to mount a full-scale response, as nearly a quarter of Gaza’s population is enduring famine-like conditions, while the remainder face emergency levels of hunger.
The report does not break down the impact of individual conflicts, but Laborde is blunt about the drivers. Conditions are getting worse because of “persistent structural vulnerabilities, which include conflict, economic instability, and limited access to affordable food.”
He added: “This region has seen a continued rise in hunger, with the prevalence of undernourishment increasing to 12.7 in 2024, up from previous years.”
Those structural weaknesses — exposure to war, import dependence, currency fragility — collided with a series of global shocks. The report cites the COVID‑19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine as major triggers of global food commodity price spikes in 2021-22.
Some pressures have eased, but inflation’s aftershocks persist, especially where budgets and safety nets are already thin. According to Laborde, the countries struggling most are those where “real wages have declined the most, food price inflation has surged, and access to healthy diets have deteriorated.”He added: “Low-income and lower-middle-income countries, many of which are in the MENA region, have experienced food price inflation above 10 percent, which is strongly associated with rising food insecurity and child malnutrition.”
For Middle Eastern economies that import a large share of their food, price spikes hit with particular force. Beyond war and pandemic disruptions, Laborde points to “climate shocks in key bread baskets have led to higher food prices. “For countries that were able to compensate for this food price increase through higher revenue from energy product sales, also impacted by the same crisis, the blow was limited. “However, for the countries with more limited revenue” from exports of oil and natural gas, “the situation was more difficult to handle.”If the region’s import bill is the first vulnerability, exchange rates are the second. The report highlights exchange-rate fluctuations and local currency depreciation as critical, non‑commodity drivers of food inflation.
This is especially relevant for “import-dependent economies (such as Western Asia) where a weaker local currency increases the cost of imported food and agricultural inputs,” said Laborde. “When local currencies depreciate, the cost of these imports rises, directly affecting consumer prices and worsening food insecurity.”Egypt offers a case study. Heavy reliance on wheat imports from Russia and Ukraine, combined with a severe foreign currency shortage, has driven food prices far beyond wage growth since mid‑2022. In practical terms, “a shortage of foreign currency has made it more difficult to pay for imports, leading to higher import costs in local currency terms, rising consumer food prices, and reduced affordability of healthy diets for households,” Laborde said. The result: Egyptians’ food purchasing power fell by 30 percent between the third quarter of 2022 and the last quarter of 2024.
Similar pressures are visible elsewhere. Syria, Yemen, and Iraq have recorded significant declines in real food wages since 2020, with unskilled wages still below early‑2020 levels — a reflection of persistent instability and the difficulty of rebuilding labor markets amid conflict.
Even when global prices cool, the Middle East does not always feel the relief. The region’s supply chains remain vulnerable to disrupted trade routes, heightened uncertainty in grain markets linked to the war in Ukraine, and hostilities in the Red Sea.
For countries like Egypt, these pressures feed directly into the food import bill, particularly for wheat — a staple with no easy substitute.
In an import‑dependent context, each additional week of shipping delays, insurance surcharges, or currency slippage translates into higher prices for bread, cooking oil, and other essentials. The report also flags a quieter, but consequential, problem: market power. In theory, competitive markets transmit falling global prices quickly to consumers. In practice, market power — the ability of firms to influence prices or supply — can mute or delay those benefits. Since 2022, many low- and lower‑middle‑income countries have experienced persistent inflation even as world prices cooled, suggesting domestic frictions at play.
These “distortions have been observed since 2022” and are “especially relevant in import-dependent regions like Western Asia and North Africa, where currency depreciation, limited competition, and supply chain bottlenecks can further entrench inflation,” Laborde said.
Beyond statistics, the social toll is mounting. Rising food prices hit the poorest households first, forcing trade‑offs between calories and quality — cheaper, less nutritious staples displacing diverse diets rich in protein and micronutrients. That is why sustained double‑digit food inflation correlates with child malnutrition and worsens long‑term health outcomes, from anemia to stunting. The consequences can also be gendered. In many Middle Eastern and North African contexts, women — who often manage household food budgets — absorb inflation by skipping meals or cutting their own portions to feed children.
When real wages drop and informal work dries up, coping strategies erode quickly.
All of this threatens the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, especially its aims to end hunger, achieve food security and improve nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture. With the deadline fast approaching, Laborde urges governments to “stabilize food prices and protect vulnerable populations” by prioritizing “integrated fiscal and trade policy reforms,” delivered through “time-bound, targeted fiscal measures.”
These include “temporary tax relief on essential foods, scaled-up social protection (e.g. cash transfers) indexed to inflation and ensuring benefits reach consumers through transparent monitoring.”

Tech leaders should focus on job creation, not worker displacement
Arnab Neil Sengupta/Arab News/August 16, 2025
When ChatGPT stormed onto the scene in late 2022, the alarm bells rang loud. Philosophers and futurists demanded new rules to prevent humanity from sliding into chaos, wars and disorder. Since then, a string of large language models and apps — Gemini, Grok, Perplexity, Meta AI — have caused fresh anxieties. Two years on, true artificial general intelligence is still a distant goal but the mixed results of widespread adoption of AI are already plain to see.
