English LCCC Newsbulletin For
Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For October 27/2025
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2025/english.october27.25.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
Do you not know that wrongdoers will not
inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters,
adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites,thieves, the greedy, drunkards,
revilers, robbers none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.
First Letter to the Corinthians 06/01-11/:”When any of you has a grievance
against another, do you dare to take it to court before the unrighteous, instead
of taking it before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the
world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try
trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels to say nothing of
ordinary matters? If you have ordinary cases, then, do you appoint as judges
those who have no standing in the church? I say this to your shame. Can it be
that there is no one among you wise enough to decide between one believer and
another, but a believer goes to court against a believer and before unbelievers
at that? In fact, to have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat
for you. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? But you
yourselves wrong and defraud and believers at that. Do you not know that
wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators,
idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy,
drunkards, revilers, robbers none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. And
this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified,
you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our
God.”.
Titles For The Latest English
LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on October
26-27/2025
Elias Bejjani/October 21/2025/ My X Account
Elias Bejjani/To PM, Nawaf Salam: Hezbollah Is an Iranian Terrorist Militia That
Did Not Liberate South Lebanon in 2000 but Occupies It Along with All of Lebanon
Nawaf Salam… When History Is Distorted to Appease Hezbollah/Elias Bejjani/October
24, 202
Dialogue and Diplomacy, Not wars Must be Pursued to Liberate Lebanon/Lebanese
Expatriate, Dr. Antoine Breidy/WhatsApp/October 26/2025
Assassination of 365 Hezbollah members since the ceasefire went into effect
Avichay Adraee/Assassination of Ali Hussein Nour al-Din al-Moussawi and Abed
Mahmoud al-Sayyed
Avichay Adraee The IDF eliminated a special force member of the Radwan Unit in
the terrorist organization Hezbollah.
Lebanon says Israeli strikes kill three
Two killed in Israeli strikes on south on Saturday
Stabilization talks: Morgan Ortagus in Israel for Gaza force, Katz signals more
strikes on Lebanon
Ortagus, Barrack and Egyptian delegation to visit Lebanon
Deep divisions emerge ahead of Parliament session over electoral law debate
Mechanism Committee Scolds Lebanon: War is at the Door!/Nadia Ghossoub/Nidaa Al-Watan/October
27, 2025
Deprived, Wounded, Isolated, and in Crisis/Amjad Iskandar/Nidaa Al-Watan/October
27, 2025
Who Doesn't Want the Pope to Visit Lebanon?/Jean Al-Fghali/Nidaa Al-Watan/October
27, 2025
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on October
26-27/2025
Israel army says targeted Islamic Jihad militant in Gaza strike
Israel allows Red Cross, Egyptian teams into Gaza as search for hostage bodies
widens
Abbas issues declaration for Vice President to assume leadership in case of
vacancy
Trump says Gaza stabilization force coming soon, warns Hamas over hostages’
bodies
Hamas expands search for hostages’ bodies in Gaza as Egypt joins effort
Israeli forces kill 20-year-old Palestinian near Hebron
Jordanian and Pakistani army chiefs discuss military cooperation
Hundreds of Syrians in Libya take up offer of free tickets home
Egyptian convoy enters Gaza to help recover hostage remains
Netanyahu says Israel to decide which foreign troops acceptable to secure Gaza
truce
Kurdish PKK says withdrawing all forces from Turkiye to north Iraq
Houthis release Yemeni actor after she spent nearly 5 years in prison
US warship docks in Trinidad and Tobago, putting more pressure on Venezuela
Trump meets Qatar leaders on way to Asia
Syria's Sharaa to attend Riyadh investment conference this week: Sources tell
Reuters
Frankly Speaking: Regional conflicts through the lens of Western media
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources
on October
26-27/2025
Realpolitik dictates Russia’s changing role
in Arab world/Zaid M. Belbagi/Arab News/October 26, 2025
From Dreyfus to Macron: The Grand French Tradition of Politically Correct
Antisemitism/Pierre Rehov/Gatestone Institute./October 26/2025
Venezuela: Bolivarian Roses for Machado/Amir Taheri/Gatestone Institute/October
26, 2025
In the context of the series of persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt/From
Rumor to Rampage: The Collective Punishment of Egypt’s Coptic Christians/Raymond
Ibrahim/Coptic Solidarity/October 23, 2025
Selected English Tweets from X Platform For 26 October/2025
The Latest English LCCC Lebanese &
Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on October
26-27/2025
Elias Bejjani/October 21/2025/ My X Account
Please be informed that my account on the X
platform has been suspended for reasons unknown to me. This is the fourth
account in five years to be arbitrarily suspended.
Elias Bejjani/To PM, Nawaf Salam: Hezbollah Is an
Iranian Terrorist Militia That Did Not Liberate South Lebanon in 2000 but
Occupies It Along with All of Lebanon
Nawaf Salam… When History Is Distorted to Appease Hezbollah
Elias Bejjani/October 24, 2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/10/148505/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqM-JHMSoi4
In an interview with Al-Mayadeen TV on October 23, 2025, Lebanese Prime Minister
Nawaf Salam made a shocking statement that cannot go unanswered: “If not for the
sacrifices of Hezbollah and the national resistance in general, before and with
the Hezbollah, the South Lebanon would not have been liberated.”
This statement not only contradicts historical truth but also constitutes a
deliberate falsification of history and an insult to the memory of the Lebanese
who witnessed the events of the liberation firsthand. They know very well that
Israel withdrew from South Lebanon in 2000 by a purely internal Israeli
government decision, having nothing to do with Hezbollah or any so-called
sacrifices.
In May 2000, then–Prime Minister Ehud Barak fulfilled his electoral promise to
unilaterally withdraw from Lebanon— a decision made within the Israeli
government as part of a broader security realignment strategy. Hezbollah had no
role in the withdrawal and entered the evacuated areas only days later, while
the Syrian occupation prevented the Lebanese army from deploying in the South,
leaving a security vacuum that Hezbollah later exploited to impose its control
under the pretext of “liberation.”
It is worth recalling that Hezbollah’s last military attempt before Israel’s
withdrawal was the Battle of Jisr al-Hamra against the South Lebanon Army, which
ended in total failure and heavy casualties for Hezbollah—an event that alone
demolishes the myth of “liberation by resistance.”
Politically, the withdrawal was the result of a tacit understanding among
Israel, Syria, and Iran, facilitated by Arab and Western channels. Israel’s
pullout from the border strip was part of regional security arrangements in
which the so-called Lebanese resistance played no role whatsoever. All
subsequent Israeli, Syrian, and Iranian political documents confirm that the
withdrawal stemmed from security bargaining related to South Lebanon, the Golan
Heights, and the future of Syrian–Israeli negotiations, not from any military
victory by Hezbollah.
In another part of the interview, Nawaf Salam referred to what he called the
“Lebanese National Movement,” which then included parties such as the
Progressive Socialist Party, Amal, the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, the
Communist Party, and Palestinian organizations. He described them as part of the
“national resistance,” while the historical record clearly shows that they were
instruments of the Syrian–Palestinian scheme that ended what remained of
Lebanon’s sovereignty through the infamous 1969 Cairo Agreement, under which
Lebanon relinquished control over the South and the thirteen Palestinian camps,
allowing armed factions to establish a state within the state and drag Lebanon
into civil war.
As for what Salam called “the Lebanese resistance before Hezbollah,” it was not
a resistance at all but chaotic armed groups that liberated not a single inch of
Lebanese land. They were part of the anarchy that destroyed the state and paved
the way for its occupation by the Syrian and Iranian regimes.
While Salam’s interview included some acceptable points, his rhetorical bowing
to Hezbollah and his plea for its approval by claiming that it “liberated the
South” and “made sacrifices” represent a moral and political collapse unworthy
of a Lebanese Prime Minister, who should represent the state, not the militia.
His words amount to whitewashing the dark history of a terrorist organization
that has inflicted oppression, abductions, assassinations, and occupation upon
the Lebanese people.
Hezbollah’s Record of Terror and Crime
Since 2000, Hezbollah has brought Lebanon nothing but destruction,
assassinations, Iranian hegemony, futile wars, poverty, displacement, and enmity
with the world. The militia has assassinated some of Lebanon’s finest: Rafik
Hariri, Gebran Tueni, Pierre Gemayel, Walid Eido, Antoine Ghanem, Lokman Slim,
Wissam Eid, Wissam al-Hassan, Mohammad Chatah, Joe Bejjani, Elias al-Hasrouni,
and many others among journalists, politicians, and security officers.
Hezbollah invaded Beirut and Mount Lebanon in May 2008, turning its so-called
“resistance” weapons against the Lebanese.
Today it controls the state’s decision-making, paralyzes the government, blocks
the implementation of the ceasefire agreement with Israel, defies international
resolutions and the Lebanese constitution, cripples Parliament and the
judiciary, and uses ports, airports, and crossings for smuggling weapons and
drugs.
It has also dragged thousands of young Lebanese Shiites into Iran’s losing wars
in Syria, Yemen, and Iraq, leaving their families in misery and poverty.
Since its creation in 1982 by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard in collaboration with
the criminal Syrian Baath regime of Hafez al-Assad, Hezbollah has never been a
Lebanese organization, a resistance movement, a liberator, or a representative
of the Shiite community. It is an Iranian transnational militia and jihadist
terrorist entity composed of Lebanese mercenaries serving the Iranian regime.
Its goal is to establish an Islamic Republic in Lebanon subordinate to the
Wilayat al-Faqih system—foreign to Lebanon’s identity, heritage, and to the free
Lebanese Shiites it holds hostage.
Conclusion
Hezbollah is neither a “liberator” nor a “resistance.” It is a gang of evildoers
listed as a terrorist organization by most countries in the world, practicing
every form of crime, smuggling, and assassination under the banner of religion
and resistance, in service of Iran’s destructive agenda.
The undeniable truth remains: the South was liberated by an Israeli decision,
not by Hezbollah’s bullets. What Hezbollah did afterward was to impose a new
occupation clothed in religious rhetoric, isolating Lebanon and condemning it to
endless wars.
To claim, as Nawaf Salam did, that Hezbollah liberated the South is not merely a
political slip — it is a betrayal of truth and history. For those who truly
liberate do not occupy; those who sacrifice do not assassinate; and those who
fight for their country do not hand it over to the rule of the mullahs.
Dialogue and Diplomacy, Not wars Must be Pursued to
Liberate Lebanon
Lebanese Expatriate, Dr. Antoine Breidy/WhatsApp/October 26/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/10/148562/
Lebanon has long suffered under the weight of armed factions operating outside
the authority of the state. These groups undermine national unity, threaten
civil peace, and obstruct the path to prosperity. It is time for Lebanon to
reclaim its sovereignty through the complete disarmament of all militias and the
restoration of state authority across the country. Peace with neighboring
nations, including Israel, must be pursued through dialogue and diplomacy—not
through proxy wars or perpetual conflict. The Lebanese people deserve a future
free from fear, corruption, and violence—a future built on justice, economic
opportunity, and democratic values. Let Lebanon rise again, not as a
battleground for foreign interests, but as a beacon of peace and resilience in
the region.
Is Israel Expanding the Scope of its Strikes?
Tomorrow's Session: Between the "Expatriate Voting Honor Roll" and the
"Expatriate Isolation Roll"
Nidaa Al-Watan / October 27, 2025 (Translated from Arabic)
The pace of escalation is rising from the South to the Bekaa, coinciding with
the return of US envoy Morgan Ortagus, whom the "resistance media" refers to as
the "liaison officer with Lebanon and an omen of doom." Ortagus had toured
northern Israel with the Israeli Defense Minister, the US and Israeli
Ambassadors, and the commander of the Israeli Northern Command, which gives her
visit exceptional importance at this sensitive time. Concurrently with Ortagus's
tour, Israel intensified its military operations in the South and the Bekaa,
where raids resulted in three deaths in strikes on the Al-Hafir, Nabi Sheet, and
Naqoura areas. This is at a time when Israeli media sources revealed that the
Israeli army has killed about 330 "Hezbollah" elements in raids since the start
of the ceasefire in Lebanon in November 2024, until today.
Fear of Expanding the Scope of Strikes
Developments in the past few hours have raised real fears of the country sliding
into a new confrontation. In this context, Nidaa Al-Watan learned that
international warnings to Lebanon regarding Israel's intensification of its
operations and the expansion of the war if "Hezbollah" does not surrender its
weapons are not new, but continuous warnings for months. These warnings have
escalated recently, and not only from the United States, but also from European
and Arab countries. Consequently, there is an official Lebanese fear of
expanding the scope of Israeli strikes, especially since the messages reaching
Lebanese officials confirm Tel Aviv's persistence in its raids and targeting,
and its insistence on striking the "Party's" infrastructure. Meanwhile,
Lebanon's contacts with Washington seek to avert the war, and have so far
succeeded in delaying it, but not in eliminating the possibility of its
outbreak. These developments will feature in Ortagus's visit to Beirut. Nidaa
Al-Watan learned that Ortagus will meet with the President of the Republic,
General Joseph Aoun, where she will discuss the security and border situation,
and she will also meet with other officials. She is expected to convey an
important message to Lebanon concerning the security situation.
Egyptian Intelligence Director in Beirut
Concurrently, Nidaa Al-Watan learned that the visit of the Egyptian Intelligence
Director to Beirut comes at a sensitive time. He will carry a message to Lebanon
warning it of the dire security situation and the need for Lebanon to take
effective steps on the ground to confine the weapon, to avoid any new war,
especially since Egypt was at the heart of the Gaza agreement and wants to spare
Lebanon from war.
Mobilization for Tuesday's Session
On the opposing front, the dispute over including the Election Law on the agenda
of the legislative session is increasing between Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri
and the parliamentary forces that signed the reiterated accelerated bill
proposal for expatriates to vote in their districts. With Berri sticking to his
position and considering any amendment to the law as "tampering with sectarian
balance," attention is focused on Tuesday's session, which he called for to
complete the agenda of the previous session that lost quorum. The Parliament is
divided between the "Expatriate Voting Honor Roll" and the "Expatriate Isolation
Roll." Participants are the Development and Liberation bloc and the Loyalty to
the Resistance bloc, in addition to the MPs of the Democratic Gathering. Also,
the Consultative Meeting, which includes MPs Elias Bou Saab, Alain Aoun, Ibrahim
Kanaan, and Simon Abi Ramia, and the Free Patriotic Movement. The Moderation
bloc will meet this afternoon to decide its final position. Conversely, the
"Expatriate Voting Honor Roll" includes: the "Strong Republic" bloc, the "Kataeb"
party, and MPs Michel Moawad, Fouad Makhzoumi, and Ashraf Rifi, and the Change
Alliance bloc, which includes MPs Michel Doueihi, Mark Daou, and Waddah Sadek.
"Strong Republic": Parliament a Hostage in the Hands of its Speaker
The "Strong Republic" bloc, which convened under the chairmanship of the head of
the "Lebanese Forces" party, Dr. Samir Geagea, issued a strongly worded
statement announcing its boycott of the legislative session scheduled for
Tuesday. It affirmed that participation in it means submitting to Speaker Nabih
Berri's dominance over the Parliament, and practically covering up a
constitutional and moral crime against hundreds of thousands of expatriate
Lebanese who are intended to be deprived of their right to contribute to
changing the reality through the ballot boxes. The bloc called on all free MPs,
from any bloc or affiliation, to stand by the right and the constitution, and
not to grant legitimacy to the situation of paralyzing the Parliament and
emptying it of its national role. It considered that "the Parliament, under the
repeated practices of its Speaker Nabih Berri, has turned from a legislative
authority representing the entire nation and caring for the interests of the
Lebanese people, into a hostage in the hands of its Speaker, who deals with it
as private property, opening and closing its doors whenever he wishes, and
deciding what is discussed and what is buried in the drawers. These practices
are no longer merely a violation of procedure, but have become a full-fledged
coup against the constitution, the internal regulations, customs, the principle
of separation of powers, and a blatant assault on the will of the Lebanese
people, who entrusted the Parliament with the authority of legislation and
oversight, not the authority of obstruction and selectivity."
"Hezbollah" Threatens and Accuses Expatriates of Treason!
In contrast, MP Hassan Fadlallah used a language of threat in the context of his
rejection of amending the election law, saying: "They want to amend the law to
allow expatriates abroad to vote, contrary to the current law, because they
believe that where there are expatriates, they have the ability to transfer
their votes through the will of the countries they are in, and they know that
our political team is unable to exercise this right. They know that sanctions
are imposed on us, and there is a ban and threat to expatriates abroad, which
means there is no equality of opportunity." He considered that "those who insist
on a coup against the current law are seeking to invest the results of the
Israeli aggression in an act that is unethical, unpatriotic, and does not belong
to the Lebanon that everyone praises." Expatriate sources denounced Fadlallah's
position, wondering how he easily resorts to accusing of treason every time the
position is not in line with "Hezbollah's" stance.
