English LCCC Newsbulletin For
Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For December 09/2025
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2025/english.december09.25.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
Among those who are born of women there has
not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptizer; yet he who is least in the
Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he
Matthew 11/11-15: Most certainly I tell you, among those who are born of women
there has not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptizer; yet he who is least
in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he. From the days of John the Baptizer
until now, the Kingdom of Heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by
force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. If you are
willing to receive it, this is Elijah, who is to come. He who has ears to hear,
let him hear.
Titles For The
Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on
December 08-09/2025
Ecclesiastical Study on the Life of Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker/Elias
Bejjani/December 06/ 2025
Washington steps up engagement as Israel warns of emerging ‘eastern front’
Preparations underway in Paris: International conference to support Lebanese
Army expected in January
Lebanese army doubles down on diplomatic push with new South Lebanon tour
Israeli military says it struck Hezbollah sites in southern Lebanon
As tensions flare on Israel-Lebanon border, war-torn communities struggle to
rebuild
Report: Netanyahu tells US he'll avoid strikes similar to Thursday's
Le Drian conveys French support, reviews preparations for army support
conference
Lebanon president defends army south of Litani, supports French involvement in
mechanism
Will Aoun visit the White House soon?
Report: US presses Israel to give Mechanism a chance
Aoun says only negotiations have chance to achieve goals
Al-Rahi lauds Aoun, says negotiations better than war
Issa says army chief's visit to Washington will likely happen
Report: Berri asks Khamenei for fatwa on handover of precision missiles and
drones
Khalil to Geagea: Speaker's powers are 'constitutional'
Berri-Jumblat bromance: Friends, allies and refusers of 'under fire negotations'
UNIFIL chief says has 'no evidence' of Hezbollah rebuilding in south Lebanon
Digital transformation: US Ambassador highlights confidence in Lebanon as Oracle
deal takes off
Digital transformation: US Ambassador highlights confidence in Lebanon as Oracle
deal takes off
The Compelling Challenge of Israel’s Diplomatic Opening to Lebanon/Dr. Charles
Chartouni/This Is Beirut/December 08/2025
Lebanon Is a Country for Guests, Not Its Own People/Sam Menassa/Asharq Al Awsat/December
08/2025
Lebanon and Israel’s Negotiations Within the Framework of The ‘Mechanism’… What
Does It Mean?/Dr. Nassif Hitti/Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous
Reports And News published
on
December 08-09/2025
Netanyahu will Meet Trump on Gaza on December 29, Spokesperson Says
Iran Opens Trial of Dual National Accused of Spying for Israel
A Second Flight of Iranian Deportees, Carrying 55, Has Left the US, Iran Says
GCC Secretary-General Condemns Iranian Officials' Statements on Member States'
Sovereignty
Iran's Currency Sinks to a New Record Low
Four Iranian Narratives on the Collapse of the ‘Resistance’ in Syria
A Year After Assad’s Fall, Families of Missing Detainees Languish without
Answers
Syria’s Sharaa Calls for United Efforts to Rebuild a Year After Assad’s Ouster
Netanyahu says Israel and Hamas will enter ceasefire's second phase soon
Netanyahu will Meet Trump on Gaza on December 29, Spokesperson Says
Iraq Shuts Down Lukoil West Qurna 2 Field Due to Leak
Zelenskyy Meets in London with European Allies on US Peace Plan and Security
Kuwait Revokes Citizenship of Tareq Al Suwaidan
Jordan’s king stresses need to preserve Christian presence in Middle East
Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous
sources published
on
December 08-09/2025
A good nuclear
deal won’t put Saudi Arabia on a path for the bomb/Peter Doran and Andrea
Stricker/The Hill/December 08/2025
Lettre ouverte à son Excellence le Président Joseph Aoun./Francois Bainy/December
08/2025
A good nuclear deal won’t put Saudi Arabia on a path for the bomb/Peter Doran
and Andrea Stricker/The Hill/December 08/2025
Why Mohamed bin Zayed — and Donald Trump — Represent a New Architecture for
Peace/Robert Williams/Gatestone Institute/December 8, 2025
Bashar Assad’s Odd Decisions/Abdulrahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Al Awsat/December
08/2025
The Latest English LCCC
Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published
on
December 08-09/2025
Ecclesiastical Study on the Life of Saint Nicholas
the Wonderworker
Elias Bejjani/December 06/ 2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/12/149941/
Today, December 6, the Church celebrates the annual feast of Saint Nicholas the
Wonderworker. Who is he, and what is the story of his ecclesiastical and
spiritual life?
First: Who Is Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker?
Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker (St. Nicholas of Myra) is one of the most
renowned saints in both Eastern and Western Churches, and among the most
prominent figures in global Christian consciousness. He was known for holiness,
generosity, miracles, and his defense of the true faith. His title “the
Wonderworker” comes from the many miracles attributed to him during his life and
after his repose. He is the patron saint of sailors, merchants, children, and
captives. His life entered Western Christian tradition as well, and he
eventually became the inspiration for the figure of “Santa Claus.”
Second: His Original Name, Family, and Homeland
Name: Nicholas (Νικόλαος in Greek), meaning “victory of the people” or “he who
triumphs for the people.”
Origin and Family: He came from a devout Christian Greek family.
Homeland: He was born in the city of Patara in the region of Lycia in southern
Anatolia (modern-day Turkey), an important early Christian center.
Third: His Birth and Historical Context
He was born between 260–270 AD in Patara, during the period of pagan
persecutions against Christians.
He grew up in a wealthy yet pious household, and his parents dedicated their
wealth to serving the poor.
Fourth: His Ecclesiastical Life and Ministry
From a young age, he was inclined toward piety and asceticism. After the death
of his parents, he secretly distributed much of his inheritance to the needy.
His uncle, the Bishop of Patara, ordained him a deacon and later a priest. After
the death of the Bishop of Myra, the clergy and faithful chose Nicholas as their
bishop—thus becoming Nicholas of Myra the Wonderworker. He became known for wise
leadership, reforming corrupt clergy, and safeguarding the orthodox teachings of
the faith.
Fifth: His Faith and Christian Formation
Saint Nicholas was raised in a devout Christian environment. From childhood, he
was called “the holy boy” for his commitment to prayer, fasting, and helping the
poor. He participated in the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, where he
defended the divinity of Christ against the teachings of Arius. Tradition
recounts that he even struck Arius in defense of the true doctrine.
Sixth: His Works and Miracles
Many miracles and acts of mercy are attributed to Saint Nicholas, including:
Saving three impoverished young women from a life of immorality by secretly
providing their dowries, Calming a storm at sea and rescuing sailors—thus known
as “Patron of Sailors,” Healing the sick and raising the dead, according to
ecclesiastical tradition, Saving three soldiers from execution by proving their
innocence, Miraculously providing grain to feed the people of Myra during a
famine, Casting out demons from those afflicted by evil. For these reasons, he
is called “the Wonderworker” in Eastern Churches.
Seventh: His Personal and Spiritual Qualities
Saint Nicholas was loved by the faithful for his: Mercy and generous charity,
especially in secret giving, Zeal for the true faith and uncompromising defense
of orthodoxy, Humility and asceticism despite being born into wealth, Spiritual
courage in confronting unjust rulers, Wisdom in shepherding his flock andTender
love for children—an image that remains alive today.
Eighth: His Death—Was He Martyred?
Although he endured imprisonment and torture during Emperor Diocletian’s
persecution (303–311 AD), Saint Nicholas was not martyred.
He died a natural death in 343 AD in the city of Myra.
He was buried in his church, which became a shrine known for healing and
miracles.
In 1087, his relics were transferred to Bari, Italy, where they remain today.
Thus, he is not a martyr, but a confessor of the faith for enduring suffering
for Christ.
Ninth: Was He Clergy, Civil, or Military?
Saint Nicholas was entirely a man of the Church: Deacon, Priest, Bishop of
Myra. He held no civil or military roles.
Tenth: Lebanese Traditions Celebrated on His Feast (December 6)
Lebanese Christians maintain ancient customs associated with Saint Nicholas:
Special liturgies in Maronite, Greek Catholic, and Greek Orthodox churches,
Distribution of sweets to children in memory of his generosity, Family visits,
reconciliation, and acts of kindness, Lighting candles for the sick and seeking
his intercession, Maritime rituals in some coastal villages, as he is the patron
of sailors, and Large celebrations and extended liturgies in Sidon, where he is
the patron saint of the city
Eleventh: Churches Named After Him in Lebanon
Lebanon has many churches and monasteries dedicated to Saint Nicholas,
including:
*In Beirut: St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Cathedral – Achrafieh, St. Nicholas
Greek Catholic Church – Msaytbeh
*In Mount Lebanon: St. Nicholas – Antelias, St. Nicholas Monastery –
Ballouneh,St. Nicholas – Dekwaneh,St. Nicholas – Shweir, St. Nicholas – Aley
*In the North: St. Nicholas – Tripoli, St. Nicholas – Kousba, St. Nicholas –
Ehden,St. Nicholas – Tannourine.
*In the South: St. Nicholas Cathedral – Sidon, St. Nicholas – Jezzine, St.
Nicholas – Maghdousheh.
*In the Bekaa: St. Nicholas – Rachaya, St. Nicholas – Zahle.
The list is long, as Saint Nicholas is among the most widely venerated saints in
Lebanon.
A Prayer for Occupied Lebanon on the Feast of Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker
O Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, merciful and zealous bishop, lover of the
poor, defender of the oppressed, patron of sailors, travelers, and children—
look upon Lebanon today, this wounded nation torn by wars and occupations,
devoured by the forces of darkness and corruption. We beseech you on your holy
feast to lift your intercession to the Lord Jesus, granting this nation
salvation and peace, restoring to its people freedom and dignity, and protecting
us from injustice, from unlawful weapons, and from every hand that steals the
future of our children.
O Saint Nicholas, shine your grace upon the land of the Cedars, strengthen the
Maronite Church and all churches, and protect the sons and daughters of Lebanon
scattered across the world. Let your feast be a herald of new hope for a
homeland whose resurrection we await.
Amen.
**Note: Some churches celebrate the feast of Saint Nicholas on December 19,
while the Maronite Church and many others celebrate it on December 6 each year.
**The information in this study is cited from various documented ecclesiastical,
theological, research, and media references.
*The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
Author’s Email: Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website: https://eliasbejjaninews.com
Washington steps up engagement as Israel warns of
emerging ‘eastern front’
LBCI/December 08/2025
From the northern border, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Michael Waltz is
set to receive a briefing on the situation involving Lebanon as part of his
Middle East tour, which includes stops in Jordan and Israel, where he is
spending four days.
Waltz opened the first day of his talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu, outlining Washington’s vision for Gaza, Syria, and Lebanon and
discussing ways to prevent escalation on those fronts. Israel’s Ambassador to
the United Nations, Danny Danon, said the Lebanon file was the primary focus of
Waltz’s discussions in Israel. Regarding Syria and the possibility of reaching a
security agreement, that prospect appears increasingly distant, especially after
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa rejected the continued presence of Israeli
forces on Mount Hermon and their control of a security zone in the south.
Israeli officials have also expressed concern over the arrival of Turkish forces
in northern Syria and the growing calls for coordination with Washington on the
issue. Amid reports that the Israeli army intercepted communications from U.S.
forces stationed at the American base in Kiryat Gat, Waltz was informed that
Israel has begun building a security barrier stretching 500 kilometers from the
Golan Heights to northern Eilat, along what is known as the eastern border
between Israel and Jordan.
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said the barrier and its related
installations are intended to curb weapons smuggling and counter attempts by
Iran and its proxies to establish an eastern front against Israel.
Preparations underway in Paris: International conference to
support Lebanese Army expected in January
LBCI/December 08/2025
French and American sources have indicated that the international conference to
support the Lebanese Army is expected to take place in January, though a final
date has not yet been set. While Paris is the likely host, French officials told
LBCI that France initially preferred holding the conference this month but did
not object to postponing it for a few weeks to ensure its success. In the
lead-up to the conference, an important preparatory meeting is scheduled next
week in Paris, bringing together U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus, Saudi Arabia's
Prince Yazid bin Farhan, and France's Anne-Claire Legendre. According to French
expectations, the Lebanese Army Commander, General Rodolph Haykal, is also set
to participate. Lebanese sources said officials in Beirut were informed directly
by Ortagus that the conference will be held during the first month of 2026. The
sources added that two key factors lie behind the timing: the appointment of
Simon Karam as head of Lebanon's negotiating delegation in Naqoura, and growing
U.S., French, and international confidence that the Lebanese Army is precisely
implementing its plan to restrict Hezbollah's weapons south and north of the
Litani River. The army has been presenting detailed reports to the mechanism,
the government, and the media, with the final report on the area south of the
Litani expected in the first week of the new year.
Lebanese army doubles down on diplomatic push with new
South Lebanon tour
LBCI/December 08/2025
The field tour organized by the Lebanese army for Western and local media south
of the Litani River left a positive impression on foreign embassies in Lebanon.
As a result, the army issued a new invitation to all accredited military
attachés and any interested ambassadors for another tour next week. The visit,
which will be held away from the media, will detail the army’s procedures and
responsibilities from south of the Litani River to the rest of Lebanon. It was
initially scheduled for December 8 but was postponed due to weather conditions.
The significance of the new tour lies in its role in explaining the army’s
efforts to contain Hezbollah’s weapons and in strengthening its position as it
seeks support to extend its authority across all Lebanese territory. President
Joseph Aoun repeated this request during his meeting with the visiting U.N.
