English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For  November 08/2025
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2025/english.november08.25.htm

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006 

Click On The Below Link To Join Elias Bejjaninews whatsapp group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/FPF0N7lE5S484LNaSm0MjW
اضغط على الرابط في أعلى للإنضمام لكروب Eliasbejjaninews whatsapp group

Elias Bejjani/Click on the below link to subscribe to my youtube channel
الياس بجاني/اضغط على الرابط في أسفل للإشتراك في موقعي ع اليوتيوب
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAOOSioLh1GE3C1hp63Camw

Bible Quotations For today
I do not call you servants any longer, but friends, because I have made known to you everything that I have heard from my Father
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint John 15/15-17:”I do not call you servants any longer, because the servant does not know what the master is doing; but I have called you friends, because I have made known to you everything that I have heard from my Father. You did not choose me but I chose you. And I appointed you to go and bear fruit, fruit that will last, so that the Father will give you whatever you ask him in my name. I am giving you these commands so that you may love one another.

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on November 07-08/2025
Anniversary of the Signing of the Catastrophic Cairo Agreement That Legitimated Occupations and Traded Sovereignty for Undelivered Security/Elias Bejjani/November 03/2025
Between a Grotto and Grottos... A Nation is Dying/Father Tony Bou Assaf /Facebook/November07/ 2025
US Vows 'The Party' Will No Longer Threaten Lebanon and the Region
Israel conducts new strikes in south Lebanon as Hezbollah rejects ‘any political negotiations’
Iran Condemns 'Savage' Israeli Attacks on Lebanon
Lebanon Agrees to Release Hannibal Gaddafi after 10 Years in Jail
US vows to use 'every tool' to ensure Hezbollah no longer threatens Lebanon, region
Aoun: Lebanon committed to ceasefire agreement, Israel increasing its attacks
Report: Israel may launch 'preventive' Hezbollah strike, but not within next month
Salam tells Hezbollah only state has war and peace decision
Israeli official says Israel would strike Beirut if army fails to disarm Hezbollah
Report: Iran behind Hezbollah's controversial 'open letter'
Report: Some in Israel don't see need for anti-Hezbollah strike
The Cairo Agreement… From Arafat to Nasrallah: Lebanon as an Alternative Homeland or an Islamic Republic/Chebel Al-Zoghbi/November 07/2025
Hezbollah in Two Statements/Mustafa Fahs/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2025
Hezbollah’s open letters: From 1985 to 2025, the same claim to rule Lebanon/Makram Rabah/english.alarabiya/November 07/2025
Hezbollah’s defiance, the instability of the ceasefire and attempts to promote an Israeli-Lebanese dialogue/Dror Doron/The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center/November 07/2025
David Daoud/Israeli operations in Lebanon against Hezbollah: October 27–November 02/2025/FDD’s Long War Journal/Israeli operations in Lebanon against Hezbollah/
November 07/2025
Question: “What happens after death?”/GotQuestions.org/November 07/2025
Lebanon faces dilemma over ending war with Israel through negotiations/Dalal Saoud/United Press International/November 07/2025

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 07-08/2025
Israel says another set of remains of a hostage has been turned over in Gaza/Julia Frankel/The Associated Press/November 07/2025
Israeli army receives body of hostage from Red Cross in Gaza
US to start UN negotiations on international Gaza force mandate
Report: Azerbaijan Will Only Send Peacekeepers to Gaza if Fighting Stops Completely
Trump Says Iran Has Been Asking if US Sanctions Can Be Lifted
Elite Iranian unit plotted assassination of Israeli ambassador to Mexico, US official says
Iranian Plot to Kill Israel's Ambassador to Mexico Contained, US Official Says
Iran's Pezeshkian Says Tehran Seeks Peace, But Will Not Bow to Coercion
Damascus Denies US Planning to Establish Military Presence in Syria
UN Security Council Removes Sanctions on Syria’s President, Interior Minister
Britain removes sanctions on Syria’s president, EU to follow
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s absence sets off alarm bells in Moscow
NATO's chief says the West is finally 'turning the tide' on Russia's ammo advantage
Germany bans Islamist influencer group calling for ‘Muslim Caliphate’, raids properties

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources on November 07-08/2025
Christian Girl Harassed in Egypt for Refusing Hijab — “They Looked at Me as if I Were Naked”/Coptic Solidarity/Raymond Ibrahim/November 07/2025
The demise of JCPOA and the road ahead for Iran’s nuclear program/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Al Arabiya English/07 November/2025
Why Gaza Does Not Need 'Peacekeepers' and 'Monitors'/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute./November 07/2025
Europe's Race to Net-Zero - and Total Self-Destruction?/Drieu Godefridi/Gatestone Institute/November 07/2025
Meet the Muslim Brotherhood ...Working to reestablish the caliphate for almost a century/Clifford D. May/The Washington Times/November 07/2025
Iranians Challenge the Regime by Celebrating Cyrus the Great/Janatan Sayeh & Behnam Ben Taleblu/FDD/November 07/2025
Iran’s October Oil Exports Hit 2025 Peak, Reflecting Failure of U.S. Sanctions Enforcement/Saeed Ghasseminejad/FDD/November 07/2025
Question: “What happens after death?”/GotQuestions.org/November 07/2025
Savage beatings and dying trees: How West Bank settler violence is impacting Palestinians’ olive harvest/Zeena Saifi, Jeremy Diamond, Cyril Theophilos, CNN/November 07/2025
US Elections: Will Trump Thank Mamdani?/Amir Taheri/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2025

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on November 07-08/2025
Anniversary of the Signing of the Catastrophic Cairo Agreement That Legitimated Occupations and Traded Sovereignty for Undelivered Security
Elias Bejjani/November 03/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/11/148840/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWDqlptsr-U
Today, we remember with anger and sorrow the Cairo Agreement, the crime and national catastrophe that was signed between Lebanon the State and the terrorist Palestinian organizations. This agreement destroyed Lebanon, eliminated its unity, undermined its independence, and handed over its decision-making to foreign terrorists, Arab nationalists, leftists, and jihadists who occupied Lebanon and continue to do so, starting with the Palestinian organizations, then the Syrian occupation, and currently the Iranian occupation through the terrorist and jihadist Hezbollah. What were the backgrounds of this voided agreement? What are its catastrophic consequences that continue to this day? And who was responsible for the signing and the surrender of Lebanon, and why?
Undoubtedly, the Cairo Agreement, signed on November 3, 1969, was not merely a military accord, but a catastrophic turning point in modern Lebanese history. It undermined its sovereignty, legitimized an armed presence outside state authority, and paved the way for the wars that Lebanon was subjected to and which are still raging, serving Palestinian, Syrian, Nasserist Arab nationalist, jihadist, and Iranian agendas.
Date of Signing, Signatories, and Background of the Cairo Agreement
Date and Place of Signing: The agreement was signed in Cairo, the capital of the United Arab Republic (Egypt at the time), on November 3, 1969.
Signatories and Parties:
On the Lebanese side: General Emile Boustani, Commander of the Army, during the presidency of Charles Helou.
On the Palestinian Organizations side: Mr. Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).
Egyptian Presence and Influence: The signing was attended by Mr. Mahmoud Riad (Egyptian Foreign Minister) and General Mohamed Fawzi (Egyptian Minister of War). The late Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser played a pivotal role in summoning Arafat and the Lebanese authorities and pressuring for the swift conclusion of the agreement. It is reported that he warned General Boustani upon signing the agreement, saying: "The agreement is not in your interest."
The Bloody Background: The agreement came in the wake of bloody and fierce clashes that lasted for months between the Lebanese Army and the local Christian popular forces rejecting the Palestinian occupation, and the Palestinian resistance factions whose power was escalating through their alliance with Lebanese leftist and nationalist political forces (later known as the Lebanese National Movement). The core of the conflict was the rejection by the majority of Lebanese Christian parties and organizations of using Lebanon as a platform for military operations against Israel or an arena for ideological Arab wars, at the expense of Lebanese state sovereignty and stability.
Text Of The Cairo Agreement 1969
IN 1969, under the authority of the then president Charles Helou, the following document was signed by the Head of the Lebanese Delegation General Emile Bustani, and the Head of the Palestinian Delegation Yasser Arafat.
Text
On Monday, 3rd November 1969, the Lebanese delegation headed by Army Commander General Emile al-Bustani, and the Palestine Liberation Organization delegation, headed by Mr. Yasir 'Arafat, chairman of the organization, met in Cairo in the presence of the United Arab Republic Minister of Foreign Affairs Mahmud Riyad, and the War Minister, General Muhammad Fawzi.
In consonance with the bonds of brotherhood and common destiny, relations between Lebanon and the Palestinian revolution must always be conducted on the bases of confidence, frankness, and positive cooperation for the benefit of Lebanon and the Palestinian revolution and within the framework of Lebanon's sovereignty and security. The two delegations agreed on the following principles and measures:
The Palestinian Presence
It was agreed to reorganize the Palestinian presence in Lebanon on the following bases:
1. The right to work, residence, and movement for Palestinians currently residing in Lebanon;
2. The formation of local committees composed of Palestinians in the camps to care for the interests of Palestinians residing in these camps in cooperation with the local Lebanese authorities within the framework of Lebanese sovereignty;
3. The establishment of posts of the Palestinian Armed Struggle [PASC] inside the camps for the purpose of cooperation with the local committees to ensure good relations with the Lebanese authorities. These posts shall undertake the task of regulating and determining the presence of arms in the camps within the framework of Lebanese security and the interests of the Palestinian revolution;
4. Palestinians resident in Lebanon are to be permitted to participate in the Palestinian revolution through the Armed Struggle and in accordance with the principles of the sovereignty and security of Lebanon.
Commando Activity
It was agreed to facilitate commando activity by means of:
1. Facilitating the passage of commandos and specifying points of passage and reconnaissance in the border areas;
2. Safeguarding the road to the 'Arqub region;
3. The Armed Struggle shall undertake to control the conduct of all the members of its organizations and [to ensure] their non-interference in Lebanese affairs;
4. Establishing a joint command control of the Armed Struggle and the Lebanese Army;
5. Ending the propaganda campaigns by both sides;
6. Conducting a census of Armed Struggle personnel in Lebanon by their command.
7. Appointing Armed Struggle representatives at Lebanese Army headquarters to participate in the resolution of all emergency matters;
8. Studying the distribution of all suitable points of concentration in border areas which will be agreed with the Lebanese Army command;
9. Regulating the entry, exit, and circulation of Armed Struggle personnel;
10. Removal of the Jiyrun base.
11. The Lebanese Army shall facilitate the operation of medical, evacuation, and supply centers for commando activity;
12. Releasing detained personnel and confiscated arms;
13. It is understood that the Lebanese authorities, both civil and military, shall continue to exercise all their prerogatives and responsibilities in all areas of Lebanon in all circumstances;
14. The two delegations affirm that the Palestinian armed struggle is in the interest of Lebanon as well as in that of the Palestinian revolution and all Arabs;
15. This agreement shall remain Top Secret and for the eyes of the commands only.
Head of Lebanese delegation
Emile Bustani
Head of Palestinian delegation
Yasir Arafat
Resolution adopted by the Lebanese Chamber of Deputies, 21 May 1987
1. Abrogation of the law issued by the Chamber of Deputies on 14 June 1983, authorizing the Government to ratify the agreement signed by the Government of the Lebanese Republic and the Government of the State of Israel on 17 May 1983.
2. The agreement signed on 3 November 1969 between the head of the Lebanese delegation General Emile Bustani and the Chairman of the PLO and which is known as the "Cairo Agreement" is hereby null and void as if it had never existed. Further, all annexes and measures related to the Cairo Agreement are hereby null and void as if they had never existed.
**The Catastrophic and Ongoing Consequences of the Agreement
Despite the apparent attempt to mitigate tension, the Cairo Agreement constituted an explicit authorization for an armed foreign group to possess weapons on Lebanese soil, leading to:
Erosion of Sovereignty and National Decision: The agreement established a "state within a state," where areas controlled by armed Palestinians, especially the camps and Southern Lebanon, became entirely outside the authority of the Lebanese state.
Abandonment of the South: Allowing the "securing of the road to the Arqoub area" and facilitating operations from the South transformed this region into an arena for direct conflict with Israel. This initiated the cycle of destruction and displacement in Southern Lebanon, with the Lebanese state bearing the consequences of a war it did not decide.
Turning Lebanon into a War Zone: Lebanon became an "open arena" for Feda'een actions and counter-military operations, leading to the destruction of infrastructure, destabilization of security, and the eruption of the Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990) as a direct result of clashes between Lebanese militias rejecting the situation and Palestinian militias allied with Lebanese leftist forces.
Transforming Camps into Security Enclaves: Palestinian camps remain outside state authority to this day, becoming safe havens for "merchants of the resistance lie," drug dealers, fugitives from justice, and fertile ground for extremist organizations and chaos.
Fourth: Loss of Sovereignty and the Continuation of Disasters
Since the signing of the Cairo Agreement, it can be said that Lebanon lost a significant part of its sovereignty and independent decision. This was not limited to armed Palestinian influence but extended to open the door wide to other regional powers:
Syrian Influence: The Assad regime exploited the agreement and then the Civil War to intervene militarily and politically, transforming Lebanon into a bargaining chip in its hand.
Iranian Hezbollah Occupation: The "crime of the Cairo Agreement" was repeated with the emergence and growth of Hezbollah (which holds Iranian identity and goals). It possesses weapons outside state authority, wages wars, and dominates Lebanon's sovereign decision, representing a continuation of the "illegitimate weapons" approach established by the Cairo Agreement.
Fifth: The Nullification of the Agreement and the Crime of Repetition
The Death of the Agreement (The Lebanese Barter):
The Cairo Agreement died and was officially annulled on May 20, 1987, shortly after the expiration of the effect of the "May 17 Agreement" (1983) signed by Lebanon and Israel.
"The Cairo Agreement died, as it was born, in the blink of an eye that lasted about 18 years... thus, the barter was nullification for nullification."
The armed Palestinian revolution departed from Beirut in 1982 following the Israeli invasion, thereby ending the effective and open armed presence of the PLO legitimized by the agreement, before it was officially annulled afterward.
The Repetition of the Cairo Agreement Crime:
The current situation in Lebanon, under the control of Hezbollah's weapon, is a repetition of the Cairo Agreement crime but with different local and regional tools.
The Lost Wars: Lebanon continues to pay the price for the "lost wars" waged by Hezbollah against Israel, which devastate the South and place the country on the brink of a comprehensive war. It remains unwilling to implement the recent ceasefire agreement and all international resolutions: 1559, 1701, 1680, in addition to its refusal to respect the Lebanese Constitution after its amendment through the Taif Agreement, which demands the dissolution of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias and the imposition of state authority through its own forces over all Lebanese territories.
Appeasement and Empowerment: The actions of the current Lebanese government and the Army leadership at present, in terms of appeasing Hezbollah and not compelling it to surrender its weapons to the state, are a repetition of the same historical mistake committed by the Lebanese leadership in 1969: the surrender of the state's sovereign decision in exchange for temporary calm or under regional pressure, thus ensuring the continuation of the national catastrophe.
Conclusion: Every time sovereignty was abandoned in exchange for purported security, the country was the loser and the Lebanese were the victims, because sovereignty belongs to the state alone and not to any armed groups, whether Lebanese or non-Lebanese

Between a Grotto and Grottos... A Nation is Dying
Father Tony Bou Assaf /Facebook/November07/ 2025
(Free translation from Arabic by Elias Bejjani)
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/11/148956/
What happened in the Jeita Grotto was not merely a wedding or a minor protocol mishap...
It was a mirror reflecting the essence of the corruption that is devouring the Lebanese nation from its roots.
A Grotto that was transformed from a divine masterpiece into a stage for display and vulgarity. But it is only the façade...
The real disaster is not in The Grotto, but in the Grottos that are unseen:
The grottos of the Ministries
The grottos of the Deals
The grottos of Tenders and Brokerage
The grottos of Administrations that have become warehouses for masked theft.
The Grottos of Ali Baba... where the thieves no longer hide themselves. Instead, they sit on the seats of power and legislate corruption in the name of the state and the law.
The scandal is not a party... The scandal is an entire system that survives by selling off what remains of Lebanon: its nature, its sea, its mountains, its schools, its hospitals, its people.
We are not defending the Grotto alone... We are defending the soul of the nation. We are defending life in a country that is being stripped bare every day, without shame.
So, either we extinguish these grottos with light, or we will remain a people who applaud while our land is plundered, our voice is stolen, and our future is sold.
Enough.
Give Lebanon back to its people... not to the guards of the grottos.

US Vows 'The Party' Will No Longer Threaten Lebanon and the Region
Salam's Counter-Attack: The Decision Belongs to the State, No Negotiations
Nidaa Al-Watan/November 08, 2025 (Translated from Arabic)
Hizballah wanted its latest "Black Book" to be a reversal of the course of events, but the ruling power, over two days, treated the letter as if it was never issued. Consequently, the "Party's" position will not change the government's direction to proceed with negotiations and advance the triple agenda: confining weapons, stabilizing the equation of restoring the state's decision on war and peace, and conducting elections based on granting expatriates the right to vote for all 128 MPs.
In parallel, contacts continued yesterday to contain any possible escalation, and Washington intervened to prevent the expansion of the war. Meanwhile, there is serious concern within the corridors of the Lebanese state about Israel's intention to expand the war, especially since it showed no positivity towards President Joseph Aoun's offer of negotiation. On a separate note, President Aoun departs Monday for Bulgaria on a two-day official visit. Today and tomorrow, he will focus on important communications before his anticipated travel.
Salam: The War and Peace Decision Belongs Only to the Government
For his part, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam responded to Hizballah's statement yesterday, saying: "We said that the government has reclaimed the war and peace decision, and no one has the authority to speak on the issue of war and peace except the government. I do not believe there is a clearer position than this."Speaking on the sidelines of the "Lebanon Technology and AI Summit" yesterday, Salam addressed the arms confinement plan: "We have made a lot of progress north of the Litani, and in the first three months' stage, we tried to contain the weapons, meaning preventing all acts of transferring and using weapons... There is a larger deployment of the Lebanese Army with the establishment of more checkpoints north of the Litani, but we are at the beginning of the road. The important thing is that we have made a statement that we are working to implement, and this implementation will take time."
Two Options for 'The Party' to Surrender Arms
Furthermore, political circles read, through Nidaa Al-Watan, that the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister dealt with 'the Party's' position by affirming the government's stances without responding to it. President Aoun's emphasis on the principle of negotiation made it seem as if 'the Party's' Black Book was never issued, knowing that the latter threatened the state and accused both Presidents Aoun and Salam of treason by stating:
"What was committed on August 5th is a sin and serves the enemy."
Hezbollah' told the President of the Republic, "The decision on negotiation belongs to me, not to you."
Hezbollah told the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister, "I am proceeding with my military actions as a resistance, despite all government decisions."
Does Hizballah also tell Israel that the confrontation with it is ongoing and it will not surrender its weapons?
The same circles asked: Why did 'the Party' say what it did? Is there a negotiation underway with it, and it is raising its ceiling to improve its terms? They added: "It is as if 'the Party' is telling Israel at this moment that if there are any shifts, they must dialogue with it, and that the decision to surrender arms, negotiate, and confront belongs to it, not the state."
The circles concluded by saying: "'Hizballah' is miscalculating, just as it miscalculated in the support war and in not exiting it, and this is through its latest statement, which will push Israel to further raise the level of confrontation because it is not in a position to negotiate with 'the Party' and will not leave any space for it, just as it will not return to the rules of engagement with it. 'Hizballah' now faces two options, no third: either entering a confrontation resulting in its surrender, or explicitly announcing the end of its armed project, similar to what the Hamas movement did."
Hezbollah' and the Rejection of Negotiation
In contrast, MP Hassan Fadlallah, a member of the "Loyalty to the Resistance" bloc, said: "The impudence of those rushing to normalization reached a level beyond all national calculations when they condemn our rejection of political negotiation with the enemy, which is outside any national consensus or interest. Does anyone in Lebanon expect us to accept any surrender to the enemy with it?"
Washington Will Prevent 'The Party' From Threatening Lebanon
Meanwhile, following the US Treasury imposing new sanctions on a network financially supporting 'Hizballah', the US Embassy in Beirut affirmed that the United States will prevent 'Hizballah' from threatening Lebanon and the region. The Embassy stressed in a brief comment published on its X account yesterday, attached to the State Department's decision on imposing new sanctions on 'the Party', that "America will continue to use every tool available to ensure that this terrorist group no longer poses a threat to the Lebanese people or the broader region."
The Election Ball is in Berri's Court
Awaiting the decision of Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri regarding the government's referral of a draft law the day before yesterday to suspend Article 112 of the Election Law, which allocated six seats to expatriates, prominent parliamentary sources told Nidaa Al-Watan that Speaker Berri "is now in the firing line." The problem has become his, and he is now positioned, internally and externally, as the obstructionist who does not want the expatriates' vote, thus violating the constitution by not placing the government's draft law on the General Assembly's agenda." They affirmed that "the confrontation with Berri will continue, and he will be held accountable based on the fact that political disagreement is a right, but violating the constitution is a sin."
The South After a Day of Raid Storms
In the field, the southern villages witnessed a noticeable calm, and the Israeli "activity" was limited to shelling the eastern outskirts of the town of Sheheen in the Tyre district with a number of shells, coinciding with intense sweeping operations with machine guns targeting the area. UNIFIL Spokesman Dani Ghafari announced that "more than 7,000 Israeli aerial violations and 2,400 activities were recorded north of the Blue Line, which constitutes a source of grave concern." He added: "We were notified in advance of the raids carried out (the day before yesterday), but we did not receive any notification regarding the evacuation of Lebanese Army barracks." He continued: "We did not observe any new activity by 'Hizballah' in our area of operations."
In this context, the European Union called on Israel to stop its violations of Resolution 1701 and the ceasefire agreement, and also called on all actors in Lebanon, especially 'Hizballah', to refrain from any action that escalates the situation. The French Foreign Ministry, in an interview with Al Arabiya channel, called for Israel's withdrawal from the five points in Lebanon. It condemned "all Israeli strikes that cause civilian casualties in south Lebanon." It pointed out that "disarming 'Hizballah' is the mission of the Lebanese Armed Forces," and that it is a difficult matter that requires daily effort. It expressed support for the Lebanese Army in the disarmament mission, as well as for the Lebanese government's plan to restore sovereignty in the South.

