English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News
& Editorials
For April 17/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.april17.26.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
Jesus Drives Out Of
the Temple Sellers and Money Changers ..He said to them: "Stop making my
Father’s house a market-place"
John 02/13-25:"The Passover of the Jews was
near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple he found people selling
cattle, sheep, and doves, and the money-changers seated at their tables. Making
a whip of cords, he drove all of them out of the temple, both the sheep and the
cattle. He also poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their
tables. He told those who were selling the doves, ‘Take these things out of
here! Stop making my Father’s house a market-place!’ His disciples remembered
that it was written, ‘Zeal for your house will consume me.’The Jews then said to
him, ‘What sign can you show us for doing this?’Jesus answered them, ‘Destroy
this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’The Jews then said, ‘This
temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and will you raise it up
in three days?’But he was speaking of the temple of his body. After he was
raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this; and they
believed the scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken. When he was in
Jerusalem during the Passover festival, many believed in his name because they
saw the signs that he was doing. But Jesus on his part would not entrust himself
to them, because he knew all people and needed no one to testify about anyone;
for he himself knew what was in everyone."
Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related
News & Editorials published
on April 16-17/2026
Patriarch Rai's Statement Attacking President Trump is a Mistake and a
Sin, Reflecting Ignorance, Stupidity, Lack of Vision, and Blatant
Sycophancy/Elias Bejjani/April 15, 2026
Link to a national, sovereign, and Lebanese patriotic interview with the
distinguished Lebanese leader and hero Abu Arz – Etienne Sakr
A video link of the press conference (in English) between President Trump and
journalists today
Netanyahu says Lebanon truce opportunity for 'historic peace'
Trump says Israel, Lebanon have agreed ceasefire, invites Aoun and Netanyahu to
White House
Israeli military ordered to prepare for Lebanon ceasefire: Report
US moves to sideline Iran in Lebanon, but the conflicts remain intertwined
Trump expects Aoun, Netanyahu at White House in 'four or five days'
Trump calls Aoun, reportedly tells him ceasefire within hours
Northern Israeli leaders criticize Lebanon ceasefire
Hezbollah MP says group will respect ceasefire if Israel stops attacks
Hezbollah reacts to ceasefire announcement
Israeli strikes kill 14, hurt dozens in 3 southern towns after ceasefire
announced
One injured in Israel after shelling from Lebanon before truce begins
Hezbollah MP says direct negotiations with Israel a 'grave error'
What have Lebanon and Israel agreed to?
Army, Berri and Hezbollah tell citizens not to return south until truce starts
EU chief welcomes Israel-Lebanon ceasefire as 'a relief'
KSA lauds 'role played by Aoun, Salam, Berri' in reaching ceasefire
Lebanon Draws a Line in Washington
Transcript: Israeli Ambassador Michael Leiter on "Face the Nation with Margaret
Brennan,"CBC/April 12, 2026
Lebanon: From 'Switzerland of the Middle East' to Iran's Puppet/Khaled Abu
Toameh/Gatestone Institute/April 16, 2026
The case for a Lebanese referendum on Israel peace/Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab
News/April 16, 2026
Links to several important news websites
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous
Reports And News published
on April 16-17/2026
Trump says Iran has agreed to hand over its enriched uranium supply
Trump: Iran has agreed to hand over its enriched uranium supply
Trump says Iran agrees to hand over enriched uranium, believes deal 'close'
Israel vows 'even more painful' strikes, if Iran refuses US proposal
Senate rejects effort to halt arms sales to Israel, but most Democrats vote to
block them
US forces ready to strike Iran’s power plants, energy industry if ordered:
Hegseth
Pakistani army chief in Iran to discuss new round of US talks
US military widens blockade on Iran to include contraband shipments, advisory
says
Pakistan army chief meets Iran speaker Ghalibaf
Merz says Germany ready to help secure Hormuz transit after end of hostilities
World could soon face ‘energy availability’ problem amid Iran war, Qatari
minister warns
Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant temporarily loses all off-site power,
IAEA says
Links to several important news websites
on April 16-17/2026
The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese
Related News & Editorials published
on April 16-17/2026
Patriarch Rai's Statement
Attacking President Trump is a Mistake and a Sin, Reflecting Ignorance,
Stupidity, Lack of Vision, and Blatant Sycophancy
Elias Bejjani/April 15, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/04/153648/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JJgrnAhAn8
The statement issued yesterday by Maronite Patriarch Bechara Rai, in which he
attacked U.S. President Donald Trump under the guise of defending the sanctity
of Pope Leo, is both a mistake and a sin. It is misplaced politically and
contextually; rather, it once again reveals a deep crisis in credibility and
vision.