Change that was happening gradually is now happening swiftly. As veteran Wall Street Journal commentator Peggy Noonan wrote in a recent column, “The story is no longer ‘AI in coming decades will take a lot of jobs’ or ‘AI will take jobs sooner than we think.’ It is ‘AI is here and a quiet havoc has begun.”Yet, for America’s AI titans, the motivation today seems less about building tools that create new jobs and more about accelerating human displacement while envisioning a vast social safety net as compensation. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal titled “What Musk, Altman and Others Say About AI-Funded ‘Universal Basic Income’” stated: “Suddenly, an idea once seen as a socialist policy that would reward idleness is one of the AI boom’s hottest acronyms.”According to the article, the consensus in Silicon Valley is that automation driven by AI is going to replace a lot of factory jobs and white-collar roles while generating billions in profits for AI companies. What tech leaders and gurus seem divided over is whether AI-funded universal basic income is the answer to the challenge of mass unemployment. Of course, as the popular 1956 Doris Day song “Que Sera, Sera (Whatever Will Be, Will Be)” reminds us: “The future’s not ours to see … what will be, will be.”Perhaps there is no need to worry excessively, as many a bleak prophecy in the past (for example, “The Population Bomb,” a book by Paul R. Ehrlich about the looming danger of overpopulation) failed to come to pass.
High-quality jobs give young people a reason to get up in the morning, a sense of fulfillment and a feeling of progress in their lives. We risk losing the essence of this in an idle society with universal basic income.
Perhaps the “quiet havoc” of which Noonan spoke is a temporary phenomenon and US employment numbers will pick up, similar to the way in which the development of mainframe computers in the 1950s created entirely new occupations. In any case, AI tycoons such as Elon Musk, Sam Altman and Marc Benioff ought to be thinking of ways in which AI can be used to create plentiful, professionally rewarding jobs instead of touting the introduction of universal basic income as inevitable. Not only would such income for Americans made redundant by AI be of little use to the rest of the world, it could be a recipe for trouble in the long term.Jobs do not just pay wages, as the Silicon Valley titans surely know. Jobs circulate money throughout the economy, creating demand for goods and services, generating tax revenues and nurturing communities. A purely passive income scheme will not generate the same level of productive economic activity. For many people, especially young adults, meaningful work is a core part of their identity. For young people in the Arab world, it is not an exaggeration to say a job equals purpose, self-worth and hope.
Employment in challenging roles builds skills, creativity and problem-solving capacities that are essential for adapting to future changes. High-quality jobs in particular give educated young people a sense of fulfillment and progress in their lives. This satisfaction would be at risk of being lost in an idle society. The workplace is a powerful training ground. Before the advent of remote working, conversation and competition made busy offices incubators of great ideas.
In his memoir “City Room,” Arthur Gelb, the late American journalist, described the New York Times newsroom of the 1940s this way: “There was an overwhelming sense of purpose, fire and life: the clacking rhythm of typewriters, the throbbing of great machines in the composing room on the floor above, reporters shouting for copy boys to pick up their stories.”Employment creates networks, encourages teamwork and accountability, and strengthens civic engagement. On the other hand, large-scale joblessness, especially among young people, produces social drift, weakens bonds, increases division, feeds unrest and erodes hope. AI tycoons such as Elon Musk, Sam Altman and Marc Benioff ought to be thinking of ways in which AI can be used to generate plentiful, professionally rewarding jobs instead of touting the introduction of universal basic income as inevitable.
No matter what term tech tycoons choose to apply to it — “universal extreme wealth,” “universal high income” or “universal basic income” — the dangers of financially rewarding idleness can scarcely be overstated. In addition to the erosion of motivation and the work ethic, a guaranteed income without the expectation of contribution might lead to disconnection from skills-building and long-term planning. There is also the risk of social fragmentation and alienation. Without shared daily activities like work, people living off AI profits could become more isolated, lose touch with community norms, and fall into destructive habits or radicalized echo chambers. None of this is an argument for a Luddite agenda resisting the adoption of a technology whose time has come. Even California socialists do not advocate turning back the clock — although, ultimately, robots rather than American workers might end up doing the heavy lifting of President Trump’s planned manufacturing renaissance.
If the technological displacement of human workers proves unstoppable, the pace and scale of AI-driven automation will undoubtedly make job creation in some sectors unviable. A universal basic income could at least ensure that people’s basic needs are met in a fully automated economy. A guaranteed supplemental income could also reduce some of the economic insecurity and stress. It could provide a safety net that allows people to take entrepreneurial risks, retrain or transition to new industries without fear of destitution, potentially prompting innovation from the ground up.
In theory, the recipients of universal basic income would have the freedom to pursue non-market value creation. Thus, with their basic needs covered, people could focus on care-giving, volunteering, education, the creative arts or environmental projects that existing markets do not adequately reward, even though the wider society still benefits from them.
If the pros and cons of an AI-funded “universal high income” make it sound like a quixotic experiment in wealth generation — lowering costs for companies and then handing out part of the profits in a post-work future — that is because it indeed would be if tried.
Job-loss fears are real, but the remedy should not be worse than the disease. Ultimately, the responsibility of tech leaders is not to make mass idleness the new normal, but to harness AI in ways that expand human opportunity.
