English LCCC Newsbulletin For
Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For August 28/2025
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2025/english.August28.25.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
You hypocrites! Does not each of you on the sabbath untie his ox or his donkey
from the manger, and lead it away to give it water?
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 13/10-17/:"Jesus was
teaching in one of the synagogues on the sabbath. And just then there appeared a
woman with a spirit that had crippled her for eighteen years. She was bent over
and was quite unable to stand up straight. When Jesus saw her, he called her
over and said, ‘Woman, you are set free from your ailment.’ When he laid his
hands on her, immediately she stood up straight and began praising God. But the
leader of the synagogue, indignant because Jesus had cured on the sabbath, kept
saying to the crowd, ‘There are six days on which work ought to be done; come on
those days and be cured, and not on the sabbath day.’ But the Lord answered him
and said, ‘You hypocrites! Does not each of you on the sabbath untie his ox or
his donkey from the manger, and lead it away to give it water? And ought not
this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen long years, be
set free from this bondage on the sabbath day?’ When he said this, all his
opponents were put to shame; and the entire crowd was rejoicing at all the
wonderful things that he was doing."
Titles For The
Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published
on August 27-28/2025
The Media
Campaign Against Tom Barrack is Childish…And the Vast Difference Between
Hezbollah the Devils, and Mullahs’ Criminality, and Morgan Ortagus: America,
Beauty, and Hope/Elias Bejjani/August 26, 2025
Call for the Arrest of Naim Qassem and the Closure of Hezbollah’s
Institutions/Elias Bejjani/August 25/2025
Hezbollah’s Threats Against Journalist Mohammad Barakat and His Family Are
Condemned – The Judiciary Must Act/Elias Bejjani/August 25/2025
Destroy Hezbollah’s weapons pipeline from Iran, support Lebanese army: Pompeo
US Envoy Says Economic Zone in South Lebanon Will Help Disarmed Hezbollah
Members
US Envoy Cuts Short South Lebanon Visit Amid Protests
Trump’s envoy tells Lebanese journalists not to be ‘animalistic,’ ties behavior
to Middle East’s ‘problem’
Lebanese wine businesses struggle through war and drought
Berri says Barrack and Ortagus 'brought nothing from Israel'
Salam meets al-Sisi, urges Arab support for ending Israel's occupation, attacks
Hezbollah MP slams Barrack's 'blatant insult' to Lebanese journalists
New UN draft extends UNIFIL term by a year, withdraws its troops within another
year
What Exactly Does Barrack Want to Offer Hezbollah?/Sam Menassa/Asharq Al Awsat/August
27/2025
Lebanon’s Moment of Truth/David Schenker/The Washington Institute/Aug 27/2025
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on August 27-28/2025
Three dead, 17 injured in shooting at Minneapolis Catholic school,
authorities say
A Word of Consolation to the Victims at Annunciation Catholic School and Church
in the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis
Israeli drone strikes kill six Syrian soldiers in Damascus suburb, reports claim
New Iran Sanctions Are Welcome, but Maximum Impact Demands Maximum Attention
‘Your Aggression Will Not Be Tolerated’: Australia Expels Iranian Ambassador
Over Attacks on Jewish Community Targets
Russia Drafts UNSC Resolution To Block Sanctions ‘Snapback’ Against Iran
Europeans likely to initiate UN sanctions process on Iran on Thursday, sources
say
IAEA chief gets special police protection over threats as deadline approaches
over Iran sanctions
Iran link to Australian synagogue attack uncovered via funding trail, spy agency
says
UN nuclear inspectors return to Iran for first time since conflict with Israel
Trump holds Gaza policy meeting with Blair and Kushner, White House official
says
US to host talks on post-war Gaza as Israel calls Gaza City evacuation
‘inevitable’
UN official says 'all hope is gone' if Israeli offensive on famine-stricken Gaza
City goes ahead
Israel's Netanyahu recognises Armenian genocide in a historic first
Israel Army Launches Operation in West Bank’s Nablus
Pope Leo XIV joins Greek Orthodox interfaith plea for peace in Gaza
Titles For
The Latest English LCCC analysis &
editorials from miscellaneous sources
on August 27-28/2025
John Bolton cashed in and America paid the price/Peter Navarro, opinion
contributor/The Hill/August 27/2025
Turkey’s Push for Regime Change in Syria: The Jihadi Highway/Sinan Ciddi/The
Jerusalem Strategic Tribune/August 26, 2025
Syria’s Agreement with Israel Is Not as Promising as Advertised/Hussain Abdul-Hussain/This
Is Beirut/August 27/2025
A Rush to Washington Seems to Have Paid Off for European Leaders/Neil Mac
Farquhar/he New York Times/August 27, 2025
Libya: UN Envoys and the Vicious Circle of Stalemate/Jumah Boukleb/Asharq Al
Awsat/August 27/2025
Syrian Citizenship for Foreign Fighters? U.S. Red Lines and Nuances/Devorah
Margolin/The Washington Institute/Aug 27/2025
Spy Versus Spy: Iran’s Playbook for Espionage in Israel/Sarah Boches & Matthew
Levitt/The Washington Institute/Aug 27/2025
With No Easy Fixes for Middle East Studies, It’s Time for New Programs/Robert
Satloff/The Washington Institute/Aug 27/2025
The Latest English LCCC
Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on August
27-28/2025
The
Media Campaign Against Tom Barrack is Childish…And the Vast Difference Between
Hezbollah the Devils, and Mullahs’ Criminality, and Morgan Ortagus: America,
Beauty, and Hope
Elias Bejjani/August 26, 2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/08/146720/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VL3wzywTU8&t=163s
My commentary today revolves around three key points:
1 – The Significance of Morgan Ortagus’s Courage in Beirut
Through both words and actions, she proved that she does not fear Hezbollah. She
urged the Lebanese not to fear it either, because it is nothing more than an
Iranian arm whose time has ended. She reassured that America, the West, and the
majority of Arab states have already decided to strip it of its weapons,
dismantle its military presence, and end its occupation of Lebanon.
2 – Hezbollah’s Hysteria and Its Mouthpieces
From Naïm Qassem, to the party’s MPs, officials, and media lackeys – they are
all living in denial, delirium, hallucinations, and daydreams before the
collapse of their project and their humiliating defeat, along with the downfall
of the so-called “Axis of Resistance,” the grand façade of terrorism.
3 – The Infantile Media Campaign Against Tom Barrack
This campaign is practically parrot-like, empty of any real meaning, and
represents a complete divorce from the real positions and priorities that should
be taken against Hezbollah’s occupation, its defiance of the constitution, its
rejection of international resolutions, and its daily threats against the
Lebanese.
To begin with, the difference between the faces of Naïm Qassem, Mohammad Raad,
Wafiq Safa, and the rest of the gang of the “fake resistance,” and the face of
Morgan Ortagus, is like the difference between devils and angels, between owls
and doves, between ugliness and grace, between evil and good.
Morgan Ortagus, the U.S. envoy who confidently walked into a famous Beirut
beauty salon to have her hair done, wanted to say boldly to the Lebanese:
“I am not afraid of Hezbollah, and I advise the Lebanese not to fear it either.
It is an Iranian arm whose time has ended, and America, the West, and most Arab
countries are working to strip it of its weapons.”
This practical gesture alone is enough to destroy the entire fear-mongering
machine that Hezbollah attempts to plant in Lebanese minds through its daily
sectarian and terrorist speeches.
Meanwhile, Hezbollah’s so-called “acting Secretary-General” Naïm Qassem, along
with the rest of its leaders and their hired propagandists – journalists,
analysts, and media parrots – live in a hysterical state of threats, screaming,
excommunication, treason, and false promises of returning to the days of total
domination. Yet behind all this noise lies one simple reality: defeat, collapse,
and pathological denial of reality. They are hallucinating, detached from facts,
after Hezbollah and Iran’s humiliating downfall, the collapse of Bashar Assad’s
criminal regime in Syria, and Israel’s systematic elimination of most Hezbollah
leaders – which continues daily – while Hezbollah is incapable of even firing a
single bullet in response.
Every day, Hezbollah threatens the lives of free and sovereign Lebanese – from
Sheikh Ahmad Shukr, to journalist Qassem Qassir linking the militia’s weapons to
the “return of the Mahdi,” passing by Wafiq Safa, Hussein al-Moussawi, and many
others. Yet most of Lebanon’s press and political class remain silent and
cowardly. Only a few dared to respond.
The absurd irony is this: the very same people who stayed silent in the face of
Hezbollah’s death threats, assassinations, and threats of civil war, exploded
hysterically against a passing comment by Tom Barrack, when he used a simple
English word telling journalists to calm down! That word was blown up into an
entire circus, as if it were the crime of the century. This is pure hypocrisy
and blindness, explained only by an addiction to submission and servility.
Where were those loud voices when Hezbollah thugs assaulted journalist Daoud
Rammal as he prayed at his parents’ grave? Where were they when Hezbollah shed
the blood of journalist Mohammad Barakat? Where were they when Hassan Nasrallah
told Lebanese opponents of his Iranian militia occupation: “You are not human”?
And where were they when Hezbollah’s newspaper editor threatened journalists
with “feel your necks”? The list goes on… Silence was the answer. Yet today,
they all pretend to be outraged at Barrack!
The reality is that what Barrack meant was simple: “Calm down, or we will leave
you alone.” But the parrots preferred screaming.
On the Word “Animalistic” vs. “Anomalistic”
From a linguistic perspective, there is no English word “anomalistic,” as some
pretended. There is anomaly (abnormality, irregularity) and anomalous (abnormal,
unusual).
The word Barrack used was animalistic. Here are its meanings from leading
dictionaries:
Oxford English Dictionary: “Relating to the characteristics or behavior of
animals; resembling or suggestive of animals.”
Merriam-Webster: “Of, relating to, or resembling an animal or animals; marked by
instinct rather than reason.”
Cambridge Dictionary: “Like an animal; relating to the behavior of animals
rather than humans.”
In plain words: animalistic = primitive, brutal, driven by raw instinct and
savagery.
So the entire outcry was nothing but empty propaganda – a parrot-like hysteria,
just as meaningless as everything Hezbollah and its chorus of mouthpieces
promote.
Conclusion
Morgan Ortagus represents America, beauty, and hope, while Hezbollah represents
ugliness, monkeys, devils, and the mullahs’ criminality. The contrast could not
be clearer. What Ortagus told the Lebanese is in itself a roadmap: Do not fear
Hezbollah. Its time is over. The international, Arab, and American decision is
to disarm it and restore Lebanon to its statehood.
As for the media campaign against Tom Barrack, it only reveals how deeply
Lebanon’s press has been infected by decades of occupation – Palestinian,
Syrian, and now Iranian – planting submissiveness, self-censorship, and the
mentality of “devil’s advocates” into the veins of too many so-called
journalists.
**Video Link to the Section of Press
conference held by U.S. Envoy Tom Barrack, & Morgan Ortagus on 26 August/2025 at
The Lebanese Presidential Palace and created the childish media Campaign again
Barrak
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi35R6qPyLI
DRM News/August 26/2025
**Video Link to the entire Press conference held by U.S. Envoy Tom Barrack, &
Morgan Ortagus on 26 August/2025 at The Lebanese Presidential Palace
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM_r5yAH26E
DRM News/August 26/2025
**Video Link to the Press Conference the UN Envoys & Senators held at the
Lebanese Presidential Palace on August 26/after Meeting with President Joseph
Aoun
(Tom Barrak, Morgan Ortagus, Sent Shaheen, Lindsey Graham & Joe Wilson.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2Up0X7mWnc
DRM News/August 26/2025
Call for the Arrest of Naim Qassem and the Closure
of Hezbollah’s Institutions
Elias Bejjani/August 25/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/08/146679/
Naim Qassem, Hezbollah’s
Secretary-General, continues to act as nothing more than a failed and repulsive
mouthpiece for the Iranian regime. His speech today, filled with empty bravado,
inflammatory rhetoric, and sectarian incitement, was nothing short of a direct
provocation against the Lebanese state and its people.Such rhetoric is
dangerous, divisive, and openly challenges Lebanon’s sovereignty and rule of
law. Qassem is not merely a political figure — he is an instigator of conflict
and a partner in terrorism. His arrest is a national necessity, and all offices
and institutions of Hezbollah — a militia serving Iran’s agenda — must be shut
down immediately to restore Lebanon’s security, peace, and sovereignty.
Hezbollah’s Threats Against
Journalist Mohammad Barakat and His Family Are Condemned – The Judiciary Must
Act
Elias Bejjani/August 25/2025
In my name, and in the name of every Lebanese expatriate who cherishes freedom
of expression, believes in the rise of the state, the restoration of its
authority and sovereignty, the implementation of all international resolutions,
and full adherence to the constitution and laws related to freedoms, I strongly
condemn the organized campaign of terrorism and threats targeting journalist
Mohammad Barakat and members of his family by Hezbollah’s media outlets, its
officials, its propaganda machine, and its hired mouthpieces.
What is being waged against Barakat is nothing but a vile attempt to silence
free voices through defamation, intimidation, and incitement to both moral and
physical assassination—an outrageous violation of the Lebanese constitution and
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Mohammad Barakat is a free and sovereign-minded journalist, a man who testifies
to the truth, openly opposes Hezbollah’s occupation of Lebanon, and calls for
mere peaceful and constitutional ending of its military and intelligence grip,
and for the full implementation of relevant international resolutions.
Targeting him in such a disgraceful manner exposes the depth of Hezbollah’s
moral and political bankruptcy before the Lebanese public at large, and before
the free and sovereign voices within its own community in particular, which it
has taken hostage and tied to its illegitimate Iranian weapons.
It must be stressed that freedom of opinion and expression is guaranteed by the
Lebanese constitution, and every journalist and citizen has the right to
practice it so long as they remain within the bounds of the law. Mohammad
Barakat has not deviated from these bounds in the slightest. Therefore, any
attempt to harm him or any member of his family constitutes a direct assault on
press freedom and on the fundamental rights of all Lebanese people.
Hezbollah, its apparatus, its propaganda outlets, and its hired agents bear full
responsibility for any threat against Barakat, and for any harm that may befall
him or his family. It is imperative that the Lebanese judiciary and security
agencies move immediately to open a transparent investigation, identify those
responsible for this campaign, and prosecute anyone who incited, fabricated, or
circulated false statements targeting his life.
An attack on the life of Mohammad Barakat—or any Lebanese journalist—is a direct
assault on freedom and on human dignity. Yet voices of truth and liberty will
not be silenced by forged statements or campaigns of intimidation. Free Lebanese
journalism, both at home and across the diaspora, has always been—and will
remain—the first line of defense for Lebanon’s sovereignty. Hezbollah, or anyone
else, will not succeed in silencing it.
Standing in full solidarity with Mohammad Barakat, and with every journalist who
faces threats, is a national, moral, and legal duty. Exposing these practices
before the international community is likewise essential, in defense of freedom
of expression, the dignity of the Lebanese press, and the right of all Lebanese
to free speech and full sovereignty.
Destroy
Hezbollah’s weapons pipeline from Iran, support Lebanese army: Pompeo
Al Arabiya English/August 27/2025
The former CIA chief and top US diplomat in the first Trump administration
called for increasing American support to Lebanon and its army while urging the
complete destruction of Iran’s weapons pipeline to Beirut. “Lebanon stands at a
crossroads,” former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said. “After decades of
Iranian manipulation and Hezbollah’s stranglehold on the country, President
Donald Trump has a historic opportunity to help the Lebanese people reclaim
their nation while advancing key American interests,” he wrote in an op-ed for
Fox News. The Lebanese government recently adopted a plan to disarm Hezbollah
and all other non-state groups in the country, despite strong opposition from
the Iran-backed group. The decision came on the heels of a crushing military
defeat by Israel against Hezbollah after the latter began lobbing rockets in
what it said was support for Hamas. As part of the US-backed ceasefire deal
between Israel and Hezbollah, the Lebanese Armed Forces were to replace
dismantled Hezbollah outposts along the southern border. The LAF has made slow
but steady progress. More work needs to be done, according to US officials as
well as the Lebanese government. “We must work with our friends and allies to
systematically destroy Iran’s weapons pipeline to Lebanon. Every rocket, every
missile, every piece of military equipment that Iran moves into Lebanon must be
identified and eliminated,” Pompeo said. Another point of contention has been
the renewal of the UN peacekeeping force (UNIFIL), which was set to be renewed
by the UN Security Council. The vote has been delayed, and Washington wants to
end the mandate for good. Pompeo said UNIFIL’s “failed mission must come to an
end.” He added: “With just a few weeks left of its mandate, now is the time to
pull the plug on this United Nations boondoggle.”While Pompeo cited the
international community spending years discussing Lebanon’s problems, including
a collapsed central bank and corrupt state institutions, he said Hezbollah’s
armed presence would always be an obstacle. “Lebanon cannot have two militaries.
It cannot have one group that answers to Tehran while claiming to serve Beirut.
There can be only one legitimate force capable of defending Lebanon: the
Lebanese Armed Forces,” Pompeo said. He added, “The US must also support the
Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF). The LAF represents Lebanon’s best hope for unified,
legitimate governance. We must provide them with everything they need, including
intelligence sharing, advanced hardware, comprehensive leadership training and
other necessary support.”
US Envoy Says
Economic Zone in South Lebanon Will Help Disarmed Hezbollah Members
Asharq Al Awsat/August 27/2025
US envoy Tom Barrack said on Tuesday that Gulf countries are ready to invest in
an economic zone in south Lebanon near the border with Israel that would create
jobs for members of the Hezbollah group and its supporters once they lay down
their weapons.
He made his comments in Beirut after trips to Israel and Syria where he
discussed with officials there the ongoing situation in Lebanon following this
month’s decision by the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah by the end of
the year. Hezbollah’s leader rejected the government’s plan, vowing to keep the
weapons. On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israeli
forces could begin withdrawing from territory they hold in southern Lebanon
after the Lebanese government’s “momentous decision” to disarm Hezbollah. The
Lebanese army is preparing a plan for Hezbollah’s disarmament that should be
ready by the end of August. The government is expected to discuss the army’s
plan and approve it during a meeting scheduled for Sept. 2. “We have to have
money coming into the system. The money will come from the Gulf,” Barrack told
reporters after meeting President Joseph Aoun. “Qatar and Saudi Arabia are
partners and are willing to do that for the south (of Lebanon) if we’re asking a
portion of the Lebanese community to give up their livelihood.” “We have 40,000
people that are being paid by Iran to fight. What are you gonna do with them?