Israel conducts new strikes in south Lebanon as Hezbollah rejects ‘any political negotiations’
Beirut, Lebanon/The Arab Weekly/November 07/2025
Israel said it struck a series of Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon on Thursday, with President Joseph Aoun denouncing the new attacks as a “fully-fledged crime” and accusing Israel of rejecting Beirut’s overtures towards diplomacy. The attacks came hours after Hezbollah lashed out at Lebanon’s leadership, rejecting suggestions that it might be time to begin direct talks with Israel. In an open letter to the Lebanese people and their leaders, Hezbollah said it rejected “any political negotiations” between Lebanon and Israel, and that such talks would “not serve the national interest”.“We reaffirm our legitimate right … to defend ourselves against an enemy that imposes war on our country and does not cease its attacks,” Hezbollah added. It nevertheless said it remained committed to the ceasefire. The truce deal was agreed between Israel and Hezbollah in November 2024 after more than a year of hostilities, but Israeli attacks in Lebanon have continued as it accuses the militant group of trying to rebuild its forces. The Israeli military said its strikes on Thursday had targeted “terrorist infrastructure and weapon storage facilities in southern Lebanon”. “We will not allow Hezbollah to re-arm themselves, to recover, build back up its strength, to threaten the state of Israel,” Israeli government spokeswoman Shosh Bedrosian told reporters, accusing the group of “continuous terrorist activities”. Hezbollah has criticised the government’s “hasty decision” to take away its weapons, claiming that Israel has taken advantage of the push. A strike killed one person earlier in the day, according to the Lebanese health ministry. The Israeli military said it had targeted an Hezbollah construction team. On Thursday evening, Aoun called the latest strikes “a fully-fledged crime, not only according to the provisions of international humanitarian law … but also a heinous political crime. “Nearly a year has passed since the ceasefire came into effect, and during this period, Israel has spared no effort to demonstrate its rejection of any negotiated settlement between the two countries,” he said.
“Your message has been received.”
Lebanon and Israel are still technically in a state of war, but all the recent armed conflicts with Israel were fought by Hezbollah, not the Lebanese military. The only diplomatic contact between the two countries is through the “ceasefire monitoring mechanism”, which includes the United States, France and the United Nations. The body meets regularly at the headquarters of the UN force in southern Lebanon, but the Lebanese and Israeli parties do not directly communicate with each other. Lebanese officials have recently voiced openness to direct talks with Israel, which maintains troops in five parts of south Lebanon in spite of the ceasefire’s stipulation that it withdraw. But after Thursday’s strikes, President Aoun said that the more Beirut “expresses its openness to peaceful negotiations to resolve outstanding issues with Israel, the more Israel persists in its aggression against Lebanese sovereignty”. A Lebanese official said on Thursday that Israel had not responded to the offer of talks. Last week, US envoy Tom Barrack had said that dialogue with Israel could be the key to easing tensions. The Lebanese army, meanwhile, accused Israel of seeking to “undermine Lebanon’s stability” with Thursday’s strikes and to “prevent the completion of the army’s deployment in accordance with the cessation of hostilities agreement”. Under the truce deal, the Lebanese military was meant to deploy to the south alongside UN peacekeepers as Hezbollah pulled back. The UNIFIL peacekeeping mission said the latest wave of strikes “undermines the progress being made toward a political and diplomatic solution”. Hezbollah was the only movement in Lebanon that refused to disarm after the 1975-1990 civil war, first claiming it had a duty to liberate territory occupied by Israel, and then to continue defending the country. The group is backed by Iran, which also fought its own war against Israel earlier this year. Since the ceasefire, the United States has increased pressure on the Lebanese authorities to disarm the group, a move opposed by Hezbollah and its allies. Lebanon says it has formulated a plan for imposing a state monopoly on weapons, and the government met on Thursday to take stock of the disarmament efforts. Information minister Paul Morcos said afterwards that the cabinet had “commended the progress achieved … despite ongoing obstacles, primarily the continued Israeli hostilities”.
Last week, Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz accused Aoun of “dragging his feet” on disarmament. Fears have been mounting in Lebanon that Israel could resume a full-blown aerial bombing campaign, particularly after Israeli leaders warned they would take action against Hezbollah if Lebanon did not step up efforts to disarm the group.

Iran Condemns 'Savage' Israeli Attacks on Lebanon
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2025
Iran strongly condemned on Friday what it called "savage" Israeli attacks on Lebanon, after its arch-foe hit targets belonging to the Tehran-backed Hezbollah movement. In a statement, the Iranian foreign ministry urged "the United Nations, the international community and regional countries to confront the warmongering" of Israel while offering "condolences on the martyrdom of Lebanese citizens during the savage attacks". Israel said Thursday it had struck a series of targets belonging to the movement in its stronghold in southern Lebanon. Israel signed a ceasefire deal with Lebanon in November 2024 that was meant to end more than a year of hostilities, but says it retains the right to strike Hezbollah targets it deems a threat. Israel says the latest strikes aim to prevent the group from rearming after suffering major losses, including the killing of its leader Hassan Nasrallah last year. One person was killed in the Thursday's bombardments, according to the Lebanese health ministry. Tehran, Hezbollah's key backer, was also targeted in recent Israeli and US strikes on its nuclear sites during a 12-day conflict in June.

Lebanon Agrees to Release Hannibal Gaddafi after 10 Years in Jail
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2025
The investigator in the case of the disappearance of cleric Imam Moussa al-Sadr and his companions Judge Zaher Hamadeh agreed on Thursday to lower the bail in the release of Hannibal al-Gaddafi, the son of late Libyan leader Moammar al-Gaddafi, paving the way for his release from jail after ten years. The bail of 11 million dollars will be reduced to 900,000 dollars, and the travel ban against him will be lifted once it is paid. Hannibal’s release was announced some two weeks ago. Hamadeh decided to reduce the bail after interrogating Hannibal for two hours at the Justice Palace in Beirut in the presence of his lawyers and representatives from Sadr, Abbas Badreddine and Mohammed Yacoub’s families. This was the first time Hannibal had been reinterrogated since 2017. His lawyer Nassib Chedid told Asharq Al-Awsat that Sadr’s family had requested it and that it did not offer any new evidence in the case against him. The Lebanese judiciary had come under international pressure, especially human rights groups, to release Hannibal, who was seen as a “political prisoner”. He was being held for allegedly withholding information in Sadr’s disappearance.
The groups refuted the claims, arguing that Hannibal was only three years old when the cleric went missing and that years later, he never assumed any political, military or security position when his father was in power. A judicial source told Asharq Al-Awsat that the decision to release Hannibal “was taken after the investigator had exhausted all legal measures, whether in communicating with Libyan authorities or during his last interrogation.”The investigator concluded that his continued detention was no longer justified after ten years, and that Hamadeh had gathered all possible information in the case, it added. A Libyan delegation, including government and judicial representatives, had visited Lebanon in recent days to follow up on the case. It met with the official committee on Sadr’s disappearance and Hamadeh. The ten million dollars removed from Hannibal’s bail were going to be a form of partial compensation for the families of the three missing people in the case. Sadr’s family eventually demanded compensation of one Lebanese pound, Badreddine’s family did not demand compensation and the Yaacoub family objected to the hefty bail. Sadr and his two companions went missing during a trip to Libya in 1978. Gaddafi had been living in exile in Syria with his Lebanese wife, Aline Skaf, and children until he was abducted in 2015 and brought to Lebanon by Lebanese militants who were demanding information about Sadr. Lebanese police later announced they had seized Hannibal from the northeastern Lebanese city of Baalbek where he was being held, and he has been held ever since in a Beirut jail, where he was faced questioning over Sadr's disappearance. Libya formally requested Hannibal’s release in 2023, citing his deteriorating health after he went on a hunger strike to protest his detention without trial. The case has been a long-standing sore point in Lebanon. The cleric’s family believes he may still be alive in a Libyan prison, though most Lebanese presume he is dead. He would be 96 years old.

US vows to use 'every tool' to ensure Hezbollah no longer threatens Lebanon, region
Naharnet/November 07/2025
The United States will continue using every tool at its disposal to ensure Hezbollah no longer poses a threat to the Lebanese people or the broader region, the U.S. department of state said in a statement, after it imposed sanctions on three Hezbollah members accused of involvement in financial transactions for Hezbollah. "The United States is committed to supporting Lebanon by exposing and disrupting Iran’s covert financing of Hizballah. By enabling Hizballah, Iran holds Lebanon back and undermines its sovereignty. Iran and Hizballah cannot be allowed to keep Lebanon captive any longer," the statement said.

Aoun: Lebanon committed to ceasefire agreement, Israel increasing its attacks
Naharnet/November 07/2025
President Joseph Aoun on Friday noted that “Lebanon is committed to the cessation of hostilities agreement, while Israel is still occupying the five hills and increasing its attacks on it.”Aoun voiced his remarks in a meeting in Baabda with a delegation from the World Bank. “Let the World Bank stand by Lebanon and continue constructive cooperation to achieve recovery and sustainable growth,” the president added.

Report: Israel may launch 'preventive' Hezbollah strike, but not within next month
Naharnet/November 07/2025
It is “not unlikely” that Israel might launch a several-day “preemptive operation" against Hezbollah across Lebanon, the Israeli Hayom newspaper has reported. “The preemptive Israeli operation against Hezbollah is not likely to take place within the next month, unless Hezbollah decides to escalate,” the Israeli daily added. Israel’s Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper meanwhile quoted Israeli security sources as saying that “Israeli intelligence has detected the transfer of weapons and new military training by Hezbollah, some with cooperation from the Lebanese Army.”

Salam tells Hezbollah only state has war and peace decision
Naharnet/November 07/2025
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said Friday that only the state has the war and peace decision, a day after Hezbollah said it has the right to defend itself against Israel. Salam said the government is working on monopolizing weapons and ending Israeli attacks and occupation. "There are no more empty promises, but rather practical steps," he vowed. In an open letter to the Lebanese people and their leaders, Hezbollah said it rejected "any political negotiations" between Lebanon and Israel, and that such talks would "not serve the national interest". "We reaffirm our legitimate right... to defend ourselves against an enemy that imposes war on our country and does not cease its attacks," Hezbollah added. It nevertheless said it remained committed to the ceasefire.

Israeli official says Israel would strike Beirut if army fails to disarm Hezbollah
Agence France Presse/November 07/2025
A senior Israeli military official has warned that Israel would attack targets in Beirut if the Lebanese army fails to disarm Hezbollah. "If the Lebanese army does not disarm Hezbollah and fails to meet the demands of the ceasefire, Israel, with U.S. backing, will attack Hezbollah targets across Lebanon, including in Beirut," the official told Israeli Channel 12, hours after Israel struck a series of targets in southern Lebanon. The official said Thursday's strikes were "just a preview" of what is to come if Hezbollah is not disarmed. The attacks came hours after Hezbollah lashed out at Lebanon's leadership, rejecting suggestions that it might be time to begin direct talks with Israel. In an open letter to the Lebanese people and their leaders, Hezbollah said it rejected "any political negotiations" between Lebanon and Israel, and that such talks would "not serve the national interest". "We reaffirm our legitimate right... to defend ourselves against an enemy that imposes war on our country and does not cease its attacks," Hezbollah added. Later on Thursday, the Israeli cabinet met to discuss "Hezbollah’s attempts to rebuild itself." President Joseph Aoun denounced the attacks and said that Israel has spared no effort to demonstrate its rejection of any negotiated settlement between the two countries, while the Lebanese army said Israeli strikes were preventing the full implementation of a ceasefire deal with Hezbollah.
Disarmament drive
Hezbollah was the only movement in Lebanon that kept its arms after the 1975-1990 civil war, claiming it had a duty to liberate territory occupied by Israel and to defend the country. Since the ceasefire, the United States has increased pressure on Lebanese authorities to disarm the group. Lebanon says it has formulated a plan for imposing a state monopoly on weapons, and the government met Thursday to take stock of the disarmament efforts. Information minister Paul Morcos said afterwards that the cabinet had "commended the progress achieved... despite ongoing obstacles, primarily the continued Israeli hostilities".Last week, Israel's Defense Minister Israel Katz accused Aoun of "dragging his feet" on disarmament. Hezbollah has criticized the government's "hasty decision" to take away its weapons, claiming that Israel has taken advantage of the push.

Report: Iran behind Hezbollah's controversial 'open letter'
Naharnet/November 07/2025
A strong dispute has erupted within Hezbollah, particularly between the political faction that is close to Speaker Nabih Berri and the military faction that implements Iran’s decisions, the Nidaa al-Watan newspaper reported on Friday. “Because the political decision ultimately rests with Iran, Hezbollah yesterday receive an Iranian memo from the supreme leader (Ali Khamenei) asking it to reject negotiations (with Israel) and maintain full readiness to undermine the ceasefire agreement between Lebanon and Israel,” the daily said. “In its letter, Hezbollah hinted yesterday to the possibility of responding to the Israeli strikes, in a step that had not been expected by the Lebanese government nor by the Israelis themselves,” Nidaa al-Watan added. “The letter was addressed to the three presidents to say that Berri bears the responsibility for convincing the political faction in Hezbollah to agree to negotiations, something that dismayed the Iranians,” the newspaper said. Moreover, Nidaa al-Watan reported that President Joseph Aoun and PM Nawaf Salam were annoyed by Hezbollah’s letter and that they communicated with Berri, who seemed to be “surprised” by the letter’s content. The daily added that U.S. and Gulf officials warned their Lebanese counterparts of the “dangerousness of Hezbollah’s stance.”

Report: Some in Israel don't see need for anti-Hezbollah strike
Naharnet/November 07/2025
The Israeli Air Force, the military intelligence and the Israeli northern command have devised a joint attack plan with the aim of weakening Hezbollah and it can be implemented based on a political decision or if Hezbollah decided to respond to the Israeli attacks, the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper said. “In Beirut, the Israeli army is still avoiding to target areas in which the organization is storing weapons in order not to undermine security there,” the daily added. It also revealed that there are divergent viewpoints in Israel over the possible implementation of the plan, with some seeing it as necessary and others believing that the current attacks are sufficient to curb Hezbollah’s growth, warning that any escalation might put international pressure on Israel. “Some officials note that there could be a round of mutual retaliation should Hezbollah respond or should it receive a strong blow, but they stress that the group is not as strong as it was on October 7 (2023) and that its missile capabilities are limited. Iran is also facing difficulties in supporting it, and although it has the ability to fire missiles at Israel, the Israeli response will be fiercer,” the newspaper added.

The Cairo Agreement… From Arafat to Nasrallah: Lebanon as an Alternative Homeland or an Islamic Republic
Chebel Al-Zoghbi/November 07/2025
(Free translation from Arabic by Elias Bejjani)
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/11/148960/
Around this time of year, we recall the memory of the ill-fated Cairo Agreement (1969), which handed over Lebanese sovereignty—first over the South, then over the entire country—to Yasser Arafat and his army. That agreement was a fatal strategic mistake, allowing what so called the “Palestinian resistance” to operate from Lebanese territory, thus dragging Lebanon into devastating wars in which it had no stake.
Today, more than half a century later, the same scene is being repeated, but with a different face and under a different name: Hezbollah.
What Arafat did under the banner of the Palestinian Revolution, Hezbollah is doing today under the slogan of the so called Islamic Resistance. Between the “Cairo Agreement” and the triad of “People, Army, and Resistance” (الشعب، الجيش، والمقاومة – a widely used slogan in Lebanon), there is no difference exept for the name… and the operator (المُشغّل).
Had Arafat succeeded, Lebanon would have been transformed into the Alternative Homeland (الوطن البديل) for the Palestinians, as some countries were planning at the time.
Had Hezbollah succeeded, Lebanon today would be an Islamic Republic, subject to the Rule of the Jurisprudent (Velayat-e Faqih) in Tehran.
Arafat occupied half of Lebanon and more, established his state within the state (دولة داخل الدولة), imposed his authority on security and military decision-making, and controlled the airport, ports, and camps.
Hezbollah, however, has gone much further: It controls all of Lebanon—the airport and the port, the crossings and the borders, the judiciary, security, and the army, and even the Central Bank and “Al-Qard Al-Hasan” (القرض الحسن – Hezbollah’s financial/lending institution), which has become the bank of the Miniature Islamic Republic.
The South, in the seventies, was transformed into what was known as “Fatah-Land,” and today, all of Lebanon has become “Hezbollah-Land.”
The fundamental difference is that Arafat was an armed refugee imposed by the circumstances of the Palestinian displacement, while Hezbollah originated within the embrace of the Lebanese state and then turned against it from within, taking an entire sect with it and programming their minds for loyalty to the Iranian Shiites “Velayat-e Faqih” not to Lebanon.
Lebanon has been hijacked twice: once in the name of the Palestinian Cause, and once in the name of the Iranian Islamic Resistance.
In both cases, the price was the same: eroded sovereignty, a weak state, and a people paying the price of regional conflicts.
Had Hezbollah succeeded in its confrontation with Israel, it would have immediately declared victory and then announced the transformation of Lebanon into an Islamic Republic, and would not have hesitated to name the airport after Qasem Soleimani. History repeated itself, those (Israel) who defeated Arafat in the past and thwarted his project have today defeated Hezbollah and foiled its project.
From the Cairo Agreement to the “People, Army, and Resistance” triad is one journey, whose permanent title is: the loss of Lebanon between a non-Lebanese rifle and a non-national agenda.
Meanwhile, Hezbollah continues to defy the Lebanese people and the international community, refusing to hand over its weapons to the state and disregarding (ضارباً عرض الحائط) all calls for sovereignty and legitimacy. For Hezbollah, weapons are not for the defense of Lebanon, but an Iranian bargaining chip used to blackmail the internal and external parties and serve Tehran’s expansionist projects.
As for the Lebanese state, it practices helplessness and subservience, hesitates to confront, and hides behind slogans of “national unity” and “civil war” to justify its surrender. It is a state hostage to fear, incapable of imposing its decisions, content with the role of a mere spectator while Hezbollah confiscates sovereignty and reduces the nation to its own square.
Thus, Lebanon is currently caught between an absent authority and an overgrown, tyrannical Hezbollah.
In summay, Lebanon remains a hostage to the illegitimate Iranian weapons, and thus is threatened once again with turning from a nation of freedom and peace, into an arena for external destructive anti-Lebanese Jihadist and terrorist schemes
**Chebel Al-Zoghbi is a Member of the Central Command Council in the Guardians of the Cedars Party (حزب حراس الأرز)

Hezbollah in Two Statements
Mustafa Fahs/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2025
Forty years separate February 16, 1985, the day in which Hezbollah issued its founding statement, and November 6, 2025, the day it issued its “re-founding” yesterday. Forty, here, is not just a random number. In the view of the Sufis, it signifies passage from the outward to the inward, from knowledge to taste, from action to unveiling.” It is the timespan of complete maturity. However, we see nothing of the sort in Hezbollah’s second statement. In its first founding statement four decades ago, “An Open Letter to the Downtrodden in Lebanon and the World,” Hezbollah presented a political document defining its identity, goals, ideology, and frame of reference. Its identity immediately ran up against the reality of Lebanon’s diverse communities as well as the solid foundations of the country’s constitutional formula. Accordingly, the party was compelled to retreat and to adopt a more “Lebanized” modus operandi, even when it was on the ascent. With the “re-founding” address yesterday, “An Open Letter to the Three Presidents and the Lebanese People,” the party appears to have been seeking to project a Lebanese identity, as well as concern for the state and its institutions. In practice, however, it has been taking what it is owed from the state without giving its due. Hezbollah continues, under the pretext of “resistance,” which served as the cornerstone of its first statement and remains the keystone of its second, to prevent the state from carrying out its most essential duty: monopolizing armament and deciding questions of war and peace.
In both statements, past and present, the Israeli enemy offers Hezbollah a pretext for keeping its weapons. What the party has failed to grasp, however, is that its pretexts and its approach to resistance do not meet the criteria for legitimacy. Resistance is, in principle, the inalienable right of all peoples to defend their land and liberate their homeland. In Hezbollah’s case, “resistance” has been equated to monopolizing this right, stripping the concept of its universalism, and turning it into a pretext for clinging to arms that have failed the test of strength.
The party’s second statement seems to build on a historical moment that had shaped the objectives of its first statement. This moment, however, can no longer be projected onto the reality of Lebanon, the region, or the world today. That moment was defined by the emergence of an ideological force that filled the vacuum left by the defeat of the Lebanese National Movement and the Palestine Liberation Organization, following the latter’s withdrawal from Lebanon in the aftermath of the Israeli invasion of 1982. This ideological force succeeded (as a result of intersecting regional and international factors) in toppling the Lebanese-Israeli peace agreement known as the May 17, 1983 Accord, allowing it to inherit the mantle of resistance, indeed to monopolize it, with the approval of the Syrian occupation forces.
In this second statement, Hezbollah is effectively reasserting that it is a “resistance movement” exempt from the stipulations of the state’s exclusive right to use armed force and decide on matters of war and peace, under the pretext of an enemy that continues to occupy Lebanese territory and attack the country. Hezbollah has gone from denial to outright repudiation: the party refuses to acknowledge that it had suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of the Israeli enemy and now seeks to avoid following through on all its commitments, placing the state in an impossible position.
Today, the party openly boasts that its “resistance” endures and does not need national consensus. It insists on making a geographic argument for its weapons, demanding that the state align with it politically and diplomatically. The latest statement of its partner in politics and arms, Parliamentary Speaker Nabih Berri, came to its support, affirming that “there will be neither war nor direct negotiations” and echoing the same rhetoric he had made before the war against Lebanon last year.
Hezbollah’s statement does nothing to protect southerners, and Berri’s remarks do not reassure the Lebanese. The policies and arms of the “Shiite duo” have been exposed by the war. They cannot ensure deterrence, and the ceasefire agreement exposed their failure at the negotiating table. Now, they make themselves look bigger by projecting their failures onto the state, obstructing its diplomacy and even its desperate attempts to spare Lebanon further calamities. Therefore, the “open letter” or “statement” declares a return to arms: no returning to the state, no southerners returning to their villages, and, most ominously, the specter of a resumption of war.

