English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For March 12/2025
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2025/english.march12.25.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 Eliasbejjaninews 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
An evil and adulterous generation asks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah
Matthew 12/38-42: "Some of the scribes and Pharisees said to Jesus, ‘Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you. ’But he answered them, ‘An evil and adulterous generation asks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was for three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so for three days and three nights the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth. The people of Nineveh will rise up at the judgement with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the proclamation of Jonah, and see, something greater than Jonah is here! The queen of the South will rise up at the judgement with this generation and condemn it, because she came from the ends of the earth to listen to the wisdom of Solomon, and see, something greater than Solomon is here."

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on March 11-12/2025
The Obligation of Gratitude: A Fundamental Virtue in the Believer's Life/Elias Bejjani / March 11, 2025
Statement of Condemnation for the Massacres Committed by Ahmad Al-Sharaa’s Jihadi Regime in Alawite Areas/Elias Bejjani/March 09/2025
Israeli drone strikes kill two in south Lebanon
Israel and Lebanon agree to land border negotiations after US push
Netanyahu says Israel and Lebanon to form working groups to resolve border disputes
Ortagus says US to mediate Lebanon-Israel talks on outstanding issues
Security appointments: Latest developments
LF lashes out at Deputy PM Mitri over Hezbollah arms
Quintet meets Berri, says seeking Israel full withdrawal
Reconstruction, disarming Hezbollah, and normalizing with Israel: Fact or myth
Israel confirms release of five Lebanese detainees
95 coffins, countless wounds: Lebanon grapples with Hezbollah's 'victory' over Israel/Nabih Bulos/LA Times/March 11, 2025
Lebanon’s new government, the absent “resistance” Clause, and Hezbollah’s fate/
David Daoud /FDD’s Long War Journal/s/March 11, 2025

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on March 11-12/2025
Syria's Druze seek a place in a changing nation, navigating pressures from the government and Israel
After violence in Syria, Israel says it is prepared to defend Syria's Druze
Syria Kurd forces chief says agreement with Sharaa ‘real opportunity’ to build new Syria
HRW says Syria must protect civilians after ‘killing spree’
Syrian fact-finding committee for sectarian killings says no one above the law
Erdogan says Syria’s agreement with Kurds will ‘serve peace’
Israel-Gaza war behind record high US anti-Muslim incidents, advocacy group says
Israeli fire kills 8 Palestinians in Gaza Strip, 3 in the occupied West Bank
Hamas official says Gaza ceasefire talks have begun in Doha
Israel’s halt to food and aid deliveries worsens Gaza conditions
Boatless in Gaza: using old fridge doors to catch fish
Saudi Arabia leads Arab nations in condemning Israel’s Gaza electricity cut
The EU wants to increase deportations and supports ‘return hubs’ in third countries
Ukraine agrees to 30-day ceasefire with Russia, US to resume intelligence sharing after Jeddah talks

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources on March 11-12/2025
Do Not Be Fooled By Hamas's 'Long-Term Ceasefire' Ploy/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/March 11, 2025
Making Real The New Pivot Toward The Western Hemisphere/Amb. Alberto M. Fernandez/MEMRI Daily Brief No. 736/March 11/2025
No negotiations before total Iranian nuclear rollback/Mark Dubowitz & Jacob Nagel/The Jerusalem Post/March 11/2025
Arab world should not ignore increasing Islamophobia in US/Ray Hanania/Arab News/March 11, 2025
How can Al-Sharaa prevent the overthrow of his regime?/Abdulrahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Al-Awsat,/March 11, 2025
The struggle in Syria … the struggle over Syria/Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al-Awsat/March 11, 2025
Will the U.S. collapse like the Soviet Union did?/James Krapfl, McGill University/The Conversation Canada/March 11, 2025
Double Dhimmi: The Plight of Christian Women in the Middle East./Mariam Wahba/Visegrad24/March 11/2025

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on March 11-12/2025
The Obligation of Gratitude: A Fundamental Virtue in the Believer's Life
Elias Bejjani / March 11, 2025
Gratitude, the acknowledgment of goodness, is one of the highest human virtues that every individual must embody. It is an expression of appreciation and recognition toward those who have helped us in times of need. Conversely, denying acts of kindness and refusing to assist those who once extended a helping hand reflect traits that contradict sound human nature and religious teachings.
In the Christian faith, gratitude is not merely a moral behavior but an essential component of the human relationship with the Creator. God granted us life and intellect freely and bestowed upon us His countless blessings. The Lord Jesus underscored this principle when He commanded His disciples during their mission to spread the Gospel: "Freely you have received, freely give" (Matthew 10:8). This is an invitation to unconditional giving and to gratitude for the blessings we have received as gifts from a loving Father.
The Holy Bible emphasizes the importance of gratitude in the believer’s life. In the First Epistle to the Thessalonians (5:16-18), there is an explicit call to practice this virtue: "Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, in everything give thanks; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you." Gratitude is not only linked to times of prosperity but must be a continuous practice, whether in ease or hardship.
The Psalms repeatedly call for praise and acknowledgment of God’s goodness. As Psalm 136:1 declares: "Oh, give thanks to the Lord, for He is good! For His mercy endures forever." This reveals that gratitude should be constant, stemming from our awareness of God's eternal mercy. Likewise, King David expresses his deep gratitude to God after overcoming trials, proclaiming in Psalm 30: "O Lord my God, I cried out to You, and You healed me... You have turned for me my mourning into dancing; You have put off my sackcloth and clothed me with gladness, to the end that my glory may sing praise to You and not be silent. O Lord my God, I will give thanks to You forever" (Psalm 30:1-12).
Even in difficult times, gratitude remains a spiritual necessity. The prophet Job, despite losing everything, never lost the spirit of thanksgiving, stating: "The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord" (Job 1:21). This teaches us that gratitude should not be conditioned by comfort or material wealth but should be rooted in deep faith in God's wisdom and care.
The Apostle Paul also emphasizes that gratitude is a defining trait of the true believer, manifesting as a continuous act of worship infused with self-respect, respect for others, and reverence.
Gratitude to God liberates a person from selfishness and despair, reminding him that the good he receives is not by his effort alone but is a divine gift. Expressing gratitude shifts the focus from personal desires and daily hardships to the recognition that God is the supreme Master of life. As the Apostle James affirms: "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights" (James 1:17).
The obligation of gratitude extends beyond our relationship with God to our dealings with others. Just as we seek God's blessings, we must also show appreciation to those who have been kind to us and never forget those who stood by us in difficult times. It has been wisely said that he who does not thank people does not thank God—a profound human value that should define our way of life.
Among the greatest expressions of gratitude is the duty children owe to their parents. Parents dedicate their lives to raising their children with love and sacrifice, often setting aside their personal needs for the well-being of their offspring. As they age, the responsibility of children does not end upon their independence; rather, they must continue to honor and care for their parents, especially in their old age when they are vulnerable. The Holy Bible commands this explicitly in the Fifth Commandment: "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you" (Exodus 20:12). This commandment is not mere advice but a divine obligation, reminding us that gratitude toward parents is an essential part of faith and righteousness. Neglecting parents in their old age is a grave moral failure that contradicts the values of love and respect taught in the Bible. The sacrifices parents make in raising their children should never be forgotten; it is the duty of every child to repay this kindness with love, care, and dedication.
The believer and the wise person understand that righteousness toward parents is one of the most beloved deeds to God. In the end, gratitude is a virtue that not only elevates a person spiritually but also fills the heart with peace and contentment. The more we cultivate gratitude within ourselves, the more we grow in happiness and fulfillment. By embracing gratitude, we walk in the footsteps of the Lord Jesus Christ and follow the teachings of the Holy Bible, which call us to be a thankful people who recognize every moment of life as an opportunity for praise and glorification.

Statement of Condemnation for the Massacres Committed by Ahmad Al-Sharaa’s Jihadi Regime in Alawite Areas
Elias Bejjani/March 09/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/03/141021/
We strongly condemn the horrific massacres committed by Ahmad Al-Sharaa’s jihadi regime in Alawite areas along the Syrian coast. Hundreds of civilians were brutally executed with no respect for human dignity or basic rights. These crimes add another dark chapter to Syria’s suffering after the fall of the criminal Assad regime.
Our firm opposition to Assad’s oppressive rule does not mean accepting the barbaric and extremist alternative represented by Ahmad Al-Sharaa. He took power through a violent coup and brought even more suffering to the Syrian people. The horrifying executions of Alawite civilians by bearded jihadi fighters, carried out for sectarian reasons, are a dangerous development that cannot be ignored.
Syria is a diverse country with many ethnic and religious communities and cannot be ruled by an Islamist extremist regime that seeks to erase others. Ahmad Al-Sharaa and his jihadi movement, with their long history of terrorism, cannot succeed in imposing their rule on Syria. They are not a legitimate alternative to Assad’s brutal dictatorship. We strongly denounce these massacres and urge Arab countries and the international community not to support Al-Sharaa’s regime. Iran’s mullahs are directly responsible for this destruction, as they have armed and incited extremist groups, just as they once backed Assad. Their terrorist proxy in Lebanon, Hezbollah, is sheltering former Assad officials and military officers while continuing Iran’s agenda of chaos and violence. What happened in northern Syria is a direct result of Iran’s aggressive policies. Its leaders, including Supreme Leader Khamenei, have repeatedly threatened to spread chaos in Syria. The world must take firm action to hold those responsible accountable and prevent further bloodshed. Syria’s stability and the safety of its people must be protected from the forces of terrorism and destruction.

Israeli drone strikes kill two in south Lebanon
Naharnet/March 11, 2025
An Israeli drone bombed a car on the Roumine-Wadi Deir al-Zahrani road in south Lebanon on Tuesday, killing one person. The Israeli army radio said the target of the strike was a member of Hezbollah's "aerial defense unit."An Israeli drone later carried out two strikes on a van between the southern towns of Froun, Srifa and Kfarseer, killing one person, the National News Agency said. The Israeli military said Saturday that it targeted a Hezbollah militant with a drone strike in southern Lebanon, saying he was “engaged in re-establishing terrorist infrastructure and directing Hezbollah terror activities.”"The IDF (Israeli army) will continue to operate to remove any threat to the State of Israel and will prevent any attempt by Hezbollah to rebuild itself," the Israeli army added. A November 27 truce largely halted more than a year of hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel, including two months of full-blown war in which Israel sent in ground troops. Israel has continued to carry out near-daily strikes on Lebanese territory since the agreement took effect. Israel had been due to withdraw from Lebanon by February 18 after missing a January deadline, but it has kept troops at five locations it deems "strategic". The ceasefire also required Hezbollah to pull back north of the Litani River, about 30 kilometers (20 miles) from the border, and to dismantle any remaining military infrastructure in the south.

Israel and Lebanon agree to land border negotiations after US push
Naharnet/March 11, 2025
Israel and Lebanon have agreed to open negotiations to resolve longstanding disputes over the land border between them, two U.S. officials told U.S. news portal Axios in remarks published Tuesday. "The Trump administration successfully pushed the two sides to come to the table just months after Israel invaded Lebanon as part of its war against Hezbollah. The border talks are intended to help stabilize the ceasefire brokered by the Biden administration last November," Axios said. Thirteen disputed points along the "Blue Line" — drawn by the U.N. in 2000 to track Israel's withdrawal after its occupation of southern Lebanon — have historically been a source of tension between Israel and Lebanon. "The Trump administration has been mediating between Israel and Lebanon for several weeks in an attempt to strengthen the ceasefire and come to an agreement on next steps," a U.S. official told Axios. The official added that during the negotiations, Israel offered a good-will gesture by releasing five Lebanese citizens who were captured by the Israeli army during the fighting last year, among them a member of Hezbollah. As part of the agreement between the parties, trilateral working groups will be established to negotiate on three issues: the land border disputes between Israel and Lebanon; the issue of Lebanese prisoners held by Israel and the conditions for Israel's withdrawal from five remaining outposts in southern Lebanon, a White House official told Axios. "The working groups will be led by diplomats from the U.S., Israel and Lebanon. We hope that these negotiations will begin as early as next month," the U.S. official added. The Israeli prime minister's office confirmed the details of the agreement and said it released the five prisoners "as a gesture of good will for the new Lebanese President Joseph Aoun."In 2022 the Biden administration brokered a deal on the maritime border between Israel and Lebanon. The November 2024 ceasefire agreement mentioned moving towards negotiations on the disputed land border.

Netanyahu says Israel and Lebanon to form working groups to resolve border disputes
Agence France Presse/March 11, 2025
Israel said on Tuesday that it had agreed to release five captive Lebanese citizens as a goodwill gesture to Lebanon’s “new president” Joseph Aoun. "In coordination with the United States and as a gesture to Lebanon's new president, Israel has agreed to release five Lebanese detainees," a statement from the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said. Netanyahu's office said that the decision came following a meeting held earlier in the day in the Lebanese border town of Naqoura that included representatives of the Israeli army, the United States, France and Lebanon. "During the meeting, it was agreed to establish three joint working groups aimed at stabilizing the region," the prime minister's statement said. "These groups will focus on the five points controlled by Israel in southern Lebanon, discussions on the Blue Line and remaining disputed areas, and the issue of Lebanese detainees held by Israel," the statement added. The Blue Line is the U.N.-patrolled demarcation line that has marked the Israel-Lebanon border since 2000. On November 27, Israel and Lebanon agreed to a U.S.-French mediated truce that largely halted more than a year of hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel, including two months of full-blown war in which Israel sent in ground troops. While the ceasefire continues to hold, Israel has periodically carried out air strikes on Lebanese territory, it says to prevent Hezbollah from rearming or returning to the territory along its northern border. The ceasefire required Hezbollah to withdraw north of the Litani River, about 30 kilometers (20 miles) from the border, and to dismantle any remaining military infrastructure in the south. Israel had been due to withdraw completely from Lebanese territory by February 18 after missing a January deadline, but decided to keep troops at five locations it deemed strategic.

Ortagus says US to mediate Lebanon-Israel talks on outstanding issues
Agence France Presse/March 11, 2025
The United States announced Tuesday that it will be “bringing together Lebanon and Israel for talks aimed at diplomatically resolving several outstanding issues between the two countries.”A statement issued by Deputy U.S. Special Envoy for Middle East Morgan Ortagus said the issues that will be discussed are “the release of Lebanese prisoners, the remaining disputed points along the Blue Line, and the remaining 5 points where Israeli forces are still deployed.”“Military to military talks concluded in Naqoura, Lebanon today, and subsequently 5 Lebanese prisoners have been released back to Lebanon from Israel,” Ortagus added. “Everyone involved remains committed to maintaining the ceasefire agreement and to fully implement all its terms. We look forward to quickly convening these diplomat-led working groups to resolve outstanding issues, along with our international partners,” she said. In an interview with Al-Jadeed TV, Ortagus said the five Lebanese prisoners were a mix of civilians and soldiers. "I'll let the government of Lebanon make the announcement of who is in the mix. But there are some soldiers and civilians in the mix of five," she said. The head of the U.S.-based Hostage Aid Worldwide organization Nizar Zakka meanwhile told LBCI television that “Israel will release 5 Lebanese captives, including 4 civilians and a Hezbollah member, and in return Lebanon has agreed to begin land border demarcation negotiations over the pending 13 points.”

Security appointments: Latest developments
Naharnet/March 11, 2025
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam held a meeting Tuesday with President Joseph Aoun in Baabda, reportedly over the issue of security appointments. MTV meanwhile reported that Speaker Nabih Berri “has not permanently given up” his endorsement of Morshed al-Hajj Sleiman for the post of General Security chief, while that the chances of Fawzi Chamoun are “high.”“No agreements have been reached over the names of the General Security chief and the Internal Security Forces chief,” MTV said. “The chances of Brig. Gen. Mahmoud Qobrosli for becoming ISF chief have surged, amid reports that an agreement has been reached to name Brig. Gen. Raed Abdallah as head of the (ISF) Intelligence Branch, while the name of Brig. Gen. Khaled al-Sabsabi is still in circulation,” MTV added.

LF lashes out at Deputy PM Mitri over Hezbollah arms
Naharnet/March 11, 2025
The Lebanese Forces has blasted Deputy Prime Minister Tarek Mitri over remarks that he voiced regarding the thorny issue of Hezbollah’s weapons, accusing him of disregarding “the Taif Agreement, the U.N. resolutions, the latest ceasefire agreement, the presidential inauguration address and the ministerial statement.”“We said in the ministerial statement that it is the state’s right and duty to monopolize carrying weapons, but we did not say when or how that will be achieved,” the LF quoted Mitri as saying in an interview. “He forgot that ministerial statements are work programs and not merely declarations of intent,” the LF added. “He also said that the issue of arms would be discussed during the debate over a national security strategy, although the issue of arms was permanently settled in the Taif Agreement, the U.N. resolutions, the latest ceasefire agreement, the presidential inauguration address and the ministerial statement, and only implementation remains pending,” the LF said. As for Mitri’s remarks that the army needs to be equipped before working on the removal of Hezbollah’s arms, the Lebanese Forces said “the army and anything in Lebanon will not be equipped as long as there are weapons outside” the army. “Lebanon’s Arab and international friends will continue to boycott Lebanon if the government does not regain the decisions of war and peace as soon as possible,” the LF added, calling on the government to “collect all illegal weapons and put them in the hand of the Lebanese Army.”

