English LCCC Newsbulletin For
Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For June 03/2025
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2025/english.june03.25.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
Whoever serves me must follow me, and where I am, there
will my servant be also
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint John 12/26-30:”Whoever serves me
must follow me, and where I am, there will my servant be also. Whoever serves
me, the Father will honour. ‘Now my soul is troubled. And what should I say
“Father, save me from this hour”? No, it is for this reason that I have come to
this hour. Father, glorify your name.’ Then a voice came from heaven, ‘I have
glorified it, and I will glorify it again.’The crowd standing there heard it and
said that it was thunder. Others said, ‘An angel has spoken to him.’Jesus
answered, ‘This voice has come for your sake, not for mine.”
Titles For The
Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published
on June 02-03/2025
A Fatherly Message from Dear Edmond El-Chidiac and His Wife to
Their Daughter on Her Wedding Day: To Our Beloved Daughter Sabine
A Must-Watch Interview Video (from Al-Badeel Platform) with the distinguished
researcher and academic Dr. Zeina Mansour
Rubio's Warning About a Potential Syrian Civil War Puts Lebanon on the Edge
'Region-by-region' plan may be adopted for Hezbollah disarmament
Judicial Council Prepares for Major Reshuffle and Appointments
Lebanese Army Removes Israeli Flag, Boosts Southern Deployment
Bank Reform in Lebanon: Central Authority Under Growing Pressure
Joe Saddi Seeks US Support to Reform Lebanon’s Energy Sector
Pharmaceutical Syndicate Urges Immediate Action Against Counterfeit Drugs
Peace vs. Normalization: Distinct Paths, Diverging Logics in ME Diplomacy
Aoun Vows No Immunity for Wrongdoers
Salam Reaffirms Support for Arab Peace Initiative and Commitment to Policy
Statement
Salam meets Berri in Ain el-Tineh, says his doors 'always open' for Hezbollah
From the UAE to Lebanon: Flights Fully Booked for the Summer
Syria Reopens Arida Border Crossing with Lebanon
Judicial Appointments: Is the Deadlock About to End?
UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon visits Israel
Report: Hezbollah member arrested in South for spying for Israel
Hezbollah’s Arms Dependence: A Calculated Business Model
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on June 02-03/2025
Iran says it has seen no change in US position on sanctions yet
Iran FM says no nuclear deal if goal is to 'deprive Iran of peaceful activities'
Iran demands ‘guarantee’ US will lift sanctions in nuclear talks
IAEA chief urges ‘more transparency’ from Iran, Tehran says it has ‘nothing to
hide’
Iran poised to dismiss US nuclear proposal, says Iranian diplomat
UN, Iran and Egypt meet in Cairo to discuss Iran's nuclear program
Ukraine, Russia hold fragile peace talks in Istanbul amid renewed strikes
'Operation Spiderweb’: How Ukraine destroyed over a third of Russian bombers
Ukraine and Russia meet in Turkey for peace talks after trading major attacks
Damascus stock exchange reopens after 6-month closure
Israel army says intercepts Yemen missile after air raid sirens sound
Three people reported killed and dozens wounded at an aid site in Gaza, medics
say
US gives nod to Syria to bring former opposition foreign fighters into army
US withdraws hundreds of troops from Syria after Pentagon directive
UN chief condemns killing of Palestinians at aid center in Gaza, calls for probe
Former Biden official Matthew Miller says he believes Israel has committed war
crimes in Gaza
Insurgents overrun Mali base, killing dozens of soldiers, sources say
Conservative Karol Nawrocki wins Poland's presidential election
FBI says 8 injured in Colorado attack by man with makeshift flamethrower who
yelled 'Free Palestine'
Titles For
The Latest English LCCC analysis &
editorials from miscellaneous sources
on June 02-03/2025
Lifting Sanctions on the Syrian Regime is a Grave Mistake/Sinan Ciddi/19FortyFive
site/June 02/2025
Are All Cultures Equal? The Ugly Truth about Multiculturalism/Raymond
Ibrahim/The Stream/June 02/2025
URGENT: World Health Organization About to Give Itself Unlimited Power/'Dr.'
Tedros Will Decide How You Must Live/Robert Williams/Gatestone Institute./June
02/2025
New Syria sanctions relief (and risks) explained/Matthew Zweig and Max Meizlish/Al
Majalla/June 02/2025
Allowing Iran to keep even a civil nuclear program is still too great a risk for
regional and international security./Saeed Ghasseminejad/The National
Interest/June 02/2025
Why a Nuclear Agreement With Iran Is Not Enough/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone
Institute./June 2, 2025
The Iranian Regime’s Deadly Entanglements/Dr. Charles Chartouni/This is
Beirut/June 02/2025
Who is Joel Rayburn/From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Latest English LCCC
Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on
June 02-03/2025
A
Fatherly Message from Dear Edmond El-Chidiac and His Wife to Their Daughter on
Her Wedding Day: To Our Beloved Daughter Sabine
June 02/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/06/143844/
On the eve of your wedding, our
beloved daughter, our hearts are overflowing with emotion as we reflect on the
incredible journey that brought you to this moment. From the first time we held
you in our arms, your mother and I knew our lives had changed forever—you
brought us joy, laughter, and a light that never stopped shining. Watching you
grow into the remarkable woman you are today has been life’s greatest gift. Your
strength, kindness, and grace have always inspired us, and now, as you prepare
to begin a new chapter with the man who holds your heart, we stand in awe of
you. Tomorrow, you will walk forward hand in hand with him, but never forget
that you will always be our little girl—forever cherished, endlessly loved, and
deeply admired..
A Must-Watch Interview Video (from Al-Badeel Platform) with the distinguished
researcher and academic Dr. Zeina Mansour
June 2, 2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/06/143848/
Key topics addressed by Dr. Zeina
Mansour during her interview with Al-Badeel
(Transcription, text, editing, and translation by Elias Bejjani, with full
freedom)
A factual exposure of the hesitation, fear, and failure of Presidents Aoun and
Salam in the mission they were brought in to fulfill.
1-The truth about Joseph Aoun being a product of the “Army, People, Resistance”
triad.
2-The grave mistake of Aoun and Salam’s blatant play on buying time and reviving
the destructive formula “Army, People, Hezbollah.”
3-Salam and Aoun working under the authority of Nabih Berri, the actual ruler of
Lebanon who has obstructed the state’s establishment for 40 years.
4-The reality of Berri’s usurping, domineering, sectarian, and dictatorial role.
5-The failure of Salam’s incoherent government dominated by the Shiite duo
allied with the mob-like left.
6-The possibility of another Israeli war to complete Hezbollah’s military
dismantling due to the regime’s failure to implement international resolutions.
7-The “Islamic” Taif Agreement that destroyed Lebanon, displaced Druze and
Christians, marginalized them, and undermined the Lebanese components.
8-The complete estrangement between Druze leaders operating under Berri and
Hezbollah and the grassroots sentiment of their community.
9-The necessity of establishing a confederation or federation after the failure
of the Lebanese system and the futility of the Taif Agreement.
10-The lies and rhetorical nature of ministerial statements and inaugural
speeches, no longer believed by patriotic and sovereign Lebanese.
11-The reality of the recent municipal and optional elections, boycotted by 60%
of Lebanese, which reinstated and revived the political class ruled by the
Shiite duo.
12-The behind-the-scenes role of President Siniora in directing President Salam,
motivated by fear of having his financial files reopened.
13-Ghazi Aridi’s wooden and parrot-like positions.
14-The fact that Hezbollah has appointed the majority of MPs, officials, and
rulers from all sects under the label and function of “deposits.”
Rubio's Warning About a Potential Syrian Civil War Puts Lebanon on the Edge
This Is Beirut/June 02/2025
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio's recent warning about Syria's potential
descent into a "full-scale civil war of epic proportions" has not gone
unnoticed. This cautionary note has raised alarm bells not only within Syria's
borders but also in neighboring Lebanon, which remains precariously balanced on
a fragile socio-political tightrope. Rubio's warning
came on the heels of President Donald Trump's significant announcement to lift
major US sanctions on Syria, marking a seismic shift in US foreign policy with
implications that could upend Lebanon's already struggling economy and
precarious regional standing. With the suspension of key restrictions under the
Caesar Act and the green light for US and foreign entities to engage in
financial transactions with Syria, Lebanon is now confronted with a dual-edged
sword: the maneuver opens both possibilities and pitfalls that could resonate
through every facet of its society.
The tenuous state of Syria's transitional government, particularly after the
ousting of Bashar al-Assad, has forged an unpredictable environment with
consequences that stretch beyond Syria's borders. Analysts in Washington express
deep concern that a resurgence of violence would exacerbate existing tensions
across security, humanitarian, and economic frameworks in Lebanon.
Challenges Facing LAF
As we examine the implications, one must recognize that escalating violence in
Syria is likely to trigger increased cross-border skirmishes, particularly in
the Bekaa Valley, where Hezbollah maintains a significant power base. Rubio's
prognostications of heightening confrontations between Syrian military units and
Assad loyalists could destabilize Lebanon's borders, intensifying strains on its
fragile social fabric.Caught in this evolving turmoil, the Lebanese Armed Forces
(LAF) find themselves in a challenging predicament. A source familiar with the
LAF has underscored that any fallout from Syria's instability may severely
impede their operations, particularly as they strive to secure the southern and
eastern borders. The LAF is grappling with resource limitations as it endeavors
to maintain effective border security. The rugged, poorly demarcated
Lebanon-Syria border further complicates these challenges, making civilian
protection and military coordination a daunting task.
The potential role of Hezbollah in this narrative adds another layer of
complexity. Analysts caution that Hezbollah's influence should not be
underestimated, particularly as the Syrian Ministry of Defense has accused the
group of executing cross-border attacks – claims that Hezbollah denied. Despite
current tensions, Hezbollah is poised to leverage the situation to underscore
its military might, as Senior Fellow Hanin Ghaddar from the Washington Institute
stated, "Although Hezbollah is currently down, it is not out, controlling 53
seats in Lebanon's parliament."
'Region-by-region' plan may
be adopted for Hezbollah disarmament
Naharnet/June 02/2025
A “region-by-region” plan for Hezbollah’s disarmament may be proposed when
“serious dialogue” kicks off between President Joseph Aoun and Hezbollah, a
media report said on Monday. Under such a plan, weapons would be handed over
“according to regional order and importance,” the Nidaa al-Watan newspaper said.
The priority would be for the South Litani area, where Israel has nearly
destroyed all of Hezbollah’s arms depots and military bases and where the
Lebanese Army has 80% cleared the area, the report added. The next area would be
the North Litani area, where the army has only seized seven Hezbollah bases and
depots, the report said, adding that the third area would be Beirut’s southern
suburbs and nearby neighborhoods, where Hezbollah’s military and political
leadership is based. The last disarmament area would be the Bekaa, the report
said, noting that such a plan would be better than handing over the weapons
according to caliber -- heavy-caliber then medium-caliber then light-caliber.
Judicial Council Prepares for Major Reshuffle and
Appointments
This is Beirut/June 02/2025
Now meeting in full capacity, Lebanon’s Higher Judicial Council is preparing to
launch the long-awaited process of judicial transfers and appointments.
“Discussions on the matter have already begun, with the Council emphasizing its
commitment to objective criteria based on competence, integrity and the actual
needs of the judiciary. The goal is to ensure a balanced and efficient judicial
system,” according to a statement released by the Council on Monday. These
remarks were delivered by Souheil Abboud, the First President of the Court of
Cassation, during the Council’s first session with all 10 appointed and elected
members in place. Judge Abboud welcomed the three newly appointed members,
congratulating them and underscoring the weight of their responsibilities in
reviving the judicial system. He highlighted the current phase as a crucial
moment for restoring regular judicial activity after a prolonged period of
institutional stagnation. The judge also noted the spirit of cooperation among
the various authorities involved, which led to the recent approval of partial
appointments. These include the heads of chambers at the Court of Cassation and
the presidents of the courts of appeal in Lebanon’s mohafazats (governorates).
The decisions were endorsed by the Council and formally signed by the relevant
authorities, representing a significant step toward restoring normal judicial
operations. Judge Abboud also extended his gratitude to the judges of the Court
of Cassation for ensuring a transparent internal election process, which
resulted in the appointment of Judges Habib Rizkallah and Nada Dakroub as new
Council members.
Lebanese Army Removes Israeli Flag, Boosts Southern
Deployment
This is Beirut/June 02/2025
The Lebanese Army has taken down an Israeli flag raised by the Israeli Golani
regiment on Rweissat al-Hadb hill, located on the outskirts of Aita al-Shaab in
the Bint Jbeil district, according to a report by the National News Agency (NNA)
on Monday. The flag removal is part of a broader
response by the Lebanese Army, which has stepped up its presence in South
Lebanon amid rising tensions along the border with Israel. The move signals a
reinforcement of Lebanese sovereignty over the area, which has seen frequent
skirmishes and military activity in recent months. In
addition to the removal of the flag, a Lebanese Army unit conducted demining
operations in the vicinity and dismantled a number of earthen barricades and
other structures erected by the Israeli army. These installations had been
viewed as encroachments near the disputed border zones. The army has also
strengthened its deployment along the outskirts of the Khallet Wardeh area, west
of Aita al-Shaab, a location that has witnessed heightened military alertness in
recent weeks. The developments come at a time of
heightened alert in southern Lebanon, with increased surveillance and
cross-border tension. While the situation remains fragile, the Lebanese Army’s
actions underscore its intent to maintain control and prevent further
escalation.
No casualties or armed clashes were reported during the operation.
Bank Reform in Lebanon: Central Authority Under Growing Pressure
This is Beirut/June 02/2025
The parliamentary subcommittee tasked with banking reform held a pivotal session
to examine Articles 5 and 6 of the draft law proposing the creation of an
independent banking authority. Two competing visions are at the center of the
debate. The first, supported by Banque du Liban (BDL), calls for the
establishment of a new, autonomous body separate from the current financial
institutions. This authority would focus specifically on bank restructuring and
liquidation, aiming to ensure independence from existing power structures.The
government, however, has presented a different approach: creating a unified
authority that wields both disciplinary and decision-making powers. Critics warn
this model could open the door to conflicts of interest, undermining efforts to
restore trust in the sector. Ibrahim Kanaan, the head of the Finance and Budget
Committee, emphasized the strategic importance of the authority’s structure and
powers. “We must ensure transparency and accountability if we are to rebuild
confidence in Lebanon’s financial system,” he said. Kanaan called for a
consensus between the government, BDL and parliament before any final decisions
are made. The subcommittee will continue discussions and submit its findings to
the Finance Committee. The ultimate goal is a fair and effective reform plan
that aligns with Lebanon’s commitments to international partners, including the
International Monetary Fund (IMF). As Lebanon’s banking crisis persists, the
shape and role of this high authority could prove critical to any genuine
recovery.
Joe Saddi Seeks US Support to Reform Lebanon’s Energy
Sector
This is Beirut/June 02/2025
Lebanon’s Minister of Energy and Water, Joe Saddi, is on an official visit to
Washington, where he has held a series of high-level meetings with United States
officials and World Bank representatives in a bid to secure international
backing for Lebanon’s ailing energy sector.Saddi met with Laura Lochman, the
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources at the US State Department, and
Natasha Franceschi, the Deputy Director of the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs,
to review Lebanon’s reform efforts, aimed at overhauling and revitalizing its
energy infrastructure.
Discussions also touched on the complex geopolitical landscape, particularly
during a meeting with Anthony Marcus, the Director of the Middle East and North
Africa (MENA) Office at the US Treasury. One of the key topics was the potential
easing of US sanctions on Syria, a development that could directly impact
Lebanon’s ability to import electricity and gas through neighboring countries.
In parallel, Saddi held working sessions at the World Bank headquarters
with Ousmane Dione, the Vice President for the MENA region, and Abdelaziz al-Mulla,
an Executive Director at the Bank. Talks focused on Lebanon’s urgent needs in
energy production and wastewater treatment, as well as the possibility of
increasing World Bank financial support for critical infrastructure projects.
The visit is part of a broader Lebanese government effort to unlock
international cooperation amid a deepening economic crisis and to inject life
into a sector crippled by years of neglect, corruption and mismanagement.
Pharmaceutical Syndicate Urges Immediate Action Against
Counterfeit Drugs
This is Beirut/June 02/2025
The Pharmaceutical Importers’ Syndicate called on Monday for the immediate
implementation of a unified plan to combat the surge of counterfeit and smuggled
medications in Lebanon. The group stressed the urgent need for strict oversight
from relevant ministries and agencies to protect citizens’ right to safe and
effective medicines. In a statement issued after a
meeting held by the Parliamentary Commission of Health, chaired by MP Bilal
Abdallah and attended by Public Health Minister Rakan Nassereddine and Justice
Minister Adel Nassar, the syndicate sounded the alarm over the increasing
infiltration of counterfeit and smuggled drugs into the market. It emphasized
that products entering Lebanon through illegal channels cannot be considered
legitimate medicines, as they do not undergo proper verification through
official testing and documentation required by regulatory authorities. “The need
to end the phenomenon of drug smuggling is urgent, given its catastrophic
repercussions on the health and safety of citizens,” the syndicate stated,
reaffirming its commitment to supporting all Lebanese authorities involved in
regulating the pharmaceutical sector. Calling the meeting a “very important
milestone,” the syndicate described it as a concrete step forward in the battle
against fake and smuggled pharmaceuticals, a concern it says it has raised
repeatedly since the beginning of the country’s health and economic crises.
During the session, representatives from the syndicate delivered a
detailed presentation on the operational practices of pharmaceutical importing
companies, outlining the procedures in place to curb smuggling and uphold
quality standards.The syndicate also confirmed that all medications registered
with the Ministry of Public Health and produced by internationally recognized
manufacturers remain consistently available on the Lebanese market. The
statement concluded by emphasizing the importance of translating the meeting’s
discussions into a clear and enforceable action plan that applies to all parties
without exception, with direct follow-up from the Ministries of Health and
Justice and the relevant oversight bodies.