• Arnab Neil Sengupta is a senior editor at Arab News.

From preventing harm to the maximization of suffering: How Europe fumbled migration
Hafed Al-Ghwell/Arab News/August 16, 2025
Europe’s hastily constructed migration frameworks have evolved from mere bureaucratic missteps into the calibrated engine of devastation that we see today.
What began as fatally misguided attempts at containment, fixated on hardened borders and outsourced deterrence at a cost of billions, has mutated into a self-perpetuating source of misery, amplifying human suffering to gain an edge in the face of the ever-changing winds of domestic politics. Naysayers will argue that the crisis that emerged as migrant arrivals increased, and the death tolls from unsuccessful attempts mounted, forced Brussels into what proved to be such a sloppy response and so there was bound to be some “policy drift” — unfortunate mishaps to be temporarily endured until future interventions corrected them. However, the reality of the situation is rather different, because the sum total of Europe’s failures is now a measurable, accelerating retreat from its proclaimed values, which is being executed using a cold political calculus. Humanitarian obligations are being discarded not through neglect but as conscious strategy. The driving imperative? Electoral survival at any cost, even if it means dismantling the very principles and ideals Europe projects globally. The initial failures have hardened into a purposeful architecture in which harm is not a byproduct but the main output. Consider the numbers: Brussels channels more than $5.2 billion into outsourcing its border enforcement, transforming Libya, Tunisia and Morocco into de facto migration buffer zones that inevitably become markets for cruelty in which payment hinges on suppression of arrival numbers, regardless of the methods used.
The result? A 59 percent reduction in Mediterranean crossings in 2024. However, this masks woeful operational realities in the strategic abandonment of tens of thousands of people in desert expulsion zones, including surging death tolls, many of which go undocumented, and the identification of mass graves near the border between Libya and Tunisia. That is without even taking account of the domino effects of illicit economies and networks that thrive on “double-dipping.” In Libya, for example, non-state armed groups easily obtain EU funding for containment efforts while simultaneously actively trafficking desperate people via “safe route taxes,” boat fees and even “auctions.” Europe has engineered a self-sustaining machinery of harm. By outsourcing brutality, legitimizing xenophobic rhetoric, and criminalizing humanitarian acts, it has rendered its own asylum norms obsolete.
The fault for this lies primarily with programs, initiatives and sources of funding such as the EU’s Neighborhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument, which financially rewards autocrats for migrant suppression while omitting any binding safeguards on human rights. Naturally, such myopic policies allow, inadvertently or not, evil to metastasize through impunity: regimes that often score the lowest on human rights indices face zero consequences for systemic abuses, precisely because they deliver the required reduction in arrival numbers. In Tunisia, for instance, EU-funded operations enable the regime of President Kais Saied to detain, extort and forcibly abandon sub-Saharan migrants in the desert, a policy explicitly designed to “make life difficult” until refugees “ask for voluntary return.” It is a chilling calculus that reduces human lives to the level of deterrence metrics, all underwritten by funding and tacit endorsement from Europe.
Clearly, this externalization machinery is not a passive drift, or the handiwork of overzealous actors with a blank check empowered by Europe’s tilt toward far-right populism. Europeans are now actively fortifying authoritarian governance abroad while simultaneously feeding political radicalization domestically. By providing funding and technical support, Europe is empowering its “partners” to enact violent crackdowns and forced displacements, actions that in turn validate and intensify the nativist rhetoric within European capitals.
This cycle is mutually reinforcing: electoral anxieties drive the funding, the funding manufactures containment “successes” at the cost of human suffering, and these manufactured results further entrench the political forces demanding increasingly harsh action.
Humanitarian principles are not eroded by accident, they are traded for a “59 percent” statistic. Simultaneously, the political landscape in Europe has been irrevocably poisoned by the very xenophobia its policies help to cultivate. Political corrosion now manifests as a self-inflicted contagion, wherein the mainstream parties that adopt increasingly nativist rhetoric inevitably accelerate their own irrelevance while empowering the very extremism they claim to combat. Germany’s center-right Christian Democrats promised intensified border theatrics and mass deportations of Syrians while hemorrhaging support to extremists despite initial leads in polls, ultimately resulting in the far-right Alternative for Germany party securing 21 percent of the vote at the federal election in February.
Meanwhile, the suspension of asylum rights in Poland, a move rubber-stamped by Brussels, failed to act as an electoral shield and instead merely paved the way for anti-migrant populists to secure executive and veto authority. The 16.6 million forcibly displaced persons in the Middle East and North Africa are confronted not only by razor wire but a continent that is actively investing in their suffering. These far-right parties now wield ministerial authority that is normalizing the dismantling of international protection frameworks. Their playbook is consistent: manufacture consent through spectacle, in the calculated normalization of cruelty and abandonment. Germany’s Interior Ministry, for example, illegally rejected 330 asylum seekers within two months of performative border operations, a spectacle divorced from efficacy yet potent in terms of political messaging.
Similarly, Poland concealed the documented deaths of dozens of migrants in the Bialowieza exclusion zone since 2021, a direct consequence of systemic pushbacks.