Hezbollah’s open letters: From 1985 to 2025, the same claim to rule Lebanon
Makram Rabah/english.alarabiya/November 07/2025
In Lebanon, history rarely repeats itself – it simply refuses to end. Hezbollah’s “open letter” of November 6, 2025, is a direct descendant of its first one, issued in February 1985, at the height of the Lebanese Civil War. Then, the young organization proclaimed its allegiance to Iran’s supreme leader, called for the establishment of an Islamic state in Lebanon, and rejected the legitimacy of the Lebanese political system altogether. Forty years later, the language has changed, but the ambition has not: to substitute the party for the state, and to place its will above the constitution.
The 2025 letter, addressed to President Joseph Aoun, Speaker Nabih Berri, and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, rejects any new negotiations with Israel and insists that Lebanon’s leaders limit themselves to enforcing the November 27, 2024 ceasefire under UN Resolution 1701. It warns against “hasty decisions” on the question of arms and claims that the issue of Hezbollah’s arsenal can only be addressed in a “national defense strategy” – a euphemism that for decades has meant endless postponement. The subtext is unmistakable: Hezbollah alone will decide when Lebanon negotiates, when it fights, and when it remains silent. The 1985 document was explicit. Hezbollah identified itself as part of the “Islamic Ummah led by the guardianship of the jurisprudent” and denounced Lebanon’s sectarian order as illegitimate. It pledged loyalty to Iran’s then-supreme leader, Ruhollah Khomeini, and envisioned an “Islamic order” established through armed struggle. The 2025 version avoids theological language, but the structure of authority it implies is identical. The “resistance” remains the ultimate arbiter of Lebanon’s destiny – a divine mandate recast as a military necessity. This continuity is crucial to understanding Hezbollah’s self-image. The party has never evolved from a revolutionary movement into a political actor bound by the state it inhabits. Instead, it has colonized that state while pretending to defend it. Its open letter reads less like a policy position and more like an edict from a parallel government, one that views itself as Lebanon’s guardian and its institutions as decorative facades.
By invoking Resolution 1701, Hezbollah claims to be the custodian of international law. Yet it embraces only the clauses that restrain Israel, not those that require the Lebanese state to establish exclusive authority south of the Litani. In Hezbollah’s telling, 1701 is a shield for its continued militarization, not a framework for demilitarization. The same distortion applies to the November 2024 ceasefire: the party portrays itself as its enforcer while rejecting any mechanism – domestic or international – that might verify compliance or curb its autonomy. This is sovereignty turned inside out. The state’s right to control its territory becomes a privilege it must earn; the militia’s right to bear arms becomes a sacred duty beyond question. What Hezbollah calls “defense of Lebanon” is, in reality, the permanent suspension of the Lebanese Republic. There is another myth that Hezbollah’s 2025 letter tries to revive – the idea that the “resistance” protects Lebanon from destruction. The facts tell a different story. Since 2006, every war Hezbollah has waged has ended not in victory but in devastation and isolation. The 2006 conflict left over a thousand Lebanese dead and much of the country in ruins. The party’s intervention in Syria, tethered Lebanon to Bashar al-Assad’s crimes and drew sanctions, financial collapse, and political paralysis in its wake. Even its latest confrontation, culminating in the 2024 ceasefire, ended with no territorial gains, no political concessions, and yet another shattered economy.
A movement that has repeatedly dragged Lebanon into wars it cannot win, that has lost the trust of most of the Arab world, and that has turned a once-neutral country into an outpost of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), has no moral or political standing to issue manifestos in the name of the nation. The irony is sharper still: Hezbollah is part of the government it now pretends to lecture. A party represented in cabinet, with ministers and MPs drawing state salaries, cannot claim to be an armed opposition defending the homeland. It is the state’s jailer, not its protector.
Hezbollah’s open letter is not a call for stability but a declaration of veto. By rejecting any “new rounds of negotiation,” the party blocks Lebanon’s leadership from even exploring diplomatic options that might ease tensions along the Blue Line or strengthen UNIFIL’s mandate. It warns the state against asserting a monopoly of force, equating constitutional principle with treason. This is not national unity – it is coercion cloaked in patriotic language. The message is also aimed inward, at the government itself. By addressing the three presidencies directly, Hezbollah is reminding them of the hierarchy it recognizes: the party speaks, the state obeys. The subtext to President Aoun and Prime Minister Salam is unmistakable – any move that hints at reclaiming sovereignty will be read as provocation.
Lebanon today stands isolated, economically strangled, and politically paralyzed – not because it lacks resistance, but because it lacks a state. The international community has grown weary of a country that speaks with two voices, one diplomatic and one militant. Gulf capitals no longer invest; Europe sees Lebanon as a humanitarian liability; Washington has downgraded it from partner to problem. All of this is the direct outcome of Hezbollah’s dual power, its insistence that Lebanon’s future must pass through the prism of its weapons. If Hezbollah truly cared about sovereignty, it would begin by surrendering the veto it seized four decades ago. It would allow the Lebanese Army to govern the borders, the government to negotiate peace, and the people to reclaim their future. Instead, it continues to weaponize the language of dignity while holding the nation hostage to its own insecurities.The true act of resistance today lies not in defying Israel but in defying the internal occupation of Hezbollah’s logic – the belief that Lebanon exists only to justify its arms. The 1985 open letter promised an Islamic state; the 2025 letter defends a militarized one. Between those two documents lies the tragedy of a country that never recovered its voice. Hezbollah’s new “open letter” should not be mistaken for a statement of national defense. It is a confession of failure – the failure to build, to govern, to coexist. A party that has lost wars, ruined alliances, and bankrupted its own society has forfeited the right to speak in Lebanon’s name. The time has come for the state to reclaim that voice, and for the Lebanese people to remember that sovereignty cannot be delegated, least of all to those who destroyed it.

Hezbollah’s defiance, the instability of the ceasefire and attempts to promote an Israeli-Lebanese dialogue
Dror Doron/The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center/November 07/2025
https://www.terrorism-info.org.il/en/hezbollahs-defiance-the-instability-of-the-ceasefire-andattempts-to-promote-an-israeli-lebanese-dialogue/
On November 6, 2025, Hezbollah published an open letter to the Lebanese leadership and public. It claimed it had abided by the November 27, 2024 ceasefire agreement and added that the objective of demanding that Hezbollah disarm and the Lebanese begin negotiations with Israel was to weaken Lebanon. It also insisted that it would not give up the “right to resist” and was not required to obey government directives on issues of war and peace. Hezbollah secretary general Na’im Qassem and other senior figures expressed similar positions.
The letter was prompted by IDF attacks to enforce the ceasefire, targeting Hezbollah’s reconstruction efforts and Radwan Force capabilities, amid reports of the organization’s rearmament. Israel and the United States also warned that if the Lebanese army did not accelerate Hezbollah’s disarmament, the attacks could intensify in quality and quantity.
To prevent escalation and resolve the disputes between Israel and Lebanon, the United States and Egypt proposed holding bilateral negotiations. Lebanese president Aoun stated that Lebanon had no choice but to engage in dialogue with Israel; Nabih Berri, speaker of the Lebanese Parliament, and a Hezbollah ally, opposed direct negotiations.
Hezbollah’s open letter was another expression the organization’s defiance of efforts to disarm it, after previously expressing vague willingness to discuss possibly disarming “under certain conditions.” However, Hezbollah has not issued the Lebanese government an ultimatum or explicitly warned Israel, reflecting the organization’s continued restraint despite the IDF attacks. In ITIC assessment, Hezbollah’s continued military buildup, the Lebanese army’s weakness in preventing it and the intensification of Israel’s measures could wear down the restraint shown by all actors since the beginning of the ceasefire and increase the risk of a serious escalation toward the end of 2025, the deadline set by the Lebanese government for disarming armed militias in the country, including Hezbollah.
Hezbollah’s Open Letter
On November 6, 2025, Hezbollah published an open letter to Lebanese president Joseph Aoun, prime minister Nawaf Salam, Lebanese Parliament speaker Nabih Berri, and the Lebanese public at large. It presented the organization’s public positions in light of continued Israeli attacks on Hezbollah targets, the demand to disarm the organization, and international pressure on Lebanon to open direct talks with Israel:
Hezbollah abided by the ceasefire agreement: Hezbollah claimed that both it and the Lebanese state had honored the November 27, 2024 ceasefire, including halting military operations against Israel, while “the Zionist enemy” continued to “violate” Lebanon’s sovereignty by land, air and at sea. It said Israel had not taken calls to stop its “aggression” seriously and used them “to blackmail Lebanon and impose conditions and demands” aimed at “subjugating and humiliating Lebanon” so it would recognize “the legitimacy of occupation by force.”
Disarming Hezbollah: Hezbollah claimed that the government’s decision on the exclusivity of arms was a “mistake,” and that Israel had exploited it to “impose” the demand for the disarmament of the “resistance”[2] in all Lebanon as a condition for ending “aggression,” not only south of the Litani. In Hezbollah’s opinion, there could be discussion of state monopoly over arms only within a national consensus for a comprehensive defense and sovereignty strategy, not in response to a “foreign request or Israeli blackmail.” It warned that “the Israeli enemy” directed its demands at all of Lebanon to “neutralize its ability to resist extortion.”
Refusal to negotiate with Israel: Hezbollah warned against attempts to drag Lebanon into new rounds of negotiations which were traps “serving the goals and interests of the Zionist enemy.” It claimed that any negotiation would only benefit Israel, since “the Israeli enemy always takes and never carries out what is imposed on it.” Seeking to portray its stance as Lebanon’s official position, the letter said, “Lebanon now seeks to end the aggression by enforcing the ceasefire declaration and by pressuring the Zionist enemy to comply with it, and has no interest whatsoever in yielding to aggressive blackmail or being dragged into political negotiations with the Zionist enemy.”
Continuing the “resistance:” Hezbollah said it viewed “resistance to occupation and aggression as a legitimate right,” and would stand alongside the Lebanese army and people to defend the country’s sovereignty. It claimed that the “right” did not fall within the category of a decision on peace or war, but was meant as a defense against an enemy imposing a war on Lebanon. Thus Hezbollah sought to undermine President Aoun and Prime Minister Salam’s stance that only the state would decide on war and peace, while also reviving the “army-people-resistance” motto removed from the current government’s founding principles.
A call for a unified Lebanese position: Hezbollah called for adopting a unified national stance to uphold all ceasefire terms and to stop “the violations, aggression, and Zionist expansion,” rather than be drawn into political negotiations that could lead to normalization or harm Lebanon’s right to self-defense.
Following the publication, a “Hezbollah source” said that despite the open letter, the organization did not want a war, but rather that Israel fulfill the terms of the ceasefire. “We do not want war,” he said, “but we will not allow Lebanon to be subdued by force, blackmail or pressure” (al-Araby al-Jadeed, November 6, 2025).
The points of the open letter were recently reiterated by senior Hezbollah figures:
Hezbollah secretary general Na’im Qassem said the state’s responsibility was to monitor Israeli “violations and aggression.” In a speech at an agricultural fair, he called on the government to support the army in repelling “Israeli aggression” and said, “Everyone in Lebanon is responsible for confronting aggression and occupation, each in their role and position.” He promised they would not change their position on “resistance and steadfastness despite intimidation” and called for pressure to be exerted on Israel to fulfill the ceasefire agreement, claiming that any new agreement would exonerate Israel by absolving it of responsibility for its actions (al-Manar, October 31, 2025).
Mohammad Raad, head of the Hezbollah faction in the Lebanese Parliament, said the organization “sheds blood and remains loyal to the resistance out of concern for Lebanon’s sovereignty so the enemy not think it will be easy to make us submit.” He urged the state and people to continue pressuring the “enemy” to declare a ceasefire and to implement the terms of the November 2024 agreement, warning that “any concession to the enemy or justification for aggression will not stop its blackmail but will encourage it to demand more” (al-Manar, November 1, 2025).
Hassan Fadlallah, member of the Hezbollah faction in the Lebanese Parliament, noted that they still viewed state institutions as responsible for handling Israeli “violations” of the ceasefire, even though Hezbollah “suffers and its members’ blood is shed.” He said that while “the enemy” continued its attacks, “the Lebanese people stand firm and engage in resistance activities that are not rockets, bullets or explosives” (al-Nashra, November 2, 2025).
Mahmoud Qamati, deputy head of Hezbollah political council, called on the Lebanese authorities to fulfill their promises and meet their commitments, including stopping the “violations.” He stressed that “the equation the Israeli enemy seeks to impose on Lebanon will not hold and will change.” He rejected calls to negotiate with “the enemy” after Israel had failed to implement the ceasefire for a year, and urged countries supporting the agreement to “complete it and pressure the enemy to implement it” (al-Akhbar, November 3, 2025).
Hezbollah’s Growing Strength and the Instability of the Ceasefire
Hezbollah’s open letter came amid intensified Israeli attacks to enforce the ceasefire agreement and warnings that Israel would escalate if Lebanon’s government did not speed up Hezbollah’s disarmament, as had been decided in August 2025.[3] Recent reports indicated that Hezbollah was in an advanced stage of rebuilding its military capabilities and arsenal for a possible future confrontation with Israel, adapting its structure to the new reality following continued Israeli enforcement since the November 27, 2024 ceasefire. “Individuals with access to Israeli and Arab intelligence” reported that Hezbollah was stockpiling rockets, anti-tank missiles and artillery, some smuggled by sea and through the Syrian border despite Damascus’ efforts to curb it, and also manufacturing weapons independently (Wall Street Journal, October 30, 2025). United States envoy Thomas Barrack, visiting Bahrain stated that Hezbollah had about 40,000 operatives and between 15,000 and 20,000 rockets and missiles (al-Nashra, November 1, 2025).
Given Hezbollah’s rearmament, the IDF stepped up attacks on Hezbollah sites and operatives. In October 2025, the IDF attacked 36 times, mainly in the Nabatieh area north of the Litani River and in the Beqa’a Valley, eliminating more than 20 operatives and commanders and damaging military sites and engineering equipment used to rebuild Hezbollah’s military capabilities.[4] From early November until November 6, 2025, seven Hezbollah terrorist operatives were eliminated, six of them from the Radwan Force (IDF spokesperson and Lebanese media, November 1–6, 2025).
Israel and the United States told the Lebanese authorities they were too slow in implementing the disarmament plan, not just south of the Litani as stipulated, but throughout Lebanon. Defense minister Israel Katz said “Hezbollah is playing with fire, and President Aoun is dragging his feet,” demanding that the Lebanese government dismantle Hezbollah and remove it from south Lebanon, warning that IDF enforcement “will continue and even escalate” (Israel Katz’s X account, November 2, 2025). “Israeli sources” added that Hezbollah would not be allowed to return to its October 6, 2023 status and that the IDF would intensify attacks and enter combat if necessary (N12, November 5, 2025). United States envoy Barrack admitted Lebanon was “a failed state” and said it was unrealistic to expect the government to forcibly disarm one of its political parties, warning that doing so could trigger a civil war, adding that the United States would support Israel if it “became more aggressive toward Lebanon” (Reuters, November 2, 2025).
However, Lebanese officials stressed their determination to complete Hezbollah’s disarmament south of the Litani by the end of the year, without addressing other regions, particularly Hezbollah’s strongholds north of the Litani, in the Beqa’a Valley and the Dahiyeh al-Janoubia, Beirut’s southern suburb. Interior minister Ahmed al-Hajjar demanded Israel withdraw from its positions in south Lebanon and stop its “aggression,” saying “it is the state’s duty to extend its control over all Lebanese territory and declare itself the sole authority in the area, so weapons must be subordinate to it.” He claimed the army had made “significant and positive progress” in disarmament in the south (al-Sharq, November 2, 2025).
On November 6, 2025, the Lebanese army was supposed to present its second monthly report to the government on the disarmament plan. A “military source” said the October report would describe “significant progress” in confiscating weapons south of the Litani, dismantling military facilities, sealing tunnels, and discovering over ten weapons caches. The source added that the army was acting “despite major risks and challenges” and urged the international community to exert pressure on Israel to stop its attacks (al-Araby al-Jadeed, November 5, 2025).
Efforts to Promote Negotiations between Lebanon and Israel
Along with the continued Israeli attacks and disputes over Hezbollah’s disarmament, international pressure on Lebanon to agree to talks with Israel has grown, with the objective of preventing further escalation and resolving bilateral disputes.
United States envoy Thomas Barrack said it was “inconceivable” that no dialogue existed between Israel and Lebanon, adding that Israel was ready to reach a border agreement and “Beirut has no time to waste.” He offered to mediate between the sides in any capital city they chose (Reuters, November 2, 2025). According to al-Akhbar, the Americans opposed any option other than direct negotiations, reportedly telling Lebanese leaders that the only way to avoid “Israeli punishment” was to “take concrete steps to dismantle the ‘resistance’ and hold direct talks with Israel” (al-Akhbar, November 5, 2025).
Egyptian intelligence chief Hassan Rashad, who visited Lebanon in late September 2025, reportedly presented a four-stage Egyptian initiative: a ceasefire of over three months during which all “Israeli hostile actions” would cease and Lebanese prisoners be released in exchange for Hezbollah’s full withdrawal south of the Litani; Egypt would initiate direct contact with Hezbollah leadership and craft a “political-security formula under international auspices” to address the group’s weapons north of the Litani; Israel would begin withdrawing from “occupied points” in south Lebanon as Hezbollah was disarmed in the north; and the land border would be demarcated (al-Liwaa, November 1, 2025). Egypt was reportedly willing to mediate, drawing on its experience from indirect Israel-Hamas negotiations (Lebanon24, November 1, 2025).
“Arab diplomatic sources” said Aoun had accepted the Egyptian offer to mediate. They reported that during Rashad’s visit, a “security figure” from Egypt had also met with Hezbollah officials, including Mohammad Raad and a Lebanese-Iranian-linked security official. The sources said Egypt urged Lebanon “to adhere to its conditions, particularly rejecting talks under fire and demanding Israeli withdrawal, so it would not enter negotiations in a position of capitulation” (aliww.com.lb, November 5, 2025).
President Aoun acknowledged that Lebanon had no choice but to negotiate. He said politics had three pillars, diplomacy, economy, and war, and when war lead nowhere, one had to turn to negotiations. He noted that negotiations were not held between friends or allies, but between enemies (Lebanese presidency X account, November 3, 2025).
Nabih Berri, speaker of the Lebanese Parliament and a Hezbollah ally, claimed that “the resistance fulfilled all its commitments under the ceasefire agreement,” asking, “When, where, and how did Israel adhere to any of its clauses?” Regarding possible talks with Israel, he said “Lebanese will not agree to normalization” (NBN network, November 4, 2025). On another occasion, he said he believed there would not be a new war and opposed any direct negotiations, saying a “proven mechanism” already existed, a reference to his indirect talks with United States envoy Amos Hochstein which led to the 2022 maritime border deal (al-Jumhuriya, November 6, 2025).
Samir Geagea, leader of the Christian Lebanese Forces party, said in response that even if Hezbollah had once acted as the “resistance” in the distant past, at other times it served as an arm of Revolutionary Guards, serving Iranian interests “at the cost of thousands of Lebanese deaths and the state itself.” He said Israel’s continued presence in south Lebanon was caused by the presence of Hezbollah fighters there in violation of the agreement (Samir Geagea’s X account, November 5, 2025).
Tensions in South Lebanon: The Incident in Blida
On the night of October 29, 2025, an IDF force operated to destroy Hezbollah terrorist facilities in the Lebanese town of Blida, near the Israeli border. The soldiers identified a suspect inside a building and, after instituting the procedure for detaining a suspect and issuing warnings, shot and killed him. The IDF spokesperson said the building had recently been used by Hezbollah for terrorist activity under civilian cover (IDF Arabic X account, October 30, 2025).
Lebanese reports claimed the IDF force, including armored vehicles, entered the town and shot Ibrahim Salameh, a Blida municipal employee, while he slept in the municipal building (al-Manar and the Lebanese News Agency, October 30, 2025).
The Lebanese army stated that upon receiving information about the shooting, a patrol was dispatched to Blida and identified a “hostile ground force” which had entered the town, shot at the council building, killed one employee, and violated Lebanon’s sovereignty and UN Security Council Resolution 1701 (Lebanese army X account, October 30, 2025).
President Joseph Aoun met with army commander Rodolf Haykal to discuss the incident, instructing him “to resist any Israeli incursion into south Lebanon in order to defend the state and its citizens.” Aoun said the mechanism monitoring the ceasefire had to exert pressure on Israel to comply and stop “violations” (Lebanese presidency X account, October 30, 2025). Justice minister Adel Nasser said the army would confront any Israeli incursion as part of the president’s directive, adding that Lebanese diplomacy would complement the army’s efforts to counter “Israeli aggression” (Al Jazeera, October 30, 2025).
Hezbollah condemned the incident in Blida, accusing “the Zionist enemy of continuing its crimes on Lebanese soil.” The organization “welcomed the president’s decision to instruct the army to resist any Israeli incursion” and called for full support of the army to strengthen its capabilities (Hezbollah combat information Telegram channel, October 30, 2025). Ali Fayyad, member of the Hezbollah faction in the Lebanese Parliament, said Aoun’s stance was “an important development in confronting the Zionist enemy and Lebanon’s official position” (al-‘Ahed, October 31, 2025).
“Sources” claimed that President Aoun received messages from the United States expressing dissatisfaction with his order for the army to “confront the enemy.” They said several parties urged Aoun “to fulfill his commitments and instruct the army to disarm Hezbollah, not seek confrontation with Israel” (al-Akhbar, November 4, 2025).
Full document in PDF format
[1] Click https://www.terrorism-info.org.il/en to subscribe and receive the ITIC's daily updates as well as its other publications.
[2] Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed terrorist organization, and its allies.
[3] For further information, see the October 2025ITIC report, Hezbollah’s Reconstruction Efforts Amid the IDF’s Enforcement of the Ceasefire in Lebanon and the October 2025 report, Implementation of the Lebanese Army’s Plan to Disarm Hezbollah: Status Report
[4] For further information, see the November 2025 ITIC report, Spotlight on Terrorism – October 2025