Quintet meets Berri, says seeking Israel full withdrawal
Naharnet/March 11, 2025
The ambassadors of the five-nation group for Lebanon met Tuesday with Speaker Nabih Berri in Ain el-Tineh. The group comprises the U.S., France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Egypt. Speaking to reporters after the meeting, the Egyptian ambassador said the group is trying to find “a solution that would lead to Israel’s full withdrawal” from south Lebanon. “We decided to meet with Speaker Berri after the government won (parliament’s) confidence, and the biggest part of the meeting tackled the issue of the South and the need for Israeli withdrawal from it,” the ambassador said, describing the meeting as “fruitful.”He added: “We discussed with Speaker Berri what’s happening in Syria and there is unanimity that stability in Syria would reflect positively on the neighboring countries.”Al-Jadeed television had reported that the ambassadors would discuss with Berri the local and external security issues and the needed reforms for the country.

Reconstruction, disarming Hezbollah, and normalizing with Israel: Fact or myth
Naharnet/March 11, 2025
Although a new-appointed government has said the state should from now on be the sole bearer of arms after a 13-months-long war between Hezbollah and Israel, Deputy Prime Minister Tarek Mitri said the government would in no way disarm Hezbollah by force. "It is not the time to take reckless risks that might take Lebanon backward, to many years ago," Metri said Monday in a televised interview. Hezbollah, once the country's most powerful military and political force, suffered major setbacks in the war with Israel and a slew of its senior commanders including the group's longtime chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah were killed. Though Hezbollah did not endorse Nawaf Salam as prime minister, the Lebanese group did engage in negotiations with the new prime minister over the Shiite Muslim seats in government and gave its confidence to the new government. A senior U.S. official had said from the presidential palace in Baabda that Hezbollah's presence in Lebanon's new government was a red line. Metri said the government did not receive any "official request" to end Hezbollah politically although such a draft law has been submitted to the U.S. Congress. He added that one of the pre-requisite conditions for international reconstruction aid is to create a transparent fund for rebuilding damaged and destroyed areas. "Disarming Hezbollah is not a condition for reconstruction," he said. Despite a ceasefire deal requiring Israeli forces to withdraw completely from Lebanon, Israel maintained its troops in five "strategic" points in south Lebanon and has been striking south and east Lebanon almost daily. Metri said Israel is violating the ceasefire although the Lebanese army has deployed in the south since the ceasefire began on Nov. 27. "They are making excuses to stay in the five points and to drag Lebanon to direct negotiations," Metri said, stressing that Lebanon would not normalize with Israel. "We have not received a direct call to sign a peace accord with Israel, but there is pressure on some politicians and an unofficial push in the U.S. to pressure Lebanon into normalizing relations with Israel," Metri revealed. After several Arab-Israeli wars, Egypt was the first Arab state to recognize Israel diplomatically in 1979. It was followed by Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan. In October 2023, Saudi Arabia suspended talks on the possible normalization of relations with Israel, following the Israeli war on Gaza.

Israel confirms release of five Lebanese detainees
NAJIA HOUSSARI/Arab News/March 11, 2025
BEIRUT: Israel confirmed the release of five Lebanese detainees held by its military, Israeli media reported on Tuesday, citing the office of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They were captured during Israel’s ground offensive in southern Lebanon that began on Oct. 1 last year, and after the Nov. 27 ceasefire went into effect. This move followed deliberations by the committee overseeing the implementation of the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hezbollah. It came as a direct result of intensified Lebanese diplomatic pressure on the supervisory committee. “President Joseph Aoun met US Gen. Jasper Jeffers, head of the international committee monitoring the implementation of the ceasefire agreement, along with his team, the US Ambassador to Lebanon Lisa Johnson, the US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for the Middle East Natasha Franceschi, and the US Defense Attaché in Lebanon Col. Joseph Becker,” a source inside the Presidential Palace told Arab News. “President Aoun urged the committee to pressure Israel into a full withdrawal from the Lebanese border region, particularly from the five hills still under Israeli occupation. He also called for the release of the Lebanese individuals taken hostage by Israel, emphasizing that Lebanon does not hold any Israeli hostages. Therefore, there is no justification for delaying the process under the pretext of a prisoner swap, and holding Lebanese people hostage offers no advantage to Israel,” the source added. According to a statement from the president’s office, Aoun requested that “these demands be raised during the committee’s meeting on Tuesday.” Reports from southern Lebanon indicate that Israel currently holds 11 Lebanese citizens — seven Hezbollah members, three civilians, and a soldier. Earlier on Monday, the Lebanese Army Command announced that “the Israeli Army captured Lebanese soldier Ziad Shibli on the southern border after communication with him was lost. It was later revealed that Israeli forces shot him while he was in civilian clothing on the outskirts of the border town of Kfarchouba. The soldier was injured and subsequently transferred to occupied Palestinian territories. Israeli violations of Lebanese sovereignty persist, with a military drone targeting a vehicle on the road between the towns of Romin and Wadi Al-Zahrani in the heart of southern Lebanon. The attack resulted in the death of the driver, identified as Hassan Ezzeddine from the town of Houmine Al-Tahta, and a member of Hezbollah. Israeli Army radio later claimed that “the dead man was an official in Hezbollah’s air defense unit.”Israeli drones have been used in a campaign pursuing Hezbollah members in the south, despite a ceasefire agreement being in effect for less than four months. On Dec. 7, an Israeli drone killed a biker in Deir Seryan, whose identity was not revealed. Another drone killed a Hamas official on Feb. 17 in Saida Mohammed Chahine. On March 4, an Israeli drone killed Khodr Hachem, a Hezbollah official, who “held the position of commander of the naval forces in Hezbollah’s Radwan Unit,” according to Israeli claims. As part of the efforts to accelerate the Israeli withdrawal from the south, Speaker Nabih Berri met the ambassadors of the Quintet Committee. Following the meeting, Egyptian Ambassador to Lebanon Alaa Moussa said the discussion focused on “the importance of the Israeli withdrawal from the south.” He added: “The Quintet Committee is currently working on reaching a formula that leads to the complete Israeli withdrawal.” The diplomat clarified that “they didn’t discuss the details of ceasing hostilities, but focused on the importance of the Israeli withdrawal.” He said Berri “affirmed his commitment to implementing the ministerial statement and the oath speech.”