Take their weapon and say ‘by the way, good luck planting olive trees’? It can’t
happen. We have to help them,” Barrack said. He was referring to tens of
thousands of Hezbollah members who have been funded since the early 1980s by
Tehran. “We, all of us, the Gulf, the US, the Lebanese are all gonna act
together to create an economic forum that is gonna produce a livelihood,”
Barrack said. When asked why the US doesn’t go to discuss the Hezbollah issue
directly with Iran rather than traveling to Israel and Syria, Barrack said: “You
think that’s not happening? Goodbye.” Barrack then ended his news conference and
walked out of the room.
Speaking on the UN peacekeeping force that has been deployed in south Lebanon
since Israel first invaded the country in 1978, Barrack said the US would rather
fund the Lebanese army than the force that is known as UNIFIL. Speaking about
this week’s vote at the United Nations in New York, Barrack said the US backs
extending UNIFIL’s term for one year only. Conflict escalated to war in
September 2024, before November ceasefire A low-level conflict between Israel
and Hezbollah started a day after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack against
Israel from Gaza, when Hezbollah began launching rockets across the border in
support of its Palestinian ally. The conflict escalated into war in September
2024 and left more than 4,000 people dead, and caused destruction worth $11
billion in Lebanon, according to the World Bank.
The war ended in November with a US-brokered ceasefire and since then Hezbollah
says it has ended its presence along the border area. Israel has continued
almost daily airstrikes that have killed dozens of Hezbollah members. Amnesty
International in a report released Tuesday said it had identified more than
10,000 buildings that were “heavily damaged or destroyed” in southern Lebanon
between October 2024 and January this year. Israeli forces remained in much of
the border area for weeks after the ceasefire agreement went into effect and are
still holding five strategic points. Amnesty’s report alleged that Israeli
forces may have violated international law by destroying civilian property in
areas they were controlling with “manually laid explosives and bulldozers” after
the active fighting had ended and there was no longer an “imperative military
necessity.”
US Envoy Cuts Short South Lebanon Visit Amid Protests
Asharq Al Awsat/August 27/2025
Lebanese state media said US envoy Tom Barrack cut short a visit to the south on
Wednesday, amid protests in two planned stops against US pressure to disarm
Hezbollah. The official National News Agency (NNA) reported that Barrack arrived
by helicopter at a Lebanese army barracks in Marjeyoun near the border, with
soldiers deploying in the area. The news agency later reported that the envoy
had cancelled planned stops in nearby Khiam, which was pummeled by Israel during
its latest hostilities with Hezbollah, and in the coastal city of Tyre. A
spokesperson told AFP the US embassy did not comment on officials' schedules for
security reasons. An AFP correspondent in Khiam saw a group of residents, some
waving Hezbollah flags or holding pictures of fighters killed in the conflict,
demonstrating against Barrack. Some were standing on a Star of David that had
been drawn on the road in blue, near the words in Arabic "America is the great
Satan", and "Barak is animal" written in English. The last was a reference to
comments by the US envoy at a Beirut press conference on Tuesday which sparked
an outcry in Lebanon. Barrack told journalists to "act civilized", adding: "The
moment that this starts becoming chaotic, like animalistic, we're gone."Bilal
Kashmar, an official from the southern municipalities union, said dozens of
people had demonstrated in Tyre on Wednesday against Barrack's expected visit
and Washington's "biased policies". Under heavy US pressure and amid fears of
expanded Israeli military action, Lebanon's government tasked the army this
month with drawing up a plan to disarm Hezbollah by year end. The Iran-backed
group, which enjoys strong support in the south, was left badly weakened by more
than a year of hostilities including two months of open war with Israel that
largely ended with a November ceasefire.
Fellow US envoy Morgan Ortagus said in Beirut on Tuesday that the Lebanese
government needed to implement its decision to disarm Hezbollah, adding that
Israel would respond in kind. Hezbollah insists that Israel must complete its
withdrawal from Lebanon and halt its continuing strikes before the future of the
group's weapons can be discussed.
Trump’s envoy tells Lebanese journalists not to be
‘animalistic,’ ties behavior to Middle East’s ‘problem’
Mostafa Salem and Charbel Mallo, CNN/August 27, 2025
United States Special Envoy Tom Barrack sparked outrage after telling Lebanese
journalists to act “civilized,” not “animalistic,” during a news conference in
the Lebanese capital Beirut on Tuesday. Barrack, joined by deputy envoy Morgan
Ortagus, was in the Lebanese capital as part of US efforts to disarm the
Iran-backed Hezbollah group. During the briefing, he scolded the journalists for
calling out questions simultaneously – a common practice in news conferences –
linking their behavior to what he described as a broader “problem” in the Middle
East. “Please, be quiet for a moment. And I wanna tell you something. The moment
this starts becoming chaotic, like animalistic, we’re gone. So, you want to know
what’s happening? Act civilized, act kind, act tolerant, because this is the
problem with what’s happening in the region,” he told the reporters. Lebanon
faces a delicate dilemma. It relies on crucial US support while accommodating
Hezbollah, the most powerful armed group in the country, even as it comes under
frequent Israeli military attacks. “Do you think this is fun for us? Do you
think this is economically beneficial for Morgan (Ortagus) and I to be here
putting up with this insanity?” he told the journalists. Barrack, who is of
Lebanese descent, is the special envoy to Syria and also serves as the US
Ambassador to Turkey. The envoy’s comments angered Lebanese journalists on
social media, who described the statements as “racist.” “Tom Barrack struts into
Beirut like a 19th-century colonial commissioner, calls Lebanese journalists
‘animalistic,’ lectures us on ‘civilization,’ & blames it all on our ‘region.’
That’s not just arrogance, it’s racism. You don’t run this country, & you don’t
get to insult its people,” Lebanese-British journalist Hala Jaber said on X.
Another journalist, Ali Hashem, called the comments “humiliating.”“The level of
arrogance US officials demonstrate in Lebanon is humiliating for the country.”
“Amb. Barrack is an excellent representative for the President in the region and
is simultaneously spearheading a number of high level and critical issues on
behalf of this Administration and the American people,” Deputy Spokesperson
Tommy Pigott told CNN in a statement. Without naming Barrack, the Lebanese
presidency said it “regrets the statements made from its platform” by “one of
its guests today.”Barrack is leading a US delegation to Lebanon, including
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen,
Congressman Joe Wilson, and Ortagus. The US has offered Lebanon support if its
government disarms Hezbollah. The militant group was weakened significantly
after months of an Israeli campaign that was launched after Hezbollah attacked
Israeli-held territory in support of Hamas in October 2023.
Lebanese wine businesses struggle through war and drought
Reuters/August 27, 2025
STORY: Lebanese winemakers like Elias Maalouf are struggling to keep their
businesses alive through war and extreme heat. Maalouf’s family has been making
wine for six generations. Last year, Israeli air strikes kept him from picking
most of the grapes.
Now, Lebanon’s worst drought on record has slashed his harvest. Maalouf said the
vineyard’s production has decreased by three-quarters - about 66 tons - due to
low rainfall this year. "Our family's story is like any other family in Lebanon,
and like any family living here in the Bekaa region - which is literally one of
the most difficult regions for one to consider establishing oneself and working
in. It's so beautiful, to the point you can't leave, but at the same time, there
are a lot of problems." The Bekaa Valley is Lebanon's agricultural heartland and
the capital of its winemaking industry. The region was hit hard by last year's
deadly Israeli air strikes which began on September 23 during the peak grape
harvest season. Israel said it was targeting Hezbollah, a Lebanese armed group
backed by Iran. "In the first strike, 6,800 bottles were broken. The roof of the
factory was blown off, and there was sun exposure to around 12,000 bottles. We
have 5,000 liter containers - four of them were nearly full and a few had a
little missing. Their caps blew off and we didn't notice that until the wine
smell spread and it was ruined." Maalouf estimated his losses at $375,000; no
compensation was provided. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization,
the war hit more than 9,800 acres of crops and vineyards in Lebanon. Some
farmers are also worried that Israel's use of white phosphorus would have a
long-lasting impact on their soil. To keep the business alive, Maalouf has
opened up the winery for other ventures. Wine lovers and restaurants can pay to
make their own mixes from his grapes, or rent his equipment to make arak, a
traditional Lebanese grape spirit. The winemaker said he wants to stay in his
homeland despite the challenges in the past five years. "It's a toxic
relationship, if I can put it that way. It's a one-sided love. The amount of
love we have for this land, that's how much we have to suffer its misfortunes."'
Berri says
Barrack and Ortagus 'brought nothing from Israel'
Naharnet/August 27, 2025
Speaker Nabih Berri on Wedneday expressed frustration and said U.S. envoys Tom
Barrack and Morgan Ortagus "brought nothing from Israel" and "came with
something contrary to what they had promised us."“Things have once again become
complicated,” Berri said in an interview with Asharq al-Awsat newspaper. Noting
that things are “not easy,” the Speaker said “any matter that leads to dispute
in the country is condemned,” when asked about the September 2 cabinet session
that will discuss the Lebanese Army’s plan for Hezbollah’s disarmament. Ortagus
said on Tuesday that Lebanese authorities must execute their decision to disarm
Hezbollah, adding that Israel would respond in kind to any government steps.
"We're all greatly encouraged by the historic decision of the government a few
weeks ago, but now it's not about words, now it's about action," Ortagus told
journalists at Lebanon's presidential palace in Baabda. On Monday, Israel's
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered a phased pullout of troops from
Lebanon if Beirut implements its decision to disarm Hezbollah -- part of a
November ceasefire agreement brokered by Washington. Ortagus said that Israel
was "willing to go step by step, it might be small steps... but they're willing
to go step by step with this government." Barrack, who was also part of the
visiting delegation, said that when the Israelis see action from Lebanon, "they
will give their counterproposal" on troop withdrawal and security arrangements.
The Lebanese government's decision to disarm Hezbollah by the end of the year
was made under heavy U.S. pressure and amid fears of expanded military action by
Israel, which has continued to carry out attacks in Lebanon despite the November
ceasefire.
Salam meets al-Sisi, urges Arab support for ending Israel's
occupation, attacks
Naharnet/August 27, 2025
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam held talks Wednesday in Egypt's New Alamein City with
President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, in the presence of Culture Minister Ghassan
Salameh and Energy Minister Joe Saddi. During the meeting, Salam explained the
government's priorities for the next phase, both in terms of ongoing economic
reforms and completing the process of “extending state authority over all its
territory,” adding that Lebanon looks forward to strengthening cooperation and
integration with all Arab countries. Salam also stressed the need for brotherly
and friendly countries to “exert pressure to ensure Israel halts its attacks on
Lebanon and withdraws completely from the south,” emphasizing the need for the
international community to support Lebanese state institutions, particularly the
army, to enable it to perform its national duties. Al-Sisi for his part praised
“the positive steps taken by the Lebanese government in recent months to restore
the regularity of state institutions and extend its authority throughout
Lebanese territory.”The Egyptian president also emphasized the need to “continue
doing everything necessary to ensure that Lebanon's stability and national unity
are not undermined.”
Hezbollah MP
slams Barrack's 'blatant insult' to Lebanese journalists
Agence France Presse/August 27, 2025
U.S. envoy Tom Barrack told Lebanese journalists at a press conference at the
country's presidential palace on Tuesday to "act civilized," sparking outcry and
calls for an apology. As journalists shouted questions after the U.S.
delegation's meeting with President Joseph Aoun, Barrack stepped up to the
podium in the packed room and said: "We're going to have a different set of
rules... please be quiet for a moment.""The moment that this starts becoming
chaotic, like animalistic, we're gone," he warned. "Act civilized, act kind, act
tolerant, because this is the problem with what's happening in the region,"
added Barrack, who is U.S. ambassador to Turkey and special envoy to Syria and
has recently been leading talks with Lebanese officials. The Lebanese presidency
in a statement on X expressed regret at "remarks made inadvertently from its
podium by one of its guests," affirming its appreciation for the journalists and
media representatives. Information Minister Paul Morcos in a statement also
expressed regret at the remarks "by a member of the foreign delegation towards
media representatives at the presidential palace.” The photojournalists'
syndicate called Barrack's comments "a direct insult" that set "a serious and
totally unacceptable precedent."In a statement, it demanded "an immediate and
public apology,” rejecting attempts to "downplay the seriousness of what
happened or let it pass without accountability.”The press editors' syndicate
also called for "a public statement of apology" and floated a boycott of the
envoy's future visits and meetings. The union of journalists in Lebanon said
Barrack's remarks were "a reflection of an unacceptable arrogance in dealing
with the media" and also called for an official apology. Ibrahim al-Moussawi, a
lawmaker from Hezbollah and head of parliament's media committee, called the
remarks "a blatant insult" and urged the government to "summon the U.S.
ambassador and reprimand her.”
New UN draft
extends UNIFIL term by a year, withdraws its troops within another year
Agence France Presse/August 27, 2025
A new U.N. draft text seen by AFP would extend the UNIFIL peacekeeping mission
followed by its withdrawal by the end of 2027. The force was first deployed in
south Lebanon in 1978 and was expanded after the 2006 war. The draft would
decide "to terminate the mandate of UNIFIL" on December 31, 2026 "and to start
an orderly and safe drawdown and withdrawal... within one year." The Security
Council was initially expected to vote on Monday on a French-drafted text that
would have kept UNIFIL in place for another year while it prepares to withdraw.
The issue was raised during a telephone call on Monday between U.S. Secretary of
State Marco Rubio and several counterparts, an Italian foreign ministry
statement said. Italy's Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani and his French
counterpart Jean-Noel Barrot noted the importance of UNIFIL's role, the
statement said. It added that they had noted the U.N. force's support for the
Lebanese Army "in the current international situation and for balance in the
broader regional context."Visiting Beirut, U.S. envoy Tom Barrack said on
Tuesday that Washington would support the extension of UNIFIL’s mandate for one
more year. Monday’s vote was postponed amid US and Israeli opposition to the
draft text, several diplomatic sources told AFP. Barrack told journalists from
Lebanon's presidential palace: "The United States' position is we will extend
for one year." Barrack noted disapprovingly that the force costs "a billion
dollars a year."
What Exactly Does
Barrack Want to Offer Hezbollah?
Sam Menassa/Asharq Al Awsat/August 27/2025
Tom Barrack’s recent statements can no longer be dismissed as casual remarks or
diplomatic slips. He is the US Envoy to Syria and Lebanon, and they should not
be downplayed; indeed, explaining his rhetoric as political naivete is itself
naive. Barrack speaks in his capacity as the official representative of the most
powerful state in the world.
The stream of Barrack’s noteworthy stances begins with his remarks to “The
National.” “I honestly think that they are going to say ‘the world will pass us
by. Why? You have Israel on one side, you have Iran on the other, and now you
have Syria manifesting itself so quickly that if Lebanon doesn’t move, it’s
going to be Bilad Al Sham again.”In his most recent visit, he openly recognized
Iran’s role in Lebanon, presenting it neighbor that cannot be ignored.
Deliberately and diplomatically choosing his words, he stressed that Hezbollah
cannot make demands with “giving something in return,” implying that the party
will not concede without demanding a price.
If we set aside any assumption of political naivete, Barrack’s statements point
to one of two possibilities: either his rhetoric is the result of confusion and
strategic ambiguity within the U.S. administration itself, or it has not been
sufficiently coordinating with Israel. In both cases, the outcome is similar:
Lebanon, once again, is not a priority to Washington, and it is being managed
callously.
Most Lebanese media outlets have framed Barrack’s latest visit as a positive
development that follows the government’s decision on monopolizing arms,
downplaying the deeper implications of his statements regarding Hezbollah and
Iran, which are very consequential.
First, they indirectly poured cold water on the threats Hezbollah
Secretary-General Naim Qassem made in his latest speech (that there would be “no
life” in Lebanon if the party’s weapons were touched and that Hezbollah cannot
exist without “the resistance”.) Barrack’s rhetoric could be interpreted as an
offer to reward the party for the harm it has caused over decades: the lives,
infrastructure, and institutions it has destroyed, both in Lebanon and across
the region.
Second, his statements risk squandering the fragile momentum behind Lebanon’s
institutions and the state’s push to monopolize arms, particularly after the
army was tasked with presenting its plan to implement the decision. Barrack’s
framing opens the door to reproducing troubling political habits: delay,
compromise, and ambiguous formulas open to endless interpretation.
Barrack’s positions suggest that the US approach is to secure “gains” for
Lebanon’s Shiite community, ostensibly to safeguard the sect’s role within the
political system. In practice- given today’s balance of power- doing so would
only cement Hezbollah’s role as the guardian and sole representative of the
Shiite community, albeit nominally as part of a duo that includes the Amal
Movement. Put bluntly, Barrack frames Lebanon’s Shiites as a monolith supportive
of Hezbollah, or at best to the “Hezbollah-Amal” duo, ignoring the significant
segments of the Shiite community opposed to both and overlooking the
far-reaching implications that this assumption could have for Lebanon’s social
fabric.
Barrack’s remarks also overlook a critical question: What, exactly, does
Washington want from Lebanon’s Shiites? After their liberation from Hezbollah’s
dominance by force of arms, will they be left under its ideological and
political shadow? Is the US prepared to ignore the party’s organic ties to Iran,
its ideological project, and the influence its alliance exerts on Lebanon’s
institutions and communal dynamics?
Adding to the confusion, Barrack now presents Iran as a necessary partner. It is
referred to as a “neighbor,” despite calls for “historic settlement” with a “new
Syria” from which Iran has been entirely sidelined following the fall of the
Assad regime.
The hard fact is that Hezbollah and its surrounding ecosystem cannot simply be
bypassed; any future settlement must include them. The question of restricting
armament is but one element of a wider range of issues, including the conclusive
cessation of attacks against Israel from Lebanese territory, Lebanon’s stance on
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and (the most challenging of them) the nature
of Hezbollah’s relationship with Iran. As we have stressed before, this
relationship is layered, complex, and multifaceted. There are religious,
cultural, social, and political dimensions to it. Ironically, of all these
dimensions, Hezbollah’s arms are the least dangerous, In principle, they are the
most negotiable.