Security Council ambassadors. Morgan Ortagus said work is underway to organize a
conference sponsored by the United States, France, and Saudi Arabia that could
be held in mid-January. It would be preceded by a meeting in Paris on December
18, attended by representatives from the United States, France, Saudi Arabia,
and the Lebanese army, along with the possibility of additional diplomatic
participation. The timing of this meeting is notable, as is that of the second
session of the ceasefire monitoring mechanism, scheduled for December 19, which
will include civilian participants. According to Western sources, the meeting
will be limited to U.S., Lebanese, and Israeli envoys, despite earlier reports
of French interest in participating.
Israeli military says it struck Hezbollah sites in southern
Lebanon
Reuters/December 09, 2025
BEIRUT: The Israeli military said on Tuesday that it struck infrastructure
belonging to Hezbollah in several areas in southern Lebanon, including what it
described as a training compound used by the armed group’s Radwan forces.
Military structures and a launch site belonging to Hezbollah were also hit in
the attacks, the military added in a statement. The strikes come less than a
week after Israel and Lebanon both sent civilian envoys to a military committee
monitoring their ceasefire, a step toward a months-old US demand that the two
countries broaden talks in line with President Donald Trump’s Middle East peace
agenda. Israel and Lebanon agreed to a US-brokered ceasefire in 2024 that ended
more than a year of fighting between Israel and Hezbollah. Since then, they have
traded accusations over violations. Lebanon’s state news agency, NNA, reported
that Israeli warplanes carried out a series of airstrikes targeting several
places in the south.
As tensions flare on Israel-Lebanon border, war-torn communities struggle to
rebuild
AP/December 09, 2025
METULA, Israel: Ilan Rosenfeld walks through the burnt-out shell of his former
business, stepping over crackling pieces of clay plates that used to line his
cafe and past metal scraps of Hezbollah rockets littering the rubble. It’s all
that’s left for him in this small, war-ravaged town — the northernmost in
Israel, surrounded on three sides by Lebanon. “Everything I had, everything I
saved, everything I built – it’s all burned,” he said as he scanned the damage
of the business he’d run for 40 years in Metula, which has long been at the
crosshairs of flare-ups along the volatile border. “Every day I wake up, and all
I have left are tears.” Rosenfeld was among tens of thousands of people forced
from their homes when war broke out between Israel and the militant group
Hezbollah in October 2023, following Hamas’ attack in southern Israel. One year
into a shaky ceasefire on this heavily fortified border, Israel’s government
says most of those displaced have returned to their homes in the north, where
they struggle to pick up the pieces of their lives. Others are reluctant to come
back, as Israel has stepped up attacks in Lebanon. Communities like Metula that
were in the center of the conflict remain little more than ghost towns, most
still half empty, with many people skeptical of their government’s promise to
keep them safe. The Israeli strikes into southern Lebanon continue, with several
a week. Hezbollah has refused to completely disarm until Israel fully withdraws.
“The security situation is starting to deteriorate again,” Rosenfeld said,
looking at the bomb shelters on a list recently distributed by the local
government. “And where am I in all this? I can barely survive the day-to-day.”
In some towns on the Israel-Lebanon border, the return has been a trickle.
Metula residents were among the 64,000 forced to evacuate and relocate to hotels
and temporary homes farther south when Hezbollah began firing rockets over the
border into Israel in fall 2023. Months of fighting escalated into a
full-fledged war. In September 2024, Israel killed 12 and wounded over 3,000 in
a coordinated pager attack and killed Hezbollah’s leader in a strike. A month
later, the ceasefire deal was reached.
Today, residents have trickled back to the sprawling apple orchards and
mountains as Israel’s government encourages them to go home. Officials say about
55,000 people have returned. In Metula, just over half of the 1,700 residents
are back. Yet the streets remain largely empty. Many hoped to rebuild their
lives, but they returned to find 60 percent of the town’s homes damaged from
rocket fire, according to the local government. Others were infested and
destroyed by rats. The economy — largely based on tourism and agriculture — has
been devastated. With many people, especially young families, reluctant to
return, some business owners have turned to workers from Thailand to fill labor
shortages. “Most of the people who worked with us before the war didn’t come
back,” said Jacob Katz, who runs a produce business. “We’ve lost a lot … and we
can’t read the future.”Rosenfeld’s modest cafe and farm were perched on a hill
overlooking the border fence. Tourists would come to eat, camp in buses
converted to rooms and enjoy the view. But now, the towns on the Lebanese side
of the border have been reduced to rubble by Israel’s attacks.
Without a home, Rosenfeld sleeps in a small shelter next to the scraps that
remain of his business. He has little more than a tent, a refrigerator and a few
chairs. Just a stone’s throw away sit a military watch tower and two armored
vehicles.
Israel’s government says it has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in
border recovery efforts, that it plans to invest more in economic revival, and
that residents can apply for support funds. But Rosenfeld said that despite his
requests for government assistance, he hasn’t received any aid. He’s among
residents and business leaders who say they feel forgotten. Most say they need
more resources to rebuild.
“The Israeli government needs to do much more for us,” Metula deputy mayor Avi
Nadiv said. “The residents who live on Israel’s northern border, we are Israel’s
human shield.”A spokesman for Zeev Elkin, a Cabinet minister overseeing
reconstruction in the north, said the local government has not used funds
allocated to reconstruction “due to narrow political and oppositional
considerations.”
Hezbollah-Israel tensions are flaring
As Hezbollah refuses to disarm, Israel has accused Lebanon’s government of not
doing enough to neutralize the militant group. The Lebanese army says it has
boosted its presence over the border area to strengthen the ceasefire.
Israel continues to bombard what it says are Hezbollah sites. Much of southern
Lebanon has been left in ruins. The strikes are among a number of offensives
Israel has launched – including those in Gaza, the West Bank and Syria – in what
it calls an effort to crack down on militant groups.The Lebanon strikes have
killed at least 127 civilians, including children, since the ceasefire took
hold, according to a November UN report. UN special rapporteur Morris
Tidball-Binz said the strikes amount to “war crimes.” Israel has maintained that
it has the right to continue strikes to protect itself from Hezbollah rearming
and accuses the group of using civilians as human shields.
Last week, Israel struck the southern suburbs of the Lebanese capital of Beirut,
killing Hezbollah’s top military commander. The group, still weakened by last
year’s fighting, has not responded.
‘The army cannot protect me’
In Metula, signs of the tensions are everywhere. The local government’s list of
public shelters reads: “Metula is prepared for an emergency.”Explosions and
gunfire periodically echo from military drills while farmer Levav Weinberg plays
with his 10-, 8- and 6-year-old children. Weinberg, a military reservist, said
his kids are too scared to ride their bikes on the street. Weinberg, 44, and his
family returned in July, skeptical of the government’s promise that everything
was returning to normal but eager to keep their business alive.
Metula’s government continues to encourage people to come back, telling
residents the region is safe and the economy will bounce back. “Today we feel
the winds of, let’s call it, the winds of war – but it doesn’t deter us,” Nadiv
said. “Coming back to Metula – there’s nothing to be afraid of. ... The army is
here. The houses are fortified. Metula is prepared for anything.” Weinberg isn’t
so sure. In recent weeks, he and his wife have considered leaving once again.
“The army cannot protect me and my family,” Weinberg said. “You sacrifice your
family to live in Metula these days. It’s not a perfect life, it’s not that
easy, and at some point your kids pay the price.”
Report: Netanyahu tells US he'll avoid strikes similar to
Thursday's
Naharnet/December 08/2025
U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus welcomed Lebanon’s move to name a civilian
representative in the Mechanism ceasefire committee, but President Joseph Aoun
lamented to her the violent Israeli strikes that targeted residential buildings
in south Lebanon the next day, a media report said. Aoun said what happened
“represented a negative message from (Israeli PM Benjamin) Netanyahu, especially
that the inspection of the targeted sites proved that they were all civilian
targets containing no Hezbollah military assets as Israel had claimed,” al-Joumhouria
newspaper reported.
“Ortagus expressed understanding of Aoun’s remarks, adding that she had chided
Netanyahu on behalf of her administration over what happened and that Netanyahu
said that he would be keen to avoid a repetition of such a move,” the daily
added.
Le Drian conveys French support, reviews preparations for
army support conference
LBCI/December 08/2025
French envoy Jean-Yves Le Drian, accompanied by Ambassador Hervé Magro, visited
Baabda Palace for a meeting with President Joseph Aoun. The meeting concluded
with no public statements from Le Drian. He arrived in Beirut earlier Monday.
During the talks, Le Drian conveyed a message of support from French President
Emmanuel Macron to Lebanon and praised the expansion of the ceasefire monitoring
mechanism. Discussions also focused on developments in the south, internal
political updates, reform-related issues, and preparations for a possible
conference to support the Lebanese army, expected early next year.
Lebanon president defends army south of Litani, supports
French involvement in mechanism
LBCI/December 08/2025
President Joseph Aoun told French presidential envoy Jean-Yves Le Drian that
Lebanon welcomes any French involvement within the ceasefire monitoring
mechanism, saying it contributes to achieving the main objectives of
negotiations conducted under the committee’s framework. Aoun rejected
accusations that the Lebanese army has not fully carried out its duties south of
the Litani River, noting that both UNIFIL leadership and the committee have
confirmed the army’s performance—a point also observed by visiting U.N. Security
Council ambassadors. He added that Lebanon supports any audits conducted by the
mechanism committee on procedures implemented south of the Litani in accordance
with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701. Foreign Minister Youssef Rajji told
Le Drian that the mechanism’s mandate is limited to halting aggression and that
the Lebanese army is performing important work, albeit with limited resources,
highlighting the need for international support. Rajji also stressed that
containing Hezbollah’s weapons is first and foremost a Lebanese demand,
necessary to build a functioning state. Among the proposals put forward by Le
Drian to help ensure the success of a planned conference to support the army was
the establishment of verification mechanisms to monitor army operations. This
proposal is set to be discussed at a meeting in Paris next week.
Will Aoun visit the White House soon?
Naharnet/December 08/2025
Contacts are underway between Baabda and Washington to arrange an official visit
by President Joseph Aoun to the White House to meet with President Donald Trump
at the beginning of the new year, al-Joumhouria newspaper reported on Monday.
Aoun is scheduled to visit the Sultanate of Oman on Tuesday at the invitation of
Sultan Haitham bin Tariq, accompanied by a number of ministers.The Presidential
Press Office stated that "this visit comes within the framework of strengthening
the strong fraternal relations that gather Lebanon and the Sultanate of Oman."
Report: US presses Israel to give Mechanism a chance
Naharnet/December 08/2025
The U.S. administration has pressed Israel to give a chance for developing the
work of the U.S.-led ceasefire Mechanism after the appointment of Lebanese and
Israeli civilian representatives in it, U.S. and French diplomats said.
Washington has also asked Israel to respect the year-end deadline for the
removal of Hezbollah’s weapons in the South Litani region, while acknowledging
that the Israeli operations and strikes will not stop during this period, the
diplomats told An-Nahar newspaper. According to Israel's Ynet news portal, U.S.
President Donald Trump had called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last
Monday and urged him to shift gradually from offensive operations and escalation
threats in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria to diplomacy and confidence-building
measures. A senior security official said Netanyahu received similar counsel
from top Israeli army commanders eager to begin rebuilding the military after
extended combat.
Aoun says only negotiations have chance to achieve goals
Naharnet/December 08/2025
Negotiations have a much higher chance of ending the Israeli violations than
staying locked in one place, President Joseph Aoun told al-Joumhouria newspaper
in remarks published Monday. Aoun's comments come as Lebanon and Israel moved
toward direct negotiations
aimed at defusing tensions. "If we stay locked in a narrow circle, we will not
achieve any result regarding our three demands (halting Israeli attacks on
Lebanon, the withdrawal of Israeli troops from five hills in south Lebanon, and
the release of the Lebanese prisoners)," Aoun told al-Joumhouria. "(Without
negotiations,) we will achieve nothing and we will be in a greater danger, but
if we take the path of negotiations, there is a 50% chance that we will achieve
something," he added. "Between zero and 50%, it is logical to choose the second
option."
Al-Rahi lauds Aoun, says negotiations better than war
Naharnet/December 08/2025
Maronite Patriarch Beshra al-Rahi said Monday after meeting with President
Joseph Aoun that the relation between Bkerki and Baabda is very good and
negotiations with Israel are better than war threats. "I have no fears (of a new
war) and we are now in the time of diplomacy and negotiations," al-Rahi told
reporters in a short press conference after the meeting.
Issa says army chief's visit to Washington will likely
happen
Naharnet/December 08/2025
U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa on Monday revealed the presence of
contacts regarding the rescheduling of Army chief Rodolphe Haykal’s visit to
Washington, expressing his belief that the visit will take place. As for the
Mechanism meetings, Issa said after meeting Foreign Minister Youssef Rajji that
no one was “expecting peace from the first meeting.”“The parties must meet and
then they would put what they have on the table,” Issa added. The U.S. Embassy
for its part said that Issa had a “good discussion” with Rajji on U.S.-Lebanese
bilateral relations, reiterating “the United States’ support for Lebanon’s
sovereignty, peace, and prosperity.”