Beyond the Mediterranean, other countries historically remote from front-line arrivals are also actively pursuing regressive policies, as European values capitulate to misguided reactionism. The human toll of this is both immediate and intergenerational. Germany’s suspension of family reunification rights for subsidiary protection holders (individuals who do not meet the criteria for refugee status but have been granted international protection because of the risk of serious harm in home countries), primarily Syrians, will result in fractured households for years to come, severing integration pathways. Moreover, Germany now processes a mere 2.8 asylum claims per 100,000 people. The rate in Poland has plummeted to a negligible 0.4. These figures are dwarfed by the 8,900 in Jordan. This deliberate institutional collapse facilitates the next regression: the targeted erosion of protections for even Ukrainian refugees. Once deemed “acceptable,” and initially welcomed as “European kin,” they now face punitive means-testing, reduced child benefits in Poland, and the denial of social provisions in Germany under Merz’s spurious “social tourism” libel. Solidarity, it seems, expires when usefulness diminishes. The capitulation of the more moderate center-right has failed to contain the surge in anti-migrant populism or reduce its appeal to enterprising politicians seeking office or reelection. It has succeeded only in commodifying human suffering as electoral currency, and entrenching the dismantling of protection frameworks as standard operating procedure.
Worse still, Europe is even criminalizing compassion. The “Hajnowka 5” face five-year prison sentences in Poland for providing water and clothing to an Iraqi family. In Belgium, police colluded with far-right militants to violently dismantle solidarity vigils.
The EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, set for implementation in 2026, codifies this moral collapse by incentivizing “remigration,” a euphemism for coercive strategies of attrition that effectively abandon migrants in a lethal state of limbo. The conclusion to draw from all this is inescapable: Europe has engineered a self-sustaining machinery of harm. By outsourcing brutality, legitimizing xenophobic rhetoric, and criminalizing humanitarian acts, it has rendered its own asylum norms obsolete. The 16.6 million forcibly displaced persons in the Middle East and North Africa are confronted not only by razor wire but a continent that is actively investing in their suffering. With far-right parties now entrenched in governments from Warsaw to Berlin — for now — and the EU institutionalization of deterrence-as-doctrine, any return to protection-based policies is politically foreclosed. Europe has not merely failed to manage migration, it has weaponized despair. The ruins of its values are now scattered in deserts, forests and voting booths alike.• Hafed Al-Ghwell is senior fellow and program director at the Stimson Center in Washington D.C. and senior fellow at the Center for Conflict and Humanitarian Studies.
X: @HafedAlGhwell

Israel is moving one (big) step closer to annexing Gaza
Yossi Mekelberg/Arab News/August 16, 2025
It would be an understatement to suggest that the current Israeli government has lost the plot. What it is plotting can only bring disaster to the Palestinians in Gaza, probably on Israel as well, and on the chances of bringing this horrific war to an end any time soon.
After an all-night meeting last week, the Cabinet decided, in a symbolic move, that by Oct. 7 this year, the Israeli army will take over the entire Gaza Strip. This includes taking control of Gaza City, where hundreds of thousands of Palestinians have been trapped for many months, suffering from acute shortages of food, drinking water and medical aid, and living in constant fear of the next Israeli military assault.
The many hours it took the Israeli Cabinet to reach this decision might suggest to some that there were deep divisions among the decision makers. This is hardly the case. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was determined to gain approval for the proposal, come what may. The only robust resistance came from Eyal Zamir, chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, who tried to talk some sense into those around the table regarding the horrendous implications of such a decision for the military, the hostages still held by Hamas, and the country’s standing in the world. But in a Cabinet stuffed with extremists, sycophants who would have no political existence without Netanyahu, and those who are too afraid to challenge him, the go-ahead for the plan was a formality. The Cabinet set out what it called five principles for expanding the military campaign in Gaza: disarming Hamas; the return of all hostages, both living and deceased; the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip; Israeli security control of the Gaza Strip; and the establishment of an alternative civilian government that involves neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority. In reality, these can hardly be described as “principles” but instead simply repeat the Cabinet’s existing objectives; some of which were set early in this war, others added as it became apparent that the level of destruction Israeli authorities were inflicting on Gaza required that they at least pretend that they do not intend to remain in Gaza for the long term. In a Cabinet stuffed with extremists, sycophants who would have no political existence without Netanyahu, and those who are too afraid to challenge him, the go-ahead for the plan was a formality.
So far, Israel might have reduced the military capabilities of Hamas but it has not eliminated the organization. Instead, it has simply inflicted immense misery and suffering upon the Palestinian people and deepened the divisions within Israel itself, while compromising the reputation of the country to the extent that it will now take a very long time for it to be salvaged. And for this Israeli government, any mention of efforts to secure the release of the remaining hostages is mere lip service. Why Netanyahu should continue to believe that what Israel has failed to achieve in more than 22 months of war, despite infinitely superior military capabilities operating with little-to-no consideration for the lives or well-being of civilians, will nonetheless eventually lead to ultimate victory over Hamas beggars belief.