Peace vs. Normalization: Distinct Paths, Diverging Logics in ME Diplomacy
Mario Chartouni/This is Beirut/June 02/2025
From the peace treaties signed between Israel and certain Arab States – most
notably Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994 – to the wave of diplomatic
normalizations initiated in 2020 with the Abraham Accords, two concepts have
consistently shaped discussions about regional diplomacy: peace agreements and
normalization. Although these terms are often interchangeably used, they
represent distinct processes, governed by different conditions and producing
different outcomes.
Two Distinct Yet Complementary Processes
A peace agreement is a formal legal and political act whereby two parties end an
armed conflict. It typically involves mutual recognition, a commitment to
renounce the use of force and often includes territorial, security or diplomatic
compromises. For example, the 1979 Israel–Egypt peace
treaty ended a state of war that had persisted since 1948, led to Israel’s
withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula and established formal diplomatic relations
between the two countries.Normalization, by contrast, usually follows the
implementation of a peace agreement – though in some cases, it may precede it –
and involves establishing diplomatic relations, including exchanging
ambassadors, launching direct flights and fostering cooperation in economic,
cultural and technological fields. Unlike peace
agreements, normalization does not necessarily resolve a prior conflict. This
distinction was evident in the 2020 Abraham Accords, through which Israel
established diplomatic ties with the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain,
Morocco and Sudan – countries that had never been in a state of war with the
Hebrew State. Thus, it is possible to end hostilities
without immediate normalization, just as normalization can occur in the absence
of a formal peace treaty. These represent two different levels of engagement:
peace agreements terminate conflict, and normalization lays the groundwork for
sustained cooperation.
From Peace to Normalization: The Uniqueness of the Abraham Accords
When an armed conflict occurs, peace typically serves as the essential first
step toward resolution, creating the legal and political framework necessary for
opening diplomatic relations. This pattern was clear in the cases of Egypt in
1979 and Jordan in 1994, where normalization directly followed peace,
establishing a chronological sequence: peace first, normalization second. The
opening of embassies, security cooperation and bilateral agreements all followed
the formal cessation of hostilities. However, in 2020,
several Arab States initiated diplomatic normalization with Israel without a
preceding peace agreement, as relations had been frozen but not overtly hostile.
The signatories – particularly the UAE – cited geostrategic and economic
interests rather than the resolution of military conflict as their primary
motivation. This shift challenged the traditional Arab
position, especially the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which linked normalization
to the prior establishment of a viable Palestinian State. Nonetheless, these
accords have yielded significant economic benefits for the Arab signatories,
whose trade with Israel dramatically surged. Bilateral trade between Israel and
the UAE soared from $125 million in 2020 to over $2.6 billion in 2022. More than
120 agreements have been signed across sectors including technology,
agriculture, finance, energy and tourism. Tourism also surged: in 2023, over
200,000 Israeli tourists visited the Emirates. Direct flights now connect Tel
Aviv with Arab capitals such as Abu Dhabi, Rabat and Manama. These expanding
human and economic exchanges are strengthening bilateral ties and fostering the
emergence of a new regional space for cooperation and dialogue.
Lebanon and Israel: Between an Undeclared War and the Absence of Relations
In stark contrast, Lebanon and Israel have never signed a peace treaty since
Israel’s founding in 1948. Lebanon participated in the first Arab-Israeli war
that same year, mainly to support its Arab neighbors, though its military
involvement was limited. An armistice was signed in 1949, but relations have
remained tense, with no normalization or mutual recognition. No ambassadors have
been exchanged and no official cooperation has been established. Moreover,
Lebanese law criminalizes any contact with Israel.
This stance is reinforced by Hezbollah, a militant group that opposes Israel,
rejects any recognition of the Hebrew State and conditions any peace on the
return of occupied territories. Against this backdrop, Lebanon became a
battleground between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006 and again in 2023. A ceasefire
took effect on November 27, 2024, stipulating the withdrawal of Israeli forces
from southern Lebanon and the redeployment of Hezbollah fighters north of the
Litani River. Additionally, the 2022 maritime border delimitation agreement was
remotely negotiated, without explicit mutual recognition, deliberately avoiding
any implications of normalization. In conclusion, peace agreements and
normalization are distinct, yet potentially mutually reinforcing processes:
peace ends conflict, normalization builds bridges. While some states in the
region have moved toward normalization without prior peace agreements, Lebanon
remains caught in a protracted state of frozen confrontation for over 75 years,
excluded from this evolving regional dynamic.
Aoun Vows No Immunity for Wrongdoers
This is Beirut/June 02/2025
President Joseph Aoun reaffirmed his administration’s unwavering stance on
accountability and transparency, declaring that “no case will remain closed and
no official will be granted protection.”His remarks came after a meeting on
Monday with a delegation from the International Federation of Lebanese
Businessmen and Businesswomen. “No culprit will be
spared,” the president emphasized, underscoring his commitment to justice and
the rule of law. Addressing broader efforts to restore trust in Lebanon, Aoun
stated that confidence in the country is “gradually being restored both
nationally and internationally.” He highlighted the vital role of the judiciary
in this process, describing a fair and impartial legal system as “essential to
strengthening this trust.”Reiterating a key pillar of his administration, Aoun
stressed that the fight against corruption remains a central priority of his
mandate. “We are determined to pursue all who abuse public office or betray the
public trust,” he disclosed.
Salam Reaffirms Support for Arab Peace Initiative and
Commitment to Policy Statement
This is Beirut/June 02/2025
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam on Monday reiterated his firm support for the Arab
Peace Initiative, emphasizing the refugees’ right of return and the need for a
two-state solution, with East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian
state. Speaking after a meeting with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, Salam
underlined that his remarks were fully aligned with Lebanon’s official stance.
“I did not say a word beyond what was agreed upon in the ministerial policy
statement,” he said, reaffirming his adherence to the government’s declared
position on regional issues. The prime minister also discussed the pressing
issue of reconstruction efforts with Speaker Berri. “I confirmed my commitment
to the reconstruction file,” Salam added. It is worth noting that in an
interview with CNN on Friday, Salam stated that any normalization of relations
with Israel must be preceded by a just and comprehensive peace.
Salam meets Berri in Ain
el-Tineh, says his doors 'always open' for Hezbollah
Naharnet/June 02/2025
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said Monday that his "doors are always open" for
Hezbollah after he met with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri in Ain el-Tineh, as
the gap between Salam and Berri's ally Hezbollah seemed to widen over the
group's disarmament.
"I am leaving plenty of room for cordiality with (Hezbollah MP) Hajj Mohammad
Raad and my doors are always open for him and Hezbollah," Salam said. Raad had
recently criticized Salam for recently omitting the word "Resistance" from the
"Resistance and Liberation Day" holiday in one of his statements, but said he
would not respond to Salam's comments on Hezbollah's disarmament "to preserve
what’s left of cordiality."Berri on Friday told local al-Joumhouria newspaper
that "if Salam escalates, we will escalate and if he chooses to calm things
down, we will calm them down," after Salam said in recent comments that the era
of "exporting the Iranian revolution has ended" and that the state "will not
remain silent over any arms outside the state’s control". In his interview with
al-Joumhouria, Berri also urged the government to prioritize the construction of
war-hit regions, saying it's the government's responsibility "whether it likes
it or not." Berri had met last Friday with President Joseph Aoun at the Baabda
Palace, in talks he described as "excellent."
From the UAE to Lebanon: Flights Fully Booked for the
Summer
This is Beirut/June 02/2025
Lebanon's Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, Fouad Dandan, announced that
flight reservations from the UAE to Lebanon for the upcoming summer season are
fully booked. The surge in travel follows the recent decision to lift the travel
ban on Emirati citizens visiting Lebanon — a move that Dandan described as
opening new horizons for bilateral relations between the two countries. Speaking
to LBCI on Monday, Dandan revealed that there is growing enthusiasm among
Emiratis to invest in Lebanon, noting that the UAE has numerous projects capable
of contributing to Lebanon’s recovery.
“In the wake of the travel ban being lifted, it is only natural that Emiratis
would plan visits to Lebanon, especially during the holidays,” he said. “Yes,
the planes are packed — and I’m optimistic.”Dandan also highlighted the improved
security situation in Lebanon. “Since President Joseph Aoun took office and
following the formation of the new government, I visited Lebanon and engaged
with the leadership,” he said. “They gave me clear directives to work on
removing the obstacles that previously prevented travel. Today, the security
situation is stable, and the state asserts its presence across all Lebanese
territory.”
Syria Reopens Arida Border Crossing with Lebanon
This is Beirut/June 02/2025
The General Authority for Land and Sea Ports in Syria announced on Monday that
the Arida border crossing with Lebanon, located in rural Tartus, will reopen to
passenger traffic starting Tuesday morning, June 3, 2025. In an official
statement, the authority said, “We inform travelers that the Arida border
crossing with Lebanon will be opened for passenger traffic on the morning of
Tuesday, 03-06-2025.” The reopening comes as a measure to ease travel for
citizens during the Eid al-Adha holiday. The authority clarified that the
decision was made despite ongoing restoration and maintenance work at the
crossing. The move aims to accommodate increased travel demand during the
festive period, facilitating smoother movement between the two neighboring
countries. It is worth remembering that the Arida
border crossing between Syria and Lebanon was previously closed following an
Israeli airstrike on November 27, 2024, during the war between Israel and
Hezbollah.
Judicial Appointments: Is the Deadlock About to End?
Natasha Metni Torbey/This is Beirut/June 02/2025
Lebanon appears poised to move forward with long-delayed judicial appointments
and reshuffles, according to well-placed judicial sources – an overdue step
after more than five years of political deadlock. The process had been blocked
since 2020, when then-President Michel Aoun rejected a package of proposed
judicial transfers submitted by the Higher Judicial Council (HJC), amid a
broader power struggle with the body. The stalemate effectively crippled several
key courts, undermined public confidence in the judiciary, and further
entrenched political interference in institutions.
The standoff dates back to June 2020, when the HJC drafted a list of judicial
reshuffles and appointments that were blocked by Aoun and his justice minister,
Marie-Claude Najm. Their official reasoning – alleged breaches of objectivity in
the selection process – did little to conceal the real motive: opposition to the
reassignment of judges seen as close to the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), the
party founded by Aoun. Among them was the highly controversial Ghada Aoun, then
serving as public prosecutor at the Mount Lebanon Court of Appeal.
In fact, Aoun and his camp effectively viewed the HJC’s selected judges
as being of no “use” to the FPM’s interests. As a result, no appointments have
been made since, with the HJC refusing to bow to conditions rooted in political
calculations. Although judicial appointments are
governed by the 2001 amended law on the organization of the judiciary, the rules
are seldom applied as intended in practice. Merit and seniority often take a
backseat to political, sectarian and clientelist interests.
The Judicial Appointment Mechanism
The HJC, made up of ten members, draws up the list of proposed appointments and
transfers. These cover key positions in the Court of Cassation, which has ten
seats, as well as public prosecutors, investigative judges and chamber
presidents. Once approved by the HJC, the list is
submitted to the minister of justice, who, if in disagreement with the proposal,
is theoretically required to provide justification. If the dispute persists, the
2001 law provides a mechanism to resolve the issue.
Under the previous system, the Council of Ministers had the final say, but the
new law assigns that authority to the HJC. The latter body can make binding
decisions on appointment proposals with the support of seven out of its ten
members. In reality, however, the situation has played
out differently. Disregarding the requirement to explain their objections to the
HJC, ministers of justice have often stalled the judicial appointment decrees
without engaging in any debate. Moreover, even if, in
the best-case scenario, the minister of justice approved the appointment
proposals, the president of the Republic, the prime minister and the ministers
of finance and defense each had the power to block the process in turn. Under
the 2001 law, the countersignature of each is required for the decree to be
published, making the process even more difficult.
HJC Meeting: A Move Toward Tangible Results?
According to judicial sources closely following the case, the ten members of the
HJC were scheduled to meet Monday afternoon to discuss the issue of judicial
appointments. A compromise could emerge under the combined pressure of several
factors. On one hand, the prolonged vacancy of key positions is severely
hampering court operations and delaying numerous trials. Some judges are
burdened with dozens of cases they cannot rule on due to a lack of quorum or a
valid panel. On the other hand, international pressure
is mounting, notably from the European Union, which has made judicial reform a
condition for releasing certain aid packages. Additionally, as part of its
discussions with Lebanon, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) insists on the
independence of the judiciary as a cornerstone of any institutional and economic
recovery. Finally, the shifting regional landscape,
together with a period of relative political stability following the recent
election of President Joseph Aoun and the formation of a new government, may
have created an opportunity for a compromise. Should
the negotiations prove successful, a partial renewal of the senior judiciary
should follow. However, no one is willing to venture a timeline. President Aoun
announced on Monday that the judicial reshuffles will happen soon.In any event,
several observers caution against expecting any fundamental reform. After all,
old habits die hard. “We will likely see a deal among the main political blocs,
each securing its own candidates in a classic power-sharing arrangement,” said a
judicial source who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Today, reforms that Lebanon is called upon to implement across all sectors are
under close scrutiny by the international community.
Whether this will amount to mere job distribution or real progress toward
judicial independence – currently kept on life support – remains to be seen. The
situation remains fluid, awaiting a collective agreement that could lead to the
eventual approval of the appointment list, considered crucial within the broader
context of reforms requested from the authorities. In Lebanon, nothing is ever
guaranteed until the final decree is signed. And even then, everything can still
be overturned.
UN Special Coordinator for
Lebanon visits Israel
Naharnet/June 02/2025
The United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert,
began Monday a visit to Israel, where she is set to meet with senior officials,
her office said. The visit is part of the Special Coordinator’s “regular
consultations on steps to consolidate progress made since the November 2024
Cessation of Hostilities Understanding came into effect and to advance the
implementation of Security Council resolution 1701 (2006),” the office said in a
statement. The Special Coordinator “continues to call on all sides to abide by
their commitments and create the necessary conditions for enduring security and
stability across the Blue Line,” the statement added.
Report: Hezbollah member arrested in South for spying for
Israel
Naharnet/June 02/2025
Lebanese security forces have arrested Hezbollah member Mahmoud Ayoub in the
Nabatieh district town of Harouf on charges of collaborating with Israeli
intelligence services, sources told Al-Arabiya’s Al-Hadath channel on Monday.
Ayoub is “the financial director of the (Hezbollah-affiliated) Ragheb Harb
Hospital” in the Nabatieh district, the sources said. “Mahmoud Ayoub was
arrested by the Internal Security Forces’ Information Branch in coordination
with Hezbollah,” the sources added.
Hezbollah’s Arms Dependence: A Calculated Business Model
Michel Touma/This is Beirut/June 02/2025
Syrian authorities recently intercepted two large shipments of weapons and
ammunition — just days apart — being smuggled into Lebanon as part of
Iranian-led efforts to replenish Hezbollah’s military arsenal. Similar attempts
had also been thwarted in recent weeks by security services loyal to the
Damascus regime. The ongoing arms smuggling — still
limited for now — toward Hezbollah, Iran’s staunch ally in Lebanon, underscores
the group’s repeated vows to uphold the “resistance” and reject disarmament, as
mandated by the ceasefire agreement reached with Israel last November. While
this position reflects a clear refusal to acknowledge the shifting geopolitical
landscape in Lebanon and the broader region, more importantly, it signals that
the hardline faction within Iran’s mullahs’ regime has no intention of backing
down. For these hardliners and warmongers, preserving
the two main levers they still wield in the Arab world — Hezbollah and Yemen’s
Houthis — is crucial. Some see this strategy as merely a bargaining chip,
intended to raise the stakes and strengthen Iran’s hand in negotiations with the
Trump administration. Yet at the same time, several indicators — including
weapons smuggling and increasingly escalatory rhetoric — suggest a headlong push
forward, reflecting a hardening stance within Iran’s clerical regime and, by
extension, Hezbollah’s leadership. Following President
Joseph Aoun’s election and the formation of the Salam cabinet, leaders of the
Shiite party cautiously sought to present a cooperative front on disarmament and
the strict enforcement of the ceasefire agreement reached in November 2024.
However, in recent days, the pro-Iranian faction appears to be backtracking from
this position, adopting a hardline stance on the future of its military arsenal
while simultaneously launching coordinated political and media campaigns against
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and Foreign Minister Joe Raggi. Circles close to the
pro-Iranian group have further escalated tensions by actively working to
discredit and undermine the government’s plan to initiate the disarmament of
Palestinian camps in Beirut, scheduled for mid-June.
This local tension likely reflects a hardening of Iran’s stance amid ongoing
nuclear negotiations with Washington. The latest report from the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) revealed a recent “substantial increase” and
acceleration in uranium enriched to 60%, exceeding the 2015 agreement’s limit by
45 times over the past few months. Meanwhile, senior Iranian officials have
repeatedly stated that any suspension of uranium enrichment — as demanded by the
United States — is unacceptable and constitutes a firm “red line.”
In this context, have Tehran’s leaders viewed the United States’ firm
resolve to secure a nuclear deal as a sign of “weakness” or a readiness to
compromise with the Iranian regime? The mullahs are certainly capable of such a
reading. Two key indicators may shed light on Tehran’s true intentions amid
talks with the Trump administration: what Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas
Araghchi will convey to senior Lebanese officials during his visit to Beirut on
Monday, May 2; and, more importantly, how the clerical regime responds to the
agreement proposal — described by the White House as “detailed and acceptable” —
delivered by US envoy Steve Witkoff via Oman on Saturday, May 31.
These two issues are expected to be resolved soon, clarifying the path
Washington and Tehran will take. While strategic decisions remain uncertain on
both sides, one thing is clear: any compromise involving Hezbollah’s and the
Houthis’ militia networks and military arsenals will ultimately strengthen the
hardline faction within Iran’s clerical regime. This faction could then regain
influence and, within a few years, mobilize its proxies for new, futile military
ventures aimed at reviving its anti-Western ideological agenda — one
fundamentally rooted in exporting the Islamic revolution.
The constant state of war, the obsessive grip on arms and chronic instability
are the lifeblood of Iran’s warmongers and their allies — the very raison d’être
for their existence (albeit a suicidal one) and the “business model” they rely
on to sustain a legitimacy long lost and increasingly contradicted by unfolding
realities on the ground.