FDD’s Long War Journal/Israeli operations in Lebanon against Hezbollah: October 27–November 02/2025/قائمة بالهجمات الإسرائيلية ضد حزب الله ما بين27 تشرين الأول و02 من تشرين الثاني لسنة 2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/11/148968/
November 7, 20251
Israeli operations in Lebanon against Hezbollah: October 27–November 02/2025
David Daoud/FDD’s Long War Journal/Published on November 05/2025
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) conducted numerous operations throughout Lebanon against Hezbollah between October 27 and November 2, 2025. Israeli activities this week were particularly intense and concentrated in south Lebanon, but targeted Hezbollah operatives, assets, and infrastructure north and south of the Litani River.
After an Israeli operation in Blida on October 30 resulted in the death of a Lebanese civilian, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun instructed Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) commander Rodolphe Haykal to have the LAF “interdict any Israeli penetration in the liberated lands of the south.” Meanwhile, the Israeli Security Cabinet met the same day to weigh intensifying the IDF’s operations in Lebanon in light of the Lebanese government’s inaction against Hezbollah’s ongoing and successful regeneration efforts.
The IDF conducted operations in 21 Lebanese locales, some of them more than once. These activities included:
Airstrikes: Five
Artillery: One
Detonations: One
Drone strikes: 11
Ground activities: Two
Surveillance activities: One
Quadcopter activities: Three
Map instructions: Click the top-left icon or an icon on the map to open the Map Key and adjust the map’s zoom as desired. Click the top-right icon to open a larger version of the map.https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid=1g9ULaxVFhhtiDU_3S_pOmTqTH_dQqJ0&ehbc=2E312F
Nabatieh Governorate
Bint Jbeil District: Aitaroun, Ayta ash Shaab, Kounine, and Yaroun
Hasbaya District: Shebaa
Marjayoun District: Khiam and Meiss al Jabal
Nabatieh District: Dawha-Kfar Reman, Jarmaq, Kfar Sir, Mahmoudiyeh, Nabatieh, and Nabatieh-Shoukine
South Lebanon Governorate
Tyre District: Bayyad, Dhayra, and Naaqoura
Casualties
October 27, 2025: Two Hezbollah operatives were killed.
October 28, 2025: No casualties were reported.
October 29, 2025: No casualties were reported.
October 30, 2025: One Lebanese civilian was killed, and four unidentified people were wounded.
October 31, 2025: Two Hezbollah operatives were killed, and five unidentified people were wounded.
November 1, 2025: Four Hezbollah operatives were killed, and four unidentified people were wounded.
November 2, 2025: No casualties were reported.
Chronology of Israeli operations against Hezbollah, October 27–November 2, 2025
October 27
At 1:53 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli quadcopter dropped a stun explosive in the Kasayer neighborhood of Meiss al Jabal in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Marjayoun District.
At 5:00 pm, NNA Lebanon reported an Israeli airstrike on a sawmill on the outskirts of Bayyad in the South Lebanon Governorate’s Tyre District. The strike killed two people, reported as brothers. Hezbollah-affiliated social media later announced the deaths of Hezbollah operative Hussian Ibrahim Suleiman, whose nom de guerre was Abu Trab, and Hezbollah operative Hassan Ibrahim Suleiman, whose nom de guerre was Hadi. Both of the men were from Bayyad. The IDF later released a statement saying that its aircraft targeted and killed Hussain Suleiman, describing him as a “terrorist […] from the ‘Radwan Force’ [commando] unit in Hezbollah,” alongside “an additional Hezbollah terrorist, Hassan Ibrahim Suleiman.” The IDF said the “terrorists were involved in advancing terror initiatives targeting the State of Israel’s territory and civilians and were assassinated as they were acting to rebuild terror infrastructure.”
No operations were reported.
October 29
At 6:35 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli quadcopter dropped an explosive in Dhayra in the South Lebanon Governorate’s Tyre District.
October 30
NNA Lebanon reported that at approximately 1:30 am, an Israeli ground patrol backed by several military vehicles and ATVs moved 1,000 meters past the Blue Line into Blida in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Marjayoun District. The force entered the Blida municipality building, where employee Ibrahim Musa Salameh had been residing, and killed Salameh. The operation lasted until 4:00 am, during which residents reportedly claimed hearing screaming and calls for help, and after which the Israeli force withdrew. Footage shown by Lebanese media outlets from the scene showed blood near a cot in a room serving as a makeshift home, appearing to confirm that Salameh was killed in the municipal building. According to his wife, the Salameh household in Blida had been destroyed during the recent Hezbollah-Israel war. After the war, Ibrahim Salameh returned to Blida to make a living, opting to reside in the municipal building due to a lack of alternate housing in the town. At 10:38 am, IDF Arabic Language Spokesman Avichay Adraee released a statement on the raid, saying, “Last night, during an IDF operation to destroy terror infrastructure belonging to Hezbollah near the village of Blida in south Lebanon, troops identified a suspect inside the building, and the force then initiated procedures aimed at arresting the suspect. [At the moment of] a direct threat to the force’s members, shots were fired to neutralize the threat, and a hit was identified. The details of the incident are being investigated.” Adraee added, “It must be noted that the building was recently used for Hezbollah’s terrorist activity under the cover of civilian infrastructure. This is the latest example of Hezbollah’s modus operandi, which endangers the people of Lebanon by absurdly exploiting civilian facilities for terrorist purposes.” While the IDF has conducted several operations in Blida since the November 2024 ceasefire, none appear to have targeted the municipal building. Therefore, Adraee’s specific claims about the Blida Municipal building being used for Hezbollah’s purposes cannot be immediately verified. However, Hezbollah is known to indirectly control municipalities in heavily Shiite areas of Lebanon. The Hezbollah-Amal electoral list won in Blida’s most recent municipal elections in May, and the municipality has cooperated with Hezbollah-controlled entities like the Islamic Health Committee, hosted official celebrations of significant Hezbollah anniversaries, maintains close links with the Iranian Embassy in Lebanon, and has commemorated several fallen Hezbollah fighters who originated in the town, some of whom were municipal workers.
At 10:37 am, NNA Lebanon reported that another Israeli airstrike targeted Jarmaq and Mahmoudiyeh. The IDF released a statement on the preceding strikes, saying it had struck a Hezbollah launcher and tunnel shaft, whose “presence in the area constituted a violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon.”
At 12:42 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli airstrike targeted a large forested area in Labbouneh, near Naqoura, in the South Lebanon Governorate’s Tyre District. Israeli ground forces simultaneously carried out a detonation in Labbouneh.
At 1:17 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli drone conducted a strike near Labbouneh, close to the area targeted in the preceding airstrike and approximately 200 meters from an LAF position.
At 3:56 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli drone targeted a house that allegedly belonged to a shepherd in Shebaa in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Hasbaya District. The strike wounded three people.
At 4:13 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli drone targeted the main road in Harouf in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Nabatieh District. The strike lightly wounded one person.
At 4:48 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that Israeli artillery positioned near the frontier town of Dishon in Northern Israel’s Safed Subdistrict targeted Yaroun in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Bint Jbeil District.
At 6:33 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli drone dropped an incendiary explosive in Mahmoudiyeh near the location of the earlier strikes, igniting fires in the area.
October 31
At 9:14 am, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli drone targeted a vehicle in Kounine in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Bint Jbeil District. The strike killed one person and wounded another. Hezbollah-affiliated social media later announced the death of Hezbollah operative Ibrahim Mahmoud Raslan, whose nom de guerre was Abu Jaafar, from Kounine. Hezbollah gave Raslan a military funeral in his hometown. The IDF later released a statement on Raslan’s assassination, describing him as “a Hezbollah maintenance officer,” who was “operating to reestablish Hezbollah terror infrastructure,” that “threatened the State of Israel and its citizens and violated the understandings between Israel and Lebanon.”
NNA Lebanon reported that at 3:30 pm, an Israeli drone targeted a building on Nabih Berri Boulevard at the entrance of the industrial zone of Nabatieh in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Nabatieh District. The strike wounded four people.
At 4:18 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli drone targeted a motorbike on the Nabatieh-Shoukine road in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Nabatieh District. The strike killed one person. Pro-Hezbollah social media accounts later announced the death of Hezbollah operative Hassan Hamed Ghaith, whose nom de guerre was Mohammad Allaiq, from Nabatieh. Lebanese media reports claimed that Ghaith had been killed while working as a delivery worker. Ghaith was given a Hezbollah military funeral in Nabatieh alongside four other Hezbollah operatives who would be killed the next day. The IDF released a statement claiming Ghaith’s assassination, describing him as an operative in Hezbollah’s Radwan Force commando unit and saying that he “was involved in advancing many terror initiatives aimed at the territory of the State of Israel and worked to restore the military infrastructure of the terror organization Hezbollah.” The IDF noted that Ghaith’s “activities posed a threat to the State of Israel and its citizens and a violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon.” The IDF later described Ghaith as the Radwan Force official in charge of the unit’s logistical operations, saying he was advancing Hezbollah’s regeneration “throughout south Lebanon.”
At 10:54 am, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli quadcopter dropped a stun explosive on the coast of Naqoura in the South Lebanon Governorate’s Tyre District.
At 2:14 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that an Israeli drone fired at several young men in the Randa neighborhood of Ayta Ash Shaab in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Bint Jbeil District.
NNA Lebanon reported that at 2:15 pm, an Israeli drone targeted a vehicle in Kfar Sir in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Nabatieh District. The strike wounded one person.
NNA Lebanon reported that at 10:20 pm, an Israeli airstrike targeted a vehicle on the Dawha-Kfar Reman road in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Nabatieh District. The strike killed four people and wounded three others. Hezbollah-affiliated social media soon announced the deaths of Hezbollah operatives Mohammad Al Jawad Mustafa Jaber, Mohammad Abbas Kaheil, whose nom de guerre was Abu Ali, Hadi Mustafa Hamed, who had been wounded in the September 17, 2024, pager detonation operation, and Abdallah Ghaleb Kaheil. All were from Nabatieh, where Hezbollah gave them a military funeral alongside Hassan Hamed Ghaith. The IDF released a statement claiming the strike, saying it had targeted and killed “four operatives in Hezbollah’s Radwan Force [commando] unit,” whose “activities constituted a threat to the State of Israel and its citizens and a violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon.”
November 2
At 4:23 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that Israeli forces fired two incendiary explosives towards the outskirts of Aitaroun in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Bint Jbeil District.
At 6:07 pm, NNA Lebanon reported that Israeli forces deployed an observation balloon over Khiam in the Nabatieh Governorate’s Marjayoun District.

Question: “What happens after death?”
GotQuestions.org/November 07/2025
Answer: Within the Christian faith, there is a significant amount of confusion regarding what happens after death. Some hold that after death everyone “sleeps” until the final judgment, after which everyone will be sent to heaven or hell. Others believe that at the moment of death people are instantly judged and sent to their eternal destinations. Still others claim that, when people die, their souls/spirits are sent to a “temporary” heaven or hell to await the final resurrection, the final judgment, and the finality of their eternal destination. So, what exactly does the Bible say happens after death?
First, for the believer in Jesus Christ, the Bible tells us that after death believers’ souls/spirits are taken to heaven, because their sins were forgiven when they received Christ as Savior (John 3:16, 18, 36). For believers, death means being “away from the body and at home with the Lord” (2 Corinthians 5:6–8; Philippians 1:23). However, passages such as 1 Corinthians 15:50–54 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13–17 describe believers being resurrected and given glorified bodies. If believers go to be with Christ immediately after death, what is the purpose of this resurrection? It seems that, while the souls/spirits of believers go to be with Christ immediately at death, the physical body remains in the grave “sleeping.” At the resurrection of believers, the physical body is resurrected, glorified, and reunited with the soul/spirit. This reunited and glorified body-soul-spirit will be the state of existence for believers for eternity in the new heavens and new earth (Revelation 21—22).
Second, for those who do not receive Jesus Christ as Savior, death means everlasting punishment. However, similar to the destiny of believers, it seems that unbelievers also go to a temporary holding place to await their final resurrection, judgment, and eternal destiny. Luke 16:22–23 describes a rich man being tormented immediately after death. Revelation 20:11–15 describes all the unbelieving dead being resurrected, judged at the great white throne, and cast into the lake of fire. Unbelievers, then, are not sent to the final “hell” (the lake of fire) immediately after death; rather, they are sent to a temporary realm of fiery judgment and anguish. The rich man cried out, “I am in agony in this fire” (Luke 16:24).
After death, a person resides in either a place of comfort or a place of torment. These realms act as a temporary “heaven” and a temporary “hell” until the resurrection. At that point, the soul is reunited with the body, but no one’s eternal destiny will change. The first resurrection is for the “blessed and holy” (Revelation 20:6)—everyone who is in Christ—and those who are part of the first resurrection will enter the millennial kingdom and, ultimately, the new heavens and new earth (Revelation 21:1). The other resurrection happens after Christ’s millennial kingdom, and it involves a judgment on the wicked and unbelieving “according to what they had done” (Revelation 20:13). These, whose names are not in the book of life, will be sent to the lake of fire to experience the “second death” (Revelation 20:14–15). The new earth and the lake of fire—these two destinations are final and eternal. People go to one or the other, based entirely on whether they have trusted Jesus Christ for salvation (Matthew 25:46; John 3:36).