Realism also demands, however, rejecting half-baked settlements that carry the
seeds of future conflicts. Recognizing Hezbollah, or even the Hezbollah-Amal
duo, as the sole representatives of the Shiite community would have a domino
effect on Lebanon’s institutions, security forces, educational structures, and
national social cohesion, given the party’s ideological rigidity allegiance to
Tehran.
In the end, Barrack’s statements are neither innocent nor incidental. They
expose the ambiguity of Washington’s policy. The bigger fear is that his remarks
reveal the tip of an iceberg- that he is hinting at quiet recalibration within
the US administration as it weighs its regional priorities and objectives.
As we noted earlier this month, in this very column “It is not implausible that
Barrack’s apparent ‘political naivete’ is a cover for more complicated plans
founded on tacit arrangements negotiated quietly behind closed doors being
pursued outside formal frameworks.” These could include “concessions from
Hezbollah in exchange for American political guarantees.”
For Lebanon, this means that if concessions are to be made, the leadership
cannot compromise on its demands. At the top of that list: an explicit
commitment from Hezbollah to permanently end all military operations beyond
Lebanon’s borders, and, critically, to formally endorse a permanent armistice
with Israel.
Lebanon’s Moment
of Truth
David Schenker/The Washington Institute/Aug 27/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/08/146753/
The government’s unprecedented decision to disarm Hezbollah is brave, but as
U.S. officials have repeatedly discovered, continual pressure will be needed to
ensure that Lebanon and Israel actually implement their obligations under the
new plan.
After months of vacillating, the government of Lebanon announced on August 7
that it would disarm all militias—including Iran-backed Hezbollah—throughout the
state. The new policy was adopted under duress. Although Beirut tacitly agreed
to confiscate all of Hezbollah’s weapons in the November 2024 ceasefire
agreement with Israel, the militia and its political allies strongly opposed the
idea, raising fears of potential civil war and undermining the government’s
resolve. Yet repeated visits by U.S. envoy Tom Barrack and continuous pressure
to respond to Washington’s disarmament roadmap eventually ended the impasse. The
government has now tasked the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) to deliver a
disarmament plan by August 31.
The coming weeks will reveal not only the seriousness of the LAF proposal, but
also the nature of Hezbollah’s response (violent or otherwise) and Beirut’s
political commitment to the initiative. Equally important will be how Israel
reacts to demonstrable progress on the Hezbollah front, with U.S. pressure
potentially being brought to bear on Jerusalem as well. In particular, Barrack
seeks reciprocal Israeli measures correspondent to Beirut’s efforts, such as
withdrawal from some occupied positions inside Lebanon and/or reduced military
strikes.
Stalled Progress in the North
Like many ceasefire deals, last year’s agreement to end the Hezbollah-Israel war
was deliberately ambiguous on certain issues. Lebanon explicitly agreed to
implement UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which called for removing
Hezbollah’s weapons and presence south of the Litani River along the frontier
with Israel—the same commitment Beirut made after the 2006 war. Yet the deal’s
provisions about disarming Hezbollah north of the Litani (originally expressed
in Resolution 1559) were less explicit. Paragraph 7 of the agreement directed
Lebanon to dismantle Hezbollah sites “starting with the southern Litani Area”
but did not clarify what would come next. Israel and the United States
understood that Lebanon would continue these efforts in the north, and Beirut
almost certainly had the same interpretation. Yet the phrasing enabled the
government to plausibly deny that it had committed to full disarmament in the
near term, avoiding (at least temporarily) Hezbollah retribution.
As a result, both the LAF and the new government that came to power early this
year largely embraced disarmament activities in the south, but then balked at
the idea of continuing these activities north of the Litani. With momentum
stalled for months, Barrack returned in June to deliver a detailed disarmament
plan, then paid another visit in July to push the process forward. On August 7,
the cabinet approved the portion of the U.S. roadmap requiring Lebanon to bring
“all arms under the authority of the state” nationwide. Notably, Hezbollah
ministers and their Shia allies withdrew from the contentious meeting before the
vote.
Barrack’s Proposal
The U.S. roadmap lays out a 120-day schedule of actions for Lebanon and Israel
to undertake simultaneously. Chapter I—which covers the first fifteen days and
focuses on declared commitments and preparatory actions—mandates that Beirut
commit to fully disarming Hezbollah by December 31, and that Israel cease
military operations in Lebanon during these initial weeks. In addition, the LAF
is expected to establish fifteen border posts south of the Litani, while the
government is to give the Red Cross details regarding prisoners held by Israel
in preparation for a future exchange.
In Chapter II (spanning forty-five days), the LAF is to present a plan for
implementing disarmament north of the Litani, with approval from the government
and military technical assistance from the United States. The LAF plan and
deployments will be monitored by the same U.S.-French mechanism that has been
overseeing the ceasefire. Concurrently, Israel is to begin withdrawing from
three of the five hilltop positions it occupies in south Lebanon, while the
United States, France, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and others organize a fall
conference to raise reconstruction funds.
Further out, the roadmap envisions a broader LAF deployment and checkpoints
throughout the country, a full Hezbollah and Israeli withdrawal from the south,
complete Hezbollah disarmament, and cessation of Israeli overflights. Should
Lebanon breach the agreement, it would be subject to economic sanctions and a
freeze on U.S. military assistance; an Israel breach would spur a Security
Council “censure” and, more ominously, “military deconfliction reviews” (i.e., a
potential downgrading of bilateral security coordination with the United
States).
The Future of UNIFIL
August 31 is also the annual renewal date for the UN Interim Force in Lebanon,
which has failed to fulfill its mandate in spectacular fashion for years despite
being granted 10,500 troops to patrol the south and $500 million per year in
funding. (The United States previously paid $125 million of this amount
annually, though the Trump administration has zeroed out the $1.2 billion U.S.
contribution for UN peacekeeping efforts worldwide in 2026.) Still, the
organization has its supporters, principally France (the UN penholder on UNIFIL)
and Lebanon (which benefits economically from the deployment and has used it as
an excuse to deploy fewer LAF troops in the south).
In 2020, the first Trump administration threatened to veto UNIFIL’s mandate
renewal unless significant changes were made, but the Beirut port blast scuttled
that effort. The current administration is also a UNIFIL skeptic and appears
poised to finally end the mandate, allowing sufficient time for an orderly
drawdown. This is the right decision, since the arguments against UNIFIL are
legion: its utility is limited, its primary substantive contribution (convening
discussions between Israeli and LAF officers) has been absorbed by the
U.S.-French mechanism, and its presence has enabled Beirut to sidestep
responsibility for the south for too long. If the administration continues to
press Beirut under the roadmap process—and with UNIFIL gone—the latter
sovereignty problem should dissipate.
Now Comes the Tough Part
Beirut should be commended for its unprecedented and difficult decision to
disarm Hezbollah. Now it is time for the historically risk-averse LAF—which has
long deconflicted with Hezbollah and even collaborated with the militia—to come
forward with a workable plan. Even if the military receives unstinting
government support, however, there is no guarantee the plan will succeed.
Although Hezbollah is now a much smaller force than the LAF (which has nearly
85,000 personnel), the potential for deadly sectarian conflict is real, with
Hezbollah threatening civil war if the government moves forward on disarmament.
The militia has a history of assassinating its political opponents, and six LAF
troops were killed earlier this month while dismantling Hezbollah
infrastructure.
As such, the LAF might balk at executing the government’s decision on Hezbollah.
In 2008, for example, military leaders refused to follow government orders to
dismantle the group’s fiber-optic network and remove a Hezbollah-affiliated
officer as head of security at Beirut airport. Hezbollah responded to the orders
by sending its forces into the streets, killing nearly a hundred civilians while
the LAF essentially did nothing. Alternatively, the LAF could proceed with a
disarmament plan but organize it in phases to minimize conflict with the
militia—though as the saying goes, “no plan survives first contact with the
enemy.”
Another complication is Israel. During his visit to Beirut just days ago,
Barrack told reporters, “I think the Lebanese government has done their part.
They’ve taken the first step. Now, what we need is Israel to comply.” He was
referring to withdrawal from military positions in Lebanon; he has also
reportedly asked Israel to reduce “non-urgent” strikes. Jerusalem will be
hesitant to honor these requests until Beirut actually begins implementing its
brave political decision. Indeed, the roadmap’s timelines are somewhat
unrealistic and call for concrete actions from Israel in return for statements
from Lebanon. Yet U.S. officials should still remind Jerusalem that an undue
delay in reciprocating tangible steps by Beirut—even well short of what the plan
proposes—could gradually discredit Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and President
Joseph Aoun, the new leaders who took the risky move of opposing Hezbollah.
In the end, Lebanon may still miss another once-in-a-generation opportunity for
state sovereignty, whether by flinching to avoid armed confrontation or proving
inadequate to the military task despite years of U.S. training and funding. Even
so, the Trump administration should persist with its pressure by leveraging U.S.
funding for the LAF, threatening sanctions against obstructionist politicians,
and conditioning reconstruction on implementation of the disarmament plan. The
LAF has shown some promise of late by establishing effective border posts along
the frontier with Syria, including in the Hezbollah heartland of Beqa Valley. On
paper and on the ground, the force should be more than capable of preventing a
weakened Hezbollah from controlling the south, as well as moving incrementally
but inexorably toward a state monopoly on weapons. This is no doubt a risky
endeavor, but the alternative is a failed state perpetually at war with Israel.
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/lebanons-moment-truth
*David Schenker is the Taube Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute and
director of its Rubin Program on Arab Politics.
The
Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on August 27-28/2025
Three dead, 17 injured in shooting at Minneapolis Catholic school,
authorities say
Reuters/27 August/2025
Two children were killed and 17 other people were injured on Wednesday after a
gunman opened fire on schoolchildren who were attending Mass at a Minneapolis
Catholic school, authorities said. The assailant, wielding a rifle, a shotgun
and a pistol, fired dozens of rounds through the church windows, officials said.
The shooter then took his own life, they said. “This was a deliberate act of
violence against innocent children and other people worshiping. The sheer
cruelty and cowardice of firing into a church full of children is absolutely
incomprehensible,” Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara told reporters.The
shooting occurred two days after school started at Annunciation Catholic school,
a private elementary school with about 395 students. The school is connected to
Annunciation Catholic Church, and both are located in a residential area in the
southeast part of Minnesota’s largest city. Local TV showed parents ducking
under yellow police crime tape and leading students out of the school. Officials
said the shooter wore black clothing, was in his early 20s and did not have an
extensive criminal history. They did not provide his name and said they were
trying to identify a motive. Children’s Minnesota, a local hospital system, said
it was treating six children. There have been more than 140 shootings at US
elementary and secondary schools this year, according to the K-12 School
Shooting Database. US President Donald Trump said he had been briefed on the
shooting and said the FBI was on the scene. “Please join me in praying for
everyone involved!” he said on social media. The US Department of Homeland
Security is in touch with local authorities and monitoring the situation,
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said on social media. There have been
three other shootings in the midwestern city since Tuesday afternoon, including
one at a Jesuit high school, that have together left three people dead and seven
wounded, according to police. Wednesday’s shooting did not appear to be related
to the others, O’Hara said. Minneapolis has experienced a significant rise in
homicides in the years following the 2020 police killing of George Floyd, which
prompted nationwide protests, civil disturbances and staffing shortages in the
city’s police department. The city recorded 54 homicides last year, down from 71
in 2021 but well above the 29 recorded in 2019. In June, Minnesota also
experienced an incident of political violence, when a gunman posing as a police
officer allegedly assassinated a Democratic state lawmaker and her husband in
their home, and wounded another lawmaker and his wife. The suspect was arrested
after a massive two-day manhunt and faces state and federal murder charges.
Minnesota state law requires background checks for all gun sales and the state
as a whole has a gun death rate below the national average, according to
Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun violence prevention group.
A Word of
Consolation to the Victims at Annunciation Catholic School and Church in the
Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis
Cardinal Raymond Burke/onAug 27, 2025
With profound sorrow of heart, I unite my prayers to those of the faithful in
the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, and throughout the Church, for
the innocent victims of the terrible act of violence that has struck the
community of Annunciation Catholic School and Church in Minneapolis. Two beloved
children, only eight and ten years old, have been taken from us in this tragedy,
while so many others — children and adults — have suffered grievous injury and
trauma. At the very moment when they were gathered in prayer at Holy Mass, the
place of God’s abiding presence, their peace was shattered by an act of
unspeakable evil. In such moments, our hearts cry out with Our Lady, standing at
the foot of the Cross of her Divine Son. With her, we place our sorrowing hearts
into the glorious-pierced Heart of Jesus, asking that the immeasurable and
unceasing grace flowing from His Heart bring healing to all involved and
strengthen us all to renew our every effort to end such violent attacks against
human life. We entrust the souls of the departed to the mercy of Christ, Who
said, “Let the children come to Me, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven” (Mt
19, 14) and Who prayed for those who tortured and executed Him: “Father, forgive
them; for they know not what they do” (Lk 23, 34). We commend the wounded, their
families, and all who grieve to the maternal care of Our Lady of Sorrows, who
knows intimately the anguish of such suffering, and to Saint Joseph, Protector
of the Holy Church.
May the Sacred Heart of Jesus, pierced for our salvation, pour out His mercy
upon the dead, His healing upon the injured, and His consolation upon every
family and loved one afflicted by this tragedy. Let us, with renewed faith, pray
for the conversion of hearts, that such acts of hatred may be transformed into
occasions of grace, and that our nation may rediscover the path of peace found
only in obedience to the law of God written upon every human heart, the law
whose first precept is the safeguarding and care of human life.
**Elias Bejjani/What toke place in the church is an evil crime that is strongly
condemned. My prayers goes for the victims and condolences to their bereaved
families
Israeli drone strikes kill six Syrian
soldiers in Damascus suburb, reports claim
Euronews/August 27, 2025
Israeli drone strikes kill six Syrian soldiers in Damascus suburb, reports claim
Israeli drone strikes on a southern suburb of the Syrian capital Damascus killed
six soldiers and wounded others, according to state-run media and Britain-based
war monitor Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. The drone raid struck the
southern Damascus suburb of Kiswah on Tuesday, Syrian state outlet Al-Ikhbariah
reported. The Observatory said the drones targeted a road that links Damascus
with the southern province of Suwayda, the site of deadly clashes last month
between the Bedouin and Druze communities. Israel intervened during the fighting
last month in what it said was protecting the Druze, a community of some 1
million that mostly lives in Syria, Lebanon and Israel. Since the fall of Bashar
al-Assad's regime in December, Israel has carried out hundreds of airstrikes on
different parts of the country, targeting military assets. The Observatory added
that the area struck on Tuesday was part of al-Assad’s military positions prior
to December. In addition to the six soldiers killed, three people were wounded,
it added. Earlier on Tuesday, an Israeli drone strike near the southern town of
Quneitra killed one person, according to Al-Ikhbariah and the Observatory.
Syria’s Foreign Ministry condemned the strike near Quneitra, saying it violates
international law and threatens peace and stability in the region. The Israeli
military did not immediately comment on the strikes.
New Iran Sanctions Are Welcome, but Maximum Impact Demands
Maximum Attention
Max Meizlish & Behnam Ben Taleblu/FDD/August 27/2025
President Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against the Islamic Republic of Iran
is taking shape — incrementally. On August 21, the Departments of State and the
Treasury sanctioned several individuals and entities involved in Tehran’s
illicit oil trade. These targets included Greek national Antonios Margaritis,
his web of sanctions busters, and nearly a dozen vessels contributing to Iran’s
“shadow fleet.” Washington also targeted two Chinese crude oil and petroleum
products terminal and storage operators for importing millions of barrels of
Iranian-origin oil from sanctioned tankers. While these actions will name,
shame, and punish the enablers of Iranian sanctions evasion, alone, they are
unlikely to yield the Trump administration’s stated aim of zeroing out Iran’s
oil exports or change the calculus of the leading buyer of this oil: China.
China Maintains Deep Ties to Iran’s Illicit Oil Economy
China purchases 91 percent of Iran’s oil exports. Its dominant position in
Iran’s illicit oil economy is reflected in the August 21 actions, with most
targets maintaining significant exposure to or dealings with Chinese buyers.
Washington designated several of the sanctioned shadow fleet vessels, as well as
the two China-based crude oil terminal and storage operators identified by
State, for transporting or dealing in millions of barrels of Iranian oil
destined for China. In May, Treasury sanctioned another terminal operator,
Shandong Baogang International Port Co., Ltd. (Baogang International), for
dealing in Iranian oil. Research from the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
details Baogang International’s position within a Chinese conglomerate’s
vertically integrated supply chain — one that appears to maintain joint ventures
with Chinese state-owned enterprises such as Sinopec, PetroChina, and China Gas
Group. The conglomerate, Wanda Holdings Group, describes having “key core
customer” relationships with several Chinese banks, including the Bank of China,
Bank of Communications, and Pudong Development Bank.
Chinese Port Groups Remain Unsanctioned Despite Supporting Iran’s Oil Trade
Like Wanda Holdings Group’s Baogang International, one of the terminal operators
that Washington targeted in the August 21 actions — Qingdao Port Haiye
Dongjiakou Oil Products Co., LTD. (DJK Oil Products) — operates out of China’s
Shandong Province. Shandong Province is home to the vast majority of allegedly
independent “teapot refiners” dealing in sanctioned oil. While the Trump
administration has thus far targeted a handful of individual terminal operators
dealing in Iranian crude, it has yet to sanction the larger port groups such as
Shandong Port Group or DJK Oil Products’ parent, Qingdao Port International Co.
Ltd., which are responsible for a significant portion of port operations in
Shandong Province. The United States has also failed to target Chinese banks
involved in supporting port group operations and dealings involving sanctioned
Iranian oil.