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on June 02-03/2025
Iran says it has seen no change in US position on
sanctions yet
Reuters/June 2, 2025
DUBAI -Iran's foreign ministry said on Monday it would have to see if there are
changes in the U.S. position on sanctions, as the two countries negotiate a deal
to resolve a decades-long dispute over Iran's nuclear ambitions. "I regret to
inform you that the American side has not yet been willing to clarify this
issue," ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said in a weekly press conference
in Tehran. "It must be clear to us how the oppressive sanctions against the
Iranian people will be lifted, to ensure that past experiences are not
repeated", he added. Oman's Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi, who has been
mediating between Iran and the Trump administration, presented elements of a
U.S. proposal for a nuclear deal between Tehran and Washington during a short
visit to Tehran on Saturday. Iranian and U.S. delegations wrapped up a fifth
round of talks in Rome last month and, while signs of some limited progress
emerged, there are many points of disagreement that are hard to breach, notably
the issue of Iran's uranium enrichment.
Iran FM says no nuclear
deal if goal is to 'deprive Iran of peaceful activities'
Agence France Presse
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Monday that a nuclear deal would
not be possible if the goal is to "deprive Iran of its peaceful nuclear
activities". "If the goal of the negotiations is to gain reassurance and
confidence that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons, then in my view, reaching
an agreement is possible," he said in a joint press conference with Egyptian
foreign minister Badr Abdelatty. "But if the goal is to deprive Iran of its
peaceful activities, then certainly no agreement will be reached," he continued.
Araghchi said that his country has "nothing to hide" on its nuclear program,
shortly after the U.N. nuclear watchdog's chief called for more transparency
from Tehran. "Iran has a peaceful nuclear program... we are prepared to provide
this assurance to any party or entity. We have nothing to hide in this regard,"
Araghchi said in the joint press conference with Abdelatty.
Iran demands ‘guarantee’ US
will lift sanctions in nuclear talks
AFP/June
2, 2025
Iran pressed the United States on Monday for guarantees that it will drop
sanctions as a condition for a nuclear deal, after the White House reportedly
sent a proposal it deemed “acceptable.”With Iran and the United States engaged
in talks over Tehran’s nuclear program since April, Washington’s proposal for a
deal came after a leaked UN report said Iran had stepped up production of highly
enriched uranium. Iran’s top diplomat and lead nuclear negotiator Abbas Araghchi
was due to meet the head of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
in Cairo on Monday, a day after the report was leaked. Iran has rejected the
report, warning it would retaliate if European powers that have threatened to
reimpose nuclear sanctions “exploit” the report. The United States and Western
countries have accused Iran of seeking nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran has
repeatedly denied, insisting it needs uranium for civilian power production.
Araghchi said on Saturday that he had received “elements” of a US proposal for a
nuclear deal following five rounds of talks mediated by Oman. On Monday, foreign
ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei told a news conference in Tehran: “We want to
guarantee that the sanctions are effectively lifted...”“So far, the American
side has not wanted to clarify this issue,” he added. He also condemned the
report and threatened an Iranian response. The report, Baqaei said, was the
result of “pressure exerted by certain European countries on the agency.”“If
they want to further exploit this political report... they will surely have to
face a proportionate response from Iran,” he added.
‘Red line’
The remarks come after a report by the UN agency showed Iran has stepped up
production of uranium enriched up to 60 percent -- close to the roughly 90
percent level needed for atomic weapons. The US envoy in the nuclear talks said
last month that the administration of President Donald Trump would oppose any
enrichment. “An enrichment program can never exist in the state of Iran ever
again. That’s our red line. No enrichment,” Steve Witkoff told Breitbart News.
Iran has vowed to keep enriching uranium “with or without a deal” on its nuclear
program. The United States has sent Iran a proposal for a nuclear deal that the
White House called “acceptable” and in its “best interest” to accept, US media
reported on Saturday. The New York Times, citing officials familiar with the
diplomatic exchanges, said the proposal calls on Iran to stop all enrichment and
suggests creating a regional grouping to produce nuclear power. Iran has held
five rounds of talks with the United States in search of a new agreement to
replace the deal with major powers that Trump abandoned during his first term in
2018.
IAEA chief urges ‘more
transparency’ from Iran, Tehran says it has ‘nothing to hide’
Al Arabiya English/June
2, 2025
The UN atomic watchdog’s chief on Monday called for more transparency from Iran
as it seeks relief from sanctions in negotiations over its nuclear program.
International Atomic Energy Agency director general Rafael Grossi made the
comments ahead of a meeting in Cairo with Iran’s top diplomat and chief nuclear
negotiator, Abbas Araghchi. It comes a day after a leaked IAEA report showed
Iran has stepped up production of uranium enriched up to 60 percent – close to
the roughly 90 percent level needed for atomic weapons. In a joint press
conference with Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty before the scheduled
tripartite meeting, Grossi defended the report, calling it “impartial.”“We say
things as they are without a political agenda,” Grossi said, stressing the
report “tells it as it is.”“There is a need for more transparency – this is
very, very clear – in Iran, and nothing will bring us to this confidence
(besides) full explanations of a number of activities,” he added. Iran has
rejected the IAEA’s findings, calling it a “political” maneuver based on
“unreliable and misleading information.”
Grossi said some of the report’s findings “may be uncomfortable for some, and we
are... used to being criticized.”
‘Nothing to hide’
Araghchi said on Monday that his country has “nothing to hide” on its nuclear
program, shortly after Grossi called for more transparency from Tehran. “Iran
has a peaceful nuclear program ... we are prepared to provide this assurance to
any party or entity. We have nothing to hide in this regard,” Araghchi said in a
joint press conference with his Egyptian counterpart Abdelatty in Cairo.
Araghchi also said that a nuclear deal with the US would not be possible if the
goal is to “deprive Iran of its peaceful nuclear activities.”“If the goal of the
negotiations is to gain reassurance and confidence that Iran is not seeking
nuclear weapons, then in my view, reaching an agreement is possible,” he said.
“But if the goal is to deprive Iran of its peaceful activities, then certainly
no agreement will be reached,” he continued. In a phone call with Grossi on
Saturday, Araghchi warned Iran would retaliate if European powers that have
threatened to reimpose nuclear sanctions “exploit” the report. Abdelatty urged a
peaceful solution, saying “the region is already experiencing enough crises and
security challenges.”“We completely reject any escalation or incitement of a
military option,” he said, warning against “descending into a state of chaos
from which no one will be spared.”The UN report comes as Iran holds talks with
the United States on its nuclear program, after Washington unilaterally
abandoned a landmark agreement between Tehran and world powers in 2018 during
President Donald Trump’s first term. Iran on Monday demanded a US guarantee that
sanctions will be lifted as part of a nuclear deal. The 2015 deal aimed to stop
Iran from developing a nuclear bomb – a goal Western countries accused it of
pursuing, though Tehran denies it. The Iranian foreign minister said Saturday he
had received “elements” of a US proposal for a potential nuclear deal following
five rounds of Omani-mediated talks. The UN agency’s board of governors is set
to review Iran’s nuclear activities in its upcoming quarterly meeting in Vienna
starting June 9. With AFP
Iran poised to dismiss US nuclear proposal, says Iranian
diplomat
Parisa Hafezi/Reuters/June 2, 2025
DUBAI -Iran is poised to reject a U.S. proposal to end a decades-long nuclear
dispute, an Iranian diplomat said on Monday, slamming it as a "non-starter" that
fails to address Tehran's interests and leaves Washington's stance on uranium
enrichment unchanged.
"Iran is drafting a negative response to the U.S. proposal, which could be
interpreted as a rejection of the U.S. offer," the senior diplomat, who is close
to Iran's negotiating team, told Reuters. The U.S. proposal for a new nuclear
deal was presented to Iran on Saturday by Oman's Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr
Albusaidi, who was on a short visit to Tehran and has been mediating nuclear
talks between Tehran and Washington. But after five rounds of talks between
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and President Donald Trump's Middle East
envoy Steve Witkoff to resolve the nuclear standoff, many issues remain
unresolved. Among clashing red lines is Iran's rejection of a U.S. demand that
Tehran commit to scrapping uranium enrichment, viewed as a potential pathway to
developing nuclear bombs. Tehran says it wants to master nuclear technology for
peaceful purposes and has long denied accusations by Western powers that it is
seeking to develop nuclear weapons. "In this proposal, the U.S. stance on
enrichment on Iranian soil remains unchanged, and there is no clear explanation
regarding the lifting of sanctions," said the diplomat, who declined to be
identified due to the sensitivity of the matter.Tehran demands the immediate
removal of all U.S.-imposed curbs that impair its oil-based economy. But for the
U.S., the removal of nuclear-related sanctions should be done in phases.Dozens
of Iranian institutions vital to Iran's economy, including its central bank and
national oil company, have been sanctioned since 2018 for, according to
Washington, "supporting terrorism or weapons proliferation".Trump's revival of a
"maximum pressure" campaign against Tehran since his return to the White House
in January has included tightened sanctions and threats to bomb Iran if current
negotiations yield no deal.
During his first term, Trump in 2018 ditched Tehran's 2015 nuclear pact with six
powers and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran's economy. In return,
Tehran has rapidly violated the 2015 nuclear pact's curbs on its nuclear
programme. The 2015 deal required Iran to take steps to restrict its nuclear
program in return for relief from U.S., EU and U.N. economic sanctions. The
diplomat said the assessment of "Iran's nuclear negotiations committee", under
the supervision of the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was that the U.S.
proposal is "completely one-sided" and cannot serve Tehran's interests.
Therefore, the diplomat said, Tehran considers this proposal a "non-starter" and
believes it unilaterally attempts to impose a "bad deal" on Iran through
excessive demands. Two Iranian officials told Reuters last week that Iran may
pause uranium enrichment if the U.S. releases frozen Iranian funds and
recognises Tehran's right to refine uranium for civilian use under a "political
deal" that could lead to a broader nuclear accord.
UN, Iran and Egypt meet in Cairo to discuss Iran's nuclear
program
Lee Keath And Melanie Lidman/The Associated Press/June 2, 2025
CAIRO — Iranian, Egyptian and U.N. leaders met in Cairo on Monday to discuss
Iran's nuclear program after a report from the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency said
Iran is further increasing its stockpile of uranium enriched to near
weapons-grade levels. Rafael Mariano Grossi, the head of the Vienna-based
International Atomic Energy Agency, said the agency compiled the report because
Iranian's uranium enrichment was an ongoing concern to the IAEA's board of
governors. “We hope that by providing the clarification we will be providing an
incentive for clarity, an incentive for a peaceful solution and a diplomatic
solution,” Grossi said in Cairo. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met
with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi and Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr
Abdelatty, though it was unclear if Araghchi would meet directly with Grossi.
The two spoke by phone early Sunday.
Araghchi wrote on the messaging app Telegram that he stressed Iran’s “continuous
cooperation” when he spoke with Grossi. The confidential IAEA report, which was
seen by The Associated Press on Saturday, raised a stern warning, saying Iran is
now “the only non-nuclear-weapon state to produce such material,” something the
agency said was of “serious concern.”Iranian leadership believes the IAEA report
is politically motivated by Grossi's hopes to become the U.N. secretary general.
Grossi is attempting to attract votes of several members of the U.N. Security
Council with the report, the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, Mohammad
Eslami, told the official IRNA news agency late Sunday. “He basically has chosen
a political attitude, and this political attitude has led the environment to be
more political rather that technical," Eslami said. Omani Foreign Minister Badr
al-Busaidi, who is mediating the U.S.-Iran talks, visited Tehran on Saturday to
present the latest U.S. proposal for ongoing talks. Araghchi wrote on Telegram
that Iran is examining the proposal and crafting a response. The U.S.-Iran talks
are an attempt to limit Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for lifting of some
of the crushing economic sanctions the U.S. has imposed on the Islamic Republic,
which have strained relations for almost 50 years. The fifth round of talks
between the U.S. and Iran concluded in Rome last week with “some but not
conclusive progress,” al-Busaidi said at the time. Iran’s deputy foreign
minister published a detailed response Sunday, which rejected many of the
report’s findings. Kazem Gharibabadi noted that out of the IAEA’s 682
inspections of 32 states, 493 were carried out in Iran alone. “So long as a
country’s nuclear activities are under the IAEA’s monitoring, there is no cause
for concern,” he said. “The Islamic Republic of Iran is neither pursuing nuclear
weapons nor does it possess any undeclared nuclear materials or activities.”The
IAEA report said Iran as of May 17 had amassed 408.6 kilograms (900.8 pounds) of
uranium enriched up to 60%. That is an increase of almost 50% since the IAEA’s
last report in February. The 60% enriched material is a short, technical step
away from weapons-grade levels of 90%.
Ukraine, Russia hold
fragile peace talks in Istanbul amid renewed strikes
Alarabiya English/June 02/2025
In this episode of W News Extra, presented by Leigh-Ann Gerrans, Ukraine and
Russia return to the negotiating table in Istanbul for a second round of peace
talks amid fresh attacks from both sides. As the delegations agree to a new
prisoner swap and Russia floats a short ceasefire proposal. Plus, we cover the
Colorado rally attack where an Egyptian national is charged with terrorism after
targeting supporters of Israeli hostages. In Damascus, Syria's stock exchange
reopens after six months, signaling a potential economic reboot. Reform UK
launches its first Musk-style “DOGE” audit into council spending, starting with
Kent, and we wrap with a look at Tinder’s height filter and 100-year-old twins
who credit their long lives to laughter and love.
'Operation Spiderweb’: How Ukraine destroyed over a third
of Russian bombers
Sasha Vakulina/Euronews/June 2, 2025
'Operation Spiderweb’: How Ukraine destroyed over a third of Russian bombers
Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) reported on Sunday that over a third of all
Russian missile carriers have been hit in a coordinated drone attack aimed at
different airfields in Russia located thousands of kilometres apart. More than
40 aircraft are known to have been hit, including the A-50, Tu-95, and Tu-22 M3,
causing overall damage of more than €6 billion. Ukrainian President Volodymyr
Zelenskyy said "Operation Spiderweb" had made "an absolutely brilliant result"
which was "achieved solely by Ukraine."The Ukrainian president also shared more
details on how the operation was carried out, explaining that 117 drones had
been used, each with its own pilot. "The most interesting thing — and we can
already say this publicly — is that the 'office' of our operation on Russian
territory was located right next to the FSB (Federal Security Service) of
Russia, in one of their regions,” he said in a post on Telegram.
In a major blow to Russia’s security services, Zelenskyy said Ukraine managed
not only to execute the operation but also to safely withdraw the people
involved. They were operating "in different Russian regions — in three time
zones." “Our most long-range operation. Our people involved in preparing the
operation were withdrawn from Russian territory in time," he explained.
Zelenskyy said it took Kyiv "one year, six months, and nine days from the start
of planning to effective execution."He thanked the head of Ukraine’s Security
Service, General Vasyl Malyuk, and asked him to reveal the details and results
of the operation to the public."Of course, not everything can be revealed at
this moment, but these are Ukrainian actions that will undoubtedly be in history
books," he added. "Ukraine is defending itself, and rightly so — we are doing
everything to make Russia feel the need to end this war. Russia started this
war, Russia must end it," Zelenskyy wrote.
What we know so far about Operation Spiderweb
Although Ukraine’s security service has not revealed more details at this stage,
Ukrainian outlets are reporting exactly how the operation was executed,
referencing SBU sources. According to these reports, first-person-view (FPV)
drones were smuggled deep inside Russia and hidden inside trucks in mobile log
cabins. The cabins' roofs were then opened remotely, and the drones proceeded to
launch their attack on Russian military bombers. Russia’s Irkutsk Governor Igor
Kobzev confirmed that the drones that attacked a military base in Siberia's
Sredniy were launched from inside a truck. In a post on Telegram, he said that
the launch site had been secured and there was no further threat to people's
lives. Russian outlets also reported that other attacks were launched in a
similar manner, with drones emerging from the backs of trucks. Social media
footage widely shared by Russian media appears to show the drones rising from
inside containers, while the panels lie discarded on the road. One clip appeared
to show men climbing onto a truck in an attempt to intercept the drones. In
October 2022, the SBU struck the Kerch bridge, which had been illegally built by
Russia after its annexation of Crimea in 2014. The explosion, which Russian
authorities said was caused by a truck bomb, badly damaged the bridge which
links Moscow-occupied Crimea and Russia. The targeting of Russian bombers, which
have been carrying out massive missile attacks on Ukrainian cities, was
previously considered almost unthinkable. Moscow had made sure to keep them well
out of the range of Kyiv’s weapons, both homemade and those supplied by allies.
Olenya air base is located in Russia's Murmansk region, around 2,000 km from the
border with Ukraine. Belaya air base is in Russia's Irkutsk region, in
south-eastern Siberia and over 4,000 km east of the frontline. These two
airfields were among the hardest hit during Sunday's operation. Another notable
aspect of the "Operation Spiderweb" was the choice of weapons. Kyiv used FPV
drones, which are produced in Ukraine en masse and are widely used and
appreciated by the military due to their affordability. FPV drones typically
cost only a few hundred euros, while a Russian A50 radar detection aircraft,
which was reportedly hit today along with other planes, costs over €300 million.
Ukraine’s presidential advisor and former minister of strategic industries
Oleksandr Kamyshin has said Ukrainian manufacturers have the capacity to produce
over 5 million FPV drones per year.
Ukraine and Russia meet in Turkey for peace talks after
trading major attacks
Mehmet Guzel, Associated Press/June 2, 2025
Delegations from Russia and Ukraine have gathered in Turkey for a second round
of direct peace talks in just over two weeks, although expectations are low for
any significant progress on ending the three-year war. The meeting in Istanbul
comes after a string of major attacks over the weekend. Ukraine said on Sunday
that it had launched a spectacular surprise attack on five Russian air bases,
ranging from targets close to Moscow to Russia’s Arctic, Siberia and Far East.
Turkey Russia Ukraine War
The targets were more than 4,300 miles from Ukraine.
More than 40 Russian warplanes were destroyed, Ukraine claimed, in what
President Volodymyr Zelensky called a “brilliant operation” that involved more
than a year of planning. Also on Sunday, Russia launched its biggest number of
drones — 472 — on Ukraine since the full-scale invasion in February 2022,
Ukraine’s air force said, in an apparent effort to overwhelm air defences.