Sheikh Qassem: Imam Khamenei Offered All Forms of Support
Hezbollah's Secretary-General, Sheikh Naim Qassem, announced on the first
anniversary of assuming the "Party's" general secretariat that "Imam Khamenei
offered all forms of support and had a detailed follow-up on the course and
results of the battle and the level of needs." Sheikh Qassem continued: "We have
the strength we have, now the tactics are different, and we do not display the
strength or surplus strength we possess." Regarding recovery, Sheikh Qassem
said: "Recovery is in the entire public that appeared in the million-man funeral
and the scout that makes the future." Qassem revealed that "the fighters
prevented the possibility of Israel reaching the Litani and Beirut and achieving
its goals."
Al-Sharaa in Saudi Arabia
In the regional scene, the visit of Syrian President Ahmed Al-Sharaa to the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia stands out, during which he will meet with Saudi Crown
Prince Prince Mohammed bin Salman and participate in the ninth edition of the
Future Investment Initiative conference. President Al-Sharaa is scheduled to
deliver a speech at the Future Investment Initiative conference held in the
Saudi capital, Riyadh, and will also meet with major international investment
companies and economic institutions.
Israel assassinated two of Hezbollah's leaders today: Ali
Hussein Nour al-Din al-Moussawi and Abed Mahmoud al-Sayyed.
Who is targeted by today's Israeli raids? What is the relationship with the
Iranian Revolutionary Guard?
Janoubia/October 26/ 2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/10/148558/
For days, the Israeli army has been carrying out systematic assassination
operations against Hezbollah members and cadres, starting from South Lebanon all
the way to the Beqaa Valley. Following the assassination of leader Abbas Karaki
the day before yesterday, and the assassination of two members yesterday in
Harouf and Al-Qlaileh, the Israeli air force today carried out two raids on the
town of Al-Naqoura in South Lebanon and the town of Nabi Sheet in the Beqaa,
targeting two other members of the party.
Martyr Ali Hussein Nour al-Din al-Moussawi Al-Arabiya channel stated that the
raid on the town of Nabi Sheet in the Beqaa targeted the Hezbollah leader Ali
Hussein Nour al-Din al-Moussawi, who is a member of the Iranian Revolutionary
Guard (IRGC). Al-Arabiya quoted sources as saying that Al-Moussawi studied
medicine in Tehran and was one of the senior officials in the war and military
operations waged by the party during the years of war in Syria. He returned to
assume security and military responsibilities in the Beqaa after the collapse of
the former president Bashar al-Assad's regime and the uprooting of the Iranian
presence in Syrian territories. Al-Moussawi, known for taking a series of
precautionary security measures, had previously survived an assassination
attempt three months ago, until Israel managed to eliminate him today, with the
assassination operation being followed up by its Defense Minister, Yisrael Katz.
Pages affiliated with the party mentioned that the target in the town of Al-Naqoura
is Abed Al-Sayyed from the town of Beit Lief, one of Hezbollah's cadres in the
South. The Israeli army had announced earlier today that it "attacked the
Israeli army last night in the Al-Qlaiaa area in South Lebanon and eliminated
the person named Muhammad Akram Arabia, one of the special force members in
Hezbollah's Radwan Force."
Martyr Abed Al-Sayyed from the town of Beit Lief The Ministry of Health reported
in a statement that an Israeli raid on a car in the town of Al-Naqoura, Tyre
district, led to the death of a martyr. In another statement, the Ministry
reported that an Israeli raid on a car in the town of Nabi Sheet, Baalbek
district, in eastern Lebanon, resulted in the death of a martyr. Despite the
approaching one-year anniversary of the ceasefire, Israel continues to launch
strikes, particularly in the south of the country. It says it targets military
infrastructure and Hezbollah members it accuses of transporting combat means or
attempting to rebuild the party's capabilities. Israel intensified the pace of
its strikes this week. Two people were killed on Saturday due to two Israeli
strikes targeting a car and a motorcycle. The Israeli army said it killed a
commander "in the anti-armor unit of the Radwan Force," in addition to "one of
the special force members" in the Radwan Force as well. Two people were also
killed on Friday in two Israeli raids on the south of the country. The Israeli
army said that in the first strike, it targeted the official for logistics in
the party's Southern Front command, and in the second strike, a member "who was
attempting to rebuild the party's military capabilities."
Assassination of 365 Hezbollah members since the
ceasefire went into effect
Janoubia/October 26/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/10/148558/
The "Maariv" newspaper reported that estimates from Israeli security sources
indicate that Israel has assassinated 365 Hezbollah members since the ceasefire
went into effect, three of them in the last twenty-four hours alone." The Hebrew
"Walla News" website stated that the air raids carried out by the Israeli air
force on Lebanon this month reveal a worrying picture: "Hezbollah is sacrificing
its commanders on the border to rebuild its infrastructure, mobilize Iranian
weapons, and prepare for a campaign deep inside Lebanon. The policy of quiet
containment is not weakness, but preparation." The site continued: "Professional
analysis of the Israeli attacks on Lebanon reveals three main insights: The
first, attacks in the Southern Lebanese border area, erode the infrastructure of
the Radwan Force, but also show that Hezbollah is trying to restore the
infrastructure for launching rockets and mortars, collecting intelligence, and
launching anti-tank missiles near the border." It added: "The second, attacks in
the areas of Nabatieh, Khiam, and Kafr Dunin target the command and control
centers of Hezbollah forces, allowing for a separation between the combat level
and the command levels." The site also continued: "The third, attacks in the
Beqaa are much more significant and indicate an intention to damage strategic
infrastructure, as this area is considered a vital logistical line and a storage
area for Iranian weapons, long-range missiles, and smuggled weapons into
Lebanon." Yesterday, the Lebanese Ministry of Health announced the killing of
two people following Israeli attacks targeting areas in the south of the
country. The Ministry of Health reported that "an Israeli enemy raid on a car in
the town of Harouf, Nabatieh district, resulted in one death and one civilian
injury." Later, the Ministry reported in a statement that "an Israeli enemy raid
on a motorcycle in the town of Al-Qlaileh, Tyre district, resulted in one
death." For its part, the Israeli army announced that it had killed Zein al-Abedin
Hussein Fatouni, noting that he was a "commander in the anti-armor unit of
Hezbollah's Radwan Force." The spokesperson for the Israeli army, Avichay Adraee,
wrote that the army "eliminated a commander in the anti-tank missile system of
the Hezbollah Radwan Force unit, who was attempting to rebuild terrorist
infrastructure in South Lebanon." Israel intensified the pace of its strikes
this week, as two people were killed on Friday due to two Israeli raids on the
south of the country.
Avichay Adraee/Assassination of Ali Hussein Nour al-Din al-Moussawi and Abed
Mahmoud al-Sayyed
X Platform/October 26/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/10/148558/
https://x.com/i/status/1982485671555019061 The IDF eliminated a Hezbollah arms
dealer and the local representative of the terrorist organization in Al-Bayada.
The IDF attacked earlier today in the Beqaa region in Lebanon and eliminated the
person named Ali Hussein Al-Moussawi, who was considered an arms smuggler in
Hezbollah. Al-Moussawi worked as an arms dealer and smuggler of combat means
within Hezbollah's ranks, was involved in purchasing and transporting weapons
from Syria to Lebanon, and constituted an important element in the
reconstruction and armament efforts of the terrorist organization Hezbollah.
Over the past year, the terrorist Al-Moussawi directly oversaw the smuggling of
weapons for the benefit of Hezbollah. The IDF also raided the Al-Naqoura area
earlier today and eliminated the terrorist named Abed Mahmoud Al-Sayyed, who
served as Hezbollah's local representative in the Al-Bayada area in South
Lebanon and was responsible for the relationship between the terrorist
organization and the residents of the area on economic and military issues, and
contributed to attempts to restore Hezbollah's military capabilities in the
village. The activities of the terrorists constituted a violation of the
understandings between Israel and Lebanon, and the IDF will continue to operate
to remove any threat to the State of Israel.
Avichay Adraee The IDF eliminated a special force
member of the Radwan Unit in the terrorist organization Hezbollah.
X Platform/October 26/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/10/148558/
The IDF attacked last night in the Al-Qlaiaa area in South Lebanon and
eliminated the person named Muhammad Akram Arabia, one of the special force
members in the terrorist organization Hezbollah's Radwan Force. The terrorist
has recently been pushing forward attempts to rebuild combat capabilities in
Hezbollah and contributed to attempts to rebuild terrorist infrastructure, as
his activities constituted a violation of the understandings between Israel and
Lebanon. The IDF will continue to operate to remove any threat to the State of
Israel.
Lebanon says Israeli strikes kill three
AFP/October 26, 2025
BEIRUT: Lebanon’s health ministry said on Sunday that Israeli strikes on the
country’s south and east had killed three people, despite an ongoing ceasefire
deal, as Israel claimed it had targeted two members of Iran-backed Hezbollah.
Officials said one person had been killed in an “Israeli enemy strike” on a car
in Naqoura, in Tyre province, while another strike on a vehicle in Nabi Sheet,
in the country’s eastern Baalbek region, resulted in another fatality. Later,
the health ministry said a further strike on the town of Al-Hafir, also in the
Baalbek area, resulted in the death of a Syrian national and an injury to
another Syrian.
Despite a nearly year-long ceasefire, Israel has kept up strikes on Lebanon,
often saying it is targeting Hezbollah positions. In a statement on Sunday, the
Israeli army said it had killed Ali Hussein Al-Mousawi in eastern Lebanon,
describing him as “a weapons dealer and smuggler on behalf of Hezbollah.”The
Israeli military said it had also killed a local Hezbollah representative it
identified as Abd Mahmoud Al-Sayed, in southern Lebanon. Israel has intensified
strikes in recent weeks, with several deadly attacks launched over the past few
days. Last week, a United Nations special rapporteur told AFP that deadly
Israeli strikes on ostensibly civilian vehicles in Lebanon could amount to war
crimes, despite Israel’s assertion they targeted Hezbollah members. As part of
last year’s ceasefire deal, Israeli troops were to withdraw from southern
Lebanon and Hezbollah was to pull back north of the Litani River and dismantle
any military infrastructure in the south. Under US pressure and fearing an
escalation of Israeli strikes, the Lebanese government has moved to begin
disarming Hezbollah, a plan the movement and its allies oppose. Despite the
terms of the truce, Israel has kept troops deployed in five border points it
deems strategic.
Two killed in Israeli strikes on south on Saturday
Agence France Presse/October 26, 2025
Lebanon's health ministry said two people were killed and another wounded in two
Israeli strikes on the country's south Saturday, the latest attacks despite a
ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. In a statement, the ministry attributed
the death to an "Israeli enemy strike on a car in Harouf, Nabatiyeh
district".The ministry then reported another Israeli strike on a motorcycle in
Qlaileh, Tyre district, which killed one person. The Israeli military said it
had killed Zayn al-Abidin Hussein Ftouni, alleging he was "a commander in the
anti-tank unit of the Radwan Force Battalion" of Hezbollah. According to the
army's statement, Fatouni "was involved in efforts to re-establish Hezbollah's
terrorist infrastructure in southern Lebanon". The military did not immediately
comment on the attack on Qlaileh. Israel has repeatedly bombed Lebanon despite a
November 2024 ceasefire that sought to end over a year of hostilities with
Hezbollah. The Israeli military has intensified its attacks over the past week,
killing two people in two separate strikes on vehicles Friday. The military said
it had killed a Hezbollah "logistics commander" in the first strike and a member
"who was involved in efforts to reestablish Hezbollah's military capabilities"
in the second. A series of Israeli raids Thursday on southern and eastern
Lebanon killed four people, including an elderly woman, with the military saying
its targets included a weapons depot, a training camp and military
infrastructure. Last week, a United Nations special rapporteur told AFP that
deadly Israeli strikes on ostensibly civilian vehicles in Lebanon could amount
to war crimes, despite Israel's assertion they targeted Hezbollah members. As
part of last year's ceasefire deal, Israeli troops were to withdraw from
southern Lebanon and Hezbollah was to pull back north of the Litani River and
dismantle any military infrastructure in the south. Under U.S. pressure and
fearing an escalation of Israeli strikes, the Lebanese government has moved to
begin disarming Hezbollah, a plan the group and its allies oppose. Despite the
terms of the truce, Israel has kept troops deployed in five border points it
deems strategic.
Stabilization talks: Morgan Ortagus in Israel for Gaza
force, Katz signals more strikes on Lebanon
LBCI/October 26, 2025
Israeli Security Minister Israel Katz threatened continued attacks on Lebanon
and vowed to take all necessary measures to ensure the safety of residents in
northern Israel and along the border. Katz toured the Lebanese frontier and the
headquarters of Israel's Northern Command, accompanied by U.S. envoy Morgan
Ortagus, representatives of U.S. Central Command, and several diplomatic and
military officials. During the visit, Ortagus was briefed by Katz on the
situation along the border and received an intelligence report from Israeli
officers claiming that Hezbollah is rebuilding its military infrastructure in
South Lebanon. Commanders also outlined current security challenges and Israel's
preparedness along the frontier. The visit came as Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu, addressing his Cabinet meeting, reiterated that Israel's policy
toward all fronts—from Lebanon to Gaza—remains unchanged. His remarks coincided
with growing U.S. pressure over the next phase of Trump's plan for Gaza.
Washington has been moving forward with efforts to launch the second stage of
the plan, which includes forming an international stabilization force to operate
in Gaza. The proposed force would be backed by international partners but
remains a point of contention, as Israel objects to the participation of certain
countries. According to Israeli assessments, the U.S. administration is
preparing to submit a draft resolution to the U.N. Security Council within weeks
to establish this stabilization force as part of a broader political and
operational framework for postwar Gaza. While the United States works with
economic and commercial entities to build a recovery and stabilization mechanism
for the enclave, internal debates have intensified in Israel—both domestically
and with Washington—over the fate of hostages' remains still held in Gaza. The
U.S.-Israeli coordination center in Kiryat Gat, southern Israel, remains the
main hub overseeing progress toward the plan's second stage under full American
supervision, both militarily and administratively. Ortagus is expected to meet
Israeli officials again to discuss two key issues before leaving on Monday: the
deployment of international forces in Gaza and the security situation in
Lebanon—both central elements in the ongoing negotiations.
Ortagus, Barrack and Egyptian delegation to visit Lebanon
Naharnet/October 26, 2025
U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus, who is currently in Israel, will visit Lebanon from
Monday to Wednesday, media reports said. The reports said Ortagus will meet with
President Joseph Aoun, Speaker Nabih Berri and PM Nawaf Salam and will take part
in a meeting for the ceasefire committee, known as the Mechanism, on Wednesday.
Al-Jadeed television meanwhile reported that a senior Egyptian security
delegation will arrive in Beirut early next week, carrying a message to Aoun,
Berri and Salam that the situation has become very dangerous. U.S. envoy Tom
Barrack will also visit Lebanon in early November carrying the same message,
diplomatic sources told Al-Jadeed.
Deep divisions emerge ahead of Parliament session over electoral law debate
LBCI/October 26, 2025
As tensions rise over whether to include the electoral law on Parliament's
legislative agenda, a sharp divide has deepened between Parliament Speaker Nabih
Berri and the parliamentary majority bloc that submitted an urgent proposal
allowing expatriates to vote in their districts. Berri remains firm in his
stance, arguing that any amendment to the existing electoral law would disrupt
Lebanon's delicate sectarian balance. All eyes now turn to Tuesday's session,
which he has called to resume discussion of the previous agenda after quorum was
lost in the last meeting. So far, blocs from the Development and Liberation,
Loyalty to the Resistance, and the Democratic Gathering have confirmed their
attendance. The Democratic Gathering said it will participate to avoid
boycotting sessions that address crucial social and economic issues. The
Consultative Gathering—which includes MPs Elias Bou Saab, Alain Aoun, and Simon
Abi Ramia—is also expected to attend, though Abi Ramia will be absent due to
travel. The Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) has yet to announce a final decision
but is leaning toward maintaining its policy of participation rather than
boycott, consistent with its stated principle of engagement in parliamentary
work. The National Moderation Bloc, seen as a potential swing group, will meet
Monday afternoon to finalize its position. However, LBCI sources indicate the
bloc is inclined to take part in officially close the minutes of the previous
session, which remain open. The delay in closing those proceedings has stalled
several previously approved laws, including the public-private partnership law,
a key step toward major investments such as the planned Rene Moawad Airport in
Qlayaat, a project strongly supported by the bloc. Boycotting the session are
the Lebanese Forces, Kataeb Party, the Change alliance, and independent MPs
Michel Moawad, Fouad Makhzoumi, and Ashraf Rifi. According to LBCI's sources,
efforts are underway to persuade MPs Michel Daher, Ghassan Skaff, Neemat Frem,
Abdel Rahman Bizri, Osama Saad, Faisal Karami, and several Change MPs to skip
the session and prevent a quorum. In a call with LBCI, MP Paula Yacoubian said
attending Tuesday's session is important if quorum is already secured, calling
it an opportunity to participate in legislative debates and shape key laws.
However, she emphasized that if the session’s convening depends on her presence
and that of other Change MPs, "we will not provide political cover for it to
take place.
Mechanism Committee Scolds Lebanon: War is at the Door!
Nadia Ghossoub/Nidaa Al-Watan/October 27, 2025 (Translated from Arabic)
The Lebanese arena has recently been experiencing a state of increasing anxiety
following international reports and stances that stress the necessity of
disarming "Hezbollah" and confining its weapons to the Lebanese state.