95 coffins, countless wounds: Lebanon grapples with Hezbollah's 'victory' over Israel
Nabih Bulos/LA Times/March 11, 2025
The procession of coffins was heard long before it came into view, a chorus of ambulance sirens drowning out the crowd assembled at the main square of this devastated village.
“Arise, Aitaroun! This is the time of martyrs, and blood, and victory,” said an announcer, as four flatbed trucks rumbled to the square bearing 95 coffins. The dead were villagers killed or who died during the war between the militant group Hezbollah and Israel last year. They had been buried elsewhere while Aitaroun remained in Israeli hands.
The Israeli withdrawal early last month spurred what amounted to a homecoming, first for Aitaroun’s living, who returned in the thousands the morning soldiers left; and now, on this Friday in February, its dead.
In its myth-making and propaganda, Hezbollah portrays the war as a victory, a
greater and more significant triumph than when it repulsed the Israeli military during the last major engagement between the two sides in 2006.
But the militant group now has to contend with an aftermath that for many Lebanese, including some Hezbollah partisans, looks very much like defeat.
Thousands of its fighters and supporters are dead, the upper echelons of its leadership decimated. Wide swaths of pro-Hezbollah areas are all but flattened; almost 100,000 people remain displaced and Israeli forces still occupy parts of Lebanon.
Hezbollah's opponents are intent on defanging the Iran-backed group once considered one of the world’s top paramilitary factions and Lebanon’s most powerful political party.
More than three months after a cease-fire with Israel, Hezbollah’s performance in the war, its role in Lebanon’s future and its position as the vanguard of Iran’s “Axis of Resistance” remain a matter of bitter debate.
Yet despite being at its weakest in years, Hezbollah retains a loyal following, a reality that appeared in full force with the thousands that descended on Aitaroun for the mass reburial ceremony.
Villagers swarmed the trucks, many desperate to touch a loved one's coffin. The more able-bodied climbed onto the flatbeds to do just that. To the side, women wailed, beating their chests or throwing fistfuls of rice and rose petals.
“This is a historic moment," the announcer said. "This is an exceptional moment, here in this square.
"Be proud, Aitaroun, of the heroes."
Hezbollah weathered Israel’s onslaught last year, but its leaders acknowledge missteps that punctured the group’s long-cultivated air of near-invincibility in the region.
Hezbollah took days to house the displaced, even as Israeli air assaults forced more than a million people from their homes. The group had vowed its arsenal of long-range missiles would level Israeli cities the instant Lebanese cities were targeted. But that never happened.
Hezbollah’s leadership appeared to have no sense of how deeply Israeli intelligence had penetrated its ranks, booby-trapping the group’s pagers and walkie-talkies and picking off its senior commanders, culminating in the assassination of its secretary-general of 32 years, Hassan Nasrallah.
“This was a very large vulnerability, that we were exposed to this extent,” said Naim Qassem, Hezbollah’s new secretary-general, in a recent speech. “What happened is an exceptional matter and a surprise.”
It’s in loyalist communities such as Aitaroun that the consequences of that surprise are most deeply felt.
When Hezbollah started a rocket campaign against northern Israel in solidarity with the Palestinian militant group Hamas a day after its Oct. 7, 2023, attack in Israel, Aitaroun, which lies slightly more than a mile from the border with Israel, immediately became a staging ground for Hezbollah operatives and a target for Israeli strikes.
Israel escalated its attacks in September 2024, then invaded southern Lebanon in a bid to dislodge Hezbollah. In the 70 days before the cease-fire took effect, Aitaroun lost 51 Hezbollah operatives fighting there and elsewhere in the south, along with 16 women, 10 civil defense workers and five children.
Mayor Salim Murad said two-thirds of Aitaroun’s 3,800 housing units are either destroyed or badly damaged. Water facilities, electricity and other infrastructure are all but obliterated.
But it’s a price many at the mass burial said they were willing to pay.
“We accept this because it’s our land, and it’s worth the blood spilled,” said Fayrooz Al-Hijazi, who lost several family members — civilians, she said — in an Israeli strike on Aitou, a Christian town in Lebanon’s north where some Aitaroun residents took refuge during the war.
Though her house was destroyed, she insisted the Resistance — as she referred to Hezbollah — had more support than ever.
“Look at all the people in the square. The fact they’re here — that’s your victory,” she said, adding her two boys were already playing with plastic assault rifles and were intent on joining Hezbollah when they grew up.
“If before we were 2% with the Resistance, now we’re 100%. All the Israelis did was enliven this spirit.”
Abdullah Mohammad, a 40-year-old cleric handing out sweets and sugary tea to mourners, dismissed the notion that Hezbollah no longer posed a deterrent to Israeli attacks. Many Lebanese consider Hezbollah more capable than the army and credit it with driving out Israeli forces in 2006 and for ably defending Lebanon until 2023.
“You lose a battle? Maybe, no problem. But are we broken? No,” he said. He pointed to a spot up the road, which he said was the farthest Israeli troops reached.
“A whole army, with U.S. support and the best weapons, and they couldn't advance more than a mile into this village? They did more damage during the cease-fire. And that proves the Resistance needs to stay.”
But not everyone in Hezbollah’s orbit was so quick to brush off their losses.
In the nearby hamlet of Bustan, Ahmad Al-Ahmad, 43, sat with his family on the wreckage of his patio. On the hill before him, a water tower lay smashed and a cupola of a mosque was askew.
Trees lining the main thoroughfare appeared to have been systematically cut down by Israelis with chain saws. Chopping down the trees "was just vandalism" to discourage people from returning to the village, Al-Ahmad said.
Not a single structure in Bustan survived Israel’s offensive, he said, including the house Al-Ahmad built with money he earned working for more than two decades in Berlin. He completed construction only last year and was planning to move in with his family before the war began; he even enrolled his children in local schools.
“Germany was good to me, but here, the sun, the air — it’s just different. The kids were so excited to move back,” he said, his voice wistful. But he had no money for repairs, and the promised compensation from Hezbollah had yet to materialize.
With a resigned tone, he said he would return to Berlin to work, but wouldn’t rebuild so long as Hezbollah remained dominant in southern Lebanon.
“If you can fight Israel, do it," he said, adding with an Arabic expression, "But if you can’t, don't 'sell talk' to people.”
Others were more scathing.
“People talk about victory. What victory? All this destruction and death? What was this for?” said Ali, a 49-year-old merchant in Tyre, who gave only his first name to avoid reprisals.
“Hezbollah must pay to fix this. And if they don’t, we’re going to kick them out.”
How Hezbollah manages reconstruction will determine its staying power, analysts say. After the 2006 war, it oversaw a rapid rehabilitation effort. But the damage this time (estimated at $14 billion by the World Bank) and a years-long economic crisis in Lebanon, precludes quick solutions.
“It’s not just Hezbollah that’s impoverished. Everyone is,” said Mona Fawaz, professor of urban studies and planning at American University of Beirut.
“People who before wouldn’t want the party to spend money on them now wait for anyone to give them cash.”
The group has dispatched crews to assess damage to homes and distributed checks between $800 to $12,000 for preliminary repairs and rent. But many recipients complain it’s not enough and speak of delays of more than a month to cash them. Hezbollah officials say they have already disbursed more than $300 million, but few Lebanese believe the group has the funds to compensate for the damage.
In the past, Hezbollah could rely on Iran, which helped establish the group in the 1980s and long supplied weapons, training and pallets of cash, either through Syria or by air into Beirut airport.
Now, Tehran has its own financial problems, and the fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad last year denied Hezbollah its logistics pipeline. The Lebanese government has taken a firmer line against Hezbollah-related smuggling. On March 1, Lebanon’s Finance Ministry announced it interdicted a suitcase with $2.5 million from someone arriving at Beirut airport — presumably a cash infusion for the group.
The liquidity crunch has forced Hezbollah to reach out to the state, other Lebanese parties and the international community. It recently backed a Cabinet viewed as inimical to its interests in a bid to unlock reconstruction funds.
“Hezbollah’s priority now is reconstruction, and this requires new political work in terms of relationships,” said Kassem Kassir, a Lebanese Hezbollah expert who is close to the group.
But the anger many Lebanese feel toward Hezbollah for dragging the country into an ill-conceived war will make outreach an uphill battle, said Michael Young, senior editor at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.
“It’s probably us Lebanese who end up paying for this, one way or another, so there’s a great deal of mistrust of Hezbollah,” he said.
The cease-fire, which is overseen by the U.S., stipulates the group must withdraw from southern Lebanon and for the Lebanese army to take its stead. Recent weeks have seen troops and a United Nations monitoring mission dismantle Hezbollah’s military infrastructure in the area, a hitherto impossible step.
Though Hezbollah is playing along for now, there's little expectation it would accept a more thorough disarmament, said Karim el-Mufti, a senior lecturer in global affairs at Sciences Po, a university in Paris.
"They're on the back foot now, but they know armed struggle will have its time again," he said.
It's a struggle many are willing to continue. In Aitaroun, Al-Hijazi said the fight against Israel wasn’t a function of a political party or faction.
“It’s the people of the land who are the Resistance, and they were there before Hezbollah," she said. "If Hezbollah leaves, I'll be the Resistance."
Al-Hijazi joined her relatives in the square, beating her chest to the rhythm of a funereal dirge, tears streaming down her cheek.
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
**This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Analysis: Lebanon’s new government, the absent “resistance” Clause, and Hezbollah’s fate
By David Daoud | March 9, 2025 | @DavidADaoud
FDD’s Long War Journal/
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/03/141112/
Lebanon officially has a new government. On January 13, 2025, Nawaf Salam was appointed prime minister-designate and tasked with cobbling together a cabinet. He accomplished this task by February 8, after which the Constitution of Lebanon required him to gain a parliamentary vote of confidence within 30 days. On February 26, Salam submitted his cabinet lineup and his government’s policy statement for the constitutionally required parliamentary vote of confidence, and lawmakers approved them the same day.
In a mid-February interview with Lebanon’s public broadcaster TeleLiban, Prime Minister Salam noted that the policy statement—which is not a legally operative document but reflects the government’s vision—was a product of political compromise. “This government needs to gain the confidence of parliament to govern,” he said, “and parliament is comprised of political blocs” with whom he engaged in negotiations and compromise both in cobbling his cabinet and formulating the policy statement.
As a result of those negotiations and two extended parliamentary sessions to discuss the policy statement, 95 of Lebanon’s 128 parliamentarians granted the government their confidence on February 26.
The parliamentarians and blocs that granted Salam and his cabinet their confidence are as follows:
Deputy Speaker of Parliament and MP Elias Bou Saab, of the Independent Consultative Gathering—a four-member faction that broke away from the Free Patriotic Movement in August 2024.
MP Paula Yaacoubian, the only MP of the National Alliance reformist party—part of the Forces of Change reformist bloc.
MP Mohammad Raad, representing Hezbollah’s 15-member Loyalty to the Resistance parliamentary bloc.
MP Hadi Abu Hassan, representing the eight-member Democratic Gathering parliamentary bloc affiliated with Walid Joumblatt’s Progressive Socialist Party.
MP Sethrida Geagea, representing the 19-member Strong Republic Bloc affiliated with the Lebanese Forces party.
MP Michel Moawad, the only parliamentarian of the Independence Movement—part of the three-member Renewal Bloc.
MP Fouad Makhzoumi, the only parliamentarian of the National Dialogue Party—also part of the Renewal Bloc.
Parliamentarians and parties that denied Salam’s government their confidence:
Twelve of the Free Patriotic Movement’s now-13-member Strong Lebanon parliamentary bloc voted against the government.
Four MPs abstained from voting.
The remaining 17 parliamentarians did not attend the voting session.
The policy statement noted the government’s intention to deal with several of the challenges confronting Lebanon. A key US priority in supporting Beirut and its official institutions is “counter[ing] Hizballah’s narrative and influence” and “countering and delegitimizing Hizballah’s false narrative and justification for retaining its arms in Lebanon and the region.” In light of that stated US objective in Lebanon, it is important to highlight the new Lebanese government’s intended posture on Hezbollah and its arms, as stated in the Salam Government’s policy statement. The policy statement reads, in relevant part:
We seek to build a State that assumes total responsibility over the country’s security and defense of its borders and porous boundaries [literally, “gaps”]. A State which deters the aggressor, protects its citizens, fortifies independence, and mobilizes Arab nations [“the Arab family”] and all states to protect Lebanon. The government, therefore, stresses its adherence to its obligations, particularly the implementation of [United Nations] Security Council Resolution 1701, completely and entirely. It reiterates what appears in the aforementioned resolution and related resolutions regarding the integrity of Lebanon’s territory, its sovereignty, and political independence within its internationally recognized borders, in accordance with the text of the March 23, 1949, General Armistice Agreement between Israel and Lebanon.
This constitutes an ostensibly sharp departure from Lebanon’s previous posture on Resolution 1701—and a direct response by the current government to that former posture. In the past, Beirut interpreted the resolution, which requires Hezbollah’s disarmament but does not specify it by name, to exclude the group from the ambit of 1701’s requirement for “the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon, so that […] there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese State.” This appeared to dovetail with Prime Minister Salam’s February 12 interview with Lebanese state broadcaster TeleLiban. In that interview, he decried Lebanon’s track record of disregarding its obligations under the resolution and the disastrous consequences Beirut had invited upon itself by avoiding its responsibilities through “play[ing word] games.” He said, in contrast, Lebanon was now serious about implementing the resolution’s terms.
In the interview, however, Salam seemed to suggest that Lebanon had “done its part, completely, by deploying the [Lebanese] army” to the south and, as a result, Beirut was “not falling short at all in carrying out our obligations.” However, both Resolution 1701 and the November 27, 2024, Israel-Lebanon ceasefire agreement demand more of Lebanon—namely, to disarm Hezbollah, dismantle its military infrastructure, and seal its borders to the reentry of arms and related materiel destined for the group.
In slight contrast to the prime minister’s words to TeleLiban, the policy statement did discuss the Lebanese State’s monopolization of force:
The government commits, pursuant to the National Reconciliation Accord reached in al-Taif [The 1989 Taif Agreement] to undertake all necessary measures to liberate all Lebanese lands from the Israeli occupation and impose the state’s sovereignty over all of its lands, exclusively through its own forces [emphasis own], and to deploy the [Lebanese] Army along the international recognized Lebanese borderlands.
The policy statement’s text deliberately echoed Section III, Paragraph C of the Taif Agreement, which states that “restoring the State’s sovereignty up to the internationally recognized borders requires the following […] undertaking all necessary measures to liberate all Lebanese lands from the Israeli occupation, imposing the sovereignty of the state over all of its lands, and deploying the Lebanese Army in the internationally recognized Lebanese border area.” The inclusion of this clause echoed a promise made by Salam during his TeleLibaninterview.
However, the policy statement included an important modification. Section II, Paragraph A of the Taif Agreement required all “militias” in Lebanon to be disbanded at the conclusion of the country’s 1975-1990 civil war. But the clause “all necessary measures” in Section III, Paragraph C was used—under the influence of Syria, which then controlled Lebanon—to exclude Hezbollah from the agreement’s obligation to disarm all militias. The policy statement’s inclusion of the modifying phrase, emphasized above, “exclusively through its own forces” was seemingly meant to close this gap. However, the policy statement did not explicitly mention disarming Hezbollah or any other armed group. This echoed Salam’s silence on the matter during his TeleLiban interview.
The policy statement implicitly addressed previous Lebanese governments’ “misapplication” of the Taif Agreement’s terms:
We seek a state loyal to the Constitution and the National Reconciliation Accord, which we adopted in Taif. This dedication requires us to implement what remains unapplied from this document. It also requires correcting the incorrect applications that marred it throughout the years.
The Salam government’s policy statement continued to discuss its concept of Lebanese self-defense:
[The government] affirms Lebanon’s right to self-defense in the case of any aggression, pursuant to the Charter of the United Nations. It will also work on executing what President Joseph Aoun said in his inaugural speech regarding the state’s monopolization of carrying arms. We want a state that possesses the decision of war and peace. We want an army that possesses a defensive fighting doctrine that protects the [Lebanese] people and will prosecute any war pursuant to the terms of the constitution.
Seemingly absent was the now-traditional explicit or implicit mention of a right to “resistance” in some variation.
All cabinets since 1989 included some explicit or implicit mention of the right to “resistance,” which Hezbollah has used to legitimize its possession of a private arsenal and armed activities. However, the current policy statement did include at least one potential nod to the right to “resistance”—a clause that several previous government policy statements used as a basis to justify that right, namely the “affirm[ation of] Lebanon’s right to self-defense in the case of any aggression, pursuant to the Charter of the United Nations.”
This clause can admittedly be interpreted in one of two ways. In light of its uses by several previous governments as a basis to justify “resistance” as being a right enshrined in international law, this could have been Beirut’s tacit way of acknowledging that right in a manner that would grant it plausible deniability at a time when Lebanon’s relationship with Hezbollah is under closer international and Israeli scrutiny, when Lebanon needs maximal international goodwill to obtain desperately needed reconstruction aid, and after that relationship invited a disastrous war upon the country.
Mohammad Raad, in granting his confidence to the government, suggested he read the clause as justifying “resistance” by stating, “In relation to the Israeli occupation and aggression, the government decided on the right of the Lebanese [Al Lubnaniyeen, i.e., the Lebanese people] to self-defense, as indicated by the legal reference in the policy statement’s formulation.” Under previous governments, “the right of the Lebanese” has been used to legitimize “resistance.”
Alternatively, and equally plausibly, in the context of the rest of the policy statement, self-defense pursuant to the UN Charter, could have been a reference to Article 51 of the charter. It guarantees Lebanon’s right—like the right of all states—to use force in self-defense in the case of an armed attack.
However, the final formulation of the policy statement was reached after extensive negotiations between Nawaf Salam and Hezbollah, as with other political parties. By granting their confidence to the government, the group was suggesting that it saw the policy statement as containing or guaranteeing their priorities. Otherwise, Hezbollah could have joined the Free Patriotic Movement in refusing to vote in favor of the incoming government—just as the Shiite organization refused to nominate Salam for the premiership. Their change in position, therefore, suggests that the premier at least ameliorated their concerns.
Furthermore, the policy statement included other potential nods to Hezbollah’s positions—chief among them was the statement’s call for a national defense strategy. The policy statement said that “the defense of Lebanon requires setting a national security strategy on the military, diplomatic, and economic level.” While the Salam government’s policy statement didn’t say so explicitly, the traditional position—expressed in both previous policy statements and in other documents or declarations by officials—has been that such a strategy would be set through domestic dialogue and consensus. However, this national dialogue would be advantageous to Hezbollah, which can leverage its continued massive social support among Lebanese Shiites to channel the outcome of this dialogue to the group’s advantage.
Such an outcome could officially authorize Hezbollah’s retention of its private arsenal. Alternatively, Hezbollah could push for passing a Lebanese version of Iraq’s 2016 Popular Mobilization Forces Commission (PMF) law, which integrated the largely pro-Iranian PMF militias into the Iraqi state as an auxiliary of the armed forces, securing their fighters state-funded salaries and benefits equal to regular military personnel while allowing the militias to maintain their arsenals and internal cohesion. If Hezbollah succeeds in adapting the PMF Law model to Lebanon, it could secure itself access to the Lebanese state’s budget while enshrining the legitimacy of its arsenal in law.
The other Hezbollah priority highlighted in the policy statement—admittedly, also a natural Lebanese-state priority—was the matter of post-war reconstruction. The statement noted the “government commitment to speedily rebuild what the Israeli aggression destroyed and removing debris, to be subsidized by a fund specialized for this urgent matter that will be marked by transparency, and which will aim to convince all citizens that the state stands by them and does not distinguish between them.” This natural Lebanese state obligation dovetails with Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem’s demand on February 16 that Beirut assume primary responsibility for reconstruction.
Meanwhile, senior Lebanese officials, like Deputy Prime Minister Tarek Mitri and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, have said Lebanon will not condition reconstruction aid on Hezbollah’s disarmament. This combined approach—the state assuming responsibility for post-war reconstruction without conditioning it on Hezbollah’s disarmament—would effectively alleviate Hezbollah’s financial burden for post-war reconstruction and reduce or forestall any anger bubbling against the group from within its traditional Shiite support base for inviting the recent destructive war with Israel without demanding a quid pro quo from the group on its arms.
For points of comparison, the policy statements of the Lebanese governments that arose after the civil war—the relevant time period for this discussion—included the following statements (portions used to legitimize Hezbollah’s armed resistance are bolded):
Second Government of Salim al-Hoss (November 25, 1989 – January 24, 1990):
“At the same time, the Government will spare no effort to liberate the land from the Israeli occupation in the South and the western Beqaa through all available means, including supporting the heroic resistance and the insistence to fully implement the [United Nations] Security Council’s Resolution 425 requiring the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanese lands.”
First Government of Omar Karami (December 24, 1990-May 16, 1992):
“First, regarding domestic affairs:
1) As an extension of the comprehensive security plan that aims to extend the state’s authority gradually over all Lebanese lands through its own armed forces […] the government will aspire to: B) the dissolution of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias and handing over their weapons to the state pursuant to the National Reconciliation Accord.
2) Liberating south Lebanon and the western Beqaa from the Israeli occupation, the reclamation of the state’s sovereignty up to the internationally recognized Lebanese borders, through working to implement Resolution 425 and all other Security Council resolutions concerning the total removal of the Israeli occupation and adhering to the March 23, 1949 [General] Armistice Agreement. Confirming the right of the Lebanese people to lawful national resistance pursuant to the United Nations Charter and undertaking all necessary measures to [achieve] liberation and spreading the sovereignty of the state.
Second Government of Rachid al-Solh (May 16, 1992-October 31, 1992):
“Second, the south: The government strongly condemns the continuation of the Israeli occupation of part of Lebanese lands, and the continuation of attacks against our [otherwise] secure people and will, therefore, work to liberate all Lebanese lands of this occupation, continue demanding the implementation of Resolutions 425 and 426, work to spread the sovereignty of the state over all of its lands, and complete the deployment of the Lebanese Army up to the internationally recognized borders. The government adheres to the approved Lebanese principles and to Lebanon’s right—as a government and people—to confront the occupation and work to liberate its land through all means based on the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
First Government of Rafic Hariri (October 31, 1992-May 25, 1995):
“The continuation of Israel’s occupation of a portion of Lebanese lands and its continued attacks on our [otherwise] secure people remain at the top of the government’s priorities, which considers the matter of liberating the nation’s land its top priority among its national and political goals. The government adheres to Lebanon’s right, as a government and people, to confront the Israeli occupation and work to liberate the Lebanese land through all means based on the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The government […] will pursue, adamantly, the implementation of Resolution 425, work to spread the sovereignty of the state over all its lands, and finish the deployment of the Lebanese Army up to the internationally recognized borders. It will also work to support the steadfastness of our people in the south and the western Beqaa.”
Second Government of Rafic Hariri (May 25, 1995-November 7, 1996):
“Our right to resist the occupation will remain a national and political principle. Confronting the occupation with all available means is a right and obligation, a right enshrined in international covenants and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
Third Government of Rafic Hariri (November 7, 1996-December 4, 1998):
“The great challenge obligating us all is liberating our land from the Israeli occupation, implementing Resolution 425, and affirming our right to resistance [against] Israel with all lawful means. We will continue to consider this matter our chief priority. […] Lebanon insists upon its right to resist the occupation, strengthening the ties between the state and its institutions and our people in the south and the western Beqaa, and supporting their steadfastness through all available means.”
Third Government of Salim al-Hoss (December 14, 1998-October 26, 2000):
“Supporting the resistance acting against the Israeli occupation to attain the unconditional implementation of Resolution 425 and supporting the steadfastness of the people of the occupied lands with whatever will extend to them the ability to remain and cling to their land.”
Fourth Government of Rafic Hariri (October 26, 2000-April 17, 2003):
“Our government launches today based upon the most important national accomplishment in Lebanon’s history, which is the victory of the resistance, the resistance of all Lebanese to the Israeli aggression and occupation, and forcing the enemy to withdraw and admit defeat [Israel’s May 25, 2000 withdrawal from south Lebanon and Hezbollah’s claim to have forced Israel to withdraw]. From this starting point, the government salutes the resistance and the steadfastness and patience of the Lebanese people generally and the people of the south and the western Beqaa, particularly over the past two decades, in light of the suffering they endured and the sacrifices they offered. […] The government considers preserving the resistance’s accomplishments and investing it in all areas one of its priorities—while also stressing that the Israeli position of continued aggression against Lebanon through continuing to occupy the Shebaa Farms, detaining Lebanese prisoners, occupying the Golan Heights, denying the rights of the Palestinian People including the right of return and exercising the worst kinds of cruelty against it, is the reason for the open escalation of unlimited possibilities in the region.
It, therefore, interests the government to stress that it will continue to operate based on the conviction that our victory in the south is a victory for all Arabs and the fruit of joint Lebanese-Syrian struggle and endurance. […] This principle [of Lebanese-Syrian unity] will act as a main propelling force, on the one hand, aiding Lebanon to complete the liberation of its lands and prisoners […] and on the other, the advancement of the Arab position and evolution of joint Arab action in confronting Israel, especially in light of the Palestinian people’s heroic intifada and the Arab position insisting that the peace process must implement international resolutions and international law and not Israeli diktat. This position will not be abandoned under the pressure of threats employed by Israel.
Lebanon, which served as an example of resistance, can also serve as an example for permanent, just, and comprehensive peace based on the completion of Israel’s withdrawal from its lands, the liberation of the Golan Heights, and the restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people pursuant to the resolutions of the United Nations. Lebanon will continue to pursue peace within the ambit of national principles, no matter how stubborn Israel becomes in its positions or how low the chances of peace appear these days. For this country, small in territory, great in sacrifice, knows how to confront occupation with resistance, but also knows how to insistently pursue the spread of justice and comprehensive peace in the region—this peace that remains a strategic goal, which we will pursue with our Arab brethren and friends around the world.”
Fifth Government of Rafic Hariri (April 17, 2003-October 26, 2004):
“First, the government stresses that Lebanon is committed to implementing international resolutions, including those aiming to achieve comprehensive, just, and permanent peace in the Middle East—while refusing to accept in any shape or form Israel’s diktats and its behaviors and maneuvers aimed at imposing its hegemony on the entire region. Likewise, Lebanon insists on solving all international conflicts through the auspices of the United Nations and making the entire Middle East region free of weapons of mass destruction.
Lebanon, more than at any time in the past, is committed to adhering to international laws, charters, human rights, and the rights of peoples to self-determination and defend their independence, sovereignty, and integrity of their lands through all means available to them, including the legitimate right to resistance until the complete liberation of the land. […] The current challenges lead us to more cooperation and coordination with Syria to jointly confront the challenges of the Arab-Israeli conflict in the coming phase, just as it was confronted in the previous stage which saw the victory of Lebanon and its national resistance over Israel and forcing it to unconditionally withdraw from most occupied Lebanese lands. […] It must also be emphasized that the government remains adamant about completing what Lebanese lands remain occupied.”
Second Government of Omar Karami (October 26, 2004-April 19, 2005):
“This government also stresses the importance of exceptional relations between Lebanon and Syria, especially regarding their durable and stable partnership in confronting the Israeli enemy, conducting the struggle against it, and adopting resistance to confront aggression and liberate the land. […] As it relates to international relations, this government clings to the Charter of the United Nations, respecting international law, and striving to achieve the best cooperative relationships with all friendly nations. […] As an extension of adhering to international law, and respecting its sources and decisions, this government adheres to the Charter of the United Nations, which enshrines the respect for the sovereignty of member states. It, therefore, rejects any interference in our affairs that contradicts the Charter of the United Nations, and which puts our security, national unity, and domestic stability at risk.
First Government of Najib Mikati (April 19, 2005 – July 19, 2005):
“This government grants its complete confidence to the Lebanese Army and its ability to carry out its assigned national task. […] This government stresses its [commitment to] abide by the Charter of the United Nations and other international resolutions and documents that Lebanon has signed or joined. It also stresses its adherence to the content of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including the right of peoples to self-determination, to defend their independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity, and the lawful right to resist occupation. The government also stresses Lebanon’s respect for international legal resolutions and calls for implementing them all and [their terms] completely. The government is also committed to the Taif Agreement and its implementation in letter and spirit, in all its contents, considering it the cornerstone of national accord expressing the consensus of the will of the Lebanese.
The government also considers the Lebanese resistance and all its weapons a just and natural expression of the national right of the Lebanese people to defend its land and dignity in confronting Israeli aggression, threats, and greed in order to complete the liberation of Lebanese lands. […] [T]he government [also] stresses its complete adherence to UN Security Council Resolution 1559, which requires an international investigative body to investigate the crime of assassinating the martyred Prime Minister [literally, president] Rafic Hariri and his companions.
First Government of Fuad Siniora (July 29, 2005-July 11, 2008):
“This is the first policy statement of the first government after elections, the first in light of Lebanon regaining its democratic system [after Syria’s 2005 withdrawal from Lebanon] […] this statement [represents] preserving the heroic resistance, the statement of calm dialogue regarding the options available to us all within the ambit of a persevering Arab strategy [lit. “equation”] confronting Israel, its occupation, and greed, and simultaneously fortifies Lebanon. It is a statement [representing] adherence to Arab solidarity and stressing commitment to the Beirut Summit’s initiative for just and comprehensive peace, and for respecting international legal decisions.
The government stresses its keen desire to adhere to respecting international law and maintaining good relations with international bodies and respecting their decisions—within the ambit of sovereignty, solidarity, and national unity. […] The government considers the Lebanese resistance to be a just and natural expression of the national right of the Lebanese people to liberate their land and defend their dignity in the face of the Israeli aggression, threats, and greed and to continue the liberation of the Lebanese land.”
Second Government of Fuad Siniora (July 11, 2008-November 9, 2009):
“This government affirms its commitment to the principle of the unity and supremacy of the state in all matters related to the country’s general policies, including preserving Lebanon and safeguarding its national sovereignty. […] Our government commits to implementing the Taif Agreement in all of its clauses. […] Today, we must increase trust in the lawful armed forces and provide them political support to carry out their duties on a level that can assure the Lebanese that it is guaranteeing their right to security and protecting them from any aggression. […]
Based on the state’s responsibility for preserving Lebanon’s sovereignty and independence and its territorial integrity pursuant to the constitution, the government stresses the following:
First: Lebanon’s right—through its people, army, and resistance—to liberate or reclaim the Shebaa Farms, Kfarchouba Hills, and the Lebanese portion of the occupied village of Ghajar, to defend Lebanon in confronting any aggression, to guard its right to its waters, and that [will be done] through all lawful and available means.
Second: The government’s commitment to UN Security Council Resolution 1701 in all of its terms.
Third: Working to set a comprehensive national strategy to protect Lebanon and defend it, which will be agreed upon through the dialogue that his excellency, the president of the republic, will call for with the participation of the Arab League and that will occur after the government gains the confidence of parliament.
Additionally, [our] national duty calls upon us to continue working to defend our rights, especially regarding our unabridged sovereignty over all Lebanese lands, up to implementing the [March 23, 1949, Lebanon-Israel General] Armistice [Agreement] as required by the Taif Agreement. The government will continue to ask the international community to implement Security Council Resolution 1701 in all of its terms, including reaching a permanent ceasefire. The Lebanese government will also work to secure Israel’s withdrawal from the Lebanese portion of Ghajar, its withdrawal from the Shebaa Farms and Kfarchouba Hills, and their return to Lebanese sovereignty, including [through] placing them under temporary United Nations guardianship.
First Government of Saadeldine Hariri (November 9, 2009-June 13, 2011):
“3-The government stresses the unity of the state, its authority, and exclusive final say in all matters related to the country’s general policies, including safeguarding Lebanon, protecting it, and preserving its national sovereignty. This principle shall guide the government’s orientation, its decisions, and its commitment. The government also stresses its commitment to the principles of the constitution and its provisions, the content of the [president’s] oath [of office] speech, the rules of the democratic system, the National Pact, and applying the Taif Agreement.
4-The government stresses its uncompromising insistence on preventing all attempts to undermine domestic peace and security. This requires security and military authority to be exclusively in the hands of the state, which will act as a guarantee for preserving coexistence. The government commits to continue supporting the lawful military and security forces and providing them [necessary] human and resources and equipment to carry out its assigned duties of protecting Lebanese residents, confronting terrorism and averting its dangers, protecting the freedoms of all citizens and their rights, not least their right to security, and combatting acts of chaos, crime, and drug dealing, all pursuant to the direction of the political authorities.
5-To safeguard Lebanon’s supreme interest, the Lebanese government reiterates [renews] its respect for international resolutions and stresses its request that the international community implement Resolution 1701 and put a total end to Israel’s violations, its constant threats, and the espionage activities it conducts. It [the government] will continue, on the basis of this resolution, to seek a permanent ceasefire and commitment to the [March 23, 1949, Lebanon-Israel General] Armistice Agreement, pursuant to the Taif Agreement. […]
6-Based on its responsibility to preserve Lebanon’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial unity and integrity, the government affirms Lebanon’s right—through its people, army, and resistance—to liberate or reclaim the Shebaa Farms, the Lebanese Kfarchouba Hills, and the Lebanese portion of the village of Ghajar, to defend Lebanon in confronting any aggression, hold to its right to its waters, through all lawful and available means. It also stresses its commitment to Resolution 1701 in all its terms. It also stresses [its commitment] to work to unify the position of the Lebanese through agreement upon a comprehensive strategy to protect Lebanon and defend it that will be decided through national dialogue.
Second Government of Najib Mikati (June 13, 2011-February 15, 2014):
“Our government […] commits to applying the constitution and pursuing the complete implementation of the Taif Agreement. […] Our government stresses before this august council the unity of the state and that there is no alternative to its authority and final say in all matters related to the country’s general policies because through that [we] guarantee Lebanon’s preservation, protection, and safeguarding its national sovereignty. […] This is a task that will be taken up by the lawful armed and security forces, in which no forces [lit. “weapons”] but its own lawfully authorized forces will take part. […]
The government stresses its efforts to end the Israeli occupation of the remainder of the occupied Lebanese lands, ending the aggressive Israeli actions and espionage operations that violate Lebanon’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity. It commits to Lebanon’s right—people, army, and resistance—to liberate and reclaim the Shebaa Farms, Lebanese Kfarchouba Hills, and the Lebanese portion of the village of Ghajar and to defend Lebanon against any aggression through all lawful and available means. […] Working on uniting the Lebanese position around a comprehensive defense strategy to protect Lebanon and defend it remains a commitment of this government, which hopes to finish exploring it through national dialogue. The government reaffirms its commitment to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1701 in all its terms.
Government of Tamam Salam (February 15, 2014-December 18, 2016):
“Our government emphasizes the unity of the state, its prerogatives, and exclusive authority over national policy-related issues to ensure Lebanon’s safety and security and to preserve its national sovereignty. The government also stresses its commitment to the principles and provisions of the constitution, the democratic system rules, the National Pact, and the Taif Agreement. […]It will work on establishing excellent relations with international bodies, respecting their resolutions, and affirms its commitment to implement Security Council Resolution 1701 in order to extend the state sovereignty over the whole of Lebanese territory, as well as [its commitment] to the United Nations and Arab League Charters. By virtue of the state’s responsibilities and role to preserve Lebanon’s sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity, and the safety of its citizens, the government stresses the state’s duty and aspiration to liberate the Shebaa Farms, the Kfarchouba Hills, and the Lebanese part of Ghajar village by all legitimate means as well as the right of Lebanese citizens to resist the Israeli occupation, repel its attacks, and regain occupied territories.
Second Government of Saadeldine Hariri (December 18, 2016-January 31, 2019):
“A national defense strategy will be agreed upon through dialogue. […] [The government] affirms its respect for all international instruments and resolutions and commitment to UN Security Council Resolution 1701. […] Regarding the conflict with the Israeli enemy, we will spare no effort nor hold back resistance for the sake of liberating what Lebanese territories remain occupied and protecting our country from an enemy that continues to crave our lands, waters, and natural resources. That [will be done] by relying upon the state’s responsibility and role in preserving Lebanon’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity. The government, therefore, stresses the responsibility of the state and its aspiration to liberate the Shebaa Farms, Kfarchouba Hills, and the Lebanese portion of the village of Ghajar through all lawful means while stressing the right of Lebanese citizens to resist the Israeli occupation, repelling its aggression, and reclaiming the occupied lands.”
Third Government of Saadeldine Hariri (January 31, 2019-January 21, 2020):
“[This government] affirms its respect for all international instruments and resolutions and its commitment to Security Council Resolution 1701. […] Regarding the conflict with the Israeli enemy, we will spare no effort nor hold back resistance for the sake of liberating what Lebanese territories remain occupied and protecting our country from an enemy that continues to crave our lands, waters, and natural resources. That [will be done] by relying upon the state’s responsibility and role in preserving Lebanon’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity. The government, therefore, stresses the responsibility of the state and its aspiration to liberate the Shebaa Farms, Kfarchouba Hills, and the Lebanese portion of the village of Ghajar through all lawful means while stressing the right of Lebanese citizens to resist the Israeli occupation, repelling its aggression, and reclaiming the occupied lands.”
Government of Hassan Diab (January 21, 2020-September 10, 2021):
“[This government] affirms its respect for all international instruments and resolutions and its commitment to Security Council Resolution 1701. […] Regarding the conflict with the Israeli enemy, we will spare no effort nor hold back resistance for the sake of liberating what Lebanese territories remain occupied and protecting our country from an enemy that continues to crave our lands, waters, and natural resources. That [will be done] by relying upon the state’s responsibility and role in preserving Lebanon’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity. The government, therefore, stresses the responsibility of the state and its aspiration to liberate the Shebaa Farms, Kfarchouba Hills, and the Lebanese portion of the village of Ghajar through all lawful means while stressing the right of Lebanese citizens to resist the Israeli occupation, repelling its aggression, and reclaiming the occupied lands.”
Third Government of Najib Mikati (July 10, 2021-February 8, 2025):
“[T]he national principles that will guide the government’s actions are:
— Commitment to the constitution’s requirements and the National Accord Document [i.e., the Taif Agreement], respecting international laws and documents Lebanon has signed and all the decisions of international bodies, stressing the commitment to implementing Security Council Resolution 1701. […]
— Stressing the absolute support for the [Lebanese] Army and all security forces to maintain security on the border and domestically, protecting the Lebanese and their property, strengthening the authority of the state, and protecting institutions.
— Adherence to the [March 23, 1949, Lebanon-Israel General] Armistice Agreement, seeking to complete the liberation of occupied Lebanese lands, defending Lebanon against any aggression, affirming its right to its waters and resources through all lawful means, while stressing the right of Lebanese citizens to resist the Israeli occupation, repel its aggression, and reclaim the occupied lands.”
**David Daoud is Senior Fellow at at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies where he focuses on Israel, Hezbollah, and Lebanon affairs.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on March 11-12/2025
Syria's Druze seek a place in a changing nation, navigating pressures from the government and Israel
KAREEM CHEHAYEB and OMAR SANADIKI/JARAMANA, Syria (AP) /pdated Mon, March 11/2025
Syria’s Druze minority has a long history of cutting their own path to survive among the country’s powerhouses. They are now trying again to navigate a new, uncertain Syria since the fall of longtime autocrat Bashar Assad. Members of the small religious sect find themselves caught between two forces that many of them distrust: the new, Islamist-led government in Damascus and Syria’s hostile neighbor, Israel, which has used the plight of the Druze as a pretext to intervene in the country. Syria’s many religious and ethnic communities are worried over their place in the new system. The transitional government has promised to include them, but has so far kept authority in the hands of the Islamist former insurgents who toppled Assad in December — Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, or HTS. That and HTS’s past affiliation with Sunni Muslim extremist al-Qaida, has minorities suspicious. The most explosive hostilities have been with the Alawite religious minority, to which Assad’s family belongs. Heavy clashes erupted this week between armed Assad loyalists and government forces, killing more than 1,000 — including hundreds of civilians — in the coastal regions that are the Alawites’ heartland, according to monitoring groups. The Associated Press has not been able to independently verify the figures. In contrast, the Druze -- largely centered in southern Syria -- have kept up quiet contacts with the government. Still, tensions have broken out. Last week in Jaramana, a suburb of Damascus with a large Druze population, unknown gunmen killed a member of the government’s security forces, which responded with a wave of arrests in the district. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and military officials weighed in by threatening to send forces to Jaramana to protect the Druze. Druze leaders quickly disavowed the offer. But soon after, someone hung an Israeli flag in Sweida, an overwhelmingly Druze region in southern Syria, prompting residents to quickly tear it down and burn it.
Many fear another flare-up is only a matter of time. Multiple Druze armed militias have existed for years, originally set up to protect their communities against Islamic State group fighters and drug smugglers coming in from the eastern desert. They have been reluctant to set down their arms. Recently a new faction, the Sweida Military Council, proclaimed itself, grouping several smaller Druze militias. The result is a cycle of mistrust, where government supporters paint Druze factions as potential separatists or tools of Israel, while government hostility only deepens Druze worries.
A struggle to unite a divided country
On the outskirts of Sweida, a commander in Liwa al-Jabal, a Druze militia, stood on a rooftop and scanned the hills with binoculars. He spoke by walkie-talkie with a militiaman with an assault rifle below. They were watching for any movement by militants or gangs. “Our arms are not for expansionist purposes. They're for self-defense and protection,” said the commander, who asked to be identified only by his nickname Abu Ali for security reasons. “We have no enemies except those who attack us.”
Abu Ali, who is a metal worker as his day job, said most Druze militiamen would merge with a new Syrian army if it’s one that “protects all Syrians rather than crushes them like the previous regime.”The Druze religious sect began as a 10th-century offshoot of Ismailism, a branch of Shiite Islam. Over half of the roughly 1 million Druze worldwide live in Syria. Most other Druze live in Lebanon and Israel, including in the Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria in the 1967 Mideast War and annexed in 1981. In Syria, the Druze take pride in their fierce independence. They were heavily involved in revolts against Ottoman and French colonial rule to establish the modern Syrian state. During Syria’s civil war that began in 2011, the Druze were split between supporters of Assad and the opposition. The Sweida region stayed quiet for much of the war, though it erupted with anti-government protests in 2023. Assad reluctantly gave Druze a degree of autonomy, as they wanted to avoid being involved on the frontlines. The Druze were exempted from conscription into the Syrian army and instead set up local armed factions made of workers and farmers to patrol their areas. Druze say they want Syria’s new authorities to include them in a political process to create a secular and democratic state. “Religion is for God and the state is for all” proclaimed a slogan written on the hood of a vehicle belonging to the Men of Dignity, another Druze militia patrolling the outskirts of Sweida.
‘Being inclusive will not hurt him’
Many Druze quickly rejected Israel’s claims to protect the minority. Hundreds took to the streets in Sweida to protest Netanyahu’s comments. “We are Arabs, whether he or whether the Lord that created him likes it or not. Syria is free,” said Nabih al-Halabi, a 60-year-old resident of Jaramana. He and others reject accusations that the Druze want partition from Syria. But patience is wearing thin over what many see as arbitrary layoffs of public sector workers, shortage of economic opportunities, and the new authorities’ lack of more than token inclusion of Syrians from minority communities. For the first time, a protest took place in Sweida on Thursday against Damascus' new authorities. Interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa has promised to create an inclusive system, but the government is made up mostly of his confidantes. The authorities convened a national dialogue conference last week, inviting Syrians from different communities, but many criticized it as rushed and not really inclusive. “What we are seeing from the state today, in our opinion, does not achieve the interests of all Syrians,” said retired nurse Nasser Abou-Halam, discussing local politics with other residents in Sweida's public square where near-daily protests took place. “It’s a one-color government, with leadership appointed through factions rather than through elections.”Al-Sharaa “has a big opportunity to be accepted just to be Syrian first and not Islamist first. Being inclusive will not hurt him,” said Bassam Barabandi, a former Syrian diplomat currently based in Washington. “On the contrary, it will give him more power.”
Economic woes shorten the honeymoon
Syria’s new leaders have struggled to convince the United States and its allies to lift Assad-era sanctions. Without the lifting of sanctions, it will be impossible for the government to rebuild Syria’s battered infrastructure or win over minority communities, analysts say. “I’m scared sanctions won’t be lifted and Syria won’t be given the chance,” said Rayyan Maarouf, who heads the activist media collective Suwayda 24. He has just returned to Sweida after fleeing to Europe over a year ago because of his activism. “Syria could go back to a civil war, and it would be worse than before,” he said. Outside Sweida, Abu Ali was helping train new volunteers for the militia. Still, he said he hopes to be able to lay down his weapons. “There is no difference between the son of Sweida or Jaramana and those of Homs and Lattakia,” he said. “People are tired of war and bloodshed … weapons don’t bring modernism.”