US-led efforts to push the two sides into accepting a ceasefire have failed.
Ukraine accepted that step, but the Kremlin effectively rejected it. The
Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank, assessed late on
Sunday that “Russia is attempting to delay negotiations and prolong the war in
order to make additional battlefield gains”.
Turkey Russia Ukraine War
Recent comments by senior officials in both countries indicate they remain far
apart on key conditions for stopping the war. The first round of talks on May
16, also in Istanbul, ended after less than two hours. While both sides agreed
on a large prisoner swap, there was no breakthrough. The Ukrainian delegation in
Istanbul for Monday’s meeting is led by defence minister Rustem Umerov,
according to Heorhii Tykhyi, spokesman for the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry.
Moscow’s delegation, headed by Vladimir Medinsky, an aide to Russian leader
Vladimir Putin, arrived on Sunday evening, Russian state media reported. Turkish
foreign minister Hakan Fidan is presiding over the talks with officials from the
Turkish intelligence agency also present. Fierce fighting has continued along
the roughly 620-mile front line, and both sides have hit each other’s territory
with deep strikes.
Russia Ukraine
Russian air defences downed 162 Ukrainian drones over eight Russian regions
overnight, as well as over the annexed Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, Russia’s
Defence Ministry said on Monday. Ukrainian air defenscs damaged 52 out of 80
drones launched by Russia overnight, the Ukrainian air force said. Two ballistic
missiles struck a residential neighbourhood in the north-eastern Ukrainian city
of Kharkiv on Monday morning, including one that hit near a school, the city’s
mayor said. One missile landed near an apartment building, while the second
struck a road near the school, Ihor Terekhov said in a statement with a photo of
a wide crater. “Standing next to the crater, you realise how different it all
could have been,” he wrote. “A few more metres — and it would have hit the
building. A few more minutes — and cars, buses would have been on the road.”
No casualties were reported.
Damascus stock exchange reopens after 6-month closure
Ghaith Alsayed, The Associated Press/June 2, 2025
DAMASCUS — Trading resumed on the Damascus Securities Exchange Monday after a
six-month closure, as Syria's new leaders attempt to shore up the country's
battered economy and begin rebuilding after nearly 14 years of civil war. The
stock exchange had closed during the chaotic days leading up to the ouster of
former President Bashar Assad in a lightning rebel offensive. Syrian Finance
Minister Mohammed Yisr Barnieh, who attended the reopening, said that it signals
that the country's economy is beginning to recover and that the stock exchange
“will operate as a private company and serve as a genuine hub for Syria’s
economic development, with a strong focus on digital,” state-run news agency
SANA reported. He said the country's new leaders plan to "facilitate business
operations and open doors to promising investment opportunities.”The move to
reopen comes as international restrictions on Syria’s financial systems begin to
ease. The United States and Europe both last month announced the lifting of a
wide raft of sanctions that had been slapped on Syria under the Assad dynasty’s
rule. Last week, Syria inked a power deal worth $7 billion with a consortium of
Qatari, Turkish and U.S. companies for development of a 5,000-megawatt energy
project to revitalize much of Syria’s war-battered electricity grid. The
consortium led by Qatar’s UCC Concession Investments — along with Power
International USA and Turkey’s Kalyon GES Enerji Yatirimlari, Cengiz Enerji —
will develop four combined-cycle gas turbines with a total generating capacity
estimated at approximately 4,000 megawatts and a 1,000-megawatt solar power
plant.
Israel army says intercepts
Yemen missile after air raid sirens sound
Reuters/June 2, 2025
The Israeli army said it intercepted a missile launched from Yemen on Monday,
with loud booms heard in the skies over Jerusalem. “Following the sirens that
sounded a short while ago in several areas in Israel, a missile launched from
Yemen was intercepted,” the army said in a statement. Yemen’s Houthis have
repeatedly launched missiles and drones at Israel since the Gaza war broke out
in October 2023 with Palestinian militant group Hamas’s attack on Israel.
Monday’s interception followed another the day before that was claimed by the
Iran-backed group. The Houthis, who say they are acting in solidarity with
Palestinians, paused their attacks during a two-month Gaza ceasefire that ended
in March, but began again after Israel resumed its military campaign in the
territory.While most of the projectiles have been intercepted, one missile fired
in early May hit inside the perimeter of Ben Gurion airport for the first time.
Israel has carried out several strikes in Yemen in retaliation for the attacks,
including on ports and the airport in the capital Sanaa.
Three people reported killed and dozens wounded at an aid
site in Gaza, medics say
Nidal al-Mughrabi; Editing by Alex Richardson/Reuters/June 2, 2025
CAIRO -Israeli fire killed at least three Palestinians and wounded dozens of
others near an aid distribution site operated by the U.S.-based Gaza
Humanitarian Foundation, local health authorities said on Monday. The Israeli
military said it was aware of reports of casualties and the incident was being
thoroughly looked into. It said in a statement that troops operating overnight
in Rafah, which is under full Israeli military control, in the southern Gaza
Strip, had fired warning shots "to prevent several suspects approaching them",
adding the incident took place about a 1 km away from the aid distribution site.
The GHF, a private group sponsored by the United States and endorsed by Israel,
said there had been no fatalities or injuries at its distribution site or the
surrounding area. Reuters could not independently verify what took place. The
reported incident was the latest in a series underscoring the volatile security
situation that has complicated aid delivery to Gaza, following the easing last
month of an almost three-month Israeli blockade. On Sunday, Palestinian and
international officials said at least 31 people were killed and dozens wounded
near the same site, one of several operated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation
in Rafah.
The Israeli military denied firing at people gathering to collect aid, and the
GHF said Sunday's distribution was carried out without incident, describing
reports of deaths as fabricated by Hamas. In an update earlier on Monday, the
GHF said it has distributed the load of 21 trucks to Palestinians. It added that
Monday's deliveries raised the number of meals it has distributed since it began
operations to nearly 6 million. The United Nations has said most of Gaza's 2
million population is at risk of famine after an 11-week Israeli blockade on aid
entering the strip.The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation launched its first
distribution sites last week and said it would launch more. The Israeli military
has said GHF had established four sites so far. Its aid plan, which bypasses
traditional aid groups, has come under fierce criticism from the United Nations
and humanitarian organisations, which say the GHF does not follow humanitarian
principles. On Monday, the Palestinian NGOs Network urged a boycott of what it
called the "U.S.-Israeli aid mechanism" in protest over the killings on Sunday.
It said that the new mechanism has deepened the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and
aimed to "bolster the occupation's security and political goals" in pushing
Palestinians out of northern Gaza towards the south.
CEASEFIRE TALKS TO RESUME
Israel and Hamas, meanwhile, traded blame for the faltering of a new Arab and
U.S. mediation bid to secure a temporary ceasefire and the release of Israeli
hostages held in Gaza by Hamas, in exchange for Palestinians in Israeli jails.
Hamas said on Saturday it was seeking amendments to a U.S.-backed ceasefire
proposal, but U.S. President Donald Trump's envoy, Steve Witkoff, rejected the
group's response as "totally unacceptable".Egypt and Qatar said in a joint
statement that they were continuing efforts to overcome disagreements and reach
a ceasefire.Hamas on Sunday welcomed those efforts and expressed its readiness
to start a round of indirect negotiations immediately. On Monday, a Palestinian
official close to the mediation effort said Hamas leaders were in constant
contact with Egyptian and Qatari mediators in Cairo and Doha, hoping they could
pressure Israel to agree to holding talks on ending the war in Gaza as part of
the ceasefire deal. Israel says it accepts a temporary truce to release
hostages, but that war can only end once Hamas is driven out of Gaza. Israel
began its offensive in Gaza in response to the Hamas-led attack on southern
Israel on October 7, 2023, which killed 1,200 people, mostly civilians,
according to Israeli tallies, and saw 251 taken as hostages into Gaza. Israel's
campaign has devastated much of Gaza, killing more than 54,000 Palestinians and
destroying most buildings. Much of the population now lives in shelters in
makeshift camps.
US gives nod to Syria to
bring former opposition foreign fighters into army
Al Arabiya English/June 02/2025
The United States has given its blessing to a plan by Syria’s new leadership to
incorporate thousands of foreign fighters who fought alongside the Syrian
opposition against Bashar al-Assad into the national army, provided that it does
so transparently, President Donald Trump’s envoy said. Three Syrian defense
officials said that under the plan, some 3,500 foreign fighters, mainly Uyghurs
from China and neighboring countries, would join a newly-formed unit, the 84th
Syrian army division, which would also include Syrians. Asked by Reuters in
Damascus whether Washington approved the integration of foreign fighters into
Syria’s new military, Thomas Barrack, the US ambassador to Turkey who was named
Trump’s special envoy to Syria last month, said: “I would say there is an
understanding, with transparency.”He said it was better to keep the fighters,
many of whom are “very loyal” to Syria’s new administration, within a state
project than to exclude them. The fate of foreigners who joined Syria’s “Hayat
Tahrir al-Sham” opposition fighters during the 13-year war between armed
opposition groups and President Bashar al-Assad has been one of the most fraught
issues hindering a rapprochement with the West since HTS, a one-time offshoot of
al-Qaeda, toppled al-Assad and took power last year. At least until early May,
the United States had been demanding the new leadership broadly exclude foreign
fighters from the security forces. But Washington’s approach to Syria has
changed sharply since Trump toured the Middle East last month. Trump agreed to
lift al-Assad-era sanctions on Syria, met Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa in
Riyadh and named Barrack, a close friend, as his special envoy. Two sources
close to the Syrian defense ministry told Reuters that al-Sharaa and his circle
had been arguing to Western interlocutors that bringing foreign fighters into
the army would be less of a security risk than abandoning them, which could
drive them into the orbit of al-Qaeda or ISIS. The US State Department and a
Syrian government spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment.
Chinese concerns
Thousands of foreigners joined Syria’s armed opposition forces early in the
13-year civil war to fight against al-Assad, who was himself aided by
Iranian-backed Shia militias. Some fighters formed their own factions, while
others joined established groups such as ISIS, which briefly declared a
caliphate in swathes of Syria and Iraq before being routed by an array of forces
backed both by the United States and Iran. Foreign fighters within HTS earned a
reputation as loyal, disciplined and experienced militants, and formed the
backbone of the group’s elite so-called suicide units. They fought against ISIS
and against other wings of al-Qaeda from 2016, when HTS broke away from the
group founded by Osama bin Laden. The Uyghur fighters from China and Central
Asia are members of the Turkistan Islamic Party, a group designated as
terrorists by Beijing. A Syrian official and a foreign diplomat said China had
sought to have the group’s influence in Syria restricted. A Chinese foreign
ministry spokesperson said: “China hopes that Syria will oppose all forms of
terrorism and extremist forces in response to the concerns of the international
community.”Osman Bughra, a TIP political official, told Reuters in a written
statement that the group had officially dissolved and integrated into the Syrian
army. “At present, the group operates entirely under the authority of the
Ministry of Defense, adheres to national policy, and maintains no affiliations
with external entities or groups,” he said. In December, the appointment of a
handful of foreign fighters who were part of HTS’s senior leadership to top
military posts had alarmed Western governments, raising concerns over the
direction of Syria’s new leadership. Demands to freeze the appointments and
expel rank-and-file foreign fighters became a key point of contention with
Washington and other Western countries up until the week of Trump’s landmark
meeting with al-Sharaa. Al-Sharaa has said that foreign fighters and their
families may be granted Syrian citizenship due to their role in fighting
al-Assad. Abbas Sharifa, a Damascus-based expert on extremist groups, said the
fighters being included in the army had shown loyalty to Syria’s leadership and
were “ideologically filtered.”But “if you abandon them they become prey to ISIS
or other radical groups” he said.
With Reuters
US withdraws hundreds of troops from Syria after Pentagon
directive
Al Arabiya English/June 02/2025
Hundreds of American troops have been withdrawn from Syria, according to US
officials, in line with US President Donald Trump’s new approach to the region
and as a direct result of the fall of the Assad regime. “The consolidation of US
forces in Syria is safe, deliberate, and conditions-based,” a US defense
official told Al Arabiya English. An estimated 500 troops were withdrawn in
recent weeks, and multiple US bases were handed over to the Syrian Democratic
Forces (SDF) or shut down, Fox News reported on Monday, citing US officials. Fox
News also reported that Mission Support Site Green Village was shut down, while
MSS Euphrates was handed over to the SDF. According to the officials who spoke
to Fox News, a third base was also vacated. Sources familiar with the matter
confirmed to Al Arabiya English that a number of troops had been deployed
elsewhere and that the bases were shut down or handed over within the last
month. CENTCOM referred questions on the matter to Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean
Parnell’s announcement of the consolidation of forces in April. That statement
said the US would consolidate troops in Syria under Combined Joint Task Force –
Operation Inherent Resolve to select locations in the country, bringing down the
US footprint in Syria to less than 1,000. “As this consolidation takes place,
consistent with President Trump’s commitment to peace through strength, US
Central Command will remain poised to continue strikes against the remnants of
ISIS in Syria,” Parnell said at the time. The United States has maintained a
partnership with the SDF for several years, viewing it as crucial in the fight
against ISIS. Despite having reservations about engaging with Syria’s interim
president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, the Trump administration has now lifted sanctions on
Syria, paving the way for regional and international players to enter the Syrian
market and help begin the path to recovery. Washington gave the Syrian
government a list of conditions earlier this year. This included expelling
foreign fighters from the country as well as removing foreign fighters from
official military or government positions, preventing Iran and its proxies from
reestablishing a foothold and others. But on Monday, Reuters reported that
Washington had okayed a plan by Damascus to integrate foreign fighters into the
army. Beyond Syria, the US has approximately 2,500 troops in Iraq, 3,500 in
Jordan, and nearly 2,000 in Turkey. In a deal between Baghdad and the Biden
administration, the US would consolidate its bases in Iraq and reduce the number
of troops stationed there. However, after the fall of the Assad regime, Iraq has
been pleading with the US to delay its transition. No decisions have been made
yet, officials said.
UN chief condemns killing of Palestinians at aid center in
Gaza, calls for probe
Ephrem Kossaify/Arab News/June 02, 2025
NEW YORK CITY: UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Monday condemned the
killing of more 30 Palestinians who were seeking food at a controversial,
US-backed aid-distribution center in Gaza. He called for an “immediate and
independent investigation” into the incident and demanded that those responsible
“be held accountable.”At least 31 Palestinians were killed and 176 wounded in
the attack by Israeli forces near the aid site in the city of Rafah in the south
of the territory. “I am appalled by the reports of Palestinians killed and
injured while seeking aid in Gaza yesterday,” Guterres said.“It is unacceptable
that Palestinians are risking their lives for food. I call for an immediate and
independent investigation into these events and for perpetrators to be held
accountable.”The aid center close to the scene of the attack is managed by the
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, an American organization with which the Israeli
government is working to implement a new aid-distribution system in Gaza that
circumvents the traditional UN-led approach. The UN has chosen not to work with
the organization, citing concerns about its impartiality. Some humanitarian
groups have said the aid initiative seems to have been tailored to align with
Israeli military interests. UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said on Monday the
international organization and its humanitarian partners continue to urgently
call for the full lifting of all restrictions on the delivery of aid and
essential supplies, to ensure the basic needs of civilians in Gaza are met at a
time when dire conditions persist in the territory. He said that civilians there
face repeated water shortages as the main pipeline in Deir Al-Balah, which
previously delivered at least 12,000 cubic meters of water a day, remains out of
service. Despite several attempts, humanitarian workers have been denied
permission to carry out coordinated repair missions, Dujarric said. Five planned
operations to distribute potable water to camps for displaced persons in
Jabaliya were also blocked by Israeli authorities, he added. Over the weekend,
humanitarian teams managed to pick up more than 100 truckloads of food and
medical supplies from the Palestinian side of the Kerem Shalom crossing,
bringing the total number collected to more than 300 since its recent reopening.
However, access remains inconsistent and unpredictable, Dujarric said. “Today,
one of our attempts to collect supplies from that crossing was denied,” he
added. “Another is still ongoing, awaiting a green light from Israeli
authorities, a pause in the bombing along the route, and the allocation of a
viable path. “Because of the Israeli weekend and holiday, the border was kept
closed, blocking us from bringing more supplies through Kerem Shalom since
Saturday. Even when the crossing is open, severe restrictions on what we can
bring in, both in terms of volume and variety, means it’s still just a trickle
of what people need.”In his statement, Guterres said: “Israel has clear
obligations under international humanitarian law to agree to and facilitate
humanitarian aid. “The unimpeded entry of assistance at scale to meet the
enormous needs in Gaza must be restored immediately. The UN must be allowed to
work in safety and security under conditions of full respect or humanitarian
principles.”
Former Biden official Matthew Miller says he believes
Israel has committed war crimes in Gaza
Sky News/June 2, 2025
A senior official in former president Joe Biden's administration has told Sky
News that he has no doubt that Israel has committed war crimes in Gaza. Speaking
to the Trump 100 podcast, Matthew Miller, who, as a state department spokesman,
was the voice and face of the US government's foreign policy under Mr Biden,
revealed disagreements, tensions and challenges within the former
administration.
In the wide-ranging conversation, he said:
• It was "without a doubt true that Israel has committed war crimes";
• That Israeli soldiers were not being "held accountable";
• That there were "disagreements all along the way" about how to handle policy;
• And that he "would have wanted to have a better candidate" than Mr Biden for
the 2024 election.
Mr Miller served as the state department spokesman from 2023 until the end of Mr
Biden's presidential term. From the podium, his job was to explain and defend
foreign policy decisions - from Ukraine to Gaza.
"Look, one of the things about being a spokesperson is you're not a spokesperson
for yourself. You are a spokesperson for the president, the administration, and
you espouse the positions of the administration. And when you're not in the
administration, you can just give your own opinions."Now out of office, he
offered a candid reflection of a hugely challenging period in foreign policy and
US politics.
Gaza disagreements
Asked about Gaza, he revealed there were "small and big" disagreements within
the Biden administration over the US-Israeli relationship.