Forging a Path Ahead for Maximum Pressure
Following the 12-Day War between Israel and Iran, the need to constrain Tehran’s
main source of revenue generation will be key to handicapping any effort to
reconstitute the regime’s missile and nuclear programs. A steady stream of
enforcement actions against the Chinese individuals and entities enabling
Iranian sanctions circumvention is therefore essential. In addition to
continuing to target vessels, which the Biden administration belatedly started
doing, Washington will need to focus on targeting ports and port operators, big
and small refiners, and foreign financial institutions processing oil
transactions. Unless the United States applies and escalates sustained pressure
against this troika, the Trump administration can expect little meaningful
change, both from the Islamic Republic and from China, rendering its maximum
pressure policy minimally effective. Specific targets should include those
linked to Wanda Holdings Group and other similarly situated Chinese
conglomerates that build their operations, at least in part, on sanctioned
Iranian oil. **Max Meizlish is a senior research analyst for the Center on
Economic and Financial Power (CEFP) at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
(FDD), where Behnam Ben Taleblu is senior director of the Iran Program and a
senior fellow. For more analysis from the authors and FDD, please subscribe
HERE. Follow Max and Behnam on X @maxmeizlish and @therealBehnamBT. Follow FDD
on X @FDD, @FDD_CEFP, and @FDD_Iran. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan
research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.
‘Your Aggression Will Not Be Tolerated’: Australia Expels Iranian Ambassador
Over Attacks on Jewish Community Targets
FDD/August 27/2025
2 Attacks Linked to Iran: Australia announced the expulsion of Iran’s ambassador
in Canberra as well as its designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
(IRGC) as a terrorist organization on August 26. Canberra accused Tehran of
orchestrating at least two attacks targeting Australian Jews following the
Hamas-led atrocities in Israel on October 7, 2023. “The actions of my government
send a clear message, a message to all Australians that we stand against
antisemitism, and we stand against violence … and a message to nations like Iran
who seek to interfere in our country, that your aggression will not be
tolerated,” Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said. The two attacks
cited were the firebombing of a Melbourne synagogue in December 2024 and an
arson attack on a kosher delicatessen in Sydney in October, with officials
adding that it was likely Iran had directed additional attacks in Australian
territory. Academic Imprisoned in Iran Recalls Interrogation: In an op-ed for
The Age, the Australian academic Kylie Moore-Gilbert, who was incarcerated in
Tehran’s notorious Evin Prison on false charges of espionage from 2018 to 2020,
recalled that her captors had interrogated her about possible Jewish targets in
Melbourne. “Typed on [a] piece of paper were the names and addresses of a number
of synagogues and Jewish organizations in my home city of Melbourne, including
in suburbs such as Caulfield and Doncaster,” she wrote, adding that her
interrogator “wanted to know if I’d visited any of them, and if so, what was
inside.” Moore-Gilbert later informed the Australian Security Intelligence
Organization about the Iranian inquiries when she was released in a prisoner
swap in November 2020.
Iran’s Global Reach: Iran has orchestrated acts of terror in other countries, in
addition to Australia, with which it maintains diplomatic relations. In March,
the U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned the Foxtrot Network, a Swedish
transnational criminal organization involved in planning attacks against Israeli
and Jewish targets in Europe on behalf of Iran, including the January 2024
attempted bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Stockholm. In March 2024,
anti-regime Iran International reporter Pouria Zeraati was stabbed in London by
three Eastern European men suspected of being hired or acting on behalf of the
Iranian regime, though the United Kingdom never formally linked Tehran to the
attack.
FDD Expert Response
“While the designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization took far too
long, it should signal the beginning of a series of steps to align Australian
and U.S. policy toward Iran. Canberra must use all available tools to empower
its law enforcement and judiciary to defend its citizens from Iran-backed terror
and make Australia off limits for the IRGC.” — Behnam Ben Taleblu, Iran Program
Senior Director and Senior Fellow. “Iran has brazenly used its embassy as a hub
for attacking Jewish targets in Australia. Since the regime had the gall to do
this in Australia, it warrants real concern that Tehran is engaging in similar
activities in other countries.” — Enia Krivine, Senior Director of FDD’s Israel
Program and National Security Network
Russia Drafts UNSC Resolution To Block Sanctions ‘Snapback’ Against Iran
FDD/August 27/2025
Russia Circulates Draft To Block Renewed Sanctions on Iran: Russia has
reportedly drafted a UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution that would delay the
decision to reimpose sanctions on Iran under the “snapback” mechanism by six
months. The text proposes a technical extension of UNSC Resolution 2231 — which
endorsed the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the Iran
nuclear deal — until April 2026, instead of its current deadline of October 18.
According to the French mission to the United Nations, “the Russian resolution
was circulated, but not put in blue yet.”No Breakthroughs in Latest Talks: No
breakthroughs were achieved in the latest talks between Iran and the deputy
foreign ministers of the E3 — France, Germany, and the United Kingdom — in
Geneva on August 26, as the August 31 deadline for a decision on the
implementation of snapback approaches. Sources told journalists from multiple
news outlets that Iranian officials did not “put tangible detailed deliverables
on the table,” continuing the stalemate. The E3 has sought to obtain Iran’s
agreement to restore nuclear monitoring by the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA), address missing stockpiles of highly enriched uranium, and engage
the United States in talks to limit the nuclear program, but Iranian Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has characterized the outstanding differences as
“unsolvable.” “They want Iran to be obedient to America. The Iranian nation will
stand with all of its power against those who have such erroneous expectations,”
Khamenei said. IAEA Inspectors Reportedly Back Inside Iran: The head of the IAEA,
Rafael Grossi, told Fox News that inspectors had returned to Iran after Tehran
ejected them following extensive Israeli and U.S. airstrikes on its nuclear
facilities in June. It remains unclear which sites the regime will permit the
agency to inspect or whether it will have access to destroyed sites or hidden
enriched uranium stockpiles, as required by Iran’s IAEA safeguards agreement.
Meanwhile, the Iranian parliament pressured the Foreign Ministry and Iran’s
Atomic Energy Organization to implement legislation halting cooperation with the
IAEA and block inspectors from nuclear sites.
FDD Expert Response
“President Donald Trump has the opportunity to deal the 2015 Iran nuclear deal a
final blow by restoring key lapsed or expiring international restrictions on
Iran’s nuclear, missile, arms, and proliferation activities. He should urge the
E3 to reject Tehran’s hollow offers and trigger the snapback of sanctions by the
end of this month. Importantly, these sanctions would restore the standard of
zero enrichment in Iran. They would also ban nuclear, missile, and military
trade with the regime to prevent it from rebuilding its atomic weapons pathway,
arming Russia, testing missiles, and supporting terrorist proxies.” — “Iran is
hurtling toward the consequences of repeatedly lying to the international
community about its nuclear program. Following military strikes by Israel and
the United States, Iran fears that allowing international inspectors to do their
jobs will result in the discovery of additional details about how far Tehran has
pursued nuclear enrichment, weaponization, and missile technology applicable to
a delivery vehicle for a nuclear warhead. Iran has provided the E3 with scant
assurances to avoid full sanctions enforcement that will deepen its economic and
diplomatic isolation.” — “There is no good reason to entertain Russia’s
convoluted draft resolution to extend the deadline for snapback given the clear
international consensus that Iran cannot reconstitute its pursuit of a nuclear
weapon. The reimplementation of sanctions should move forward without delay.” —
Richard Goldberg, FDD Senior Advisor
Europeans likely to initiate UN sanctions process on Iran on Thursday, sources
say
John Irish and Parisa Hafezi/Reuters/August 27, 2025
PARIS/DUBAI (Reuters) -Britain, France and Germany are likely to begin the
process of reimposing U.N. sanctions on Iran on Thursday, but hope Tehran will
provide commitments over its nuclear programme within 30 days that will convince
them to defer concrete action, four diplomats said. The trio, known as the E3,
met Iran on Tuesday to try to revive diplomacy over the nuclear programme before
they lose the ability in mid-October to restore sanctions on Tehran that were
lifted under a 2015 nuclear accord with world powers. Three European diplomats
and a Western diplomat said Tuesday's talks did not yield sufficiently tangible
commitments from Iran, although they believed there was scope for further
diplomacy in the coming weeks. They said the E3 had decided to start triggering
the so-called snapback of U.N. sanctions, possibly as early as Thursday, over
accusations that Iran has violated the 2015 deal with world powers that aimed to
prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon.
The West says the advancement of Iran's nuclear programme goes beyond civilian
needs, while Tehran denies it is seeking nuclear weapons.
The U.N process takes 30 days before sanctions that would cover Iran's
financial, banking, hydrocarbons and defence sectors were restored. "The real
negotiations will start once the letter (to the U.N. Security Council) is
submitted," the Western diplomat said, speaking on condition of anonymity. A
German foreign ministry spokesperson said triggering the snapback remained an
option for the E3. The British and French foreign ministries did not immediately
respond to requests for comment. U.N. nuclear inspectors have returned to Iran
for the first time since it suspended cooperation with them in the wake of
Israel and the United States' attacks on its nuclear sites in June, Iranian
state media reported on Wednesday. International Atomic Energy Agency chief
Rafael Grossi said on Tuesday they had been allowed into the country, although
there was no agreement on what they would actually be allowed to do there or
whether they would have access to nuclear facilities. Iranian Foreign Minister
Abbas Araqchi also told lawmakers Tehran had not reached an agreement on how it
would resume full work with the watchdog, parliament news agency ICANA reported.
The E3 have offered to delay the snapback for as much as six months to enable
serious negotiations if Iran resumes full U.N. inspections - which would also
seek to account for Iran's large stock of enriched uranium that has not been
verified since the attacks - and engages in talks with the United States. Iran
has been enriching uranium to up to 60% fissile purity, a short step from the
roughly 90% of weapons-grade, and had enough material enriched to that level, if
refined further, for six nuclear weapons, before the strikes by Israel started
on June 13, according the IAEA. Actually producing a weapon would take more
time, however, and the IAEA has said that while it cannot guarantee Tehran's
nuclear programme is entirely peaceful, it has no credible indication of a
coordinated weapons project in the Islamic Republic. Iran and the United States
had held several rounds of talks before June. One diplomat said Iran had shown
signs of readiness to resume negotiations with the U.S. in Tuesday's meeting
with the E3. An Iranian source said it would only do so "if Washington
guarantees there will be no (military) strikes during the talks".
IAEA chief gets special police protection over threats as
deadline approaches over Iran sanctions
AP/Jon Gambrell And Stephanie Liechtenstein/August 27, 2025
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The head of the International Atomic Energy
Agency is receiving special police protection from Austria following a threat,
the Vienna-based organization acknowledged Wednesday, as its inspectors
reportedly returned to Iran to monitor a fuel transfer at the country's sole
nuclear power plant. The protection for Director-General Rafael Grossi comes as
tensions over Iran's nuclear program are rising again. France, Germany and the
United Kingdom appear poised to declare “snapback” — the reimplementation of
United Nations sanctions on the Islamic Republic over its not allowing IAEA
inspections, and other concerns. Iran has until Aug. 31 to satisfy those
concerns. Questions remain following the 12-day Iran-Israel war in June over the
status of Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium, which could be enough for
several atomic bombs if Tehran chooses to build them. Iran has maintained that
its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.
Elite police unit guards Grossi
Grossi, who plans to run for United Nations secretary-general, is being
protected by an Austrian police Cobra unit. The elite unit under the Austrian
Federal Ministry of Interior mainly handles counterterrorism operations, hostage
rescues and responses to mass shootings. It also engages in personal protection
and the protection of Austrian foreign representations abroad. In Austria, Cobra
operatives are known for protecting the president and chancellor as well as the
U.S. and Israeli ambassadors. “We can confirm that Austria provided a Cobra unit
but we cannot confirm where the specific threat came from," IAEA spokesman
Fredrik Dahl said. The Wall Street Journal first reported on the additional
security for Grossi, an Argentine diplomat who has raised the profile of the
IAEA with his trips into Ukraine after Russia's 2022 full-scale invasion and the
agency's work on Iran. Israel attacked Iran in June after the IAEA's Board of
Governors voted to censure Iran over its noncooperation with the agency, the
first such censure in 20 years. Iran accused the IAEA, without providing
evidence, of aiding Israel and, later, the United States in its airstrikes
targeting its nuclear sites. Top Iranian officials and Iranian media called for
Grossi to be arrested and put on trial if he returned to the country.
IAEA reportedly monitors Bushehr refueling
On Wednesday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said IAEA inspectors were
at the Bushehr nuclear power plant to watch a fuel replacement at the facility,
according to a report by the state-run IRNA news agency. U.S. Secretary of State
Marco Rubio had a phone call on Wednesday with the foreign ministers of Germany,
France and the U.K. after a series of high and low-level meetings with the
Iranians over the last week. “All reiterated their commitment to ensuring that
Iran never develops or obtains a nuclear weapon,” Tommy Pigott, deputy State
Department spokesperson, said in a statement. The call between the Western
leaders comes after talks in Switzerland on Tuesday between representatives of
the E3 and Iran “ended without a final outcome,” a diplomat with knowledge of
the meeting told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity
because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the sensitive
discussions. Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister for legal and
international affairs, said on X after the meeting that Tehran “remains
committed to diplomacy″ and that it was “high time” for the European countries
“to make the right choice, and give diplomacy time and space.” That same day,
IAEA chief Rafael Grossi told Fox News that a team of international inspectors
was back in Iran for the first time since the war with Israel in June.
The new development indicates that, despite its rhetoric, Iran is taking the
looming threat of European sanctions seriously.
Iran link to Australian synagogue attack uncovered via funding trail, spy agency
says
Kirsty Needham/Reuters/August 27, 2025
SYDNEY (Reuters) -Australia's intelligence agency traced the funding of hooded
criminals who allegedly set fire to a Melbourne synagogue, linking the
antisemitic attack to Iran, officials said, even as those charged with the crime
were likely unaware Tehran was their puppet master. A 20-year-old local man,
Younes Ali Younes, appeared in Melbourne's Magistrates Court on Wednesday
charged with the December 6 arson attack on the Adass Israel synagogue and theft
of a car. He did not enter a plea and did not seek bail. His lawyer declined to
comment to Reuters.
A day earlier Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Australia's intelligence
agencies had shown the attack, and another in Sydney last year, were directed by
the Iranian government, and expelled Tehran's ambassador, becoming the latest
Western government to accuse Iran of carrying out hostile covert activities on
its soil. Security services in Britain and Sweden warned last year that Tehran
was using criminal proxies to carry out its violent attacks in those countries,
with London saying it had disrupted 20 Iran-linked plots since 2022. A dozen
other countries have condemned what they called a surge in assassination,
kidnapping, and harassment plots by Iranian intelligence services. Australia's
spy chief Mike Burgess said a series of "cut outs", an intelligence term for
intermediaries, were used to conceal Iran's involvement in the attacks, and
warned that it may have orchestrated others. Security forces "have done rather
extraordinary work to trace the source of the funding of these criminal elements
who've been used as tools of the Iranian regime," Albanese told the Australian
Broadcasting Corporation on Tuesday.
The investigation worked backwards through payments made onshore and offshore to
"petty and sometimes not so petty criminals", he said in parliament on
Wednesday. Albanese was briefed by the Australian Security Intelligence
Organisation on Monday on evidence of a "supply chain" that he said linked the
attacks to offshore individuals and Tehran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Australia's diplomats in Iran were discreetly told to leave, making it out of
Iranian airspace just after midnight, he said. A public announcement, with
Albanese flanked by his spy chief and foreign and home affairs ministers, came
on Tuesday, prompting accolades from Israel.
Iran's Foreign Ministry said it "absolutely rejected" Australia's accusation.
The turning point in the investigation came weeks earlier, as Australian Federal
Police and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) seized
mobile phones and digital devices from suspects arrested in Victoria state over
the synagogue attack - and highlighted a stolen blue Volkswagen Golf sedan used
in unrelated attacks. CCTV footage of the night of December 6 released by police
shows three hooded figures unloading red jerry cans of fuel from the boot of the
car, one of whom was wielding an axe, at the entrance of the synagogue and
setting it alight before speeding away. Victoria's Joint Counter Terrorism Team
alleged Younes, 20, stole the car to carry out the attack and recklessly
endangered lives by setting fire to the A$20 million synagogue when people were
inside, a charge sheet shows. No one was wounded in the attack. A co-accused,
Giovanni Laulu, 21, appeared in court last month on the same charges. Police
have referred to the sedan as a "communal crime car" linked to other attacks
that were not politically motivated. In a press conference on July 30 to
announce seven search warrants had been executed and a man arrested over the
synagogue attack, the Australian Federal Police's then deputy commissioner
Krissy Barrett said it was politically motivated and involved offshore
criminals. "We suspect these criminals worked with criminal associates in
Victoria to carry out the arson attack," she said, also confirming a major
Australian crime figure deported to Iraq in 2023 was "one of our ongoing lines
of inquiry." Police were working with the Five Eyes intelligence network that
also includes Britain, the United States, Canada and New Zealand, she said. Home
Affairs Minister Tony Burke told ABC Radio on Wednesday that those involved
locally would not have necessarily known "who had started it". "You have a
series of intermediaries so that people performing different actions don't in
fact know who is directing them or don't necessarily know who is directing
them," he said.
UN nuclear inspectors return to Iran for first time since
conflict with Israel
Mostafa Salem, CNN/August 27, 2025
Inspectors from the United Nations nuclear watchdog have returned to Iran, the
head of the agency and Iranian officials said, despite an Iranian ban on
cooperation with it. “We are about to restart… there are many (nuclear)
facilities, some were attacked and some were not. We are discussing what kind of
practical modalities can be implemented in order to facilitate the restart of
our work,” Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),
told Fox News on Tuesday. In June, Israel launched strikes on Iran’s nuclear
facilities, sparking an unprecedented 12-day military conflict and prompting
Iranian retaliatory attacks on Israeli cities. The United States also joined,
striking three Iranian sites in the conflict’s final days. The IAEA withdrew its
team from Iran in July after parliament passed a law halting cooperation with
the agency in response to the US-Israeli strikes. Grossi said the inspectors
withdrew because inspections were “not possible” due to “wartime.” Iran’s
parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf confirmed the return of UN
inspectors during a parliament session Wednesday, Iranian state media said.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the inspectors were allowed to monitor fuel
replacement at the Bushehr nuclear power plant following a decision by the
country’s Supreme National Security Council. Araghchi denied that an agreement
was reached on “new cooperation” between Iran and the IAEA, according to a post
on his Telegram channel. During the conflict, Iran accused the IAEA of giving
Israel a pretext to attack by releasing a report declaring Tehran was not
complying with its safeguard obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty, which is designed to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons through
strict inspections of nuclear sites. “Ever since, we’ve been in negotiations
with Iran to return, it’s not an easy situation… because for some in Iran the
presence of international inspectors is detrimental to their international
security,” Grossi, who is in Washington, D.C. to meet US officials, told Fox
News in a televised interview. Israel launched its attack a day before Iran and
the US were set to hold a round of negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program.