After violence in Syria, Israel says it is prepared to defend Syria's Druze
Reuters/March 11/2025
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel said on Monday that it was willing to defend Syria's Druze community following days of violence in Syria that a war monitor said led to mass killings of another religious minority. The violence began last week between fighters linked to Syria's new government and forces loyal to ousted president Bashar al-Assad. Speaking to reporters, Israeli government spokesperson David Mencer described the violence as a "massacre of civilians" and said that Israel was "prepared, if needed, to defend the Druze", without giving details how. The Druze are Arabs who practise a religion widely considered as an offshoot of Islam. There are minority Druze communities in Israel, Syria and Lebanon. Syria's Islamist-led government on Monday said it had completed a military operation against a nascent insurgency. The violence had been centred around coastal provinces where most of Syria's Alawite minority live. Assad is an Alawite, an offshoot of Shi'ite Islam, whose family for decades ruled over the Sunni Muslim majority. British-based war monitoring group the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has said that 973 civilians were killed by government forces and allied fighters in reprisal killings. More than 250 Alawite fighters were killed and more than 230 members of government security forces were also killed, the group said. Reuters has not independently verified the tolls. Israel has a small Druze community and there are also some 24,000 Druze living in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria in the 1967 Six-Day war. Israel annexed the territory in 1981, a move that has not been recognised by most countries or the United Nations. Many Syrian Druze have family in the Golan Heights. Israel on Sunday announced it would allow Syrian Druze to work there. Israel announced on March 1 that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Israel Katz had instructed the military to be ready to defend a Druze town in the suburbs of Damascus from Syrian government forces.