"There were disagreements all along the way about how to handle policy. Some of
those were big disagreements, some of those were little disagreements," he said.
Pushed on rumours that then-secretary of state Antony Blinken had frustrations
with Mr Biden over both Gaza and Ukraine policy, Mr Miller hinted at the
tensions.
"I'll probably wait and let the secretary speak for himself… but I will say,
speaking generally, look, it is true about every senior official in government
that they don't win every policy fight that they enter into. And what you do is
you make your best case to the president. "The administration did debate, at
times, whether and when to cut off weapons to Israel. You saw us in the spring
of 2024 stop the shipment of 2,000-pound bombs to Israel because we did not
believe they would use those in a way that was appropriate in Gaza."Through the
spring and summer of 2024, the Biden administration was caught between its
bedrock policy of the unconditional defence of its ally Israel and the reality
of what that ally was doing in Gaza, with American weapons.
Mr Mill said: "There were debates about whether to suspend other arms
deliveries, and you saw at times us hold back certain arms while we negotiated
the use of those arms…
"But we found ourselves in this really tough position, especially in that time
period when it really came to a head… We were at a place where - I'm thinking of
the way I can appropriately say this - the decisions and the thinking of Hamas
leadership were not always secret to the United States and to our partners."
He continued: "And it was clear to us in that period that there was a time when
our public discussion of withholding weapons from Israel, as well as the
protests on college campuses in the United States, and the movement of some
European countries to recognise the state of Palestine - appropriate
discussions, appropriate decisions - protests are appropriate - but all of those
things together were leading the leadership of Hamas to conclude that they
didn't need to agree to a ceasefire, they just needed to hold out for a little
bit longer, and they could get what they always wanted."
"Now, the thing that I look back on, that I will always ask questions of myself
about, and I think this is true for others in government, is in that intervening
period between the end of May and the middle of January [2025], when thousands
of Palestinians were killed, innocent civilians who didn't want this war, had
nothing to do with it, was there more that we could, could have done to pressure
the Israeli government to agree to that ceasefire? I think at times there
probably was," Mr Miller said.
Asked for his view on the accusation of genocide in Gaza, he said: "I don't
think it's a genocide, but I think it is without a doubt true that Israel has
committed war crimes."
Challenged on why he didn't make these points while in government, he said:
"When you're at the podium, you're not expressing your personal opinion. You're
expressing the conclusions of the United States government. The United States
government had not concluded that they committed war crimes, still have not
concluded [that]."
He went on to offer a qualification to his accusation. "There are two ways to
think about the commission of war crimes," he said. "One is if the state has
pursued a policy of deliberately committing war crimes or is acting recklessly
in a way that aids and abets war crimes. Is the state committing war crimes?
"That, I think, is an open question. I think what is almost certainly not an
open question is that there have been individual incidents that have been war
crimes where Israeli soldiers, members of the Israeli military, have committed
war crimes." The Israeli government continues to strongly deny all claims that
it has committed war crimes in Gaza.
On Joe Biden's election hopes
Mr Miller also offered a candid reflection on the suitability of Mr Biden as a
candidate in the 2024 US election. While Mr Biden initially ran to extend his
stay in the White House, he stepped aside, with Kamala Harris taking his place
as the Democratic candidate.
"Had I not been inside the government, had I been outside the government acting
kind of in a political role, of course, I would have wanted to have a better
candidate," he said. "It's that collective action problem where no one wants to
be the first to speak out and stand up alone. You stand up by yourself and get
your head chopped off, stand up together, you can take action. "But there was
never really a consensus position in the party, and there was no one that was
willing to stand up and rally the party to say this isn't going to work. "I
don't think there is anyone on the White House staff, including the most senior
White House staffers, who could have gone to Joe Biden in the spring of 2023 or
at any time after that and told him: 'Mr President, you are not able to do the
duties of this job. And you will not win re-election.' He would have rejected
that outright."
The Trump presidency
On the Donald Trump presidency so far, he offered a nuanced view.
He described Mr Trump's Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff as "an extremely capable
individual" but expressed his worry that he was being manipulated by Russian
President Vladimir Putin. "I know the people in the Biden administration who
worked with him during the first negotiations for Gaza ceasefire thought that he
was capable."I think at times he doesn't know what he doesn't know. And you see
that especially in the negotiations to end the war in Ukraine, where you see him
go into a meeting with Vladimir Putin and come out spouting Russian propaganda…
I think he would benefit from a little diplomatic savvy and some experienced
diplomats around him."He continued: "But I do think it's extremely important
that when people sit down with an envoy of the United States they know that that
envoy speaks for the President of the United States and it is very clear that
Witkoff has that and that's an extremely valuable asset to bring to the table."
On the months and years ahead under Mr Trump, Mr Miller said: "The thing that
worries me most is that Donald Trump may squander the position that the United
States has built around the world over successive administrations of both
parties over a course of decades. "I don't think most Americans understand the
benefits that they get to their daily lives by the United States being the
indispensable nation in the world. "The open question is: will the damage that
he's doing be recoverable or not?"
Insurgents overrun Mali base, killing dozens of soldiers,
sources say
Reuters/June 2, 2025
BAMAKO-An Al Qaeda-linked rebel group active in West Africa's Sahel region has
claimed responsibility for an attack on a military base in Mali on Sunday that
two sources said had killed more than 30 soldiers. More than 400 soldiers have
reportedly been killed by insurgents since the start of May in bases and towns
in Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso, an unstable region prone to coups. The jihadist
group, Jama'a Nusrat ul-Islam wa al-Muslimin (JNIM), said in a statement on
Sunday that it had seized the base in Boulkessi in central Mali, near the border
with Burkina Faso. The Malian army said it had been forced to pull back.
"Many men fought, some until their last breath, to defend the Malian nation,"
its statement said, without giving any casualty numbers. A spokesperson did not
respond to a question about the toll, but two security sources said more than 30
soldiers had been killed.
A municipal source at Mondoro, near the base, said the insurgents "cleared the
camp" and that there were many dead. Videos shared online showed dozens of
insurgents overrunning the base. One showed militants stepping on the bodies of
soldiers who had fallen between sandbags. Reuters could not immediately
authenticate the videos.
WIDENING INSECURITY
JNIM has claimed responsibility for a host of recent attacks in the region.
On May 24, it said it had attacked a base in Dioura, central Mali, killing 40
soldiers.
Last Friday, it said it had seized a base in Sirakorola in southwestern Mali,
although the army said it had repelled the attack. It did not provide a toll for
that incident either.
In neighbouring Burkina Faso, JNIM claimed attacks on military positions and the
town of Djibo in mid-May in which it said it had killed 200 soldiers.
And in Niger, more than 100 soldiers were killed in two attacks in the Tahoua
region on May 24 and the Dosso region on May 26, security sources said.
Neither Burkina Faso nor Niger has published an official death toll.
Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger are all ruled by juntas that seized power between
2020 and 2023, citing the inability of civilian governments to stamp out
jihadist insurgencies.
All have cut ties with Western nations and turned to Russia for military
support, but are still struggling to contain violence that has displaced
millions.
Conservative Karol Nawrocki wins Poland's presidential
election
Vanessa Gera/The Associated Press/June 2, 2025
WARSAW, Poland — Conservative Karol Nawrocki won Poland’s weekend presidential
runoff election, according to the final vote count on Monday. Nawrocki won
50.89% of votes in a very tight race against liberal Warsaw Mayor Rafał
Trzaskowski, who received 49.11%. The race had Poland on edge since a first
round of voting two weeks earlier, revealing deep divisions in the country along
the eastern flank of NATO and the European Union. An early exit poll released
Sunday evening suggested Trzaskowski was headed to victory before updated
polling began to reverse the picture a couple of hours later. The outcome
suggests that Poland can be expected to take a more populist and nationalist
path under its new president, who was backed by U.S. President Donald Trump.
Trzaskowski conceded defeat and congratulated Nawrocki on Monday, thanking all
those who voted for him. “I fought for us to build a strong, safe, honest, and
empathetic Poland together,” he wrote on X. “I’m sorry I wasn’t able to convince
the majority of citizens of my vision for Poland. I’m sorry we didn’t win
together.”
Congratulations from different corners
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was among the leaders offering their
congratulations to Nawrocki on Monday morning, an acknowledgment of Poland's key
role as a neighbor, ally and hub for Western weapons sent to Kyiv.
He called Poland “a pillar of regional and European security,” and said, “by
reinforcing one another on our continent, we give greater strength to Europe in
global competition and bring the achievement of real and lasting peace closer. I
look forward to continued fruitful cooperation with Poland and with President
Nawrocki personally.”Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who shares
Nawrocki's national conservative worldview, hailed Nawrocki's “fantastic
victory.”Meanwhile, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen offered
measured congratulations, emphasizing continued EU-Poland collaboration rooted
in shared democratic values: “We are all stronger together in our community of
peace, democracy, and values. So let us work to ensure the security and
prosperity of our common home.”
The role of a president in Poland
Most day-to-day power in the Polish political system rests with a prime minister
chosen by the parliament. However, the president's role is not merely
ceremonial. The office holds the power to influence foreign policy and to veto
legislation. Nawrocki will succeed Andrzej Duda, a conservative whose second and
final term ends on Aug. 6.
Under the Polish constitution, the president serves a five-year term and may be
re-elected once.
A headache for Tusk
Prime Minister Donald Tusk came to power in late 2023 with a coalition
government that spans a broad ideological divide — so broad that it hasn't been
able to fulfill certain of his electoral promises, such as loosening the
restrictive abortion law or passing a civil partnership law for same-sex
couples. But Duda's veto power has been another obstacle. It has prevented Tusk
from fulfilling promises to reverse laws that politicized the court system in a
way that the EU found to be undemocratic. Now it appears Tusk will have no way
to fulfill those promises, which he made both to voters and the EU.
Some observers in Poland have said the unfulfilled promises could make it more
difficult for Tusk to continue his term until the next parliamentary election
scheduled for late 2027, particularly if Law and Justice dangles the prospect of
future cooperation with conservatives in his coalition.
A former boxer, historian and political novice
Nawrocki, a 42-year-old amateur boxer and historian, was tapped by the Law and
Justice party as part of its push for a fresh start. The party governed Poland
from 2015 to 2023, when it lost power to Tusk's centrist coalition. Some
political observers predicted it would never make a comeback, and Nawrocki was
chosen as a new face who would not be burned by the scandals of the party's
eight years of rule.The election outcome vindicated party leader Jarosław
Kaczyński's strategy but on Monday many were also blaming the increasingly
unpopular Tusk and Trzaskowski. Nawrocki has most recently been the head of the
Institute of National Remembrance, which embraces nationalist historical
narratives. He led efforts to topple monuments to the Soviet Red Army in Poland,
and Russia responded by putting him on a wanted list, according to Polish media
reports. Nawrocki’s supporters describe him as the embodiment of traditional,
patriotic values. Those who oppose secular trends, including LGBTQ+ visibility,
have embraced him, viewing him as a reflection of the values they grew up with.
Nawrocki’s candidacy was clouded by allegations of past connections to criminal
figures and his participation in a violent street brawl. He denies the criminal
links but was unapologetic about the street fight, saying he had taken part in
various “noble” fights in his life. The revelations did not seem to hurt his
support among right-wing voters, many of whom see the allegations as politically
motivated.
The Trump factor
Trump made it clear he wanted Nawrocki as Poland's president. He welcomed
Nawrocki to the White House a month ago. And last week the conservative group
CPAC held its first meeting in Poland to give Nawrocki a boost. Kristi Noem, the
U.S. Homeland Security Secretary and a prominent Trump ally, strongly praised
Nawrocki and urged Poles to vote for him. The U.S. has about 10,000 troops
stationed in Poland and Noem suggested that military ties could deepen with
Nawrocki as president. A common refrain from Nawrocki's supporters is that he
will restore “normality,” as they believe Trump has done. U.S. flags often
appeared at Nawrocki's rallies, and his supporters believed that he offered a
better chance for good ties with the Trump administration.Nawrocki has also
echoed some of Trump's language on Ukraine. He promises to continue Poland's
support for Ukraine but has been critical of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy,
accusing him of taking advantage of allies. He has accused Ukrainian refugees of
taking advantage of Polish generosity, vowing to prioritize Poles for social
services such as health care and schooling.
FBI says
8 injured in Colorado attack by man with makeshift flamethrower who yelled 'Free
Palestine'
Colleen Slevin And Eric Tucker/The Associated Press/June 2, 2025
BOULDER, Colo.— A man with a makeshift flamethrower yelled “Free Palestine” and
hurled an incendiary device into a group that had assembled to raise attention
for Israeli hostages in Gaza, law enforcement officials said Sunday. Eight
people were injured, some with burns. The suspect, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45,
was booked into the Boulder County jail north of Denver and expected to face
charges in connection with the attack the FBI was investigating as a terrorist
act. Online records did not immediately show when he would make a court
appearance.The burst of violence at the popular Pearl Street pedestrian mall, a
four-block area in downtown Boulder, unfolded against the backdrop of a war
between Israel and Hamas that continues to inflame global tensions and has
contributed to a spike in antisemitic violence in the United States. The attack
happened on the beginning of the Jewish holiday of Shavuot, which is marked with
the reading of the Torah and barely a week after a man who also yelled “Free
Palestine” was charged with fatally shooting two Israeli embassy staffers
outside of a Jewish museum in Washington. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu issued a statement Monday saying he, his wife and the entire nation of
Israel were praying for the full recovery of the people wounded in the “vicious
terror attack” in Colorado. “This attack was aimed against peaceful people who
wished to express their solidarity with the hostages held by Hamas, simply
because they were Jews,” Netanyahu said.
Attack leads to increased security elsewhere
Across the U.S., the New York Police Department said it has upped its presence
at religious sites throughout the city for Shavuot. “Sadly, attacks like this
are becoming too common across the country,” said Mark Michalek, the special
agent in charge of the FBI's Denver field office, which encompasses Boulder.
“This is an example of how perpetrators of violence continue to threaten
communities across the nation.”The eight victims who were wounded range in age
from 52 to 88 and the injuries spanned from serious to minor, officials said.
The attack occurred as people with a volunteer group called Run For Their Lives
was concluding their weekly demonstration to raise visibility for the hostages
who remain in Gaza. Video from the scene shows a witness shouting, “He’s right
there. He’s throwing Molotov cocktails,” as a police officer with his gun drawn
advances on a bare-chested suspect who is holding containers in each hand. Alex
Osante of San Diego said he was having lunch on a restaurant patio across the
pedestrian mall when he heard the crash of a bottle breaking on the ground, a
“boom” sound followed by people yelling and screaming. In video of the scene
captured by Osante, people could be seen pouring water on a woman lying on the
ground who Osante said had caught on fire during the attack. A man, who later
identified himself as an Israeli visiting Boulder who decided to join the group
that day, ran up to Osante on the video asking for some water to help.
Suspect reemerged after initial attack before being arrested
After the initial attack, Osante said the suspect went behind some bushes and
then reemerged and threw a Molotov cocktail but apparently accidentally caught
himself on fire as he threw it. The man then took off his shirt and what
appeared to be a bulletproof vest before the police arrived. The man dropped to
the ground and was arrested without any apparent resistance in the video that
Osante filmed. As people tried to help the woman on the ground, another woman
who appeared to be a participant in the event yelled to others out of the
camera’s view, defending their cause, saying they don’t talk about the
government but just talk about the hostages. Lynn Segal, 72, was among about 20
people who gathered Sunday. They had finished their march in front of the
courthouse when a “rope of fire” shot in front of her and then "two big
flares.”She said the scene quickly turned chaotic as people worked to find water
to put out flames and find help. Segal, who said she is Jewish on her father’s
side and has supported the Palestinian cause for more than 40 years, was
concerned that she might be accused of helping the suspect because she was
wearing a pro-Palestinian shirt.
“There were people who were burning, I wanted to help,” she said. “But I didn’t
want to be associated with the perpetrator.”
Authorities say they believe the suspect acted alone
Authorities did not disclose details about Soliman but said they believe that he
acted alone and that no other suspect was being sought. No criminal charges were
immediately announced but officials said they would move to hold Soliman
accountable. He was also injured and was taken to the hospital to be treated,
but authorities didn’t elaborate on the nature of his injuries. FBI leaders
immediately declared the attack an act of terrorism and the Justice Department
denounced it as a "needless act of violence, which follows recent attacks
against Jewish Americans."
“This act of terror is being investigated as an act of ideologically motivated
violence based on the early information, the evidence, and witness accounts. We
will speak clearly on these incidents when the facts warrant it,” FBI Deputy
Director Dan Bongino said in a post on X. Israel's war in Gaza began when
Hamas-led militants stormed into southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing some
1,200 people, mostly civilians, and abducting about 250 others. They are still
holding 58 hostages, around a third believed to be alive, after most of the rest
were released in ceasefire agreements or other deals.
Israel’s military campaign has killed over 54,000 people in Hamas-run Gaza,
mostly women and children, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, which does not
say how many of the dead were civilians or combatants. The offensive has
destroyed vast areas, displaced around 90% of the population and left people
almost completely reliant on international aid. The violence comes four years
after a shooting rampage at a grocery store in Boulder, about 25 miles (40
kilometers) northwest of Denver, that killed 10 people. The gunman was sentenced
to life in prison for murder after a jury rejected his attempt to avoid prison
time by pleading not guilty by reason of insanity. Multiple blocks of the
pedestrian mall area were evacuated by police. The scene shortly after the
attack was tense, as law enforcement agents with a police dog walked through the
streets looking for threats and instructed the public to stay clear of the mall.