The most dangerous aspect of this statement is not just its content, but the
motive behind it. According to reports circulating in well-informed Lebanese
circles, it appears to be an attempt at flattery and a plea for favor from the
Vatican and the Pope. This comes amid increasing talk of dissatisfaction within
high ecclesiastical circles regarding Rai's performance, and even reports that
he was asked to resign and the banning of secretary, lawyer Walid Ghayyad from
any public appearance during the Pope’s recent visit to Lebanon. This places the
statement within a personal and sycophantic framework that has nothing to do
with faith, principles, or ethics.
Regarding his track record, since his election in 2011, Rai has not provided a
model of a clear sovereignist patriarch. In his first week, he visited Sheikh
Mohammad Yazbek in Baalbek, the then-representative of the Iranian Supreme
Leader in Lebanon. From there, he attacked the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL)
investigating the assassination of PM, Rafik Hariri, in a move that constituted
flagrant political bias.
Later, he visited the criminal head of the Syrian regime, Bashar al-Assad,
without achieving any tangible results, particularly regarding the file of
Lebanese detainees in Syrian prisons. Driven by jealousy and envy of the
achievements of the late Patriarch Mar Nasrallah Sfeir, he then attempted to
create a political framework similar to "Qornet Shehwan" by gathering political
and religious figures affiliated with the Syrian regime and Hezbollah; failure
was inevitable. Additionally, in his early days as Patriarch, he dispatched
Father Abdo Abou Kasam to participate on his behalf in "Quds Day" in Iran.
During his European, American, and Canadian tours, he did not hesitate to
shamelessly and foolishly promote Bashar al-Assad's regime under the slogan of
"protecting Christians," ignoring the bloody facts known to everyone.
Internally, his performance has been no better. Serious suspicions have been
raised regarding the management of church properties, specifically the
allocation of church lands. A prominent example is the circulating reports that
he granted a piece of church land near Bkerke to his secretary, Walid Ghayyad,
who built a palace on it in clear violation of ecclesiastical laws, sparking
widespread resentment within church circles and the community.
Politically, his positions have been characterized by appeasement from the
start, especially toward Hezbollah. Clear sovereignist stances have been absent,
replaced by a "gray" rhetoric that does not align with the historical role of
Bkerke.
In light of all this, his latest statement merely reinforces the same approach:
biased, flowery rhetoric that oversteps the spiritual role for the sake of
political posturing, attacking an elected president while ignoring the
priorities of Lebanon and its people.
This statement adds nothing to the value of defending the Pope. On the contrary,
it harms the cause because the person issuing it suffers from a clear crisis of
trust, and his positions are surrounded by much doubt.
Conclusion: Patriarch Rai's statement is nothing more than a weak political
stance driven by personal calculations and attempts at flattery. It lacks
credibility and vision and, therefore, holds no actual value on a national or
moral level.
Link to a national,
sovereign, and Lebanese patriotic interview with the distinguished Lebanese
leader and hero Abu Arz – Etienne Sakr/
A visionary reading of the Lebanese situation: past, present, and future;
Hezbollah’s occupation; peace with Israel; and the misery and blindness of
Lebanese leadership, along with the dependency and cowardice of most rulers and
officials.