Report: Berri asks Khamenei for fatwa on handover of
precision missiles and drones
Naharnet/December 08/2025
Speaker Nabih Berri has relayed to the Iranians three demands reflecting his
growing concern over Lebanon’s continued involvement in the “game of axes,” a
highly informed diplomatic source said. “The first demand calls for keep Lebanon
fully neutral in any future confrontation between Iran and Israel and refraining
from using the Lebanese arena as a pressure card in Tehran’s negotiations with
Washington,” the source told the Nidaa al-Watan newspaper. “The second demand
was more sensitive, with Berri asking for a fatwa from Supreme Leader Ali
Khamenei allowing Hezbollah to hand over the precision-guided missiles and
drones, in return for securing U.S. approval of a deal that would lead to a full
end to the war,” the sources added, quoting Berri as saying that he can
guarantee the U.S. response. “The third demand was obtaining swift and urgent
funds to support tens of thousands of Shiites who have lost their homes,
businesses and asset due to the latest war,” the source said. The Iranian
response was “ambiguous,” with Tehran only agreeing to the financing demand, the
source added. Tehran “did not offer any clear answer regarding the
neutralization demand or the fatwa, which increased the level of concern among
Shiite political and religious circles, who considered that the ‘Iranian
silence’ was a message in itself and that Tehran’s decision to cling to the
Lebanese card had not changed despite the hefty prices,” the source went on to
say. Berri’s political aide MP Ali Hassan Khalil had visited Tehran in recent
days where he held talks with senior officials. Iran’s foreign ministry
meanwhile announced on Sunday that “Iran does not interfere in Lebanon” and that
“Hezbollah is an institution that takes the decision regarding its weapons in an
independent manner.”
Khalil to Geagea: Speaker's powers are 'constitutional'
Naharnet/December 08/2025
Amal MP Ali Hassan Khalil said Friday that Speaker Nabih Berri's powers are
constitutional after Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea criticized the Speaker
for refusing to discuss in parliament a draft law demanding the amendment of the
current electoral law ahead of the parliamentary elections scheduled for May
2026.The LF, the Kataeb and other MPS forming a parliamentary majority are
pushing for amending the law to allow a large Lebanese diaspora to vote for the
128 seats. The current electoral law only allows expats to vote for six
newly-introduced seats in parliament. Hezbollah and Amal argue that they do not
enjoy the same campaigning freedom that other parties enjoy abroad and are
objecting against the possible amendment. "We will not allow any party to try to
affect the Speaker's powers," Khalil said. Geagea had said Sunday that what
Berri is doing has gone beyond all limits. After sixty-five MPs, including those
of the LF, demanded to amend the law and Berri refused to discuss the draft law
in parliament, LF's Foreign Minister Youssef Rajji submitted the draft law to
cabinet. Cabinet passed it and sent it to Parliament. But Berri has still not
called for a session to discuss it. "I ask you to have mercy on the Parliament,
the government, and all the Lebanese, residents and expats, and to stop the
obstruction and refer the draft law to a plenary session as soon as possible,"
Geagea said.
Berri-Jumblat bromance: Friends, allies and refusers of 'under fire negotations'
Naharnet/December 08/2025
Former Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblat has described a Sunday
meeting with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri as "friendly and warm", calling
Berri a "long-time friend and ally." After the meeting, Jumblat said the same
phrase previously used by Berri: We cannot negotiate under (Israeli) fire. "It
is not acceptable to negotiate under fire," Berri had told a United Nations
Security Council delegation last week, urging it to pressure Israel to respect a
year-old ceasefire and to halt its "one-sided war" on Lebanon. "Negotiations are
legitimate but we cannot accept to negotiate under fire," Jumblat said, lauding
Simon Karam who was recently appointed as Lebanon's first civilian
representative in negotiations with Israel. "He has good moral and political
qualities and is a seasoned negotiator," Jumblat said, adding that he supports
the monopoly on arms in south Lebanon, and later on all Lebanese territories.
UNIFIL chief says has 'no evidence' of Hezbollah rebuilding
in south Lebanon
Naharnet/December 08/2025
Commander of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon Diodato Abagnara has
said that UNIFIL has no evidence that Hezbollah is rebuilding its military
capabilities south of the Litani. In an interview with Israel's Channel 12,
Abagnara said that the presence of Israeli troops along the Blue Line
constitutes "a flagrant" violation of U.N. resolution 1701. He warned that the
slightest mistake could lead to a major escalation, describing the security
situation as "really fragile."
Digital transformation: US Ambassador highlights confidence
in Lebanon as Oracle deal takes off
LBCI/December 08/2025
The United States signaled renewed confidence in Lebanon's future, U.S.
Ambassador Michel Issa said, as tech giant Oracle signed a cooperation agreement
with the State for Technology and Artificial Intelligence Ministry to train
50,000 Lebanese in digital and AI skills. The trainees will be drawn primarily
from university students, with additional seats allocated to public-sector
employees. Candidates will be selected through a mechanism coordinated between
the ministry and participating universities. The partnership is the first formal
agreement between a major American company and a Lebanese state institution in
more than two decades. It comes as Lebanon increasingly turns toward the digital
economy as one of the few viable avenues to revitalize the job market and create
opportunities for its young workforce. The training program will cover practical
skills in programming, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence, delivered
by Oracle in collaboration with several universities and aligned with
international standards. Officials say the message is clear: investing in
Lebanese talent is no longer optional but essential if the country hopes to
enter the economy of the future.
The Compelling Challenge of Israel’s Diplomatic Opening
to Lebanon
Dr. Charles Chartouni/This Is Beirut/December 08/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/12/150024/
Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Leiter’s diplomatic opening to Lebanon is
a major turning point amid the encumbered political horizons, uncertainties, and
doomsaying enveloping the country. Coming at the heels of Prime Minister
Netanyahu’s peace offer, the benevolence and the moral density of this statement
cannot be overlooked by the Lebanese government and the Lebanese people at
large.
The ongoing negotiations cannot move forward unless Lebanon’s stakeholders pay
attention to the messages issued by Israeli authorities and start engaging with
them on this very basis. The arrogant dismissal of peace offers betrays
political immaturity and an inability to come to terms with the challenges posed
by the state of war, festering hostilities, and institutionalized political
impasses that have consolidated over time.
The Israeli ambassador is offering Lebanon an open political horizon along which
the negotiations should proceed if we were to put an end to vicious cycles of
violence and their pervasive destructiveness. This appeal comes when the
Lebanese authorities struggle defining the scope of these negotiations driven by
crippling incapacities and cumulative emergencies. Lebanese authorities have
engaged in negotiations since they had no other choice to do otherwise.
However, the very nature of these negotiations behooves a change of perspective
since the curtailed vision of peace is inevitably going awry. The failure of the
Lebanese authorities to approach the negotiations comprehensively and the
narrowing of their scope to tactical military redeployment is inevitably
recoiling on the limited agendas they set.
The Israeli ambassador is proposing a major intellectual, political, and
strategic inflection, which would facilitate Lebanon’s political and strategic
repositioning. While engaging in negotiations, Lebanese executives are bound to
reassess their political and strategic interests away from the ideological and
situational constraints set by Iran’s Islamic regime, reclaim their moral and
political autonomy, and start operating independently.
Ambassador Leiter’s vision is compelling and cannot be dismissed lightly: We
have no claims of any nature on your territories; we “want to live in peace and
harmony with you.” However, the ongoing talks do not preclude military
interventions if the threats against Israeli security are not addressed and if
Hezbollah is not decommissioned. The comprehensive nature of the negotiations is
contingent upon demilitarization and the restoration of Lebanese sovereignty.
Simply listening to the Israeli ambassador’s elaborate statement should draw
attention to the absence of political civility in this region and to the very
nature of democratic diplomacy: the discursive nature of politics and their
ethical framing, which contrasts strikingly with the state of political
relations between states in this part of the world. The Lebanese government must
pursue its negotiations on an unequivocal basis and stop mincing words. The
reduction of scope of the ongoing negotiations is likely to stall their momentum
and kill their underlying dynamics.
Lebanon cannot retreat behind the constraints imposed by Hezbollah and its
conditionalities without compromising its political independence and moral
authority. Hezbollah’s restrictions should never be part of the intellectual
subtext of negotiations nor their modus operandi. The pattern of paradoxical
communication adopted by Lebanon’s executives has called into question the
consistency of the country’s purported constitutional democracy and its
international credibility.
The scope of Israeli diplomacy is clearly defined and well-articulated, whereas
Lebanon’s absent diplomatic stature betrays the notional and political
inconsistencies of a failed state unable to formulate a policy course. A country
cannot engage in diplomacy if the notional and operational conditions of working
statehood have consistently defaulted. The negotiation process cannot proceed in
a constructive manner unless its premises are clearly stated and upheld by the
engaging parties.
Prime Minister Netanyahu and Ambassador Leiter’s statements were comprehensive
in nature, linking the success of the negotiations to political, economic, and
human considerations that should frame strategic and military chapters. Lebanese
authorities adhere, mutatis mutandis, to the conventional ideological and
political narrative that prevails in Islamic and Arab societies and make theirs
the political doxa of Hezbollah and its clones.
Without acknowledging Israel’s legitimacy and repudiating Lebanon’s political
theodicies and their apocalypticism, the prospects for normalization and open
political conversation is undermined from the very outset. Lebanon must move
beyond the restrictions mandated by antisemitism, Islamic totalitarianism,
ideological politics, and their strategic vectors if it is to oversee an end to
seven decades of protracted conflicts and institutionalized enmity. If the
negotiations are to proceed, Lebanon must move beyond the ideological blindfolds
and mandates of Iranian imperial politics and their religious framing.
Lebanon cannot navigate the tumultuous waters of a murderous dystopia and await
anything other than the cumulative outcomes of open-ended conflicts, endemic
civil wars, and destructive Islamic radicalization. US diplomacy has strived
throughout the last year to help Lebanon make its transition towards
normalization, conflict resolution, and working diplomatic mediations to no
avail.
Rather than seizing the strategic opportunities offered by the Israeli strategic
disruptions and innovative geostrategic dynamics, the new incumbents'
self-defeating politics have undermined Lebanon’s rising political opportunities
and chances to break away from the hold of Hezbollah and the pathologies of a
failed political state and its lurking pitfalls.
Lebanon Is a Country for Guests, Not Its Own People
Sam Menassa/Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
Pope Leo XIV’s visit to Lebanon was not a religious occasion that Lebanese
people could simply move beyond and forget. It became a mirror that, in just
three days, exposed what Lebanon has been trying to hide for decades. In a
country that has mastered the art of adorning ruin, Lebanon suddenly seem
capable of everything it has long claimed impossible since the collapse:
repaving roads overnight wherever the Pope’s motorcade would pass, providing
electricity, organizing thousands of volunteers, mobilizing hundreds of
thousands, and ensuring security after having consistently failed to protect
politicians and judges, apprehend a smuggler, or uphold a judicial verdict. It
was akin to declaring that Lebanon is not a failed state, but a state that
chooses failure whenever it can without harming its image.
The Lebanon we saw during the visit is a deceptive facade the ruling authorities
rush to erect whenever they need to put on a show for the world. The issue is
not this fleeting improvement but what it reveals: the country does not lack
capabilities, but rather the will to use them. It does not suffer from
organizational weaknesses but excessive deliberate obstruction. The Lebanese are
not incapable of mobilizing; they are incapable of mobilizing to confront
existential threats and defend their rights. “Incapacity” is a policy: the
Lebanese authority and people prefer to remain in limbo, caught between an
absent state and a festive facade that conceals decay without addressing it.
Regarding the Pope’s visit, the state suddenly becomes a real state:
administrations fall into line, security agencies coordinate without confusion,
municipalities activate their functions, the media speaks with one voice, and
political quarrels halt. But once the guest departs, that state collapses again,
and the country goes back to its old habits: sects lurking and waiting for an
opportunity to pounce on the others, electricity cut off, institutions
shattered, and exhausted citizens who can no longer defend their right to bread,
medicine, or schooling. How can a people who remain silent while being deprived
of healthcare, education, electricity, and water pour into the streets by the
thousands to greet the Pope? How can a regime that has been collapsing for
decades present itself to the world as a stable country capable of welcoming the
head of the Catholic Church?
The contrast goes beyond logistics; it extends to state discourse. Officials
avoided politics altogether, perhaps because politics the scandal that can no
longer be adorned. They merely recycled slogans that have turned into linguistic
statues: political cosmetics that lost their meaning as practice contradicted
them: “Lebanon the message,” “Lebanon the resilient,” “Lebanon the model of
coexistence.” A Lebanon of message, resilience, and model does not threaten a
judge investigating the crime of the century, does not surrender its economy to
oligarchs, and is not ruled by weapons outside the authority of the state.
The Pope, a spiritual leader, seemed the most politically clear. He did not say
that Lebanon is a “message,” but that it is a “responsibility.” He did not call
for coexistence as a slogan, but for “real peace” reinforced by laws and
institutions, not speeches and ceremonies. He urged the Lebanese to reconcile
before asking the world to stand with them, and to move from the illusion of
their historic role to the practice of a modern state of rights, not of myths.
He called for a peace that ends inter-sectarian and intra-sectarian divisions,
and for peace that would move Lebanon from the trenches to the state. He did not
treat Lebanon as a symbol, but as an unfinished state that requires
determination to build, not celebrations that hums ballads over ruins.