Diplomatic sources revealed to Nidaa Al-Watan that an American officer in the
Mechanism Committee directed sharp remarks to the Lebanese side, considering
that the state has not shown sufficient seriousness on this sensitive file.
According to the information, this position resonates in Israel and the United
States, which view Lebanon as a state hesitant to take a long-awaited strategic
decision. Diplomatic and military indicators suggest that the region may be
heading towards a more tense phase, especially in light of what is described as
the "strategic vacuum" left by the shifts in Gaza. Western sources expect that
after the situation there stabilizes, Israel will dedicate itself to addressing
the Iranian and Lebanese files. For Tel Aviv, the two tracks are interconnected:
the first aims to curb Iranian influence through negotiations or political
pressure, and the second seeks the complete disarmament of "Hezbollah" to close
what Israel describes as the "Iranian tributaries in the Eastern Mediterranean."
Indicators are increasing that the American-Arab stance towards Lebanon is
shifting from the "warning" phase to "direct pressure," especially after the
statement by Tom Barrack, who said that "if the Lebanese state does not withdraw
'Hezbollah's' weapon, Israel will retaliate against it." Lebanon must resolve
its divisions, restore its sovereignty, and commit to a unifying national path
that fortifies state institutions. The United States cannot—and should not
attempt to—repeat the mistakes of the past. On the Lebanese side, the government
appears incapable of entering a serious discussion about the future of the
"Party's" weapon. Political forces are divided between those who believe that
disarmament must be an internal step that takes national balances into account,
and those who consider that its continuation keeps Lebanon in a state of
permanent confrontation. Between these two positions, ambiguity increases over
whether Beirut is capable of formulating a clear vision that prevents the coming
explosion. The danger today, according to analysts, is that Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may exploit this atmosphere to launch a military
operation against vital targets in Lebanon under the title of "imposing
deterrence." Even with an Arab and international desire to prevent complete
collapse, it seems that no one is able to curb Netanyahu's momentum or his
ambition to invest the war domestically. In contrast, Israeli media reports
indicate that "Hezbollah" has re-reinforced its field capabilities in recent
months, taking advantage of the period of relative calm, and is preparing for a
new phase of "mutual deterrence." This equation, while temporarily preventing
war, makes it more likely with any miscalculation. The most dangerous equation
is that Lebanon, which is economically exhausted and politically fragmented, may
not be able to withstand a new shock. The war, if it breaks out, will not be
merely a military confrontation but a humanitarian and economic catastrophe that
could set the country back years. With the absence of a unified national vision,
the Lebanese arena remains vulnerable to regional and international tug-of-war
seeking to settle scores on the land of others. What is happening today is not
merely a verbal escalation or a reminder of UN resolutions, but part of a
redrawing of the region's balances. If the Lebanese do not hasten to a sincere
internal dialogue about their position and role, they may find themselves once
again between the hammer and the anvil: the hammer of international demands and
the anvil of regional calculations. Lebanon stands today on the verge of two
possibilities—war or settlement—and between them is a narrow space of hope that
requires political courage before time closes the windows of last opportunity.
Deprived, Wounded, Isolated, and in Crisis
Amjad Iskandar/Nidaa Al-Watan/October 27, 2025 (Translated from Arabic)
It must be acknowledged that the Shiite community is in a state of crisis, and
any attempt from outside to help it emerge from this state of crisis will only
increase its self-isolation. It has surrendered its fate to the trauma of its
heritage, where even if facts and sound logic point in one direction, the trauma
mandates going in the opposite direction.
Before the 1975 Civil War, the Shiites raised the slogan of the "deprived" (al-mahrumin).
After the recent Israeli war, the description "the wounded community" became
prevalent in political discourse. And when the debate intensified over the
election law, Nabih Berri coined the term "the attempt to isolate the
community." Thirty-five years of surplus power are forgotten by the "Shiite
Duo," as if they never happened. Two opportunities were lost by the community in
crisis, and with it all Lebanese, in an attempt to extract the Shiites from the
cycle of dependency on foreign projects that are failed by all standards.
Although the experience of Imam Musa al-Sadr did not have enough time to
crystallize due to his kidnapping in Libya, the direction was towards lifting
the "oppression" by engaging in the Lebanese project, so that the Shiites would
not be fuel for international leftist projects and Arab tug-of-war, especially
between the Palestine Liberation Organization and Hafez al-Assad's regime. How
could Hafez al-Assad not protect Sadr after his kidnapping despite the close
alliance with Muammar Gaddafi? Some today say that the collusion was shared
between the two regimes to get rid of a leader who was moving the Shiites
towards independent decision-making. And there are those who liken Nabih Berri's
falling into the embrace of the Assad regime after the Imam's kidnapping to what
happened with Walid Jumblatt after the assassination of his father, Kamal
Jumblatt. Both opted for safety when they felt they were too weak for
confrontation. Years later, hundreds were killed in the war waged by the "Amal
Movement," supported by the Assad regime, and "Hezbollah," Iran's armed faction
in Lebanon. Berri did not want to follow the independent path of Imam Sadr and
was convinced by the role assigned to him out of fear of an inevitable fate, and
the two Assads' regime and Iran shared the Shiite decision. A new glimmer of
hope emerged with Sadr's deputy, Imam Sheikh Muhammad Mahdi Shamseddine, who,
before death kidnapped him this time, not Gaddafi or Bashar al-Assad, left a
valuable will that asked the Shiites to integrate into the Arab nations and not
be led astray by foreign projects. What is regrettable is that Nabih Berri,
despite his age and the experiences he has lived through, does not try to return
to his teacher and inspirer, Imam Sadr, and contents himself with playing the
role of the official spokesman for "Hezbollah," and goes along with Naim
Qassem's theory of a Karbala narrative that is incorrect in its Lebanese place
and time. Berri, who fought "Hezbollah" and once said that this party killed
more from "Amal" than Israel did, is leading his movement and, more importantly,
his community in the opposite direction of historical logic, where the Shiites
enjoy their right to build the Lebanese project instead of a new drowning in the
labyrinths of tragedies. Contrary to what is promoted, the salvation of the
Shiites begins from within their ranks, and the talk about the necessity for the
state to embrace them is misplaced, because a state that does not embrace its
citizens is meaningless. Based on the foregoing, the dangers of Israel renewing
its war seem less significant than the Shiite community remaining outside a
review of a historical path that is intended to "isolate" the schools of Sadr
and Mahdi Shamseddine, in their Lebanese dimension, in favor of remaining
subservient to the Wilayat al-Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist) in Iran.
Who Doesn't Want the Pope to Visit Lebanon?
Jean Al-Fghali/Nidaa Al-Watan/October 27, 2025 (Translated from Arabic)
"The Pope cancels his visit to Lebanon," four words that spread like wildfire on
social media platforms and "group chats," and were attributed to an Arab
satellite channel that quickly rushed to deny that it was the source of the
news, writing: "There is no truth to the news attributed to the channel
regarding the cancellation of the Pope's visit to Lebanon."
The publication of the news, which was confirmed to be fake, and the
non-innocence of those behind it, suggest that it was a professional act backed
not by an individual but by a party, which raises the question: What is its
purpose? And who wants to cast doubt on the Pope's visit to Lebanon? The
approach to the subject stems from the visit's extreme importance, based on the
following facts:
It is His Holiness's first visit outside the Vatican City since his election as
the head of the Catholic Church.
Through this visit, the Vatican intends to send a multi-directional message that
Lebanon remains important to the Holy See, based on the "shared history" between
the capital of Catholicism and the only diverse country in the Middle East,
which Pope John Paul II described as "more than a country, it is a message." The
Apostolic Exhortation launched by the Holy Pope following the "Synod for
Lebanon" gives this ultimate importance to the current Pope's visit.
The visit comes at a supremely sensitive time, to the extent that some observers
and analysts consider its date a turning point between what precedes and what
follows it. Some even say that the situation in Lebanon will not be the same
after the visit as it was before, and some have gone so far as to say that there
will be a truce that can be called the "Pope's Truce," meaning that Lebanon will
witness field developments after the Pope's visit.
Is this expectation in place?
Fears are numerous, but Lebanon is accustomed to "milestones," and there is a
fondness for them. However, what is certain is that every time there is a
historic visit to Lebanon, efforts to disrupt it begin, and the disruption this
time is more internal than external. Many "domestic opponents" are resentful of
the Pope's visit because it will be placed in the column of the President of the
Republic, General Joseph Aoun, and this is a sufficient reason to disrupt it.
From here, one can understand or estimate who is behind the false and baseless
news, to the extent that neither of the two concerned parties, Lebanon and the
Vatican, felt the need to deny the false report.
The resentful will repeat the attempt because they do not want it to be recorded
that the Pope came to Lebanon during the term of President Joseph Aoun, and that
his first visit outside the Vatican will be to Lebanon. This is a message to all
those concerned, both domestically and abroad, that "Lebanon is more than a
country, it is a message." The most prominent evidence that the concerned
parties did not dwell much on the false news is that preparations for the visit
are taking place with complete seriousness and secrecy to ensure its success,
and the "working cell" meeting at the Presidential Palace is working day and
night to ensure that the preparations are carried out with the utmost
professionalism. This alone is sufficient to respond to the lies of the
resentful.
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on October
26-27/2025
Israel army says targeted Islamic Jihad militant in Gaza strike
Agence France Presse/October 26/2025
The Israeli military said Saturday it had conducted an air strike targeting an
alleged Islamic Jihad militant in central Gaza, despite a ceasefire brokered by
U.S. President Donald Trump. For the past two weeks there has been a fragile
truce between Hamas, an ally of Islamic Jihad, and Israel -- although the latter
reserves the right to defend itself and its forces from militant attacks. "A
short while ago, the IDF (army) conducted a precise strike in the Nuseirat area
in the central Gaza Strip targeting a terrorist from the Islamic Jihad terrorist
organisation who planned to carry out an imminent terrorist attack against IDF
troops," the military said. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking to
journalists as he left Israel, did not address the strike directly, but he noted
that incidents are common in the immediate aftermath of ceasefires. "Every night
will bring new challenges on how to keep it together," he said. "So we recognise
that, but we also feel like we've made tremendous progress in the last 12 or 13
days."Inside the Hamas-run territory, the Al-Awda hospital confirmed it had
received wounded for treatment after a strike in Nuseirat. "The hospital has
received four injured people following the Israeli occupation's targeting of a
civilian car in the Al-Ahli Club area in Nuseirat Camp in central Gaza," the
hospital said.The military said it would continue operations in Gaza "to remove
any immediate threat" to its troops.
Israel allows Red Cross, Egyptian teams into Gaza as
search for hostage bodies widens
Reuters/26 October/2025
Red Cross and Egyptian teams have been permitted to search for the bodies of
deceased hostages beyond the “yellow line” demarcating the Israeli military’s
pullback in the Gaza Strip, an Israeli government spokesperson said on Sunday.
Abbas issues declaration for Vice President to assume
leadership in case of vacancy
Al Arabiya English/26 October ,2025: 04:14 PM GST
Updated: 26 October/2025
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas issued on Sunday a constitutional
declaration stipulating that in case the presidential post becomes vacant the
Vice President will temporarily assume his duties, according to Palestinian WAFA
news agency. “In the event of a vacancy in the office of the President of the
Palestinian Authority, and in the absence of the Palestine Legislative Council,
the Vice President of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO), also the Vice President of the State of Palestine, will
temporarily assume the duties of the President for a period not exceeding 90
days,” the declaration issued by Abbas said, WAFA reported. During this period
elections should be held to elect a new president. However, if elections cannot
be held, this period can be extended by a decision of the Palestinian Central
Council for one time only. The declaration aims “to protect the Palestinian
political system, safeguard our homeland, ensure its security, and preserve its
constitutional institutions” in the event of a vacancy in the office of the
President of the Palestinian Authority. “We have issued this constitutional
declaration to affirm the principle of the separation of powers and the peaceful
transfer of power through free and fair elections.”Under the new constitutional
declaration, a previous 2024 declaration is revoked.
Trump says Gaza stabilization force coming soon, warns
Hamas over hostages’ bodies
Al Arabiya English/26 October/2025
US President Donald Trump said on Saturday that efforts to stabilize Gaza were
advancing and that an international force would be deployed soon following a
meeting with Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani during a refueling
stop in Doha. “This should be an enduring peace,” Trump told reporters when
asked about the situation in Gaza. He said Qatar would be willing to contribute
peace-keeping troops if needed. Trump, however, says Hamas needs to “quickly”
continue returning bodies of deceased hostages, warning of action that will be
taken against the group if it doesn’t do so. “Hamas is going to have to start
returning the bodies of the deceased hostages, including two Americans, quickly,
or the other Countries involved in this GREAT PEACE will take action,” Trump
said in a post on Truth Social. He added that although some bodies were hard to
reach, “others they can return now and, for some reason, they are not.”“Perhaps
it has to do with their disarming, but when I said, ‘Both sides would be treated
fairly,’ that only applies if they comply with their obligations. Let’s see what
they do over the next 48 hours. I am watching this very closely.”Trump’s warning
comes as equipment and machinery from Egypt entered Gaza to assist in the search
for the bodies of the remaining Israeli hostages, according to Al Arabiya. The
equipment entered Gaza on Saturday night and early hours Sunday to help search
for the bodies of Israeli hostages under the rubble of collapsed buildings.
Hamas expands search for hostages’ bodies in Gaza as Egypt
joins effort
AP/October 26, 2025
CAIRO: Hamas expanded its search for the bodies of hostages in new areas in the
Gaza Strip Sunday, the Palestinian group said, a day after Egypt deployed a team
of experts and heavy equipment to help retrieve the bodies. Under the fragile
US-brokered ceasefire, reached on Oct. 10, Hamas is expected to return all of
the remains Israeli hostages as soon as possible. Israel agreed to give back 15
bodies of Palestinians for every body of a hostage. Thus far, Israel has sent
back the bodies of 195 Palestinians. Hamas has since returned 18 bodies of
hostages, but in the past five days, failed to release any.
An Egyptian team in Gaza
An Egyptian team and heavy equipment, including an excavator and bulldozers,
entered Gaza Saturday to help search for the hostages’ bodies, part of efforts
by international mediators to shore up the ceasefire, two Egyptian officials
said, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to
talk to the media. Hamas’ chief in Gaza, Khalil Al-Hayya, said the Palestinian
group started searching in new areas for 13 bodies of hostages that remain in
the enclave, according to comments shared by the group early Sunday. US
President Donald Trump warned Saturday that he was “watching very closely” to
ensure Hamas returns more bodies within the next 48 hours. “Some of the bodies
are hard to reach, but others they can return now and, for some reason, they are
not,” he wrote on Truth Social. Al-Hayya, who is also Hamas’ top negotiator,
told an Egyptian media outlet last week that efforts to retrieve the bodies
faced challenges because of the massive destruction, burying them deep
underground.
Israeli strikes wound four in central Gaza
Israeli forces struck the central Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza on Saturday
night, for the second time in a week, according to Awda Hospital that received
the wounded. The Israeli military claimed it targeted militants associated with
the Palestinian Islamic Jihad group who were planning to attack Israeli troops.
Islamic Jihad, the second largest militant group in Gaza, denied it was
preparing for an attack. Hamas called the strike a “clear violation” of the
ceasefire agreement and accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of attempting
to sabotage Trump’s efforts to end the war. It was the same area that Israel
targeted in a series of strikes on Oct. 19, after the military accused Hamas
militants of killing two Israeli soldiers. That day, Israel launched dozens of
deadly strikes across Gaza, killing at least 36 Palestinians, including women
and children, according to the strip’s health authorities. It was the most
serious challenge to the fragile ceasefire. Saturday’s strike in Nuseirat came a
few hours after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio left Israel, the latest in a
series of top US officials to visit Israel and a new center for civilian and
military coordination that is attempting to oversee the ceasefire. US Vice
President JD Vance was in Israel earlier this week, and US envoys Steve Witkoff
and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, were also in Israel. Rubio said
Saturday, en route to Qatar, that Israel, the US and the other mediators of the
Gaza ceasefire deal are sharing information to disrupt any threats and that
allowed them to identify a possible impending attack last weekend. Around 200 US
troops are working alongside the Israeli military and delegations from other
countries at the coordination center, planning the stabilization and
reconstruction of Gaza.
Israeli forces kill 20-year-old Palestinian near Hebron
Arab News/October 27, 2025
LONDON: Israeli forces shot and killed a 20-year-old Palestinian on Sunday
evening near Hebron, in the southern occupied West Bank. The Ministry of Health
confirmed that Mohammad Bassam Tayaha Sha’our, 20, was killed by bullets fired
by Israeli forces at the Meitar crossing near the town of Adh Dhahiriya, south
of Hebron. Sha’our died instantly at the scene, according to Wafa news agency.
The Red Crescent paramedics transferred his body to Dura Government Hospital.
Since January, over 300 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces or
settlers in the West Bank, including 44 individuals under the age of 18,
according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
Jordanian and Pakistani army chiefs discuss military cooperation
Arab News/October 26, 2025
LODNON: Pakistan’s Chief of the Army Staff, Field Marshal Asim Munir, discussed
military cooperation with King Abdullah II of Jordan and Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff Maj. Gen. Yousef Huneiti. The meeting held on Sunday in Amman
discussed enhancing cooperation between Jordan and Pakistan, particularly in
defense and related regional developments, according to Petra news agency.