Abu Arz declares: “See you soon in Beirut”
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/04/153703/
Below is a summary of the most important issues and positions presented in the
interview of leader Abu Arz with “Pen Media” Youtube Platform on April 16, 2026.
Summary, transcription, and free formulation by Elias Bejjani.
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/04/153703/
First: Announcement of Return to Lebanon
Etienne Sakr clearly confirmed his intention to return to Lebanon after many
years in exile, declaring: “See you soon in Beirut.” He considered his return a
natural step and a legitimate right after decades of absence.
Second: Peace with Israel
He presented a clear position regarding relations with Israel, seeing peace as a
necessary and essential choice for Lebanon. He stated that continued hostility
no longer serves the national interest and called for direct and clear
negotiations leading to a peace agreement. He linked peace with the State of
Israel to restoring stability, prosperity, independence, and sovereignty to
Lebanon.
Third: Hezbollah’s Weapons
He directly addressed the issue of Hezbollah, strongly emphasizing the need for
the complete disarmament of its weapons. He refused limiting or regulating these
weapons, insisting that any arms outside state authority are completely
unacceptable. He stressed that true sovereignty can only exist when the state is
the sole holder of arms.
Fourth: The Concept of the State and Sovereignty
He outlined his vision of the Lebanese state:
The state must be strong, centralized, and fully in control of decision-making.
There should be no armed groups or external influence outside the state.
Sovereignty means: exclusive control of weapons, independent political
decision-making, and freedom from any external axis.
Fifth: His Stance on Lebanese Leadership
He expressed a sharp stance toward the political parties, politicians, rulers
and official class, stating that current leaders are incapable of governing and
lack vision. He accused them of failing to protect Lebanon and held them
responsible for the country’s deterioration. He called for a different and more
decisive leadership approach.
Sixth: His Message to President Joseph Aoun
He addressed President Joseph Aoun directly, urging him to be strong in
decision-making. He said the path to peace requires courage, firmness, and
vision, and called on him to seriously work toward disarming illegal weapons,
stressing that the current stage demands decisive leadership.
Seventh: The case of Exiles and Those Falsely Accused of Collaboration
He discussed sensitive issues concerning those exiled or convicted on what he
described as fabricated and unjust charges, including accusations of
collaboration. He called for readdressing this file under the rule of law and
emphasized the need for fair solutions for those who left Lebanon in 2000 or
were unjustly sentenced. He linked this issue to ongoing political changes.
Eighth: His Vision for Lebanon’s Future
He presented a clear vision for Lebanon:
A country at peace with its surroundings.
A state fully independent from regional conflicts.
A prosperous and open economy.
A political system based on strength and clarity in decision-making.
Ninth: Lebanese Christians in the South and Their Resilience
Etienne Sakr gave special importance to the presence of Christians in southern
Lebanon, considering it to carry a deep national and sovereign meaning beyond
demographics. He stressed that Christians in the South represent Lebanon’s
historical roots in that region. He stated that their resilience, despite
difficult security and political conditions, reflects a strong attachment to the
land and Lebanese identity. He emphasized that their presence acts as a barrier
against any change to the Lebanese identity of the South.
He also referred to Major Saad Haddad and his national role, describing him as a
“hero” and a symbol of steadfastness and attachment to the land. He directly
linked the presence of Christians in the South to Lebanon’s identity, affirming
that their continued presence is a fundamental guarantee that the South remains
an integral part of Lebanon, and that their absence could open the door to
changes affecting the Lebanese character of the region.
Conclusion
Etienne Sakr’s positions in the interview focus on:
Returning to Lebanon and participating in the next phase.
Peace with Israel as a strategic choice.
The complete disarmament of Hezbollah.
Building a strong state that holds exclusive control of arms.
Calling for decisive political leadership.
Addressing the cases of exiles and the convicted.