The obvious ulterior motives of Israel’s prime minister are becoming ever more apparent as he not only ignores the recommendations of the head of his army but, astonishingly, also a letter signed by some 600 retired senior security officials, including former army and intelligence agency chiefs, who wrote to US President Donald Trump urging him to put pressure on Israeli authorities to end the war in Gaza immediately.
It is also telling that in their despair, these people, all of whom served their country loyally for decades, should send their plea to the American president and not their own prime minister, in whose integrity and judgment they have completely lost trust. Those who signed that letter are not wrong to have lost faith in Netanyahu’s conduct of this war; his latest decision, which to all intents and purposes means occupation of the Gaza Strip in its entirety, was taken either because he is biding his time to satisfy the messianic ultranationalists within his coalition government, or is gambling that by entering Gaza City he will be able to defeat Hamas and release the hostages, which could put him in a position to call an early general election and perhaps win it. The former scenario is pure, cynical opportunism. The latter reflects cynicism and delusion in equal measure. Regardless of the motivation, the outcome will be yet more suffering and bloodshed. Moreover, it was reported that during last week’s Cabinet meeting, Gen. Zamir warned that this course of action was as good as giving up on those hostages still thought to be alive. In light of the fact that it was mainly diplomacy that achieved the prior release of some hostages, it is impossible to contradict his warning.
For a long time now, this war has no longer been about defeating Hamas or rescuing the hostages … it has purely been about rescuing Netanyahu’s declining political career and saving him from a possible jail sentence. In an effort to cool the inevitable roasting his country would receive from the international community upon learning of his plan, Netanyahu refrained from describing the objective of the military operation as an “occupation” and opted instead to use the word “takeover.”After more than 22 months of mass killings and destruction inflicted by Israel in Gaza, however, his decision was still viewed as a step too far by countries around the globe, including close friends and allies, who condemned it in no uncertain terms.
The UK’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, instantly condemned the Israeli security Cabinet’s decision as “wrong” and urged its members to immediately reconsider as “it will only bring more bloodshed.”In an unprecedented move, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz announced that his government would no longer approve the sale of military equipment to Israel if it might be used in Gaza. It would be naive not to believe that one of the calculations made by the Israeli government in formulating its plan was that the threat of a large-scale military operation would result in many residents of Gaza City fleeing to other parts of the tiny territory, and perhaps eventually leaving it. This would only add to the extreme woes of the Palestinian population, many of them young children, who have been displaced several times in the past two years with no access to food or clean water, and are suffering from malnutrition and even starvation. Moreover, war in urban areas not only means the likelihood of many civilian casualties, it also means further deployment in such an environment of already exhausted Israeli troops who have been on active service on the front lines for nearly two years, with all the likely effects this might have on their judgment. It is a recipe for disaster. For a long time now, this war has no longer been about defeating Hamas or rescuing the hostages. Instead, it has purely been about rescuing Netanyahu’s declining political career and saving him from a possible jail sentence for corruption. In service of that, he will stop at nothing.
• Yossi Mekelberg is professor of international relations and an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House.
X: @YMekelberg

Right-wing culture warfare comes to Germany
Jan-Werner Mueller/Arab News/August 16, 2025
Something just broke in Germany. A highly respected jurist whom the governing Social Democratic Party nominated to sit on the country’s constitutional court has withdrawn herself from consideration after a relentless smear campaign by right-wing journalists and politicians. Worse, it was the party’s own coalition partner, the center-right Christian Democratic Union, that suddenly shifted from supporting Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf’s candidacy to deeming her unacceptable. This sabotage of a hitherto consensual procedure is a test run for bringing US-style culture war politics to Germany. The goal is to peel away ever more members of the center right that former Chancellor Angela Merkel once led and to move toward an arrangement that has already been put in place in some other European democracies: an alliance of the center right and the populist far right.
True, Germany’s constitutional court, though one of the world’s most respected and influential, has not always been above controversy. In the mid-1990s, it drew conservatives’ ire when it ruled that Bavarian nondenominational schools may not display crucifixes on their walls. But the process of appointing judges has always been spared from the spectacle that is all too familiar from the US. Rather than holding highly publicized, televised and reliably polarizing hearings, parties meet behind closed doors to propose a balanced ticket of nominees, each of whom then must win supermajority support in the lower house. As with so much else in European politics, this process has been complicated by the success of far-right populists. The Alternative for Germany, now the second-largest group in parliament, has been demanding its “own judge,” objecting to the fact that smaller German parties — the pro-market Free Democrats and the Greens — hold the right to nominate members of the court. In one federal state, Thuringia, where the Alternative for Germany won the last elections, the party has effectively blocked the appointment of new judges as a protest against what it sees as its unjustified exclusion. As with so much else in European politics, this process has been complicated by the success of far-right populists.
But it was not primarily the far right that brought down Brosius-Gersdorf. Rather, she faced a wider campaign of criticism that sought to paint her as a left-wing radical who supposedly wants to liberalize abortion completely and introduce mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations. Not only did a fellow law professor alter her Wikipedia entry to make her look like an “activist,” but the archbishop of Bamberg attacked her in a sermon — only to admit, after a personal conversation with the candidate, that he had been “misinformed.”