The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous
sources on June 02-03/2025
Lifting Sanctions on the Syrian Regime is a Grave
Mistake
Sinan Ciddi/19FortyFive site/June 02/2025
https://www.19fortyfive.com/2025/05/lifting-sanctions-on-the-syrian-regime-is-a-grave-mistake/
At a future point, many will ask an obvious question: why did the United States
and Europe lift sanctions on Syria? The question will come after the likely fall
of the Ahmed al Sharaa regime when the mirage of a unified Syria governed by a
central government gives way to renewed civil war by competing jihadist factions
and militias. At the highest levels of European and American governance,
decision-makers want world audiences to believe that Syria’s new government must
be given all the support it can get if Syria has a chance of succeeding
following the fall of the Bashar al Assad regime in December 2024. Without
lifting sanctions, the logic goes that Syria has no hope of economically
recovering and risks becoming a failed state. Syria was designated by the United
States as a state sponsor of terrorism in 1979, which was further compounded by
Congress’ Caeser Act of 2019, which economically ruined the Baathist regime’s
economy. The argument by proponents of Sharaa states that the sanctions in place
were directed against Syria’s old regime, which is now gone, and to keep them in
place is not only wrong, but maintaining them would be the practice of
collective punishment against the Syrian people.
Syria’s New Leadership
Questioning this logic should not be frowned upon. To be clear, sanctions are
not being lifted on a state governed by benign rulers who value the sanctity of
human life. Syria is now led by Ahmed al Sharaa, a jihadist with previous ties
to Al Qaeda, presiding over a cabinet, most of whom also had ties to violent
extremist organizations, including Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. Many,
including al Sharaa, had bounties on their heads. Since Sharaa and Hayat
Tahrir al Sham (HTS)—the Al Qaeda entity he led that toppled the Assad
regime—Europe and Washington have been willing to take Sharaa (and his
followers) at his word that he has abandoned his lifelong violent quest to
pursue jihadist causes. Verifying his word or intention is not part of the
West’s calculation in dealing with Sharaa for one simple reason: both the Trump
administration and Europe do not want to explore more direct or alternative ways
to stabilize Syria’s unified future. The West does not want to commit any
resources. There simply is no resolve or patience. The Assad regime was
overthrown, and one must simply make do with what there is, and that is a
self-avowed ‘former’ terrorist and his alleged transitional government. To
ensure that Sharaa’s government succeeds, the West has accepted the enthusiastic
support of Turkey and the Gulf monarchies, which are keen to shape and influence
Syria in their own image. Since 2011, Ankara has been determined to overthrow
the Assad regime and install a new government that is directly affiliated or
ideologically adjacent to the Muslim Brotherhood. Its support of the Mohammed
Morsi regime in Egypt and Hamas in Gaza is clear proof of Erdogan’s ideological
desires for the region. Ankara greenlit HTS’ military campaign to topple the
Assad regime in December 2024, as seen when HTS fighters draped Turkish flags on
the walls of Aleppo following the city’s capture.
A New Syria, or Puppet State
Having displaced Iran’s influence and presence in Syria, Erdogan now intends to
expand Turkey’s power throughout the region. Turkey seeks to utilize Syrian
territory to establish a permanent military presence through bases, forward
positioning its military, and playing a primary role in building Syria’s
military capability under Sharaa. Turkey also seeks to gain economically out of
Syria: Turkish construction, manufacturing, infrastructure, and service firms
stand ready to rebuild the war-torn state, all to be financed with capital
flowing from the Gulf.
But these lofty goals are dangerous and unlikely to succeed. By lifting
sanctions on the Sharaa government, Western powers are providing the basis of
empowering future jihadist pursuits. At present, Sharaa has professed
moderation. He has visited Western capitals, shaken hands with United States
President Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron, and promised to
build an inclusive Syria for all Syrians. Institutionally speaking, it is
unclear if the new regime is interested in providing a governance structure that
will satisfy the needs and wants of the country’s heterogeneous population. We
simply have no idea if elections and participation by Syrians in Syria’s future
will ever be witnessed. Sharaa has already declared that elections will not be
held for at least five years.
Rule in Syria
This is not the sign of a leader interested in building an inclusive rule but
rather amassing personal power. There have been strong expressions that Sharia
law will be the basis of Syrian law, which is unlikely to sit well with the
country’s minority components, especially its sizeable Kurdish population, which
are both militarily well equipped, capable of resisting Sharaa, and abundantly
skeptical of Sharaa’s ability to preside over a central government for a
meaningful length of time. Representatives of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)
and its political wing, the Democratic Union Party (PYD), have made little
secret of their desire to push for a decentralized government in Syria. They do
not trust Sharaa. The biggest threat to Syrian unity comes from the jihadist
factions/militias, now being mobilized to supposedly create the new Syrian Army,
Syrian law enforcement, and staff institutions of the new Syrian state.
Succeeding in this area is the greatest challenge, and it may be a bridge too
far. Asking jihadist militias to renounce their ambitions for holy jihad, to
support and defend the creation of a Weberian administrative state, is simply a
fantasy. There is a credible concern that Sharaa may struggle to convince the
various components of this governing coalition to support his moderate
intentions. Take the multiple militias that comprise the so-called “Syrian
National Army.” An umbrella organization consisting of numerous opposition
Syrian jihadist groups formed by Turkey in 2011, dedicated to the overthrow of
the Assad regime. They are largely responsible for the violence against
Syrian Alawites following the overthrow of the regime. They are not entirely
under the control of the so-called central government of Sharaa. Turkey has
mobilized them to attack SDF forces, which Turkey wants to be disbanded and
dissolved into the new Syrian army. Ankara has been providing material support
to the SNA in terms of weapons, salaries, training, and equipment for years. It
is difficult to gauge whether the SNA would now be willing to take orders from
the Sharaa government, or from the hand that feeds it: Turkey. Suppose
Sharaa fails to reach a negotiated settlement with the SDF or continues to
elicit the SNA’s obedience. In that case, it is conceivable that its constituent
militias could begin fighting anyone they deem to be their enemies: the Sharaa
government, Kurds, Druze, Alawites, or Christians, and threaten the security of
all states that bordering Syria. Even if Sharaa is sincere and pragmatic in
intent, there is little guarantee that those in government around him will
support his program of moderation. For years, violent militias have been armed
and supported by a number of state actors, including Turkey, Iran, and Russia.
Sharaa’s HTS was one such entity, likely receiving support from Turkey. The
likelihood of building an inclusive and stable Syrian government for all
Syrians, presided over by a jihadist-Salafist leader, is more likely to come to
a terrible end than not. And this is not because doubters are pessimistic
detractors who do not want to see peace and stability reign in post-Assad Syria.
It’s because this is the most likely scenario. U.S. Secretary of State Marco
Rubio couldn’t have been clearer when stating Syria’s government “maybe weeks,
not many months, away from potential collapse.” The most troubling aspect of the
West’s championing of the Sharaa government rests in the fact that in the event
of its collapse, whom does Europe and Washington after Sharaa?
**Sinan Ciddi is a senior fellow at FDD and an expert on Turkish politics.
Are All Cultures Equal? The Ugly Truth about
Multiculturalism
Raymond Ibrahim/The Stream/June 02/2025
Are all cultures equal? That is, after all, the taken-for-granted premise behind
the now deeply rooted and unquestioned notion of multiculturalism, which itself
has singlehandedly led to countless cultures being infused into the West. This
claim comes out often and casually. For example, while apologizing to
“indigenous peoples” and denouncing Christians — without the all-important
historical context — Pope Francis once declared, “Never again can the Christian
community allow itself to be infected by the idea that one culture is superior
to others…”This widely held position is very dangerous — particularly because it
leads to relativism and the abnegation of Truth.
Culture Rests on Religion
For most Western people today, the word culture conjures at best superficial
differences—“exotic” dress or food. In reality, however, cultures are nothing
less than entire and distinct worldviews with their own unique sets of rights
and wrongs, often rooted in a religion or philosophy.
Indeed, for some thinkers, such as essayist T.S. Eliot, “culture and religion”
are inextricably linked, just “different aspects of the same thing”: Culture may
even be described simply as that which makes life worth living…. [N]o culture
can appear or develop except in relation to a religion… We can see a religion as
the whole way of life of a people, from birth to the grave, from morning to
night and even in sleep, and that way of life is also its culture. [From Eliot’s
Notes Towards the Definition of Culture, 1943, p.100-101; emphasis in original.]
Similarly, for Anglo-French historian Hilaire Belloc,
Cultures spring from religions; ultimately the vital force which maintains any
culture is its philosophy, its attitude toward the universe; the decay of a
religion involves the decay of the culture corresponding to it — we see that
most clearly in the breakdown of Christendom today.
In short, cultures bring much more than, say, the convenience of having Thai
cuisine down the street. Which leads to another important fact: All values
traditionally prized by the modern West — religious freedom, tolerance,
humanism, the equality of males and females — did not develop in a vacuum but
rather are inextricably rooted to Christian principles which, over the course of
some two thousand years, have had a profound influence on Western epistemology,
society and, of course, culture.
Christian Principles
While they are now taken for granted and seen as “universal,” there’s a reason
why these values were born and nourished in Christian — not Muslim, Buddhist,
Hindu, or Confucian — nations. Even if one were to accept the widely entrenched
narrative that the “Enlightenment” is what led to Western progress, it is alone
telling that this enlightenment developed in Christian — as opposed to any of
the many non-Christian — nations. Those ignorant of the spiritual and
intellectual roots of Western civilization (including, apparently, Pope Francis)
miss all of this.
Incidentally, it’s also why all secular Western people arrogantly see themselves
as the culmination of all human history — “enlightened” thinkers who have left
all cultural and religious baggage behind and now are concerned only for the
material. For them, all religions and cultures are superficialities that all the
peoples of the world will eventually slough off. The non-Western world,
according to this thinking, is destined to develop just like the West, which is
no longer seen as a distinct culture but rather the end point of all cultures.
The folly of such thinking is especially on display in the context of Islam and
Muslims, who in this new paradigm are seen as embryonic Westerners. Whatever a
Muslim may say — calls for jihad, hate for infidels — surely deep down inside he
values “secularism,” and appreciates the need to practice Islam privately,
respect religious freedom, gender equality, and so on. Thus is he made “in our
image” — except, of course, we forget the roots of “our image.”
Not a Westerner in the Making
In reality, the Muslim has his own unique and ancient worldview and set of
principles — his own culture — which in turn prompts behavior deemed “radical”
by Western standards (which are falsely assumed to be “universal” standards). As
T.S. Eliot, who gave these questions much thought, wrote, “Ultimately,
antagonistic religions must mean antagonistic cultures; and ultimately,
religions cannot be reconciled.” Portraying what at root is a Christian paradigm
as “universal,” and then applying it to an alien culture like Islam, is doomed
to failure. The idea that Muslims can be true to their religion and yet
naturally fit into Western society is false and built on an equally false
premise: that Christianity somehow also had to moderate itself to fit into a
secular society. In fact, Christian principles, which are so alien to Islam,
were fundamental to the creation of the West. What, then, of “multiculturalism”
— this word that the West is supposed to continue celebrating and embracing
wholeheartedly? As seen, behind it is the idea that all cultures are equal, and
none — certainly not Christian or Western culture — “is superior to others,” to
quote the pope. In reality, multiculturalism is another euphemistic way of
undermining and replacing the truths of a religion and its culture — namely
Christianity — with relativism.
Unless Two Are Agreed, They Cannot Walk Together
Earlier Western peoples understood that capitulating to a foreign culture was
tantamount to suicide. Again, Eliot points out:
[I]t is inevitable that we should, when we defend our religion, be at the same
time defending our culture, and vice versa: we are obeying the fundamental
instinct to preserve our existence [emphasis in original]. One anecdote well
captures this “clash of cultures.” After the British colonial powers banned sati
— the Hindu practice of burning a widow alive on her husband’s funeral pyre —
Hindu priests complained to British governor Charles James Napier that sati was
their custom and therefore right, to which he replied: Be it so. This burning of
widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a
custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their
property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all
concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national
customs. Incidentally, being opposed to “multiculturalism” — that is to say,
relativism — is in no way the same thing as being opposed to other races or
ethnicities but rather being opposed to social disunity and chaos. After all,
racially homogenous but culturally heterogeneous nations are much more fractured
than the reverse. One need look no further than the United States, where
“leftist” and “rightist” whites often abhor one another. Or look to the Middle
East, where Muslims and Christians are largely homogenous — racially,
ethnically, and linguistically — but where the former are ruthlessly persecuting
the latter, exclusively over religion. In short, there’s nothing wrong with a
nation’s citizenry being composed of different races and ethnicities, but only
if they share the same worldview, the same priorities, the same ethics, the same
sense of right and wrong — in a word, the same culture.
**Raymond Ibrahim, author of Defenders of the West and Sword and Scimitar, is
the Distinguished Senior Shillman Fellow at the Gatestone Institute and the
Judith Rosen Friedman Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
https://outlook.live.com/mail/0/inbox/id/AAkALgAAAAAAHYQDEapmEc2byACqAC%2FEWg0AQD3AMaXtfEW1haoJocBU4gAISTRk%2FAAA
URGENT: World Health Organization About to Give Itself Unlimited Power/'Dr.'
Tedros Will Decide How You Must Live
Robert Williams/Gatestone Institute./June 02/2025
[O]n May 20 they adopted the WHO Pandemic Treaty at the 78th session of the
World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland. It will have to be ratified by at
least 60 states, however, before it can come into effect, which means that it is
up to citizens to prevent that from happening.
The deadline to opt out of the International Health Regulations is July 19 –
less than two months from now. It is time to notify your lawmakers to take
immediate action in their parliaments and say NO to these regulations. So far,
no country has opted out, and due to lack of media coverage most people appear
completely unaware that a problem even exists. On June 1, 2024, the WHO's 194
member states agreed to sweeping amendments of the WHO International Health
Regulations that give the organization's Director-General -- currently "Dr."
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who is not a medical doctor and to all appearances
is in China's pocket -- overwhelming authority to declare not only actual
international public health emergencies, but also potential ones. ""[T]he WHO's
proposed amendments to its international health regulations and its forthcoming
pandemic treaty present the most serious threat to national sovereignty in a
generation." — Suella Braverman, former UK Home Secretary, April 20, 2025. [P]ublic
health, according to the WHO and its member states (your governments), is now
intertwined with "climate change." If climate warrior Bill Gates and his WHO
cohorts feel like it, they can declare a "climate pandemic," pronounce lockdowns
and a rollout of whatever measures they might see fit "to save the
planet."Sadly, [the WHO] made itself into a fully disgraced and corrupt body, so
deeply in the pockets not only of Gates and the pharmaceutical industry, but
also of Communist China.
During Covid-19, the WHO and "Dr." Tedros actually praised China for its
"extraordinary" handling of the pandemic. "If you liked how the COVID-19 crisis
was handled – in large measure thanks to the incompetence and malfeasance of the
WHO and the insidious influence of the perpetrator, the Chinese Communist
Party... you're going to love this new world order. Among its consequences will
be: universal health IDs, vaccine mandates, obligatory censorship, technology
transfers, open-ended financial costs and the proliferation of viruses with the
potential to cause pandemics – all 'managed' by greatly empowered and
unaccountable international bureaucrats." – Frank Gaffney, X, April 17, 2025
There is, however, another, newly acquired, instrument in the UN's toolbox, the
"Digital Global Compact" (DGC) that seeks to make it impossible to criticize
this new UN/WHO reign of terror. Without an ever-present, imminent and
terrible-sounding "pandemic" there would be no legitimacy for WHO to seize all
this power and gain access to so much control. This arrogation of power to
itself could reasonably turn into runaway totalitarianism unless lawmakers step
up immediately and demand that their governments object to the amendments to the
International Health Regulations -- and opt out of them. Sadly, the WHO has made
itself into a fully disgraced and corrupt body, so deeply in the pockets not
only of Bill Gates and the pharmaceutical industry, but also of Communist China.
And now, the WHO might finally be getting just what it wanted: Unlimited power
and control.
The World Health Organization (WHO) might finally be getting just what it
wanted: Unlimited power and control. The deadline to opt out of the
International Health Regulations is July 19 – less than two months from now. It
is time to notify your lawmakers to take immediate action in their parliaments
and say NO to these regulations. So far, no country has opted out, and due to
lack of media coverage most people appear completely unaware that a problem even
exists. On June 1, 2024, the WHO's 194 member states agreed to sweeping
amendments of the WHO International Health Regulations that give the
organization's Director-General -- currently "Dr." Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus,
who is not a medical doctor and to all appearances is in China's pocket --
overwhelming authority to declare not only actual international public health
emergencies, but also potential ones.
"Agreed" is hardly accurate: member states did not even vote on them, but
"agreed" on them through what is known as a consensus process. If no country
objected by the end of a deadline, the amendments were to be considered
approved. The process may not even have been legal. The final text was
apparently not circulated with sufficient advance notice, while the negotiations
were largely held behind closed doors, meaning that there was no transparency.
Did parliamentarians in WHO member states even know what their governments
"agreed" to?
In addition to the International Health Regulations, the WHO member states, all
194 of them, agreed on a historic draft Pandemic Treaty in April 2025 and on May
20 they adopted the WHO Pandemic Treaty at the 78th session of the World Health
Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland. It will have to be ratified by at least 60
states, however, before it can come into effect, which means that it is up to
citizens to prevent that from happening. In addition, there are still
outstanding "details" such as the Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing System (PABS)
to facilitate the sharing of genetic data on potential pandemic pathogens that
the treaty introduces, on which there is still a lack of consensus. With it, the
WHO handed itself sweeping powers over how countries respond to future health
emergencies.
Frank Gaffney, President of the Institute for the American Future, wrote on X
shortly before the adoption of the treaty:
"In less than a month, world government will be imposed on us indirectly, if not
directly, thanks to a new pandemic treaty the World Health Organization
finalized yesterday and plans to adopt and make legally binding in mid-May –
with profound implications for public health, personal freedoms and national
sovereignty. "If you liked how the COVID-19 crisis was handled – in large
measure thanks to the incompetence and malfeasance of the WHO and the insidious
influence of the perpetrator, the Chinese Communist Party, and the principal
beneficiary, Big Pharma – you're going to love this new world order.
"Among its consequences will be: universal health IDs, vaccine mandates,
obligatory censorship, technology transfers, open-ended financial costs and the
proliferation of viruses with the potential to cause pandemics – all 'managed'
by greatly empowered and unaccountable international bureaucrats."
Congratulating himself on the adoption of the treaty, "Dr." Tedros declared in a
monstrously untruthful statement:
"The agreement is a victory for public health, science and multilateral action.