A video link of the press conference (in English) between
President Trump and journalists today
He addressed many pressing issues, most notably the Lebanese situation. He
explained that President Aoun and the Israeli Prime Minister would meet at the
White House and that they had agreed to a 10-day ceasefire. He also indicated
the possibility of visiting Lebanon at the appropriate time. He further
discussed his disagreement with Pope Leon, the war with Iran, and many other
topics.
April 16/2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Cndln1jxXQ&t=1198s
FULL CLASH: Trump on Iran, Nuclear Deal, Pope Clash, Lebanon, Hezbollah-Israel
Talks & Ukraine |AC1E
DWS News and DRM News
In this wide-ranging press exchange, Donald Trump discusses major global issues
including Iran, nuclear negotiations, and ongoing Middle East tensions. Trump
claims that a potential deal with Iran is “very close,” highlighting the impact
of military pressure and a naval blockade. He reiterates that Iran must never
obtain a nuclear weapon, warning of severe consequences if diplomacy fails. The
President also comments on relations with the Pope, stating he has the right to
disagree while emphasizing global security concerns. He further addresses
developments in Lebanon and Israel, suggesting progress in talks involving
Hezbollah and regional ceasefire efforts. Trump also touches on Ukraine, oil
prices, and international cooperation, presenting an optimistic outlook on
economic and geopolitical stability. The remarks reflect a critical moment in
U.S. foreign policy as multiple conflicts and negotiations unfold
simultaneously.
Donald Trump Iran speech, Trump nuclear deal update, US Iran negotiations 2026,
Trump Middle East remarks, Lebanon Israel ceasefire news, Hezbollah conflict
update, Ukraine war Trump statement, global politics breaking news, Iran
blockade US navy, Trump press conference full, nuclear weapons Iran warning,
Trump foreign policy update, international diplomacy news, Middle East crisis
latest, world leaders news today, Trump latest speech transcript, geopolitical
tensions update, global security crisis news, Iran deal progress analysis,
ceasefire negotiations Middle East
Netanyahu says Lebanon
truce opportunity for 'historic peace'
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu said Thursday that the ten-day ceasefire with Lebanon offered an
opportunity for a "historic peace agreement" with Lebanon, but insisted that the
disarmament of Hezbollah remained a precondition. "We have an opportunity to
make a historic peace agreement with Lebanon," Netanyahu said in a televised
speech. U.S. President Donald Trump earlier said that Netanyahu and President
Joseph Aoun had agreed to a ten-day truce starting at 2100 GMT on Thursday
evening, noting that it would include Hezbollah. "This opportunity exists
because... we have fundamentally changed the balance of power in Lebanon," he
added, highlighting Israel's military achievements against Hezbollah since the
war first broke out in October 2023. "This balance has shifted to such an extent
that in the past month we have begun receiving calls from Lebanon to hold direct
peace talks -- something that had not happened for over 40 years," he said. The
premier said Israel agreed to the ten-day truce but will maintain a 10-kilometer
(6.2-mile) "security zone" along the border in southern Lebanon. He added that
Israel maintained two conditions for the ceasefire: Hezbollah's disarmament, and
a lasting peace agreement "based on strength".Netanyahu also boasted that he
rejected the two conditions posed by Hezbollah: Israel's full withdrawal from
Lebanese territory, and a ceasefire based on the principle of "quiet in return
for quiet."
Trump says Israel, Lebanon have agreed ceasefire, invites
Aoun and Netanyahu to White House
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump announced
that Israel and Lebanon had agreed to a ceasefire Thursday, and said he was
trying to set up the first-ever meeting between the leaders of the two
countries. Following what he called "excellent" phone calls with Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, Trump said the
truce would begin at midnight Beirut time. "These two Leaders have agreed that
in order to achieve PEACE between their Countries, they will formally begin a 10
Day CEASEFIRE at 5 P.M. EST," or 2100 GMT, Trump said on his Truth Social
network. The U.S. leader said he had directed Vice President JD Vance, Secretary
of State Marco Rubio, and top U.S. military officer Dan Caine to work with the
two countries "to achieve a Lasting PEACE."