Huneiti and Munir held a separate meeting to explore joint military cooperation
between their countries’ armed forces. The two sides discussed training,
operational, and logistical programs aimed at enhancing military cooperation,
particularly in exercises and training courses to develop defense capabilities,
Petra added. Munir praised Jordan’s vital role under King Abdullah in promoting
security and stability, highlighting the JAF’s professionalism and performance.
Pakistan’s ambassador and defense attaché in Amman, along with several senior
JAF officers, attended the meeting.
Hundreds of Syrians in Libya take up offer of free tickets
home
AFP/October 26, 2025
TRIPOLI: Hundreds of Syrian refugees living in Libya poured into a travel agency
in Tripoli to take advantage of an offer of free tickets to Damascus, AFP
journalists saw.
By midday, more than 700 Syrians, many of them residing in Libya for years after
fleeing their country’s civil war, had come to collect tickets and travel passes
from the agency commissioned by the new authorities in Damascus. In all,
thousands have taken up the offer since the Syrian Arab Republic’s Foreign
Ministry first announced it. Walid Hamud, a 32-year-old refugee who arrived five
years ago, acknowledged that “the situation still is not very stable” back home,
but nonetheless wanted to return, while keeping open the possibility of coming
back to Libya for work “legally with a residence permit”. Fellow refugee Rami
Hassun fled Idlib province in 2020 because his life was in danger, he said.
“Today, Syria is finding peace and is in a better situation than before. We are
returning to our country, thank God,” he said. Once there, “we will strive to
work and rebuild everything, given the scale of the destruction”, said Mahmoud
Nasr Al-Din, who has been in Libya for three years. Din said he anticipated
“strong demand for labor” back home, but noted returning would have been
difficult without the new travel arrangement, given the Syrian Arab Republic’s
lack of a fully functioning embassy in Libya. In mid-August, a Damascus
delegation symbolically reopened the embassy, which had been shut in 2012, but
it currently does not offer consular services. While there is no official census
of Syrians in Libya, thousands of families have been living in the country for
decades, with thousands more arriving since the start of the Syrian civil war in
2011, many hoping to cross the Mediterranean to Europe.
Egyptian convoy enters Gaza to help recover hostage remains
Agence France Presse/October 26/2025
A convoy of Egyptian trucks and vehicles transporting heavy machinery entered
Gaza overnight to help locate the remains of Israeli hostages in the territory,
AFP footage showed. The vehicles were filmed in Khan Yunis in the south of Gaza.
The Israeli military did not immediately respond to a request on Sunday morning
for confirmation that the vehicles had entered. But The Times of Israel had
reported that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu personally approved the
entry of the Egyptian team and several engineering vehicles to the Palestinian
territory to locate the missing remains. On Saturday night, Egyptian
state-linked Al-Qahera News channel reported that the team was on its way to
Gaza. Two Egyptian military sources had also confirmed to AFP that the convoy
was at the Kerem Shalom crossing Saturday night, awaiting authorization to cross
into the Palestinian territory. On October 17, a Turkish official had announced
that a team of 81 rescuers sent by Ankara to locate the hostages' bodies in Gaza
was waiting in Egypt to enter the strip. But the Turkish team never received
approval from Israel, amid reports that Israel objected to any Turkish
involvement in Gaza. Based on the ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel,
the Palestinian militant group was due to return all 48 remaining hostages,
alive and dead, who were still held in the territory, in exchange for nearly
2,000 Palestinians held by Israel. But only 15 of the 28 dead hostages have been
returned so far, with the remaining bodies buried under the rubble across the
devastated territory and Hamas calling for tools and assistance to locate them.
Netanyahu says Israel to decide which foreign troops
acceptable to secure Gaza truce
Reuters/October 26, 2025
JERUSALEM: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday Israel would
determine which foreign forces it would allow as part of a planned international
force in Gaza to help secure a fragile ceasefire under US President Donald
Trump’s plan. It remains unclear whether Arab and other states will be ready to
commit troops, in part given the refusal of Palestinian Hamas militants to
disarm as called for by the plan, while Israel has voiced concerns about the
make-up of the force. While the Trump administration has ruled out sending US
soldiers into the Gaza Strip, it has been speaking to Indonesia, the United Arab
Emirates, Egypt, Qatar, Turkiye and Azerbaijan to contribute to the
multinational force. “We are in control of our security, and we have also made
it clear regarding international forces that Israel will determine which forces
are unacceptable to us, and this is how we operate and will continue to
operate,” Netanyahu said. “This is, of course, acceptable to the United States
as well, as its most senior representatives have expressed in recent days,” he
told a session of his cabinet. Israel, which besieged Gaza for two years to back
up its air and ground war in the enclave against Hamas after the Palestinian
militant group’s cross-border attack on October 7, 2023, continues to control
all access to the territory.
Israel opposed to Turkish role in Gaza force
Last week Netanyahu hinted that he would be opposed to any role for Turkish
security forces in Gaza. Once-warm Turkish-Israeli relations soured drastically
during the Gaza war, with Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan lambasting Israel’s
devastating air and ground campaign in the small Palestinian enclave. US
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, on a visit to Israel aimed at shoring up the
truce, said on Friday the international force would have to be made up of
“countries that Israel’s comfortable with.” He made no comment on Turkish
involvement. Rubio added that Gaza’s future governance still needed to be worked
out among Israel and partner nations but could not include Hamas. Rubio later
said US officials were receiving input on a possible UN resolution or
international agreement to authorize the multinational force in Gaza and would
discuss the issue in Qatar, a key Gulf mediator on Gaza, on Sunday.
A major challenge to Trump’s plan is that Hamas has balked at disarming. Since
the ceasefire took hold two weeks ago as the first stage of Trump’s 20-point
plan, Hamas has waged a violent crackdown on clans that have tested its grip on
power.
Israel says Hamas knows where hostage remains are
At the same time, the remains of 13 deceased hostages remain in Gaza with Hamas
citing obstacles to locating them in the pervasive rubble left by the fighting.
An Israeli government spokesperson said on Sunday Hamas, which released the
remaining 20 living hostages it took in its October 2023 assault, knew where the
bodies were. “Israel is aware that Hamas knows where our deceased hostages are,
in fact, located. If Hamas made more of an effort, they would be able to
retrieve the remains of our hostages,” the spokesperson said. Israel had,
however, allowed the entry of an Egyptian technical team to work with the Red
Cross to locate the bodies. She said the team would use excavator machines and
trucks for the search beyond the so-called yellow line in Gaza behind which
Israeli troops have initially pulled back under Trump’s plan. Netanyahu began
the cabinet session by stressing Israel was an independent country, rejecting
the notion that “the American administration controls me and dictates Israel’s
security policy.” Israel and the US, he said, are a “partnership.” Diplomats and
analysts say Trump managed to push Netanyahu, who had long rejected global
pressure for a ceasefire in Gaza, to accept his framework for a broader peace
deal and also forced Netanyahu to call Qatar’s leader to apologize after a
failed bombing raid targeting Hamas negotiators in that country. Trump also
persuaded Arab states to convince Hamas to return all the Israeli hostages, its
key leverage in the war.
Kurdish PKK says withdrawing all forces from Turkiye to
north Iraq
AFP/October 26, 2025
QANDIL MOUTAINS, Iraq: The Kurdish militant PKK said Sunday it was withdrawing
all its forces from Turkiye to northern Iraq, urging Ankara to take legal steps
to protect the peace process as held a ceremony in northern Iraq. “We are
implementing the withdrawal of all our forces within Turkiye,” the Kurdistan
Workers’ Party (PKK) said in a statement read out in the Qandil area of northern
Iraq, according to an AFP journalist present at the ceremony. It released a
picture showing 25 fighters – among them eight women – who had already traveled
there from Turkiye. The PKK, which formally renounced its 40-year armed struggle
in May, is currently making the transition from armed insurgency to democratic
politics in a bid to end one of the region’s longest conflicts, which claimed
some 50,000 lives. But it urged Turkiye to take the necessary steps to push
forward the process which began a year ago when Ankara offered an unexpected
olive branch to its jailed leader Abdullah Ocalan. “The legal and political
steps required by the process (...) and the laws of freedom and democratic
integration necessary to participate in democratic politics must be put in place
without delay,” it said. The group has said it wants to pursue a democratic
struggle to defend the rights of the Kurdish minority in line with a historic
call by Ocalan. In July they held a symbolic ceremony in the mountains of
northern Iraq at which they destroyed a first batch of weapons, which was hailed
by Turkiye as “an irreversible turning point.”
Houthis release Yemeni actor after she spent nearly 5 years
in prison
AP/October 26, 2025
CAIRO: Yemen ‘s Houthi rebels released actor and model Intisar Al-Hammadi after
nearly five years in prison over charges of committing an indecent act and drug
possession in a case rights groups said was ” marred with irregularities and
abuse,” her lawyer said Sunday.
Al-Hammadi was detained in the capital Sanaa in February 2021 and sentenced to
five years in prison after a Houthi-run court convicted her of committing an
indecent act and having drugs in her possession. Her detention and trial
showcased the Houthi repression of women and dissent in areas under their
control in war-torn Yemen. Lawyer Khalid Al-Kamal said Al-Hammadi was released
on Saturday after she spent nearly five years in the Central Prison in Sanaa. An
online statement signed by dozens of public figures in Yemen welcomed her
release and called on the Houthis to provide health care for Al-Hammadi. Al-Hammadi,
25, was arrested along with three other women. Al-Hammadi and another woman,
Yousra Al-Nashri, were sentenced to five years, while the two other women
received one and three years in prison. Human Rights Watch had criticized the
court proceedings as arbitrary and lacking due process. Born to a Yemeni father
and an Ethiopian mother, Al-Hammadi worked as a model for four years and acted
in two Yemeni soap drama series in 2020. Before her imprisonment, she was the
sole breadwinner for her four-member family. The Iranian-backed Houthis have
ruled Sanaa and much of Yemen’s north since 2014, when they marched from their
northern stronghold of Saada province and forced the internationally recognized
government into exile. Since then, Yemen, the Arab world’s poorest country, has
been in a state of civil war. A Saudi-led coalition that included the United
Arab Emirates entered the Yemen war the following year in an attempt to restore
the government. The war has been stalemated in recent years and the rebels
reached a deal with Saudi Arabia that stopped their attacks on the kingdom in
return for ceasing the Saudi-led strikes on their territories. Both the Houthis
and the internationally recognized government have cracked down on opposition
and restricted women’s movement. They barred women from traveling between the
country’s provinces, and in some cases from traveling abroad, without have a
male guardian’s permission or being accompanied by an immediate male relative,
according to HRW.
US warship docks in Trinidad and Tobago, putting more
pressure on Venezuela
AP/October 27, 2025
PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad and Tobago: A US warship docked in Trinidad and Tobago
‘s capital Sunday as the Trump administration boosts military pressure on
neighboring Venezuela and its President Nicolás Maduro. The arrival of the USS
Gravely, a guided missile destroyer, in the capital of the Caribbean nation is
in addition to the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, which is moving closer
to Venezuela. Maduro criticized the movement of the carrier as an attempt by the
USgovernment to fabricate “a new eternal war” against his country. US President
Donald Trump has accused Maduro, without providing evidence, of being the leader
of the organized crime gang Tren de Aragua. Government officials from the
twin-island nation and the US said the massive warship will remain in Trinidad
until Thursday so both countries can carry out training exercises. A senior
military official in Trinidad and Tobago told The Associated Press that the move
was only recently scheduled. The official spoke under condition of anonymity due
to lack of authorization to discuss the matter publicly. Kamla Persad-Bissessar,
the prime minister of Trinidad and Tobago, has been a vocal supporter of the US
military presence and the deadly strikes on suspected drug boats in waters off
Venezuela. US Embassy Chargé d’Affaires Jenifer Neidhart de Ortiz said in a
statement that the exercises seek to “address shared threats like transnational
crime and build resilience through training, humanitarian missions, and security
efforts.”The visit comes one week after the US Embassy in Trinidad and Tobago
warned Americans to stay away from US government facilities there. Local
authorities said a reported threat against Americans prompted the warning. Many
people in Trinidad and Tobago criticize the warship’s docking in town. At a
recent demonstration outside the US Embassy, David Abdulah, the leader of the
Movement for Social Justice political party, said Trinidad and Tobago should not
have allowed the warship into its waters. “This is a warship in Trinidad, which
will be anchored here for several days just miles off Venezuela when there’s a
threat of war,” said Abdulah, who is also the leader of the Movement for Social
Justice political party. “That’s an abomination.”Caricom, a regional trade bloc
made up of 15 Caribbean countries, has called for dialogue. Trinidad and Tobago
is a member of the group, but Persad-Bissessar has said the region is not a zone
of peace, citing the number of murders and other violent crimes.
Trump meets Qatar leaders on way to Asia
Agence France Presse/October 26/2025
U.S. President Donald Trump on Saturday thanked Qatar's emir and prime minister
for being a "big factor" in helping secure a Gaza ceasefire deal, during a
refueling stop on his way to Asia. The Qatari leaders boarded Air Force One when
it landed at Al Udeid Air Base, which hosts the regional headquarters for the
U.S. military and thousands of American troops.Trump said the duo had played a
crucial role in the Middle East peace process, adding that Prime Minister Sheikh
Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani had been his "friend to the world.""What we've
done is incredible peace to the Middle East, and they were a very big factor in
it," Trump said. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, fresh off a trip to Israel
as part of an all-out diplomatic push by Washington to keep the Gaza truce on
track, was present for the meeting with Qatar's leaders. Trump is traveling to
Asia for the first time since retaking office in January, with two regional
summits and face-to-face meetings with China's Xi Jinping and other leaders on
the agenda. Qatar has played a key mediating role in indirect talks between
Israel and Hamas since the outbreak of the war, and is among the guarantors of
the fragile peace deal, along with Egypt, the United States and Turkey. Qatar's
Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani hosted Turkish President Recep Tayyip
Erdogan this week to discuss the highly sensitive next steps in the deal,
including the establishment of a security force in Gaza and the fate of Hamas.
Qatar's prime minister has also been a key negotiator since the outbreak of the
war following Hamas' October 7, 2023 attack on Israel. The talks aboard Air
Force One came as Israel conducted an air strike targeting an alleged Islamic
Jihad militant in Gaza. Despite the ceasefire between Hamas, an ally of Islamic
Jihad, and Israel, the latter reserves the right to defend itself and its forces
from militant attacks. "Let's see what they do over the next 48 hours. I am
watching this very closely," Trump said on his Truth Social platform after the
talks with Qatar's leaders.
Syria's Sharaa to attend Riyadh investment conference
this week: Sources tell Reuters
Reuters/October 26/2025
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa will attend the annual Future Investment
Initiative conference in Riyadh this week, two people familiar with the matter
said, in his latest effort to put Syria back on the world stage after 14 years
of war. Sharaa is set to address the event - Saudi Arabia's flagship investment
conference - on Tuesday, the sources said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The Syrian presidency and the Saudi government's media office did not
immediately respond to requests for comment.
Frankly Speaking: Regional conflicts through the lens of
Western media
Arab News/October 26, 2025
RIYADH: As critics accuse Western media of complicity in Gaza’s “genocide” by
echoing Israeli narratives and playing down its deadly attacks on local
journalists, CNN’s Nic Robertson says international media shut out by Israel
depend on local reporters who risk their lives to tell the story. Appearing on
the Arab News current affairs program “Frankly Speaking,” Robertson, CNN’s
international diplomatic editor and a veteran war correspondent, sought to
explain Western media coverage of the war in Gaza. “I think we’re doing a huge
amount to report on the suffering of Palestinians,” he said.
“We have teams in Gaza who are reporting for us, who we liaise with daily,
hourly, and who help us get that frontline reporting that we can’t do ourselves.
And they’re hugely courageous and do a tremendous job of bringing the absolute
despair and destruction that’s going on in Gaza.”Since the war began in October
2023, Israeli authorities have prevented foreign journalists from entering Gaza,
allowing only a handful of tightly controlled visits accompanied by its troops.
To illustrate the difficulties of covering the war remotely, Robertson recalled
reporting on a young child who died from starvation — a case Israel disputed. “I
was sitting in Israel reporting on the death through starvation of a young
child,” he told “Frankly Speaking” host Katie Jensen. “Israel disputes that the
child died of starvation, disputes the narrative that comes from Gaza — says
that this is all sort of Hamas propaganda.”The story, he added, was emotionally
wrenching. “It was hugely difficult to see the images and to tell that story
because it’s emotionally hard. And you can only begin to imagine what it’s like
for those families inside of Gaza.”Israel began bombarding Gaza after a
Hamas-led Palestinian militant attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, in which about
1,200 people, mostly civilians, were killed and 251 taken hostage, according to
Israeli tallies. Israel’s retaliatory military campaign has since killed
more than 68,500 people in Gaza, most of them civilians, according to Gaza
health authorities, and devastated the enclave.