Syria Kurd forces chief says agreement with Sharaa ‘real opportunity’ to build new Syria
AFP/March 10, 2025
DAMASCUS: The head of the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) said Tuesday that an accord reached with the new leaders in Damascus is a “real opportunity to build a new Syria.” “We are committed to building a better future that guarantees the rights of all Syrians and fulfills their aspirations for peace and dignity,” Mazloum Abdi said in a posting on X. The Syrian presidency announced on Monday an agreement with the SDF to integrate the institutions of the autonomous Kurdish administration in the northeast into the national government.

HRW says Syria must protect civilians after ‘killing spree’
AFP/March 11, 2025
BEIRUT: Human Rights Watch on Tuesday called on the Syrian Arab Republic’s new authorities to ensure accountability for the mass killings of hundreds of civilians in recent days in the coastal heartland of the Alawite minority. Violence broke out Thursday as security forces clashed with gunmen loyal to former president Bashar Assad, who is Alawite, in areas along the Mediterranean coast. Since then, war monitor the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said security forces and allied groups had killed at least 1,093 civilians, the vast majority Alawites. “Syria’s new leaders promised to break with the horrors of the past, but grave abuses on a staggering scale are being reported against predominantly Alawite Syrians in the coastal region and elsewhere in Syria,” said HRW’s deputy regional director Adam Coogle. “Government action to protect civilians and prosecute perpetrators of indiscriminate shootings, summary executions, and other grave crimes must be swift and unequivocal,” he said in a statement decrying the “coastal killing spree.” The New York-based rights group said it was “not able to verify the number of civilians killed or displaced, but obituaries circulating on Facebook indicate hundreds were killed, including entire families.”The wave of violence is the worst since forces led by the Islamist group Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) launched a lightning offensive that toppled Assad on December 8, capping a 13-year civil war. Syria’s interim President Ahmed Al-Sharaa, who led HTS, has vowed to “hold accountable, firmly and without leniency, anyone who was involved in the bloodshed of civilians.”The defense ministry announced on Monday the end of the “military operation” seeking to root out “regime remnants” in the coastal areas. But according to the Britain-based Observatory, another 120 civilians have been killed since then, the majority of them in Latakia and Tartus provinces on the coast — where much of the earlier violence since last week had occurred. Authorities have announced the arrest of at least two fighters seen in videos killing civilians, the official news agency SANA reported. HRW said that “accountability for atrocities must include all parties,” including groups like HTS and the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army that “now constitute Syria’s new security forces.”“These groups have a well-documented history of human rights abuses and violations of international law,” it added. HTS, which has its roots in the Syrian branch of jihadist network Al-Qaeda, is still proscribed as a terrorist organization by several governments including the United States. Since toppling Assad and taking power, Sharaa has vowed to protect Syria’s religious and ethnic minorities. In its statement, HRW called on the authorities to “fully cooperate with and ensure unhindered access to independent monitors.”
Syria’s presidency had announced that an “independent committee” was formed to investigate the killings. The panel is due to hold its first press conference later Tuesday.

Syrian fact-finding committee for sectarian killings says no one above the law
AFP/March 11, 2025
DAMASCUS: A Syrian fact-finding committee investigating sectarian killings during clashes between the army and loyalists of Bashar Assad said on Tuesday that no one was above the law and it would seek the arrest and prosecution of any perpetrators. Pressure has been growing on Syria’s Islamist-led government to investigate after reports by witnesses and a war monitor of the killing of hundreds of civilians in villages where the majority of the population are members of the ousted president’s Alawite sect. “No one is above the law, the committee will relay all the results to the entity that launched it, the presidency, and the judiciary,” the committee’s spokesperson Yasser Farhan said in a televised press conference. The committee was preparing lists of witnesses to interview and potential perpetrators, and would refer any suspects with sufficient evidence against them to the judiciary, Farhan added.The UN human rights office said entire families including women and children were killed in the coastal region as part of a series of sectarian killings by the army against an insurgency by Assad loyalists. Syria’s interim president Ahmed Al-Sharaa told Reuters in an interview on Monday that he could not yet say whether forces from Syria’s defense ministry — which has incorporated former rebel factions under one structure — were involved in the sectarian killings. Asked whether the committee would seek international help to document violations, Farhan said it was “open” to cooperation but would prefer using its own national mechanisms. The violence began to spiral on Thursday, when the authorities said their forces in the coastal region came under attack from fighters aligned with the ousted Assad regime. The Sunni Islamist-led government poured reinforcements into the area to crush what it described as a deadly, well-planned and premeditated assault by remnants of the Assad government. But Sharaa acknowledged to Reuters that some armed groups had entered without prior coordination with the defense ministry.

Erdogan says Syria’s agreement with Kurds will ‘serve peace’
AFP/March 11, 2025
ISTANBUL: An agreement to integrate autonomous Kurdish institutions in Syria’s northeast into the new Syrian national government will “serve peace,” Turkiye’s president said on Tuesday. “The full implementation of the agreement reached yesterday will serve Syria’s security and peace. The winner will be all of our Syrian brothers,” Recep Tayyip Erdogan told a Ramadan fast breaking dinner. Syria’s new authorities under interim President Ahmed Al-Sharaa have sought to disband armed groups and establish government control over the entirety of the country since ousting long-time leader Bashar Assad in December after more than 13 years of civil war. On Monday, the Syrian presidency announced an agreement with the head of the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) to integrate the autonomous Kurdish administration that has governed much of the northeast for the past decade into the national government. The new accord is expected to be implemented by the end of the year. The SDF — seen essential in the fight against Daesh terrorists — is dominated by the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), which Ankara views as an offshoot of the PKK, an outlawed group dominated by ethnic Kurds in Turkiye which has waged a bloody insurgency against the Turkish state since 1984. Turkiye, which has forged close relations with Sharaa, has pressed Syria’s new rulers to address the issue of the YPG’s control over wide parts of Syria. On Tuesday, Erdogan said Turkiye attached “great importance to preserving the territorial integrity and unitary structure of our neighbor Syria.” He added: “We see every effort to cleanse Syria of terrorism as a step in the right direction.” The agreement comes nearly two weeks after a historic call by jailed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) founder Abdullah Ocalan for the militant group to lay down its weapons and disband.

Israel-Gaza war behind record high US anti-Muslim incidents, advocacy group says
Reuters/March 11, 2025
WASHINGTON: Discrimination and attacks against American Muslims and Arabs rose by 7.4 percent in 2024 due to heightened Islamophobia caused by US ally Israel’s war in Gaza and the resulting college campus protests, a Muslim advocacy group said on Tuesday. The Council on American Islamic Relations said it recorded the highest number of anti-Muslim and anti-Arab complaints — 8,658 — in 2024 since it began publishing data in 1996. Most complaints were in the categories of employment discrimination (15.4 percent), immigration and asylum (14.8 percent), education discrimination (9.8 percent) and hate crimes (7.5 percent), according to the CAIR report. Rights advocates have highlighted an increase in Islamophobia, anti-Arab bias and antisemitism since the start of Israel’s devastating assault on Gaza.
The CAIR report also details police and university crackdowns on pro-Palestinian protests and encampments on college campuses. Demonstrators have for months demanded an end to US support for Israel. At the height of college campus demonstrations in the summer of 2024, classes were canceled, some university administrators resigned, and student protesters were suspended and arrested. Human rights and free speech advocates condemned the crackdown on protests which were called disruptive by university administrators. Notable incidents include violent arrests by police of protesters at Columbia University and a mob attack on pro-Palestinian protesters at the University of California, Los Angeles. “For the second year in a row, the US-backed Gaza genocide drove a wave of Islamophobia in the United States,” CAIR said. Israel denies genocide and war crimes accusations. Last month, an Illinois jury found a man guilty of hate crime in an October 2023 fatal stabbing of a 6-year-old Palestinian American boy. Other alarming US incidents since late 2023 include the attempted drowning of a 3-year-old Palestinian American girl in Texas, the stabbing of a Palestinian American man in Texas, the beating of a Muslim man in New York and a Florida shooting of two Israeli visitors whom a suspect mistook to be Palestinians. In recent days, the US government has faced criticism from rights advocates over the arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian graduate student who has played a prominent role in pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University.

Israeli fire kills 8 Palestinians in Gaza Strip, 3 in the occupied West Bank
AP/March 11, 2025
WEST BANK: Israeli fire has killed eight people in the Gaza Strip over the past 24 hours, Palestinian officials said, even as a fragile ceasefire with Hamas has largely held. Israeli strikes have killed dozens of Palestinians who the army says had approached its troops or entered unauthorized areas in violation of the January truce. Israel last week suspended supplies of goods and electricity to the territory of more than 2 million Palestinians as it tries to pressure the militant group to accept an extension of the first phase of their ceasefire. That phase ended March 1. Israel wants Hamas to release half of the remaining hostages in return for a promise to negotiate a lasting truce. Hamas instead wants to start negotiations on the ceasefire’s more difficult second phase, which would see the release of remaining hostages from Gaza, the withdrawal of Israeli forces and a lasting peace. Hamas is believed to have 24 living hostages and the bodies of 35 others.
An Israeli airstrike kills 4 in Gaza
Palestinian first responders say an Israeli airstrike killed four people, including two brothers, in the Gaza Strip. The Civil Defense, which operates under the Hamas-run government, said Tuesday’s strike was carried out near the Netzarim corridor, where Israeli forces had carved out a military zone bisecting the territory before withdrawing from the area as part of a fragile ceasefire. The Israeli military said it carried out an airstrike against a group of militants “engaged in suspicious activity.”The fragile ceasefire has held since it began on Jan. 19, even as Israeli strikes have killed dozens of Palestinians. Israel says it has struck Palestinians who approached its troops, entered unauthorized areas or otherwise violated the terms of the truce. Palestinians say settlers attacked a garage in West Bank
Palestinians say settlers attacked a garage in the occupied West Bank overnight, torching three cars. Rafaat Sabah, the owner of the garage, said the attack overnight was not the first. He said settlers had broken into his garage previously and stolen oil, tools and other things. This time they set fire to cars belonging to his customers, he said. The Israeli military said it was investigating the incident. Marwan Sabah, head of the Umm Safa village council, said settlers have recently brought livestock to graze on village lands with the aim of eventually taking them over. The West Bank has seen a surge in violence, including settler attacks on Palestinians, since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack out of the Gaza Strip ignited the war there. Over 500,000 settlers with Israeli citizenship live in well over 100 settlements across the West Bank, ranging from hilltop outposts to fully-developed suburbs. The territory’s 3 million Palestinians live under Israeli military rule, with the Palestinian Authority administering cities and towns.
3 Palestinians killed by Israeli fire in the West Bank
The Palestinian Health Ministry says three Palestinians, including a 58-year-old woman, were killed by Israeli fire in the volatile West Bank city of Jenin on Tuesday. The Israeli military said troops killed two militants in an exchange of fire in Jenin and arrested 10 others. It said its forces eliminated a third militant who had fired at them during the operation and destroyed two vehicles loaded with weapons. Israel launched a large-scale military operation centered on Jenin shortly after reaching a fragile ceasefire with Hamas in the Gaza Strip in January. Troops have destroyed homes and infrastructure, and tens of thousands of Palestinians have fled their homes across the northern West Bank.

Hamas official says Gaza ceasefire talks have begun in Doha
AFP/March 11, 2025
CAIRO: A senior Hamas official said that a fresh round of Gaza ceasefire talks began on Tuesday in the Qatari capital Doha, with the Palestinian movement approaching the negotiations “positively and responsibly.”“A new round of ceasefire negotiations began today,” Abdul Rahman Shadid said in a statement. “Our movement is dealing with these negotiations positively and responsibly.” Israel has also sent a team of negotiators for talks aimed at extending the fragile ceasefire in Gaza, but has so far not commented on the talks. “We hope that the current round of negotiations leads to tangible progress toward beginning the second phase,” Shadid said. He also expressed hope that US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff would help “initiate negotiations for the second phase of the ceasefire agreement.”“The US administration bears responsibility due to its unwavering support for the occupying (Israeli) government.”The first 42-day phase of the truce deal expired in early March without agreement on subsequent stages meant to secure a lasting end to the war, which erupted after Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack on Israel. There are differing views on how to proceed, with Hamas seeking immediate negotiations for the next phase, while Israel wants to extend the first phase. Hamas has accused Israel of reneging on the ceasefire deal, stating in a statement on Monday that Israel “refuses to commence the second phase, exposing its intentions of evasion and stalling.”Ahead of the current round of talks, Israel halted the supply of electricity to Gaza’s only desalination plant, a move Hamas condemned as “cheap and unacceptable blackmail.”Israel has already stopped aid deliveries to Gaza amid the deadlock over the ceasefire. “Denying the flow of food, medicines, fuel and basic relief means has led to a spike in food prices and a severe shortage of medical supplies, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in Gaza,” Hamas said in a separate statement.
The initial phase of the truce brokered by Qatar, Egypt and the United States began on January 19, and helped reduce hostilities after more than 15 months of relentless fighting that displaced nearly all of Gaza’s 2.4 million residents.
While the fate of the ceasefire remains uncertain, both sides have largely refrained from all-out hostilities. However, in recent days, Israel has conducted daily strikes targeting militants in Gaza. On Tuesday, an Israeli airstrike killed four men in Gaza City, according to the territory’s civil defense agency. The Israeli military said that its air forces had struck “several terrorists engaged in suspicious activity posing a threat to IDF (Israeli) troops.”During the ceasefire’s first phase, 25 living Israeli hostages and eight bodies were exchanged for around 1,800 Palestinians in Israeli custody. Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack led to the deaths of 1,218 people on the Israeli side, most of them civilians, while Israel’s retaliatory campaign has killed at least 48,503 people in Gaza, also mostly civilians, according to data from both sides.
In recent days, US hostages envoy Adam Boehler held unprecedented direct talks with Hamas and said an agreement for releasing more captives was expected “in the coming weeks.”But US Secretary of State Marco Rubio talked down the prospects of a breakthrough from those discussions. “That was a one-off situation in which our special envoy for hostages, whose job it is to get people released, had an opportunity to talk directly to someone who has control over these people and was given permission and encouraged to do so,” Rubio told journalists late on Monday in Jeddah. “It hasn’t borne fruit. But it... doesn’t mean he was wrong to try.”

Israel’s halt to food and aid deliveries worsens Gaza conditions
Reuters/March 11, 2025
CAIRO: Israel’s suspension of goods entering Gaza is taking a toll on the Palestinian enclave, with some bakeries closing and food prices rising, while a cut in the electricity supply could deprive people of clean water, Palestinian officials said. The suspension, which Israel said was aimed at pressuring militant group Hamas in ceasefire talks, applies to food, medicine and fuel imports. The UN Palestinian refugees agency UNRWA said the decision to halt humanitarian aid threatens the lives of civilians exhausted by 17 months of “brutal” war. Most of Gaza’s 2.3 million people were dependent on aid, it said. Hamas describes the measure as “collective punishment” and insisted it will not be pushed into making concessions. Abdel-Nasser Al-Ajrami, head of the Gaza bakers’ union, told Reuters that six out of the 22 bakeries still able to operate in the enclave had already shut after they ran out of cooking gas. “The remaining bakeries may close down in a week or so should they run out of diesel or flour, unless the crossing is reopened to allow the goods to flow,” he said. The bakeries were already unable to meet the needs of the people, he said. Israel last week blocked the entry of goods into the territory in a standoff over a truce that has halted fighting for the past seven weeks. The move has led to a hike in prices of essential foods as well as of fuel, forcing many to ration their meals. Displaced from her destroyed house and living in a tent in Khan Younis, 40-year-old Ghada Al-Rakab said she is struggling to secure basic needs. The mother of six bakes some goods for her family and neighbors, sometimes renting out a clay makeshift oven. “What kind of life are we living? No electricity, no water, no life, we don’t even live a proper life. What else is left there in life? May God take us and give us rest,” Al-Rakab said.
’ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH RISKS’
Israel’s onslaught on Gaza has killed more than 48,000 Palestinians since October 2023, according to Gaza health officials, left most of its people destitute and razed much of the territory to the ground. The war was triggered by a Hamas-led cross-border raid into southern Israel in which militants killed 1,200 people and took 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. In Israel’s latest punitive measure, Energy Minister Eli Cohen said on Sunday he had instructed the Israel Electric Corporation not to sell electricity to Gaza in what he described as a means of pressure on Hamas to free hostages.
Israel already cut power supply to Gaza at the war’s start but this move would affect a wastewater treatment plant currently supplied with power, according to the Israeli electricity company. The Palestinian Water Authority said the decision suspended operations at a water desalination plant that produced 18,000 cubic meters of water per day for the population in central and southern areas of Gaza Strip. Mohammad Thabet, the spokesperson of the Gaza power distribution plant, told Reuters the decision will deprive people in those areas of clean and healthy water.
“The decision is catastrophic, municipalities now will be obliged to let sewage water stream into the sea, which may result in environmental and health risks that go beyond the boundaries of Gaza,” Thabet said. All the aid supplies being distributed by the Palestine Red Crescent are dwindling and it is having to ration what remains, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent societies said. “If it is possible to find the basics like eggs and chicken, the prices have rocketed and are out of reach for the majority of people in Gaza,” IFRC spokesperson Tommaso Della Longa said. It is also concerned that a lack of medical supplies and medicines may impact the treatment of patients.
MEDIATORS TRY TO SALVAGE TRUCE
Fighting in Gaza has been halted since January 19 under a truce, and Hamas has exchanged 33 Israeli hostages and five Thais for some 2,000 Palestinian prisoners and detainees. But the truce’s initial 42-day stage has expired and Hamas and Israel remain far apart on broader issues including the postwar governance of Gaza and the future of Hamas itself. Underscoring the fragility of the ceasefire, an Israeli airstrike killed three Palestinians in the Bureij camp in central Gaza Strip, medics said. The Israeli military said the air force struck three individuals in Nuseirat, central Gaza, who were accused of trying to plant explosives. It also said soldiers shot at several militants in Gaza City who were also allegedly attempting to plant explosives. Arab mediators, Egypt and Qatar, and the US are trying to salvage the ceasefire deal. They held talks with Hamas leaders and are set to receive Israeli negotiators in Doha on Monday. Hamas spokesperson Abdel-Latif Al-Qanoua told Reuters on Monday the group was committed to the original phased agreement and expected mediators to “compel” Israel to begin talks on implementing the second stage. Phase two is intended to focus on agreements on the release of remaining hostages and withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza. Israel demands Hamas free the remaining hostages without beginning phase two negotiations.