It will ensure we, collectively, can better protect the world from future
pandemic threats. It is also a recognition by the international community that
our citizens, societies and economies must not be left vulnerable to again
suffer losses like those endured during COVID-19."
Following the adoption of the Pandemic Treaty, US Secretary of Health Robert F.
Kennedy Jr. posted the following statement to X, urging countries to exit the
WHO:
"Like many legacy institutions, the WHO has become mired in bureaucratic bloat,
entrenched paradigms, conflicts of interest, and international power politics.
While the United States has provided the lion's share of the organization's
funding historically, other countries such as China have exerted undue influence
over its operations in ways that serve their own interests and not particularly
the interests of the global public. Global cooperation on health is still
critically important to POTUS and myself, but it isn't working very well under
the WHO as the failures of the COVID era demonstrate. I urge the world's health
ministers and the WHO to take our withdrawal from the organization as a wake-up
call."
No one on this planet voted for this treaty and, worse, no one will be allowed
to criticize any of this in the future, if the UN has its way: The original
Pandemic Treaty draft contained language against "misinformation" and "infodemics."
The text agreed upon, after pushback, toned down the speech restrictions to
"just" requiring member states to promote "timely, transparent, accurate,
science- and evidence-informed information" to counter "misleading narratives"
during pandemics. There is, however, another, newly acquired, instrument in the
UN's toolbox, the "Digital Global Compact" (DGC) that seeks to make it
impossible to criticize this new UN/WHO reign of terror.
The DGC is a new totalitarian tool of censorship meant to silence anyone who
disagrees with the globalist agenda. Buried near the end of the DGC, in
paragraph 30, is the only thing you need to know about it:
"We must urgently counter and address... all forms of hate speech and
discrimination, misinformation and disinformation... We will establish and
maintain robust risk mitigation and redress measures... We commit by, 2030 to:
(a)... Develop, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders, effective
methodologies to measure, monitor and counter all forms of violence and abuse in
the digital space... call on social media platforms to establish safe, secure
and accessible reporting mechanisms for users and their advocates to report
potential policy violations."
The WHO is a specialized UN agency, the purpose of which is purportedly "to
promote health, keep the world safe, and serve the vulnerable." WHO receives a
large amount of its funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which is
jointly controlled by activist billionaire, climate crusader and globalist Bill
Gates, and his ex-wife Melinsa. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has in some
years been the second-largest donor to the WHO, after the United States --
before President Donald J. Trump, on his first day in office in 2025, mercifully
withdrew the US from the organization.
"If a private foundation were to become WHO's highest donor, it would be
transformational," Lawrence Gostin, faculty director for the O'Neill Institute
at Georgetown University and director of WHO's Collaborating Center on National
and Global Health Law, said in 2020, adding that the idea that a private
foundation could have such influence, "would have been unimaginable" at the time
when the WHO was founded as an intergovernmental institution. "It would enable a
single rich philanthropist to set the global health agenda," Gostin said,
referring to Gates.
Apparently, however, anything is possible, including not only letting Gates and
the pharmaceutical industry put the WHO with its member states into their
pockets, but also giving them unlimited power.
Christine Anderson, a German Member of the European Parliament from the
Alternative für Deutschland party, said this month:
"They realized something during COVID: as much as they wanted to impose even
harsher restrictions, they were limited—because in a democracy, if a politician
goes too far, they risk not being re-elected. So the workaround? Shift the
authority to an unelected body like the WHO. That way, when harsh measures are
imposed—lockdowns, vaccine mandates, or whatever else—they can say, 'Hey, it
wasn't us. Our hands are tied. The WHO made the call.'"
The amended health regulations give the WHO such unprecedented power that former
UK Home Secretary Suella Braverman has warned:
"[T]he WHO's proposed amendments to its international health regulations and its
forthcoming pandemic treaty present the most serious threat to national
sovereignty in a generation.
"Buried within these legal frameworks are proposals that would allow unelected
WHO officials to declare public health emergencies and issue recommendations –
including on lockdowns, border closures and vaccine requirements."
These demands include digital vaccine passports; the amended regulations
encourage the use of digital tools for health documentation. Digital vaccine
passports, not yet compulsory, could be made a requirement. Earlier drafts of
the amendments, which were discarded after pushback, also had included proposals
for mandatory digital health documents and provisions for approving vaccination
certificates during emergencies, and even for vaccines in research phases.
It is disastrous that national governments have agreed for this power to be
given to the unaccountable WHO. Sadly, it made itself into a fully disgraced and
corrupt body, so deeply in the pockets not only of Gates and the pharmaceutical
industry, but also of Communist China.
During Covid-19, the WHO and "Dr." Tedros actually praised China for its
"extraordinary" handling of the pandemic. To this day, nothing has been done
about the duplicitous role WHO played during Covid, when the organization
parroted Chinese Communist Party propaganda about the virus. China, too, has
never suffered a single negative consequence -- not only for having unleashed
the virus on the world, but for having deliberately lied about the virus's
human-to-human transmissibility.
The WHO itself admits that approximately 15 million people died from the Covid
virus -- which it refused to try to stop before it grew into a pandemic.
Apparently, we are all now supposed to pretend that all of that never happened,
and look to the WHO for instruction and guidance in even potential pandemics.
The European Union in June 2024 praised the amended health regulations as
"historic." Yes, they are "historic" -- but for the wrong reason.
Should the unelected and corrupt WHO, then, be allowed to determine when a
pandemic is declared and, if so, how to deal with it? Should the WHO be able to
recommend restrictions, lock you down, keep your children home from school, and
dictate whether or not you should take a vaccine? Would you like "Dr." Tedros to
decide how you must live?
The most obvious downside, based on past performance, is that WHO will weaponize
its powers under the disguise of "public health" to pursue strictly political
agendas. According to Braverman:
"The WHO insists these measures are necessary to ensure global preparedness. But
the question is preparedness for what – and on whose terms? It is not difficult
to imagine a future crisis – real or perceived – where political interests
masquerade as public health, especially in an age where digital censorship and
ideological capture are increasingly normalised."Sadly, Braverman's scenario of
political interests masquerading as public health is even not far-fetched. In
May 2024, the WHO declared:
"In a resounding call to action, the Seventy-seventh World Health Assembly has
recognized climate change as an imminent threat to global health, passing a
resolution which underscores the urgent need for decisive measures to confront
the profound health risks posed by climate change.
"The resolution, supported overwhelmingly by Member States, presents an overview
of the existential threat that climate change poses to human health. The Health
Assembly asserts that radical action is imperative to safeguard the health of
the planet, underscoring the interdependence of environmental sustainability and
public health."
What does it mean? That public health, according to the WHO and its member
states (your governments), is now intertwined with "climate change." If climate
warrior Bill Gates and his WHO cohorts feel like it, they can declare a "climate
pandemic," pronounce lockdowns and a rollout of whatever measures they might see
fit "to save the planet." In fact, ever since Covid-19, the WHO's corrupt Tedros
has continued to fearmonger, making dire-sounding "predictions" that a new
pandemic is "inevitable."There is a perfect reason for that: Without an
ever-present, imminent and terrible-sounding "pandemic" there would be no
legitimacy for WHO to seize all this power and gain access to so much control.
This arrogation of power to itself could reasonably turn into runaway
totalitarianism unless lawmakers step up immediately and demand that their
governments object to the amendments to the International Health Regulations --
and opt out of them. Welcome to George Orwell's "Ministry of Truth." Lawmakers
around the world urgently need to act on behalf of the people they were elected
to represent. No governments here seem to have the interests of their citizens
at heart. Time is running out – fast.
*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. No
part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied
or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
New Syria sanctions relief (and risks) explained
Matthew Zweig and Max Meizlish/Al Majalla/June 02/2025
Firms relying on the recent wave of lifted sanctions and exceptive relief will
face significant hurdles in verifying that transactions do not benefit excluded
actors
The United States drastically reshaped its policy toward Syria late last week.
On 23 May, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)
issued Syria General License (GL) 25, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)
provided exceptive relief for the Commercial Bank of Syria, and the State
Department issued a temporary waiver under the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection
Act. Together, these measures mark the most significant shift in US policy
toward Syria since the fall of the Assad regime, moving from a posture of
near-total isolation to one of broad support for economic recovery and
reconstruction. To fully understand the implications of this relief—including
the significant anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing risks they
have introduced—we must examine its scope and limitations, as well as the
present need for robust compliance monitoring in the weeks and months ahead to
ensure its intended effect. Absent any further immediate action, GL 25
indefinitely authorises transactions previously prohibited under the Syrian
Sanctions Regulations. It effectively suspends most US economic sanctions on
Syria—particularly those issued under Executive Order 13582—allowing
transactions across most sectors of the Syrian economy. This broadly includes
making new investments, providing financial services, and trading in
Syrian-origin petroleum or petroleum products. Additionally, while still short
of full diplomatic recognition of the current Syrian government, GL 25 permits
dealings with the new “Government of Syria…as in existence on or after 13 May
2025,” which “includes Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa and his government.”
Expanded definition
Of particular note, GL 25’s broad authorisation appears to extend not only to
transactions involving Syria’s military and intelligence apparatus—at least some
of which involves participation from or is being led by foreign jihadist
fighters who have been sanctioned by the United States as Specially Designated
Global Terrorists or are members of designated Foreign Terrorist Organisations—but
also to any “person that is, or has been, acting or purporting to act, directly
or indirectly, for or on behalf of” the new “Government of Syria.” This
expansive definition appears to contrast with the more limited scope of prior
general licenses, such as GL 24 (which is set to expire on 7 July 2025 absent
renewal), which forbade “any transactions involving military or intelligence
entities.” Notably, GL 25 includes an annexe listing specific sanctioned
individuals and entities with whom transactions are now permitted beyond the
scope of dealings involving the new “Government of Syria,” including Syrian
President Ahmed al-Sharaa (identified as Abu Muhammad Al-Jawlani) and Syrian
Interior Minister Anas Hasan Khattab—both of whom continue to be sanctioned by
the United States and the United Nations for their ties to Al-Qaeda’s branch in
Syria known as Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). The annexe also includes sanctioned
entities such as the Central Bank of Syria, the Syrian Ministry of Petroleum and
Mineral Resources, and the Syrian Ministry of Tourism. Notably, GL 25 does not
rescind or modify other general licenses, such as GL 23 and GL 24, which remain
in effect for their specific humanitarian purposes. This presents continued
risks as GL 24’s authorisation for transactions involving Syria’s HTS-led
government extends to unspecified “entities involved with (HTS) across all
geographic areas of Syria”, which could act contrary to US national security and
foreign policy objectives.
Complementing GL 25, the State Department’s Caesar Act waiver exempts certain
activities from sanctions under the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, which
targeted the Assad regime and its facilitators.
Narrower waiver
Notably, the State Department used the narrower of the two Caesar Act waiver
authorities to allow a temporary 180-day suspension of specific sanctions, not
the broader authority to suspend the law entirely. The effect is a 180-day
waiver period that suspends mandatory secondary sanctions, allowing foreign
countries to engage in Syria’s reconstruction with markedly less sanctions risk.
Meanwhile, FinCEN’s exceptive relief for the Commercial Bank of Syria allows US
financial institutions to establish or maintain correspondent accounts for the
bank—which remains sanctioned for enabling Syrian and North Korean weapons
proliferation. While aimed at facilitating international transactions like trade
payments and remittances to support Syria’s recovery, FinCEN’s guidance does not
exempt the Commercial Bank of Syria from other regulatory requirements or ease
the compliance burden for correspondent banks.
In fact, FinCEN’s exceptive relief increases compliance risks for firms willing
to establish or maintain correspondent accounts for the Commercial Bank of
Syria, as the exceptive relief does not waive or alter their due diligence
obligations under Section 312 of the USA PATRIOT Act.
This means firms establishing or maintaining correspondent accounts for the
Commercial Bank of Syria will, pursuant to Section 312’s implementing
regulations, need to “conduct enhanced scrutiny of such correspondent account to
guard against money laundering and to identify and report any suspicious
transactions in accordance with applicable law and regulation.”
Explicit prohibitions
Notably, all three measures—GL 25, the Caesar Act waiver, and FinCEN
guidance—explicitly prohibit transactions benefiting Russia, Iran, and North
Korea. They also do not apply to any terrorist organisations, human rights
abusers, war criminals, or drug traffickers that may be currently sanctioned by
the United States to the extent they are not acting or purporting to act,
directly or indirectly, for or on behalf of the “Government of Syria.”They also
do not automatically unblock assets frozen under prior Syrian sanctions, unwind
any export controls or other restrictions under the Syria Accountability and
Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act, or alter in any way Syria’s designation as
a state sponsor of terrorism. They also do not rescind the designation of
multiple organisations within Syria’s governing authorities, such as HTS.
Ensuring compliance with these measures will be no small feat. Firms relying on
the recent wave of lifted sanctions and exceptive relief will face significant
hurdles in verifying that transactions do not benefit excluded actors, such as
non-government-linked terrorist groups or adversarial states.
Limited visibility into Syria’s transitional government and economy will
continue to complicate enforcement, as will the risk of sanctions evasion
through opaque financial networks. Coordinating with international partners,
each with their own regulatory frameworks and political priorities, will add
further complexity.
This trio of measures—GL 25, the Caesar Act waiver, and FinCEN’s exceptive
relief with respect to the Commercial Bank of Syria—ushers in a new chapter for
Syria in which economic recovery and reconstruction have the potential to take
centre stage. Success depends on robust monitoring, international collaboration,
and the new Syrian government’s commitment to stability and reform from its
terrorist past. The United States must be clear in this regard about what will
constitute success for the new Syrian government, as well as what future actions
will result in continued sanctions relief and, potentially, a full lifting of
the regulatory regime supporting them.
A rare opportunity
The new Syrian government has been handed an opportunity. The shift in US policy
reflects a willingness by the Trump administration and some members of Congress
to support Syria’s recovery, but only if that recovery is rooted in reform, not
repression. Syria’s self-appointed president remains under US and UN sanctions
for leading a jihadist movement. Key ministries remain entangled with sanctioned
terrorist groups. The Central Bank of Syria, which has long been a conduit for
illicit finance and proliferation activity, remains far from rehabilitated.
These are serious red flags that demand rigorous oversight from the United
States and international watchdogs such as the Financial Action Task Force. To
prevent empowering malign actors under the guise of economic recovery, the US
must establish clear benchmarks for continued sanctions relief and outline
consequences for backsliding. This includes establishing robust and transparent
compliance mechanisms, enhancing international coordination, and reaffirming
that sanctions relief can and will be reversed if reforms falter or abuses
persist. A prosperous, peaceful Syria is a worthy objective. But if the new
government fails to break with its terrorist past and uphold its obligations,
the United States must be prepared to snap back sanctions in full. Simply put,
Washington cannot afford to let a policy meant to support recovery become a
shield for impunity.
**Matt Zweig is Senior Director of Policy at FDD Action. Max Meizlish is a
Senior Research Analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
Allowing Iran to keep even a civil nuclear program is still too great a risk for
regional and international security.
Saeed Ghasseminejad/The National Interest/June 02/2025
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/middle-east-watch/why-iran-must-be-denied-any-uranium-enrichment
The consensus that recently emerged within the Trump administration rightly
identifies the absolute necessity of permanently preventing the Islamic Republic
from enriching uranium on its own soil. The Trump administration must remain
firm on this issue and not weaken this requirement with “creative” solutions. To
allow the Islamist regime in Tehran such a capability is to pave a pathway,
however disguised, to a nuclear bomb—an outcome the world can ill afford.
The allure of allowing Iran to maintain a civilian nuclear energy program masks
a hazardous potential. Even a domestic, industrial-scale enrichment capacity,
ostensibly limited to the 3–5 percent low-enriched uranium (LEU) suitable for
reactor fuel, is fraught with peril. Such an endeavor would cultivate indigenous
expertise and stockpiles of fissile material, dramatically shortening the
“breakout time”—the period required to dash towards weapons-grade uranium,
typically 90 percent or higher.
The history of nuclear proliferation is replete with examples where civilian
programs served as a smokescreen for military intentions. Given the opaque
nature of Iran’s decision-making, its persistence in supporting terrorism, its
commitment to annihilate Israel, and its track record of clandestine activities,
entrusting it with the complete nuclear fuel cycle is an unacceptable gamble.
The dual-use nature of enrichment technology means that any facility capable of
producing reactor fuel can, with relative ease and speed, be repurposed to yield
material for a warhead.
This inherent technological risk is magnified exponentially by the character of
the Islamist regime. A government whose official slogans remain “Death to
America” and “Death to Israel” cannot be viewed as a responsible custodian of
the atom. Its statements in this vein are not merely political posturing; they
reflect a deeply entrenched ideology consistently manifested in malign actions.
The Islamic Republic stands widely recognized as the world’s foremost state
sponsor of terrorism, systematically diverting its nation’s wealth to fund, arm,
and direct a vast network of proxy forces. From Hezbollah in Lebanon and Shia
militias in Iraq to the Houthis in Yemen, these groups actively work to
destabilize the Middle East, incite conflict, and target US interests and
allies.
The pronouncements of its leadership offer further chilling clarity. When
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei recently reiterated his conviction that Israel “must
be and will be eliminated” and demanded that the United States be “kicked out of
the region,” he articulated a vision of regional hegemony. Imagine such
ambitions backed by a nuclear arsenal or even the latent capability to produce
one on demand. This aggressive posture is particularly alarming in a region that
remains the heartland of global fossil fuel production, a critical resource for
economies worldwide. American strategic interests and global economic stability
necessitate a Middle East not threatened by a nuclear-emboldened Islamic
Republic.
Furthermore, acceding to Khamenei’s demand for domestic enrichment would unlock
a Pandora’s Box of regional proliferation. If Tehran is granted this concession,
on what logical basis could similar capabilities be denied to other regional
powers? Nations such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and the UAE, each with
their own security concerns and ambitions, would almost certainly feel compelled
to pursue parallel paths. The result would be a dangerous proliferation cascade,
transforming an already volatile region into a landscape of multiple
nuclear-threshold states. The potential for miscalculation, accidental
escalation, or a full-blown nuclear arms race would become terrifyingly real.