Human rights groups and the UN accuse Israel of using starvation as a weapon of
war by systematically restricting food and aid. International organizations say
famine and widespread malnutrition are direct consequences of these policies. Of
the more than 400 reported starvation deaths, at least 151 children have died
from acute malnutrition since the start of the war — most of them in 2025 —
according to Palestinian health authorities. Even after a fragile ceasefire took
effect on Oct. 10, Gaza remains one of the most dangerous places in the world
for journalists. In September, UN Special Rapporteur Irene Khan called the
conflict “the deadliest ever for journalists.”Robertson, who has reported from
Sarajevo, Kabul and beyond, agreed that Gaza is the most dangerous and
restrictive environment he has seen. Yet, he noted, as in most wars, it is local
journalists who bear the greatest risk. Asked if Gaza was the most dangerous and
restrictive environment that he had ever reported from, he said: “It is. And I
think as with all the journalist casualties we see around the world, in
whichever conflict, almost invariably, they are the local journalists. “That’s
what we’re seeing in Gaza again — it’s the local journalists who are paying the
highest price to try to bring the state of the war that’s developing and
enveloping them and their lives and their families to the rest of the world. And
that’s something all of us, who would like to be in Gaza reporting, deeply
respect. It’s the ultimate sacrifice. In this profession, too many people have
to pay that price.”
By mid-September, 252 Palestinian journalists had been killed in Israel’s
offensive, according to UN figures. A separate count by Shireen.ps, a site named
after slain Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, put the toll at more than
270.
Under international humanitarian law, journalists enjoy civilian protection
unless they take direct part in hostilities. But Israel has been accused of
deliberately targeting journalists in Gaza. Investigations by press freedom
groups, the UN, and major media outlets indicate Israeli forces have
deliberately attacked reporters. Between October 2023 and January 2025,
Reporters Without Borders filed five complaints with the International Criminal
Court, providing evidence that the Israeli military committed war crimes against
journalists in Gaza. Israel denies deliberately targeting reporters, saying
deaths occurred during operations against Hamas or involved individuals
allegedly linked to militant groups. Asked whether Israel has shown disregard
for journalists’ lives and should face accountability, Robertson said the
allegations are difficult to verify. “Israel has named some of the journalists
or said that some of the journalists that it’s killed belong to Hamas,” he said.
“The proof of that hasn’t been put in a public forum for complete scrutiny. “And
part of the scrutiny that a journalist like me would want to probe those kinds
of allegations is to be there on the ground and talk to people on the ground,”
he added. “So, Israel’s allegations are hard to prove or disprove.” In August,
seven journalists were killed when Israel targeted their tent in Gaza City,
drawing condemnation from the UN and global media organizations. Israel claimed
one of them, Al Jazeera’s Anas Al-Sharif, was “the head of a Hamas terrorist
cell,” but the BBC reported the military offered little evidence. The Committee
to Protect Journalists’ CEO Jodie Ginsberg told the British outlet there was “no
justification” for Al-Sharif’s killing. Robertson said friends of the slain
journalists “would dispute what Israel has said,” adding that some journalists
have been hit in follow-up strikes — a tactic not uncommon in war. “Over the
past month or so, where a group of journalists went to report on one strike and
then Israel had a follow-on strike.”On Aug. 25, a double Israeli strike on
Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis killed 20 people, including five journalists from
the Associated Press, Reuters, Al Jazeera and Middle East Eye. “This is not
uncommon in war, to have follow-on strikes, but the result of it was very clear
that the journalists and recovery workers who’d gone there in the immediate
aftermath of the first strike were again targeted,” Robertson said.
“It’s increasingly the case that journalists will be caught up in those
strikes.”
Still, he emphasized, the inability to investigate Israel’s claims firsthand is
deeply frustrating.
“I think when it comes to the allegations that Israel has made that journalists
were members of proscribed organizations like Hamas, is a very frustrating one
for journalists stuck on the outside who would like to do due diligence and
follow up on those allegations and report the findings,” he said. “If Israel
makes those allegations, then perhaps it could provide the ability for reporters
to test their claims — and that’s just not possible right now.”When asked
whether CNN journalists feel frustrated by the access restrictions, Robertson
said such limits are not new — but Gaza is uniquely closed off.
“I think back to other wars we’ve covered that have been dangerous,” he said.
“And I think back, perhaps to 1992 to 1995, in Bosnia, the journalists there
were able to get into Sarajevo, a city under siege. “The besieging forces
wouldn’t allow journalists easy access to get in. They controlled the access,
but they still allowed journalists to get through the front lines. It wasn’t an
easy process.”However, he said that while the situation was “fraught with
danger,” it was “perhaps not the same dangers that exist in Gaza” where the
situation is “absolutely beyond that in the realm that we can’t get there.”In
terms of access, he said: “We’re not permitted either from crossing from Egypt
or crossing from Israel. And that’s a frustration because to be there, you feel
that you can tell the story and bring the voices from the story.” Still,
Robertson said, those voices “are not extinguished,” thanks to local journalists
who continue to report despite immense danger, but the restriction “limits the
world’s understanding and scale of what is happening.”On a personal note,
Robertson spoke of how he copes with decades of war coverage — from Iraq and
Afghanistan to Libya, Syria, Ukraine, and now Gaza.
“I’m incredibly lucky,” he said.
“I have a very, very supportive family. My wife is a journalist. Well, was a
journalist. We met while at CNN during the buildup to the first Gulf War.
“Indeed, she came with me to Baghdad when the first Gulf War started. We’ve seen
each other in difficult situations. “Our daughters, who are now grown and one of
them is a journalist as well, understand what it is I do,” he added, stressing
that “being able to go home and just be dad and a husband is incredibly
grounding.”Still, he admitted that the work has left emotional scars. “When you
watch suffering up close and you talk to people who’ve suffered, who’ve lost
loved ones, I kind of feel that the burden of that is accumulative. “Our family
jokes that if we’re sitting at home watching a movie, I’m the first one to have
tears rolling down my cheeks. And I don’t think I was like that 20 or 30 years
ago,” he said. Robertson said his earliest assignments remain the most vivid,
including in Afghanistan during the Taliban’s early years in the mid-1990s.
“Just what the utter desperation of families whose villages had been destroyed,
mud homes reduced,” he said. “The mud on the floor and a man with a shovel one
October, then digging through, looking for the remains of his family’s
possessions in what was left of his house and pulling out an old iron
bedstead.”“For me, it just told me about the appalling paucity and tragedy that
accompany war the world over.”Reflecting on journalism’s future amid many
challenges, including from artificial intelligence, Robertson said serious
reporting and serious audiences “go hand in hand.” “There is an appetite for
good, trustworthy journalism,” he added. “And I think if we can keep delivering
that, there’ll be an audience that wants it.”“And I suppose one of my takeaway
experiences from the last 30 years or so — and it’s a shame that this is the
experience in a way — but people value news more when it’s really important to
them. And here I’m thinking of countries in conflict.”He cited the example of
the four-day war between India and Pakistan in May. “There was an immense
appetite in the region there, both in India and Pakistan, and more broadly in
the region, for journalism like ours at CNN that was seen as nonpartisan,” he
said. “So, absolutely, there is an appetite for what we offer, which is
trustworthy, unbiased, unvarnished news reporting. And we stay true to that, and
we’ll have to continue to stay true to that.”Robertson added: “They’ll come to
us when they realize they need us. And that may take a number of people in their
tens of millions to stray into the rumor mills and the twisting that’s available
on everywhere they turn on their social media feeds.
“But people will trust people who are trustworthy. That’s my core belief, and
that’s never been shaken by this, and I don’t believe it will change.”
The Latest
English LCCC
analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources
on October
25-26/2025
Realpolitik dictates Russia’s changing role
in Arab world
Zaid M. Belbagi/Arab News/October 26, 2025
Vladimir Putin last week rolled out the red carpet for Syria’s interim President
Ahmad Al-Sharaa. For years, Al-Sharaa had fought to overthrow the Russian-backed
Bashar Assad. Now, Putin has welcomed with open arms the man who toppled his
closest regional ally, while Assad remains in hiding somewhere in the Russian
capital, granted asylum after fleeing Syria last December. Days before Al-Sharaa’s
visit, Moscow had postponed its flagship Russia-Arab summit after only two of 22
invited leaders confirmed their attendance. The Kremlin viewed the summit as one
of the year’s most important foreign policy initiatives, a chance to signal that
Russia still commands support and influence across the Arab world. The empty
chairs tell a different story and Al-Sharaa’s welcome demonstrates Russia’s
acceptance, however begrudging, of realpolitik. In the meeting, the Syrian
president was clear that his administration seeks to “restore and redefine” the
relationship on new terms that respect its sovereignty and independence. Moscow,
despite its loyalties to the former regime, chose to ensure the continuation of
the two countries’ “special” relationship. Russia has also attempted to curry
Arab favor with increasingly sharp rhetoric on Israel, in what appears to be an
effort to undercut the US at a pivotal moment for the nation’s policy in the
Middle East. But the Kremlin failed to expand Russia’s diplomatic role. Arab
states appear to prefer US President Donald Trump’s transactional approach and
concrete outcomes, which culminated in this month’s ceasefire deal between Hamas
and Israel, over rhetoric and symbolism.
Moscow’s diplomatic struggles are compounded by growing military constraints,
forcing a shift from its long-standing expansionist policy to one of
preservation. Last week’s negotiations with Al-Sharaa followed the Syrian
government’s termination of a treaty that granted Russia a long-term military
presence in Tartus. To surrender its bases in Syria would be devastating for
Russia in the region — so much so that Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov indicated
Moscow is willing to restructure the mission from a military to a
multifunctional role, even suggesting a “humanitarian logistics hub.” The
suggestion represents a significant departure from Russia’s traditional approach
and a huge tactical concession. In tandem, the Wagner Group’s operational
capacity has collapsed. Leadership decapitation, major defeats, resource
diversion to Ukraine and withdrawal from key fronts, including Sudan and Mali,
have left it operating with reduced personnel across a narrower geographic
footprint. Resources diverted to Ukraine and Russia’s damaged reputation as a
reliable security provider have forced Moscow to abandon its aspirations for
regional leadership. Instead, it is concentrating on bilateral relationships
where it offers unique value, in what appears to be an acknowledgment of its
limited capabilities. Its policy in the Arab world now seeks to build influence
through long-term infrastructure and industrial projects that create mutual
dependencies.
In Morocco, a joint intergovernmental commission last week covered agriculture,
energy, transport, education and tourism, framed as a “new strategic dynamic.”
The high-level talks renewed fisheries agreements and explored investment
opportunities. Monumentally, on the Western Sahara, Russia signaled for the
first time its potential openness to support the autonomy proposal. Arab states
appear to prefer US President Donald Trump’s transactional approach and concrete
outcomes. In Sudan, Russia is securing a Red Sea naval base as a hedge against
the uncertain future of its Syrian operations. The base would host up to 300
troops and four navy ships, including nuclear-powered vessels. Twelve percent of
global trade passes through the Red Sea, making Port Sudan well positioned for
power projection. Russia has sought this foothold for more than a decade,
initially through Wagner Group’s ties to the Rapid Support Forces, then pivoting
to support the Sudanese Armed Forces, which control the coastline, in exchange
for base access. Egypt remains heavily dependent on Russia. In May, the two
countries signed an agreement establishing a Russian industrial zone in the Suez
Canal. The El-Dabaa nuclear power project creates deep technological dependence
on Russian expertise for fuel supply, maintenance and operations training.
Nuclear cooperation is notoriously sticky. Once committed to Russian reactor
technology, countries typically remain locked into Russian fuel cycles for the
facility’s 60-plus-year lifespan. Egypt accounted for 19 percent of Russian arms
exports in 2020-24, making it one of the country’s most significant defense
clients. Yet it also receives $1.3 billion in US military aid annually and has
been a cornerstone of America’s Middle East strategy since the Camp David
Accords. Historical purchases of Russian systems that complement rather than
replace US equipment have worked as a hedge. But reports of potential Su-35
fighter jet purchases may cross a red line with Washington, as the advanced
aircraft would compromise US military technology if Russian and American systems
operated in integrated environments.Russia is also leveraging institutional
frameworks to help it exert influence in the region. Egypt, the UAE and Iran
joining BRICS significantly increases the bloc’s economic and political weight,
as its collective gross domestic product now exceeds $16 trillion with a
population of more than 2.5 billion. When Putin took over the rotating
leadership in 2024, he emphasized the group’s commitment to strengthening
multilateralism for equitable global development. The expansion was touted as
heralding a post-Western world order in which the “global majority” is finally
empowered. In 2025, this narrative rings hollow, given the Trump
administration’s recent and continuing successes. However, OPEC+ provides
another forum where Russia coordinates with Middle East and North African
countries on oil policy, maintaining diplomatic influence through ongoing
collaboration. Russia’s approach toward the Arab world reflects a necessary
recalibration driven less by ideological partnership, convening power and
military capacity. Moscow now relies on niche capabilities in military equipment
and nuclear technologies, as well as participation in multilateral forums, to
bolster its ties with nations in the Middle East and North Africa. States in the
region, for their part, increasingly view Russia as a useful hedge and leverage
tool with the West. This diminished yet persistent role is one that Moscow can
realistically sustain. Russia’s willingness to work with any nation on any
ideological terms ensures it retains relevance even as its regional influence
shrinks.
**Zaid M. Belbagi is a political commentator and an adviser to private clients
between London and the Gulf Cooperation Council. X: @Moulay_Zaid
From Dreyfus to Macron: The Grand French Tradition of
Politically Correct Antisemitism
Pierre Rehov/Gatestone Institute./October 26/2025
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22005/france-antisemitism
Macron did not even have the decency to make his recognition of a non-existent
Palestinian state contingent on Hamas releasing the hostages.
Joining Macron in this narcissistic display were other small, soft leaders with
large, hard Islamist constituencies -- Britain's PM Keir Starmer, Australia's PM
Anthony Albanese, and Canada's PM Mark Carney -- who followed Macron's lead in
granting international legitimacy to a cause dedicated to terrorism.
The Palestinian Authority continues to operate as an unelected dictatorship,
funneling millions into its infamous pay-for-slay "jobs" program -- sometimes
listed as "welfare" -- which grants salaries to terrorists and their families
based on how many Jews they succeed in murdering. The more Jews they murder, the
higher the monthly stipend. Palestinian schoolbooks still erase Israel from
maps, depict Jews as usurpers, and teach children that the ultimate aspiration
is martyrdom.
Macron's recognition, applauded by large sections of Europe and beyond, was not
the action of a statesman seeking peace. It was a pitiful lunge to hold onto
power by a weakened leader, desperate to posture as a "moral arbiter" abroad
while avoiding accountability at home. Macron is willing to betray the Israelis,
who are fighting not only for the West but for his own people, the French.
After France's defeat at the hands of Germany in 1940 came collaboration.
France's Vichy regime did not merely submit to German edicts; it embraced its
own homegrown antisemitism. Vichy's machinery operated with bureaucratic zeal:
statutes defining who was a Jew, the exclusion of Jews from professions,
property seizures, internments, and ultimately deportations to Auschwitz. The
cultivated myth of a France "shielding" Jews while Germany did the harm has long
since been demolished by the historical record. Vichy was a French government,
enacting French laws to persecute Jews on French soil, and in too many
instances, to deliver them to their deaths.
The moral cost was enormous. By making stability the overriding priority, French
authorities tacitly normalized contact with organizations that targeted Jews and
Israelis. These back-channel accommodations blurred the line between
counterterrorism and collusion — and served as an early modern example of a
recurring French pattern: When domestic tranquility and influence in the Arab
world collide with the safety and security of Jews, the balance is often struck
in favor of tranquility.
President Chirac, during a visit to Israel in October 1996, erupted at what he
called a "provocation" by Israeli plainclothes security guards during a walk in
the Old City of Jerusalem — an incident that became emblematic of Paris's
sensitivity to perceived Israeli slights and a readiness to dramatize grievances
that resonated with the Arab and Muslim public. Whether the outburst was theatre
or genuine indignation, it fed a narrative: France would hold Israel to scrutiny
in a way that sometimes felt public and punitive, while remaining discreet,
conciliatory, or accommodating toward Arab regimes.
[H]ow come, if Mohammad al-Durrah was shot, there was no blood at the scene? The
controversy led to libel suits, heated media debates in France, and a long war
of narratives: for many critics, the al-Durrah case became a test of whether
French media could be trusted to report dispassionately on Palestine-Israel — or
whether powerful images produced abroad would be turned into instruments of
political mobilization at home.
For decades, the front pages of Le Monde, Libération, and Le Monde Diplomatique
have provided disproportionate framing that vilifies Israel while sanitizing
Palestinian violence. Headlines portraying Israeli counter-terrorism as
"aggression," while minimizing rocket fire or suicide bombings, have shaped
French public opinion, sometimes more decisively than presidential speeches.
The effect of this editorial slant is cumulative: each cover, each op-ed, each
biased image is built into a narrative architecture in which Israel stands as
the perennial aggressor and Palestinians as the archetypal victims. This
distortion is not merely academic. It affects political choices, emboldens
intellectuals who conflate anti-Zionism with moral virtue, and reinforces a
climate where politicians know they can score points by signaling distance from
Jerusalem. In the long run, media coverage has hardened the double standard and
provided cultural cover for diplomatic betrayals.