The Pope’s choice for his visit’s motto, “Blessed are the peacemakers,” was not
a rhetorical tactic but the essence of his message. The word “peace” was the
nucleus of his speeches; he repeated it with deliberate cadence, as though he
were seeking to replace the lexicon of war with one of peace. He called on the
Lebanese to join the regional peace process not as spectators but as actors, and
to build peace within the country to heal sectarian wounds, as well as striving
for peace with their neighbors and the world.
The height of the paradox peaked with Hezbollah’s presence. The party, which
took part in the reception ceremonies, seemed to blend into the mosaic of
“Lebanese unity” even as its actions undermine most basic conditions for unity
on a daily basis. How can a force that seizes decision-making and obstructs
justice celebrate the visit of a man calling for a single state, a single law,
and justice? This symbolic embrace of his visit coincides with behavior that
entrenches division and embodies the Lebanese model: importing symbolism while
burying meaning, participating in rituals while refusing to engage with their
message.
The Pope did not need three days to understand that Lebanon is not incapable but
chooses incapacity. It is a country governed by the logic of ceremony, not the
logic of institution- the logic of the moment, not the logic of continuity. It
does not build policies but occasions. It does not establish a system but adds
cosmetics that are taken down as soon as the show ends. It rises efficiently
when the world is watching, only to return to collapse once the spotlight fades.
The problem is not one of ability but the discretion in using this ability to
decorate reality rather than change it. The state performs its role when guests
arrive, then forgets this role when they depart. The question is: do the
Lebanese want a real state, or are they happy with merely having occasions that
reflect the image they imagine for themselves? As always, Lebanon chose the
easier answer: appearance over structure, spectacle over action, scenery over
the state.
Lebanon and Israel’s Negotiations Within the Framework of The ‘Mechanism’… What
Does It Mean?
Dr. Nassif Hitti/Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
Much has been said about the appointment of a civilian (former ambassador Simon
Karam) to head of the Lebanese delegation to the Mechanism- the body established
to oversee the implementation of the ceasefire reached on November 26 last year
between Lebanon and Israel.Some of the explanations of this move and its
messages were entirely detached from reality: supporters and allies of Hezbollah
considered the appointment a step towards gradual normalization with Israel or a
sign of moving toward political negotiations with the Israeli enemy. Others,
however, believe that this appointment may signal stronger or more serious
engagement in this process. Appointing a civilian figure does not, neither in
principle nor in practice, imply normalization. The goals of the negotiations,
its frame of reference and the course it takes, answer this question.
The Lebanese position is clear: no peace talks with Israel and no direct
negotiations outside the framework of the Mechanism. Israel has not fully
respected the agreement/declaration: it was supposed to withdraw from the South
to the Blue Line within sixty days (point 12 of the declaration), which of
course did not happen. It did not release the prisoners either; on the contrary,
Israel’s war intensified in ferocity and scale. Israel also occupied five hills
for what it calls “security sovereignty.” This concept likewise applies to the
Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and southern Syria, southern Lebanon, and, more
recently, the Beqaa. Appointing a civilian does not change the nature or goal of
indirect “technical” negotiations within the framework of the Mechanism on the
implementation of the ceasefire, which Israel has not respected in practice.
The inclusion of civilian negotiators is entirely normal in technical
negotiations given the issues being discussed. It is also important to recall
that the current format of these negotiations fall under an international/UN
committee (the United States, France, and the UN peacekeeping forces in the
South). It should likewise be recalled that the goal of the negotiations is
Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon, the release of prisoners, and the
establishment of a viable security arrangement that consolidates stability,
security, and safety along the border. In this context, and with the mandate of
UNIFIL in southern Lebanon ending in late 2026, an alternative international/UN
framework for monitoring this process and reinforcing stability must be found.
The official Lebanese position in this regard is clear: Lebanon wants to revive
the 1949 Armistice Agreement, with the possibility of reinforcing this agreement
that Israel, in various ways, refuses to re-enter: deploying UN monitors on both
sides of the line in a balanced manner.
As for talk of indirect- or “soft,” as some call it- normalization, the Lebanese
position is clear: Lebanon remains committed to the Arab Peace Initiative
adopted at the 2002 Arab Summit in Beirut, which seeks a comprehensive, just,
and durable peace grounded entirely in United Nations Resolutions. Today,
because of Israel’s policies, we are extremely far from achieving its goals.
Accordingly, safeguarding security and stability along the southern border is
necessary, as is preventing Lebanon from becoming a playground for regional
conflicts or for intermittent, open-ended proxy wars employed in the “Great
Game” of the region. Today, Lebanon must intensify its engagement with both the
international community and the Arab states. Both official diplomacy and public
diplomacy (efforts to influence opinion-makers and decision-makers in the
capitals that matter), in order to support the Lebanese position outlined above.
We must warn (and there are many lessons to this effect from both the recent and
distant past are) that the game of buying time through tenuous arrangements and
makeshift settlements, which some may be pursuing, would destroy Lebanon over
time. It is a game that will lead only to further complications and difficulties
at a moment when the Middle Eastern is undergoing grave and fundamental changes.
For this reason, supporting the official Lebanese position, and ensuring genuine
adherence to this position by all Lebanese components, remains more than
necessary if Lebanon is to reinforce its state.
The Latest English
LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on
December 08-09/2025
Netanyahu will Meet Trump on
Gaza on December 29, Spokesperson Says
Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will meet US President Donald Trump on
December 29 to discuss the next steps of the Gaza ceasefire, an Israeli
government spokesperson said on Monday, Reuters reported. On Sunday, Netanyahu
said that he will be discussing with Trump the second phase of a US plan to end
the war in Gaza later this month. A ceasefire between Israel and Hamas came into
effect in October. Both sides have repeatedly accused each other of violating
the truce and wide gaps remain on key issues yet to be discussed under Trump's
plan to end the war, including Hamas disarmament, the governance of post-war
Gaza and the composition and mandate of an international security force in the
enclave. "The Prime Minister will meet with President Trump on Monday, December
29 they will discuss the future steps and phases and the international
stabilization force of the ceasefire plan," government spokesperson Shosh
Bedrosian said in an online briefing to reporters. The prime minister's office
said on December 1 that Trump had invited Netanyahu to the White House. Israeli
media have since reported that the two leaders may meet in Florida.
Iran Opens Trial of Dual National Accused of Spying for
Israel
Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
The trial of a dual national holding European citizenship has begun in Iran, the
semi-official Tasnim news agency reported on Monday, saying they were indicted
for "intelligence cooperation and espionage in favor of the Zionist regime
(Israel)."
According to the Alborz provincial attorney general, the defendant - whose
identity has not been disclosed - entered Iran about a month before the 12-day
war in June, during which Israel and the US struck Iranian nuclear facilities.
They were arrested on the fourth day of the conflict by the elite Revolutionary
Guards. "Sophisticated spy and intelligence items and equipment were discovered
in their villa in Karaj," the attorney general said, adding that the charges
under investigation carry penalties for "waging war against God" and "corruption
on earth" - offences often punishable by death. In recent years, the
Revolutionary Guards have detained dozens of dual nationals and foreigners,
mostly on espionage and security-related charges. Rights groups and some Western
countries have accused Tehran of using such arrests to gain leverage in
negotiations. Tehran denies arresting people for political reasons.
A Second Flight of Iranian Deportees, Carrying 55, Has Left the US, Iran Says
Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
A second flight carrying Iranians deported from the United States has left
America, Iranian officials said, as Washington reportedly planned to send
hundreds of prisoners back to the Iranian Republic. The deportations come as
tensions remain high between Iran and the US after America bombed Iranian
nuclear sites during Tehran's 12-day war with Israel in June. Activists abroad
also have expressed concern about deportees returning to Iran, whose theocracy
has been cracking down on intellectuals and executing prisoners at a rate unseen
in decades.A report published Monday by the Mizan news agency, the official
mouthpiece of the Iran's judiciary, quoted Iranian Foreign Ministry official
Mojtaba Shasti Karimi acknowledging the deportation of 55 Iranians. “These
individuals announced their willingness for return following continuation of
anti-immigration and discriminative policy against foreign nationals
particularly Iranians by the United States,” Karimi reportedly said. Iranian
Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei also said Sunday there were plans
for 55 Iranians to return to their country. Based on the US claims, “the
Iranians were repatriated because of legal reasons and breach of immigration
regulations," Baghaei said. The US government did not immediately acknowledge
the deportation flight and it wasn't clear whether the plane had arrived yet in
Tehran. The US Department of Homeland Security and State Department did not
immediately respond to requests for comment from The Associated Press early
Monday. The deportations represent a collision of a top priority of President
Donald Trump — targeting illegal immigration — against a decades-long practice
by the US of welcoming Iranian dissidents, exiles and others since the 1979
Iranian Revolution. In September, Iranian officials acknowledged as many as 400
Iranians could be returned under the Trump administration policy. That month,
the first such flight arrived in Tehran. In the lead up to and after the 1979
revolution, a large number of Iranians fled to the US. In the decades since, the
US had been sensitive in allowing those fleeing from Iran over religious, sexual
or political persecution to seek residency. Iran has maintained only those
facing criminal charges face prosecution, while others can travel freely.
However, Tehran has detained Westerns and others with ties abroad in the past to
be exchanged in prisoner swaps. Iran has criticized Washington for hosting
dissidents and others in the past. US federal prosecutors have accused Iran of
hiring hitmen to target dissidents as well in America.
GCC Secretary-General Condemns Iranian Officials'
Statements on Member States' Sovereignty
Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Jasem Albudaiwi
expressed the GCC states’ denunciation of the media statements made by Iranian
officials regarding the GCC states. "These statements contained fallacies, false
claims, and rejected allegations that contradict the principles of
non-interference in internal affairs and good neighborliness—principles which
Iran violated through its aggression against the sovereignty and independence of
the State of Qatar," Albudaiwi stated. Furthermore, he noted that these
statements contradict the GCC states' continuous efforts to enhance relations
with the Islamic Republic of Iran at all levels, SPA reported. "The GCC states
have consistently reaffirmed the importance of adhering to the foundations and
principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter and international law,
including the principles of good neighborliness, respect for state sovereignty,
non-interference in internal affairs, the peaceful resolution of disputes, and
refraining from the use or threat of force," Albudaiwi emphasized. He added that
the GCC states have consistently demonstrated goodwill towards Iran, stressing
their keenness on Iran's security and stability to preserve the interests of the
Iranian people and to spare the region the repercussions of tension and
escalation. "This commitment was underlined during the joint meetings between
the GCC foreign ministers and Iranian Foreign Minister Dr. Seyyed Abbas Araghchi.
The council member states have also underscored the significance of continuing
bilateral communication between the GCC and Iran to enhance shared interests and
maintain regional security and stability," he pointed out. Moreover, Albudaiwi
affirmed the GCC states' commitment to peace, coexistence, and pursuing dialogue
and diplomatic solutions in international relations. He called on Iran to cease
spreading false claims that undermine trust and hinder communication and
understanding, at a time when the countries of the region need rapprochement and
cooperation to safeguard their interests and achieve their peoples' aspirations
for security, stability, growth, and prosperity.
Iran's Currency Sinks to a New Record Low
Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
Iran's currency slipped to the lowest level in its history on Monday, nearing
1,250,000 rial to the US dollar on the open rate market, various outlets
including the semi-official Tasnim news agency reported. The Iranian rial stood
around 55,000 to the US dollar in 2018, when US sanctions were reimposed by the
first Trump administration to force Tehran to the negotiating table by limiting
its oil exports and access to foreign currency. Iranian media blamed the
government's recent economic liberalization policies for adding pressure to the
open rate market, Reuters. The open rate market is where ordinary Iranians buy
foreign currency, whereas businesses typically use state-regulated rates.
However, the government's recent decision to allow importers to tap into the
open market to import essential goods has added pressure on the market and
increased the dollar's price, semi-official Fars news agency said. Iran's
economy is at risk of recession, with the World Bank forecasting an economic
shrinkage of 1.7% in 2025 and 2.8% in 2026. The risk is compounded by rising
inflation, with Iran's Statistical Center announcing monthly inflation of 48.6%
in October, the highest in 40 months. Despite inflationary pressures, Iran said
last month it would increase fuel prices in December under certain conditions,
primarily impacting drivers using more than 100 liters per month.
Four Iranian Narratives on the Collapse of the ‘Resistance’
in Syria
London: Adil Al-Salmi/Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
One hundred and ninety-two days separated the last meeting between Iran’s
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and Syria’s ousted President Bashar al-Assad in
Tehran from the moment the Syrian regime fell to the opposition in December
2024. That interval was no footnote in the Syrian war. It became a sharp mirror
inside Tehran, reflecting the magnitude of the wager Iran’s leadership had
placed on Assad, and the limits of its ability to anticipate the trajectory of
the conflict and shifts in the regional balance of power. At that meeting,
Khamenei laid out the essence of his “Syrian doctrine” amid changing realities
across the “Axis of Resistance.” Syria, he argued, was no ordinary state but one
with a “special place” because its identity, in his view, stemmed from its role
in this axis. Since “resistance is Syria’s defining identity and must be
preserved,” he addressed Assad not as a political ally but as a partner in that
identity. He praised Assad for once saying that “the cost of resistance is lower
than the cost of compromise” and that “whenever we retreat, the other side
advances.” Thus, Khamenei reaffirmed his full - if belated – gamble on the
regime’s survival, even as signs of collapse were unmistakable on the ground.