Shortly afterward, Trump added that "I will be inviting the Prime Minister of
Israel, Bibi Netanyahu, and the President of Lebanon, Joseph Aoun, to the White
House."
The truce announcement comes amid Washington's continuing efforts to reach a
deal to end the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran. Tehran has insisted that a Lebanon
ceasefire must be part of any agreement. Lebanon was pulled into the Middle East
war on March 2 after Hezbollah, which is backed by Iran, attacked Israel. Since
then, Israeli strikes in Lebanon have killed more than 2,100 people and
displaced more than a million, and Israeli ground forces have invaded the
country's south. A lawmaker from Hezbollah told AFP the group would "cautiously
adhere" to the ceasefire if Israel stopped attacks. Ibrahim al-Moussawi thanked
Iran for having applied pressure in Lebanon's favor, adding that "the ceasefire
would not have happened without Iran considering the ceasefire as equal to
closing the Strait of Hormuz."
'Breathing room'
The first signs of movement on Lebanon came when Trump said late Wednesday that
Aoun and Netanyahu were due to speak on Thursday. "Trying to get a little
breathing room between Israel and Lebanon," Trump said Wednesday on his Truth
Social platform, referring to the two countries' ambassadors meeting held in
Washington the day before -- the first meeting of its kind since 1993. But Aoun
rejected the U.S. request for a direct phone call with Netanyahu on Thursday, an
official source told AFP. Instead, Aoun's office confirmed a call during which
he thanked the U.S. leader for his "efforts" to secure a ceasefire with Israel.
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam welcomed Trump's announcement of a
ceasefire, saying a truce was a "key Lebanese demand that we have pursued since
the very first day of the war" between Hezbollah and Israel. He also thanked
European and Arab states for their involvement. European Commission president
Ursula Von Der Leyen hailed the ceasefire as "a relief."But fighting on the
ground continued right up until Trump's announcement and at least 14 people were
killed and dozens others wounded in Israeli airstrikes on three southern towns
near Sidon that followed the ceasefire announcement. The Lebanese Army said
Thursday that Israeli strikes that destroyed the Qasmiyeh bridge over the
southern Litani River have cut off the area from the rest of the country. The
Israeli army on Thursday again called on civilians to evacuate the entire area
of southern Lebanon up to the Zahrani River, about 40 kilometers (25 miles)
north of the border. Meanwhile, Lebanon's state-run National News Agency (NNA)
reported clashes in Bint Jbeil, a town five kilometers from the border where
Hezbollah fighters are battling the Israeli army. The White House has said it is
discussing a possible second round of talks with Iran in the Pakistani capital
Islamabad, after a first round last weekend failed to produce a deal. But a
senior U.S. administration official stressed that any end to the hostilities
between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon was not part of talks between Washington
and Tehran.
Israeli military ordered to
prepare for Lebanon ceasefire: Report
Al Arabiya English/16 April/2026
The Israeli military has been ordered to prepare for an imminent ceasefire in
Lebanon, according to a report published on Thursday. “High-ranking [Israeli
military] commanders received instructions to prepare the forces currently
deployed in southern Lebanon for the truce, which they were told would begin
between 7:00 PM and midnight,” Haaretz reported.This follows the start peace
talks between the Lebanese and Israelis in Washington and an earlier phone call
between Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Lebanese president, Joseph Aoun.
Sources also said Aoun spoke to President Donald Trump on Thursday. Neither the
White House nor the Lebanese Presidency has yet responded to a request for
comment.
US moves to sideline Iran in Lebanon, but the conflicts
remain intertwined
Al Arabiya English/16 April/2026
“Iran will not be allowed to dictate the future of Lebanon anymore,” a State
Department official said, describing the direct talks in Washington as central
to that effort.