This is not a theoretical concern in a region already contending with the
virulent presence of terrorist organizations like ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hamas, and
Hezbollah. The specter of industrial-scale enrichment facilities operating in
proximity to such groups or a nuclear-armed Iran feeling emboldened to provide
them with even greater shelter and support presents an intolerable risk. The
potential for nuclear materials, technology, or, in a nightmare scenario, a
crude device to fall into extremist hands poses a direct and existential threat
that extends far beyond the Middle East, reaching the US homeland itself.
It is for these compelling reasons that leaders like President Donald Trump,
alongside officials such as Ambassador Witkoff and Secretary Rubio, are entirely
justified in their uncompromising stance: the Islamic Republic must be
unequivocally denied indigenous enrichment capacity. This objective requires
nothing less than the complete, verifiable, and irreversible dismantling of the
Islamic Republic’s enrichment infrastructure.
This includes the destruction or permanent conversion of hardened clandestine
facilities, such as Fordow and Natanz, the elimination of centrifuge production
and assembly centers, and the cessation of all related research and development
activities with dual-use purposes. Crucially, any diplomatic framework must
categorically reject “sunset clauses,” which merely defer the threat, allowing
the regime to legally revive and expand its nuclear program after an arbitrary
interval. The only acceptable sunset clause is the end of the regime.
While neutralizing the immediate nuclear threat is paramount, it must be the
cornerstone of a broader strategy. Should a path to complete nuclear
dismantlement emerge, the United States and its allies must then rigorously
address Iran’s other destabilizing behaviors: its ballistic missile program, its
unceasing support for terrorism, and its relentless efforts to destabilize its
neighbors. A critical lesson from past diplomatic endeavors is to prevent the
regime from accessing financial windfalls—whether through sanctions relief or
unfrozen assets—that would inevitably be channeled towards nefarious ends.
Ultimately, a robust policy towards Iran must also recognize and support the
aspirations of its people. Millions within Iran yearn for freedom, economic
opportunity, accountable governance, and peaceful relations with the global
community. A strategy that resolutely counters the regime’s dangerous ambitions
while empowering its citizens through a maximum support campaign offers the most
sustainable pathway to a more secure and stable Middle East.
*Saeed Ghasseminejad is a senior adviser for Iran and financial economics at FDD,
specializing in Iran’s economy and financial markets, sanctions, and illicit
finance.
Why a Nuclear Agreement With Iran Is Not Enough
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute./June 2, 2025
As talks between Washington and Tehran are underway to reach an agreement on
Iran's efforts to acquire nuclear weapons, even if a deal is reached, unless it
features "anywhere, anytime" inspections, to which Iran has never agreed, Iran
will secretly continue to develop nuclear weapons and cheat, cheat, cheat.
If such a deal is reached, Iran also is not going to stop its financial and
military support for its terror proxies in the Middle East, including Hamas and
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the Houthi militia in
Yemen. Iran, in short, is not going to abandon its declared goal of obliterating
the "Zionist entity" ("the Little Satan") or the United States ("the Great
Satan").
If Trump is serious about preventing war and bloodshed in the Middle East, he
must insist that any agreement with Iran's mullahs include no centrifuges or
uranium enrichment of any kind, and no support for Tehran's terror proxies.
If something could possibly go wrong, unfortunately it will -- leaving Trump
with the legacy of delivering yet another laughably fake peace deal and of his
presidency being that of another failed Barack Obama.
Trump must also demand that Iran's leaders stop calling for the annihilation of
Israel.
The same is true for the leaders of Qatar, as well Qatar's personal insults
against Trump himself.
The Iranian regime is determined to continue supporting [terrorist leaders] to
help them achieve their goal of murdering Jews and eliminating Israel.
"Iran's openly stated goal is to destroy Israel, but the broader game is its
perception of the United States as the 'Great Satan.' Iran's strategy involves
orchestrating various terrorist groups in the Middle East, with multifaceted
objectives. Firstly, it seeks to dominate the Islamic world in the region,
asserting its influence over other nations. Simultaneously, it aims to strike at
the credibility of the United States, a long-standing adversary in Iranian
foreign policy." — Shishir Gupta, executive editor, Hindustan Times, April 27,
2023.
The Trump administration would do well to take these issues into consideration
before signing any agreement with Iran. Such an agreement, if reached,
unfortunately will not mean that the Iranian regime has become America's friend.
As long as the mullahs continue to wish for the destruction of Israel and
America, and to back Islamist terror groups, they should be treated as dangerous
enemies of both Israel and the US.
It is wrong and unrealistic to assume that Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his
regime, if and when they sign a nuclear agreement with the Trump administration,
would abandon their dream of destroying Israel and America.
As talks between Washington and Tehran are underway to reach an agreement on
Iran's efforts to acquire nuclear weapons, even if a deal is reached, unless it
features "anywhere, anytime" inspections, to which Iran has never agreed, Iran
will secretly continue to develop nuclear weapons and cheat, cheat, cheat.
If such a deal is reached, Iran also is not going to stop its financial and
military support for its terror proxies in the Middle East, including Hamas and
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the Houthi militia in
Yemen. Iran, in short, is not going to abandon its declared goal of obliterating
the "Zionist entity" ("the Little Satan") or the United States ("the Great
Satan").
US President Donald J. Trump said on May 28 that he believes his administration
is "very close to a solution" with Iran on a nuclear agreement. "Right now, I
think they want to make a deal," Trump said. "And if we can make a deal, I'd
save a lot of lives."
These are the main reasons that address why an agreement regarding Iran's
nuclear ambitions is not enough.
The Iranian regime's ongoing effort to acquire nuclear weapons is a huge
problem, as are its repeated demands to enrich uranium (whatever could go
wrong?) and threats to destroy Israel – especially with Iran's proxy terror
groups that also seek to destroy Israel.
If Trump is serious about preventing war and bloodshed in the Middle East, he
must insist that any agreement with Iran's mullahs include no centrifuges or
uranium enrichment of any kind, and no support for Tehran's terror proxies.
If something could possibly go wrong, unfortunately it will -- leaving Trump
with the legacy of delivering yet another laughably fake peace deal and of his
presidency being that of another failed Barack Obama.
Were it not for Iran's financial and military support, Hamas, Palestinian
Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and the Houthis would not have been able to fire
thousands of rockets, ballistic missiles and explosive drones at Israel over the
past 20 months.
Halting or limiting Iran's uranium enrichment may be a positive development, but
what about the hundreds of millions of dollars and the weapons it sends to its
terror proxies? The Trump administration must demand an immediate halt to the
funding and arming of the Iran-backed Islamist terror groups. Furthermore, it
must demand that Iran's leaders stop calling for the annihilation of Israel.
The same is true for the leaders of Qatar (such as here and here), as well
Qatar's personal insults against Trump himself.
As Trump was voicing optimism regarding the prospects of reaching a nuclear deal
with the Iranian regime, Ali Akbar Velayati, senior adviser to Iran's Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, received a delegation of Hamas and PIJ officials
in Tehran and discussed with them "the latest developments in the region,
especially the situation in Palestine and the Gaza Strip."
Iranian and Palestinian media outlets quoted Velayati as "assuring" the Hamas
and PIJ officials that "the Zionist entity is doomed to disappear." Hamas and
PIJ, the second largest Iran-backed terror group in the Gaza Strip, participated
in the October 7, 2023 invasion of Israel. At least 1,200 Israelis were murdered
and thousands wounded on that day. Another 251 Israelis and foreign nationals
were kidnapped to the Gaza Strip, where 58 remain in captivity (only 20 are
believed to be alive).
Velayati also "affirmed Iran's solidarity with the [Palestinian] resistance
groups and praised the victories of the Palestinian resistance [against Israel]
as a rare achievement in the history of Islam," according to media reports.
The meeting between Velayati and the Hamas and PIJ representatives shows that
the Iranian regime has no intention to turn its back on its terror proxies,
notwithstanding any possible future nuclear agreement with the US. The opposite
is true. Velayati reassured the Palestinian terror leaders that the Iranian
regime is determined to continue supporting them, to help them achieve their
goal of murdering Jews and eliminating Israel. When the Iranian official talks
about the "resistance," he is referring to terrorism against Israel, including
the October 7 massacre.
Velayati's talk about the destruction of the "Zionist entity" shows that the
Iranian regime does not intend to abandon its dream of wiping Israel off the
map, and the US as well.
In the past few years, Khamenei has repeatedly called for the destruction of
Israel and America. He was also quick to praise the October 7 massacre as a
"logical and legal" action.
It is wrong and unrealistic to assume that Khamenei and his regime, if and when
they sign a nuclear agreement with the Trump administration, would abandon their
dream of destroying Israel and America. The previous nuclear agreement the
Iranian regime signed with the Obama administration in 2015 did not stop the
mullahs in Tehran from providing financial and military aid to the Islamist
terror groups in the Middle East. That agreement, known as the Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also did not see Iran's leaders change
their minds about destroying Israel.
Iran's support for the Palestinian terror groups, Hezbollah and the Houthi
militia has brought death and destruction on Palestinians, Lebanese and Yemenis.
Iran's regime is a threat not only to Israel, but also to the US.
"Iran's openly stated goal is to destroy Israel, but the broader game is its
perception of the United States as the 'Great Satan,'" wrote Shishir Gupta,
executive editor of the Hindustan Times, in April 2023.
"Iran's strategy involves orchestrating various terrorist groups in the Middle
East, with multifaceted objectives. Firstly, it seeks to dominate the Islamic
world in the region, asserting its influence over other nations. Simultaneously,
it aims to strike at the credibility of the United States, a long-standing
adversary in Iranian foreign policy."
The Trump administration would do well to take these issues into consideration
before signing any agreement with Iran. Such an agreement, if reached,
unfortunately will not mean that the Iranian regime has become America's friend.
As long as the mullahs continue to wish for the destruction of Israel and
America, and to back Islamist terror groups, they should be treated as dangerous
enemies of both Israel and the US.
*Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.
*Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter)
© 2025 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No
part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied
or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21661/iran-nuclear-agreement
The Iranian Regime’s Deadly Entanglements
Dr. Charles Chartouni/This is Beirut/June 02/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/06/143857/
The Middle Eastern landscape is becoming more complicated, with
its issues bordering intractability. The heightening tensions are far from being
incidental; they are part of the Iranian sabotaging politics.
Iranians have always been duplicitous when negotiating their nuclear deals.
Hezbollah’s obstructionism is hobbling normalization in Lebanon, Hamas is still
pursuing its brinkmanship, while Gaza’s tragic plight is getting worse by the
day, and the civilian population is defraying the exacting costs of the military
standoff. The evolution of the US-Iranian negotiations is stalled, and working
around a single issue at a time when the rifts between the US administration and
the Israeli government are openly aired. The overall regional normalization
looming on the horizon is compromised, and the Iranian proxies, substantially
weakened, are still on the move.
The US-Iranian negotiations are circumscribed to the uranium enrichment issue,
and the Iranians are intentionally overlooking their overall destabilization
politics and pursuing it adamantly. The US administration is averse to any
security breakdown and unable to widen the radius of the ongoing negotiations.
The more the Iranians try to force their agenda on the table, the less likely
Israel is to be co-opted and engage in the ongoing process. The predicates of
both scenarios are unlikely to converge, and the sabotaging tactics on both
sides may probably take over. The Iranian delaying tactics, the negotiations’
narrowed scope and the continued sabotaging are dooming the process and
resetting the military priorities.
The Iranian regime has to renounce its bluster and reengage the process
unapologetically if it were to operate a major strategic shift, which doesn’t
seem to be the case. The highly challenged legitimacy of this regime is still
quartered in a dilemma: the one of normalization and liberalization and their
impact on the survival of the regime. The regime has never been able to come to
terms with their stipulations from an ideological standpoint and is unwilling to
risk the vested interests of the clerical dictatorship and its allies. The
Iranian negotiator wagers on the US disinclination towards war and the
aspiration of President Trump to be hallowed as a peacemaker and awarded the
Nobel Prize for Peace.
This maneuvering is short-sighted and leads to nowhere. As for the Israeli
government, its policy track is located on a continuum with the newly ushered
geostrategic dynamic that led to the destruction of the “integrated operational
platforms” of the Iranian regime. The outreach has not spared the Iranian
nuclear sanctuaries that are targeted by the Israelis at this stage. The
differences between the US administration and the Israeli government may not be
solved, and Netanyahu is determined to pursue his containment strategy with or
without a finalized agreement. The time span is narrowing, and the issues at
stake are critical enough to invite careful introspection before it’s too late.
Iranians have to give up their waffling tactics, the US administration cannot
condone an undue protraction, and Israel is bound to face up to its multiple
challenges.
The tragic situation in Gaza should be immediately tackled through forceful
diplomatic mediations wherein the dire humanitarian issues are wedded to a
political solution that addresses both issues. The diplomatic scheme should
address the immediate release of the remaining hostages, dead and alive; Hamas
should quit Gaza under international auspices; and a temporary government of
transition regrouping Israel, the Palestinian Authority and a UN coalition
should be formed and entrusted with the governance of the district. The broader
political issues related to Israeli national security and the finalization of
the peace process between the State of Israel and the Palestinian Authority
should be separately addressed within a specific framework.
Otherwise, Lebanon has to address its lingering problems of curtailed
sovereignty, gnawing extraterritorialities, inability to rebuild a working
governance and extract itself from the destructive sway of regional power
politics. The Hezbollah extraterritoriality puts at stake statehood and
nationhood. The inability of the new executive to enforce the internationally
mandated national security resolutions (1701, 1680, 1559) is tendentially
leading to the disintegration of Lebanese statehood, putting the country on the
road to civil war, and adding to the bolting strategic voids at the regional
level. The inconsistencies of the actual political course are not sustainable
and are superseded by subversive power projections that are not quite congruent
with the imperatives of civil peace, post-war reconstruction and regional
stability.
The state of indeterminacy cannot endure; the main actors have to set their
choices and avoid miscalculations, since the rules of the game have changed and
the emergence of new power politics scenarios and political configurations are
not mere assumptions. Iran has to mourn its defeated imperial projections; the
US should oversee its stabilization process; the Palestinians have to reengage
Israel on more realistic terms and put an end to the delirium of the
annihilation of the State of Israel; and Israel is bound to rebuild its
consensus around a viable solution to the Palestinian question. If not, the
further unraveling of the regional order is going to pursue its unhindered
course.
Who is Joel Rayburn
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Joel Rayburn is a retired United States Army officer, former
diplomat, and historian who served as the United States Special Envoy for Syria
from 2018 to 2021. He has published books and articles about the American
invasion of Iraq in 2003 and its results. From January to July 2021 he served as
a special advisor for Middle East affairs to U.S. Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN).
He is currently a Fellow in the National Security Program at the New America
Foundation. In 2025, he was nominated by Donald Trump to be the Assistant
Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs.[1]
Biography
Joel Rayburn entered the United States Army in 1992 after graduating from the
U.S. Military Academy at West Point. Commissioned into the field artillery,
Rayburn served in Germany and Bosnia-Herzegovina before transferring to the
military intelligence corps in 1996. From 2002 to 2005, he taught history at
West Point. Between 2006 and 2011, Rayburn served multiple combat tours in Iraq
and Afghanistan, including during the "surge" period of 2007-2008 in Iraq.
From 2010 to 2013, Rayburn was a frequent critic of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri
Maliki and of the Obama administration's decision to withdraw all U.S. forces
from Iraq in December, 2011. In January, 2012 Rayburn wrote in an article
published by the Hoover Institution that the U.S. withdrawal would result in a
security vacuum in Iraq and a potential return to civil war.[2] In 2012, Rayburn
wrote that Nuri Maliki and his Da'wa Party allies were becoming a new
authoritarian regime that was alienating Iraq's Sunnis and youthful
protesters.[3] In 2013, Rayburn warned that events in Iraq were leading the
country back into civil war.[4]
In 2014 Rayburn published a book titled Iraq After America: Strongmen,
Sectarians, Resistance,[5][6] telling the history of the conflict in Iraq from
the Iraqi perspective. The book was published by the Hoover Institution.[7]
Chapter 5 of his book is frequently cited to support the assertion that the
Faith Campaign of Saddam Hussein promoted Salafi ideology, and thus created a
base for the rise in 2003 of the Islamic State of Iraq and the related
insurgency.[8] Chapter 6 of his book discusses the Kurdish nationalist movement
and its purpose "to annex the strategic city of Kirkuk" and to reverse the
demographic changes there which had been caused by the actions of the regime of
Saddam Hussein.
From 2013 to January 2017, Rayburn directed a U.S. Army project to produce a
history of the Iraq War. In that capacity, he was editor and co-author of the
two-volume history, The U.S. Army in the Iraq War, which was published in
January 2019.[9][10]
From January 2017 to July 2018, he served as Senior Director for Iran, Iraq,
Syria, and Lebanon on the U.S. National Security Council staff at the White
House. In that position, he served as the White House's senior staff officer on
a number of high-profile issues, such as the April, 2017 and April, 2018 U.S.
airstrikes meant to deter the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad from continuing
its use of chemical weapons against Syrian civilians. He also oversaw the
development of the Trump administration's strategy concerning the Iranian
regime, announced by President Trump in October, 2017.
In July 2018 Rayburn was appointed to the position of Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Levant Affairs, a position he held until November 2020. In addition, he was
appointed in July 2018 as Special Envoy for Syria, a position he held until
January 2021. As Special Envoy for Syria, Rayburn was responsible for
implementing the United States' diplomatic strategy concerning Syria, including
the implementation of sanctions against the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad
under the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019 and other U.S. sanctions
authorities. In December, 2020, Rayburn testified before the House Foreign
Affairs Committee, where he advised members of Congress that the U.S. policy of
pressuring the Assad regime through sanctions and political pressure had brought
the United States' main objectives in Syria within reach, as long as the United
States maintained the pressure.[11] On April 18, 2023 Rayburn testified before
the Subcommittee on the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia (Committee
on Foreign Affairs) with others about alleged war crimes committed in the
prosecution of the Syrian civil war.[12][13]
*Rayburn holds master's degrees in History from Texas A&M University (2002) and
in strategic studies from the National War College (2013). He is originally from
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. [14]