The 21st century has added a more transactional layer to France's Arab policy:
investment in the French economy. Few states have invested more aggressively in
French assets and businesses than Qatar. The oil-rich emirate poured billions
into Parisian real estate, media holdings, luxury firms, and sports franchises.
The purchase of Paris Saint-Germain football team became a symbol of how deeply
Qatari capital has embedded itself into French public life. Alongside investment
came soft power: television channels, think tanks, and influence campaigns aimed
at projecting Doha's narratives into French discourse.
Qatar's record is not benign. For years it has financed Hamas and sheltered its
leadership. That France tolerated -- even courted -- Qatar despite these links
testifies to a familiar pattern: geopolitical expediency trumping moral clarity.
Macron's post on X insisted on conditionality (Hamas must relinquish control and
the Palestinian Authority must reform), yet those conditions remain
unenforceable in practice. A state without concrete guarantees risks rewarding
the very actors — such as Hamas and its patrons — who use terrorism as a policy.
Macron's declaration looks less like statesmanship and more like firing blanks:
a symbolic attempt at appeasement to placate vocal constituencies at home and
reclaim the moral high ground abroad by offering up a state that someone else --
a sovereign nation, far away -- is supposed to implement, while offering Israel
and the United States nothing at all.
Domestically, Macron's maneuver landed poorly. Multiple polls indicate that a
large majority of the French public — roughly three-quarters — opposed
immediate, unconditional recognition of a "Palestine" while Israeli hostages
remained in Gaza or while Hamas remained in power. The disconnect between Macron
and his electorate is striking. While he sought applause abroad, he was being
widely perceived at home as indulging in moral posturing that had little chance
of delivering peace and a lot of chance of making matters worse.
French President Emmanuel Macron's recognition of the non-existent state of
"Palestine", applauded by large sections of Europe and beyond, was not the
action of a statesman seeking peace. It was a pitiful lunge to hold onto power
by a weakened leader, desperate to posture as a "moral arbiter" abroad while
avoiding accountability at home. Macron is willing to betray the Israelis, who
are fighting not only for the West but for his own people, the French.
On the eve of the Jewish New Year, when families across the world were preparing
to celebrate renewal and resilience, French President Emmanuel Macron chose a
different symbol.
He formally recognized, at the United Nations on September 23, a so-called
Palestinian state -- an act that emboldened Hamas, even as the 20 Israeli
hostages still believed to be alive remained starved, tortured, and trapped in
its tunnels in Gaza. Macron did not even have the decency to make his
recognition of a non-existent Palestinian state contingent on Hamas releasing
the hostages.
Joining Macron in this narcissistic display were other small, soft leaders with
large, hard Islamist constituencies -- Britain's PM Keir Starmer, Australia's PM
Anthony Albanese, and Canada's PM Mark Carney -- who followed Macron's lead in
granting international legitimacy to a cause dedicated to terrorism.
The timing could hardly have been more cynical. It trampled on the dignity of
the hostages and their families, and rewarded forces that glorify conquest and
bloodshed, also in the West.
The Palestinian Authority continues to operate as an unelected dictatorship,
funneling millions into its infamous pay-for-slay "jobs" program -- sometimes
listed as "welfare" -- which grants salaries to terrorists and their families
based on how many Jews they succeed in murdering. The more Jews they murder, the
higher the monthly stipend. Palestinian schoolbooks still erase Israel from
maps, depict Jews as usurpers, and teach children that the ultimate aspiration
is martyrdom.
Macron's recognition, applauded by large sections of Europe and beyond, was not
the action of a statesman seeking peace. It was a pitiful lunge to hold onto
power by a weakened leader, desperate to posture as a "moral arbiter" abroad
while avoiding accountability at home. Macron is willing to betray the Israelis,
who are fighting not only for the West but for his own people, the French.
The great French leader Charles Martel, who repelled the Muslims trying to
conquer France at Tours in the year 732, would probably die again from disgust.
Macron's calculation is transparent: appease an increasingly assertive Muslim
electorate, cater to progressive elites, and hope that an international gesture
will distract the French public from his collapsing domestic authority.
This is not the first time, in moments of moral testing, that France has
betrayed its own ideals. Not long ago, France surrendered to Hitler and lived
under the Third Reich's collaborationist government in France, Vichy.
The very nation that proclaims itself the cradle of the Rights of Man has a long
and extremely questionable record when it comes to Jews and, later, the Jewish
state. From the anti-Semitic hysteria of the Dreyfus Affair to the anti-Israel
rhetoric of Charles de Gaulle, from France's protection of the Grand Mufti of
Jerusalem, Amin al-Husseini after World War II, to its welcoming of Ayatollah
Ruhollah Khomeini on the eve of Iran's Islamic Revolution, Paris has repeatedly
oscillated between lofty universalist proclamations and sordid accommodations.
France's stance today under Macron is not an aberration. It is the latest
chapter in a long history of ambiguous — and often duplicitous — policies toward
the Jewish people and the State of Israel. To understand this trajectory, one
must begin at the very moment when modern political Zionism was born: the
Dreyfus Affair, in the heart of Paris.
*I. Dreyfus as the Matrix: The Birth of Modern Political Zionism
In 1894, Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish officer in the French Army, was
falsely accused of treason. The ensuing scandal tore French society apart,
dividing the country into two camps: the anti-Dreyfusards, steeped in
anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, and the defenders of Dreyfus, who rallied
behind principles of evidence, justice, and equality before the law.
The hysteria was not confined to the courtroom. French newspapers spread
venomous caricatures portraying Jews as traitors, parasites, and alien intruders
within the French body politic. Crowds chanted "Death to the Jews" in the
streets of Paris.
For many, the case was not about one officer's guilt or innocence—it was about
the place of Jews in France itself.
One man observing this tragedy with particular intensity was Theodor Herzl, a
Jewish Viennese journalist covering the trial. Herzl had once believed in the
promise of European liberalism, convinced that Jews could assimilate fully
within modern nation-states. Yet in Paris he witnessed the fragility of that
dream. If antisemitism could erupt with such virulence in the land of Voltaire
(who, sadly, was himself a venomous antisemite) and the Enlightenment, then
emancipation was a lie. Jews, Herzl concluded, would never be secure unless they
had a state of their own.
From this epiphany came Herzl's 1896 pamphlet Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State),
then, one year later, the first Zionist Congress in Basel. His vision did not
emerge in a vacuum; it was born of the venom he had witnessed in France. The
Dreyfus Affair became the crucible in which modern political Zionism was forged.
French intellectual currents not only gave rise to Zionism — they also nourished
antisemitism in forms that would metastasize worldwide. As France vacillated
between defenders of justice and merchants of hatred, the battle lines drawn in
the 1890s would echo throughout the twentieth century.
II. French Letters and the Poisoned Well (1890s–1930s)
It is hard to understand the modern spread of European antisemitism without
factoring in its French literary engine. In 1886, Édouard Drumont published La
France juive, a runaway bestseller that packaged bigotry as a total explanation
of French decline. Drumont did not merely "describe" Jews; he indicted them as
an alien cabal, thereby giving a popular movement both its slogans and its
pseudo-intellectual veneer. His newspaper, La Libre Parole, normalized the
discourse, turning antisemitism into a daily habit for thousands of readers. The
template of conspiracy, financial demonology and cultural contempt would stretch
across Europe and into the twentieth century.
By the years between the world wars, the climate had worsened. Jacques Doriot,
once a rising Communist, mutated into a fascist, founding the Parti Populaire
Français (PPF). His trajectory, from far-left tribune to Nazi collaborator,
embodied a grim convergence: Jew-hatred as the bridge between extremes. Under
the German occupation during WWII, the PPF enforced antisemitic policies and
aped Nazi methods, showing how French politics could serve as a transmission
belt for imported totalitarianism.
The literary canon itself was not spared. Louis-Ferdinand Céline, one of
France's most stylistically gifted novelists, published two notorious pamphlets
— Bagatelles pour un massacre (1937) and L'École des cadavres (1938) — that
dripped with genocidal antisemitic bile. He never atoned. Even decades later,
debates about republishing his pamphlets acknowledged their openly antisemitic,
fascistic core. What mattered for the wider world was the export value: when
hatred is written with elegance, it travels farther.
III. The Communist Blind Spot: From Molotov-Ribbentrop to Defeatism (1939–1941)
When Stalin signed his non-aggression pact with Hitler in August 1939, the shock
swept through Europe. The French Communist Party struggled for a few days, but
then aligned with Moscow.
The result was a propaganda campaign that promoted defeatism and make-believe
"peace" with Hitler, precisely when what France really needed was immediate
mobilization. Contemporary and subsequent analyses record how communists
disseminated the view that the war was "imperialist," consequently undercutting
national resolve at a decisive hour.
Scholarly work details the tactical shifts and the impact inside factories and
unions during 1939–1940. The narrative is complex, but the through-line is not:
between 1939, the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact, and June 1941 (Operation
Barbarossa, when Germany invaded the Soviet Union), the French Communist Party's
stance mirrored Soviet policies, not France's interests. This posture, however
rationalized, proved catastrophically out of step with the threat France
actually faced.
While the far right had given antisemitism a pulpit, part of the far left gave
Hitler a window — briefly but fatefully — through which to divide and demoralize
a democracy. Different motives, same effect: France entered the storm of war
after being weakened from within.
IV. Vichy: State Complicity and Deportations
After France's defeat at the hands of Germany in 1940 came collaboration.
France's Vichy regime did not merely submit to German edicts; it embraced its
own homegrown antisemitism. Vichy's machinery operated with bureaucratic zeal:
statutes defining who was a Jew, the exclusion of Jews from professions,
property seizures, internments, and ultimately deportations to Auschwitz. The
cultivated myth of a France "shielding" Jews while Germany did the harm has long
since been demolished by the historical record. Vichy was a French government,
enacting French laws to persecute Jews on French soil, and in too many
instances, to deliver them to their deaths.
The shock is enduring because the betrayal was intimate. The nation of the
Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen transformed its own legal
code into a weapon against a tiny minority that had fought for France in WWI and
WWII and believed in its promise. This was not only an occupation story; it was
a national story.
V. Post-War Realpolitik: Sheltering the Grand Mufti
Few episodes illustrate France's duplicity more vividly than its post-war
protection of Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. Long before World
War II, al-Husseini had incited murderous pogroms against Jews in Palestine,
most conspicuously in 1929 at Hebron and Safed. Al-Husseini then lent
ideological support to the Farhud pogrom in Iraq in 1941, in which more than a
hundred of Jews were murdered, and hundreds more wounded. During WWII, Husseini
was a willing partner of Nazi Germany: broadcasting anti-Jewish and anti-British
propaganda from Berlin, lobbying Adolf Hitler and SS chief Heinrich Himmler to
prevent any transfer of Jews to Palestine, and even helping to recruit Bosnian
Muslims into the Waffen-SS.
At war's end, the case for accountability was clear. Al-Husseini's name was
raised for trial at Nuremberg; Yugoslavia filed an extradition request for war
crimes, and Britain initially pressed for his prosecution.
The French government, however, which held him under house arrest from May 1945
until May 1946, had other priorities. Apparently fearing to alienate Arab
opinion and desperate to preserve France's influence in North Africa and the
Middle East, French Foreign Ministry officials concluded that leniency toward
Husseini would be rewarded diplomatically. Prosecuting him, they feared, would
risk uprisings and the loss of goodwill in Muslim lands.
Political considerations won out over justice. British resolve softened;
Yugoslavia eventually dropped its request. France used this collapse of nerve as
cover to avoid a trial. In May 1946, Husseini conveniently "escaped" from France
to Egypt. Most historians agree the escape was tolerated — if not facilitated —
by the French government, eager to rid itself of a political embarrassment while
currying favor with Arab leaders.
This episode set a pattern that would haunt French policy for decades: when
forced to choose between upholding justice for Jewish victims or cultivating
Arab alliances, Paris chose the latter. In doing so, France sheltered one of the
most vicious antisemites of the twentieth century — an active ally of Hitler, a
recruiter for the SS, and an instigator of pogroms — because his political
utility outweighed the moral imperative of accountability.
Then came a brief period of rational alliance and partnership between France and
Israel -- one that eventually led the two countries to become nuclear powers.
Unfortunately, this honeymoon did not last.
VI. De Gaulle and the "Arab Policy" (1967 and After)
Charles de Gaulle's reaction to the Six-Day War marked a dramatic rupture in
French policy toward Israel. Within days of Israel's stunning military victory
in June 1967, Paris moved from being one of Israel's principal arms suppliers to
imposing an arms embargo that effectively cut military ties and signaled a
strategic pivot toward Arab capitals. This embargo, and the harsh language de
Gaulle used to describe Israel and the Jews — calling them at one point "a
people sure of themselves and domineering" — left an enduring scar on
French-Israeli relations and created the political space for a more openly
pro-Arab, realpolitik French diplomacy.
The logic behind the shift was straightforward: France was recalibrating toward
what it perceived as long-term national interests — energy supplies in the form
of Arab oil, commercial ties, and influence in North Africa after decolonization
— even at the price of alienating a democratic ally. De Gaulle evidently
believed that maintaining good relations with the Arab world would serve
France's global role and help secure its independence from both the US and the
Soviet Union. The moral consequence, however, was a clear double standard:
universalist rhetoric at home; transactional back-stabbing abroad.
VII. Giscard, Family Reunification and the Demographic Turn (1974–1981)
The post-1968 order in France included policies whose long-term social and
political impact has been underestimated by many commentators. One such policy
was the legal framework for family reunification for immigrants, consolidated in
the mid-1970s under President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing and his prime ministers.
By permitting long-term immigrant workers to bring their families to France,
successive governments transformed a temporary labor policy into a more
permanent demographic shift — with important consequences for domestic politics
and the composition of the electorate that, in later decades, would severely
influence France's approach to the Middle East.
It is important to stress causality carefully: legislation on family
reunification did not deterministically produce any single foreign policy
choice. It did, all the same, help to create the electoral constituencies whose
concerns and votes French leaders would increasingly weigh — and with whom
political elites sometimes sought conciliatory gestures on foreign policy as a
matter of political expediency. In short, immigration policy became a
significant factor in France's geopolitical calculations.
VIII. Khomeini's Safe Haven: France's Unwitting Launchpad (1978–1979)
When Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini spent his final months in exile in Neauphle-le-Château
outside Paris, France inadvertently became a broadcast platform for Iran's
Islamic revolutionary movement. With broad press freedoms and a ravenous
international media corps gathered around the cleric, Khomeini's sermons and
statements were rapidly transmitted back into Iran. What French authorities saw
as a short-term humanitarian and logistical solution turned into a strategic
blunder: the relative openness of France amplified Khomeini's message and helped
him to consolidate a revolutionary narrative that would soon sweep away Iran's
Shah and establish an anti-Western, jihadist, theocratic regime.
The decision to allow Khomeini into French territory was complicated. He had
been expelled from Najaf, Iraq and was seeking a place from which he could
freely communicate his messages to Iran. French officials and local hosts were,
according to contemporary reporting and later histories, guided more by
considerations of asylum and the technicalities of visas than by any intent to
aid an Islamic revolution. Yet the strategic effect was that his stay in France
gave Khomeini a massive international megaphone. The French media — and the
protections of French civil rights — transformed a reclusive cleric into a
global icon.
IX. Mitterrand, Beirut and the Paradox of Protection (1982)
The 1982 Lebanon War demonstrated once again how France could position itself
rhetorically as a mediator while pursuing policies that many in Israel and the
US found opaque — even hostile. As Israeli forces closed in on West Beirut and
the PLO leadership faced annihilation, Paris — under President François
Mitterrand and through foreign policy channels — advocated a multinational force
to oversee the evacuation of the PLO from Lebanon. France pressed for, and
contributed troops to, the multinational contingent that was supposed to
supervise the PLO withdrawal. France's diplomatic posture was presented as
saving the PLO from complete destruction. PLO leader Yasser Arafat himself
publicly expressed gratitude to France for its role in arranging and
guaranteeing the evacuation.
The same intervention, all the same, fed narratives of French partiality.
Critics argued that Paris's willingness to play shepherd to Arafat reflected not
a neutral humanitarian instinct but a consistent policy tendency to court Arab
opinion and preserve French influence in the Levant. The multinational force
succeeded in evacuating thousands of PLO terrorists and the organization's
leaders, but the region's bloody aftermath revealed the limits of diplomatic
theater when not paired with decisive measures to protect civilians and confront
militias. France's role in Beirut in 1982 is therefore ambiguous: a protector of
evacuation on paper; in practice, a state whose broader policy choices had
repeatedly favored accommodating terrorists over accountability.
X. The "Secret Deal": PFLP and French Intelligence
One of the darkest and most revealing episodes of late-20th-century French
diplomacy was the quiet coordination between elements of France's intelligence
services and Palestinian terrorist groups. In the years after a wave of terror
attacks on French soil in the 1970s and 1980s, former French intelligence
officials later admitted that the country's security services had entered
informal understandings with Palestinian terrorist factions — not out of
sympathy for their cause, but from a blunt, transactional desire to keep terror
off French streets. Yves Bonnet, who headed the Directorate of Territorial
Surveillance (DST) in the early 1980s, publicly described how the DST cultivated
channels to Palestinian terrorist organizations as a "pragmatic" way to prevent
attacks and preserve domestic order.