Boatless in Gaza: using old fridge doors to catch fish
AFP/March 11, 2025
GAZA CITY: Balanced calmly on top of what was once a refrigerator door, fisherman Khaled Habib uses a makeshift paddle to propel himself through the waters of Gaza City’s fishing port. Israeli bombardment over more than 15 months of war has destroyed most of the boats in the harbor, wrecking the fishermen’s means of making a living. “We’re in a very difficult situation today, and struggling with the fishing. There are no fishing boats left. They’ve all been destroyed and tossed on the ground,” said Habib. “I made this ‘boat’ from refrigerator doors and cork — and thankfully it worked.”So he could continue feeding his family, Habib came up with the idea of stuffing cork into old fridge doors to make them buoyant. He covered one side with wood and the other with plastic sheeting to help make the makeshift paddleboard waterproof. Habib also crafted a fishing cage out of wire because of the lack of nets but admitted that his resulting catch was “small.” The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization said in December that the conflict had taken Gaza’s “once thriving fishing sector to the brink of collapse.”“Gaza’s average daily catch between October 2023 to April 2024 dropped to just 7.3 percent of 2022 levels, causing a $17.5 million production loss,” the FAO said. Habib now fishes mainly inside the small port area using dough as bait.
Despite the fragile ceasefire that came into force on Jan. 19, which essentially halted the fighting, Habib said that fishing outside the port is prohibited. “If we go (outside the fishermen’s harbor), the Israeli boats will shoot at us, and that’s a problem we suffer from a lot.”Habib said he catches enough fish to feed his family and tries to help others by selling the rest at an affordable price. After dividing his catch into small plastic bags, the fisherman sells some at the high prices at the harbor market. The first phase of the Gaza truce, which ended on March 1, had enabled the entry of vital food, shelter, and medical assistance into the Palestinian territory. Israel announced on March 2 that it was blocking aid deliveries to Gaza, where Palestinians say they fear food shortages and price hikes. Several other fishermen, particularly the younger generation, have also used the new makeshift floating platforms. Habib sees the homemade paddleboards as having a dual purpose. “If we wanted to raise a new generation to learn how to swim, boats should be made from refrigerator doors, and then everyone would learn how to swim, row, and sail,” he said. “Thank God, now they’ve learned how to swim,” he added, looking over the water at children trying to keep their balance.

Saudi Arabia leads Arab nations in condemning Israel’s Gaza electricity cut
Arab News/AFP/March 11, 2025
RIYADH: Saudi Arabia led other Arab nations Qatar and Jordan in condemning Israel’s decision to cut electricity supply to the war-battered Gaza Strip, calling in separate statements for the international community to take action. Israel announced on Sunday it was disconnecting the only power line to a water desalination plant in Gaza, in an effort to pressure Palestinian militant group Hamas into releasing hostages amid an apparent impasse in truce talks. Saudi Arabia’s foreign ministry expressed “condemnation in the strongest terms of the Israeli occupation authorities’ use of collective punishment against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip by cutting off electricity to the area.”It reiterated its call on the international community to take urgent measures to restore electricity and the flow of aid to the Gaza Strip immediately without conditions or restrictions. The Kingdom “renewed its call to activate international accountability mechanisms for these serious violations,” the statement concluded. A Qatari foreign ministry statement said the Gulf state “strongly condemns the Israeli occupation’s act of cutting electricity to the Gaza Strip, considering it a blatant violation of international humanitarian law.”Jordanian foreign ministry spokesman Sufyan Qudah called the electricity cut “a clear continuation of the policy of starvation and siege imposed by Israel,” about a week after Israeli authorities blocked the entry of aid into Gaza. The United Nations has warned of “dire consequences” for Gaza’s population, while Britain said it was “deeply concerned” by the Israeli move. Saudi Arabia called on the international community to “take urgent actions immediately,” while Qatar also urged “immediate action to provide the necessary protection for the Palestinian people.”Jordan’s Qudah called on the world “to assume its legal and moral responsibilities, and oblige Israel to continue with the ceasefire agreement... restore electricity to Gaza” and reopen border crossings for aid deliveries. Egypt called Israel’s decision a “new violation of international humanitarian law” on Tuesday. In a statement, the Egyptian foreign ministry said the move was part of Israel’s “policies of collective punishment.”Cairo called on the international community to “take the necessary measures to stop these violations.”Israeli negotiators were expected to hold talks with mediators in Qatar, part of efforts to extend a fragile truce since January that has largely halted the war in Gaza, triggered by Hamas’s unprecedented attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.

The EU wants to increase deportations and supports ‘return hubs’ in third countries
AP/March 11, 2025
STRASBOURG, France: The European Union wants to increase deportations and is opening the way for “return hubs” to be set up in third countries for rejected asylum-seekers, according to a new migration proposal unveiled Tuesday. Only 20 percent of people with a deportation order are effectively removed from EU territory, according to the European Commission, which presented the “European System for Returns” in Strasbourg as a potential solution. The proposal aims to set a standard for all 27 members of the bloc and allow national authorities from one country to enforce the deportation order issued by another. Such rules were missing from the EU’s migration and asylum pact approved last year. “The European system needs to be clear that when someone is issued a return decision they are being told to leave, not just the country but the entire European Union,” said Magnus Brunner, the EU’s commissioner for migration, who called the current 20 percent removal rate unacceptable. “Any figure would be an improvement, but we don’t want to pin down any specific figures,” he added. For the proposal to work, however, the EU needs to get countries of origin to readmit their citizens. Brunner acknowledged that the commission and member states are still working on improving that. The “return hubs,” a euphemism for deportation centers, would apply only to people whose asylum requests have been rejected and exclude unaccompanied minors, Brunner said. He added that any future deal would have to include safeguards to ensure international law and human rights are respected. The EU wouldn’t set up or manage such centers, which could be in Europe or elsewhere, but would create the legal framework to allow states to negotiate with non-EU countries willing to take the rejected asylum-seekers. This differs from the existing but so-far ineffective deal signed by Italy with Albania to offshore the asylum processing of migrants rescued at sea. At the time, the contentious plan was applauded by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen as an “out-of-the-box” solution to manage irregular migration but courts in Italy have repeatedly blocked it. Brunner reiterated the need for “innovative” solutions to manage irregular migration and asylum — a highly politicized issue that the far right has used across the continent to gain votes. While the potential “return hubs” were the most striking aspect of the proposal, it also included stricter punishments for those absconding deportations and extends the detention of rejected asylum-seekers posing a flight or security risk from 18 months to 24 months. The commission did not provide any data on how many people currently pose a “security risk.”European Commission Executive Vice President Henna Virkkunen, who presented the new migration reform alongside Brunner, said the proposal was tougher but fair and would encourage migrants to leave voluntarily before they had to be forcibly removed. Migrant rights groups criticized the proposed reform saying it undermined the right to asylum and would lead to more detentions. “We can likely expect more people being locked up in immigration detention centers across Europe, families separated and people sent to countries they don’t even know,” said Silvia Carta of the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants. The proposal will now be sent to the European Parliament and member states for approval.

Ukraine agrees to 30-day ceasefire with Russia, US to resume intelligence sharing after Jeddah talks
Arab News/AP/March 11, 2025
JEDDAH: Talks between the US and Ukraine aimed at ending the war with Russia took place in Jeddah on Tuesday, Saudi Press Agency reported. The administration of US President Donald Trump agreed to lift its suspension of military aid and intelligence sharing for Ukraine, and Kyiv signaled that it was open to a 30-day ceasefire in the war with Russia, pending Moscow’s agreement, American and Ukrainian officials said following the talks. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the US would present the ceasefire offer to the Kremlin. “We’re going to tell them this is what’s on the table. Ukraine is ready to stop shooting and start talking. And now it’ll be up to them to say yes or no,” Rubio said. The talks were held at the direction of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and took place in the presence of the Kingdom’s Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan and Minister of State and Member of the Council of Ministers Musaed bin Mohammed Al-Aiban. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan and Minister of State and Member of the Council of Ministers Musaed bin Mohammed Al-Aiban. (SPA) The US was represented by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, while Ukraine was represented by the head of the Ukrainian presidential office Andriy Yermak, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha, and Defense Minister Rustem Umerov.
The talks come within the Kingdom’s efforts to resolve the crisis in Ukraine, thanks to its balanced relations with various parties, and as part of its efforts to enhance global security and peace, SPA said. They are based on Saudi Arabia’s belief in the importance of adhering to international laws and norms, and that dialogue is the most successful means of resolving disputes and bringing viewpoints closer together, SPA added. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky left the Kingdom early on Tuesday morning after meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman during a brief visit before the talks started. After the meeting, Saudi Arabia expressed hope that efforts would succeed in ending the crisis in Ukraine in line with international law and the United Nations Charter, including respect for the principles of sovereignty and internationally recognized borders. Kyiv expressed appreciation for Riyadh’s efforts in hosting talks between Ukraine and the US, and for humanitarian and development aid provided by the Kingdom. Here follows the full text of the joint US-Ukrainian statement that was published after bilateral talks in Saudi Arabia’s Jeddah on Tuesday:
Today in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia – under the gracious hospitality of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman – the United States and Ukraine took important steps toward restoring durable peace for Ukraine. Representatives of both nations praised the bravery of the Ukrainian people in defense of their nation and agreed that now is the time to begin a process toward lasting peace. The Ukrainian delegation reiterated the Ukrainian people’s strong gratitude to President Trump, the US Congress, and the people of the United States for making possible meaningful progress toward peace. Ukraine expressed readiness to accept the US proposal to enact an immediate, interim 30-day ceasefire, which can be extended by mutual agreement of the parties, and which is subject to acceptance and concurrent implementation by the Russian Federation. The United States will communicate to Russia that Russian reciprocity is the key to achieving peace. The United States will immediately lift the pause on intelligence sharing and resume security assistance to Ukraine. The delegations also discussed the importance of humanitarian relief efforts as part of the peace process, particularly during the above-mentioned ceasefire, including the exchange of prisoners of war, the release of civilian detainees, and the return of forcibly transferred Ukrainian children. Both delegations agreed to name their negotiating teams and immediately begin negotiations toward an enduring peace that provides for Ukraine’s long-term security. The United States committed to discussing these specific proposals with representatives from Russia. The Ukrainian delegation reiterated that European partners shall be involved in the peace process. Lastly, both countries’ presidents agreed to conclude as soon as possible a comprehensive agreement for developing Ukraine’s critical mineral resources to expand Ukraine’s economy and guarantee Ukraine’s long-term prosperity and security.

The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources on March 11-12/2025
Do Not Be Fooled By Hamas's 'Long-Term Ceasefire' Ploy
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/March 11, 2025
As part of the deception, according to the IDF report, Hamas was working to convince Israel that it was interested in calm and was working for economic prosperity. The IDF investigation concluded that Hamas had planned the October 7 attack for more than 10 years. Today, everyone knows that the talk about a long-term truce was nothing but a smokescreen to conceal Hamas's real intention of launching its October 7 attack against Israel. Hamas anyway is not known for honoring ceasefire agreements.... On July 26, 2014, Hamas announced a 24-hour humanitarian ceasefire at 14.00. Hamas violated its own ceasefire a short time later. For Hamas, a hudna is a temporary break from war -- it does not indicate a desire to end it and achieve peace. While Hamas was talking, for ten years before October 7, 2023, about its desire to reach a long-term truce, it was busy preparing for the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.
It is plainly uninformed to believe that Hamas would ever lay down its weapons and agree to end its jihad (holy war) against Israel.
The Trump administration is advised to listen to what Hamas leaders say in Arabic to their own people, and not what they tell US officials during secret meetings in Qatar. Earlier this month, for instance, senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri, speaking in Arabic, reassured his people that his group rejects demands by Israel and the US to disarm...A ceasefire deal will allow Hamas to remain in power and prepare more massacres against Israel. The only solution for the current crisis is for Hamas to disarm, cede control over the Gaza Strip and leave the Palestinian arena.
For Hamas, a hudna is a temporary break from war -- it does not indicate a desire to end it and achieve peace. While Hamas was talking, for ten years before October 7, 2023, about its desire to reach a long-term truce, it was busy preparing for the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. It is plainly uninformed to believe that Hamas would ever lay down its weapons and agree to end its jihad (holy war) against Israel. A ceasefire deal will allow Hamas to remain in power and prepare more massacres against Israel. Pictured: Hamas terrorists in Gaza City on January 25, 2025. (Photo by Abood Abusalama/Middle East Images via AFP)
Adam Boehler, the US Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs, stated on March 9 that he did not rule out the possibility of reaching a long-term truce between Israel and the Iran-backed Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in the Gaza Strip. He also did not rule out the possibility that Hamas would agree to lay down its weapons, saying:
"I think there's an answer here, and I think the answer is that Hamas lays down their arms. We exchange prisoners, and they [Hamas] go into a long-term truce, where they don't fight, they're not part of any political party, and that gives us lots of cooling-off time."Boehler's statements came after the American media outlet Axios revealed that the Trump administration has been holding direct talks with Hamas over the release of US hostages held in the Gaza Strip and the possibility of a broader deal to end the war, which erupted on October 7, 2023 when thousands of Hamas terrorists and ordinary Palestinians invaded Israel, murdered some 1,200 Israelis and wounded thousands others. Another 251 people were kidnapped to the Gaza Strip. Fifty-nine hostages are still being held by Hamas, half of whom may no longer be alive.
While the Trump administration deserves enormous appreciation for its sincere efforts to secure the release of the Israeli and American hostages, it must be careful not to allow itself to be duped by Hamas.
For many years, Israel believed that Hamas was not interested in an all-out war with Israel and was working for economic prosperity in the Gaza Strip. Recently, when the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) published the results of an investigation into the October 7 massacre, they showed how Hamas managed to deceive Israel into thinking that the terrorist group was not interested in another round of fighting. As part of the deception, according to the IDF report, Hamas was working to convince Israel that it was interested in calm and was working for economic prosperity. The IDF investigation concluded that Hamas had planned the October 7 attack for more than 10 years.
Hamas's deception included sending messages to Israel indicating interest in a long-term truce. According to one report:
"Hamas recently sent a series of messages to Israel indicating interest in a long-term ceasefire lasting for several years... Senior Hamas officials met with Western diplomats about the ceasefire, and also reached a number of understandings about the character of the ceasefire, also known as tahdiyya [calm]."
In 2018, Egypt was reported to be finalizing details of a long-term truce deal between Israel and Hamas. An Egyptian security source was quoted as saying that "the period of calm will be for one year, during which contacts will be held to extend it for another four years."Today, everyone knows that the talk about a long-term truce was nothing but a smokescreen to conceal Hamas's real intention of launching its October 7 attack against Israel. Hamas anyway is not known for honoring ceasefire agreements. During the past 15 years, several truces reached between Hamas and Israel collapsed after the terrorist group violated them, including by test-firing rockets toward the sea, including those with a notably long range. On July 15, 2014, Israel accepted a ceasefire initiated by Egypt and stopped all fire. However, Hamas terrorists then fired more than 50 rockets at Israeli communities. On July 17, Israel agreed to a five-hour humanitarian ceasefire. Hamas rejected it and fired rockets, including at the city of Beersheba. On July 20, Israel approved a two-hour medical and humanitarian window in the area of Shejaiya in the Gaza Strip, following an International Committee of the Red Cross request. Forty minutes after the ceasefire went into effect, Hamas violated it. Nevertheless, Israel implemented the ceasefire, even extending it for two more hours. On July 26, 2014, Hamas announced a 24-hour humanitarian ceasefire at 14.00. Hamas violated its own ceasefire a short time later.
Some Westerners mistakenly think that Hamas's talk about a hudna (armistice or truce) implies that the terrorist group seeks peace with Israel. Yet, hudna has another meaning for many Muslims, particularly extremists. The roots of hudna can be traced back to the Treaty of Hudaybiyya in 628 CE, a pivotal agreement between prophet Mohammed and the Quraysh tribe of Mecca. This treaty allowed Muslims to perform pilgrimage to Mecca and established a truce between the two parties for 10 years. Over the following two years, however, Mohammed rearmed, broke the hudna and launched a full conquest of Mecca.
For Hamas, a hudna is a temporary break from war -- it does not indicate a desire to end it and achieve peace. While Hamas was talking, for ten years before October 7, 2023, about its desire to reach a long-term truce, it was busy preparing for the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.
It is plainly uninformed to believe that Hamas would ever lay down its weapons and agree to end its jihad (holy war) against Israel.
The Trump administration is advised to listen to what Hamas leaders say in Arabic to their own people, and not what they tell US officials during secret meetings in Qatar. Earlier this month, for instance, senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri, speaking in Arabic, reassured his people that his group rejects demands by Israel and the US to disarm, emphasizing:
"The right to resistance is nonnegotiable. The weapons of the resistance are a red line, and we won't exchange it for reconstruction [of the Gaza Strip] and humanitarian aid."
The assumption that a long-term ceasefire would lead to "cooling-off time" is misguided. As in the past, Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups will exploit any period of calm to rearm, regroup and resupply.
In the past, Hamas leaders also met with Western officials, but that did not prevent them from pursuing their jihad against Israel. In the past, some Hamas officials also mentioned the possibility of reaching a long-term truce with Israel, but that feint did not stop the terrorist group from firing rockets toward Israeli towns and cities or preparing the October 7 massacre.
A ceasefire deal will allow Hamas to remain in power and prepare more massacres against Israel. The only solution for the current crisis is for Hamas to disarm, cede control over the Gaza Strip and leave the Palestinian arena.
**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.