Before last week’s talks with the US in Islamabad, Iran’s two lead negotiators
threatened to scrap negotiations unless a Lebanon ceasefire was secured in
advance. No ceasefire materialized, yet the talks went ahead at the highest
level in decades.
In parallel, a coordinated media campaign appeared to take shape among the
Iranian regime’s allies, both domestically and across the region, shifting focus
squarely onto Lebanon. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliament speaker and
their lead negotiator, repeatedly framed a Lebanon ceasefire as a precondition
for engaging with Washington. As recently as Wednesday, he wrote on X that any
ceasefire would come as a result of “the great Hezbollah and the unity of the
Axis of Resistance.”The messaging extended beyond Tehran. Ahead of the Pakistan
talks, the editor-in-chief of Hezbollah-linked Al-Akhbar in Beirut called for
the overthrow of the Lebanese government, which has banned Hezbollah’s military
wing and declared the Iranian ambassador persona non grata. The ambassador has
refused to comply and remains in the country. This intensified as reports
surfaced that the State Department would host the Lebanese and Israeli
ambassadors to Washington for the first direct talks in decades. Iran will no
longer dictate Lebanon’s future, official says. The Trump administration pushed
ahead with mediating direct talks between Lebanon and Israel while insisting
that a ceasefire between those two countries is not linked to the ongoing
negotiations between Washington and Tehran. Although no joint statement followed
the first round of Lebanon-Israel talks, which were held on Tuesday, the US
issued a pointed message: any agreement to halt hostilities “must be reached
between the two governments, brokered by the US, and not through any separate
track.” A White House official said that Lebanon had acknowledged that Hezbollah
was a mutual problem for both Israel and Lebanon during the talks on Tuesday.
For Trump administration officials, this marked a turning point.
“Iran will not be allowed to dictate the future of Lebanon anymore,” a State
Department official said, describing the direct talks in Washington as central
to that effort. Officials told Al Arabiya English that preparations for these
talks had been underway for months, with US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa
working behind the scenes to bring both sides together. The State Department
official also said that the Lebanon track was conceived well before any
discussions about US-Iran negotiations in Pakistan. “As the President has made
clear, there is no link between the negotiations between the United States and
Iran in Islamabad and the Israel-Lebanon talks,” the official insisted.
Iran’s threats
Still, the overlap in timing has fueled tensions.
Lebanon’s prime minister postponed a scheduled visit to Washington this week,
citing “internal circumstances,” as pressure mounted from Tehran and its allies
while also threatening the fate of his government. Iranian officials and
advisers accused Beirut of “obstructing” US-Iran ceasefire talks by attempting
to pursue a separate track with Israel, one that excludes Iran. Ali Akbar
Velayati, a senior adviser to Iran’s leadership and former foreign minister,
went further, warning the Lebanese premier of “irreparable security risks” for
“ignoring the role of the resistance.” In a post on X, Velayati added that
Lebanon’s stability “lies solely in the synergy between the government and the
resistance,” a reference to Hezbollah. Hezbollah itself has signaled resistance
to the process. Ahead of the Washington talks, senior official Wafik Safa said
the group would not abide by any agreement emerging from the negotiations.US
officials, however, have drawn a firm line. “Iran dragged the Lebanese people
into a war, so it cannot pretend to be Lebanon’s protector,” a second State
Department official said. “Hezbollah is a terrorist organization that does not
deserve a place. It must be fully disarmed, and the United States supports that
goal,” the official added. Behind the scenes, sources say Iran has continued to
test Washington’s approach, pressing for a Lebanon ceasefire in order to gauge
whether the US can restrain Israeli military action. The effort is seen as a
potential model for how a broader arrangement might function in the context of a
deal to end the US-Israeli war with Iran, according to the sources familiar with
the talks.
For Washington, the priority remains narrower.