This was not high-minded diplomacy. It was a deal underwritten by cynicism:
toleration and limited engagement in exchange for the simple promise that
murderers would not strike France again.
The moral cost was enormous. By making stability the overriding priority,
French authorities tacitly normalized contact with organizations that targeted
Jews and Israelis. These back-channel accommodations blurred the line between
counterterrorism and collusion — and served as an early modern example of a
recurring French pattern: When domestic tranquility and influence in the Arab
world collide with the safety and security of Jews, the balance is often struck
in favor of tranquility.
XI. Chirac's Arabist Reflex
Jacques Chirac's career embodied the ambivalence of France's post-colonial
diplomacy: a leader who publicly confronted France's past crimes against the
Jews (his 1995 speech acknowledging responsibility for the Vichy deportations is
historic), yet repeatedly cultivated personal and political ties with
authoritarian Arab leaders. Chirac's long-standing, almost intimate ties with
Iraq and with Saddam Hussein in particular were well known in diplomatic
circles; those ties illustrate how French foreign policy often privileged
personal relationships and strategic commerce over moral clarity.
The texture of that reflex is visible in smaller, symbolic episodes, as well.
President Chirac, during a visit to Israel in October 1996, erupted at what he
called a "provocation" by Israeli plainclothes security guards during a walk in
the Old City of Jerusalem — an incident that became emblematic of Paris's
sensitivity to perceived Israeli slights and a readiness to dramatize grievances
that resonated with the Arab and Muslim public. Whether the outburst was theatre
or genuine indignation, it fed a narrative: France would hold Israel to scrutiny
in a way that sometimes felt public and punitive, while remaining discreet,
conciliatory, or accommodating toward Arab regimes.
Chirac also played a backchannel role in moments of regional crisis. During the
fraught period following the failure of Camp David II and the violence that
surrounded the second Intifada in 2000, Paris's posture favored diplomatic
hedging and protection of Palestinian leadership in ways that, critics argued,
sometimes shielded figures whose methods and rhetoric hardened the conflict
rather than resolving it. This posture — part humanitarian, part geopolitical
calculation — confirmed a French habit: act as mediator and moral broker while
maintaining policies that preserve Paris's influence in the Arab world, as in
its support for Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein.
XII. Al-Durrah: The Icon That Divided a Nation
Few images from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict had the raw emotional impact of
the footage broadcast by France 2 on September 30, 2000: a father crouched over
his son, bullets flying — and the boy apparently dying on camera. The scene of
Muhammad al-Durrah became an emblem of Palestinian suffering and a rallying
image across the Muslim world. The initial France 2 report, narrated by Charles
Enderlin and filmed by Talal Abu Rahma, was widely accepted as real and
re-broadcast; it shaped international opinion during the opening months of the
Second Intifada, a violent Palestinian uprising against Israelis.
This narrative, however, did not long survive forensic and legal scrutiny.
Subsequent inquiries, re-examination of the footage, and several technical
reconstructions raised serious doubts about whether Israeli fire had caused the
boy's death or whether he was even shot. Some investigators argued that the
image had been edited or narrated in a way that produced a politically explosive
impression not fully supported by the raw material -- for instance, how come, if
Mohammad al-Durrah was shot, there was no blood at the scene? The controversy
led to libel suits, heated media debates in France, and a long war of
narratives: for many critics, the al-Durrah case became a test of whether French
media could be trusted to report dispassionately on Palestine-Israel — or
whether powerful images produced abroad would be turned into instruments of
political mobilization at home.
The scandal's political consequences were immediate. The image accelerated
anti-Israel sentiment in French public opinion, fed protests and hardened the
belligerent framing of the conflict in French media and politics. Whether one
believes the original France 2 account in full or accepts the skeptical
reconstructions, the al-Durrah affair demonstrated how a single televised
sequence can change the political chemistry of a country and create a lasting
credibility problem for its media.
XIII. The French Anti-Zionist Intelligentsia
Beyond presidents and spy chiefs, France's intellectual and media class has been
a decisive engine shaping public attitudes. From certain influential columnists
to the editorial positions of major publications, anti-Zionist framings have
often bled into the discourse, sometimes tipping into rhetorical excesses that
risk conflating policy critique with cultural or religious denigration.
Outlets and figures across the French media ecosystem — from leading op-eds in
Mediapart to controversies inside Le Monde and Libération — have been accused by
critics of asymmetrical coverage that places Israel's worst actions at the
center while "contextualizing" or downplaying incitement, violence and terrorism
from Palestinians and other extremist actors.
Edwy Plenel himself, before founding Mediapart and after serving as
editor-in-chief of Le Monde, has a history that exemplifies this problem. In
1972, while writing for Rouge, the weekly of the Trotskyist Revolutionary
Communist League, he reacted to the murder of Israeli athletes at the Munich
Olympics not with condemnation but with praise. He argued that "no revolutionary
could disown Black September" after they murdered the Israeli athletes, thereby
effectively offering what contemporaries described as "unconditional support" to
the terrorists.
While Plenel has since distanced himself from this youthful radicalism,
acknowledging that it was indefensible, the episode remains a solid reminder of
how parts of the French intelligentsia once crossed the line from political
critique to glorification of terror.
This environment creates two linked problems. First, it makes France's public
conversation unusually capricious: a large portion of France's opinion-forming
institutions interpret events through frames that often emphasize French
universalism and human rights language, yet apply those frames unevenly when
Jews and Israel are involved. Second, it gives political actors license to
pursue policies that mirror the elite discourse — policies that, for reasons of
domestic politics or international positioning, can be strikingly less
sympathetic to Israel than to rival states. The result is predictable: when
moral outrage is selective, credibility erodes — and the Jewish community, and
Israel, frequently pay the price.
XIV. The Media Coverage That Misled a Nation
No survey of France's ambiguous stance toward Israel would be complete without
scrutinizing its media ecosystem. For decades, the front pages of Le Monde,
Libération, and Le Monde Diplomatique have provided disproportionate framing
that vilifies Israel while sanitizing Palestinian violence. Headlines portraying
Israeli counter-terrorism as "aggression," while minimizing rocket fire or
suicide bombings, have shaped French public opinion, sometimes more decisively
than presidential speeches.
The effect of this editorial slant is cumulative: each cover, each op-ed, each
biased image is built into a narrative architecture in which Israel stands as
the perennial aggressor and Palestinians as the archetypal victims. This
distortion is not merely academic. It affects political choices, emboldens
intellectuals who conflate anti-Zionism with moral virtue, and reinforces a
climate where politicians know they can score points by signaling distance from
Jerusalem. In the long run, media coverage has hardened the double standard and
provided cultural cover for diplomatic betrayals.
XV. Qatar, Inc.: Money, Influence, and Macron's Blind Eye
The 21st century has added a more transactional layer to France's Arab policy:
investment in the French economy. Few states have invested more aggressively in
French assets and businesses than Qatar. The oil-rich emirate poured billions
into Parisian real estate, media holdings, luxury firms, and sports franchises.
The purchase of Paris Saint-Germain football team became a symbol of how deeply
Qatari capital has embedded itself into French public life. Alongside investment
came soft power: television channels, think tanks, and influence campaigns aimed
at projecting Doha's narratives into French discourse.
Qatar's record is not benign. For years it has financed Hamas and sheltered its
leadership. That France tolerated -- even courted -- Qatar despite these links
testifies to a familiar pattern: geopolitical expediency trumping moral clarity.
Macron himself has wavered on Qatar, oscillating between mild criticisms and
enthusiastic embrace. The paradox is disingenuous: while Macron preaches
republican secularism at home, he welcomes investments from a monarchy accused
of fueling Islamist extremism abroad.
Some Qatari investors have pulled back from French markets of late, signaling
that Doha's support is conditional and that Macron's balancing act offers
uncertain returns. At the same time, Macron is touting new economic
partnerships, including a promise of 10 billion euros of Qatari investments in
France — a reminder that lofty diplomatic postures are often cushioned by
pragmatic financial deals.
XVI. La France Insoumise: The threat within.
In France, a radical left-wing political party has become a destabilizing
domestic force. La France Insoumise (LFI, "France Unbowed"), led by Jean-Luc
Mélenchon, has adopted methods of political agitation that increasingly recall
strategies once used by the Nazis: street intimidation, permanent propaganda,
and an obsessive use of scapegoats. LFI has made antisemitism and hostility
toward Israel central to its discourse. Members of Parliament such as Thomas
Portes, Aymeric Caron and Rima Hassan have turned their anti-Zionist obsession
into a quasi-monopolistic political project, using Israel as a lightning rod to
mobilize resentment. The aim is clear: to capture as many votes as possible
within immigrant communities, where this rhetoric finds fertile ground. For
Macron, who is now unpopular with a broad majority of the French population of
native or integrated origin, "throwing Israel under the bus" serves a dual
purpose: attempting to seduce a segment of this electorate while also appeasing
an ultra-violent street movement emboldened by LFI's constant incitement.
XVII. October 7, 2023 and After: Macron's Anti-Israel Tilt
The Hamas massacre of October 7, 2023 was a moral flashpoint. At first, Macron's
words were unequivocal: "France stands in solidarity with Israel and the
Israelis, committed to their security and their right to defend themselves," he
wrote on the day of the attack. Yet, within months, the rhetoric shifted. As
harrowing images from Gaza saturated global media and pressure mounted from the
European left and Muslim communities inside France, Macron began to emphasize
"humanitarian" concerns and call publicly for ceasefires and restraint. On July
25, 2025, he announced on X that "the urgent thing today is that the war in Gaza
stops and the civilian population is saved," and declared his intention to
formally recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations -- which he did on
September 23, 2025.
This about-face reveals the weakness of Macron's calculation. He presented
"recognition" at the United Nations as a humane corrective — a way to "restore
political hope" and revive the two-state solution — but the move was both poorly
timed and politically naïve, if not duplicitous.
Macron's post on X insisted on conditionality (Hamas must relinquish control and
the Palestinian Authority must reform), yet those conditions remain
unenforceable in practice. A state without concrete guarantees risks rewarding
the very actors — such as Hamas and its patrons — who use terrorism as a policy.
Macron's declaration looks less like statesmanship and more like firing blanks:
a symbolic attempt at appeasement to placate vocal constituencies at home and
reclaim the moral high ground abroad by offering up a state that someone else --
a sovereign nation, far away -- is supposed to implement, while offering Israel
and the United States nothing at all.
The international reaction was immediate and revealing. Israeli hard-liners
seized the moment to harden their posture. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich
publicly thanked Macron — ironically — for providing "yet another reason" to
press for Israeli sovereignty over parts of Judea and Samaria, while other
ministers openly mulled steps toward annexation that until now had been largely
rhetorical. Such responses were predictable: unilateral recognition encourages
maximalist countermoves from the threatened party.
Washington also did not embrace Macron's gambit. U.S. officials publicly warned
that unilateral European recognition undermined leverage in hostage negotiations
and could empower extremist factions inside Palestinian politics. US Ambassador
to Israel Mike Huckabee noted, "If France is really so determined to see a
Palestinian state, I have a suggestion for them–carve out a piece of the French
Riviera." Macron's symbolic act effectively sabotaged the very US-led channels
that were most likely to secure the hostages and constrain Hamas.
Domestically, Macron's maneuver landed poorly. Multiple polls indicate that a
large majority of the French public — roughly three-quarters — opposed
immediate, unconditional recognition of a "Palestine" while Israeli hostages
remained in Gaza or while Hamas remained in power. The disconnect between Macron
and his electorate is striking. While he sought applause abroad, he was being
widely perceived at home as indulging in moral posturing that had little chance
of delivering peace and a lot of chance of making matters worse.
Macron's credibility was further undercut by other domestic crises that exposed
governance fatigue and strategic drift. His administration has been battered by
repeated street protests — over pension reforms, austerity and other measures —
and his government's authority has been weakened by scandals and declining
approval. These weaknesses mean that Macron has fewer domestic political
resources to absorb an international backlash or to press for a foreign policy
that might risk his political future. The timing of his recognition of a
non-existent Palestinian state looked less like high moral purpose and more like
the miscalculated act of a beleaguered leader trying to reset a collapsing
career.
Macron's "recognition" declaration will probably do more harm than good. It has
angered Israel, failed to win over the United States, alienated important
swathes of his own electorate, and encouraged Israeli hard-liners to entertain
permanent annexation. The result is the political opposite of what Macron
thought he was promising. It is not a revived diplomacy, but a harder, more
dangerous stalemate — with France's reputation as an honest broker badly in a
ditch.
This disconnect — between a president desperate for approval abroad but trying
to woo a public increasingly skeptical of elite pretenses — is the final irony.
The nation of Alfred Dreyfus, Émile Zola, and the Rights of Man, so often
invoked as a beacon of a "universalism" that no one appears to want any more,
finds itself led by a government more concerned with empty posturing than with
genuine justice. Macron's maneuver, like de Gaulle's embargo on Israel, like
France's sheltering Amin al-Husseini, will be remembered not as statesmanship
but as yet another entry in the ledger of France's double standard toward Jews,
Israel and other policies over which it preens itself as an avatar of virtue.
What next?
France's tangled relationship with Jews, Zionism and Israel stretches from the
Dreyfus Affair to today's diplomatic theater under Macron. This history is a
mosaic of high-minded ideals and ugly sell-outs and compromises that put French
interests ahead of moral clarity, as well as a succession of leaders who
sometimes courted Arab rulers and "causes" for reasons of strategy, prestige or
domestic politics.
What is new — and alarming — is how a contemporary French presidency, ambitious
abroad but weak at home, has chosen a symbolic, unilateral, Wonderlandian path —
recognizing the statehood of a fictitious "Palestine" -- at a moment of extreme
violence, hostage-taking, and diplomatic fragility. Macron's move is being sold
as a pragmatic tool to reframe the region and "isolate Hamas," yet it has of
necessity only hardened Israel's stance, alienated large swathes of French
public opinion, and reopened old wounds that France's post-war politics had
never fully settled.
If France's century-long oscillation between principle and self-interest teaches
anything, it is that gestures divorced from on-the-ground realities and credible
enforcement rarely produce peace. Recognizing a non-existent state — while
hostages remain captive and Hamas is still in power — rewards force over
reconstruction and rhetoric over results. The only durable path will require
credible security guarantees, an enforceable plan for disarming terror groups,
and a diplomatic strategy coordinated with Israel and the United States — not a
one-off diplomatic flourish that inflames passions at home and abroad.
Finally, a sober France must confront its past honestly: the anti-Jewish
strains, the Nazi collaborators who facilitated the deportation of Jews to their
deaths, the postwar compromises that protected war criminals, and the repeated
flirtations with illiberal movements abroad. Only by facing up to policies that
are doing more harm than good to France can it credibly advance "peace and
prosperity" either in the Middle East or at home.
*Pierre Rehov, who holds a law degree from Paris-Assas, is a French reporter,
novelist and documentary filmmaker. He is the author of six novels, including
"Beyond Red Lines", " The Third Testament" and "Red Eden", translated from
French. His latest essay on the aftermath of the October 7 massacre " 7 octobre
- La riposte " became a bestseller in France.As a filmmaker, he has produced and
directed 17 documentaries, many photographed at high risk in Middle Eastern war
zones, and focusing on terrorism, media bias, and the persecution of Christians.
His latest documentary, "Pogrom(s)" highlights the context of ancient Jew hatred
within Muslim civilization as the main force behind the October 7 massacre.
© 2025 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.
Venezuela: Bolivarian Roses for Machado
Amir Taheri/Gatestone Institute/October 26, 2025
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22015/venezuela-bolivarian-roses-for-machado
In the case of Machado, a case could be made to support her brave campaign to
force an authoritarian regime to respect its own constitution by allowing free
and fair elections according to the law of the land.
"There is no need for anyone to be poor in a country as rich as ours," Hugo
Chávez asserted. "Give me four years, just give me four years!"
Well, Chávez had three times as many years and left Venezuela as poor, if not
poorer, and certainly more divided than ever under Maduro, whom he called "my
bus driver."
Venezuela has headed the list of Latin American nations as far as capital flight
is concerned. Over the years, something like $170 billion has been transferred
by Venezuelans to foreign, mostly American, banks. The "Bolivarians" also spent
billions helping Cuba and distributing free or cut-price oil to several
countries, including some areas of the United States.
Venezuela ended up with a shortage of gasoline, seeking emergency imports from
far-away Iran.
Bolivar wanted Latin America to seek allies among Western democracies, not the
potentates of the Orient.
Simón Bolívar wanted Latin America to compete with the United States by
enhancing its own freedoms, improving its educational system, achieving economic
growth, and developing its culture. Bolívar did not believe that seeking the
destruction of the United States was a worthy goal for any sane person, let
alone a nation.
Bolívar died in 1830 and is buried in next-door Colombia, but never forgot
Venezuela as the "jewel" in the crown of his long campaign for liberation. Had
he been here today, he would have sent a bouquet of roses to Machado for her
non-violent, but no less courageous, fight for freedom.
As might have been expected, the decision by the Nobel Committee in Oslo to
grant this year's Peace Prize to Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina
Machado has raised a storm of controversy about an annual ritual that has been
losing luster for years.