Making Real The New Pivot Toward The Western Hemisphere
Amb. Alberto M. Fernandez/MEMRI Daily Brief No. 736/March 11/2025
Suppose you announced you were pivoting toward a different direction, stopped in mid pivot and wound up right back where you were in the first place? That is what happened with the Obama Administration's much-heralded Pivot to Asia 15 years ago. This meant East Asia and the Pacific (Hillary Clinton wrote about America's coming "Pacific Century") but the Obama people spent a lot of time right back where they started – focused on the Middle East and Europe. Those were the years of the failed nuclear deal with Iran, of the rise of the Islamic State and of #UnitedforUkraine.
Today the incoming second Trump Administration talks much of a pivot to the Americas, from Greenland to Argentina. This is a refreshing and much needed refocus and was reinforced by Secretary of State Marco Rubio's first foreign trip, which was to Central America and the Caribbean.[1] President Trump has publicly engaged, at least rhetorically, in the early days of the Administration, on Greenland, Canada, Mexico, Panama, Colombia, and Venezuela. In 2001, Colin Powell's and George W. Bush's first foreign junket was to Mexico but that Administration wound up spending most of its time focused on the Middle East and the Global War on Terrorism. Latin America was forgotten.
In the early days of this administration, Trump and Rubio find themselves in a familiar place, spending a lot of time and energy on Europe and the Middle East as they try to stamp out interminable wars begun under the previous Democratic government. Can they really pivot – to the Americas and to Asia – as they want and what could they hope to accomplish?
The first thing that must be said is that a true pivot away from the old and to new horizons will require ruthless, iron discipline. The American "Empire" is constantly tempted to do too much, to be dragged into fixing whatever becomes the trendy cause, usually far from our shores.
Secondly, that discipline will not only require focusing away from regional distractions but focusing toward actual concrete goals that can be launched or achieved in the short to mid-term. Is the policy to be to build a smaller Fortress America (the USA alone) or a bigger Fortress Western Hemisphere, or both? Can a focus be maintained on achieving certainly tangible outcomes rather than talking or wishing them to happen? For example, how can the United States acquire Greenland, what are the practical steps to do so – rather than talking about acquiring Greenland?[2]
Some changes can be reversed but take time. Building trust takes time and real diplomacy, restoring commercial ties takes nurturing mutually beneficial relationships. China, for example, has steadily increased its trade and economic investment in Latin America over the past 25 years. While the United States is still the main trading partner of Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean Basin, it has lost ground to China in South America. Chinese trade in goods and services (from only $12 billion in 2000 to $450 billion in 2023) and foreign investment in the hemisphere have soared over the past quarter century. China replaced the United States as Brazil's main trading partner in 2009. Chinese savvy has been matched by declines in American manufacturing and investment over those same years. To increase trade, you have to have something to trade with. Reviving American manufacturing and our industrial base, as the Trump Administration wants to do, is a sure way to strengthen economic ties with our neighbors.[3]
As far as politics in the hemisphere is concerned, the United States has a golden opportunity to forge constructive ties with regional right-of-center parties. In 1990, left-wing parties in the Americas (the U.S. Democratic Socialists of America became associate members in 2023) organized themselves under the so-called São Paulo Forum (FSP).[4] FSP members range from left-wing democratic parties to the ruling dictatorships in Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. In 2020, the right-wing Spanish Vox party launched the Madrid Charter (or Madrid Forum) as an effort to begin to try to counter the influence of the left in the hemisphere.[5] Cooperation with or parallel efforts complimentary to the Madrid Charter makes sense for U.S. foreign policy.
And while both Mexico and Brazil currently have left-wing more-or-less democratic governments, the United States faces the challenge of virulently anti-U.S. leftist dictatorial regimes in Havana, Managua, and Caracas – all three allies of Russia, China, and Iran. But they are not the same. The Cuban Communist regime has never been as weak as it is today. If it survives intact for the next four years, that will have been a failure of U.S. foreign policy. While Venezuela is an economic and political basket case and a threat to the U.S. ruled by narco-leftists, it is a relatively large country, a tougher nut to crack. A U.S. effort to radically change the trajectory of the smaller, weaker regimes in Cuba and Nicaragua is overdue. They are the low-hanging fruit of the left in the Americas and ripe for the plucking.
If commerce and politics are two key areas in a pivot to the Americas, counter-terrorism should be a third. For too long, Iran and its catspaw Lebanese Hezbollah have had too much room to maneuver in Latin America.[6] U.S. policy should move aggressively to weaken Iran's subversive efforts and to make sure that Hezbollah is uniformly treated in the hemisphere, not just as criminals, but as the terrorist group that it is.[7]
Something which should have been logical and relatively easy – a close relationship with those countries and regions closest to us – was made difficult because we weakened ourselves, diluted our internal strength and focused too much and too long on distant foreign misadventures of marginal benefit to us. Time to change, to make the Americas great again.
*Alberto M. Fernandez is Vice President of MEMRI. He also served as a U.S. diplomat in Guatemala, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic.
[1] Miamiherald.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/andres-oppenheimer/article299114840.html, January 26, 2025.
[2] Nationalgeographic.com/history/article/greenland-us-purchase-history-wwii, accessed March 10, 2025.
[3] Whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/03/president-trump-is-putting-american-workers-first-and-bringing-back-american-manufacturing, March 4, 2025.
[4] Mesaredonda.cubadebate.cu/noticias/2018/07/17/que-es-el-foro-de-sao-paulo-y-cuales-son-sus-antecedentes, July 17, 2018.
[5] Fundaciondisenso.org/carta-de-madrid-en-defensa-de-la-libertad-y-la-democracia-en-la-iberosfera, October 26, 2020.
[6] See MEMRI Daily Brief No. 291 Iran's Hardy Spanish Media Mole, January 30, 2021.
[7] Jpost.com/international/article-845343, March 9, 2025.

No negotiations before total Iranian nuclear rollback
Mark Dubowitz & Jacob Nagel/The Jerusalem Post/March 11/2025
Any talk of negotiating a new nuclear agreement—before Iran meets strict preconditions—is a dangerous mistake.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington marked an important moment in US-Israel relations. As the first foreign leader received by President Trump in this new phase of his presidency, Netanyahu was welcomed with high honors, reminiscent of their 2017 meeting. While much of the public focus was on Gaza, the most critical discussions behind closed doors centered on the Iranian threat—the regime’s nuclear ambitions, its regional aggression, and its sponsorship of terrorism.
Though the public statements suggested a broad consensus between Washington and Jerusalem on Iran, potentially troubling developments have emerged. On Friday, Trump confirmed to Fox News that he had written a letter to Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei offering negotiations, a letter that the Iranian leader rejected at this stage. Trump warned Iran that it can either “make a deal” with the US or face the US “militarily. Meanwhile, there is a dialogue between the United States and Russia about the need to open negotiations on a new nuclear deal, with Iran.
These are tough words. But any talk of negotiating a new nuclear agreement—before Iran meets strict preconditions—is a dangerous mistake. The focus must not be on what a future agreement might look like, but on what Iran must do before any talks begin. This was the fatal flaw of the nuclear negotiations under Obama. Western negotiators began with demands for zero enrichment mandated by multiple UN Security Council resolutions and ended up surrendering to Tehran an industrial-size enrichment capability that would lead to rapid nuclear weapons breakout over time along with hundreds of billions of dollars in sanctions relief.
Violation of agreement
For years, Iran has systematically violated international agreements, deceived inspectors, and developed nuclear capabilities under the cover of diplomacy. A nuclear deal that merely attempts to improve on the JCPOA—without addressing Iran’s fundamental nuclear infrastructure—will lead to another disaster.
Any agreement must comprehensively dismantle all three pillars of Iran’s nuclear program: fissile material production – Iran must completely eliminate its stockpiles of enriched uranium, destroy its centrifuges, and shut down all conversion and enrichment facilities; weaponization – Iran must halt all weapon design and development activities, fully disclose past work, and dismantle research centers working on nuclear warhead technology; and delivery systems– Iran’s ballistic missile program, which is designed for nuclear payloads, must be stopped, with clear restrictions and verifiable enforcement mechanisms.
Critically, Iran must not be allowed to retain any nuclear capabilities on its soil. The world made this mistake once with the JCPOA, granting Tehran legitimacy while it continued developing its weapons program in secret. The only acceptable outcome is Iran’s complete nuclear rollback, enforced by intrusive inspections. Tehran can have a civilian nuclear energy program without uranium enrichment, advanced centrifuges or plutonium reprocessing. It can buy fuel rods from abroad like over 20 other countries do to power its existing nuclear reactor and any additional others it plans to build. But all must be fully proliferation proof.
Given the high likelihood that Iran will reject such preconditions to start a negotiation process, Israel must prepare for a large-scale campaign to neutralize the Iranian nuclear threat. This should ideally be done in full cooperation with the United States. The strategic priority must be clear: First, eliminate Iran’s weaponization activities and its stockpiled enriched uranium. Then, enrichment facilities like Natanz and Fordow will be dismantled and destroyed.
Destroying nuclear sites without addressing weaponization would be a mistake. Iran’s extensive work on warhead design, combined with its existing uranium stockpile and advanced centrifuges, would enable it to recover quickly—even demand international legitimacy for its program after an attack.
The responsibility of countering Iran’s nuclear ambitions now falls on Israel’s 24th Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir. He carries the weight of ensuring that Iran’s nuclear threat is neutralized before it reaches the point of no return. The Israeli people stand behind him, and the government must ensure that he has all the necessary resources to carry out this mission effectively.
At the same time, full cooperation with the United States is essential. While Israel must be prepared to act alone, if necessary, an American-Israeli partnership significantly strengthens deterrence and operational capabilities. Washington and Jerusalem must work together to remove the most dangerous threat to Israel’s existence. The time for diplomacy ended the moment Iran violated its commitments and raced toward nuclear breakout. The last thing President Trump should want is to be compared to Barack Obama, whose nuclear deal enabled Iran’s nuclear and regional aggression. The lesson from 2015 is clear: No more half-measures, no more bad deals, and no negotiations until Iran commits to completely dismantling its nuclear program.
**Brig. Gen. (res.) Jacob Nagel is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and a professor at Technion. He served as National Security Advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and as acting head of the National Security Council. Mark Dubowitz is FDD’s chief executive and an expert on Iran’s nuclear program and sanctions. In 2019, he was sanctioned by Iran.

Arab world should not ignore increasing Islamophobia in US
Ray Hanania/Arab News/March 11, 2025
Trends show a rise in terms of both Islamophobia and antisemitism, but in America more concern is expressed for the latter, often exaggerated by politically weaponized pro-Israel agendas and growing animosity toward Arabs. Although this may seem to only be a problem for Arabs and Muslims in America, it is actually an early warning sign that could portend long-term problems for these communities worldwide. The White House and Congress have recently stepped up efforts to punish pro-Palestinian student protesters by denying them their constitutional right to free speech when they express legitimate criticism of Israeli violence against Muslims and Christians in the Gaza Strip. President Donald Trump, with the backing of the pro-Israel Congress, in January signed an executive order to “combat antisemitism,” calling for tougher action on colleges.
Last week, for example, the federal government cut $400 million in grants that were due to Columbia University, one of the nation’s preeminent educational institutions, because students there protested against Israel’s indiscriminate killing of women and children in the Gaza Strip.
Other universities are also being targeted, such as the prestigious DePaul University in Chicago, which was founded by Vincentians, a Catholic organization that helps the poor. Investigations have been launched into four other universities for allegations of tolerating antisemitism, including Northwestern University in suburban Chicago and the University of California at Berkeley, which has often been identified as a leader in free speech. Also targeted are Portland State University in Oregon and the University of Minnesota.
The campaign against pro-Palestinian protests was also augmented when the Anti-Defamation League — a political organization that conflates criticism of Israel’s government with hatred of Jews — last month released the results of a survey that purports to show a rise in antisemitism.
This is not a fight against antisemitism. Instead, it is the augmentation of an unconstitutional political campaign to silence supporters of Palestinian rights.
Ignored in all of this is the fact that hatred targeting Arabs in America is not only at an all-time high, but it continues unabated and unaddressed by the White House or Congress. It is a new trend to criticize anything Palestinian while defending everything Israeli. It does not matter that Israel is a foreign country that shields its war crimes behind the false veil of weaponized antisemitism.
The American news media is complicit, reporting on every instance of alleged antisemitism in lengthy and detailed reports, while marginalizing stories on the increase in Islamophobia and ignoring instances of racism against Arabs.
All this is a result of how “hate” has become politicized.
Democrats in Congress last month reintroduced a bill known as the Combating International Islamophobia Act, which has already been ignored by Republicans and the White House. If approved, the State Department would be required to create a special envoy to monitor anti-Muslim bigotry globally. One of the sponsors of the bill is a prominent Jewish member of Congress, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, who has taken a more moderate approach to the Middle East conflict than her Republican rivals.
In fact, concerns about rising Islamophobia have been more prominent elsewhere in the world than in America, where so many anti-Muslim incidents have occurred. One of the leaders in warning about the “alarming rise” in Islamophobia has been the UN, attracting criticism from Israel, the White House and Congress. The ADL has consistently used accusations of antisemitism to respond to rising expressions of concern by UN officials over the increasing Israeli violence against Palestinians.
In contrast to the US, the British government last month created a working group to provide it with a working definition of Islamophobia, while cautioning that confronting anti-Muslim hate “must be compatible with the unchanging right of British citizens to exercise freedom of speech and expression.” This is the exact opposite approach being taken by Congress and the White House, which is calling for stronger measures to block protests against Israel’s government policies.
These changes in how the West views the hatred of individuals because of their race or religion are fueling the political activism that is undermining the international rule of law and empowering those who wish to silence those who speak out against favored political policies or favored foreign governments.
Unable to hear both sides fairly, the public is likely to embrace the distorted view that essentially makes Islamophobia more acceptable. It may not appear to be a problem for the Arab world today, but it is. These policies, which augment and broaden antisemitism to include political issues in defense of Israel and that are unrelated to hate, are marginalizing the growing hatred of Muslims. The political movement to weaponize anti-Muslim sentiment in America will skew the public’s perception of the issue. Unable to hear both sides fairly, the public is likely to embrace the distorted view that essentially makes Islamophobia more acceptable. The Arab and Muslim worlds really need to make a greater effort to speak out on the issues of Islamophobia and anti-Arab racism. So far, expressions of concern have not been matched by programs or funding to educate the public and push back against the rising hatred. For the region, it may not seem important that Islamophobia is being weaponized and empowered in America in both obvious and subtle ways, but it will result in long-term consequences for the Middle Eastern countries that may be hoping for improved relations with America and the West.
The Arab world should be more vocal in defending the rights of pro-Palestinian protesters at American universities and colleges or face a future of growing animosity among Americans toward the Middle East.
**Ray Hanania is an award-winning former Chicago City Hall political reporter and columnist. He can be reached on his personal website at www.Hanania.com. X: @RayHanania

How can Al-Sharaa prevent the overthrow of his regime?
Abdulrahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Al-Awsat,/March 11, 2025
It is rare to hear of a regime in our time that has triumphed and treated its followers and affiliates with nobility and tolerance, as we have seen with Ahmad Al-Sharaa in the Syrian Arab Republic. In Iraq, the Baathists dragged communists through the streets and, before them, the communists participated in the extermination of monarchists. The Americans pursued the remnants of Saddam Hussein’s regime and dismissed half a million people associated with him. In Syria itself, Salah Jadid hanged nationalists, only to be overthrown by Hafez Assad, who then buried thousands of Hama’s residents alive as collective punishment for a faction’s rebellion. His son, Bashar, followed suit, digging mass graves and filling prisons. The UN archived tens of thousands of images smuggled out of the country by a forensic doctor, making it the largest documented case of murder and torture in history.
Unfortunately, wars bring out deep-seated grudges and vendettas. However, to his credit, the new Syrian ruler’s first message upon entering Damascus was one of reassurance to the Alawites before anyone else, along with other minorities and those who had worked with the regime, excluding those involved in murder and torture. We witnessed a swift acceptance of the new regime.
The recent armed rebellion in the coastal region is not surprising; it was expected after the fall of a regime that had ruled for half a century. Transition requires wisdom, patience, inclusion and communication — it cannot be managed by force alone.
To his credit, the new Syrian ruler’s first message upon entering Damascus was one of reassurance to the Alawites. Yet, there are forces that will not stop destabilizing the situation and fueling public distrust against the new regime — those who lost power, as well as regional regimes that suffered from Assad’s downfall, such as Iran and its militias in Iraq and Lebanon. There are various factions — Sunni, Christian and Alawite — that supported Assad’s regime and lost their privileges with his fall and they will work against Damascus today. The narrative of hostility toward the Alawites is specifically being pushed by remnants of the deposed regime to provoke nearly 2 million Alawites into siding with them. Even fleeing figures from Assad’s regime, like Rami Makhlouf, are seeking reconciliation.
This crisis tests the new regime’s leadership. When it was merely an armed militia in Idlib, its responsibility for its fighters’ actions was limited. Today, it is the state and it must not let its enemies drag it into the same trench as the fallen regime, becoming another sectarian and violent entity that resorts to force instead of politics. Most Arab states rushed to express solidarity with the Damascus government, sending a clear message to the Syrian people about where they stand. This political stance is crucial for the international community to hear. However, Damascus faces a difficult road ahead, with challenges that could last for years. Al-Sharaa cannot fight multiple wars simultaneously, such as confronting both Israel and Iran — no state has ever done so and succeeded.
His government must therefore understand Israel’s intentions, or at least its expectations, as seen in its support for the Druze against what it describes as oppression by Damascus. For half a century, Israel tolerated — even protected — the Assad regime, until Bashar granted Iran military privileges, prompting Israel to turn against him. Since taking office, Al-Sharaa has been aware of these geopolitical realities and has stated that he does not intend to enter conflicts with his neighbors, including Israel.
The president’s leadership is critical in restraining both his allies and opponents, preventing political, ideological and military clashes
It is important to remember that all states bordering Israel have signed agreements or understandings with it. Al-Sharaa will be forced to either reach an understanding with Israel or Iran — facing both adversaries at once is impossible.
Domestically, we recognize the conflicting pressures facing President Al-Sharaa. Syrians who suffered under the previous regime demand exclusion and sectarian revenge. Others seek full federalization, a demand difficult to achieve during wartime, as it risks leading to separatism. Here, the president’s leadership is critical in restraining both his allies and opponents, preventing political, ideological and military clashes. In the end, Al-Sharaa’s regime will succeed in resisting attempts to overthrow it and in unifying Syria while confronting the rebels. But can he shorten the timescale and reduce the losses?