Germany has never had the equivalent of Fox News (whereas France now has CNews, one of whose leading journalists even stood as a prominent candidate for the French presidency in 2022). However, relatively small far-right startups — claiming to be “the voice of the majority” — have increasingly gained influence within the CDU. One CDU member recently declared, in effect, that anyone not subscribing to natural law doctrines cannot serve as a judge. Suddenly, the supposed mainstream is echoing the populist talking point that courts should primarily “represent the people” (as opposed to upholding the constitution). The CDU has been in an intellectual crisis for some time. Hardly anyone can today articulate the party’s core principles. True, like the Conservatives in the UK, German Christian Democrats long prided themselves on their pragmatism, cultivating an image as the competent default party of government. Moreover, natural law thinking was indeed prominent among Christian Democrats in the postwar period.
But precisely because they were interested in power, Christian Democrats — like British Tories — carefully adapted to a changing society. The ironic result is that they are now maligning as “radical” a jurist who actually does seem to represent “the people” — insofar as she generally holds views that command majority support. The CDU has been in an intellectual crisis for some time. Hardly anyone can today articulate the party’s core principles. Christian Democrats traditionally pursued a political strategy of seeking to mediate among different groups and interests, pursuing what Catholic social doctrine had long held out as a vision of social harmony. In this sense, Merkel — always eager to balance and compromise — was still practicing the traditional model.
But today’s right-wing culture warriors are polarization entrepreneurs. Often armed with disinformation, they seek to sharpen conflicts and divide constituencies into friends and enemies, and this has led them to target the center right’s weak point. Feeling pressure from the far right, Christian Democrats think they must prove to their constituencies that they are still genuinely conservative — unlike the supposedly uber-liberal Merkel. While the archbishop of Bamberg was willing to speak with the nominee directly, CDU members of parliament apparently refused to do so. Such behavior represents a stark deviation from the culture of compromise and moderation that has prevented the US-style politicization of Germany’s highest court. The CDU’s norm-breaking is analogous to US Republicans’ refusal to even consider Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee in 2016. Despite CDU leaders’ claims to be democracy’s last defense against the rising far right, the party is falling into the culture war traps the far right has set for them. It is not inevitable that the last major country with a firewall to contain the far right will go the way so many other European democracies have gone already. But that scenario is becoming more realistic.
• Jan-Werner Mueller, professor of politics at Princeton University, is the author, most recently, of 'Democracy Rules' (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2021).
©Project Syndicate

Freedom of Religion in Turkey: Foreign Policy Implications
Soner Cagaptay/The Washington Institute/Aug 16/2025
The director of the Institute’s Turkish Research Program testifies on why Ankara remains vitally important to U.S. policy in the Middle East and the great power arena despite its major domestic shifts in mosque-state relations under President Erdogan.
Chair Hartzler, Vice Chair Mahmood, and honorable commissioners, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I have been asked to discuss Turkey’s importance to the United States as a NATO ally and explain key dynamics informing its foreign policy and its ties with the United States today. Ankara’s foreign policy has undergone a dramatic shift in the past two decades under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, moving away from its earlier Eurocentric focus. There are many ways to interpret this shift, including religion and the political career of President Erdogan, among others. However, I believe that a more fundamental dynamic is at play here, one that is informed by shifts in the country’s demographics and global vocation.
European Origins
About a hundred years ago, following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and his followers—known as Kemalists—forged the country as a European secular republic. At the republic’s founding, Turkey’s elites—many of them born in Europe and catapulted into Anatolia amid the collapse of the Ottoman Empire—held on to European-influenced ideas of statecraft and social life.
At the helm of this group, Ataturk expelled Islam into the private sphere, banned religious brotherhoods, purged Islam from Turkish laws, and came close to outlawing religious education. Additionally, he changed the country’s alphabet from an Arabic-based script to a Roman one, expunging Arabic and Persian words from Turkish while retaining French and Italian borrowings. Turkey also dropped the Islamic Hijri calendar in favor of the Western Gregorian alternative and banned fezzes and turbans for men.
Ataturk’s model for state-Islam relations in Turkey was freedom from religion in government and education. In this way, modern Turkey’s founder embedded the country firmly within Europe. Ataturk’s European project, however, was by no means limited to the country’s elites. During the unraveling of the Ottoman Empire, which started in the nineteenth century, millions of Turks and non-Turkish Muslims—including Albanians, Bosnians, Bulgarians, Greeks, and Macedonians—moved into Anatolia, a transcontinental space spanning Europe, Eurasia, and the Middle East. Together with Muslims expelled by Russia from the former Ottoman territories north of the Black Sea (such as Circassia and Crimea), European Muslims thus accounted for nearly 40 percent of Turkey’s population by the time Ataturk founded the republic in 1923, and they tended to support Ataturk’s project of strict secularization and pro-European foreign policy.
Modern Turkey became a multiparty democracy in the 1950s, less than two decades after Ataturk’s death in 1938, and his Kemalist followers on the left and right, many of them born in the Balkans or descendants of immigrants from Europe, perpetuated the idea of Turkey as a European entity. Throughout the twentieth century, the Kemalists followed Ataturk in trying to shape Turkey and its institutions along European lines.