Talks have since stopped, with no clear timeline for resumption. Kamran
Ghazanfari, a member of Iran’s parliament, criticized comments by Ghalibaf in
Wednesday’s legislative session, which suggested that the government could allow
inspectors to enter the Bushehr nuclear plant and a Tehran research site.
The lawmaker said the decision would be an “explicit violation” of the law
“obliging the government to suspend cooperation with the agency.” On Tuesday,
Iranian negotiators met with representatives from France, Germany and the United
Kingdom, known as the E3, in Geneva in an attempt to avert the reimposition of
UN sanctions on Iran, which were lifted under a landmark nuclear agreement
signed 10 years ago. The E3 told the UN they would move to reimpose sanctions
through what’s known as the ‘snapback’ mechanism if Iran continues to violate
its obligations under the 2015 deal. Iran scaled back compliance with the deal
and accelerated uranium enrichment after US President Donald Trump withdrew from
the agreement in his first term.
Trump holds Gaza policy
meeting with Blair and Kushner, White House official says
Reuters/27 Augus/2025
US President Donald Trump was presiding over a policy meeting on the Gaza war on
Wednesday with input from former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and former
Trump Middle East envoy Jared Kushner, a senior White House official said.
Trump, top White House officials, Blair and Kushner were discussing all aspects
of the Gaza issue, including escalating food aid deliveries, the hostage crisis,
post-war plans and more, the official told Reuters. The official described the
session as “simply a policy meeting,” the type frequently held by Trump and his
team. Kushner, who is married to Trump’s daughter Ivanka, was a key White House
adviser in Trump’s first term on Middle East issues. Blair, who was prime
minister during the 2003 Iraq war, has also been active on Middle East issues.
US special envoy Steve Witkoff previewed the meeting in an appearance on Fox
News’ “Special Reporting with Bret Baier” on Tuesday. “It is a very
comprehensive plan we are putting together on the next day (in Gaza) and many
people are going to see how robust it is and how well meaning it is and it
reflects President Trump’s humanitarian motives here,” Witkoff said. Trump had
promised a quick end to the war in Gaza during last year’s presidential campaign
but a resolution has been elusive seven months into his second term. Trump’s
term began with a ceasefire which lasted two months, until Israeli strikes
killed around 400 Palestinians on March 18. More recently, images of starving
Palestinians in Gaza, including children, have shocked the world and fed
criticism of Israel over the deteriorating conditions. “President Trump has been
clear that he wants the war to end, and he wants peace and prosperity for
everyone in the region. The White House has nothing additional to share on the
meeting at this time,” a second White House official said.
US to host talks on post-war Gaza as Israel calls Gaza City evacuation
‘inevitable’
Wafaa Shurafa, Sam Metz And Sally Abou Aljoud/AP/ August 27, 2025
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) — Israeli and U.S. officials were to meet Wednesday
in Washington to discuss post-war Gaza, even as Israel's military called the
evacuation of Gaza City “inevitable” ahead of a new offensive and no signs of a
ceasefire were in sight.
The meeting comes amid mounting outrage over this week's double Israeli strike
on a southern Gaza hospital that killed journalists, emergency responders and
others. The toll from the attack on Nasser Hospital rose to 22 after two more
people died Wednesday, Gaza health officials said. The Israeli military, which
has said it will investigate, offered no immediate explanation for striking
twice and no evidence for an assertion that six of the dead were militants. As a
growing chorus of international leaders urge Israel to reconsider its offensive
and commit to talks, Pope Leo XIV called for Israel to halt the “collective
punishment” and forced displacement of Palestinians in Gaza.
Israel prepares Gaza City for an evacuation
Aid groups warn that an expanded Israeli military offensive could worsen the
humanitarian crisis in the besieged territory, where most of the over 2 million
residents have been displaced, neighborhoods lie in ruins and a famine has been
declared in Gaza City.
The Israeli military on Wednesday told residents of Gaza City to prepare to
leave. “The evacuation of Gaza City is inevitable,” spokesperson Avichay Adraee
wrote in Arabic on X. He said Israeli forces have surveyed vast empty areas
south of the city “to assist the evacuating residents as much as possible.” He
said the displaced would receive space for tents, and infrastructure would be
set up to distribute aid and water. More than 80% of Gaza is designated as an
Israeli military zone or subject to displacement orders, the U.N. humanitarian
agency said in June.
Israel has pressed ahead with plans to mobilize tens of thousands of reservists.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the military will launch its
offensive while simultaneously pursuing a ceasefire. Hamas said last week that
it accepted a ceasefire plan from Arab mediators. Qatar, which has rarely
assigned blame through more than a year of mediation, said Tuesday that Israel
has yet to officially respond and “does not want to reach an agreement." Last
week, an official from Qatar said the proposal under discussion was “almost
identical” to an earlier draft that U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff put forth and
Israel accepted. The deal said to be under discussion would include a 60-day
truce, the release of some of the 50 remaining hostages held by Hamas in return
for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, a surge of humanitarian aid into Gaza and
a road map toward talks on a lasting ceasefire. Many in Netanyahu’s coalition
oppose such a phased deal. Meanwhile, protests have swelled in Israel as
hostages' families and their supporters press for a ceasefire. The government
argues that a widened offensive is the best way to bring them home and cripple
Hamas’ capacity to launch future attacks.
Witkoff says Trump will chair a separate meeting
In Washington, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio was set to meet Wednesday
with Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar. Witkoff told Fox News on Tuesday that
President Donald Trump would chair a separate meeting, which would feature “a
very comprehensive plan.”He did not offer details about that meeting, which did
not appear on Trump’s public schedule for Wednesday. Witkoff also said the
official U.S. position was that hostages — Hamas’ main source of leverage —
should no longer be part of negotiations. He told Fox News the talks should
instead focus on issues such as Gaza’s future and how to define Hamas in that
context.
Hospitals report strikes near aid sites
Local hospitals reported at least 10 deaths Wednesday, including near an
aid-distribution site in central Gaza and at a displacement camp in the south.
An Israeli strike killed three people, including a child and a woman, and
wounded 21 others when it hit tents in Khan Younis overnight, the Kuwait
Specialized Field Hospital said. Three Israeli strikes killed at least six
others in Khan Younis, Nasser Hospital said. Israel's military did not
immediately respond to questions about the strikes. Its offensive has killed
62,895 Palestinians during the war, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, which
says around half were women and children. The agency does not distinguish
between fighters and civilians in its count. The ministry said Wednesday that 10
more people have died of malnutrition-related causes over the past 24 hours,
bringing the total of victims of malnutrition-related causes to 313 people
during the war, including 119 children. The ministry is part of the Hamas-run
government and staffed by medical professionals. The U.N. and independent
experts consider it the most reliable source on war casualties. Israel disputes
its figures but has not provided its own. Hamas-led militants abducted 251
people and killed around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, in the Oct. 7, 2023,
attack that triggered the war. Most of the hostages have been released in
ceasefires or other deals. Of the 50 remaining in Gaza, Israel believes around
20 are alive.
UN official says 'all hope is gone' if Israeli offensive on famine-stricken Gaza
City goes ahead
Sam Mcneil/AP/August 27, 2025
BRUSSELS (AP) — If Israel's military goes ahead with a planned offensive in Gaza
City, then “all hope is gone that we’re ever going to see the end to this,” a
United Nations official told The Associated Press on Wednesday. Israel says the
evacuation of Gaza's most populated city is “inevitable,” adding to
international alarm for hundreds of thousands of people there as famine —
documented and declared — threatens to spread after 22 months of war. Sam Rose,
the acting director of Gaza operations for UNRWA, or the U.N. Relief and Works
Agency for Palestine Refugees, said some people are too old, too young or too
ill or incapacitated to evacuate Gaza City as Israeli tanks and armored vehicles
have deployed to its outskirts. “You’ve got a population that’s living in abject
fear, in abject cruelty, abject humiliation, that has no control whatsoever over
their day-to-day, their minute-to minute lives,” Rose said. “Just think for a
minute about what that means for any human being, but what it means for parents,
what it means for children who’ve grown up knowing nothing but this.”Instead of
an offensive, all efforts should be made to provide services and support to keep
people alive, he said. Rose was in Gaza from February 2024 until March of this
year. The agency was feeding 1.2 million people a day in Gaza before the war
began with the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. He said
6,000 trucks full of lifesaving aid including food, medicine, fuel and water
have been stuck outside Gaza for months. The U.N. has cited Israeli
restrictions. “That’s enough food to feed everyone, enough soap to give
everyone, enough nappies, diapers,” Rose said. Separately, the European
commissioner for humanitarian aid and crisis management, Hadja Lahbib, described
“mountains” of aid sitting at the Gaza border. She also denounced the plan for
the military offensive. The European Union’s recent agreement with Israel to
ramp up aid for Gaza has not worked out, Lahbib said, and pleaded for access:
“Let us save lives.”Israel's government, which blocked all aid into Gaza for two
and a half months earlier this year, asserts it has allowed enough aid to enter
during the war. The U.N., however, has said the amount of aid entering and
reaching Palestinians remains far below the roughly 600 trucks a day that
entered before the war. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly
denied there’s starvation in Gaza, and his government called the recent famine
declaration by international food security experts “an outright lie.”
Israel's Netanyahu recognises Armenian genocide in a
historic first
Euronews/August 27, 2025
Israel's Netanyahu recognises Armenian genocide in a historic first
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recognised the alleged genocide
carried out by the Ottoman Empire against Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians during
World War I, in a first for the country. During a podcast interview with
Armenian-born presenter Patrick Bet-David, Netanyahu said, "I think we did. I
think the Knesset passed a resolution to that effect," although no such
legislation has been passed by Israel's parliament. When asked why no Israeli
prime minister has ever recognised the mass killings, Netanyahu replied: "I just
did. Here you go." Armenia has sought international recognition of the systemic
killings which left an estimated 1.5 million people dead as a genocide. Turkey,
on the other hand, has steadfastly rejected allegations that the mass killings
and forced deportation of hundreds of thousands of Armenians amounted to
genocide.
Shifting stances
Israel, one of Turkey's key trading partners, has long grappled with the issue
and been hesitant to describe the atrocities in the early 20th century as
genocide. In 2001, then Foreign Minister Shimon Peres categorically denied what
he described as "Armenian claims". He added that Israel rejected "attempts to
create a similarity between the Holocaust and the Armenian allegations."However,
in 2000, then-Education Minister Yossi Sarid of the left-wing Meretz party
announced plans to include the Armenian genocide in Israel's history curriculum.
Eleven years later, a member of the far-right National Union party introduced a
bill to declare 24 April an official day of commemoration for the massacre.
Despite the Knesset holding its first-ever debate on recognising the genocide,
and the majority appearing to be in favour, the issue was ultimately not put to
a vote.
Former Israeli President Reuven Rivlin, who was known to be an advocate for
recognition, refrained during his presidency from taking any official step,
including renewing his signature on an annual petition calling for recognition.
In 2018, a Knesset vote on recognising the Armenian Genocide was cancelled due
to a lack of sufficient support from the ruling coalition.
Turkey's position
Although Turkey has yet to comment on Netanyahu's remarks, Ankara has long
denied the massacre amounts to genocide under internationally recognised law. In
an official review published by the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the
country referred to the last years of the Ottoman Empire as a "tragic period for
its people. Turks, Armenians and others suffered terribly." The review said the
"memory of all those lives lost must be duly honoured," but argued the Armenian
view of history "cherry-picks Armenian suffering, summarises it in multiple
ways, and portrays it as genocide."Turkey has alleged that "many more Turks died
or were killed in the years leading up to and during the war" and argued that
there is no conclusive evidence to support the claim of a "deliberate plan by
the Ottoman government to exterminate Armenians."
Meanwhile, the Turkish Foreign Ministry issued a statement in April reiterating
its call to support normalisation with Yerevan and categorically rejecting any
characterisation of the events of 1915 that "distort historical facts and
international law."
Despite Turkey's refusal to heed Armenia's goal of recognising the massacre as
genocide, several rounds of talks have been held with the goal of normalising
relations between the two countries. In December 2021, Turkey appointed Serdar
Kılıç, its former ambassador to Washington, as its special representative for
normalisation talks with Armenia. Ruben Rubinian was appointed by Armenia as his
counterpart. In mid-March, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said at a
press conference in Yerevan that the normalisation of relations between his
country and Turkey had become "a matter of time".
Global recognition
The issue of recognising the genocide remains controversial, with Uruguay being
the first country to recognise the killings as the Armenian genocide in April
1995. To date, only 34 governments around the world recognise the Armenian
genocide.
The US did not offer formal recognition until former President Joe Biden took
office in 2021. At the time, the move prompted Turkey to summon the US
ambassador in Ankara to denounce the shift. In the Arab world, only Syria and
Lebanon — two countries with hundreds of thousands of citizens of Armenian
origin — recognise the genocide. In Europe, most countries have recognised the
genocide, with the exception of Spain and the United Kingdom.
Israel Army Launches Operation in West Bank’s Nablus
Asharq Al Awsat/August 27/2025
Dozens of Israeli soldiers stormed the occupied West Bank city of Nablus on
Wednesday, witnesses and Palestinian officials said, with the Red Crescent
reporting at least seven people wounded in the raid. Contacted by AFP, the
Israeli military confirmed that its forces were conducting an operation in the
northern West Bank city, without specifying its purpose. The raid began at
around 3:00 am (0000 GMT), residents said, with soldiers in armored vehicles
storming several neighborhoods of Nablus's old city, which has a population of
around 30,000 people. It came a day after Israeli forces carried out a
relatively rare raid on Ramallah, seat of the Palestinian Authority, targeting a
currency exchange in the city center and leaving dozens of Palestinians wounded,
according to the Palestine Red Crescent Society. Nablus Governor Ghassan Daghlas
told AFP that Wednesday's "assault... is merely a show of force with no
justification". One witness, who declined to give his name, reported that
soldiers had expelled an elderly couple from their home. Israeli troops "are
storming and searching houses and shops inside the old city, while some houses
have been turned into military posts", said Ghassan Hamdan, head of the
Palestinian Medical Relief organization in Nablus. AFP footage showed Israeli
forces and military vehicles deployed on the streets, with some troops taking
position on a rooftop. Daghlas said the army had informed Palestinian
authorities that the raid would last until 4:00 pm. Local sources said clashes
broke out at the eastern entrance to the old city, where young people threw
stones at Israeli soldiers, who responded with tear gas and live ammunition.
The Red Crescent said its teams treated five people wounded by rubber bullets,
one person hit by live bullet shrapnel and another following "physical assault".
One more person was injured in a "fall" during the raid, the medical
organization added, and at least 27 others suffered from tear gas inhalation.
Palestinian presidential spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh, in a statement carried by
official news agency Wafa, slammed "the Israeli escalation in cities and refugee
camps", calling a recent uptick in raids "dangerous, condemned and
unacceptable".
The old city of Nablus has been the focus of several major Israeli raids,
including in 2022 and 2023 during large-scale operations targeting a local
grouping of armed fighters, as well as in 2002 during the second Palestinian
intifada, or uprising. In early June 2025, an Israeli military operation there
resulted in two Palestinians killed. Since the start of the Gaza war in October
2023, violence has surged in the West Bank, which Israel has occupied since
1967.
Israeli troops or settlers in the West Bank have killed at least 972
Palestinians, including gunmen and civilians, since the beginning of the Gaza
war, according to an AFP tally based on Palestinian Authority figures. In the
same period, at least 36 Israelis, both civilians and security forces, have been
killed in attacks or during military operations in the territory, according to
Israeli figures.
Pope Leo XIV joins Greek Orthodox interfaith plea for peace in Gaza
Chris Benson/United Press International/August 27, 2025
Aug. 27 (UPI) -- Pope Leo XIV joined other religious leaders again calling for a
cease-fire in Israel's war in Gaza with Hamas, and urged Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu's government to end its "collective punishment" of Palestinians.
"Today I renew a strong appeal both to the parties involved and to the
international community, that an end be put to the conflict in the Holy Land,
which has caused so much terror, destruction and death," the American-born Pope
Leo said Wednesday during his weekly audience in the Vatican attended by
thousands. The U.S. native and leader of the Catholic Church's billions of
religious faithful joined his voice with the head of the Greek Orthodox Church
in Israel, Patriarch Theophilos III, and Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa as the
pope's representative in Jerusalem.
"It seems that the Israeli government's announcement that 'the gates of hell
will open' is indeed taking on tragic forms," the patriarchs wrote Tuesday in
their statement. They called for peace in the war-torn Gaza Strip where
international groups have declared a state of famine, and urged Hamas to release
the remaining 50 Israeli hostages kidnapped by the terror syndicate over 20
months ago. dnesday, the Vatican's chief was interrupted twice by applause as he
read his latest plea for peace in the Vatican auditorium. He begged for a
permanent cease-fire, the safe entry of humanitarian aid to be facilitated "and
humanitarian law to be fully respected.". The pontiff, 69, cited international
law and its obligation to "protect civilians and the prohibitions against
collective punishment, the indiscriminate use of force and the forced
displacement of populations." Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed
Israel will launch its ground offensive in Gaza City while it pursues peace.
However, reports indicate Israel has yet to send emissaries to negotiate.
Palestinians on Aug. 7 carried sacks of flour after trucks carrying humanitarian
aid entered through the
Palestinians on Aug. 7 carried sacks of flour after trucks carrying humanitarian
aid entered through the Zikim crossing in northern Gaza. Nearly 100% of Gaza has
been destroyed and a half million children without schools or stability. Photo
by Mahmoud Issa/UPI.