Less than seven months later, the regime would fall. Assad’s collapse would
yield several Iranian narratives: the Supreme Leader’s, the Revolutionary
Guard’s, the diplomatic narrative, and a fourth voiced from within the system
itself, one that raised blunt questions about the price of Iran’s Syrian gamble.
Khamenei’s narrative
In his first speech after Assad’s fall, Khamenei offered a hard-edged
explanation: the event, he said, was the product of a “joint American-Zionist
plot,” aided by neighboring states. He spoke of factors that he claimed
prevented Iran from providing the necessary support, including Israeli and US
strikes inside Syria and the closure of air and land corridors to Iranian
supplies. He concluded that the decisive flaw lay within Syria itself, where the
“spirit of resistance” had eroded in state institutions. He stressed that the
regime’s fall did not mean the fall of the idea of “resistance,” predicting that
“patriotic Syrian youth” would one day revive it in a new form. This narrative
rejects the notion of strategic defeat: for Khamenei, what happened is not the
end of the struggle, but a harsh phase in a longer one.
Revolutionary Guard’s narrative
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) adopted a language closer to
national security logic than pure ideology, though it drew from the same
lexicon. In 2013, cleric Mehdi Taeb, head of the IRGC’s Ammar Headquarters think
tank, framed the equation starkly: “Syria is our 35th province... If the enemy
attacks Syria or Khuzestan, our priority is to keep Syria.” With that shocking
sentence, Syria was elevated to the level of Iranian strategic geography,
sometimes above parts of Iran itself. Late General Qassem Soleimani, then
commander of the Quds Force, became the chief architect of this approach:
confronting threats abroad by building multinational militia networks and using
the “protection of shrines” as a mobilizing slogan that fused ideology with
national security calculations. A month after Assad’s fall, at a memorial for
Soleimani, Khamenei reaffirmed this school of thought, linking the defense of
shrines in Damascus and Iraq to the defense of “Iran as a sanctuary,” aiming to
bind various fronts into a single cross-border security-sectarian struggle.
After the Syrian regime’s collapse, this narrative preserved its core: success
or failure is not defined by who sits in Damascus, but by whether the IRGC’s
influence networks remain intact and whether Iran still has access to Syrian
depth. Full withdrawal would amount, in this logic, to admitting that the “35th
province” had slipped from the map, so the IRGC will continue to search for any
possible foothold.
Diplomatic narrative
Iran’s diplomatic apparatus sought to tell a softer story. Weeks before the
fall, Khamenei dispatched his adviser Ali Larijani to Damascus and Beirut with
reassuring messages for Assad and other allies, publicly asserting that events
in Syria and Lebanon “directly concern Iran’s national security.” Days later,
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi visited Damascus just six days before the
collapse, even posing with shawarma in a downtown restaurant to signal
“normalcy” and dismiss talk of impending downfall as “psychological warfare.” It
was the peak of the gap between diplomatic messaging and a disintegrating
reality. Afterward, the Foreign Ministry adopted a defensive formula: Iran had
“responded to the request of an allied government”, but “cannot decide on behalf
of peoples.” Thus, responsibility was shifted toward Syrian internal failures
and the external “conspiracy” often invoked by Khamenei. This narrative treats
Syria as one file among many, not an existential arena as seen by the IRGC and
the Leader.
‘Open account’ narrative
The fourth narrative emerged, unexpectedly, from within the establishment
itself. For the first time, semi-public acknowledgments surfaced that the
economic return on Iran’s Syrian adventure was nearly nil and that the
political-security “investment” had resulted in something resembling a net loss.
In 2020, former member of the Iranian parliamentary national security and
foreign policy committee, Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh revealed that Tehran had
spent “$20-30 billion” in Syria, insisting: “This is the people’s money and must
be recovered.”Five years later, he returned with a more bitter charge: Syria’s
debts to Iran were effectively settled through “land without oil, cow farms
without cows, and empty promises.”This view is no outlier. Over a decade,
Iranian protest slogans increasingly linked “Gaza, Lebanon, Syria” with bread,
fuel, and economic hardship at home. With Assad gone, critics more easily argue
that Iran spent tens of billions and paid a human cost among its fighters and
proxies, only to end up with almost no influence in Damascus. For
decision-makers, this narrative becomes domestic pressure against any
large-scale return to Syria.
Four scenarios for Tehran
Taken together, these narratives reveal a deep contradiction: the IRGC and
Khamenei refuse to concede that Iran “lost Syria,” treating the episode as one
phase in a longer struggle. Meanwhile, the diplomatic and economic narratives
acknowledge, implicitly, that the previous intervention model is no longer
sustainable. Four broad scenarios emerge. The first is a return through proxies,
closest to the IRGC’s logic: Iran would rebuild influence from the ground up
through militias - old or newly recruited - to pressure any future authority in
Damascus. The second is regional repositioning without Syria, in which Iran
shifts resources to arenas where it still holds leverage, including Lebanon,
Iraq, Yemen and Gaza, while limiting its role in Syria to preventing hostile
entrenchment. The third is a “gray” re-entry: a gradual, negotiated,
non-confrontational return through localized deals or modest economic and
security projects, allowing Tehran to claim continued presence without the cost
of backing a single ruler. The fourth is institutionalizing the loss: Iran
accepts Syria’s departure from its strategic depth, but repackages the outcome
within a narrative of “conspiracy and steadfastness,” using it to tighten
internal control while maintaining symbolic presence through shrine rhetoric and
minimal diplomacy. Across all scenarios, one fact remains. Syria, which was once
described as more vital than Khuzestan and the “distinct identity of
resistance”, is no longer what it was before December 8, 2024 when the regime
collapsed.
Tehran can invoke time, the IRGC can search for openings, diplomats can polish
their statements, and critics can lament “land without oil.” But one question
looms over every debate in Iran: Can Tehran afford a second Syrian-sized gamble
after emerging from the first still trying to convince itself that the
“resistance factor” remains standing, even as its Syrian pillar has broken?
A Year After Assad’s Fall, Families of Missing Detainees Languish without
Answers
Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
A year after dictator Bashar al-Assad's ouster in Syria, little has changed in
Amina Beqai's desperate quest. She types her missing husband's name yet again
into an internet search box, hoping for answers to a 13-year-old question. In
vain. Beqai has nowhere else to turn. A National Commission for Missing Persons
established in May has been gathering evidence of enforced disappearances under
Assad, but has yet to offer families any clues on the estimated 150,000 people
who vanished in his notorious prisons. They include Beqai's husband Mahmoud,
arrested by Syria's security forces at their home near Damascus on April 17,
2012, and her brother Ahmed, detained in August that year. Assad's overthrow
initially stirred hope that prison records could tell families if, when and how
their loved ones died. Mass graves dug by Assad's forces across Syria could be
exhumed. Victims could be properly buried.None of that has transpired."It's been
a year. They didn't do anything ... Is it thinkable that they didn't even get
the documents for these men? Showing us the truth is what we want," Beqai told
Reuters.
FADING HOPES
As opposition fighters swept through Syrian towns last year on the way to
capturing Damascus, they rushed first to the jails, flinging doors open to free
thousands of bewildered prisoners. On December 8, 2024, hours after Assad fled
to Russia, the fighters freed dozens of prisoners from Sednaya, dubbed "the
human slaughterhouse" by Amnesty International for the industrial-scale torture
and executions undertaken there. The emerging detainees did not include Beqai's
loved ones. "When the prisons were open, and they didn't come back – that was
the shock. That was when the hope ended, it really died," Beqai said. But she
demands to know how, when and where her husband and brother may have died. With
no updates from the national commission, Beqai said she had become "obsessed"
with her online hunt, scouring pictures of dead detainees and scans of prison
documents published by Syrian news outlets who entered jails and security
branches after Assad's fall. "All there is left to do is sit and search," she
said. Such documents have revealed crucial information. Sarah al-Khattab last
saw her husband heading into a police station in Syria's south on February 9,
2019 to reconcile with Assad's government after years holed up with insurgents.
She has had no news of him since.A spreadsheet of dead Sednaya prisoners seen by
Reuters after Assad's fall included his name, Ali Mohsen al-Baridi, dating his
death as October 22, 2019 from "stopped pulse and breathing" with orders that
the body not be given to his family. Reuters passed its finding to the Syrian
Justice and Accountability Center, an advocacy group working with families of
the missing, who informed Khattab.
COMMISSION SEEKS HELP, OVERSIGHT
The national commission was established by new President Ahmed al-Sharaa. The
commission's media adviser, Zeina Shahla, told Reuters its mandate includes any
missing Syrian, no matter the circumstances. "When it comes to the pain of the
families, maybe we really are being slow. But this file needs progress to come
carefully, in a way that is scientific and systemic and not rushed," she said.
Next year, the commission hopes to launch a database of all the missing using
documents from prisons and other locations. Exhuming mass graves requires more
technical expertise and probably won't happen until 2027, Shahla said. The
commission has met with Syrian advocacy groups and some families. In November,
it signed a cooperation agreement with the Geneva-based International Committee
of the Red Cross and the International Commission on Missing Persons, which have
global expertise on the issue. Syria's commission hopes that will lead to more
training for its personnel and access to equipment in short supply in Syria,
including DNA testing labs for exhumed remains. "We welcome any kind of
cooperation and support we can receive, as long as the issue remains under (our
commission's) authority,” Shahla said.
RELATIVES, ACTIVISTS DEMAND BETTER
The government's approach has upset organizations who developed expertise on
enforced disappearances while in exile during the Assad era, six rights groups
told Reuters. Many were excited to apply that knowledge on the ground with Assad
gone, but say the government's centralized approach has excluded them, slowed
progress and left families in limbo. "When you have as many as a quarter of a
million people missing, you can't do that. You break up the work," said Ahmad
Helmi, a Syrian activist who leads Ta'afi, an initiative focused on missing
detainees and prison survivors. Activists also accuse the commission of
"monopolizing" detention-related documents. In September, Syrian authorities
briefly detained Amer Matar, an activist who founded a virtual museum to
preserve detainees' experiences, accusing him of illegally accessing official
documents for personal purposes. In November, the commission urged families not
to believe any detention-related documents shared on unofficial online
platforms, like the ones Beqai has been searching, and threatened legal action
against those outlets. "The commission wants to monopolize the file, but it
lacks the tools, the competence and the transparency. It demands the trust of
families but delivers no results," Matar said. Shahla said the commission is
"the central, official body authorized to reveal the fate" of missing people and
that families needed one place to go to for accurate answers. Agnes Callamard,
head of Amnesty International, said the commission should issue regular updates
about its progress and consider granting financial aid to relatives of missing
people. "The most important thing ... the national commission can do at the
moment is ensuring that families feel they are being heard and being supported,"
she told Reuters. As Syria marks a year since Assad's downfall, many people
remain exhausted by the same burden that plagued them under his rule: the lack
of closure. Alia Darraji last saw her son Yazan on November 1, 2014, as he left
home to meet friends near Damascus. He never returned. In the last year, the
elderly woman has spent time in "truth tents" - sit-ins demanding information on
disappeared Syrians that were unthinkable under Assad. While solidarity has
helped, it hasn't given her what her heart aches for. "We were hoping to find
their bodies, to bury them, or to find out where they are," Darraji said.
Syria’s Sharaa Calls for United Efforts to Rebuild a Year
After Assad’s Ouster
Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
Syrians marked the first anniversary of the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad and his
iron-fisted rule on Monday with jubilant celebrations in major cities, as the
fractured nation struggles to find stability and recover after years of war. The
new leader, President Ahmed al-Sharaa, told a large crowd of supporters that his
government had "laid out a clear vision for a new Syria as a state that looks
towards a promising future", calling it a historic break from a "dark chapter".
Assad fled Syria for Russia a year ago as Sharaa's opposition fighters seized
Damascus following an eight-day blitz through the country, ending his rule more
than 13 years after an uprising had spiraled into bitter civil war.
'WE STARTED LOVING THE COUNTRY,' SAYS ALEPPO RESIDENT
Sharaa began Monday with dawn prayers at Damascus' Umayyad Mosque, dressed in
the military fatigues he wore as head of the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group, a
uniform he has since switched for the somber suits of presidential office. He
promised to build a just and strong Syria, state news agency SANA reported.
"From north to south and from east to west, God willing, we will rebuild a
strong Syria with a structure befitting its present and past," he said. In
Aleppo, the first major city to fall to Sharaa's forces last year, cars paraded
through the streets honking their horns, with passengers waving Syria's new
flag.
"We started loving the country. We didn't love the country before, we used to
try to escape from it," said Mohammed Karam Hammami, an Aleppo resident. Sharaa
has ushered in big changes which have reshaped Syria's foreign ties. He has
forged relations with the US, won support from Gulf Arab states and Türkiye, and
turned away from Assad's backers Iran and Russia. Crippling Western sanctions
have largely been lifted. He has promised to replace Assad's brutal police state
with an inclusive and just order. However, hundreds of people have been killed
in bouts of sectarian violence, causing new displacements and fueling mistrust
among minorities towards Sharaa's government, as he struggles to bring all Syria
back under Damascus' authority. The Kurdish-led administration that runs
the northeast banned gatherings or events on security grounds, citing increased
activity by "terror cells" seeking to exploit the occasion. It congratulated
Syrians on the anniversary. The Kurdish-led administration has sought to
safeguard its regional autonomy, while in the south, some Druze have been
demanding independence in the southern province of Sweida since hundreds of
people were killed there in deadly clashes in July with government forces.