A senior Trump administration official said the focus is on building trust
between Lebanon and Israel to create space for a durable agreement, “so that any
future understandings can be durable. Both sides need to build political
momentum.”That momentum appeared to accelerate on Thursday, when Trump announced
that a ceasefire in Lebanon would take effect at 5 p.m. EST. Following the
constructive tone of Tuesday’s meeting, Trump spoke with Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu. “The Prime Minister agreed to a ceasefire with certain
terms,” a White House official said. That was followed by a call on Wednesday
night between the top US diplomat and the Lebanese president, Joseph Aoun,
during which the later agreed to the ceasefire. On Thursday morning, Trump spoke
separately with the Lebanese president and Netanyahu ahead of his public
announcement of the ceasefire. Trump then said that he would invite the Lebanese
president and the Israeli prime minister to the White House for talks. “Both
sides want to see PEACE, and I believe that will happen, quickly!” he said on
Truth Social. Such a meeting would put a dent in the Iranian narrative that
Lebanon, which has hosted Tehran’s number one proxy for the last four decades,
is a bastion of the so-called axis of resistance.
Lebanese-Israeli peace deal
For some observers, the shift is strategic.
“In doing this, Trump is effectively pulling Lebanon out from under the Iranians
and making it exclusively the prerogative of the United States to mediate peace
and a better future for the Lebanese than the Iranians have done over the last
40 years,” a source close to the talks said. Firas Maksad, Eurasia Group’s
managing director for the Middle East and North Africa, told the New York Times
that the US was “signaling its refusal of continued Iranian influence over
Lebanon.” Even so, US officials acknowledge the broader stakes. Ahead of
Tuesday's State Department talks, Secretary of State Marco Rubio framed the
effort as part of a longer-term objective. “This is about bringing a permanent
end to 20 or 30 years of Hezbollah’s influence in this part of the world… This
will take time, but we believe it is worth this endeavor.”
Trump expects Aoun, Netanyahu at White House in 'four or
five days'
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump said Thursday he expected Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanhyahu and President Joseph Aoun to visit the White House in coming
days, after the U.S. leader announced a ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel.
"As of two hours from now, we have a ceasefire with Israel and Lebanon. And
that'll be great. And they'll be meeting -- probably coming to the White House
-- over the next four or five days," Trump told reporters. The president added
that he is "certainly" open to visiting Lebanon “at the right time," in response
to a Lebanese reporter's question.
Trump calls Aoun, reportedly tells him ceasefire within
hours
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
President Joseph Aoun held a phone call with U.S. President Donald Trump on
Thursday during which he thanked the U.S. leader for his "efforts" to secure a
ceasefire with Israel, the Lebanese Presidency said. "President Aoun reiterated
his thanks for the efforts Trump is making to achieve a ceasefire in Lebanon and
to secure lasting peace and stability as a prelude to implementing the peace
process in the region," the statement said. The call comes after Aoun rejected a
U.S. request for a "direct call" with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,
according to an official Lebanese source, and a day after Trump announced an
expected call between the Lebanese and Israeli "leaders". The Presidency said
Trump voiced support for Aoun and Lebanon and stressed that he is "committed to
fulfill the Lebanese request for a ceasefire as soon as possible."Arab and
Israeli media reports meanwhile said Trump told Aoun that "there will be a
ceasefire within hours."
Northern Israeli leaders criticize Lebanon ceasefire
Associated Press/April
16/2026
Two local leaders in northern Israel criticized the nascent ceasefire with
Lebanon, warning it would leave communities vulnerable. Moshe Davidovich, head
of the Mateh Asher Regional Council, said agreements may be signed in Washington
but “the price is paid here in blood, in destroyed homes and shattered
communities.”He warned that a ceasefire without strict enforcement against
Hezbollah and a buffer zone up to the Litani River, some 30 kilometers (18.64
miles) north of the Israeli border, would amount to “waiting for the next
massacre.”Eitan Davidi, head of the Margaliot settlement, called the move “a
surrender” and “a political defeat.” He told the N12 news site it was made
without coordination with northern residents and contradicts the stated goal of
dismantling Hezbollah’s capabilities.