Lebanon faces dilemma over ending war with Israel through negotiations
Dalal Saoud/United Press International/November 07/2025
BEIRUT, Lebanon, Nov. 7 (UPI) -- Lebanon faces the dilemma of whether to go ahead with negotiations with Israel to end the ongoing cycle of violence and prevent a full-scale war despite Hezbollah's rejection of the talks -- highlighting a deep political divide within the country. The Hezbollah-Israel war, which broke out when the Iran-backed group opened a support front for Gaza on Oct. 8, 2023, never came to an end, even after a cease-fire agreement was reached on Nov. 27, 2024.
Israel has continued its unrestrained attacks on Hezbollah, causing further casualties and destruction. It has refused to withdraw from five strategic positions it still occupies in southern Lebanon, refrained from releasing Lebanese prisoners detained during the war, and prevented displaced residents from returning to their border villages turned to ruin. The Lebanese Army's successful advance in taking control of southern Lebanon and eliminating Hezbollah's military presence along the border and south of the Litani River, as stipulated by the cease-fire agreement, does not seem sufficient for Israel, which wants Hezbollah to be completely disarmed.In fact, Hezbollah, which suffered heavy losses during the war, has refrained from firing a single shot in retaliation to Israel's continued air and drone strikes, which allegedly target the group's remaining arms depots and military infrastructure beyond southern areas of the Litani River. However, Hezbollah's recent claims that it has fully recovered, restructured its military capabilities and rebuilt its command structure -- coupled with its refusal to disarm or support Lebanese President Joseph Aoun in his new approach to negotiations with Israel -- put the country at risk of another round of war.
While Aoun said that Lebanon has no choice but to engage in talks with Israel to end its occupation and halt its attacks, Hezbollah rejected any attempt to involve the country in new negotiations -- outside the framework of the "mechanism" committee responsible for supervising the implementation of the ceasefire accord -- arguing that they would only serve "the enemy and its interests."Hisham Jaber, a Lebanese military expert and former Army general, said it is the Lebanese state -- not Hezbollah -- that should negotiate with Israel, based on terms set by President Aoun: no direct or political negotiations, only military-security talks conducted via a third party, such as the U.S. or the United Nations, and no use of force to complete Hezbollah's disarmament.
Jaber said that indirect talks with Israel had proven successful, recalling the 2022 U.S.-mediated maritime border deal that ended a years-long dispute between Lebanon and Israel over the ownership of natural gas fields.
"Why not do that again?" he told UPI. But to sit at the negotiation table, he added, the United States, which is pressuring Lebanon to accept the talks, should ensure that Israel withdraws from southern Lebanon and releases the prisoners, instead of "cornering us."
What Lebanon wants is for Israel to abide by the truce accord through the "mechanism" committee, which is made up of Israel, Lebanon, the United States, France and the United Nations. However, the newly proposed negotiations, although their framework is still unclear, would also address land border disputes and other issues. "There is a need for an agreement on the disputed points along the border, and this is not within the mandate of the mechanism," said Riad Kahwaji, a Middle East security analyst, adding that the truce committee is charged with ensuring Hezbollah's disarmament, the return of prisoners, and Israel's withdrawal behind the [U.N.-drawn] Blue Line that existed before the last war in October 2023.
If the new negotiations with Israel proceed and result in a final land border agreement, it would lead to the cessation of the state of war between the two countries, and "the 1949 Armistice will prevail," Kahwaji said..
"But, of course, Hezbollah does not want an end to the state of war between Lebanon and Israel, because that would require it to disarm, causing it to lose its value for Iran and its significance and standing within its own popular base," he told UPI. "Its resistance will no longer be needed or relevant."
However, Hezbollah's attempts to rearm appear extremely difficult after the group lost its main supply route after the overthrow of its key ally, Syrian President Bashar Assad, as well as its long-standing access to Beirut's port and airport, which it had used for years to smuggle weapons and funds.
It is now impossible for Hezbollah to smuggle large weapons, such as heavy missiles, across the border with Syria, though it may still attempt to acquire Grad rockets, anti-tank Kornet missiles and drones.
"If Hezbollah goes into another war with Israel, it will be using whatever is left from its arsenal, which is not that much," Kahwaji said, noting that the group now has "a different leadership" after Israel killed most of its top leaders and military commanders, and that "its popular base is exhausted ... so the repercussions will be huge."Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "is acting as a victor," refusing to make any concessions and imposing all his conditions, he added. Lebanon has been facing mounting pressure, especially from the United States and Israel, to disarm Hezbollah even forcibly. Authorities prefer a quiet approach to avoid a confrontation between the Lebanese Army and the militant group, which could create divisions within the army and potentially spark a civil war. Jaber, the former Army general who is well-informed about Hezbollah, said Washington should instead understand and support Lebanon's approach, because the group "is ready to hand over its weapons" if Israel stops its attacks and withdraws in line with the truce accord. "Hezbollah is prepared to relinquish its offensive weapons first, followed by its defensive weapons at a later stage, as part of a national defense strategy," he said. "This is now an attrition war, not between two parties, but led by only one [Israel]." Iran, which has funded and armed Hezbollah since its formation in the early 1980s, no longer is interfering in the group's day-to-day affairs, but remains keen to preserve it as a political and military entity -a card in its hand -- after "losing all its other cards in the region," Jaber said. With Israel threatening to expand its attacks and launch a full-scale war to force the complete disarmament of Hezbollah, Lebanon remains with few options: diplomacy and political pressure. "It is in Lebanon's best interest to seize this opportunity and drag Israel into negotiations to end the war and the conflict," Kahwaji said.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 07-08/2025
Israel says another set of remains of a hostage has been turned over in Gaza
Julia Frankel/The Associated Press/November 07/2025
JERUSALEM (AP) — The Red Cross transferred the remains of a hostage to Israeli troops in Gaza on Friday, the military said, hours after hundreds of mourners flocked to the funeral of a soldier whose body was turned over earlier in the week by Palestinian militants. Before Friday's handover, Hamas had returned the bodies of 22 hostages since the start of the current ceasefire. The latest remains were moved into Israel late Friday, the military said, and taken to the National Institute for Forensic Medicine for identification.
If they are confirmed to be those of an additional hostage, that would leave five others in Gaza still to be returned under terms of the ceasefire that began Oct. 10. The agreement is aimed at winding down the deadliest and most destructive war ever fought between Israel and the Palestinian militant group. As part of the ceasefire, Israel has released the bodies of 285 Palestinians, the Red Cross and Gaza’s Health Ministry said. Only 84 of them have been identified. DNA labs are not allowed in Gaza, according to the ministry, which makes the identification more difficult. Friday's handover is a sign of progress under the fragile Israel-Hamas ceasefire agreement. But relief efforts under the pact still fall well short of what Palestinians in Gaza require, said Farhan Haqq, deputy spokesperson for the United Nations. More than 200,000 metric tons in aid is positioned to move into Gaza, but only 37,000 tons, mostly food, have been admitted, he said.
Israeli-American soldier is buried
Hundreds of mourners attended the military funeral of an Israeli-American soldier whose body was returned to the country Sunday night. Capt. Omer Neutra was 21 when Hamas militants killed him and abducted his body to Gaza in the Oct. 7, 2023 attack that began the war. “Since that day, the old world stopped, turned upside down. We became broken, clinging to your memory, your smile, your voice,” said his father, Ronen Neutra. “Today we finally have a place to be with you, a place to talk to you, a place to love you, even when you’re no longer here. ”Neutra was also eulogized by Adm. Brad Cooper, commander of U.S. Central Command, and Israel’s President Isaac Herzog. “He is the son of two nations. He embodied the best of both the United States and Israel. Uniquely, he has firmly cemented his place in history as the hero of two countries,” said Cooper. Orna Neutra spoke last and addressed her son's coffin. “My beloved,” she said, her voice quivering, her eyes shaded by dark sunglasses. “We are all left with the vast space between who you were to us and to the world in your life and what you were yet to become. And with the mission to fill that gap with the light and goodness that you are.”Omer Neutra was born and raised on Long Island, New York, and moved to Israel to enlist in the military as a volunteer. After he was abducted, his parents made some 40 trips to Washington to lobby for their son, appeared regularly at protests in the U.S. and Israel and addressed the Republican National Convention last year. For more than a year following the Oct. 7 attack, they believed Omer was still alive. After 14 months, they received word from the military that intelligence indicated he had been killed during the 2023 attack.
Turkey seeks arrest of Israeli officials
Prosecutors in Turkey issued arrest warrants Friday for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and 36 other Israeli officials on charges of carrying out “genocide” in Gaza. The warrants also seek the arrest of Defense Minister Israel Katz, National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, Chief of General Staff Eyal Zamir, and Navy Commander David Saar Salama, according to a statement from the Istanbul Chief Prosecutor’s Office. The move is highly symbolic since the Israeli officials are unlikely to enter Turkey. The prosecutor’s office accuses the officials of crimes against humanity, citing a military offensive that has killed thousands of civilians in Gaza. The charges were brought following complaints filed by activists from the Global Sumud Flotilla, who were arrested by Israeli forces last month after trying to break through the blockade of Gaza.
Three Palestinian teenagers killed in West Bank
Meanwhile in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, Palestinian officials say Israeli troops have shot, killed, and confiscated the bodies of three Palestinian teenagers since Wednesday. No soldiers were injured in the exchanges, the military said. Two were killed Thursday night north of Jerusalem, said the military, claiming the teens had been throwing explosives toward a major highway. In a statement on social media, the military released grainy and undated footage showing the apparent ambush. In the video, one of two figures standing near a wall appears to hurl something over it. Quickly, what appear to be bullets begin to pelt the ground, sending the two scrambling. One falls down. The Palestinian Health Ministry identified the teenagers as Muhammad Atem and Muhammad Qasem, both 16 years old, and said Israel was holding their bodies.
On Wednesday, forces shot, killed and confiscated the body of Murad Abu Seifen, 15, near the West Bank city of Jenin Wednesday. The military said, without providing evidence, that troops had shot him after he threw an explosive at them.
Defense for Children International-Palestine, a local rights organization that investigates and documents violence against Palestinian children, said Abu Seifen's family heard from Palestinian officials early Thursday that he had been killed. DCIP said it had no information about the number of bullet wounds on Abu Seifen's body and had no idea where the body was. The organization says Israeli forces have withheld the bodies of at least 54 Palestinian children since June 2016. Six of the bodies have since been released to their families, while 48 Palestinian children’s bodies remain withheld.
Upswing in West Bank violence
The shootings are the latest in a surge of military killings of Palestinian children in the West Bank that has accompanied a general upswing in violence in the territory since the start of the Israel-Hamas war. The U.N.'s humanitarian office said Thursday that 42 Palestinian children under the age of 18 had been killed by Israeli forces in the West Bank since the start of 2025. Some were killed during Israeli military raids in dense neighborhoods, others by sniper fire in peaceful areas. The killings have risen as the Israeli military has stepped up operations in the occupied West Bank since the war’s onset. Settler violence has also surged recently with the olive harvest season, as Palestinian farmers face threats from violent Israeli settlers roaming the groves.
The U.N.’s humanitarian office said Thursday that in October it documented the highest monthly number of Israeli settler attacks on Palestinians and their property in the West Bank since the office began keeping track in 2006. There were over 260 attacks, or an average of eight incidents per day, the office said.
*Reporter Farnoush Amiri at the United Nations contributed to this story.
*Julia Frankel, The Associated Press

Israeli army receives body of hostage from Red Cross in Gaza
FRANCE 24/November 07/2025
The Israeli army has received the remains of another hostage as part of the US-brokered Gaza ceasefire, the Israeli prime minister's office said Friday. Of the 28 deceased hostages held in Gaza when the ceasefire took effect, 22 have previously been returned – including 19 Israelis, one Thai national, one Nepali and one Tanzanian. Israel received from the Red Cross on Friday the remains of one the last six hostages held by Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip, according to the prime minister's office. The Israeli military later confirmed that a coffin containing the deceased hostage's body had "crossed the border into the State of Israel" after being delivered by the Red Cross to the army and the Shin Bet security agency in Gaza. It said the body was being sent to a forensic facility in Tel Aviv for identification. Earlier in the day, Hamas's armed wing, the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, had said that it and the armed wing of Islamic Jihad would "hand over the body of one of the occupation's captives, which was found today in the city of Khan Yunis". The handover took place under the terms of a US-brokered Gaza ceasefire deal that took effect in October. At the start of the truce, Hamas released all 20 surviving hostages seized during its October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, which triggered the Gaza war. In exchange, Israel freed hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in its custody. Of the 28 deceased hostages that Hamas agreed to hand over under the deal, it has so far returned 22 – 19 Israelis, one Thai, one Nepali and one Tanzanian – excluding the latest body. Israel has accused Hamas of dragging its feet in returning the bodies of deceased hostages, while the Palestinian group says the process is slow because many are buried beneath Gaza's rubble. (FRANCE 24 with AFP)

US to start UN negotiations on international Gaza force mandate
Reuters/07 November/2025
The United Nations Security Council on Thursday will start negotiations on a US-drafted resolution to endorse President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan, said a senior US government official, and authorize a two-year mandate for a transitional governance body and international stabilization force. The US formally circulated the draft resolution to the 15 council members late on Wednesday and has said it has regional support from Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates for the text. “The message is: if the region is with us on this and the region is with us on how this resolution is constructed, then we believe that the council should be as well,” the senior US government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters. A council resolution needs at least nine votes in favor and no vetoes by Russia, China, France, Britain or the United States to be adopted. When asked when the draft text could be put to a vote, the official said: “The sooner that we move, the better. We’re looking at weeks, not months.” “Russia and China will certainly have their inputs, and we’ll take those as they come. But at the end of the day, I do not see those countries standing in the way and blocking what is probably the most promising plan for peace in a generation,” the official said.Trump told reporters later on Thursday that the international force would deploy “very soon.” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio then noted that the countries volunteering to contribute troops “need this UN mandate in order to be able to do it.”
International force would have authority to disarm Hamas
The draft resolution, seen by Reuters, would authorize a Board of Peace transitional governance administration to establish a temporary International Stabilization Force in Gaza that could “use all necessary measures” - language for force - to carry out its mandate. The ISF would be authorized to protect civilians and humanitarian aid operations, work to secure border areas with Israel, Egypt and a “newly trained and vetted Palestinian police force.”The ISF would stabilize security in Gaza by “ensuring the process of demilitarizing the Gaza Strip, including the destruction and prevention of rebuilding of the military, terror, and offensive infrastructure, as well as the permanent decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups.” The official said the draft UN resolution gives the ISF authority to disarm Palestinian militants Hamas, but that the US was still expecting Hamas to “live up to its end of the agreement” and give up its weapons. Hamas has not said whether it will agree to disarm and demilitarize Gaza — something the militants have rejected before. International force likely around 20,000 troops
The senior US official said the ISF was shaping up to be around 20,000 troops.
While the Trump administration has ruled out sending US soldiers into the Gaza Strip, it has been speaking to Indonesia, the UAE, Egypt, Qatar, Turkey and Azerbaijan to contribute. “We’ve been in steady contact with the potential troop contributors, and what they need in terms of a mandate, what type of language they need,” said the official. “Almost all of the countries are looking to have some type of international mandate. The preferred is UN” The official said he was unaware if Israel had ruled out any specific countries from contributing troops to the ISF, but added: “We’re in constant conversations with them.” Israel said last month it would not accept Turkish armed forces in Gaza under the US peace plan. Israel and Palestinian militants Hamas agreed a month ago to the first phase of Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza, a ceasefire in their two-year war and a hostage release deal. That 20-point plan is annexed to the draft UN Security Council resolution. “Time is not on our side here. The ceasefire is holding, but it is fragile, and ... we cannot get bogged down in wordsmithing in the council. I think this is a real test for the United Nations,” the senior US official said.

Report: Azerbaijan Will Only Send Peacekeepers to Gaza if Fighting Stops Completely
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2025
Azerbaijan does not plan to send peacekeepers to Gaza unless there is a complete halt to fighting there between Israel and Hamas, an Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry source told Reuters on Friday. As part of President Donald Trump's peace plan for Gaza, the US has been speaking to Azerbaijan, Indonesia, the UAE, Egypt, Qatar and Türkiye about possible contributions from those countries to an International Stabilization Force (ISF) of around 20,000 troops. "We do not want to put our troops in danger. This can only happen if military action is completely stopped," the Azerbaijani source said. The source noted that any such decision would have to be approved by parliament. The head of the parliamentary security committee told Reuters that it had not yet received any draft bill on the matter. A US-drafted resolution at the United Nations would authorize the ISF to "use all necessary measures" - meaning force, if necessary - to carry out its mandate to stabilize security in Gaza. Hamas has not said whether it will agree to disarm and demilitarize Gaza, something it has previously rejected.

Trump Says Iran Has Been Asking if US Sanctions Can Be Lifted
Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2025
US President Donald Trump said on Thursday that Iran has been asking if US sanctions against the country can be lifted. "Iran has been asking if the sanctions could be lifted. Iran has got very heavy US sanctions, and it makes it really hard for them to do what they'd like to be able to do. And I'm open to hearing that, and we'll see what happens, but I would be open to it," Trump told reporters late on Thursday at the White House. Iran's mission to the United Nations in New York did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said on Monday that cooperation between Iran and the United States is not possible as long as Washington continues to support Israel, maintain military bases, and interfere in the Middle East. After taking office for his second term in January, Trump restored his "maximum pressure" campaign on Iran, which includes efforts to prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon. In June, the US bombed Iran's nuclear sites. The two countries held five rounds of nuclear talks, prior to a 12-day war between Iran and Israel in June. However, talks between the two sides have faced major stumbling blocks, such as the issue of uranium enrichment on Iranian soil, which Western powers want to bring down to zero to minimize any risk of weaponization - a plan that Tehran has rejected

Elite Iranian unit plotted assassination of Israeli ambassador to Mexico, US official says
Jennifer Hansler, Oren Liebermann/CNN/November 07/2025
An elite Iranian military unit plotted to assassinate the Israeli ambassador to Mexico, according to a US official familiar with the matter. The plan, hatched by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force, was initiated at the end of 2024 and was active through the first half of this year, said the official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The plan has since been contained and no longer poses a security threat, the official added. It is among a string of plots by Tehran to target government officials, journalists and dissidents abroad. Israel’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement thanking Mexico “for thwarting a terrorist network directed by Iran that sought to attack Israel’s ambassador in Mexico.” Einat Kranz Neiger has served as the ambassador since August 2023. “The Israeli security and intelligence community will continue to work tirelessly, in full cooperation with security and intelligence agencies around the world, to thwart terrorist threats from Iran and its proxies against Israeli and Jewish targets worldwide,” the ministry said. Israel has long accused Iran of planning to attack Jewish and Israeli targets overseas. In August, Australia expelled the Iranian ambassador after the country’s intelligence agency found that Iran was behind at least two antisemitic attacks on Australian soil. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) would also be listed as a terrorist organization. Iran has also plotted to assassinate senior US officials, especially after the killing of IRGC commander Qassem Soleimani in January 2020. Iran planned the assassinations of former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo and former national security adviser John Bolton, CNN has previously reported.

Iranian Plot to Kill Israel's Ambassador to Mexico Contained, US Official Says
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2025
Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps plotted to assassinate Israel's ambassador to Mexico starting late last year, but the effort was contained and there is no current threat, a US official said on Friday. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the plot against the ambassador, Einat Kranz Neiger, was active through the first half of this year. "The plot was contained and does not pose a current threat," the official told Reuters. "This is just the latest in a long history of Iran's global lethal targeting of diplomats, journalists, dissidents, and anyone who disagrees with them, something that should deeply worry every country where there is an Iranian presence." The official declined to say how the plot was foiled or offer more details about the operation. The United States and its allies have frequently alleged that Iran and its proxies have sought to launch violent attacks against Tehran's opponents. Security services in Britain and Sweden warned last year that Tehran was using criminal proxies to carry out its violent attacks in those countries, with London saying it had disrupted 20 Iran-linked plots since 2022. A dozen other countries have condemned what they called a surge in assassination, kidnapping, and harassment plots by Iranian intelligence services. Britain's domestic spy chief, MI5 Director General Ken McCallum, said last month that Iran was "frantically" trying to silence its critics around the world, and cited how Australia had exposed Iranian involvement in antisemitic plots and Dutch authorities had revealed a failed assassination attempt.

Iran's Pezeshkian Says Tehran Seeks Peace, But Will Not Bow to Coercion
Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2025
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Friday that Iran seeks peace, but will not be coerced into abandoning its nuclear and missile programs, state media reported. US President Donald Trump said on Thursday that Iran had been asking if US sanctions against the country could be lifted. "We are willing to hold talks under international frameworks, but not if they say you can't have a (nuclear) science, or the right to defend yourself (with missiles) or else we will bomb you," Pezeshkian said, Reuters reported.
Iran has repeatedly dismissed the possibility of negotiations over its defensive capabilities, including its missile program, and the idea of abandoning all enrichment of uranium on its soil. "We want to live in this world in peace and security, but not be humiliated, and it is not acceptable that they impose upon us whatever they want and we just serve them," Pezeshkian said. Israel sees Iran as an existential threat. But Iran says its ballistic missiles, with a range of up to 2,000 km (1,200 miles), are an important deterrent and retaliatory force against the United States, Israel and other potential regional targets. It denies seeking nuclear weapons.

Damascus Denies US Planning to Establish Military Presence in Syria
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2025
The Syrian Foreign Ministry denied on Thursday reports saying the United States was planning on establishing a military presence in the country. Six sources familiar with the matter told Reuters that the US is preparing to establish a military presence at an airbase in Damascus to help enable a security pact that Washington is brokering between Syria and Israel. After publication, a Syrian foreign ministry source denied the report, saying it was "false", state news agency SANA reported late on Thursday. "Work is underway to transfer the partnerships and understandings that were necessarily made with provisional entities to Damascus, within the framework of joint political, military and economic coordination," SANA added, citing the source. The US plans for the presence in the Syrian capital, which have not previously been reported, would be a sign of Syria's strategic realignment with the US following the fall last year of longtime leader Bashar al-Assad, an ally of Iran, continued Reuters. The base sits at the gateway to parts of southern Syria that are expected to make up a demilitarized zone as part of a non-aggression pact between Israel and Syria. That deal is being mediated by US President Donald Trump's administration.
TRUMP SET TO MEET SYRIAN PRESIDENT ON MONDAY
Trump will meet Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa at the White House on Monday, the first such visit by a Syrian head of state. Reuters spoke to six sources familiar with preparations at the base, including two Western officials and a Syrian defense official, who confirmed the US was planning to use the base to help monitor a potential Israel-Syria agreement. The Pentagon and Syrian foreign ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the plan. The Syrian presidency and defense ministry did not immediately respond to questions about the plan sent via the Syrian information ministry. A US administration official said the US was "constantly evaluating our necessary posture in Syria to effectively combat ISIS and (we) do not comment on locations or possible locations of (where) forces operate."The official requested that the name and location of the base be removed for operational security reasons. Reuters has agreed to not reveal the exact location. A Western military official said the Pentagon had accelerated its plans over the last two months with several reconnaissance missions to the base. Those missions concluded the base's long runway was ready for immediate use. Two Syrian military sources said the technical talks have been focused on the use of the base for logistics, surveillance, refueling and humanitarian operations, while Syria would retain full sovereignty over the facility. A Syrian defense official said the US had flown to the base in military C-130 transport aircraft to make sure the runway was usable. A security guard at one of the base's entrances told Reuters that American aircraft were landing there as part of "tests". It was not immediately clear when US military personnel would be dispatched to the base.
JOINT SYRIAN-AMERICAN PRESENCE
The new US plans appear to mirror two other new US military presences in the region monitoring cessation of hostilities agreements: one in Lebanon, which closely watches last year's ceasefire between Lebanese armed group Hezbollah and Israel, and one in Israel that monitors the Trump-era truce between Palestinian group Hamas and Israel. The US already has troops stationed in northeastern Syria, as part of a decade-long effort to help a Kurdish-led force there combat ISIS. In April, the Pentagon said it would halve the number of troops there to 1,000. Sharaa has said any US troop presence should be agreed with the new Syrian state. Syria is set to imminently join the US-led global anti-ISIS coalition, US and Syrian officials say. A person familiar with the talks over the base said the move was discussed during a trip by Admiral Brad Cooper, commander of the US Central Command (CENTCOM), to Damascus on September 12. A CENTCOM statement at the time said Cooper and US envoy to Syria Thomas Barrack had met Sharaa and thanked him for contributing to the fight against ISIS in Syria, which it said could help accomplish Trump's "vision of a prosperous Middle East and a stable Syria at peace with itself and its neighbors." The statement did not mention Israel. The US has been working for months to reach a security pact between Israel and Syria, two longtime foes. It had hoped to announce a deal at the United Nations General Assembly in September but talks hit a last-minute snag. A Syrian source familiar with the talks told Reuters that Washington was exerting pressure on Syria to reach a deal before the end of the year, and possibly before Sharaa's trip to Washington.

UN Security Council Removes Sanctions on Syria’s President, Interior Minister
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2025
The United Nations Security Council has removed sanctions on Syrian interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa, who is due to meet US President Donald Trump at the White House on Monday. The US-drafted resolution on Thursday also lifted sanctions on Syrian Interior Minister Anas Khattab. It received 14 votes in favor, while China abstained. Washington has been urging the 15-member Security Council for months to ease Syria sanctions. Trump announced a major US policy shift in May when he said he would lift US sanctions on Syria. "I think he's doing a very good job," Trump said later on Thursday of Sharaa. "It's a tough neighborhood, and he's a tough guy, but I got along with him very well. And a lot of progress has been made with Syria." "We did take the sanctions off Syria in order to give them a fighting shot," he told reporters in Washington.
After 13 years of civil war, Syria's President Bashar al-Assad was ousted in December in a lightning offensive by opposition forces led by the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). Formerly known as the al-Nusra Front, HTS was al-Qaeda's official wing in Syria until breaking ties in 2016. Since May 2014, the group has been on the UN Security Council's al-Qaeda and ISIS sanctions list. Russia's UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said Moscow supported the brief, succinct resolution because it "most importantly ... reflects the interests and aspirations of the Syrian people themselves."Russia diplomatically shielded its ally Assad during the war, casting more than a dozen vetoes at the Security Council, on many occasions backed by China. The council met several times a month throughout the war to discuss Syria's political and humanitarian situation and chemical weapons. After years of Security Council division, Syria's UN Ambassador Ibrahim Olabi praised the decision on Thursday as a "message of support for Syrian women and men in their effort to rebuild their homeland and restore their lives." "The new Syria will be a success story. It will be a shining model that proves that the optimal path in international relations is positive engagement and constructive cooperation. If there are concerns, Syria is fully prepared to address them with sincere intent based on mutual respect," he told the council.