FOUR MORE YEARS OF TRANSITION BEFORE ELECTIONS
Sharaa told a forum in Qatar over the weekend that "Syria today is living its
best times", despite the bouts of violence, and said those responsible would be
held accountable. He said a transitional period led by him would continue for
four more years, to set up institutions, laws and a new constitution - to be put
to a public vote - at which point the country would hold elections. Sharaa
wields broad powers under a temporary constitution approved in March. The
authorities organized an indirect vote in October to form a parliament, but
Sharaa has yet to select one third of the 210 members as per the constitution.
The Assad family, members of Syria's Alawite minority community, ruled Syria for
54 years. The Syrian war killed hundreds of thousands of people and
displaced millions more since 2011, driving some five million into neighboring
countries as refugees. The UN refugee agency said on Monday that some 1.2
million refugees, in addition to 1.9 million internally displaced people, had
gone home since Assad was toppled, but a decline in global funding could deter
others. Syria's central bank governor, speaking at a Reuters NEXT conference
last week, said the return of some 1.5 million refugees was helping the economy
grow.
The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs says humanitarian
needs across Syria are acute, with some 16.5 million people needing aid in 2025.
Netanyahu says Israel and Hamas will enter ceasefire's
second phase soon
Associated Press/December 08/2025
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday that Israel and Hamas are
"very shortly expected to move into the second phase of the ceasefire," after
Hamas returns the remains of the last hostage held in Gaza. Netanyahu spoke
during a news conference with visiting German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and
stressed that the second phase, which addresses the disarming of Hamas and the
withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza, could begin as soon as the end of the
month. Hamas has yet to hand over the remains of Ran Gvili, a 24-year-old police
officer who was killed in the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, attack that sparked the
war. His body was taken to Gaza. The ceasefire's second stage also includes the
deployment of an international force to secure Gaza and forming a temporary
Palestinian government to run day-to-day affairs under the supervision of an
international board led by U.S. President Donald Trump. A senior Hamas official
on Sunday told The Associated Press the group is ready to discuss "freezing or
storing or laying down" its weapons as part of the ceasefire in a possible
approach to one of the most difficult issues ahead.
Netanyahu says second phase will be challenging
Netanyahu said few people believed the ceasefire's first stage could be
achieved, and the second phase is just as challenging. "As I mentioned to the
chancellor, there's a third phase, and that is to deradicalize Gaza, something
that also people believed was impossible. But it was done in Germany, it was
done in Japan, it was done in the Gulf States. It can be done in Gaza, too, but
of course Hamas has to be dismantled," he said. The return of Gvili's remains —
and Israel's return of 15 bodies of Palestinians in exchange — would complete
the first phase of Trump's 20-point ceasefire plan.
Hamas says it has not been able to reach all remains because they are buried
under rubble left by Israel's two-year offensive in Gaza. Israel has accused the
militants of stalling and threatened to resume military operations or withhold
humanitarian aid if all remains are not returned. A group of families of
hostages said in a statement that "we cannot advance to the next phase before
Ran Gvili returns home." Meanwhile, Israeli military Chief of Staff Lt. Gen.
Eyal Zamir on Sunday called the so-called Yellow Line that divides the
Israeli-controlled majority of Gaza from the rest of the territory a "new
border.""We have operational control over extensive parts of the Gaza Strip and
we will remain on those defense lines," Zamir said. "The Yellow Line is a new
border line, serving as a forward defensive line for our communities and a line
of operational activity."
Germany says support for Israel is unchanged
Merz said Germany, one of Israel's closest allies, is assisting with the
implementation of the second phase by sending officers and diplomats to a
U.S.-led civilian and military coordination center in southern Israel, and by
sending humanitarian aid to Gaza. The chancellor also said Germany still
believes that a two-state-solution is the best possible option but that "the
German federal government remains of the opinion that recognition of a
Palestinian state can only come at the end of such a process, not at the
beginning."The U.S.-drafted plan for Gaza leaves the door open to Palestinian
independence. Netanyahu has long asserted that creating a Palestinian state
would reward Hamas and eventually lead to an even larger Hamas-run state on
Israel's borders. Netanyahu also said that while he would like to visit Germany,
he hasn't planned a diplomatic trip because he is concerned about an arrest
warrant issued by the International Criminal Court, the U.N.'s top war crimes
court, last year in connection with the war in Gaza. Merz said there are
currently no plans for a visit but he may invite Netanyahu in the future. He
added that he is not aware of future sanctions against Israel from the European
Union nor any plans to renew German bans on military exports to Israel. Germany
had a temporary ban on exporting military equipment to Israel, which was lifted
after the ceasefire began on Oct. 10.
Israel kills militant in Gaza
The Israeli military said it killed a militant who approached its troops across
the Yellow Line. Gaza's Health Ministry says Israeli forces have killed more
than 370 Palestinians since the start of the ceasefire, and that the bodies of
six people killed in attacks had been brought to local hospitals over the past
24 hours. In the original Hamas-led attack in 2023, the militants killed around
1,200 people and took more than 250 others hostage. Almost all the hostages or
their remains have been returned in ceasefires or other deals. Israel's
offensive in Gaza has killed at least 70,360 Palestinians, according to Gaza's
Health Ministry, which operates under the Hamas-run government. The ministry
does not differentiate between civilians and combatants, but says that nearly
half the dead have been women and children. The ministry is part of Gaza's Hamas
government and its numbers are considered reliable by the U.N. and other
international bodies.
Netanyahu will Meet Trump on Gaza on December 29,
Spokesperson Says
Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will meet US President Donald Trump on
December 29 to discuss the next steps of the Gaza ceasefire, an Israeli
government spokesperson said on Monday, Reuters reported. On Sunday, Netanyahu
said that he will be discussing with Trump the second phase of a US plan to end
the war in Gaza later this month. A ceasefire between Israel and Hamas came into
effect in October. Both sides have repeatedly accused each other of violating
the truce and wide gaps remain on key issues yet to be discussed under Trump's
plan to end the war, including Hamas disarmament, the governance of post-war
Gaza and the composition and mandate of an international security force in the
enclave. "The Prime Minister will meet with President Trump on Monday, December
29 they will discuss the future steps and phases and the international
stabilization force of the ceasefire plan," government spokesperson Shosh
Bedrosian said in an online briefing to reporters. The prime minister's office
said on December 1 that Trump had invited Netanyahu to the White House. Israeli
media have since reported that the two leaders may meet in Florida.
Iraq Shuts Down Lukoil West Qurna 2 Field Due to Leak
Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
Iraq has shut down the entire oil production at Lukoil's West Qurna 2 oilfield,
one of the world's largest, due to a leak on an export pipeline, two Iraqi
energy officials told Reuters on Monday. Lukoil declared force majeure last
month at West Qurna 2 as it was hit with sanctions alongside Rosneft as part of
US President Donald Trump's push to end the war in Ukraine. The field, with
output of around 460,000 barrels per day, accounts for about 0.5% of world oil
supply and 9% of total output in Iraq, OPEC's second-largest producer. Lukoil's
75% operational stake in the field is its largest foreign asset.
Iraq has frequently produced above its output target agreed with OPEC and allies
including Russia, known as OPEC+. The sanctions have drawn a growing list of
potential bidders for Lukoil's global assets that includes oil majors.
Zelenskyy Meets in London with European Allies on US Peace
Plan and Security
Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met French, German and British leaders in London
on Monday amid what Kyiv’s European allies described as a “decisive time” in the
US-led effort to end Russia's war in Ukraine. Prime Minister Keir Starmer held
talks with Zelenskyy, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor
Friedrich Merz at the British leader’s 10 Downing St. residence to try to
strengthen Ukraine’s hand amid mounting impatience from US President Donald
Trump. “This is the furthest we’ve got in four years, and we welcome the fact
that these talks are continuing at every level,” said Starmer's spokesman, Tom
Wells, adding: “It isn't a straight line between conflict and peace.”He said
“intensive work” will continue in the coming days, although “there are still
outstanding issues.”Macron’s office said the session allowed the leaders “to
continue joint work on the US plan in order to complement it with European
contributions, in close coordination with Ukraine.” In an exchange with
reporters on Sunday night, Trump appeared frustrated with Zelenskyy, claiming
the Ukrainian leader “hasn’t yet read the proposal.” “Russia is, I believe, fine
with it, but I’m not sure that Zelenskyy’s fine with it,” Trump said in
Washington. “His people love it, but he hasn’t read it.” It’s not clear why
Trump thought Zelenskyy hadn’t read the plan or who he was saying loved it.
Ukrainian officials have made sparing comments about it and few details of the
negotiations have been made public. Starmer, Macron and Merz took a more
supportive stance toward Kyiv in comments before their Monday meeting, which
lasted about two hours. The UK leader said the push for peace was at a “critical
stage,” and stressed the need for "a just and lasting ceasefire.”
Merz, meanwhile, said he was “skeptical” about some details in documents
released by the US. “We have to talk about it. That’s why we are here,” he said.
“The coming days ... could be a decisive time for all of us."European leaders
are working to ensure that any ceasefire is backed by solid security guarantees
both from Europe and the US to deter Russia from attacking again. Trump has not
given explicit guarantees in public. Zelenskyy said late Sunday that his talks
with European leaders this week in London and Brussels will focus on security,
air defense and long-term funding for Ukraine’s war effort. He said Monday that
Ukraine needs support from both Europe and the US. “There are some things we
can’t manage without the Americans, things which we can’t manage without Europe,
and that’s why we need to make some important decisions,” he said at Downing
Street. Macron's office said national security advisers are finalizing ways to
provide Ukraine with robust security guarantees and to plan measures for
Ukraine’s reconstruction.”
Obstacles in the peace plan
US and Ukrainian negotiators completed three days of talks on Saturday aimed at
trying to narrow differences on the US administration’s peace proposal.
Zelenskyy said on Telegram that talks had been “substantive” and that National
Security and Defense Council Secretary Rustem Umerov and Chief of the General
Staff Andrii Hnatov were traveling back to Europe to brief him. A major sticking
point in the plan is the suggestion that Kyiv must cede control of the Donbas
region of eastern Ukraine to Russia, which illegally occupies most but not all
of the territory. Ukraine and its European allies have balked at the idea of
handing over land. Starmer said he “won’t be putting pressure” on Zelenskyy to
accept a peace settlement. Trump has had a hot-and-cold relationship with
Zelenskyy since winning a second term, insisting the war was a waste of US
taxpayers’ money. Trump has also repeatedly urged the Ukrainians to cede land to
Russia to end the nearly four-year conflict.
US releases national security strategy
The European talks follow the publication of a new US national security strategy
that alarmed European leaders and was welcomed by Russia. Kremlin spokesman
Dmitry Peskov said the document, which spells out the administration’s core
foreign policy interests, was largely in line with Moscow’s vision. “The nuances
that we see in the new concept certainly look appealing to us,” he said Monday.
“It mentions the need for dialogue and building constructive, friendly
relations. This cannot but appeal to us, and it absolutely corresponds to our
vision. We understand that by eliminating the irritants that currently exist in
bilateral relations, a prospect may open for us to truly restore our relations
and bring them out of the rather deep crisis.”The document released Friday by
the White House said the US wants to improve its relationship with Russia after
years of Moscow being treated as a global pariah and that ending the war is a
core US interest to “reestablish strategic stability with Russia.”The document
also says NATO must not be “a perpetually expanding alliance,” echoing another
complaint by Russia. It was scathing about the migration and free speech
policies of longstanding US allies in Europe, suggesting they face the “prospect
of civilizational erasure” due to migration. Starmer’s government has declined
to comment on the document, saying it is a matter for the US. government. Russia
continued to attack Ukraine amid the diplomatic efforts. Its drones struck
high-rise apartments in the northeastern Ukrainian city of Okhtyrka overnight,
injuring seven people, according to the head of the regional administration,
Oleh Hryhorov. He said the building was extensively damaged. In the northern
city of Chernihiv, a Russian drone exploded outside a residential building,
injuring three people, regional head Viacheslav Chaus said. The attack also
damaged a kindergarten, gas lines and cars. Ukraine’s air force said Russia
fired 149 drones overnight, with 131 neutralized and 16 others striking their
targets. Meanwhile, Russian air defenses destroyed 67 Ukrainian drones
overnight, Russia’s Defense Ministry said. The drones were shot down over 11
Russian regions, it said.