Critics say the committee chose Machado, a staunch Trumpist, because it didn't
want to anoint her idol. At the same time, choosing another "globalist
left-winger" would have given some credibility to the charge that most Nobel
prizes have become political trophies.
One example: French President Emmanuel Macron's economic advisor was named a
winner in economics.
Even in science categories, prizes are distributed in a way to reflect
geopolitics. In literature, the winner, at least for the past 30 years, has been
a writer or poet with left-wing credentials and few readers outside the European
champagne and caviar liberal elites.
While that criticism may or may not be worth consideration, I think that the
attacks launched on Machado, precisely from the same elites, are unfair.
To be sure, Machado hasn't done anything for peace in the way understood so far.
As the architect of several shaky ceasefires between Israel and Hamas, between
India and Pakistan, between Congo-Kinshasa and Rwanda, and between Iran and
Israel, US President Donald Trump would have made a more credible peace prize
laureate.
One way out of the impasse created by ideology may be to rename the prize as the
Nobel Prize for Campaigner of the Year for Political Freedom and Human Rights. I
know, such a long phrase may trigger even more controversy about what is meant
by freedom and human rights.
In the case of Machado, however, a case could be made to support her brave
campaign to force an authoritarian regime to respect its own constitution by
allowing free and fair elections according to the law of the land.
Machado isn't calling for revolution or the violent overthrow of President
Nicolás Maduro's "Bolivarian" regime. All she is asking for is elections in the
presence of international observers and a commitment by all contesting parties
to accept the outcome.
I first visited Venezuela in 1972, at a time when it was ruled by an ersatz
aristocratic elite that claimed imperial Spanish ancestry and regarded the
"native" population as extras in a Cecil B. DeMille extravaganza.
So, when Hugo Chávez appeared on the scene to give a voice to those "extras," I
was among many who welcomed the change.
It was after one of his earlier trips to Iran that I first met the flamboyant
Chávez. With a few colleagues, we had invited him to dinner at an Italian
restaurant in Paris, and the conversation that ensued touched on a range of
topics.
However, two themes dominated.
The first was his "determination" to end poverty in Venezuela.
"There is no need for anyone to be poor in a country as rich as ours," he
asserted. "Give me four years, just give me four years!"
The second theme was Chávez's claim that the Catholic Church, prompted by
"wealthy oligarchs," was trying to sabotage his social revolution.
Well, Chávez had three times as many years and left Venezuela as poor, if not
poorer, and certainly more divided than ever under Maduro, whom he called "my
bus driver."
Under Chávez and Maduro, Venezuela, which has the world's largest oil reserves,
earned more than $1.5 trillion from oil exports. And yet it fell into a maze of
budget deficit, public borrowing and hyperinflation combined with corruption
that seems to have become a way of life rather than an anomaly.
What happened? What did Chávez and Maduro do with the unprecedented wealth that
came to Venezuela under their stewardship?
Part of the answer may lie in the fact that Venezuela has headed the list of
Latin American nations as far as capital flight is concerned. Over the years,
something like $170 billion has been transferred by Venezuelans to foreign,
mostly American, banks. The "Bolivarians" also spent billions helping Cuba and
distributing free or cut-price oil to several countries, including some areas of
the United States.
Venezuela ended up with a shortage of gasoline, seeking emergency imports from
far-away Iran.
Somewhere along his trajectory, Chávez decided to cast himself as a "fighter
against Yankee imperialism." Once that decision was made, all other
considerations became secondary. The elimination of poverty could wait for
another day. As for Simón Bolívar's philosophy, it could be twisted to suit the
new "heroic discourse."
Under Maduro, anti-Americanism morphed into a neo-Bolivarian gospel that
justified any excess in the "fight against Yankee imperialism," including
turning a blind eye to drug traffickers from the whole region to flood US
markets in what Trump sees as "aggression by drugs" to justify military action
at sea against Venezuelan criminal gangs.
Chávez and Maduro set up something called the Bolivarian Alliance in Latin
America. But the regimes he managed to attract, that is to say Cuba, Nicaragua
and Bolivia, are more of anachronistic Communist setups than Bolivarian
constructs.
Bolívar insisted on the separation of religion and state. Bolívar was on the
side of the poor people. Bolívar wanted Latin America to seek allies among
Western democracies, not the potentates of the Orient.
Bolívar wanted Latin America to compete with the United States by enhancing its
own freedoms, improving its educational system, achieving economic growth, and
developing its culture. Bolívar did not believe that seeking the destruction of
the United States was a worthy goal for any sane person, let alone a nation.
Machado is campaigning for a return of sanity to Venezuela's politics, a nation
that by the 1980s had embarked on the bumpy road to democracy, something that
included Chávez's election as the first "native" to become president of
Venezuela and Maduro's initial smooth and legal succession.
Bolívar died in 1830 and is buried in next-door Colombia, but never forgot
Venezuela as the "jewel" in the crown of his long campaign for liberation. Had
he been here today, he would have sent a bouquet of roses to Machado for her
non-violent, but no less courageous, fight for freedom.
**Amir Taheri was the executive editor-in-chief of the daily Kayhan in Iran from
1972 to 1979. He has worked at or written for innumerable publications,
published eleven books, and has been a columnist for Asharq Al-Awsat since 1987.
**Gatestone Institute would like to thank the author for his kind permission to
reprint this article in slightly different form from Asharq Al-Awsat. He
graciously serves as Chairman of Gatestone Europe.
© 2025 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.
In the context of the series of persecution of Coptic Christians
in Egypt/From Rumor to Rampage: The Collective Punishment of Egypt’s Coptic
Christians
Raymond Ibrahim/Coptic Solidarity/October 23, 2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2025/10/148560/
On October 23, 2025, the village of Nazlet Jelf in Egypt’s Minya province became
the latest site of anti-Christian violence. The trigger was familiar: rumors
alleging a romantic liaison between a young Coptic man and a Muslim woman. As
has so often been the case across Upper Egypt for centuries, the accusation
alone sufficed to mobilize a mad Muslim mob.
Eyewitnesses reported scenes of chaos: “A large number of villagers surrounded
the Copts’ homes,” one resident said. “They threw stones at the houses, breaking
doors and windows. Fires were set in some of the farmland owned by the Copts.
Women screamed repeatedly; children cried in terror. Even those with no
connection to the alleged affair were attacked.”
The mob’s fury was indiscriminate, a collective punishment inflicted for
violating Islamic sensibilities. According to one report, the attacks
transformed a community once accustomed to a reasonable degree of coexistence
into one gripped with fear. Residents described how moments of shared daily
life—children playing together, neighbors visiting—turned, like the flip of a
switch, into hatred, aggression, and terror.
Police eventually restored order (once the mob was sated) but the
damage—physical and metaphysical—was extensive. Christian households kept their
children home from school, afraid they would get attacked again. Many are
looking into relocating.
Local officials offered the usual lip service: “Law must be applied to
everyone,” they declared. Yet those familiar with Minya know that similar
pronouncements have followed almost every comparable incident, rarely leading to
any accountability.
Nazlet Jelf’s violent outburst is not an anomaly; it is the latest chapter in a
centuries-long pattern of anti-Christian violence in Egypt. The mere accusation
of transgressing sharia—which bans relations between Christian men and Muslim
women—has been enough to mobilize Muslim mobs to collectively punish the Copts
for nearly fourteen centuries.
Minya itself has a long record of such incidents. In past decades, militant
Muslim groups like al-Gamaʿa al-Islamiya targeted Copts. Today, even without
organized militancy, the logic of collective guilt persists: a rumor about a
Christian man becomes a justification to terrorize his entire family and, by
extension, his community.
Indeed, this most recent violence mirrors other egregious cases in Minya. In
2016, an elderly Christian woman, Soad Thabet, was publicly stripped naked,
beaten, spat upon, and paraded through the streets of al-Karm village by
hundreds of Muslim men—her only “crime” being that her son was accused of
associating with a Muslim woman. Even as video evidence and eyewitness testimony
clearly identified the attackers, they were acquitted.
“Though I am strong,” she later reflected, “it is sometimes hard for me to
speak; I’m always fighting back tears and sometimes break down.”
As yet another example, in January 2012, a mob of over three-thousand Muslims
attacked Christians in an Alexandrian village because a Muslim accused a
Christian of having “intimate photos” of a Muslim woman on his phone.
Some months later, the village of Dahshur witnessed another large-scale attack
on Copts after a Christian launderer accidentally burned a Muslim’s shirt. A
brawl ensued, and in retaliation, some two-thousand Muslims attacked multiple
Christian homes and businesses, causing widespread property damage and forcing
dozens of families to flee.
All of these incidents demonstrate the enduring logic, first laid out in The
Conditions of Omar, a key juridical text outlining Muslim and Christian
relations: the offense of a single “dhimmi” justifies the collective punishment
of an entire Christian community—a pattern repeated across centuries.
To the Muslim mob, the alleged “infraction” is not a private matter but a
violation of divine and social order. Eyewitnesses in this latest uprising in
Nazlet Jelf made this clear: “Even people with no relation to the accused were
assaulted. The violence was indiscriminate. Fires were set. Houses were
destroyed. Women and children were screaming for help.”
It is worth noting that many of these attacks occur on Fridays—the one day of
communal Muslim prayer—when sermons and mosque gatherings often stir congregants
to outrage over perceived offenses by non-Muslims. Ideological reinforcement,
combined with long-standing social norms, ensures that collective punishment is
not only tolerated but expected.
The rumors of a Christian man courting a Muslim woman, or minor disputes, thus
become sufficient to mobilize a mob that perceives itself as enacting divine
justice—as when thousands of Muslims attacked and burned Christian properties in
another Minya province village on learning that a Christian household was about
to have a mobile network booster installed on their roof..
In short, the most recent outburst in Nazlet Jelf follows a well-known script:
1. A rumor or accusation arises, often of a Christian “overstepping” his or her
bounds and wounding Muslim sensibilities (by, for instance, dating a Muslim
woman, trying to build or repair a church, etc.).
2. A Muslim mob gathers, compelled by collective notions of honor and religious
obligation.
3. Coptic homes and property are attacked; women and children are terrorized.
4. Authorities intervene belatedly, restoring superficial order but rarely
punishing the perpetrators.
5. Christians are compelled to “reconcile” with their attackers, without seeing
any justice done, and brace themselves for the next time the pattern repeats.
The failure to punish offenders leads to the perception that such acts are
acceptable. Impunity, reinforced over generations, normalizes collective
punishment. In every case of the collective punishment of Copts, the same logic
applies—and has for centuries: rumor + Islamic law + lenient enforcement =
unchecked violence.
The script is old, familiar, and unbroken—and history will repeat itself so long
as the conditions remain the same.
https://www.raymondibrahim.com/10/26/2025/articles-of-the-day
Selected English Tweets from X Platform For
26
October/2025
Elie Abouaoun
A healer like you could not leave us this soon, causing such a tragic heartbreak
for family and friends.
Yesterday, at your funeral, most of those bidding farewell to you—just like
me—felt lost, struggling to figure out who to mourn: the loving brother, the
dedicated friend, the compassionate physician, the discreet philanthropist, the
eternal optimist, the touching piano player, or the connector who always brought
everyone together. I can't possibly capture all the great qualities you
embodied.
After 35 years of intense and brotherly friendship, I can't recall all the
meaningful and trivial memories we made together. You never failed me, and I
honestly can't remember a single time anyone was ever upset or disappointed by
you, with the exception of your death that devastated so many of us.
You're not just leaving behind a gracious wife, wonderful sons, and loving
siblings. Hundreds of individuals whose lives were profoundly touched by either
your knowledge, wisdom, or kindness (or all three together) will remember
vividly your kindness and good deeds
Salem: You've certainly earned eternal peace near our Lord. RIP.
Joumana Salem Amer Salem
Hussain Abdul-Hussain
Collective Delusion among Lebanese partisans of Hezbollah is out of this world:
1. Hezbollah launched war on Israel to support Gaza by pinning down Israeli
military resources in the north, away from Gaza in the south.
2. America insisted on an unconditional ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel.
Israel agreed. Hezbollah refused, tying its ceasefire to a ceasefire in Gaza.
3. Israel killed Hezbollah chief and 30 commanders in line after him, tearing
the militia into pieces. A humiliated Hezbollah begged for a ceasefire. But now
Israel had its conditions: Full disarmament of Hezbollah across Lebanon.
Hezbollah agreed, signed on Cessation of Hostilities.
4. Hezbollah declared victory over Israel because:
A. “Legendary steadfastness” against “Israel’s aggression.”
B. Hezbollah stopped Israel from invading all the way to Beirut (imaginary
Israeli goal).
C. Israel failed to start a civil war in Lebanon.
Now because Hezbollah insists that it won, it reneged on agreeing to disarm and
blames the Lebanese government for abiding by ceasefire deal that militia had
signed on and calls everyone who supports disarmament treasonous.
In this world of Collective Delusion, building a state and planning for a better
future becomes impossible. Hezbollah is not the cause of sociopolitical culture
failure in Lebanon, failure that inhibits state building. Hezbollah is the
result of Lebanon’s social and political culture failure.
Fixing Lebanon requires much more than diplomatic deals. It needs major
redirection in the debate over its existence and future, which in turn requires
intellectual heavy lifting. But Lebanese intellectuals either emigrated, or lend
their muscle to highest bidders from the alien powers to make a living as
propagandists. It’s a Catch 22 situation, and no matter how many opportunities
Israel gives the Lebanese (at least three in my lifetime alone — 1983, 2000,
2024), Lebanon will continue to fail. Sad.
Hussain Abdul-Hussain
I could write a book about this video, but for now: a Hezbollah woman (in Iran's
Islamist chador) on a talk show told a Hezbollah TV anchor about a young
Hezbollah couple: Boy took girl to Nasrallah's shrine, saying he lacked the
means to take her to Iraqi shrines or Lady Zaynab in Damascus, so he proposed
before Nasrallah's shrine with roses. The narrator, like the majority
Westernized Lebanese, used the English word "simple" because she couldn't
remember its Arabic equivalent. This substantiates my hypothesis: The
non-Western world admires Western culture, despite the opposition of non-Western
tyrants, who resist Western culture because liberty brings equality and
representative government. Tyrants peach Cultural Relativism that allows their
tyranny to continue. While this hijabi woman embraces identity politics (being
veiled and loyal to Islamist Iran), her lifestyle mirrors the West. None of my
Shia ancestors, including my father and uncles, proposed separately or knew
their wives before engagement (technically marriage), which was the business of
elders of both families.
Western civilization leads the world because of the law of evolution. Western
civilization suits human needs more than the next competitor. Claims of Western
decline and the rise of others are propaganda, often funded by attention-seeking
Qatar.
Vice President JD Vance
Vice President Vance and Second Lady Usha Vance
visited the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the site of Christ's crucifixion and
resurrection, in Jerusalem this week.
Blitz
"Lebanon, this small peaceful country, has never
been among the nations that invaded others out of greed for expansion Rather,
Lebanon has been like a second Vatican, calling for love and peace among nations
and peoples."
~Sheikh Pierre Gemayel on 21 September 1979
Hussain Abdul-Hussain
Why would Lebanon's Prime Minister discuss Palestinians with the Pope? Who
elected him? Palestinians? Who pays his salary? Palestinians? He calls himself a
statesman who knows the constitution and laws, yet seems unaware of which nation
he represents.
Hussain Abdul-Hussain
Collective Delusion among Lebanese partisans of
Hezbollah is out of this world:
1. Hezbollah launched war on Israel to support Gaza by pinning down Israeli
military resources in the north, away from Gaza in the south.
2. America insisted on an unconditional ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel.
Israel agreed. Hezbollah refused, tying its ceasefire to a ceasefire in Gaza.
3. Israel killed Hezbollah chief and 30 commanders in line after him, tearing
the militia into pieces. A humiliated Hezbollah begged for a ceasefire. But now
Israel had its conditions: Full disarmament of Hezbollah across Lebanon.
Hezbollah agreed, signed on Cessation of Hostilities.
4. Hezbollah declared victory over Israel because:
A. “Legendary steadfastness” against “Israel’s aggression.”
B. Hezbollah stopped Israel from invading all the way to Beirut (imaginary
Israeli goal).
C. Israel failed to start a civil war in Lebanon.
Now because Hezbollah insists that it won, it reneged on agreeing to disarm and
blames the Lebanese government for abiding by ceasefire deal that militia had
signed on and calls everyone who supports disarmament treasonous.
In this world of Collective Delusion, building a state and planning for a better
future becomes impossible. Hezbollah is not the cause of sociopolitical culture
failure in Lebanon, failure that inhibits state building. Hezbollah is the
result of Lebanon’s social and political culture failure.
Fixing Lebanon requires much more than diplomatic deals. It needs major
redirection in the debate over its existence and future, which in turn requires
intellectual heavy lifting. But Lebanese intellectuals either emigrated, or lend
their muscle to highest bidders from the alien powers to make a living as
propagandists. It’s a Catch 22 situation, and no matter how many opportunities
Israel gives the Lebanese (at least three in my lifetime alone — 1983, 2000,
2024), Lebanon will continue to fail. Sad.