Britain removes sanctions on Syria’s president, EU to follow
Al Arabiya English/07 November/2025
Britain removed sanctions on Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa on Friday, a day after the United Nations Security Council did the same ahead of his meeting with US President Donald Trump next week, with the European Union confirming it would follow suit.
Britain said in a notice on the government’s website that it was also lifting sanctions on Syria’s Interior Minister Anas Khattab. Both men had formerly been subject to financial sanctions targeted at ISIS and al-Qaeda. A European Union spokesperson said on Friday the UN decision would be reflected in EU measures. Britain lifted some sanctions on Syria in April, while the bloc lifted its economic sanctions in May, but restrictions related to arms and security remain in place. “We remain committed to supporting a peaceful and inclusive Syrian-led and Syrian-owned transition to help build a better future for all Syrians,” a European Commission spokesperson said. Al-Sharaa became Syria’s president in January after opposition forces led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) ousted Bashar al-Assad in a lightning offensive. Al-Sharaa, once a senior figure in HTS and previously affiliated with al-Qaeda, was sanctioned by the UN and Britain in 2014, which included a travel ban, asset freeze and arms embargo. The UN Security Council lifted those measures on Thursday, citing a lack of active ties between HTS and al-Qaeda. The move came ahead of al-Sharaa’s planned meeting with Trump at the White House on Monday. With Reuters

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s absence sets off alarm bells in Moscow
Analysis by Nathan Hodge/CNN/November 07/2025
On Friday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov moved to tamp down intense media speculation about a potential reshuffle at the highest echelon of Russian foreign policy. The reason? Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s prominent absence from a Russian Security Council meeting on Wednesday, when President Vladimir Putin floated the possibility of full-scale nuclear testing. “There is no truth to these reports whatsoever,” Peskov said on a call with reporters Friday. “Lavrov continues to serve as foreign minister, of course.”To explain why that’s news, a bit of Kremlinology is in order. On Wednesday, the Russian business daily Kommersant – citing “informed sources” – raised eyebrows by reporting that the veteran diplomat “was absent by agreement” from the high-level confab with Putin. What’s more, observers noted that Lavrov was the only permanent member of the Security Council to miss the meeting. And in parallel, it emerged that the foreign minister would not be leading the Russian delegation to the G20 summit in Johannesburg later this month: Putin on November 4 signed a decree, appointing a more junior official, Deputy Chief of Staff of the Presidential Executive Office Maxim Oreshkin, to head up the delegation. Inquiring minds quickly asked: Was Lavrov on the outs with Putin, and was this a sign of a possible shakeup inside the Russian government? News of Lavrov’s no-show came just a couple of weeks after the collapse of a plan for an in-person summit in Budapest between Putin and US President Donald Trump. Lavrov was Russia’s point man for making that happen, but after a phone call between Lavrov and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the summit was put on ice. US officials said the Russians had not shifted from their maximalist position on Ukraine; the Trump administration followed with fresh sanctions on Moscow. But if there is blowback in Moscow over an apparent diplomatic setback, the Kremlin appears keen to keep any internal squabbles out of public view. Asked by CNN whether Lavrov was still serving, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said Lavrov was still in his post; she confirmed his absence from Wednesday’s session, adding, “but that happens.”Lavrov has been the face of Russian diplomacy for over two decades and previously served as Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations. He served Putin loyally through a period of intense Russian confrontation with the West, from the brief 2008 Russo-Georgian war and the 2014 invasion and annexation of Crimea to Moscow’s entry into the Syrian civil war in 2015. He has also been a full-throated defender of Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The 75-year-old Lavrov has also honed a brash, confrontational style of diplomacy that has often matched Putin’s imperial aspirations. At the recent summit in Anchorage, Alaska, with Trump, the Russian foreign minister arrived wearing a sweater emblazoned with the logo CCCP, the Cyrillic initials for the Soviet Union. But trolling may only get you so far, especially when it comes to the Trump administration. After Trump signaled that the Budapest meeting was canceled, Kirill Dmitriev, the head of the Russian sovereign wealth fund and a Kremlin special envoy, flew to the United States for what some observers saw as a round of damage control. Under Putin, however, loyalty and continuity are still prized. Last year, for instance, the Kremlin announced the replacement of Sergei Shoigu, Russia’s long-serving minister of defense. But instead of being fired outright for a lack of battlefield success, Shoigu was moved sideways to a post as the secretary of Russia’s Security Council. Even when faced with major setbacks, it seems, the Kremlin leader’s response is often a rearrangement of the deck chairs.

NATO's chief says the West is finally 'turning the tide' on Russia's ammo advantage
Matthew Loh/Business Insider/November 07/2025
After years of warning about Russia's advantage, NATO is starting to look positive on ammo making. NATO chief Mark Rutte said the alliance is now making more ammo "than we have done in decades." It's a sign that NATO believes it can soon overcome Russia's massive production advantage. NATO chief Mark Rutte said on Thursday that the alliance is closing the gap with Russia's advantage in ammunition manufacturing. "We are already turning the tide on ammunition," Rutte said at a defense industry forum in Bucharest, Romania. "Until recently, Russia was producing more ammunition than all NATO allies put together. But not anymore." The secretary-general's comments were a rare positive note for the alliance in its assessment of the balance of power between Europe and Russia. Rutte and his predecessor, Jens Stoltenberg, have warned for years that NATO is desperately behind Russia in ammunition production. It's unclear whether Rutte intended to suggest that the alliance had already achieved parity — or if it was close to achieving parity — with Russia in ammunition manufacturing. Just five months ago, Rutte said the Kremlin was making four times as much ammunition as NATO, despite the alliance fielding a combined economy that's 25 times as large as Russia's. A NATO official told Business Insider in an email that they could not disclose estimates for Russia or the alliance's production capacity. "But what we can say is that Allies are in a much better place than even just a few months ago, and the capacity to produce what's needed, at speed, continues to improve," they wrote. European production of 155mm artillery shells has increased by sixfold in the last two years, they added.
In his Thursday speech, Rutte said that NATO is now producing more ammunition "than we have done in decades." However, he also spoke of new factories as works in progress. "Across the alliance, we are now opening dozens of new production lines and expanding existing ones," he said. A key concern for NATO has been stocks of 155mm artillery shells, which European nations are funneling toward Ukraine as the war drags into an extended conflict of attrition. To replenish their inventories, NATO countries such as Poland, Germany, and the UK have invested heavily in local industries to rapidly scale up shell production, with over a dozen factories opened in Europe in the last two years. But ramping up shell manufacturing can take months, if not years, with some companies estimating that they can only meet demand by 2026 or later. The US military, for example, had hoped to produce 100,000 shells a month by October but has now pushed that goal back to mid-2026. Meanwhile, Ukrainian estimates say Russia produced about 3.8 million artillery shells in 2024 alone, or roughly 310,000 shells a month.
Making artillery ammo isn't just about building factories. The 155mm shell relies on supply lines for steel, fuzes, propellant, and energetics. Propellant, which drives an artillery shell out of its launcher, has often been a major chokepoint for ammo production because it relies on a compound called nitrocellulose that's now in short supply. Another vital component is the explosive material within the shell, such as regular TNT and its higher-performance counterpart, RDX. Several countries and companies have been building TNT plants to reduce Western reliance on the Asian market. November 7, 2025: This story was updated to reflect comment from NATO's press team.

Germany bans Islamist influencer group calling for ‘Muslim Caliphate’, raids properties
The Arab Weekly/November 07/2025
German authorities banned the “Muslim Interaktiv” influencer group, accusing it of anti-constitutional activities in calling for a caliphate, and raided the properties of two other Islamist groups on similar grounds on Wednesday. Under the ban, “Muslim Interaktiv”, which organises demonstrations and is active on various social media channels, will be disbanded and its assets confiscated. The group rejects accusations that it wants to overthrow the social order. The group, founded in 2020, drew national attention in April 2024 over a demonstration in Hamburg with 1,000 attendees brandished signs reading “Caliphate is the solution” and “Muslims will not stay silent.”Seven properties were raided in Hamburg, and 12 in Berlin and the state of Hesse early on Wednesday as part of preliminary investigations into two other groups, Generation Islam and Realitaet Islam. the interior ministry said in a statement. Tensions between the German government and Muslim communities have become strained in the wake of Berlin’s sustained support for Israel since the October 7, 2023 attacks that triggered the war in Gaza. Islamist groups have been accused of tapping in to such tensions in pursuit of their agendas. Chancellor Friedrich Merz stirred them up again last month in comments interpreted by critics as suggesting that Muslim men are a problem in many cities and calling for more deportations. After initially saying deportations are needed to address what he vaguely termed as the state of urban spaces, he later specified it was a reference to immigrants without residence permits. “We will respond with the full force of the law to anyone who aggressively calls for a caliphate on our streets, incites hatred against the state of Israel and Jews in an intolerable manner, and despises the rights of women and minorities,” said Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt in the ministry statement. The ministry said its ban was issued solely on the basis of a professional risk assessment and religion played no role in it.
Muslim Interaktiv, which has roughly 19,000 followers on TikTok and YouTube, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on its social media channels. In a position paper shared on the YouTube channel of the face of Muslim Interaktiv, Raheem Boateng, the group affirmed its support for the German constitution but rejected any state interference in its understanding of Islam. “We recognise the validity of the Basic Law (constitution) as the normative order of the Federal Republic. It is precisely this regulatory framework that guarantees us, as Muslims, the right to exist in Germany,” according to the position paper.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 07-08/2025
Christian Girl Harassed in Egypt for Refusing Hijab — “They Looked at Me as if I Were Naked”
Coptic Solidarity/Raymond Ibrahim/November 07/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/11/148951/
On her first day at a public high school in the Egyptian province of Minya, Maryam walked in like every girl in the West does—with her hair uncovered. Unlike in the West, she was immediately confronted by the school principal, who scolded her before the other students: “You can’t come with your hair like that,” the principal barked. “It’s shameful! You must come tomorrow wearing a head scarf.”
Maryam was taken aback. “I told her that I’m Christian and not required to wear the hijab,” she later recalled, “but she insisted that this was the rule, and that I was causing fitna [sedition] by refusing.”When Maryam returned to school the next morning still bare-headed, the atmosphere was hostile. “Everyone was shocked and looked at me as if I were naked,” said the determined teen. “Some girls giggled; others whispered insults like kafira [infidel]. One of the teachers told me, ‘You Christians always want to show off your bodies.’”
The harassment did not end there. Other teachers began to single her out in class, calling her “arrogant” and “rebellious.” Several Muslim classmates refused to sit beside her. “It was as if I had committed a crime,” Maryam said. “They treated me like I was dirty — just because I didn’t cover my hair.”Even outside school, the pressure intensified. Some of Maryam’s relatives — themselves weary of constant discrimination — urged her to comply “for your own safety.” But she refused to bend. “I feel like I’m getting into a fight defending my freedom,” she said. “I want to be myself. I’m not Muslim. Why should I wear the hijab?”Maryam dreams of attending university “with my hair spread over my shoulders, without anyone looking at me as if I’ve done something wrong.” But in Egypt today, this “dream” requires courage bordering on defiance.
Though the hijab is not legally mandated in Egypt, Islamic norms dominate public life, especially in provincial towns. Officially, Egypt’s constitution promises “freedom of religion,” yet the state’s education system —overseen by a powerful Islamic stronghold in the Ministry of Education— enforces a de facto Islamic culture in public schools. Coptic girls are often told to cover their hair; Christian boys are mocked for not memorizing Koran verses as part of Arabic language courses; and Christian teachers risk dismissal if they complain. Such incidents have multiplied in recent years, part of the ongoing Islamization program of the nation. Under the presidency of Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Egypt officially presents itself as a bulwark against “extremism”; meanwhile, the everyday experience of Christians tells another story: mosques proliferate while church construction faces severe bureaucratic obstruction; sermons and textbooks glorify Islam while ignoring or vilifying Christianity; and even clothing has become a political statement of submission or defiance.
Now it’s hair. Maryam’s experience thus reveals not an isolated misunderstanding, but a symptom of a much broader reality: in today’s Egypt, to be visibly Christian is to invite persecution. What begins as “advice” to wear the veil can quickly escalate to ostracism, threats, and even violence — all justified under the guise of “conformity” and “social harmony.”Incidentally, it is no coincidence that Minya, Maryam’s home province, is also one of Egypt’s most intolerant regions. Churches there are routinely attacked or closed; Christian girls are abducted and forcibly converted; and the police, when not complicit, are indifferent. In this climate, a 16-year-old girl insisting on the right to leave her hair uncovered becomes an act of “rebellion” — a stand against the coercive weight of an entire Islamized culture. “I just want to study and live like anyone else,” Maryam said; “but I don’t want to be forced to pretend to be something I’m not.”Her simple plea — for dignity, conscience, and freedom — speaks volumes about the fate of Egypt’s Christians today. Once again, the “land of the Nile” shows that its most ancient and indigenous people, the Copts, remain strangers in their own homeland.
https://www.raymondibrahim.com/11/6/2025/articles-of-the-day

The demise of JCPOA and the road ahead for Iran’s nuclear program
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Al Arabiya English/07 November/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/11/148947/
Although the European Union and its E3 partners -the United Kingdom, France, and Germany -have signaled that they remain open to dialogue with Iran, the reality on the ground indicates that any meaningful revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is extremely unlikely.
Despite the EU’s overtures and public statements expressing willingness to engage, the deal now appears effectively dead. The optimism expressed in diplomatic statements masks the deeper structural and strategic obstacles that make negotiations improbable.
The EU’s position, while framed as openness to dialogue, is conditional and highly constrained by its close coordination with the United States. Europe can express a desire to restart talks, but without a major shift in the fundamental dynamics between Iran and Washington, these discussions are unlikely to produce tangible results. As it stands, both sides remain entrenched in positions that leave little room for compromise.
A primary obstacle to restarting negotiations lies in the insistence of the United States on direct engagement with Iran, contrasted sharply with Tehran’s categorical refusal. The US has consistently made clear that any credible new nuclear framework would require direct talks between the two sides, asserting that negotiations without American involvement would lack credibility and enforceability.
On the other hand, Iran has rejected direct discussions under current circumstances. Tehran’s insistence on engaging only from a position of power reflects its historical experience in negotiations, particularly in 2015 when the original JCPOA was concluded. Without US participation, any deal risks being symbolic at best and ineffective at worst, leaving a critical gap in both verification and enforcement. This fundamental disconnect between Washington’s demands and Tehran’s conditions has become one of the most intractable barriers to any substantive diplomatic progress, creating a situation in which negotiations are highly unlikely to move beyond preliminary diplomatic gestures.
Another significant challenge is Iran’s diminished leverage, which makes the prospect of negotiation less attractive from its perspective. After the June strikes on Iranian nuclear and military sites, Tehran’s willingness to engage constructively has declined. These strikes not only caused physical damage to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure but also exposed vulnerabilities in its military, particularly its air force and defensive capabilities. Historically, Iran approached the 2015 negotiations from a position of relative strength, possessing leverage that enabled it to extract significant concessions.
Today, however, the strategic balance has shifted. Iran faces weakened leverage, heightened economic pressures from renewed sanctions, and diminished regional influence. It has lost some of its allies and its ability to project power effectively has been challenged. In this context, Iran sees little incentive to return to the negotiating table without guarantees that it can achieve meaningful concessions. The combination of damaged nuclear capability, exposed military weaknesses, and economic strain has created a strategic environment in which Iran is less motivated to compromise, further complicating the prospects for reviving the JCPOA. The European overture, while publicly noted, is largely conditional and cannot overcome the fundamental obstacles in the US-Iran relationship. These include demands for Iran to return to compliance with previous nuclear limitations, halt enrichment escalations, and submit to rigorous verification measures. In addition, Europe’s approach remains tightly aligned with US policy, which means that any negotiation initiative must be acceptable to Washington. With the prospects for a negotiated deal fading, the US has been increasingly relying on the “maximum pressure” strategy to manage the Iran issue. This approach involves a combination of economic, diplomatic, and strategic measures designed to constrain Iran’s ability to advance its nuclear program and exert regional influence. Sanctions under this policy are not static; they are continually expanded to target key sectors of Iran’s economy, including oil exports, financial networks, and industries that support its nuclear and military ambitions.
Beyond unilateral measures, the US seeks to coordinate internationally to prevent Iran from evading these sanctions, engaging with allies and third-party countries to limit Iran’s access to global markets. This includes diplomatic outreach, economic incentives, and, if necessary, the threat of secondary sanctions against nations or companies that continue to trade with Tehran. The goal of maximum pressure is not only to constrain Iran’s capabilities but also to increase the cost of noncompliance, effectively applying strategic leverage to influence Tehran’s calculations.
A central challenge for the US in implementing maximum pressure is Iran’s relationship with China. Iran derives a significant portion of its revenue from oil exports to Beijing, making China a critical actor in determining the effectiveness of US sanctions. Convincing China to halt or reduce its purchases of Iranian oil is extraordinarily difficult because Iran offers favorable economic terms, strategic access to the Arabian Gulf, and potential long-term partnerships. Washington faces the complex task of either offering China alternatives that match or exceed the benefits it receives from Iranian oil or imposing sufficient diplomatic and economic pressure to compel compliance. Without Chinese cooperation, sanctions risk being only partially effective, allowing Iran to continue funding key programs and maintaining strategic options. Regionally, the implications of a dead JCPOA are significant. Iran’s influence across the Middle East is likely to decline as its economic pressures mount and its military vulnerabilities become more apparent. Its ability to project power through proxy groups or conventional military channels is constrained, while the confidence of regional adversaries, including Israel increases.
In conclusion, the JCPOA, as originally negotiated, is effectively dead. While European leaders continue to express openness to dialogue, structural and strategic impediments make meaningful negotiations unlikely. Iran’s refusal to engage directly with the US, combined with diminished leverage, economic strain, and exposed military vulnerabilities, creates an environment in which compromise is improbable. The US, recognizing the limited prospects for a renewed agreement, is likely to intensify its maximum pressure strategy, combining sanctions, multilateral coordination, and diplomatic engagement to constrain Iran’s economic and strategic options.