Turkey’s democratic evolution after World War II and inclusion in Europe during the Cold War further strengthened the country’s claims to a European and Western identity. It was a founding member of the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, among other pan-European entities; it was also admitted to NATO soon after the alliance’s creation in 1952. And in 1987, it applied to join the European Union.
Shifting Demographics
With the passing of a century, however, the connection to Europe of many Turks became increasingly tenuous. To begin with, the share of citizens with European origins dropped precipitously throughout the twentieth century, while the percentage of Anatolians increased significantly. Accordingly, when Erdogan came to power in 2003, native Anatolians constituted an overwhelming majority of Turkey’s population. Hailing from the peninsula’s interior, this population tended to be devoutly Muslim, and for the most part had never been fully at ease with the republic’s secularist founding project. As these conservative hinterland Turks began to enter the middle class and climb up the ladder of political power, the European identity that Ataturk grafted onto the nation became thinner with each passing decade, eventually falling away. Unlike the Kemalists, the new Anatolian elites do not think of themselves primarily as European, and their view has come to form the heart of Turkey’s geopolitical identity.
At the same time, the EU has been hesitant about its relationship to Turkey. Between 1995 and 2013, during the rapid expansion that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the Union absorbed sixteen new countries. At first, it looked like Turkey might join this group: its own accession process had begun before the end of the Cold War, in 1987, and received a shot in the arm with Erdogan’s coming to power in 2003. Erdogan was hailed by Many European observers as a new style of moderate Islamist who was deeply committed to democratic institutions and willing to take on the country’s entrenched military and turn Turkey into a full-fledged democracy. In 2005, the EU started formal talks with Turkey regarding membership. But Turkey remained on the outside. Soon after talks began, Brussels notified Ankara that no offer for membership would be forthcoming. The EU never started accession talks with a country that did not culminate in an offer of membership. The unique signaling this time around was clear: Turkey had no home in Europe.
Anatolians in Charge
At least since the early twenty-first century, the Western-leaning Turkish elites of yesteryear had begun to lose control over a society they had tried to direct since the country’s founding. Erdogan embodies that shift even though he is not entirely responsible for it. Unlike Ataturk, who came from the Ottoman Empire’s European provinces, Erdogan hails from Anatolia; his political base consists of pious Anatolians, many of whom never fully adopted Ataturk’s radically secularist project. Accordingly, Erdogan’s Turkey has fewer emotional and political attachments to the West or Europe. In turn, the new Turkey he has crafted is anchored not in Europe but in the Turkish hinterland. Its foreign policy represents the political and cultural sensitivities of Anatolians far removed from the secularist ethos of the country’s founding elites. This Anatolian takeover is simply a product of Turkey’s demographic shift over the past decades and the diminishing hold of the old secular elites over Turkish society.
Turkey’s new Anatolian elites, often informed by more conservative strains of Islam, also see Islam as inherent to Turkey’s national identity. In fact, these new elites celebrate Islam as vigorously as Ataturk tried to suppress it. President Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) long sought to challenge and then eliminate Turkey’s Kemalist-era attachment to Europe and the West, and with that the country’s commitment to European-style secularism that mimicked (and perhaps exceeded in its severity) France’s system of laicity. Since coming to power, Erdogan has lifted Turkey’s Kemalist-era ban on the hijab while also allowing Islam to flood the country’s educational curriculum and political life. The new model for state-Islam relations in Turkey is freedom of religion in government and education.
Turkey’s Global Vocation Today
This is not to say that Turkey will abandon its seat at the Western table. After all, Turkey’s quest to join the West goes as far back as the first attempts at Europeanization by Ottoman elites in the early eighteenth century. It dates to the birth of modern Europe itself. Rather, with its center of gravity now in Anatolia, Turkey can be expected to position itself as a hybrid power between the West and the rest of the world. This Turkey still sees itself as part of Europe, but not to the detriment of its other associations, such as Eurasian or Middle Eastern. Ankara now freely engages with Iran, Russia, the United States, wealthy Gulf monarchies, and others, along with Europe, without feeling that it must choose a favorite. Whereas twentieth-century Turkish leaders had an emotional attachment to Europe, Erdogan does not.
A European-influenced outlook governed Turkish foreign policy for decades, but the new Turkey will freely engage with other countries without regard to Western objectives or priorities. That is because Turkey now sees the world through an Anatolian lens.
A Middle Power and NATO Ally—with Multiple Identities
The new Turkey has many identities, none of them exclusive or easy to classify: if it is a Middle Eastern country, then it is the only Middle Eastern state that is also a Black Sea power. And if it is a European country, then it is the only European state that borders Iran. And if it is a Eurasian power, it is the only state that belongs to NATO.
More important still, Turkey is the only swing state—different from other swing states such as India, Brazil, or South Africa—that is simultaneously a middle power, a NATO member, and increasingly a global player, thanks to its ability to straddle East and West and, more recently, Global North and Global South. How Should Washington Approach Cooperation with Turkey?
The best way for the United States to approach Turkey is to acknowledge the reality of these multiple alignments. Erdogan is fond of being seen as the center of things, with the world revolving around Turkey—he has tried to serve as an arbiter in the war in Ukraine, played an active role in the South Caucasus, and projected Turkey’s power in the Sahel, Horn of Africa, South Caucasus, and Western Balkans. He relishes being the dealmaker or middleman in regional conflicts, which boosts his already monumental standing at home. The United States would be better served to deal with Turkey as it does other middle powers such as India and Indonesia—engaging with Ankara in areas of potential cooperation while not anticipating complete alignment on all issues.