Reports indicate malnutrition kills dozens daily in Gaza with 92% of
malnourished infants aged six months to two years, and that nine in 10
Palestinians have been displaced by Israel with nearly 100% of Gaza destroyed
and a half million children without schools or stability.
The two patriarchs on Tuesday called for the end of "senseless and destructive
war," but all three were critical of Netanyahu's plan to resettle millions of
Palestinian refugees in other nations. They stated since the outbreak of
Israel's expanded war in Gaza with Iran's terror proxy group Hamas that the
Greek Orthodox compound of Saint Porphyrius and the Holy Family compound has
been a refuge for "hundreds" of elderly, women and Palestinian children. A
Catholic Church in Gaza was recently hit by IDF shelling that killed three and
injured its priest. "Leaving Gaza City and trying to flee to the south would be
nothing less than a death sentence," they wrote. "For this reason, the clergy
and nuns have decided to remain and continue to care for all those who will be
in the compound." The world's 267th pope in the Catholic Church's 2,000-year
history followed in the footsteps of his much-beloved late predecessor, Pope
Francis, in pleading for global peace. Since assuming the Chair of Saint Peter
in May, Pope Leo XIV has called for an end to growing global war multiple times
and pointed a finger at heads of state for a failure to provide much-needed
humanitarian aid amid accusations of Palestinian genocide by Israel. "I renew my
heartfelt appeal to allow the entry of dignified humanitarian aid and to put an
end to the hostilities, whose heartbreaking price is paid by the children,
elderly and the sick," Leo said in May to tens of thousands of Catholic faithful
during his first general audience in St. Peter's Square. That month he told over
1,000 journalists "the way we communicate is of fundamental importance." "We
must say 'no' to the war of words and images; we must reject the paradigm of
war," he said.
The Latest English LCCC analysis &
editorials from miscellaneous sources
on August 27-28/2025
John Bolton cashed in and America paid the price
Peter Navarro, opinion contributor/The Hill/August 27/2025
I went to prison for defending the Constitutional separation of powers.
John Bolton (an occasional contributor to The Hill) may well wind up in prison,
too if investigators uncover evidence and prosecutors decide to bring charges
over his alleged classified disclosures. When Bolton wrote his book, “The Room
Where It Happened” — reportedly receiving a $2 million advance — he wasn’t just
dishing gossip. He was sharing information about Oval Office conversations and
national security that should have stayed secret — either by law or under
executive privilege. A federal judge already spelled this out in black and
white. In June 2020, Judge Royce Lamberth warned that Bolton had “likely
jeopardized national security by disclosing classified information in violation
of his nondisclosure agreement obligations.” The judge only allowed the book to
hit shelves because “the horse is already out of the barn,” given the
publication of excerpts and the shipment of 200,000 copies of the book.
Lamberth went further in his ruling, stressing that Bolton had “gambled with the
national security of the United States” and that the government was “likely to
succeed on the merits” of proving he unlawfully disclosed classified material.
Translation: Bolton didn’t just break trust — he may have also broken the law.
I served with Bolton, and he was far too frequently a loose cannon, bent on
bombings and coups— Doctor Strangelove with a mustache. He agitated for
airstrikes, pushed regime-change fantasies, and obsessed over military solutions
when diplomacy was working. Then, instead of honoring executive privilege and
confidential debate, Bolton acknowledged that in writing his memoir he relied on
the “copious notes” he had conspicuously taken inside the White House. That
isn’t service. That isn’t patriotism. That’s profiteering off of America’s
secrets.
For example, Bolton described confidential U.S. deliberations on how to fracture
Nicolás Maduro’s control and prompt military defections. That kind of blueprint
isn’t something you hand to the public — or to Maduro’s intelligence services.
Such a disclosure of national-defense information without authorization can
constitute a crime. Bolton puffed himself up as the great strategist of Caracas,
but in reality, his disclosures were reckless speculation. No covert plan was
exposed, no law broken by President Trump, and no evidence of U.S. misconduct
was ever substantiated.
Another case pertained to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Turkey’s
Halkbank. In 2019, the U.S. Justice Department charged Halkbank with helping
Iran evade American sanctions by funneling oil and gas revenues through front
companies and falsifying records. Bolton recounts a conversation in his book
where Turkey’s strongman pressed Trump to back off. But that wasn’t a colorful
anecdote — it was an active criminal matter even at the time he published, which
subsequently went all the way to the Supreme Court.
Under federal law, removing or retaining classified drafts or notes of such a
meeting can be punishable by prison time. Moreover, in the end, Bolton’s claims
amounted to nothing but bluster. There was no Justice Department retreat on
Halkbank, no evidence whatsoever that the prosecution was derailed, and no Trump
misconduct.
On North Korea, Bolton revealed the inside playbook of U.S. negotiations with
Kim Jong-un and consultations with South Korea. Seoul publicly blasted him for
breaking trust. Allied intelligence, if documented in notes taken outside secure
channels, could implicate either of two sections of the U.S. code covering
unauthorized disclosure of communications intelligence. Bolton’s book also
exposed the advice and concerns of Britain, France, and other NATO partners
during closed-door consultations. Foreign-government information is
automatically classified under U.S. law. Publishing it didn’t just humiliate our
allies; it shredded trust. Not only that, but his sensationalized speculation
about Trump breaching the NATO treaty proved to be just that. These aren’t minor
indiscretions. They are statutory minefields. Collectively, these and other “Big
Reveals” in Bolton’s book create a trove of national defense intelligence
scattered by someone who took an oath of office to guard it. I said it plainly
on Newsmax when Bolton’s disclosures were under fresh scrutiny: “Hey, John, the
difference between you and a president is that presidents can take anything they
want and declassify it. And brother, you can’t.”
I know the stakes because I’ve paid the price. Steve Bannon and I both went to
prison for defending the Constitution and our system of separation of powers. If
evidence is found and indictments made, Bolton may one day go to prison for
shredding that Constitution, defying executive privilege, and trampling
safeguards meant to protect America’s security. If that happens, Bolton won’t be
remembered for his book tour. He’ll be remembered for the sequel he writes in
prison.
*Peter Navarro, an adviser to President Trump in both of his terms, is the
author of “I Went to Prison So You Won’t Have To.” His personal views do not
necessarily reflect those of the Trump administration.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be
published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Turkey’s Push for Regime Change in Syria: The Jihadi
Highway
Sinan Ciddi/The Jerusalem Strategic Tribune/August 26, 2025
Syria’s civil war broke out in March 2011, in reaction to the brutal crackdown
by the regime of Bashar al-Asad of popular protests that were part of the wider
Arab Spring. In supporting the Syrian rebels, Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip
Erdoğan initially used the language of humanitarian intervention, claiming to
protect civilians from the Asad regime’s repression. But it soon became clear
that Erdoğan was also seeking regime change, motivated by an ideological goal:
replacing Asad’s secular Arab nationalist regime with an Islamist government.
This new Syria would then support Turkey’s leadership of a new Sunni Muslim
order in the Levant. Early in the conflict, Erdoğan and then-Foreign Minister
Ahmet Davutoğlu declared that Turkey could not stand idly by while Asad’s regime
silenced the cries of freedom of Syria’s Sunni majority. Publicly, they urged
Asad to implement democratic reforms. Privately, Davutoğlu assured Erdoğan that
Asad’s fall was imminent, either through internal collapse or Western
intervention, as had occurred in Libya and Egypt. But Turkey lacked the capacity
to orchestrate regime change in its southern neighbor. What it possessed was a
growing willingness to support jihadist elements in the Syrian opposition. By
mid-2011, Turkey transitioned from diplomatic pressure to active support of the
rebels. Ankara allowed the Syrian opposition to organize on Turkish soil,
enabling the formation of groups like the “Friends of Syria” and the Free Syrian
Army. Foreign fighters traveled to Turkey to join the anti-Asad ranks. Turkey
became a hub for Syria’s rebellion. Turkey, led by the AKP, cast itself as the
model Sunni democracy – exporting this “Turkish Model” to Arab Spring nations.
In October 2011, Turkey helped launch the Syrian National Council in Istanbul.
Though intended as a broad opposition umbrella, it became dominated by the
Syrian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. At a 2012 State Department meeting,
Syrian Kurdish representatives complained that “with the support of Turkey,” the
Brotherhood had sidelined other opposition voices. One US official summarized
Ankara’s vision as “a centralized Islamist government backed by a
constitution.”When Turkey convened the Syrian opposition in Antalya in December
2012 to form a new command structure, nearly two-thirds of the delegates invited
were Muslim Brotherhood members. Turkey’s vision for Syria was now plainly
visible: a Brotherhood-led regime beholden to Ankara. But Asad did not fall. As
the civil war dragged on, Turkey doubled down, providing covert aid to rebel
groups. Hakan Fidan, head of Turkey’s intelligence agency MIT, directed this
support. According to The Wall Street Journal, MIT became a “traffic cop”
coordinating weapons shipments and directing convoys across the 565-mile
Turkish-Syrian border. By early 2012, the insurgency had changed. Extremist
factions, initially peripheral, began to dominate, including Jabhat al-Nusra
[al-Nusra Front]. It established cells across Syria, in Aleppo, Idlib, Deir al-Zor,
and Dera’a. Another Islamist group, Ahrar al-Sham, formed in January 2012. By
the end of the year, it joined ten other militias to create the Syrian Islamic
Front. In 2013, it evolved into Harakat Ahrar al-Sham al-Islamiyya and
collaborated with jihadist and US-backed groups alike.
All these groups benefited from Turkey’s open-door policy. One US official
described Turkey’s border approach as a revolving door: “They more or less let
all kinds of people in – al-Nusra was among them. ” Turkish border guards
“looked the other way,” allowing jihadists to cross with impunity. In December
2012, the US designated al-Nusra as a foreign terrorist organization
highlighting its ties to al-Qai’da.
By May 2013, the White House was alarmed. President Obama reportedly warned
Erdoğan that Turkey was “letting arms and fighters flow into Syria
indiscriminately and sometimes to the wrong rebels, including anti-Western
jihadists.” US officials pressed Ankara to “tightly control the arms flow.”
Turkey was the central artery of what analysts dubbed the “jihadi highway.”
Norwegian terrorism expert Thomas Heghammer noted, “Turkey is to Syria now what
Pakistan was to Afghanistan in the 1990s. Antakya is the Peshawar of Syria.”
Fighters flowed in from across the world. Turkish border towns became staging
grounds for Islamist militias. Local shops sold smartphones and supplies to
jihadists. Hospitals treated wounded fighters from both ISIS and al-Nusra.
Mehmet Ali Ediboğlu, a Turkish member of parliament from the opposition CHP,
told The Wall Street Journal that he personally tracked “a convoy of more than
50 buses carrying radical fighters” to the border, escorted by Turkish police.
Weapons also streamed across the border. Reuters reported in 2012 that Turkey,
Saudi Arabia, and Qatar had established a secret operations center near the
border to coordinate arms and communications for Syrian rebels. Washington was
complicit. Francis Ricciardone, former US ambassador to Turkey, said in 2014
that Ankara “worked with groups for a period, including al-Nusra,” and hoped to
“moderate” them. When Davutoğlu was pressed about al-Nusra’s links to al-Qa’ida,
he merely admitted, “declaring them [al-Nusra] a terrorist organization has
resulted in more harm than good.”Erdoğan and Davutoğlu’s pursuit of regime
change was not a defensive reaction to Asad’s brutality. It was an effort to
remake the region in the AKP’s Islamist image. And in that reckless endeavor,
they opened the gates to forces far beyond their control, including the
terrorist ISIS caliphate.
**Sinan Ciddi is a non-resident senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of
Democracies where he contributes to its Turkey Program and Center on Economic
and Financial Power. You can follow Sinan on X, @sinanciddi.
Syria’s Agreement with Israel Is Not as Promising as Advertised
Hussain Abdul-Hussain/This Is Beirut/August 27/2025
The world is celebrating the anticipated signing of a security agreement between
Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa and Israel, hailed as evidence of Sharaa’s
moderation and a departure from his radical Islamist past. However, this
narrative is misleading. Islamist doctrine permits, and even encourages,
temporary truces—up to 10 years—with adversaries until conditions favor a
stronger position. This strategy is modeled on the Prophet Muhammad’s Treaty of
Hudaybiyyah with the Quraysh of Mecca in 628 CE. Hamas has repeatedly proposed
10-year truces with Israel as an alternative to peace or a two-state solution.
If Sharaa were truly a moderate, reformer or visionary, he would have aimed
higher. He could have called, and met with, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu to propose a comprehensive peace treaty, setting aside past grievances
to secure a prosperous future for both nations.
Instead, neither Sharaa nor his officials have uttered the word “peace” in
relation to Israel. The current agreement merely restores the status quo of the
1974 ceasefire and the UNDOF line, in place before December 2024. This interim
arrangement might be defensible if Sharaa were focused on transitional
governance, such as organizing elections or drafting a constitution—tasks
typical of an acting president. However, since declaring himself president in
February 2025, Sharaa has acted as a permanent leader, signing long-term
contracts for public infrastructure, inviting foreign investors and overseeing
business and government memoranda of understanding (MoUs). In nearly every
domain, Sharaa has promised both short- and long-term progress, except in
Syria’s relations with Israel, where he offers only a return to the 2024 status
quo. The separation of economic growth from relations with Israel is a hallmark
of most Arab states, with or without peace treaties, except for the United Arab
Emirates and Bahrain. These Gulf states, through the Abraham Accords,
demonstrated that economic interests drove their normalization with Israel. In
contrast, other Arab states treat peace with Israel as disconnected from
economic growth—a flawed approach.
Separation between foreign policy and the economy stems from prioritizing
identity politics over pragmatic, cause-and-effect policymaking.
Under identity politics, the Arab grievance over Israel’s control of Palestinian
territory overshadows all else, including economic benefits. In contrast, a
cause-and-effect approach prioritizes national interests, particularly economic
growth, over pride, dignity or identity. Developed economies exemplify this:
despite a brutal war, the United States and Vietnam have become major trade
partners. Today, Vietnam continues to celebrate its military victory over
America, but prioritizes exports and growth over past animosity. If Sharaa were
the visionary his supporters claim, he would recognize that restoring Syrian
sovereignty over the Golan Heights offers minimal economic dividends compared to
a peace treaty with Israel. Given his stated focus on economic growth, peace
with Israel should be a pressing priority. Recent media reports highlight Syrian
Foreign Minister Assaad al-Shibani’s meeting with Ron Dermer, a senior aide to
Netanyahu, in Paris. This was the first high-level meeting between Syrian and
Israeli officials in 25 years, meaning it was not unprecedented. In 2000, Syrian
Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa met with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak at
Camp David under President Bill Clinton’s mediation. Talks under Clinton were
aimed at a peace treaty allowing Israel to retain control over Mount Hermon’s
peak and establishing a shared border buffer zone designed as a park accessible
to both sides. These talks progressed far beyond Sharaa’s current truce offer.
Media reports also suggest that Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa, scheduled to
address the UN General Assembly in New York next month, may meet with Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his US visit. Whether this encounter
will be a brief handshake, a photo opportunity under President Trump’s auspices
or something more substantial remains unclear. What is certain, however, is that
any minor gesture between Sharaa and Netanyahu will likely be overhyped as a
breakthrough, despite its probable lack of substance.
The era of incremental steps and symbolic gestures toward peace has passed. Now
is the time for bold, courageous action. Sharaa should publicly invite Netanyahu
to a meeting and explicitly declare his goal of achieving peace. Better yet, he
could emulate Anwar Sadat’s historic 1977 visit to Jerusalem and address the
Knesset, calling for a new chapter in Syrian-Israeli relations and a
comprehensive peace treaty.
A mere security agreement between Sharaa and Israel does not justify the hype it
has received. Until Sharaa openly advocates for a comprehensive peace treaty,
expectations should remain tempered.
**Hussain Abdul-Hussain is a research fellow at The Foundation for the Defense
of Democracies (FDD).
Will Trump Let Putin Win?
Con Coughlin/Gatestone Institute/August 27, 2025
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21871/trump-putin-win
China will be among a collection of hostile states, which also includes Iran and
North Korea, that will be taking a close interest in the outcome of the
diplomatic initiative Trump began...Trump himself has given a clear indication
that... the White House is prepared to grant Moscow control over some of
Ukraine's most strategic and resource-rich regions. Such a deal would not only
represent a complete betrayal of the Ukrainian people, who have fought
heroically to defend their country from Russian aggression. It would completely
undermine the credibility of the Western alliance to defend its interests in the
face of unprovoked acts of aggression in Europe. By far the most likely
consequence of Trump agreeing to any sell-out over Ukraine would be to encourage
China's Communist rulers to launch their long-anticipated plan to invade the
democratic territory of Taiwan, a move that runs the risk of provoking a major
conflict in the Indo-Pacific. If Trump really wants to end the war in Ukraine
and achieve lasting peace, then he should consider reviving his threat to impose
punitive sanctions against countries that continue trading with Russia, as well
as providing Ukraine immediately with offensive weapons, rather than just
defensive ones. Every day of delay is simply being used by Putin to kill more
Ukrainian civilians and gain more territory. Such a move would not only end
Putin's ability to fund his "special military operation" in Ukraine. It would
send a clear signal to other autocratic regimes like China, as well as terrorist
groups, that the Trump administration will confront acts of aggression, and
never reward them.
China will be among a collection of hostile states, which also includes Iran and
North Korea, that will be taking a close interest in the outcome of the
diplomatic initiative Trump began with Putin following their face-to-face
meeting in Alaska earlier this month, to end the Ukraine conflict.
Terrorist groups, ranging from Hamas in Gaza, to Hezbollah in Lebanon, to the
remnants of Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, will similarly be keeping a
watchful eye on the type of deal that is forthcoming.
This is why it is vital that Washington, rather than making unpalatable
concessions to Moscow such as agreeing to land swaps, should use the ongoing
talks to force through a deal that punishes Russia for attacking Ukraine, rather
than rewarding it.
Prior to the Alaska talks, Trump indicated he was serious about imposing
punitive tariffs against countries, such as China and India, which continue
trading with Russia despite international sanctions. This trade is providing
Russia with a vital economic lifeline to continue financing its war in Ukraine.