Kuwait Revokes Citizenship of Tareq Al Suwaidan
Kuwait/Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
Kuwait has revoked the citizenship of 24 people, including prominent preacher
Tareq Al Suwaidan, according to an official decree published in the Kuwait Al-Youm
gazette. Decree No. 227 of 2025 stated that Al Suwaidan’s Kuwaiti nationality,
along with that of any dependents who obtained it through him, is to be
withdrawn. The decree was issued from Seif Palace and signed by the Emir, Sheikh
Mishal Al Ahmad Al Jaber Al Sabah, upon the recommendation of the First Deputy
Prime Minister and Minister of Interior and after Cabinet approval. The order
did not cite the legal grounds for the decision, though Kuwaiti authorities have
previously said citizenship may be revoked in cases involving fraud, criminal
activity or threats to state security. About 60,000 people have been stripped of
nationality since the establishment of the Higher Committee for Citizenship
Affairs in Kuwait. Born in 1953, Al Suwaidan is rather considered a media figure
affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood than as a thinker and researcher in
Islamic history and personal development. He moved to the United States at age
17, where he spent two decades and earned a PhD. Earlier, Al Suwaidan has faced
accusations of insulting sister countries, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
On July 30, 2024, the Criminal Court has acquitted Al Suwaidan of insulting the
two states, but the Public Prosecutor later appealed the verdict
Jordan’s king stresses need to preserve Christian
presence in Middle East
Arab News/December 08, 2025
LONDON: King Abdullah II of Jordan emphasized the importance of preserving a
Christian presence in the Middle East on Monday during talks with religious
leaders. In meetings at Al-Husseiniya Palace with Patriarch John X of Antioch
and All the East and Archimandrite Metodije of the Serbian Orthodox Church, the
king called for an end to the violation of Muslim and Christian holy sites in
Jerusalem by Israel, which he said was seeking to change the historical and
legal status quo, the Petra news agency reported. The king reaffirmed Jordan’s
religious and historical role in protecting holy sites under its Hashemite
Custodianship. Crown Prince Hussein, Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad, the king’s chief
adviser for religious and cultural affairs, Alaa Batayneh, director of the
Office of His Majesty, and Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem Theophilos III
also joined the talks, the report said. King Abdullah stressed the need for all
parties to adhere to the agreement to end the war in Gaza, ensure the flow of
aid and prevent escalations in the occupied West Bank.
The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources
published
on
December 08-09/2025
A good nuclear deal won’t put Saudi Arabia on a path for the bomb
Peter Doran and Andrea Stricker/The Hill/December 08/2025
What was Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman looking for on his visit to
Washington in return for his trillion-dollar investment pledge? There were jets,
a defense agreement, and what could possibly turn into America’s blessing to
become the newest Middle Eastern state capable of producing nuclear-weapons
fuel. The two sides continue negotiating a binding U.S.-Saudi civil nuclear
agreement. The devil, as always, will be in the details. If President Donald
Trump cuts a weak deal, he risks unwittingly igniting a global nuclear arms race
— a legacy no president wants.
On the other hand, a civil nuclear accord with Saudi Arabia clearly serves
American interests. It would cement ties with Riyadh, now a major non-NATO ally,
and could ease more Saudi oil onto world markets, helping keep prices in check.
Yet Riyadh is pushing to loosen U.S. and international safeguards on its nascent
nuclear program. It wants Washington’s approval — and possibly its active help —
to enrich uranium, the critical pathway to nuclear weapons. Only 14 or 15
countries currently enrich uranium, and just 10 reprocess plutonium, the other
main bomb fuel. Among states without nuclear weapons, only Argentina, Brazil,
Germany, Japan, and the Netherlands enrich their own uranium. (Iran no longer
does so, having lost that capability to U.S. and Israeli strikes in June). Only
Japan reprocesses plutonium.
By contrast, 23 nations with nuclear power forgo enrichment and reprocessing.
The reasons are straightforward: it is enormously expensive, and buying reactor
fuel from established suppliers is far cheaper. More importantly, possessing
enrichment and reprocessing plants puts a country mere months away from a bomb,
should it covertly amass the know-how to construct them.
Peaceful nations do not want to send that signal to their neighbors.
Other warning signs abound. Riyadh has so far refused to adopt the Additional
Protocol (AP), the International Atomic Energy Agency’s toughest inspection
regime, which allows short-notice inspections of undeclared sites to uncover
covert nuclear weapons work. That the Saudis want fewer watchful eyes should set
off alarm bells — especially given the crown prince’s repeated public vow to
acquire nuclear weapons if Iran does.
Consider the contrast with the 2009 U.S.-United Arab Emirates (UAE) nuclear
cooperation agreement, which established a true “gold standard”: a major U.S.
defense partner built a peaceful nuclear power program, signed the Additional
Protocol, and explicitly foreswore enrichment and reprocessing. The result has
been no regional arms race.
Iran offers the cautionary counterexample. After decades of clandestine activity
and production of near-weapons-grade uranium, Tehran stood in June 2025 on the
threshold of fielding as many as 22 nuclear weapons. Trump’s decisive strikes on
Iran’s nuclear facilities, followed by his unequivocal warning that he will
“absolutely” bomb them again if enrichment resumes, sent a powerful message:
break the rules of nonproliferation and America’s B-2s will pay a visit.
The president should reinforce, not erode, this standard across the Middle East.
Encouragingly, Energy Secretary Chris Wright has recently insisted the pending
U.S.-Saudi deal will not permit enrichment, whereas previously he said the
opposite. Other reports suggest the accord may center on nuclear reactors and
other nuclear cooperation. Riyadh, however, will almost certainly keep pressing
for future consent, trying to poke holes in the gold standard. It can point to
the Trump administration’s recent decision to let South Korea enrich and
reprocess — ending decades of U.S. refusals — as proof that “no” today can
become “yes” tomorrow. That precedent will only embolden the kingdom. If Trump
drops the “gold standard” for Saudi Arabia, a queue will quickly form: Turkey,
Poland, Jordan, Egypt, even the UAE, and others will seek similar exemptions for
their own latent nuclear weapons programs. What was once gold threatens to turn
to lead overnight. To prevent that outcome, the White House and Congress should
insist on four non-negotiable conditions:
First, Saudi Arabia must ratify and implement the Additional Protocol, giving
the IAEA timely authority to detect any illicit weapons effort.
Second, like the U.S.-UAE agreement, a Saudi nuclear agreement must ensure the
United States retains a perpetual right of return for all U.S.-origin nuclear
material and technology, ensuring Riyadh can never divert American-supplied
commodities to bombs. Third, the agreement must explicitly lock Saudi Arabia
into the UAE gold standard: a clear, legally binding, and verifiable pledge
never to enrich uranium and reprocess plutonium on its own soil. In return,
Washington can guarantee Riyadh a dependable, long-term supply of reactor fuel —
especially as America’s own domestic enrichment capacity ramps up in the years
ahead. Fourth, every Saudi nuclear facility — current and future — must remain
under permanent IAEA safeguards and real-time monitoring, with no exceptions or
sunset clauses.
The strategic and commercial rewards of locking in Riyadh as a long-term Middle
East partner are undeniable. But Trump must hold the line and reject Saudi
pressure for a “leaky” nonproliferation standard. Trump has long called nuclear
weapons the world’s “biggest problem” and their destructive power “unthinkable.”
Now is the moment to match deeds to those words — and keep America’s friends
from starting a nuclear scramble that its foes would eagerly join.
https://thehill.com/homenews/5634758-saudi-arabia-nuclear-deal/
**Peter B. Doran is an adjunct senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of
Democracies, where Andrea Stricker is deputy director of the Nonproliferation
Program and a research fellow. and Stricker Nonpro. FDD is a Washington-based,
nonpartisan research institute focused on national security and foreign policy.
Lettre ouverte à son Excellence le Président Joseph Aoun.
Francois Bainy/December 08/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/12/150028/
Quand le dénoncé s’incrimine par
ommission,par doute,par fierté ou par ignorance…
Je m explique:
La semaine précédant la visite du St.Père au Liban vous aviez pris un
risque,lourd en conséquences, d’accuser (sans les nommer)des mouchards qui vous
ont dénoncé à l’Administration Américaine.
Je ne vais pas rentrer dans le mérite ni la teneur de la dénonciation mais
plutôt de la grosse gaffe diplomatique dans laquelle vos (ignorants)conseillers
vous ont impliqué.
La législation Américaine,se basant sur votre dénonciation est obligée d’ouvrir
une enquête
afin de découvrir l’identité de la personne ou le service qui vous a rapporté
ces faits.
M.le Président,en tant que figure officielle vous n’avez qu’un seul moyen pour
obtenir des renseignements de l’Administration Américaine. Vous devez suivre le
seul protocole existant c’est les moyens Diplomatiques.
Le Ministre des Affaires Étrangères charge l’Ambassade du Liban aux États Unis
afin de solliciter auprès du Sécrétaire d’Etat Américain d’examiner votre
requête et vous répondre positivement ou négativement.
N’importe quel autre moyen est sujet à l’ouverture d’une enquête afin de
découvrir qui au sein de l Administration Américaine vous fournit les
renseignements.
Dans ce cas précis le principal accusé c’est vous M.le Président car vous avez
violé la Constitution et les lois Américaines.
Ce cas est investigué par le (FISC),United States Foreign Intelligence
Survellance Court.
La loi est claire:
Quand un gouvernement étranger obtient des renseignements en rapport avec des
sources US, plusieurs réponses et potentielles mesures peuvent être prises
dépendant de la nature et la gravité du leak.
Si le renseignement obtenu n’a pas été authorisé par le biais diplomatique c’est
une infraction grâve et une enfreinte à la sécurité Natonale et constitue un
crime Fédéral.
– Action légale et pénalités criminelles:
Les personnes responsables pour ces péripéties non authorisées peuvent encourir
de graves peines de prison.
Dans le cas de considérer ce leak une affaire d espionnage les peines peuvent
varier entre réclusion à vie ou la peine de mort.
M.le Président
Dans le cas d’ouverture d’une enquête vous êtes le premier appelé à fournir des
“éclaircissements” car vous avez reconnu devant les moyens de communication
avoir reçu des renseignements selon lesquels
vous avez été victime de dénonciateurs.
Si ce dénonciateur est proche de l’Administration Américaine et s’il possède la
nationalité Américaine vous êtes tous les deux dans de sales draps.Et si votre
source fait partie du Lobby Iranien pire encore.
Avant de terminer cette lettre je voudrais attirer votre attention sur les
efforts que vous déployez pour défendre l’image de Madame la Présidente .En
toute honnêteté Madame la présidente est victime de ce cirque politique car les
critiques proférées contre Mme Nehmat ont pour but de porter atteinte à votte
image…Et comme vous avez pu le constater les libanais avaient eu leur lune de
miel suite à votre élection mais un mois plus tard et depuis la nomination de
vos conseillers hétéroclytes le peuple a sombré dans la déception.
Vous aviez tout pour faire un excellent président de la République mais vous
avez perdu une occasion en or.
Pour terminer deux conseils:
1 N’accusez pas les autres de vos erreurs.
2 On ne badine pas avec l’administration Américaine. (F.B.)
A good nuclear deal won’t
put Saudi Arabia on a path for the bomb
Peter Doran and Andrea Stricker/The Hill/December 08/2025
What was Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman looking for on his visit to
Washington in return for his trillion-dollar investment pledge? There were jets,
a defense agreement, and what could possibly turn into America’s blessing to
become the newest Middle Eastern state capable of producing nuclear-weapons
fuel. The two sides continue negotiating a binding U.S.-Saudi civil nuclear
agreement. The devil, as always, will be in the details. If President Donald
Trump cuts a weak deal, he risks unwittingly igniting a global nuclear arms race
— a legacy no president wants. On the other hand, a civil nuclear accord with
Saudi Arabia clearly serves American interests. It would cement ties with
Riyadh, now a major non-NATO ally, and could ease more Saudi oil onto world
markets, helping keep prices in check. Yet Riyadh is pushing to loosen U.S. and
international safeguards on its nascent nuclear program. It wants Washington’s
approval — and possibly its active help — to enrich uranium, the critical
pathway to nuclear weapons. Only 14 or 15 countries currently enrich uranium,
and just 10 reprocess plutonium, the other main bomb fuel.Among states without
nuclear weapons, only Argentina, Brazil, Germany, Japan, and the Netherlands
enrich their own uranium. (Iran no longer does so, having lost that capability
to U.S. and Israeli strikes in June). Only Japan reprocesses plutonium. By
contrast, 23 nations with nuclear power forgo enrichment and reprocessing. The
reasons are straightforward: it is enormously expensive, and buying reactor fuel
from established suppliers is far cheaper. More importantly, possessing
enrichment and reprocessing plants puts a country mere months away from a bomb,
should it covertly amass the know-how to construct them.
Peaceful nations do not want to send that signal to their neighbors.
Other warning signs abound. Riyadh has so far refused to adopt the Additional
Protocol (AP), the International Atomic Energy Agency’s toughest inspection
regime, which allows short-notice inspections of undeclared sites to uncover
covert nuclear weapons work. That the Saudis want fewer watchful eyes should set
off alarm bells — especially given the crown prince’s repeated public vow to
acquire nuclear weapons if Iran does. Consider the contrast with the 2009
U.S.-United Arab Emirates (UAE) nuclear cooperation agreement, which established
a true “gold standard”: a major U.S. defense partner built a peaceful nuclear
power program, signed the Additional Protocol, and explicitly foreswore
enrichment and reprocessing. The result has been no regional arms race. Iran
offers the cautionary counterexample. After decades of clandestine activity and
production of near-weapons-grade uranium, Tehran stood in June 2025 on the
threshold of fielding as many as 22 nuclear weapons. Trump’s decisive strikes on
Iran’s nuclear facilities, followed by his unequivocal warning that he will
“absolutely” bomb them again if enrichment resumes, sent a powerful message:
break the rules of nonproliferation and America’s B-2s will pay a visit.
The president should reinforce, not erode, this standard across the Middle East.