The struggle in Syria … the struggle over Syria
Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al-Awsat/March 11, 2025
Safeguarding victory is often more difficult than achieving it.
That is self-evident, all the more so when powers and factions are eagerly seeking to overturn the shifts we saw in Syria a few months ago.
These actors were caught off-guard by the pace at which the shift unfolded, especially the collapse of the security apparatus in major Syrian cities, one after another. Nonetheless, anyone who understands the fabric of Syrian society recognized, at the time, that multiple actors, both domestic and foreign, had not yet had their final say.
This is not a fleeting phase but is rather the legacy of 54 years of iron-fisted rule, the “deep state” it built, systematic brainwashing and the networks of vested interests and transnational mutual accommodations.
On the other hand, Syria is not, as we are constantly reminded, an isolated island. It is the heart of the Middle East, which is the heart of the world.
Syria is a cradle of civilization, culture and religion — it is a crossroads of trade and military confrontation, as well as the West’s window to the East and the East’s gateway to the West. It gave the world the alphabet. Religions whose faithful span the globe emerged in Syria. It has produced emperors, while empires have relied on the bounty of its land. It has played a role in most of the major events that have shaped the fate of humanity: from the Islamic conquests and the Crusades to the rise and fall of the Ottoman Empire and the world order established after the First World War. That world order, however, left fragmentation (partition) in the Levant, first through the Sykes-Picot Agreement and second with the Balfour Declaration. As we can see today, we are still dealing with the repercussions of these two major turning points.
Syria is not, as we are constantly reminded, an isolated island. It is the heart of the Middle East, which is the heart of the world
At this critical moment, Syria is undergoing a difficult ordeal that many had anticipated.
First, the state of shock that facilitated the collapse of the Assad regime and the dominance of regional patron Iran’s “Velayat-e Faqih” regime has faded. Tehran has regained its footing and begun to retaliate, undermining the change in Syria. There are many reasons behind its effort to destabilize the country, chief among them proving that it remains a powerful regional player following the blows it received at the hands of Israel in Lebanon. Israel’s blows sought to put a ceiling on Iran’s ambitions for regional dominance, which had come at the expense of the other two sides of the triangle: Israel and Turkiye.
Here, it is worth recalling, once again, that neither Tel Aviv nor Washington has an interest in removing Tehran’s regime. The well-known reasons include Tehran’s role in impeding Palestinian unity, undermining Palestinian resistance and thwarting the state project in Lebanon.
Second, Israel has never, even for a moment, forgotten its geopolitical priorities. Foremost among them is realizing its ancient messianic dream of dominating the land that stretches from the Euphrates to the Nile. This dream emboldens the most extreme Torah adherents, racists and advocates of population transfer, pushing them to impose their will on a region that has become exhausted, dazed and confused.
Exploiting Palestinian divisions is crucial to achieving this end. Facilitated and fostered by the regime in Tehran, this division is a steppingstone toward the displacement of Palestinians, first from Gaza and then from the West Bank. And who knows whether the Palestinian citizens of Israel will be spared from this wave of displacement at a time when the US president is not only signing a blank check to the Israelis, but also seeking to go further, appointing political and diplomatic officials with the goal of further fragmenting the region.
Furthermore, Syria and its mosaic-like social fabric has long been a point of interest for Israeli expansionists, who see potential for exploitation. For quite some time now, Tel Aviv has been leveraging every doubt and fear to convince weak-spirited individuals in Syria and Lebanon that they need protection from their own compatriots — those who share their homeland, identity and fate.
Accordingly, while Iran, which had long-standing and deep ties to the Assad regime, led efforts to overturn the shift in Syria from the coast (Latakia and Tartous) by stirring fear in the hearts of Alawite communities, Israel took the initiative in southern Syria (Quneitra, Deraa and Suwayda) by playing the Druze card. Drawing on old ties with their religious establishment that predate the founding of Israel in 1948, Tel Aviv reminded its local proxies of the 2015 Nusra Front massacre in the village of Qalb Lawzah in Idlib province, as well as the Daesh offensive in eastern Suwayda in 2018.
Syria and its mosaic-like social fabric has long been a point of interest for Israeli expansionists, who see potential for exploitation
Eyad Abu Shakra
Finally, we have the Kurdish separatist project east of the Euphrates, a region home to major recourse and US geopolitical interests, as well as it being a battleground between Iran and Turkiye. Undoubtedly, the weaker Syria’s central authority becomes, the greater the ambitions of Kurdish separatists, who reject Syria’s Arab identity, oppose unity and are willing to make a deal with the devil to achieve their goal.
I believe the current Syrian leadership is fully aware of the grave implications of everything outlined above. However, despite its unquestionably sincere intentions, the steps it has taken on the ground have, so far, fallen short.
A transition from the logic of armed struggle to the logic of statehood is necessary, but it has not yet come. Unfortunately, one side continues to dominate decision-making and appointments and mistakes continue to be justified.
Moreover, the grim legacy of the past 54 years has made its popular base seem content, at times, to remain silent in the face of human rights violations, or to even eagerly defend the indefensible, both morally and politically. This is especially concerning in light of the international scrutiny and regional conspiracies that the Syrian government has to deal with.
The atrocities seen in the coastal region — and the fears, whether genuine or dubious, of similar events in the south — are unacceptable. They legitimize chaos and justify additional conspiracies. What we need is transitional justice, not retribution and revenge.
**Eyad Abu Shakra is managing editor of Asharq Al-Awsat, where this article was originally published. X: @eyad1949

Will the U.S. collapse like the Soviet Union did?
James Krapfl, McGill University/The Conversation Canada/March 11, 2025
“You’re next,” said a Russian historian I interviewed in 1993 about the Soviet Union’s collapse in late 1991. I was an American student in St. Petersburg, and he was referring to the United States.
His argument was informed by a pseudo-scientific demographic theory that would eventually find favour in the Kremlin, but more remarkable to me then was the hopefulness with which he spoke.
If this man is still alive, he must be feeling vindicated. America’s current retreat from its engagements around the world — from gutting USAid to abandoning European allies — constitutes a surrender of power comparable in living memory only to Mikhail Gorbachev’s unilateral withdrawals from Afghanistan, Eastern Europe and elsewhere between 1988 and 1991 — right before the Soviet Union’s collapse.
Accompanying both foreign policy about-faces, we can’t miss profound shifts in the two states’ ideological foundations.
Destabilizing master signifiers
Gorbachev justified his “restructuring” or perestroika by invoking the Soviet Union’s founding father, Vladimir Lenin. He did so, however, by observing that the historical Lenin had pragmatically modified policies according to circumstances. That called into question the mythological Lenin — an infallible hero whose virtues could not be questioned.
The Russian-born American anthropologist Alexei Yurchak argues that Lenin was the Soviet system’s “master signifier.”
As long as his sacredness remained unquestioned, referring to Lenin could legitimize a range of policies and actions. Viewing Lenin through a historical lens, however, called his sacredness into question. It consequently became impossible for Soviet citizens to agree on what policies and actions were legitimate. This crisis of meaning allowed chronic political, economic and social problems to suddenly to become devastating.
America’s master signifier is its Constitution, reverentially enshrined in Washington, D.C., rather like Lenin’s body is in Moscow. Under President Donald Trump, however, violations of the Constitution have become routine, and the federal government’s legislative branch has shown little will to guard its powers from executive encroachment. Like Lenin under Gorbachev, it seems that the sacred centre of America’s political system has become destabilized.
As a written contract, a constitution is easier to interpret than the thoughts of a dead man. Lenin’s advantage, however, was that he could embody traits considered virtuous in the Soviet system. Where could Americans look for that same type of guiding light?
For most of American history, it was George Washington — the first president who swore to uphold the Constitution.
George Washington’s America
As a hero of the Revolutionary War, Washington could have become king.
Army officers, frustrated at the central government’s weakness after the war under the Articles of Confederation, considered a coup d'état. Washington — the army’s commander in chief — could have led the overthrow (as Oliver Cromwell had or Napoleon Bonaparte would).
Washington refused, and after British capitulation in 1783, he relinquished his command to Congress.
In 1789, after the Constitution was ratified as a legal solution to the problems of confederation, Washington was unanimously elected president. After two terms, however, he rejected suggestions that he stand for a third.
He frequently stressed the importance of habit in human affairs and reasoned that, if he clung to power, Americans might not get accustomed to peaceful and regular rotation of office. By retiring, he transferred much of the reverence that had accrued to him onto the Constitution.
Remembering Washington
Washington’s birthday falls on Feb. 22, and Americans began observing it while he was still alive. In 1879, U.S. Congress made the day a federal holiday, an occasion for celebrating the example of selfless public service and respect for the rule of law that “the father of his country” had embodied.
So it remained until 1971.
In that year, the Monday Holiday Act went into effect. Adopted in 1968 at the behest of the business lobby, which saw in three-day weekends an opportunity for sales, the act moved Washington’s birthday commemoration to the third Monday in February.
Since many states also celebrated Abraham Lincoln’s birthday and the new date fell between his and Washington’s, some began calling it “Presidents’ Day.” When nationwide advertisers and calendar-makers adopted the term in the 1980s, it came to seem official.
The name change, of course, eroded the holiday’s connection to Washington, and insofar as it remained more than a shopping day, it came to be associated with all the presidents, effectively cheapening it. Though the federal holiday officially remains “Washington’s Birthday,” few Americans know that.
The dangers of mythologizing
The shift happened to coincide with a wave of revisionist historiography that pointed out Washington — a slave-owner — was not perfect.
All historiography is revisionist in the sense that historians revise existing interpretations on the basis of new evidence. For those who wanted an untainted idol, however, it appeared either that Washington could no longer fit the bill or that historical facts had to be massaged.
Ever since, historical assessments have tended to get lost in culture wars, where neither side can accept a real person with both reprehensible and admirable traits.
In the Soviet Union, however, most citizens found it difficult to think historically about Lenin because, under the conditions of dictatorship, open public debate based on factual information about him had been impossible.
Dictatorship depends on mythological thinking that worships heroes and does not expose contradictions between official pronouncements and reality. In the early 1990s, Russians failed to establish the rule of law for a similar reason: they could not overcome the habit of mythologizing, which made them prioritize personality over policy.
The personality they chose as independent Russia’s first president — Boris Yeltsin — lacked Washington’s respect for the rule of law.
Losing sight of Washington
Thanks to Washington, the U.S. got off to a better start. But by abandoning the widespread commemoration of his historically exceptional deference to the rule of law, Americans have have lost an opportunity to practise historical thinking in the public sphere. Not only has mythological thinking encroached, but it is now even possible for a president to style himself as a monarch and to emulate Napoleon, as Donald Trump has.
The Constitution — America’s master signifier — has lost its ability to unite citizens around a shared sense of meaningfulness.
Will Washington’s country be next?
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organisation bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: James Krapfl, McGill University

Double Dhimmi: The Plight of Christian Women in the Middle East.
Mariam Wahba/Visegrad24/March 11/2025
https://www.visegrad24.com/articles/mariam-wahba
The systemic persecution of Christian women in the Middle East underscores a harrowing reality that their suffering is not just the collateral damage in a war of ideologies but a targeted assault on the very essence of pluralism. It's time the West acknowledged the plight of the Dhimmi in its own battle for freedom and dignity.
When I wrote my college thesis, “Women in the World of Islam: Hated, Pampered, Oppressed, or Just Complaining?”, I devoted thirty-something pages to the challenges faced by women in Muslim-majority societies. Yet, when I stumbled upon a copy a few weeks ago and reread it, I realized that not once did I mention the plight of non-Muslim women in the region—not the Yazidis, Assyrians, Jews, or even my own community, Coptic Christians.
Christian women in the Middle East bear the brunt of Islamism. Yet, their suffering remains hidden, often deemed an inconvenient truth.
Looking back, I realize that the omission was not just an oversight on my part, but a reinforced willful blindness. At no point during my four years of studying the Middle East at a university in the heart of progressive New York City were the struggles of Christian (or any other minority group, for that matter) women in the region ever discussed. Whether due to cultural taboo, intellectual discomfort, or a desire to avoid contentious discussions in a room full of opinionated 18-year-olds, this issue was neglected in the many Middle East-focused classes I attended. Despite my firsthand experience growing up in Egypt, I failed to confront the glaring omission.
One thing that did come up in the classroom was the term dhimmi. Translating to “protected” in Arabic, the term was popularised during the Ottoman Empire to describe non-Muslims living under Muslim rule, particularly Christians and Jews, who were considered “People of the Book” according to Islamic tradition. In practice, however, the term has evolved to signify a deeply entrenched second-class status, or worse, of non-Muslims in Muslim-majority countries.
Christian women endure not only the oppression associated with being non-Muslim, but the added vulnerability of being women in an honor-based society. As a result, they become prime targets for Islamist groups, whether during orchestrated attacks by Jihadist organizations like ISIS or through individual acts of violence in times of supposed peace. Forced conversions, abductions, and routine violence are part of their grim reality. These acts are rarely isolated incidents rather, they are symptoms of an entrenched ideologies that promote and legitimise such persecution.
In 2014, ISIS’s genocidal takeover of Mosul, Iraq, specifically targeted Assyrian Christians alongside Yazidis and other minority groups. The United States State Department estimates that upwards of 60,000 Christians were murdered, raped, or trafficked as sex slaves. While some captives have been freed, Assyrian community sources suggest at least 30 Christian women of both Iraqi and Syrian nationality remain missing after their abduction in 2014 and 2015, likely forced into marriages with ISIS fighters.
While the Islamic State’s atrocities may be the most overt and brutal manifestation of anti-Christian violence in the Middle East, the systematic targeting of Christian women in Egypt rivals even ISIS in its cruelty and scope. Christian women in Egypt face the constant threat of abduction, forced conversion, and coerced marriage. In 2012, the U.S. Helsinki Commission heard a testimony to the effect that there had been 550 abductions and disappearances over a period of five years. In its 2020 report, “Jihad of the Womb,” U.S.-based nonprofit group Coptic Solidarity (CS) estimated there had been 500 cases over the previous decade in which “elements of coercion were used that amount to trafficking.” Despite these alarming statistics, Egyptian authorities frequently dismiss the severity of the situation, often claiming these forced marriages are consensual. The problem persists, with CS estimating that at least 12 Coptic Christian women were kidnapped in just the first half of 2023.
These case studies represent a mere snapshot of a broader pattern of persecution that grows with impunity. Whether through ISIS’s horrific campaigns or faceless kidnappers in Egypt, the message is clear: Islamism is brutal in its pursuit of religious and political hegemony. Religiously, it seeks to erase any opposition to the extremist ideological framework and, politically, it aims to subjugate women, who are often the foundation of familial and communal identity.
The violence faced by Christian women in the Middle East is not merely religious persecution; it is a violent rejection of pluralism itself. The suffering of these women symbolises a broader struggle for dignity and equal citizenship. By targeting these women through abduction, forced conversion, and violence, Islamists are not only dismantling what remains of religious diversity but actively working to erase it.
The fight for the protection of these women is integral to the fight for a stable and prosperous Middle East.
**Mariam Wahba is a research analyst at FDD focused on Egypt and minorities in the Middle East.