To underline his seriousness, Trump added an extra 25 percent tariff against
India shortly before his meeting with Putin. While no final details of a lasting
peace plan to end a conflict that has already lasted for three-and-a-half years
have been forthcoming, worrying indications have already emerged that the Trump
administration is giving serious consideration to a settlement that would
ultimately reward Putin for launching his so-called "special military operation"
to seize control of Ukraine in February 2022.
Trump himself has given a clear indication that some form of land-swap
arrangement will be necessary to persuade both Russia and Ukraine to end
hostilities, and there are concerns that the White House is prepared to grant
Moscow control over some of Ukraine's most strategic and resource-rich regions.
Such a deal would not only represent a complete betrayal of the Ukrainian
people, who have fought heroically to defend their country from Russian
aggression. It would completely undermine the credibility of the Western
alliance to defend its interests in the face of unprovoked acts of aggression in
Europe.
Land swaps would also send a clear signal to other autocratic regimes such as
China, as well as numerous terrorist organisations, that the US has no interest
in confronting acts of military aggression aimed at destabilising the
established global order, which decrees that the borders of all internationally-recognised
states are inviolate. By far the most likely consequence of Trump agreeing to
any sell-out over Ukraine would be to encourage China's Communist rulers to
launch their long-anticipated plan to invade the democratic territory of Taiwan,
a move that runs the risk of provoking a major conflict in the Indo-Pacific.
The important factor that Trump needs to take on board as he weighs up his
options post the Alaska summit is the impact a flawed Ukraine deal will have on
terrorist groups such as Hamas. Long before Trump's meeting with Putin, Hamas's
terrorist leadership had already announced it had no intention of ending the war
in Gaza.
If Trump agrees to a flawed deal with Putin over Ukraine, therefore, it would
simply encourage Hamas and other Islamist groups, such as Hezbollah and Islamic
Jihad, that they have nothing to fear from the Trump administration if they
persist with their long-standing campaign to destroy Israel.
These are not the only important considerations that need to be taken into
account as Trump maintains his diplomatic effort to end the Ukraine conflict.
For all the considerable military effort Russia has invested in trying to
achieve a major breakthrough in Ukraine, this year's Russian summer offensive
has achieved little, with the Ukrainian forces demonstrating once again their
ability to defend themselves against their far larger adversary.
Apart from failing miserably to achieve his objectives in Ukraine, Putin has
also suffered the humiliation of watching his efforts to expand his influence in
the Middle East collapse in ruins. Moscow's attempts to deepen its strategic
partnership with Damascus by backing Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad before his
ouster now lie in ruins after Islamist rebels with close ties to al-Qaeda seized
control of the country at the end of last year, thereby jeopardising the future
of Russia's two key military bases in Tartus and Latakia. Similarly, Putin's
efforts to develop a strategic partnership with Iran lie in tatters after Moscow
failed to come to Tehran's aid during its recent military confrontation with
Israel and the US, which also exposed the inadequacy of Russia's much-vaunted
air-defence systems, which failed to protect Iran's key nuclear sites. Add to
these setbacks the desperate state of the Russian economy, which is under
enormous pressure as a result of international sanctions, and it is clear that
Trump has a very strong hand to play with Putin, who, for all his public
bravado, is desperate for the war in Ukraine to end. If Trump is serious about
establishing his credentials as a peace-maker, then he needs to frame a peace
deal for Ukraine that deters further acts of military aggression, rather than
encouraging them. If Trump really wants to end the war in Ukraine and achieve
lasting peace, then he should consider reviving his threat to impose punitive
sanctions against countries that continue trading with Russia, as well as
providing Ukraine immediately with offensive weapons, rather than just defensive
ones. Every day of delay is simply being used by Putin to kill more Ukrainian
civilians and gain more territory. Such a move would not only end Putin's
ability to fund his "special military operation" in Ukraine. It would send a
clear signal to other autocratic regimes like China, as well as terrorist
groups, that the Trump administration will confront acts of aggression, and
never reward them.
**Con Coughlin is the Telegraph's Defence and Foreign Affairs Editor and a
Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
A Rush to Washington Seems to Have Paid Off for European
Leaders
Neil Mac Farquhar/he New York Times/August 27, 2025
The sudden stampede of European leaders to Washington to buttress Ukraine’s
position in any future peace agreement with Russia seems to have paid off, at
least in the short term, with the talks focused on security guarantees for
Ukraine. President Trump’s effusive welcome in Alaska for Russia’s president,
Vladimir V. Putin, who had been in diplomatic isolation for more than three
years after his full-scale invasion of Ukraine, prompted fears that Mr. Trump
was about forge a peace agreement built around Russian demands. Instead, the
historic presence of President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine and seven senior
European leaders in the White House seems to have forestalled that outcome, not
to mention a repeat of the disastrous meeting in February when Mr. Trump
castigated Mr. Zelensky the Oval Office. Starting with Mr. Zelensky, all the
leaders present seem to have understood that flattering Mr. Trump was the surest
way to avoid derailing talks. So in their opening remarks they underscored the
fact that Mr. Trump had suggested that the United States would play an as yet
unspecified role in security guarantees.
The discussions on Monday focused on that issue and little else, according to
remarks by various leaders after discussions that lasted more than two hours.
“It is important for the United States to send signals that it will help,” Mr.
Zelensky told reporters at a news conference at the White House. “This is a huge
step forward,” he added. “The political will is there.”It would take at least
another 10 days to hammer out the details, he said, declining to be more
specific, but the agreement thus far included a commitment from Ukraine to buy
around $90 billion of American military equipment through its European allies,
he said, including aviation and antimissile systems. Ukraine had presented a
list of weapons, he said, although it was unclear what the final outcome will
be. “We have not found that everything will be granted, but it is just a start,”
he said. In addition, the United States will purchase Ukrainian drones when the
country begins to export them. “This is going to be very important for us,” Mr.
Zelensky said. “It’s going to help to finance our own production.”
During an interview on Fox News, Mark Rutte, the NATO secretary general,
acknowledged that the Trump administration’s commitment to providing security
guarantees for the Ukrainians remained vague. “What it will exactly mean — US
involvement — that will be discussed in the coming days,” Mr. Rutte said,
although he described US involvement as a “breakthrough.”President Emmanuel
Macron of France said that European leaders wanted to assert that Ukraine needed
a strong army. “We’re going to need to help Ukraine with boots on the ground, to
make sure that there is no intrusion from Russia in the future,” Mr. Macron
said. The Europeans had also been concerned about Mr. Trump’s assertion that a
peace treaty could be negotiated without a cease-fire. They were still uneasy
about that idea, Mr. Macron indicated. “President Trump is convinced that he can
come to a peace agreement without a cease-fire, and so we’ll see what happens,
we’ll see how it unfolds,” Mr. Macron said. “But we all told him that we cannot
discuss a peace agreement that takes several days, several weeks, as bombs
continue to be dropped onto Ukraine.”New direct and secondary sanctions remain
on the table if Mr. Putin does not play ball, Mr. Macron said. Mr. Trump had
agreed that stopping the killing was a priority, he said. Security guarantees
had taken up most of the discussion, he said, so the question of territorial
swaps did not come up on Monday. The Europeans had been wary that Washington was
going to hand the Kremlin pieces of Ukraine that it had been unable to win on
the battlefield. Mr. Trump and Mr. Zelensky did have a discussion about that
topic in front of a large map of the battlefield that was on an easel in the
Oval Office, the Ukrainian president said. And although Mr. Zelensky said he did
not fully agree with what the map showed, he did not go into detail. For his
part, Mr. Trump said the next step should be direct talks between Mr. Putin and
Mr. Zelensky, probably just the two leaders first and then with his
participation. Mr. Zelensky said he was prepared for such talks in any format.
In Moscow, however, Yuri Ushakov, a policy aide to Mr. Putin, did not mention
any such participation by the Russian leader in a summary he gave of a phone
call that Mr. Trump made to Mr. Putin in the middle of Monday’s meetings.
The other European leaders at the meeting included Prime Minister Keir Starmer
of Britain, Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni
of Italy, President Alexander Stubb of Finland and Ursula von der Leyen, the
president of the European Commission, the European Union’s executive arm. During
his brief remarks in Alaska last Friday, Mr. Putin said he hoped that the
Europeans would not meddle in any agreements that he had reached with Mr. Trump,
which he did not specify. But the Europeans appeared satisfied that they had
achieved what they came for.
“Unacceptable decisions were not made,” Mr. Zelensky said. “I think that
everyone of us has done the job.”
Libya: UN Envoys and the Vicious Circle of Stalemate
Jumah Boukleb/Asharq Al Awsat/August 27/2025
They come and go, one after another. The empty loops drawn by their steps are
the only trace they leave behind. Some two out of ten envoys have tried and
failed, the Lebanese Ghassan Salameh and the American Stephanie Williams. All of
them were tasked with leading the UN mission in Libya by UN Secretary-General
Antonio Guterres, in the hope that they would crack the wall and achieve a
breakthrough that would help the people of this politically, militarily, and
socially fragmented country that has been plundered from within and without.
Indeed, Libya has become a textbook case; it should be used, at both
universities and political institutes, to illustrate how corrupt political
financing can wreck societies, and how foreign interventions - with their
rivalries and clashes - can shatter a nation that awakens and sleeps over a
wealth of oil. One unique obstacle faced by the UN envoys to Libya is that they
have all been forced to start from square one. The moment an envoy’s term ends,
their name fades into oblivion. The successor steps in only to inevitably be
trapped inside the same vicious circle, and then they run in dizzying circles
until the recall message arrives.
The current envoy, Hanna Tetteh, is circling this same closed loop, though she
doesn’t seem to have been exhausted or discouraged yet. Last Thursday, in New
York, she briefed members of the UN Security Council on a new roadmap. She
claimed her plan would allow for the formation of a new government and
amendments to the electoral law, paving the way for elections. The proposed
government’s sole mission: to unify state institutions and restructure the High
National Elections Commission so that a vote can be held.
However, we have heard this record before. She has not presented anything novel.
Everyone, both inside Libya and abroad, has heard these promises already. The
current government in Tripoli led by Abdul Hamid al-Dbeibah, which was appointed
in Geneva four or five years ago, under the auspices of UN envoy Stephanie
Williams, was, after all, tasked with doing exactly that. Williams had
stipulated that the government should not remain in place for over a year. It
had a single mission to achieve in this time: organize parliamentary and
presidential elections. Nearly five years later, that government has yet to step
aside, elections have yet to be held, and instead of one government, Libya now
has two. The day after Tetteh’s Security Council briefing, Libyan news sites
reported that RPGs had been used to attack the UN mission’s headquarters in the
Janzour suburb, around 15 kilometers west of Tripoli. The rocket missed the
compound, landing in a Libyan family’s house nearby. Later, the Interior
Ministry issued a statement claiming that the car used in the attack had been
found, with only two more rockets and the launcher inside, and that it was
tracking down the perpetrator.That attack was a threat that the armed groups
sent Ms. Tetteh. It is also a grim reminder of the fate that the UN mission and
its staff could meet if they insist on pressing forward with their plan.
Curiously, Tripoli’s government, the Presidential Council, the House of
Representatives, the High Council of State, and the Benghazi-based government
all welcomed Tetteh’s roadmap. The question, though, remains: who will implement
it if the UN mission has neither teeth nor claws to do so?
Last week, the Libyan High National Election Commission organized municipal
council elections. The climate was mixed: elections were successfully held in
some municipalities but banned in others. One polling station was attacked by
armed men who seized ballot papers.
The encouraging news is that, in the municipalities where elections did take
place, the Islamist groups were disappointed by the results. Thus, for the third
time since February 2011, Libyan citizens used their chance to vote to reject
Islamist candidates. In a statement, the UN envoy remarked that the successful
municipal elections left no room for doubt about the Libyan people’s desire to
hold national elections. She is absolutely right. The problem, however, is that
those with power, wealth, and weapons across Libya refuse to allow elections to
proceed. There is nothing they are not willing to do to safeguard their
privileges. The UN envoy cannot persuade them to stop sending militants to
attack the UN compound with RPGs, nor can she convince them to negotiate among
themselves, disarm, and finally save this country from the limbo it has been in
for far too long.
Syrian Citizenship for Foreign Fighters? U.S.
Red Lines and Nuances
Devorah Margolin/The Washington Institute/Aug 27/2025
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/syrian-citizenship-foreign-fighters-us-red-lines-and-nuances
Any proposal for granting citizenship to such fighters must be careful, clear,
and firm in how it addresses various complexities, including international
concerns about external security threats, Syria’s stability, and the post-Assad
accountability process.
Arecent petition submitted to Syria’s interim government is seeking citizenship
for foreign fighters who traveled there to take part in the civil war. While
President Ahmed al-Sharaa hinted at taking this step for some foreign fighters
earlier this year, it is unclear how (or even if) Damascus will answer the
current petition, which many have dismissed given the manner in which it was
raised (via social media) and the person who initiated it (Bilal Abdul Kareem, a
U.S. citizen who is not associated with the factions that lead post-Assad
Syria).
Whatever the veracity of the current proposal, it comes in the wake of
months-long bilateral discussions on this exact issue. In March, the Trump
administration gave the new government eight conditions for partial sanctions
relief, including a demand that foreign fighters not be installed in senior
roles. Damascus responded that this issue “requires a broader consultative
session.” In May, the administration updated its conditions, urging Sharaa to
“tell all foreign terrorists to leave.” In June, however, U.S. envoy Tom Barrack
hinted at a U.S. “understanding” that incorporating some foreign fighters into
the Syrian army would be okay if done transparently. Meanwhile, the
administration quickly suspended most U.S. sanctions against Syria, signaling
(perhaps inadvertently) that its conditions had been sufficiently met.
Why did the administration seemingly move from explicit prohibitions to tacit
concessions on this complex issue in a matter of weeks? And should certain red
lines really be crossed given the fragility of Syria’s transition and the
well-documented role that foreign fighters have played in past human rights
abuses and recent intercommunal massacres?
Differentiating Between Foreign Fighters
Broadly speaking, the foreign fighters who remain in Syria can be categorized in
three large groups:
Those associated with the terrorist-designated Islamic State (IS).
Those associated with the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), a Kurdish group that is
based primarily in Turkey but also operates in Syria, Iraq, and Iran. It is
designated as a terrorist entity by the United States and others.
Those associated with former Syrian opposition forces, including Sharaa’s
formally defunct group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which was removed from the
U.S. list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations last month but remains designated
by the UN.
The first category primarily consists of thousands of IS fighters and affiliated
individuals held in northeastern detention facilities by the Kurdish-led Syrian
Democratic Forces (SDF). Both the Syrian government and much of the public
disapprove of these fighters, blaming them for worsening the war and bringing
more death and destruction to Syria. The U.S.-led coalition has repeatedly
encouraged—though, importantly, not required—other countries to repatriate their
IS-affiliated citizens. Yet this process has been slowed by the SDF’s nonstate
status and the fact that many foreign governments have strong political, legal,
and security concerns about voluntarily repatriating such individuals.
To be sure, none of these northeastern detainees would likely benefit from a
decision to grant citizenship to foreign fighters. The same goes for the
thousands of active IS fighters who remain at large and continue to operate
against the new government, just as they did against both HTS and the Assad
regime during the war. Yet some IS-affiliated individuals were freed from regime
prisons after Assad’s fall and may seek to exploit any new citizenship laws,
whether for their own benefit or in aid of active fighters.
The second category of foreign fighters comprises those associated with the PKK,
which includes mostly non-Syrian Kurds based in the northeastern areas
controlled by the SDF. Turkey contends that the PKK’s presence in Syria is a
threat and has launched several incursions into the northeast over the years.
Here, too, none of the fighters in this category are likely to be included in
any new citizenship laws. Given the PKK’s history and Turkey’s influence on
Damascus, many Syrians view the status of these fighters as a Turkey-PKK issue
and oppose granting them citizenship. In an effort to differentiate between his
forces and the PKK, SDF leader Gen. Mazloum Abdi has previously stated that PKK
foreign fighters would leave Syria under the right conditions. In short, the
status of these fighters, while highly contentious, will likely be resolved
through discussions between the SDF and Damascus.
That leaves members of the third category as the most likely to benefit from a
future citizenship law. Given their participation in the offensive that toppled
the regime and their association with former opposition forces like HTS, these
foreign fighters enjoyed broad support across Syria in the early days of the
post-Assad transition. Moreover, the country’s interim leaders have contended
that these fighters are very loyal to the new government, and that keeping them
within the state system would be safer than abandoning them. Yet complications
abound:
In some cases, foreign fighters aligned with Sharaa’s government have taken part
in the growing wave of intercommunal violence that Damascus is struggling to
contain, spurring the public to question their role in the country’s future.
Many of these fighters were once associated with terrorist groups like IS and
al-Qaeda (though they are now helping Damascus fight such groups).
For some foreign fighters, international law would not support them being
forcibly returned to their countries of origin due to human rights concerns
(e.g., Uyghur fighters would face death sentences if they went back to China).
Despite HTS formally disbanding and the United States asking others to delist
the group, it is still on the UN terrorist list, which could complicate matters
for Syria in the international arena.
Policy Recommendations
Implementing any citizenship proposal related to foreign fighters raises big
questions for both U.S. policy and the future stability of Syria. Washington and
Damascus should therefore be crystal clear on the red lines and plans for this
process.
First, they should continue taking steps to reaffirm their shared view that
granting citizenship to IS-affiliated individuals is a nonstarter. Both
governments are actively working to counter IS, with Damascus using actionable
U.S. intelligence to fight the group’s persistent insurgency. The Trump
administration should not only continue this cooperation, but also support
ongoing discussions between Damascus and the SDF regarding eventual
responsibility for the detention facilities. Yet Washington should not rush this
process given its significant security concerns, its years-long training and
equipping of the SDF for this mission, and the lack of sufficient assurances
that Damascus has the will, capabilities, and resources to fully assume this
mission at present. The administration should also keep pressing other countries
to repatriate these individuals, reminding them that once the Syrian government
moves past its interim status, it could use its authority to unilaterally deport
such detainees, removing the option of conveniently deferring the repatriation
issue.