That said, here are areas in which Washington can productively work with Turkey:
Great power competition. Over the past decades, branching out from its exclusive focus on Europe, Turkey has built significant soft and hard power—from drone sales and defense treaties to educational and religious institutions—in Africa, Southeast Europe, the South Caucasus, and Central Asia. In view of Turkey’s role on the global scene, the Trump administration should consider cooperating with Turkey to amplify America’s global power in great power competition and engage in successful competition against China and Russia in the noted areas of Turkish influence.
Syria. Turning to the Middle East and considering President Trump’s calls to “end the wars,” Ankara has already effectively ended the war in Syria through its proxies and can continue to play a key role in bringing further stability to that country. This would be important in preventing new refugee flows as well as an Islamic State comeback, among other challenges. Today, Syria is the most important and immediate area of U.S.-Turkish cooperation, with the Trump administration relying greatly on Turkey’s institutions to stabilize Syria.
Ukraine. Playing a swing-state role, Turkey has kept open channels of communication with both Russia and Ukraine throughout the Ukraine war. To this end, Ankara has supported Ukraine militarily, while keeping open economic ties with Russia. Accordingly, today Ankara has the ears of both combatants.
Even if an ultimate end to that conflict will have to be ironed out between the United States and Russia, Turkey, which has already brokered important deals between Russia and Ukraine, such as a grain corridor and prisoner exchange, can help manage the conflict until a ceasefire is reached. And once it is time for ceasefire talks, Turkey is likely to host these negotiations—potentially helping end yet another war.
Iran’s regional influence. In recent years, Ankara has increased its influence in Iraq, providing some sort of balance against Iran’s presence there. At the same time, considering open channels of communication between Ankara and Tehran, Turkey—which opposes military targeting of Iran—could play a role backing the Trump administration’s diplomatic efforts to prevent Iran’s nuclearization.
Turkey-Israel Ties
Considering the mostly positive trajectory of Turkish foreign policy and U.S.-Turkey cooperation, the greatest risks today lie in Turkey-Israel ties. In late 2024, the Turkish-allied jihadist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) took over Damascus, ending decades of Assad regime rule in Syria and essentially kicking Iran out of the country. However, Israel considers Turkey’s newfound influence in Damascus a threat. This may be an exaggerated fear: while President Erdogan is not a fan of Israel’s policies regionally, unlike the Iranians, he does not want to destroy Israel: he is simply critical of its policies, if harshly so.
Yet the recent conflict between Israel and Syria’s new Turkish-backed government suggests tensions are not yet fully resolved. Keeping Turkish relations with Israel afloat will require work from President Trump, relying on his rapport with President Erdogan and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. To this end, Trump should consider brokering a detente between the two states in Syria.
Presidential Dialogue
The relationship between Presidents Trump and Erdogan is—indeed—the greatest asset for bilateral ties. It has allowed the two principals to settle past bilateral differences and might lead to future resolutions regarding military sales and cooperation. To this end, regular presidential-level meetings and open communication between the two leaders should be supplemented by stronger dialogue between the countries’ bureaucratic agencies, legislatures, and policymakers.
**Soner Cagaptay is the Beyer Family Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute, director of its Turkish Research Program, and author of its presidential transition memo “Building on Momentum in U.S.-Turkey Relations."

Selected tweets for 16 August/2025
Mike Pompeo
Coming out of the Summit, it’ll be more important to watch Putin’s actions versus words. Does he continue to steal Ukrainian kids and launch missiles into Kyiv?  I hope Putin is actually serious about ending this war. 

Zéna Mansour
The Druze population in Syria is seeking independence as a result of marginalization, inequality & a lack of respect for their rights, with the aim of preserving their independent identity& fulfilling their economic needs that have been neglected.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy
On the day of negotiations, the Russians are killing as well. And that speaks volumes. Recently, weʼve discussed with the U.S. and Europeans what can truly work. Everyone needs a just end to the war. Ukraine is ready to work as productively as possible to bring the war to an end, and we count on a strong position from America. Everything will depend on this – the Russians factor in American strength. Make no mistake – strength.

Ronnie Chatah
Ignore the vengeful sound. They would lose a civil war, let alone no competing militia (unlike 1975) to battle one.Focus on the signal. Iran has no option but to leverage Hezbollah’s weapons for some form of regime protection.And that bargaining is with the Americans, not us.

Nabil El Halabi
It was a successful and productive meeting. Our Christian brothers are an essential part of this nation. We have lived alongside them in peace and cooperation for more than 1,430 years.

Rev. Johnnie Moore
Very pleased to see my friend His Beatitude Patriarch John X of Antioch and All the East meeting with Syrian President al-Sharaa.

Amine Bar-Julius Iskandar
From the eye of the cyclone, Jabal-Druze, the entire map of the Middle East will be redrawn. Caliphates and Wilayas will fall, and indigenous peoples will rise.