Encouragingly, Energy Secretary Chris Wright has recently insisted the pending
U.S.-Saudi deal will not permit enrichment, whereas previously he said the
opposite. Other reports suggest the accord may center on nuclear reactors and
other nuclear cooperation. Riyadh, however, will almost certainly keep pressing
for future consent, trying to poke holes in the gold standard. It can point to
the Trump administration’s recent decision to let South Korea enrich and
reprocess — ending decades of U.S. refusals — as proof that “no” today can
become “yes” tomorrow. That precedent will only embolden the kingdom. If Trump
drops the “gold standard” for Saudi Arabia, a queue will quickly form: Turkey,
Poland, Jordan, Egypt, even the UAE, and others will seek similar exemptions for
their own latent nuclear weapons programs. What was once gold threatens to turn
to lead overnight. To prevent that outcome, the White House and Congress should
insist on four non-negotiable conditions:
First, Saudi Arabia must ratify and implement the Additional Protocol, giving
the IAEA timely authority to detect any illicit weapons effort. Second, like the
U.S.-UAE agreement, a Saudi nuclear agreement must ensure the United States
retains a perpetual right of return for all U.S.-origin nuclear material and
technology, ensuring Riyadh can never divert American-supplied commodities to
bombs. Third, the agreement must explicitly lock Saudi Arabia into the UAE gold
standard: a clear, legally binding, and verifiable pledge never to enrich
uranium and reprocess plutonium on its own soil. In return, Washington can
guarantee Riyadh a dependable, long-term supply of reactor fuel — especially as
America’s own domestic enrichment capacity ramps up in the years ahead. Fourth,
every Saudi nuclear facility — current and future — must remain under permanent
IAEA safeguards and real-time monitoring, with no exceptions or sunset
clauses.The strategic and commercial rewards of locking in Riyadh as a long-term
Middle East partner are undeniable. But Trump must hold the line and reject
Saudi pressure for a “leaky” nonproliferation standard. Trump has long called
nuclear weapons the world’s “biggest problem” and their destructive power
“unthinkable.” Now is the moment to match deeds to those words — and keep
America’s friends from starting a nuclear scramble that its foes would eagerly
join.
https://thehill.com/homenews/5634758-saudi-arabia-nuclear-deal/
**Peter B. Doran is an adjunct senior fellow at the
Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where Andrea Stricker is deputy director
of the Nonproliferation Program and a research fellow. and Stricker Nonpro. FDD
is a Washington-based, nonpartisan research institute focused on national
security and foreign policy.
Why Mohamed bin Zayed — and Donald Trump — Represent a New
Architecture for Peace
Robert Williams/Gatestone Institute/December 8, 2025
[T]wo leaders have reshaped the strategic map with a clarity rarely seen in this
era: United States President Donald J. Trump and United Arab Emirates President
Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan (MBZ). MBZ's long-term project is not
ideological and not transactional. It is developmental. His vision of governance
is anchored in four pillars: modernity, competence, coexistence, and scientific
advancement. This is why the UAE has become a regional pioneer in space
exploration, renewable energy, and peaceful nuclear development. It is why the
country became the third in the world — after the United States and China — to
invest at scale in artificial intelligence, signing multibillion-dollar
agreements to accelerate the technological transformation of its economy.
MBZ understood that a modern Middle East cannot be built by capitulating to
militancy.
His reforms stand in stark contrast to the ideological rigidity of groups such
as the Muslim Brotherhood, whose governance models have produced paralysis,
institutional weakness, and repeated humanitarian disasters. Where they promote
confrontation, MBZ promotes capacity-building. Where they elevate dogma, he
elevates human development.
The Nobel Peace Prize has often been awarded to symbolic acts or aspirational
visions. But the Middle East today demands something different: recognition of
leaders whose decisions produced tangible pathways to peace, stability, and
human survival. Trump and MBZ did not simply speak about peace; they engineered
it.
The Nobel Peace Prize should acknowledge both. History surely will.
Two leaders have reshaped the strategic map with a clarity rarely seen in this
era: United States President Donald J. Trump and United Arab Emirates President
Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan (MBZ). Pictured: Trump meets with MBZ at the
White House on May 15, 2017, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chris Kleponis/Pool/Getty
Images)
At a time when diplomacy is paralyzed, institutions are overwhelmed, and war has
returned to the Middle East with devastating force, two leaders have reshaped
the strategic map with a clarity rarely seen in this era: United States
President Donald J. Trump and United Arab Emirates President Sheikh Mohamed bin
Zayed Al Nahyan (MBZ). Their approaches differ in style and origin, but converge
on a single point: both pushed the region toward pragmatism at a moment when it
was veering toward extremism and fragmentation. For this reason, both deserve to
be considered among the most consequential peacemakers of the twenty-first
century—and worthy of recognition at the highest international level, including
the Nobel Peace Prize.
A Vision of Peace That Broke with Old Orthodoxy
When Trump launched the Abraham Accords, most observers underestimated the scale
of what was about to unfold. Traditional diplomacy had failed repeatedly because
it insisted on sequencing peace according to old formulas. Trump reversed the
logic: he created a political opening, protected regional actors who were ready
to take a risk, and refused to allow entrenched ideological narratives to
dictate the future.
But the political umbrella was only half of the equation. The other half — the
regional courage to turn diplomatic possibility into reality — came from the
United Arab Emirates and from MBZ personally. The UAE did not simply sign a
document; it transformed the Abraham Accords into a functioning structure that
other states could trust and join. It was the first country to take the leap,
despite threats from extremist movements, political pressure and Iranian-aligned
proxies. When Yemen's Houthis launched drones at Abu Dhabi, it was a stark
reminder of the risks involved. Yet the UAE did not retreat. MBZ understood that
a modern Middle East cannot be built by capitulating to militancy.
A Leadership Philosophy Rooted in Modern Statecraft
MBZ's long-term project is not ideological and not transactional. It is
developmental. His vision of governance is anchored in four pillars: modernity,
competence, coexistence, and scientific advancement. This is why the UAE has
become a regional pioneer in space exploration, renewable energy, and peaceful
nuclear development. It is why the country became the third in the world — after
the United States and China — to invest at scale in artificial intelligence,
signing multibillion-dollar agreements to accelerate the technological
transformation of its economy.
For MBZ, modernization is not a luxury; it is the region's only path out of
permanent crisis. His reforms stand in stark contrast to the ideological
rigidity of groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, whose governance models have
produced paralysis, institutional weakness, and repeated humanitarian disasters.
Where they promote confrontation, MBZ promotes capacity-building. Where they
elevate dogma, he elevates human development.
Humanitarian Leadership Not as Charity, But as Strategy
If diplomacy and modernization form two pillars of MBZ's legacy, humanitarian
leadership forms the third — and perhaps the most visible today. The UAE's
response to the Gaza crisis has been unprecedented. Through its "Gallant Knight
3" operation, the Emirates launched one of the largest humanitarian missions in
the world: more than 102,750 tonnes of aid, USD $2.65 billion in assistance, 725
flights, 21 ships, 10,000 trucks, field hospitals, desalination plants, and
extensive medical evacuations. It built functioning systems inside a war zone —
bakeries, community kitchens, hospital ships, and six water-desalination plants
serving over a million people daily.
These efforts were not symbolic. They were immediate, logistical, and
lifesaving.
But Gaza is not the only crisis where MBZ's humanitarian doctrine has reshaped
outcomes. In Sudan, where conflict has displaced millions since 2023, the UAE
has delivered USD $784 million in aid and more than 12,700 tonnes of relief
supplies, alongside two major field hospitals in Chad and a third in South
Sudan. More than 180,000 medical cases have been treated in these facilities
alone. Across Uganda, Chad, South Sudan, and Sudan, the UAE rehabilitated
schools, provided wells and solar lighting, and supported international
organizations such as WFP, UNICEF, UNHCR, and WHO.
From 2016 to 2025, total UAE assistance to Sudan exceeded USD $3.56 billion—one
of the largest humanitarian commitments in Africa.
This is not episodic generosity. It is statecraft: stability through
humanitarian depth.
The Middle East Needs Builders, Not Ideologues
The region today is trapped between militant groups that reject coexistence and
governments struggling to respond to cascading crises. MBZ represents a
radically different model of Arab leadership — one grounded in strategic
sobriety and humanitarian responsibility. His approach does not seek headlines;
it seeks durable outcomes. It defends national sovereignty without falling into
zero-sum confrontation. It prioritizes the dignity of civilians over political
theatrics. It recognizes that peace cannot survive without development,
security, and functioning institutions.
Trump's contribution to this shift was indispensable. He broke diplomatic
inertia, challenged long-standing assumptions, and enabled the first real
structural opening in decades. MBZ transformed that opening into a working
architecture. Together, their actions altered the direction of Middle Eastern
history.
A Nobel Peace Prize Rooted in Outcomes, Not Idealism
The Nobel Peace Prize has often been awarded to symbolic acts or aspirational
visions. But the Middle East today demands something different: recognition of
leaders whose decisions produced tangible pathways to peace, stability, and
human survival. Trump and MBZ did not simply speak about peace; they engineered
it. One from the global capital of power, the other from a small country with an
outsized moral and strategic footprint.
Mohamed bin Zayed deserves recognition not only because he supported a
diplomatic breakthrough, but because he continues to build a model of regional
governance that rejects extremism, invests in humanity, and anchors peace in
practical realities. His leadership represents the clearest alternative to the
ideological forces driving the region toward perpetual conflict.
In an age defined by crisis, the world needs examples of what real peacebuilding
looks like. Trump provided the political courage to break old barriers. MBZ
provided the strategic courage to build something enduring behind them. The
Nobel Peace Prize should acknowledge both. History surely will.
*Robert Williams is based in the United States.
© 2025 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.
Bashar Assad’s Odd
Decisions
Abdulrahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Al Awsat/December 08/2025
A year has passed since the fall of the Assad regime. The change has been
immense, and its consequences are still unfolding. As the first anniversary
approaches, key questions remain unresolved, the most prominent being: Why did
Bashar al-Assad and his regime become subservient to Iran so early in his rule?
In my view, had he not pursued such a dangerous policy, he might not have ended
up exiled in Moscow. This conviction only grows stronger when reviewing his
governance over more than two decades, not merely from the outbreak of protests
in 2011. More than eight years before the uprising against him, Assad’s regime
had already been working closely with Iran at political and military levels
across the region. In coordination with Tehran, Syria became a hub for covert
operations against the Americans after the invasion of Iraq, at a time when Iran
was skillfully playing a double game. Tehran used Assad as a base for
“resistance” while simultaneously cooperating with Washington to dismantle what
remained of Saddam Hussein’s regime. In an interview I conducted with Assad
before those operations began, he vowed to “turn Iraq into another Vietnam.” He
was convinced the Americans intended to topple him next after overthrowing
Saddam. In reality, Washington showed no interest in Damascus and did not target
his rule, viewing Syria instead as a security buffer for Israel.
Between 2004 and 2009, Syria became a training ground and transit point for
armed groups – Iraqi, Arab, and “jihadist” – numbering in the thousands.
Fighters were smuggled from Syria into Iraq through unstable provinces such as
Anbar and Salah al-Din. These operations strengthened Iran’s negotiating
position with Washington, and they continued for years afterward. On a second
front, Assad also aligned his regime with Iran’s agenda in Lebanon, assisting in
the elimination of many opposition figures and helping Iran’s proxy, Hezbollah,
consolidate full control. Tehran’s long-term project was to build Lebanon into
the most heavily armed front in its regional confrontation with Israel. When
protests broke out in Daraa and later across Syria, it was expected that states
harmed by Assad’s regime would offer at least partial support to the new
movement. The uprising was indeed successful, and the regime was close to
collapse. It would have fallen had Iran not rushed to save it, sending tens of
thousands of fighters from Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
After surviving this phase, Assad grew even more convinced of the strategic bond
with Tehran, believing that the regime’s survival was safest under Iran’s
umbrella. In reality, his relationship with Tehran had always been toxic,
burdensome, and dangerous for him.
His policies show he never understood the region’s balance of power or the risky
game he had entered. Before the revolution, he was not compelled to ally himself
with Iran. Europe opened its doors to him after he succeeded his father. The
Arab moderate bloc welcomed him. Even many Syrian opposition figures who had
resisted his father were hopeful when he came to power.
It is also inaccurate to claim that Bashar moved straight from the clinic to the
presidency, as often rumored. In the last years of Hafez al-Assad’s life, Bashar
participated from the shadows in presidential activities, attended important
meetings, and was familiar with state files. His later decisions revealed that
he was nothing like his father, who had maintained balanced ties with Tehran,
Riyadh, Moscow, and the West as part of a carefully managed strategy against the
Baathist regime in Iraq and against Türkiye. Hafez benefited from Israel’s role
in safeguarding the minority-based Syrian regime and even welcomed cooperation
with the Americans during the 1990 war against Saddam. Bashar did the opposite
at every turn. It must also be said that the Assad regime, a product of the Cold
War, had nearly exhausted its political lifespan before Bashar came to power.
His rise offered only a narrow window of opportunity. It required him to
reposition Syria in line with the post-Cold War era and a region dominated by a
single global power. Instead, he repeatedly chose the wrong course, mismanaging
every major moment until his final days in office. Recent information confirms
that Moscow “abandoned” Bashar roughly ten days before the regime collapsed,
when Ahmed al-Sharaa’s forces carried out a rapid military campaign in Aleppo’s
countryside and began their march toward Damascus. Russia realized that the fall
of the regime was inevitable.
Bashar’s downfall reverberated across the region and the world. He collapsed
before the eyes of Iran and its allies, who this time were unable to save him.
With his departure, Iran’s influence also receded, and its imperial project in
that strategically important region crumbled. Syria was finally freed from a
criminal regime, though the regional repercussions are still unfolding.
Selected Face Book & X tweets
for
/December 08,
2025
@followers
@highlight
@everyone