Second, U.S. officials should press Syrian and SDF officials to come to the
table for intensive discussions on the fate of non-Syrian Kurdish fighters in
the northeast. With negotiations seemingly stalled since March, Washington
should remind both parties that continued U.S. support rests on them working
toward national stability. Removing foreign fighters associated with the PKK
would not only alleviate Turkey’s main concern, but also help lift some of the
barriers to reconciliation between Damascus and the SDF. This in turn could
serve the Trump administration’s broader goal of lightening the U.S. footprint
in the Middle East, a key prerequisite of which is stabilizing Syria’s northern
and eastern frontiers.
Third, Washington and its partners need to carefully engage with Damascus on the
topic of granting citizenship to foreign fighters associated with former
opposition forces, since this could have numerous implications for Syria
domestically and internationally. President Sharaa appears ready to take on the
responsibility for these individuals, but the United States will need specific,
serious assurances on this front before supporting such a measure. This includes
candid conversations about the following:
Barring foreign fighters from leadership and decisionmaking roles in the
security services. Given the background of these fighters, the U.S. government
needs to clarify its red line: namely, it is unacceptable for such individuals
to hold the types of security roles that would compromise U.S. support and
intelligence-sharing efforts.
Accounting for the potential impact on Syrian recovery and accountability. As
noted above, some of the fighters in question have been implicated in recent
massacres and other abuses, so it is unclear how various segments of the public
would react to granting them citizenship, let alone roles in the security
forces. Either move could potentially impede recovery and stabilization efforts.
Moreover, the notion of providing government jobs and services to non-Syrians
may prove divisive, since inclusivity, accountability, and limited domestic
resources are currently dominating the national discourse.
Providing international security guarantees. Even if Damascus bars naturalized
foreign fighters from certain security services and roles, it would still need
to spell out what steps it will take, such as continued monitoring, to ensure
that these former fighters do not pose a threat beyond Syria’s borders.
Addressing diplomatic concerns. Some foreign governments may be relieved if they
no longer have to deal with the question of what to do about nationals who went
off to join the Syrian jihad. Others, however, will have political or security
concerns about Damascus unilaterally granting citizenship to such individuals,
and they may alter their future diplomatic engagement with Syria accordingly.
For example, Lebanon recently objected after discovering that Syria’s new head
of security for the western border province of Homs is a former Lebanese army
officer—a revelation that exacerbated growing bilateral distrust over various
issues on their shared frontier. As Syria works to reenter the international
community, Washington should encourage it to clearly articulate any
naturalization effort for such fighters.
In sum, as Damascus weighs the possibility of granting citizenship to certain
foreign fighters, the United States must clarify its red lines, emphasize the
implications that such a decision would have for Syria domestically and
internationally, and reinforce the need for a clearly communicated and
transparent process.
*Devorah Margolin is the Blumenstein-Rosenbloom Senior Fellow at The Washington
Institute and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University.
Spy Versus Spy: Iran’s Playbook for Espionage in Israel
Sarah Boches & Matthew Levitt/The Washington Institute/Aug
27/2025
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/spy-versus-spy-irans-playbook-espionage-israel
Tehran’s recruitment of Israelis for military surveillance, sabotage,
assassination plots, and other operations is on the rise, showing how the shadow
war between the two adversaries continues to evolve even after their recent hot
war.
Israel’s intelligence penetration of Iran played out in dramatic form over the
course of the 12-day war this summer, but Iran is running an aggressive
recruitment and spying operation of its own targeting Israel. And while the two
espionage campaigns are not comparable in scale, scope, or success, Israel’s
domestic security agency was sufficiently concerned that in the wake of the war
it partnered with the country’s national public diplomacy directorate to launch
a media campaign warning Israelis against spying for Iran.
Over the course of the war, Israeli intelligence treated Iran like its backyard
playground, recruiting sources, both Iranian citizens and citizens of
neighboring countries, and inserting its operatives to gather intelligence on
the country’s most secret nuclear facilities, scientists, and officials. These
efforts enabled covert operations, including the construction of remotely
controlled missile and drone systems inside central Iran, that struck Iranian
targets from within at the very outset of the 12-day war. Iranians recruited by
Israel even helped smuggle “technologically modified vehicles” into the country,
which were used to target Iranian air defense positions and clear a path for
Israeli aircraft entering Iranian airspace.
In the weeks since the war ended, Iranian officials have carried out a domestic
witch hunt, arresting thousands of individuals in their search for people who
spied for Israel. Iran even executed one of its own nuclear scientists, alleging
he spied for Israel. Now, Iran aims to turn the tables on Israel by increasing
its own network of people in Israel recruited to spy for Iran. It is now clear,
however, that at the same time Israeli intelligence was recruiting sources and
operatives in Iran, Iran was doing the same in Israel, just to a much smaller
effect. While Iranian efforts to infiltrate and surveil targets in Israel date
back to at least 2013, Israeli intelligence organizations have documented a
significant surge in Iranian efforts to recruit both Israeli and non-Israeli
citizens to spy for Iran, beginning in early 2020. Unlike Israel’s penetration
of key Iranian intelligence and nuclear agencies, Iranian espionage in Israel
remains at the edges, probing at the margins in its attempts to penetrate
Israeli intelligence and society. These typically involve digital recruitment
targeting Israelis in financial straits.
At first, Iran only tasked its recruits to collect basic information on the
location of Israeli military bases and Israeli leaders, and to post
anti-government signs and graffiti in public places to brew domestic dissent.
Indeed, in the days before the 12-day war, Iranian officials boasted that the
regime’s spy networks in Israel acquired sensitive documents about Israel’s
nuclear program. Iran’s minister of intelligence, Esmail Khatib, said that
“complete nuclear files were obtained, along with documents related to
[Israel’s] connections with the U.S., Europe, and other countries, as well as
intelligence that strengthens Iran’s offensive capabilities.”But starting in
mid-2024—between the Iranian missile and drone attack on Israel in April and the
ballistic missile attack in October—the Iranians started tasking recruits to
carry out not only acts of espionage but also arson and even murder plots
targeting Israeli scientists, journalists, security and military leaders, and
senior politicians. Israeli officials described the spike in the number of plots
as “unprecedented.” Israel Police Superintendent Maor Goren said, “If we go
check the last years—the last decades—we can count on two hands how many people
got arrested for this.”
While none of the murder plots came to fruition, Israeli authorities report that
several came very close to being carried out and were thwarted at the last
minute. And unlike pure espionage cases, which often take time to develop, some
of the murder plots were being planned as soon as 9 days after initial
recruitment. In other cases, Israeli authorities only discovered a cell of
persons of Azeri descent who had been carrying out espionage operations as a
team, some two years after they started spying on Israel. They were spotted when
they moved from spying on military sites to conducting surveillance of a senior
Israeli military figure they were told to kill. The Washington Institute’s
Iranian External Operations Map, which tracks Iranian plots abroad, has
documented at least 31 plots carried out by Iranian-recruited Israelis in
Israel. These recruits have sprayed graffiti and lit fires across Israel, in
addition to collecting basic information on military bases, government
officials, and nuclear scientists to send back to their handlers in Iran.
However, Iranian efforts to recruit Israeli spies have not led to a single
successful assassination or targeted attack in Israel. Iran conducts its
recruitment primarily online via Telegram, WhatsApp, and social media platforms,
although there are a few instances of Iranian handlers approaching potential
recruits in person while abroad. Recruitment efforts appear to rely heavily on
financial incentives while also exploiting existing social cleavages. Out of the
31 cases carried out by Israeli perpetrators documented by The Washington
Institute, 20 involved some type of monetary compensation, usually via
cryptocurrency. While the Israeli perpetrators in 25 out of the 31 cases knew,
or at least suspected, that they were working on behalf of the Iranians, many
rationalized their actions as falling short of full-blown espionage. The tasks
assigned to these individuals varied widely. Some were given relatively harmless
assignments, such as tagging graffiti or putting up posters, while others
appeared to be amateurish or unskilled in their roles. However, not all the
recruits were unsophisticated. Several engaged in more serious activities,
including intelligence collection and attempts to recruit others—sometimes even
targeting their own family members to expand the network.
Consider the case of father and son Bassem and Tahrir Safadi, residents of the
Druze village of Mas’ade, who were arrested for spying on behalf of the Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force. At the request of his father, Tahrir would
allegedly collect information on IDF movements in the Golan Heights and report
to Hussam as-Salam Tawfiq Zidan, a journalist at Al-Alam News Network, an
Iranian state-owned news outlet. Zidan, who lived in Damascus and worked for the
Palestine division of the Quds Force, is accused of requesting Bassem and Tahrir
to take photos of troops, tank movements, equipment, and more. One of the most
serious plots Israel thwarted is the 2024 assassination plot against Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and former
Shin Bet Director Ronen Bar. Moti Maman, a businessman with connections to
Turkey and Iran, allegedly travelled to Turkey and Iran twice to meet with
Iranian intelligence officials to further the plots against Netanyahu, Gallant,
and Bar. Maman was also allegedly directed to intimidate Israeli civilians
working for Iran who had failed to complete their missions, to find Russians or
Americans who could be tasked with assassinating Iranian dissidents in the
United States and Europe, and to attempt to recruit a Mossad officer to act as a
double agent. Before leaving Iran for the second time, Maman received 5,000
euros from the Iranian intelligence agents for attending the meetings. According
to the Shin Bet, Iranian officials viewed the assassination plots as acts of
revenge for the killing of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh.
In total, The Washington Institute has documented 39 known Iranian plots in
Israel from 2013-2025, 31 of which involved Israeli nationals; the rest involved
Palestinians or other non-Israeli citizens. Several of these plots had multiple
perpetrators, bringing the total number of Israeli participants in those 31
cases to more than 45 individuals. According to the National Public Diplomacy
Directorate, indictments have been filed against 35 Israeli citizens involved in
these cases. The age of the perpetrators ranges from 13 to 73, with over half in
their teens or twenties. The individuals recruited came from a range of
backgrounds, such as Azerbaijani or the Caucasus region, and the targets of
their espionage efforts included both security infrastructure and broader social
vulnerabilities, including the Iron Dome, government officials, Muhane Yehuda
market, IDF bases, nuclear scientists and facilities, and malls and hospitals.
The wide breadth of targets illustrates how Iranian intelligence sought to
exploit financial, ideological, and personal incentives to build influence
inside Israel.
Iranian Minister of Intelligence Esmail Khatib described Iranian espionage and
sabotage plots in Israel as a key part of Iran’s broader war against Israel.
“The Zionist regime must confront a strategy of internal aggression within
itself,” he said a month after the 12-day war concluded, “and just as our armed
forces’ effective missiles compelled them to halt [the war], all intelligence
and security agencies are also exerting effort, and in recent days, you have
seen they were forced to conduct briefing sessions to counter the infiltration
of intelligence services within the Zionist regime.”
In response to Iranian recruitment efforts in Israel, the Shin Bet, in
partnership with the National Public Diplomacy Directorate, launched a
nationwide public-awareness campaign titled “Easy Money, Heavy Price,” to warn
Israelis against spying for Iran. Running across radio, online platforms, and
social media, the campaign warns that even modest payments from Iran, roughly
$1,500, can result in severe consequences. The ads note that some who accepted
money from Iran are now in prison, and that assisting Tehran can carry penalties
of up to 15 years in jail.
Still, it’s important to contextualize these plots. None came close to matching
the level of operational complexity, strategic impact, or tradecraft displayed
by Israel in its operations against Hezbollah or Iran. While Israel slowly vets
and trains its potential recruits, the Iranians engage in shotgun recruitment
online, with few recruits going to meet their handlers in places like Turkey or
for training in Iran. The two sides are operating on completely different levels
of intelligence capability and sophistication. Nevertheless, the Israeli
authorities have treated these cases with appropriate seriousness, underscoring
the potential long-term threat posed by Iran. “The war has not ended. We are in
a state of temporary pause,” the head of the IRGC’s intelligence organization,
Brigadier General Majid Khademi, warned last week. Iranian Intelligence Minister
Khatib made his plans clear, calling for an “aggressive internal strategy”
against Israel so that Israeli security agencies are forced to “confront a
strategy of internal aggression” by Iranian agents within Israeli territory.
Alongside Israel’s demonstrated ability to penetrate Iran, the country’s
security agencies now believe they will have to step up their game to counter
Iranian spying in Israel. The public media campaign is surely just the beginning
of a broader counter-espionage effort. What they have seen in the past year,
Israeli officials maintain, represents a far greater espionage threat than
anything they have seen before.
*Sarah Boches is a research assistant in The Washington Institute’s Reinhard
Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence and maintains its Iranian External
Operations Map. Matthew Levitt is the Institute’s Fromer-Wexler Senior Fellow
and director of the Reinhard Program. This article was originally published on
the Cipher Brief website.
With No Easy Fixes for Middle East Studies, It’s Time for
New Programs
Robert Satloff/The Washington Institute/Aug 27/2025
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/spy-versus-spy-irans-playbook-espionage-israel
Existing programs are plagued by a broken tenure system, suspect foreign donors,
Hamas apologists, and other ailments, but new programs at up-and-coming
universities can help the field return to practical, non-ideological scholarship
and respect for civil discourse.
As an undergraduate at Duke University over 40 years ago, I took advantage of a
major that no longer exists—Comparative Area Studies—to focus on history,
religion, and politics in the Middle East and South Asia. In essence, I created
my own personal course of study in “Arab and Islamic Studies.” My class on U.S.
Middle East policy was taught by a smart, practical, problem-solving army
veteran who had served on the State Department Policy Planning Staff and in its
Bureau of Intelligence and Research. My year-long seminar on Mughal history was
taught by a brilliant, self-effacing scholar after whom the American Historical
Association later named an annual prize in South Asian history. My first Arabic
instructor regrettably became a vocal BDS advocate, but that was many years
after I left Durham; when I was there, she kept politics out of the classroom.
My collegiate years coincided with a tumultuous period in America’s engagement
in the Middle East. This included the Iranian revolution and the ensuing hostage
crisis that gripped the nation as well as the immediate post-Camp David era,
when Israel’s Menachem Begin butted heads with both a Democratic and a
Republican president. But despite a heated political context, my education was
undisturbed by the region’s turmoil. I may have suffered through the worst two
seasons of Mike Krzyzewski’s coaching career, but no one on campus blamed either
the Zionist entity or a murky Jewish conspiracy for the Blue Devils’ going a
combined 21-34 my junior and senior years.
Forty years after my graduation, Duke got fairly high marks for navigating the
post-October 7 campus upheaval, but many peer schools failed, some abysmally so.
Here, I am not just talking about the ugly violence and uglier anti-Semitism
that rocked schools from UCLA to Columbia. I am talking about the debasement of
the classroom itself at numerous supposedly elite universities.
Take, for example, the consortium of Middle East programs at major universities
that actively participates in a wildly tendentious series of online “teach-ins”
and podcasts called “Gaza in Context,” under the auspices of an organization
called the Arab Studies Institute, which lists its headquarters as Beirut and
Washington. On its Jadaliyya e-zine website, one can find listings of more than
a hundred events since October 7, 2023, featuring a who’s who of Hamas
apologists, BDS activists, and anti-Zionist conspiracists, under titles in which
“genocide,” “settler-colonialism,” and “liberation” compete to be the most
common word. And, scandalously, even today (August 15)—after all the hubbub over
the Trump administration’s crackdown on higher education—the list of
“co-organizers” still includes Harvard’s Center for Middle Eastern Studies,
Columbia’s Center for Palestine Studies, Brown University’s Center for Middle
East Studies, Georgetown’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, George Mason
University’s Middle East and Islamic Studies Program, and both University of
Chicago’s Center for Contemporary Theory and its Center for Middle Eastern
Studies, among others. (Thankfully, Duke was not on this list.)
In my view, Middle Eastern-studies programs at these and many other schools are
broken, beyond repair in any reasonable timeframe. That is because the core
problem is not the university administration, though presidents, provosts, and
deans are responsible for the drift that allowed this corruption of scholarship
to occur, sometimes by the greedy courting of foreign donors with political
agendas. Neither is the core problem the radicalism of the student body, though
individual students are certainly responsible for some of the most outrageous
post-October 7 acts of intimidation and violence.
Rather, the core problem is the tenure and appointments system that, at many
schools, has allowed an increasingly extremist professoriate to perpetuate
itself, one generation after the next, through control of doctoral programs,
post-doctoral fellowships, instructor hiring, and eventual faculty promotion.
Even if universities adopted a policy of radical disruption to the tenure system
today, the current generation of tenured professors would have to retire before
there is even a chance to fix what’s wrong. And there is no prospect of radical
disruption on the horizon.
All, however, is not lost. In a country famous for both re-invention and
competition, one solution is to provide our students with alternatives—new
programs committed to the values that the old programs used to celebrate,
including non-ideological scholarship, a respect for civil discourse, and a
commitment to diversity of opinions. Up-and-coming universities with ambitions
to break into the academic “big leagues” are ready to compete. Frustrated
donors, angry that their generous gifts to Middle East- or Israel-studies
programs were channeled into funding chairs for rabid Israel-haters or Muslim
Brotherhood sympathizers, are primed for new projects. Outstanding instructors,
often with policy or military experience that isn’t respected in many faculty
lounges, are waiting to be recruited. And smart, savvy students, who know when
their (or their families’) tuition dollars are being wasted, are poised to take
a chance on programs that make up in content for what they lack in prestige.
In full partnership with Pepperdine University’s School of Public Policy, The
Washington Institute for Near East Policy—the organization I direct—took a leap
of faith and created just such a program, offering a fully accredited master’s
degree in what we call “Middle East Policy Studies.” Classes begin today, with
an impressive inaugural cohort of about 25 students. Our offer of full-tuition
scholarships certainly got these students’ attention, but I believe the prospect
of a different type of education—one infused with the values difficult to find
today at established Middle East programs—is what closed the deal.
Ours is not the only possible model; nor, I hope, will ours be the only success
of its type. With a mix of vision, grit, and persistence, the next decade could
see numerous new initiatives take root. It is only natural that some will thrive
and some won’t even survive, and along the way, the established schools will
take notice. In the end, this process of re-invention cannot but be beneficial
for the future of Middle Eastern studies in America.
*Robert Satloff is The Washington Institute’s Segal Executive Director and
Howard P. Berkowitz Chair in U.S. Middle East Policy. This article was
originally published on the Tikvah website.