Why Gaza Does Not Need 'Peacekeepers' and 'Monitors'
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute./November 07/2025
Hamas is not the only terror group that opposes the presence of international forces in the Gaza Strip. On October 8, two other terror groups, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, also rejected the idea of any "foreign guardianship" over the Gaza Strip. "We are ready to benefit from Arab and international participation in the fields of reconstruction, recovery and development support," the two groups said in a joint statement with Hamas.
For them, the international community's role in the Gaza Strip should be limited to pouring billions of dollars into reconstruction and development.
When Hamas officials such as Abu Marzouk say they will not allow any force to replace the Israeli army, they are actually threatening to carry out terror attacks against members of such a force.
"Whoever comes to replace Israel will be treated as Israel." — Osama Hamdan, senior Hamas official, arabi21.com, February 15, 2025.
[T]he terror group may accept the presence of troops from some Arab and Islamic countries such as Qatar and Turkey, which are longtime sponsors of the terror group. The presence of such friendly forces will undoubtedly ensure Hamas's continued dominion over the Gaza Strip and allow the terror group to rearm, regroup and rebuild its military capabilities. It is simply unrealistic to expect Qatari or Turkish soldiers to forcibly disarm Hamas.
Notably, the Arab and Muslim ministers did not call on Hamas to cede control of the Gaza Strip or lay down its weapons.
Turkey clearly considers Hamas a legitimate and acceptable actor in any future administration of the Gaza Strip.... This position is shared by Egypt....
It is equally unrealistic, unfortunately, to think that soldiers of any outside force -- especially Arab and Muslim troops -- would risk being shot at by trying to stop any military reconstruction in Gaza by Hamas or other terrorist groups. This bad bet was made unmistakably clear by the presence of UNIFIL in Lebanon, where it took about a minute for the UNIFIL forces to support the terrorists, not confront them.
Hamas and other Palestinian terror groups -- as well as deeply fundamentalist Muslim countries, such as Turkey, Qatar and Egypt -- will simply use any international force as cover to avoid being targeted by Israel and to maintain control of the Gaza Strip.
Is Hamas planning to thwart US efforts to deploy an international force in the Gaza Strip? When Hamas officials such as Musa Abu Marzouk say they will not allow any force to replace the Israeli army, they are actually threatening to carry out terror attacks against members of such a force.
Is Hamas planning to thwart US efforts to deploy an international force in the Gaza Strip?
On November 4, Musa Abu Marzouk, a senior Hamas official, told Qatar's Al-Jazeera TV network that "a military force that could replace the [Israeli] occupation is unacceptable."
Abu Marzouk, based in Qatar, stressed that there is a "Palestinian consensus that the security force in Gaza should be Palestinian, under the leadership of the committee managing the Strip." This option, he said, enjoys Palestinian consensus and reflects the will to manage security independently without external interference.
The Hamas official was commenting on reports that the US has sent several United Nations Security Council members a draft resolution for the establishment of an international force in the Gaza Strip. According to an unnamed US official, the proposed International Security Force (ISF) will be an "enforcement force and not a peacekeeping force."
According to the draft, the ISF would "stabilize the security environment in Gaza by ensuring the process of demilitarization and prevention of rebuilding of military, terror, and offensive infrastructure, as well as the permanent decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups."
Hamas is not the only terror group that opposes the presence of international forces in the Gaza Strip. On October 8, two other terror groups, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, also rejected the idea of any "foreign guardianship" over the Gaza Strip. "We are ready to benefit from Arab and international participation in the fields of reconstruction, recovery and development support," the two groups said in a joint statement with Hamas. The Palestinian terror groups, in short, argue that the governance and security of the Gaza Strip must be a Palestinian matter. For them, the international community's role in the Gaza Strip should be limited to pouring billions of dollars into reconstruction and development.
Since the beginning of the Gaza war, triggered by the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on Israel's southern communities, the terror group has come out against the idea of involving non-Palestinians in governance and security.
In July 2024, Hamas announced that it rejects any measures that would override the "will of Palestinians regarding the future of the Gaza Strip," and said that the administration of the Strip constitutes a "purely Palestinian affair."
In a statement, Hamas expressed its refusal to accept any plans, projects, proposals, statements, or positions supporting moves for the entry of foreign forces into the Gaza Strip under any name or pretext, adding:
"The Palestinian people will not allow any guardianship or imposition of external solutions or equations that diminish their constants based on their inherent right to achieve their freedom and determine their destiny."
When Hamas officials such as Abu Marzouk say they will not allow any force to replace the Israeli army, they are actually threatening to carry out terror attacks against members of such a force.
Earlier this year, another senior Hamas official, Osama Hamdan, said that his group would treat any force that replaces Israel in the Gaza Strip as an "occupying force," adding: "Whoever comes to replace Israel will be treated as Israel."
The Hamas official is saying that his group will act against any force that seeks to replace Israel, even if that force consists of a Palestinian party other than Hamas.
Hamas is opposed to an international force: the terror group views it as a direct threat to its rule over the Gaza Strip. Hamas leaders and officials have repeatedly emphasized that their group has no intention of laying down its weapons and have said they would do so only after the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Despite Hamas's declared opposition to the deployment of an international force in the Gaza Strip, the terror group may accept the presence of troops from some Arab and Islamic countries such as Qatar and Turkey, which are longtime sponsors of the terror group. The presence of such friendly forces will undoubtedly ensure Hamas's continued dominion over the Gaza Strip and allow the terror group to rearm, regroup and rebuild its military capabilities. It is simply unrealistic to expect Qatari or Turkish soldiers to forcibly disarm Hamas.
Recently, foreign ministers of several Arab and Muslim countries who met in Istanbul to discuss the future of the Gaza Strip seemed to support Hamas's position. The ministers stressed that governance of the Gaza Strip must be in the hands of Palestinians alone and rejected any "new guardianship regime" over it.
After the meeting -- which included Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Pakistan and Indonesia -- Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan told a press conference:
"Palestinians must govern themselves and guarantee their own security.... Gaza needs to be rebuilt, and its residents must return to their homes. It needs its wounds healed, but... no one wants to see the emergence of a new guardianship regime."
Notably, the Arab and Muslim ministers did not call on Hamas to cede control of the Gaza Strip or lay down its weapons.
Instead, Fidan expressed hope for a "quick internal Palestinian reconciliation" between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority led by Mahmoud Abbas, indicating that this reconciliation would "enhance Palestine's representation within the international community."
Turkey clearly considers Hamas a legitimate and acceptable actor in any future administration of the Gaza Strip. The minister would like to see Hamas patch up its differences with its rivals in the Palestinian Authority and agree on a joint government to manage the affairs of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. This position is shared by Egypt, which recently hosted a meeting of Palestinian factions, including the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, to discuss the formation of a "technocratic committee" to administer the Gaza Strip.
In light of Hamas's opposition and threats, any international force that enters the Gaza Strip will have to act as an anti-terrorism force, not as a peacekeeping or monitoring force. Its No. 1 mission should be to crack down on all terror groups, confiscate their weapons, destroy their military infrastructure, and prevent the smuggling of weapons from Egypt into the Gaza Strip. Members of the proposed force should have a clear and strong mandate to open fire at any terrorist roaming the streets of the Gaza Strip.
It is equally unrealistic, unfortunately, to think that soldiers of any outside force -- especially Arab and Muslim troops -- would risk being shot at by trying to stop any military reconstruction in Gaza by Hamas or other terrorist groups. This bad bet was made unmistakably clear by the presence of UNIFIL in Lebanon, where it took about a minute for the UNIFIL forces to support the terrorists, not confront them.
Hamas and other Palestinian terror groups -- as well as deeply fundamentalist Muslim countries, such as Turkey, Qatar and Egypt -- will simply use any international force as cover to avoid being targeted by Israel and to maintain control of the Gaza Strip.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22036/gaza-peacekeepers-monitors
**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.

Europe's Race to Net-Zero - and Total Self-Destruction?
Drieu Godefridi/Gatestone Institute/November 07/2025
Today, China is responsible for nearly 12 billion tons of CO₂ emissions — five times Europe's current emissions and one-third of the global total.
Europe's misguided decarbonization has handed its prosperity to China on a silver platter. Moreover, it has done so through the European Union. Many people despise the EU without really knowing why. Now they do.
We mock the credulity of ancient peoples who believed in myriad deities, to whom they did not hesitate to offer human sacrifices — even children... We feel only contempt for such myths. Yet today, the European Union is sacrificing 500 million citizens on the altar of a faceless green god.
Not a single European will die from "global warming." But millions could die from not being able to heat their homes during the winter.
Crucially, however, China has also been investing billions in nuclear-fusion energy – to provide limitless clean, cheap energy for the unimaginable amounts of electricity that will be required for global dominance in artificial intelligence...
The lifespan of a wind turbine is short. By 2030, around 14,000 of them will need to be replaced in Europe. How fortunate! Simply do not replace them. The issue is easy: the semi-public companies managing these turbines have set aside nothing at all — not a single cent — for their replacement. All that is needed is to dismantle and remove them. Think of it: our landscapes will no longer be dotted with these useless eyesores. Then we can all write them off as a bet that was lost.
Europe's misguided decarbonization has handed its prosperity to China on a silver platter. Under the pretext of "saving the planet," Europeans have dismantled their factories, outsourced their jobs and increased their energy costs. No better example illustrates the sham of decarbonization than the case of wind farms. Not a single wind turbine is profitable without massive public subsidies, which Europeans pay for every month through their exorbitant energy bills.
In 1992, global carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions stood at 22.3 billion metric tons. By 2024, they had reached a record high of 37.4 billion tons— an increase of nearly 68%.
Europe, by comparison, emitted 4 billion tons in 1992. By 2023, this figure had fallen to around 2.5 billion tons, a reduction of approximately 40% — on a global scale, a derisory amount. China, for its part, emitted only 2.5 billion tons of CO₂ in 1992. Today, China is responsible for nearly 12 billion tons of CO₂ emissions — five times Europe's current emissions and one-third of the global total.
While Europe flagellates itself in a supposedly virtuous asceticism, aiming to eliminate carbon from the continent ("net-zero"), the rest of the world, led by China, is burning coal at full throttle, propelling global emissions to unprecedented heights.
Industrial collapse
Worse still, this European decarbonization has been accompanied by an accelerating industrial collapse. In 1992, manufacturing represented 20% of the European Union's GDP; today, it accounts for barely 14%, and the trend is downward. Globally, Europe once produced nearly 30% of global manufacturing; it now represents only 15%, overtaken by China, which dominates with more than 30%.
Europe's misguided decarbonization has handed its prosperity to China on a silver platter. Moreover, it has done so through the European Union. Many people despise the EU without really knowing why. Now they do.
Decarbonization is a pure myth — a fiction skillfully designed by Malthusian ideologues to keep Europeans in servitude (see Robert Zurbin, Merchants of Despair: Radical Environmentalists, Criminal Pseudo-Scientists, and the Fatal Cult of Antihumanism). Under the pretext of "saving the planet," Europeans have dismantled their factories, outsourced their jobs, increased their energy costs, and subjected their economies to the tutelage of an authoritarian, arbitrary Brussels bureaucracy — as ignorant as it is malevolent and complicit with Beijing.
Murder by energy
When an American pays $100 to heat his home, a European pays between $300 and $500. When an American spends $100 to light his home, a European spends $200 — despite the average gross income in the United States being twice that of Europe and the average net income 2.5 times higher.
In Germany, 10,000 industrial jobs are being lost every month. The chemical industry, once the pride of the port of Antwerp, Belgium, is in rapid and massive decline. Chemicals in Antwerp are not a minor detail; they are a fundamental and structuring element of its prosperity. Antwerp politicians who attempt to balance public finances while adhering to the myth of decarbonization are deluding themselves. One can have either decarbonization or prosperity — not both. A choice must be made -- now.
"But Global Warming!"
Environmentalists from all parties have turned Europe into a vast, unproductive, and dependent wind farm. But, say the well-trained creatures, "What about global warming? Won't we all perish in torrents of lava and a deluge of floods if we stop building wind turbines, and fail to sacrifice our last factories on the altar of decarbonization?"
Even America's premier climate alarmist, Microsoft founder Bill Gates, last week dismissed , in his words, the "doomsday view" that climate change would "decimate civilization," and, according to Time, called for:
"a recalibration of priorities—including more funding for global health and a narrower focus on key technologies that can make a difference on climate. Paired with a move to cut funding for efforts to craft climate policy earlier this year, [Gates'] memo was perceived as an indication of a dramatic pivot."
Since the beginning of the industrial era, a slight warming has indeed been observed — +1.2°C, not exactly the Apocalypse. Humanity will adapt, as it has always done — to ice ages, droughts, and floods. This will be all the easier now that we have at our disposal rapidly advancing technological tools: artificial intelligence, precision agriculture, and large-scale desalination.
Humans are preparing to colonize the Moon and Mars — where the average temperature is -63°C. But we are told we could not adapt to a 1.5-degree increase on Earth? What a grim joke.
We mock the credulity of ancient peoples who believed in myriad deities, to whom they did not hesitate to offer human sacrifices — even children. We condemn the Mayan rites — decapitations, immolations, the extraction of still-beating hearts — to appease Chaac, god of rain and storms, who demanded blood to make it rain; Quetzalcóatl, because blood nourished the cosmic serpent, and so on. We feel only contempt for such myths. Yet today, the European Union is sacrificing 500 million citizens on the altar of a faceless green god.
Not a single European will die from "global warming." But millions could die from not being able to heat their homes during the winter.
What Europe needs
Europe needs a policy of strength — economic, military, geopolitical. It must destroy the myth of decarbonization and reaffirm its true goals: the well-being of individuals and families, economic growth, and technological progress. Relocate industry, free up fossil and nuclear energy, and invest massively in research. Only a sovereign, industrious, and assertive Europe will regain its prosperity.
The Chinese Communist Party, for years, has been opening two coal-fired plants a week. In just the first half of 2025, China expanded these coal-fired plants more than in the last nine years. Crucially, however, China has also been investing billions in nuclear-fusion energy – to provide limitless clean, cheap energy for the unimaginable amounts of electricity that will be required for global dominance in artificial intelligence.
Europe and the UK would be well-advised to stop listening to charming little scoundrels like Boris Johnson, that ephemeral former British prime minister who now profits from his "moral commitment" to the totalitarian absurdity of the "net-zero society," cashing in with the highest-bidding regimes and lobbies.
Decarbonization is a myth. There is no "decarbonization." Only Europe — alone, like an old drunkard lost in its fantasies — is hanging itself.
No better example illustrates the sham of decarbonization than the case of wind farms. Not a single wind turbine is profitable without massive public subsidies, which Europeans pay for every month through their exorbitant energy bills.
The real problem, though, rarely mentioned, lies in the replacement of these sad monsters. The lifespan of a wind turbine is short. By 2030, around 14,000 of them will need to be replaced in Europe. How fortunate! Simply do not replace them. The issue is easy: the semi-public companies managing these turbines have set aside nothing at all — not a single cent — for their replacement. All that is needed is to dismantle and remove them. Think of it: our landscapes will no longer be dotted with these useless eyesores. Then we can all write them off as a bet that was lost.
**Drieu Godefridi is a jurist (University Saint-Louis, University of Louvain), philosopher (University Saint-Louis, University of Louvain) and PhD in legal theory (Paris IV-Sorbonne). He is an entrepreneur, CEO of a European private education group and director of PAN Medias Group. He is the author of The Green Reich (2020).
© 2025 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.

Meet the Muslim Brotherhood ...Working to reestablish the caliphate for almost a century
Clifford D. May/The Washington Times/November 07/2025
In 1918, V.I. Lenin renamed the Bolshevik Party the Russian Communist Party. Western scholars and policymakers soon began studying communism and the threat it posed to free nations. In 1920, the German Workers’ Party adopted a new name: the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, better known as the Nazi Party. Western scholars and policymakers soon began studying Nazism and the threat it posed to free nations.
In 1928, Hassan al-Banna founded the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Western scholars and policymakers were uninterested, regarding it as just a nothing more than a religious-social welfare organization and therefore no threat to free nations.
For nearly a century, that view has persisted despite accumulating evidence to the contrary. Now, finally, clearer perceptions are emerging.
One example: Last week, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), the think tank over which I’m proud to preside, published a monograph titled “Patient Extremism: The Many Faces of the Muslim Brotherhood.” I have space here to highlight just a few of its insights and offer just a few of my own.
First, to comprehend what motivated Mr. al-Banna, you need to consider what happened in 1922: The Ottoman Empire, having made the mistake of siding with Germany in World War I, collapsed when Turkish nationalists, led by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, abolished the Ottoman Sultanate. The Ottoman Caliphate, a religious institution associated with the Sultanate, was abolished two years later as part of Atatürk’s secular reforms.
To Mr. al-Banna, there could be no greater tragedy and humiliation.
The first caliphate had been established in 632 CE, immediately after the death of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. Thereafter, a succession of caliphates conquered and ruled much of the world. The Muslim Brotherhood’s mission: to establish a new and even mightier empire and caliphate based on Islamic supremacy, the expansion of the Dar al-Islam (the lands of Islam, contrasted with the Dar-al-harb, where wars must be waged) and the conviction that “Islam is a faith and a ritual, a nation and a nationality, a religion and a state, spirit and deed, holy text and sword.”
The Brotherhood today is not monolithic. Each branch decides how best to make progress in its region. Some, such as Hamas, conduct terrorist attacks, though by calling violence directed against civilians “resistance,” and spinning its vow to exterminate Jews “from the river to the sea” as “anti-colonialism,” it enhances its appeal to the left.
Other branches adhere to a policy of non-violence but based on “prudence not principle,” as the FDD monograph observes. “They may accept leaders chosen by the people, but their bedrock conviction remains that no government is legitimate unless it rules according to the dictates of sharia, Islamic law.” Both Osama bin Ladin and his longtime deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, had ties to the Brotherhood early in their careers. Though the Brotherhood is Sunni, it has influenced Iran’s Shia rulers. Prior to the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has been Iran’s Supreme Leader since 1989, translated into Persian several books by Sayyid Qutb, a leading ideologue of the Brotherhood who followed Mr. al-Banna in the 1940s and early 1950s.
Mr. Qutb proposed that a revolutionary “vanguard” (tali’a) of true believers would be necessary to overthrow existing orders and wage jihad against the West – “all the Satanic forces and Satanic systems” – as well as against those Muslims insufficiently hostile to the West. The Brotherhood has come a long way since the days of Messrs. al-Banna and Qutb. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, president of NATO member Turkey since 2014, supports Hamas and embraces the Brotherhood’s broader goals, perhaps imagining himself as the first Ottoman sultan and caliph of the 21st century.
Qatar, designated as a Major Non-Nato Ally of the U.S., also supports Hamas, along with many other branches of the Brotherhood in many other places.
The emirate’s rulers are fabulously wealthy thanks primarily to vast offshore natural gas reserves, particularly the North Field, which the Qataris share with Iran’s rulers.
Among the projects on which they spend their fortune: Al Jazeera media platforms which have long disseminated Brotherhood propaganda, much as the Cominform – short for the Communist Information Bureau – did for the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
Al Jazeera collaborates and shares content with such foreign media outlets as the BBC, France 24, Reuters, and PBS. In addition, Wikipedia regards Al Jazeera as a “reliable source” for its articles. This may partly explain why there is now burgeoning support for Hamas in many Western countries. In the U.S. there are mosques where Brotherhood imams preach, and organizations that present themselves as advocates for Muslim civil rights but are, transparently, Brotherhood fronts.
Now a bit of good news: Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain have declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said that the U.S. is preparing to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO). Senator Ted Cruz has introduced the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2025. Representatives Mario Díaz-Balart (R-FL) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) have introduced a companion bill in the House.
Final thoughts for today: Communism has not been defeated. On the contrary, Beijing is now the headquarters of the most powerful Communist Party in history.
Naziism may be making a comeback. Last month, podcaster Tucker Carlson conducted a cordial interview with neo-Nazi influencer Nick Fuentes who said he thought Adolf Hitler was “very, very cool.” And of course, the Muslim Brotherhood is waging a jihad that began 1,400 years ago. All this reinforces my longstanding belief that there are no permanent victories, only permanent battles. We can fight those battles, or we can shout “No more endless wars!” and capitulate.
I’m not aware of a third option.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2025/nov/4/meet-muslim-brotherhood/
**Clifford D. May is founder and president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a columnist for the Washington Times, and host of the “Foreign Podicy” podcast.

Iranians Challenge the Regime by Celebrating Cyrus the Great
Janatan Sayeh & Behnam Ben Taleblu/FDD/November 07/2025
A tribute to an ancient and pre-Islamic king is now a form of protest against a modern Islamist theocracy.
October 29 marked Cyrus the Great Day, celebrated by Iranians across the country. Though not recognized by UNESCO or the United Nations calendar, many Iranians consider it the day Cyrus entered Babylon after defeating the Neo-Babylonian Empire two and a half millennia ago. Iranians have long observed their ancient holidays like Nowruz (Iranian new year), but under the Islamic Republic a growing number have reconnected with their pre-Islamic identity as a way to contest the Islamic Republic.
This day represents more than a celebration of Iran’s most revered ruler; it reflects how nationalism has become a major unifying counterweight to Tehran’s theocrats. This resurgence of Iranian nationalism has fueled civic movements in recent years, a reality mainstream Western media and policymakers have failed to grasp.
Cyrus the Great Day Represents a National Awakening
In a turbulent era marked by the protests of 2017-2020 and 2022, Iran’s return to its ancient identity has fueled a more openly anti-regime spirit. In 2016, thousands gathered at Pasargadae, the site of Cyrus’s tomb, chanting anti-regime and pro-monarchy slogans. Some 300 were detained. The following year, regime-aligned media reported security forces had detained the alleged organizers, accusing dissidents of exploiting national sentiment to incite civil disobedience.
Since then, security forces have closed roads and fenced off the site annually to block potential demonstrations, including this year. Yet repression has only strengthened the nationalist current. During the 2023 Nowruz holiday, amid the Women, Life, Freedom uprising, Persepolis — ancient Persia’s capital — became the most visited heritage site in Iran. By 2025, even state-run media reported a 30 percent rise in domestic tourism to historical sites such as Persepolis and the tombs of poets, with Fars Province, home to many ancient landmarks, seeing a 50 percent increase.
In stark contrast, regime-affiliated religious authorities complained in 2023 that 50,000 of Iran’s 75,000 mosques were closed due to lack of attendance. A leaked 2024 Culture Ministry survey found that 85 percent of respondents believed Iranians had grown less religious than five years earlier, with only 11 percent attending congregational prayers and 45 percent never joining Friday prayers.
The Regime Failed To Co-Opt Nationalism
During the 12-Day War, many Iranians shared videos celebrating Israeli strikes on regime figures, distinguishing between their Iranian identity and the Islamic Republic’s ideology. In response, authorities have tried and failed to hijack nationalism for their own purposes by erecting billboards with ancient Persian heroes.
The Islamic Republic has always had a tenuous relationship with nationalism. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, founding father of the regime, famously derided nationalists as “useless” compared to Islamists. His successor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has not been any kinder to nationalism or Iran’s pre-Islamic heritage.
In 2014, Khamenei dismissed Iran’s pre-Islamic monuments, writing, “These works [Persepolis] belong to the tyrants of Iran’s history, and hatred of despotism makes such works lose their appeal in people’s eyes and hearts.” Yet nearly a decade later, facing the regime’s deep unpopularity, he invited a religious chanter during a mourning ceremony for Imam Husayn to perform a patriotic anthem in place of a mourning elegy as an unprecedented gesture to co-opt Iranian nationalism. Iranians saw through the maneuver.
Make Iran Great Again
A regime that fears its own people’s sense of national pride is proof of its ideological and political bankruptcy. For Iranians, the longing to reclaim their civilizational past is not nostalgia, it is outright rebellion. That sentiment gives Washington a rhetorical opening in support of the Iranian people and a meaningful tool against their oppressors. When President Trump once said, “Make America Great Again,” many Iranians heard an echo of their own desire. Washington should not miss such opportunities in the future.
https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2025/11/05/iranians-challenge-the-regime-by-celebrating-cyrus-the-great/
**Janatan Sayeh is a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), where Behnam Ben Taleblu is senior director of the Iran Program and a senior fellow. For more analysis from the authors and FDD, please subscribe HERE. Follow Janatan and Behnam on X @JanatanSayeh and @therealBehnamBT. Follow FDD on X @FDD and @FDD_Iran. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.

Iran’s October Oil Exports Hit 2025 Peak, Reflecting Failure of U.S. Sanctions Enforcement
Saeed Ghasseminejad/FDD/November 07/2025
Iran’s oil exports in October reached their highest monthly level of the year. This highlights the continued failure of the Trump administration to cut Tehran’s key financial lifeline.
Tehran shipped an estimated 66.8 million barrels during the month, averaging 2.15 million barrels per day (mbpd), slightly higher than September. Crude oil constituted the core of these flows at 1.93 mbpd (89.8 percent), supplemented by fuel oil at 193.6 thousand barrels per day (kbpd)(9 percent) and condensate at 26 kbpd (1.2 percent). Priced at a 5-10 percent discount to Brent, October exports likely generated between $3.9 billion and $4.2 billion in gross revenue, similar to the revenue in September.
Who Are the Customers and Enablers?
According to TankerTrackers, China remains Tehran’s primary buyer, with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as its second-largest buyer. China accounted for 90.6 percent of exports. The remaining volumes transited through the UAE (6.7 percent), Singapore (1.5 percent), and Yemen (0.4 percent).
Almost 85 percent of Iran’s crude, condensate, and fuel oil was exported from Kharg Island. Showing the unique role it plays in the country’s oil export operation. Mahshahr port, with an 8 percent share, ranked second, while Assaluyeh, Bandar Abbas, Imam Khomeini, Siri Island, and Lavan were the other ports of origin.
Receiving ports for Iranian oil included Changjiangkou, Huizhou, Qingdao, and Tianjin in China; port of Singapore in Singapore; Fujairah, Jebel Ali, and Sharjah in the UAE; and Ras Isa in Yemen.
Thirteen Iranian-flagged vessels transferred the largest share of the oil, accounting for 34.14 percent of the total. The next-largest transfers were made by seven vessels from Guyana (14.63 percent), four from Curaçao (11.45 percent), four from the Gambia (11.15 percent), six from the Comoros (7.13 percent), and six from Panama (5.95 percent).
The remaining vessels each carried less than 3 percent of the total: one from Benin (2.87 percent), one from Brazil (2.77 percent), one from Cameroon (2.75 percent), three from Barbados (1.85 percent), one from San Marino (1.43 percent), two from Jamaica (1.14 percent), one from Aruba (1.04 percent), one from Mozambique (0.78 percent), one from Hong Kong (0.55 percent), and one from the Cook Islands (0.36 percent).
Weakness of Current Sanctions
Of the 53 vessels that carried Iranian oil, 39 have been sanctioned by the United States, two by the United Kingdom, three by the European Union, and 14 by none. This shows a key problem: A quarter of the shadow fleets involved in the October illicit oil trade remains undesignated. An additional concern is that those designated still travel freely across the globe.
In October, the U.S. Department of the Treasury imposed three rounds of sanctions related to Iran. Of them, the designation package of October 9 is the broadest, targeting the energy industry and “over 50 individuals, entities, and vessels that facilitate Iranian oil and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) sales and shipments from Iran,” Treasury stated. The list includes shadow fleet vessels, the China-based Rizhao Shihua Crude Oil Terminal, and the teapot refinery Shandong Jincheng Petrochemical Group Co. Ltd., as well as front companies operating across the globe. Still, while these designations are steps in the right direction, they have yet to reduce Iran’s oil exports.
U.S. Must Increase Pressure
On October 31, Treasury announced that John Hurley, undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, would travel to Israel, Lebanon, the UAE, and Turkey to ramp up the maximum pressure campaign on Iran. In particular, the UAE and Turkey are key hubs for sanctions busting and money laundering for Iran. Hurley must ensure his meetings will lead the two governments to take significant action to reduce Tehran’s oil exports.
On October 18, a tanker carrying Iranian LPG to Yemen was attacked, though the perpetrator remains unknown. More such attacks would significantly increase the risk and cost of this illicit trade. Furthermore, Washington should use the U.S. Navy to confiscate tankers that carry Iranian oil and condensate.
https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2025/11/05/irans-october-oil-exports-hit-2025-peak-reflecting-failure-of-u-s-sanctions-enforcement/
**Saeed Ghasseminejad is a senior Iran and financial economics advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). For more analysis from Saeed and FDD, please subscribe HERE. Follow Saeed on X @SGhasseminejad. Follow FDD on X @FDD and @FDD_Iran. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on foreign policy and national security.

Question: “What happens after death?”
GotQuestions.org/November 07/2025
Answer: Within the Christian faith, there is a significant amount of confusion regarding what happens after death. Some hold that after death everyone “sleeps” until the final judgment, after which everyone will be sent to heaven or hell. Others believe that at the moment of death people are instantly judged and sent to their eternal destinations. Still others claim that, when people die, their souls/spirits are sent to a “temporary” heaven or hell to await the final resurrection, the final judgment, and the finality of their eternal destination. So, what exactly does the Bible say happens after death?
First, for the believer in Jesus Christ, the Bible tells us that after death believers’ souls/spirits are taken to heaven, because their sins were forgiven when they received Christ as Savior (John 3:16, 18, 36). For believers, death means being “away from the body and at home with the Lord” (2 Corinthians 5:6–8; Philippians 1:23). However, passages such as 1 Corinthians 15:50–54 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13–17 describe believers being resurrected and given glorified bodies. If believers go to be with Christ immediately after death, what is the purpose of this resurrection? It seems that, while the souls/spirits of believers go to be with Christ immediately at death, the physical body remains in the grave “sleeping.” At the resurrection of believers, the physical body is resurrected, glorified, and reunited with the soul/spirit. This reunited and glorified body-soul-spirit will be the state of existence for believers for eternity in the new heavens and new earth (Revelation 21—22).
Second, for those who do not receive Jesus Christ as Savior, death means everlasting punishment. However, similar to the destiny of believers, it seems that unbelievers also go to a temporary holding place to await their final resurrection, judgment, and eternal destiny. Luke 16:22–23 describes a rich man being tormented immediately after death. Revelation 20:11–15 describes all the unbelieving dead being resurrected, judged at the great white throne, and cast into the lake of fire. Unbelievers, then, are not sent to the final “hell” (the lake of fire) immediately after death; rather, they are sent to a temporary realm of fiery judgment and anguish. The rich man cried out, “I am in agony in this fire” (Luke 16:24).
After death, a person resides in either a place of comfort or a place of torment. These realms act as a temporary “heaven” and a temporary “hell” until the resurrection. At that point, the soul is reunited with the body, but no one’s eternal destiny will change. The first resurrection is for the “blessed and holy” (Revelation 20:6)—everyone who is in Christ—and those who are part of the first resurrection will enter the millennial kingdom and, ultimately, the new heavens and new earth (Revelation 21:1). The other resurrection happens after Christ’s millennial kingdom, and it involves a judgment on the wicked and unbelieving “according to what they had done” (Revelation 20:13). These, whose names are not in the book of life, will be sent to the lake of fire to experience the “second death” (Revelation 20:14–15). The new earth and the lake of fire—these two destinations are final and eternal. People go to one or the other, based entirely on whether they have trusted Jesus Christ for salvation (Matthew 25:46; John 3:36).

Savage beatings and dying trees: How West Bank settler violence is impacting Palestinians’ olive harvest
Zeena Saifi, Jeremy Diamond, Cyril Theophilos, CNN/November 07/2025
Palestinian olive pickers attacked over and overScroll back up to restore default view.
Umm Shukry inspects her olive trees one by one, just as she did every year for a decade. But this olive harvest season is different. Nearly all her trees are damaged; their branches bare and brittle. Examining each limb, she feels exhausted with sorrow. “I am suffocated. I am suffocated from seeing my hard work turn out like this,” she told CNN. “I used to spend so much time here under the scorching heat, taking care of them… we’ve had this land for over 50 years.”For the past two years, the 72-year-old has been prevented from accessing her land, cut off by settler violence and Israeli army restrictions. It sits opposite an illegal outpost in the occupied West Bank’s Jordan Valley. The Israeli settlers living there have assaulted and threatened her family, she said, forcing them to leave their land out of fear.During their absence, settlers sent cows to graze on their olive trees, Umm Shukry’s son Shukry Shehadeh, explains. Neighbors sent him videos of settlers damaging the land. He returned to find his home ransacked, solar panels stolen, and water tanks and irrigation pipes destroyed. And perhaps most painfully, there were no olives in sight. “They forced us to leave, and then they used extreme violence to destroy our olives, our home, our belongings. I am struggling to comprehend this shock,” Shehadeh says. Umm Shukry has tended to her olive trees for 10 years. This olive harvest, she was prevented from accessing her land because of settler attacks. Settler attacks on Shehadeh’s farm are part of a systematic pattern of settler impunity amid a sharp increase in attacks against Palestinians, particularly in the past two years. In the first half of 2025, there were 757 settler attacks that caused casualties or property damage – a 13% increase compared with the same period last year, according to the United Nations’ human rights office (OHCHR). This year’s harvest season has also seen some of the most brazen violence in recent years. Palestinian olive pickers have been attacked at least 259 times since the harvest season began last month, according to figures gathered by the Palestinian Authority’s Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission (CWRC). more than 4,000 trees and saplings have been vandalized, according to the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Many of these attacks have been widely documented and videos have surfaced online, showing some Palestinians left bloodied and beaten.
The UN has urged Israel, as the occupying power, to prevent further attacks in the West Bank. “The failure to prevent or punish such attacks is inconsistent with international law,” the UN Humanitarian Relief Chief Tom Fletcher warned. “Palestinians must be protected. Impunity cannot prevail. Perpetrators must be held accountable.”
Dozens of videos filmed by Palestinian farmers and activists have shown masked Israeli settlers carrying clubs and sticks and sometimes wielding rifles while attacking Palestinians and Jewish activists standing in solidarity with them. Other videos have shown settlers acting with soldiers nearby, often supporting them. On Sunday, Israeli soldiers were filmed stealing olives in the town of Sinjil, after declaring the area a military zone and expelling Palestinian farmers, according to Palestinian and Israeli activists who were present. In a response to a query about the incident from CNN, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said “the conduct of the forces is not in line with IDF values,” adding that the incident will be examined and “addressed disciplinarily.” Palestinians say they have no recourse to seek justice when they are attacked, because they see the army as abetting the settlers. Under what activists call a two-tiered legal system in the occupied West Bank, Palestinians are subject to military law, while Israeli settlers are subject to Israeli civilian law. Over the past two years, the Shehadehs have made several attempts to return to their land and their crops – only to be pushed back by settlers, the army or both.
They returned last Friday accompanied by Jewish and Israeli activists with the Israeli human rights organization Rabbis for Human Rights (RHR), one of several that bring together hundreds of foreign volunteers to accompany and support Palestinian farmers during their annual harvest.
Sometimes there is safety in numbers, but not always. Palestinians and activists across the West Bank have been assaulted or detained as they attempted peacefully to harvest olives. On October 27, Jewish activists sent CNN videos of Israeli soldiers and settlement security detaining farmers in the town of Qarawat Bani Hassan while they were harvesting olives. Two Jewish-American women who joined Palestinians and RHR in the village of Burin last month were deported by Israeli authorities last Friday, according to a statement issued by the group, which said it “underscores Israel’s growing crackdown on civil society.”The Israeli army declared the area a closed military zone – a security tool used to block Palestinians from accessing their land, according to Palestinian residents and activists on the ground. RHR said it was notable that none of the Jewish settlers who attacked Palestinian farmers in the area were arrested. On Tuesday, Israeli volunteers with RHR were injured while accompanying Palestinian farmers in the town of Qarawat Bani Hassan. The group says those present were attacked by settlers and a soldier who fired shots in their direction. Responding to a query from CNN about the Israeli military blocking Palestinians from accessing their lands, the IDF said it “recognizes the importance of the olive harvest in maintaining the fabric of life in the region,” but acknowledged it has restricted entry to certain areas in order to “prevent friction.”“The IDF firmly condemns all forms of violence, which divert the attention of commanders and soldiers from their primary mission of defense and counterterrorism.”
A symbol of resilience
The olive tree is one of the most enduring symbols of Palestinians’ connection to their land. The yearly harvest is a historic ritual, deeply rooted in culture and tradition. But its importance extends beyond symbolism and identity. Up to 100,000 families depend on the olive harvest for a living, according to Ajith Sunghay, the head of OHCHR’s Office in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, who described it as “the economic backbone of rural Palestinian communities.” “The olive here is never just a tree. It is livelihood and lineage, resilience and economy, and a historic vein connecting Palestinians to the land,” he said. For Shehadeh, a big part of his income depends on olives. He said in the two years that he’s been away from his groves, he’s lost the equivalent of close to $25,000. And as the settler attacks intensify, so does the effort to drive Palestinians from their land, led by hardliners in the Israeli government. Sunghay warns that the rise in settler violence is occurring “against the backdrop of an accelerated Israeli land grab,” with officials “openly declaring their intent to annex the whole of the West Bank.”US President Donald Trump has said he would not allow Israel to do that. But for most Palestinians, de-facto annexation is already unfolding daily. Israel has built more military checkpoints, roadblocks and iron gates across the occupied territory, heavily restricting freedom of movement. According to a UN report from May, there are at least 849 “movement obstacles that permanently or intermittently restrict the movement of 3.3 million Palestinians across the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.”Illegal outposts are also being legalized by Israel and growing at a rapid pace. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in September that Israel had “doubled Jewish settlements” in the West Bank – considered illegal under international law – and “will continue on this path.” With the attention on Gaza, the Trump administration has done almost nothing to curtail these moves. Palestinians in turn say they feel helpless in the face of such aggression.
Remaining steadfast
Ahmad Shakarna knows all too well what it means to feel helpless. On October 25, the 58-year-old received a call from neighbors that his mother-in-law had been detained by Israeli soldiers while picking olives in the village of Nahalin in Bethlehem.
He rushed to find her, he told CNN, only to learn the soldiers had dragged her from her olive groves and forced her to climb a rocky hill toward the military watchtower overlooking the nearby settlement of Beitar. Shakarna grabbed her medication and headed to try to reach her, fearing for her life. But he was aware that confronting the soldiers might endanger his life as well, he said. When he reached her, a settler suddenly descended from atop the hill, grabbing Shakarna and beating him, before two Israeli soldiers pushed him to the ground. In a video of the attack that was widely circulated on social media, one soldier is seen striking him with the barrel of his rifle, before the settler comes in to land several more punches. Shakarna said he briefly lost his eyesight and was evaluated with a mild concussion at the hospital. “Isn’t it an odd sight to see – an army holding a civilian and allowing settlers to beat him?” he told CNN. After five hours of interrogation, he and his mother-in-law were released without charge; proof, he says, that they did nothing wrong. The IDF told CNN an investigation had been opened into the incident, but said it could not provide details about an ongoing investigation. But Shakarna doesn’t believe it will be sincere. “They know exactly what happened, but they don’t care. They want to hide the crime they committed,” he said. If the incident hadn’t been caught on video, it would’ve “come and gone” even if he were killed, he said. “The life of a Palestinian is worth nothing,” he said. But Shakarna is determined to remain steadfast on his land. “The olive tree existed before the occupation,” he said. “It is valuable and dear to us… we will not abandon it.”
‘I won’t leave’
Back in the Jordan Valley, Umm Shukry continues to wade through the olive groves with unsteady yet quick steps, shuffling between broken branches and dried-out leaves. She speaks in a stream of emotion without pause, trying to make sense of her situation. “Why do they have to keep tormenting us and ruining our lives? Just let us come back here and water our trees… what did we do to deserve this violence?” she asks. After circling the farm in exhausted loops, she finally settles beneath a tree to rest. “Ten years of hard work. Ten years of me spending time on this land, refusing to leave,” she mumbles as tears fall. “But this is where I want to be. I will remain here underneath my olives. I won’t leave.”

US Elections: Will Trump Thank Mamdani?
Amir Taheri/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2025
The election of Zohran Mamdani as New York City mayor is widely hailed as a political setback for President Donald Trump across the global commentariat. European pundits describe it as a sign that populism, triumphant for the past few years, may be peaking out.
At first glance pundits may seem to have hit the bull’s eye.
Mamdani represents anti-Trumpism in many ways.
He is a Muslim while one of Trump’s first moves in his first term as president was to ban citizens of seven Muslim majority countries from travelling to the US. Mamdani describes himself as a duodecimal Shi’ite, which brackets him with what Trump regards as an especially challenging brand of religion. The fact that in Tehran official media has hailed Mamdani’s “victory” reinforces that impression.
The new mayor is also unabashedly anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian to the point of threatening to have Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu arrested if he arrives in the Big Apple. (Needless to say, he can’t because that is above his paygrade.)
At a time that Trump is waging a campaign against “too much immigration”, legal or illegal, Mamdani, who became a US citizen recently, would have difficulty claiming that he is “one of us” as MAGA supporters define.Mamdani has been congratulated by almost all of Trump’s betes-noires notably former President Barak Obama and Senator Bernie Sanders. But how serious is the “beginning of the end for Trump” theme played by his political foes?
The short answer is: not very!
The real test of Trump’s durability will come in next year’s mid-term election.
This time round the Republicans managed to keep their majority in the House of Representatives by holding the two seats contested in Florida. Democrats won the governors’ position in Virginia and New Jersey states that have been often theirs for decades. In California, a proposition to add five seats to the state’s representation in the Congress passed - no surprise as this increases the Golden State’s influence in Washington. However, in contrast with Mamdani’s fire and brimstone rhetoric Democrats projected a centrist profile in all three states. They tried to portray Trump as an extremist in terms of the current phase of the American cultural war.
Because he was not born in the US, Mamdani of course cannot reach for the presidency.
In fact, his mayoral victory may be due to conjectures that few foresaw.
New Yorkers who won’t vote for a Republican even by holding their nose were left with no choice but to listen to a newcomer promising all sorts of goodies.
Then Mamdani made an error that might not only doom his mayorship but could also reduce the Democrats’ chances of winning back the Senate and the House next year. The error was to brag about himself as a “socialist”, one of those clichés that American politicians and pundits equated with Communism and a weapon in the hands of the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
Last Tuesday Trump branded Mamdani and beyond him the Democrats as crypto communists. However, if socialism is seen in its Wester European meaning the United States tacitly adopted a Social democratic agenda from the mid-1960s with President Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society”. Socialism might have been invented by the character in one of Charles Dickens’s novel Oliver Twist when the cheeky street urchin along with other urchins being served the orphanage’s soup shouts: More! He doesn’t care that if he gets more, someone must get less.
For the past six decades, successive US administrations have done socialism while using it as a “reds under the bed” trope against adversaries.
Today almost half of all Americans receive benefits and entitlements of various kinds costing over $1 trillion in 2024, something unheard of in the US until the 1960s in days that self-reliance and the pioneer spirit was seen as the nation’s code of ethics.
Senator George Mitchel, an eminent figure in Democrat Party’s recent history told me in a conversation in London years ago that his party always won by “offering a social agenda but appearing to be at the center.”He described Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio Cortez, an icon in the left of the party, as “offering a tactical win but ensuring strategic loss.”I was reminded of that conversation when AOC jumped the queue to congratulate Mamdani on his “historic victory.”Whenever the Democrat party has lost a presidential election and veered left to remedy that loss it has lost even bigger in subsequent contests. This is what happened when the party chose Senator George McGovern as presidential candidate in 1972. Democrats made the same mistake a decade later by fielding another left-leaning candidate in the person of Governor Mike Dukakis. To a good part of American electorate socialism is like sin, you are tempted to enjoy it but loath to admit it. Obama understood that. He “socialized” large chunks of the health sector, almost 12 per cent of GDP, while swearing he wasn’t doing socialism. If Democrats get high on Mamdani displaying an Ali Baba’s cave of more entitlements in the name of democratic socialism Trump may have to thank the young man from Kampala for giving him new ammunition in the cultural war he says he is waging. George Orwell warned that “disparate desiderata of sections of society” could lead to a “feeling of cultural insecurity by a nation.” Trump has built his electoral successes on precisely that feeling.
The last time socialism got big public exposure in the US was when Socialist candidate Eugene V. Debs won nearly 1 million votes in both the 1912 and 1920 presidential elections. In the 1930s, Socialists won more than 1,000 state and local elected offices nationwide but evaporated as snowflakes in June.

Selected X Tweets For November 07/2025
Through me, a whisper reminding me that God is love. That is why I left Islam.
Fatima N Jomaa/Face Book/November 07/2025
I was at the mosque, and because of the circumstances that brought me there, I stayed and listened to the sermon. The Sheikh speaking is one of the few I truly respect, calm and sincere, never shaming or condemning anyone to hell.
The sermon was about honoring one’s parents, respecting them for all they teach and for shaping who we become. It spoke of obedience, duty, and gratitude toward them, for through their guidance we fulfill our purpose as Muslims, to worship God.
In that hour I heard that Allah is merciful.
But I did not hear that Allah loves.
I heard about the responsibilities of parents, structure, discipline, and authority,
but not about patience, tenderness, or unconditional love.
Before the old feelings of fear, anxiety, and worthlessness could return, a quiet shiver ran through me, a whisper reminding me that God is love.
That is why I left Islam.
Because I was never taught what it means to love or to be loved.
And in my darkest days, when everything else fails, I still hold onto one truth:
I am loved.

Guila Fakhoury
As Nancy Pelosi retires after her long service in the House, I’m honored to have met her in person and to have received her insights on Lebanon and the broader Middle East. I also shared the story of my father, Amer Fakhoury. Whether one agrees with her politics or not, her historic achievement as the first woman to wield the Speaker’s gavel stands as a powerful testament to leadership.