Hezbollah MP says group will respect ceasefire if Israel
stops attacks
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
Hezbollah lawmaker Ibrahim al-Moussawi told AFP on Thursday that the Lebanese
group would respect a ceasefire with Israel announced earlier by U.S. President
Donald Trump if Israeli attacks on the militants stopped. "We in Hezbollah will
cautiously adhere to the ceasefire on the condition that it is a comprehensive
halt to hostilities against us and that Israel not use it to carry out any
assassinations," he said. "We express thanks to Iran for having applied pressure
in Lebanon's favor," he said, adding that "the ceasefire would not have happened
without Iran considering the ceasefire as equal to closing the Strait of
Hormuz," he added.
Hezbollah reacts to ceasefire announcement
Associated Press/April
16/2026
Hezbollah said in a statement that “any ceasefire must be comprehensive across
all Lebanese territory and must not allow the Israeli enemy any freedom of
movement.”Hezbollah added that “Israeli occupation on our land grants Lebanon
and its people the right to resist it, and this matter will be determined based
on how developments unfold,” a stance that could complicate the ceasefire.
Israel has staged a ground invasion in southern Lebanon, where its forces have
been engaged in fierce battles with Hezbollah fighters in the border area.It is
unclear whether Israel would withdraw some of its forces as part of the truce.
Israeli strikes kill 14, hurt dozens in 3 southern towns
after ceasefire announced
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
An Israeli strike on the southern Lebanese town of Ghazieh has killed at least
seven people and wounded 33, the health ministry said Thursday, hours before a
10-day ceasefire between the two countries is scheduled to take effect. Lebanese
state media reported a "massacre against civilians" in the town, noting that
rubble removal operations are ongoing, while the health ministry said its toll
is "preliminary and not final".The Ministry later announced that at least seven
people were killed and 24 wounded in Israeli strikes on the southern towns of
al-Zrariyeh and al-Saksakiyeh, also near Sidon.
One injured in Israel after shelling from Lebanon before
truce begins
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
Israeli rescue services said on Thursday that one person was seriously injured
in northern Israel after shelling from Lebanon that came less than two hours
before the start of a truce agreed with Lebanon. In the Karmiel area, rescuers
"are providing medical treatment on site to a 25-year-old man in serious
condition, who was injured by interception debris", Israel's emergency service,
Magen David Adom, said in a statement. Civil defense authorities had earlier
issued a rocket alert for the area.
Hezbollah MP says direct negotiations with Israel a 'grave
error'
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
Hezbollah lawmaker Hussein Hajj Hassan told AFP on Thursday that the Lebanese
government's decision to hold direct negotiations with Israel was a "grave
error", urging authorities to stop making concessions to Israel and the United
States. Israel and Lebanon agreed on Tuesday to begin direct talks following a
landmark meeting between the Israeli and Lebanese ambassadors to the United
States, weeks after Hezbollah pulled Lebanon into the Middle East war with
rocket fire at Israel in support of its backer Iran. "Direct negotiations with
the enemy are a grave sin and a grave error," Hajj Hassan said from his
parliamentary office. U.S. President Donald Trump said the Lebanese and Israeli
"leaders" would speak on Thursday, but President Joseph Aoun's office has not
confirmed the call, stressing the importance of a ceasefire before any direct
negotiations. An official source told AFP that Aoun had rejected a U.S. request
for a direct phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on
Thursday. Hajj Hassan said direct talks serve "no interest for the country or
its citizens... so how can there be contact at the level Trump mentioned?"He
criticized the government for agreeing to negotiations before securing a
ceasefire in Lebanon. "If they are unable to uphold a single condition called a
ceasefire, how will they negotiate with the Zionist entity (Israel) under
American auspices?" he said. The Lebanese government "insists on reaching a
ceasefire through the Israelis and the Americans... and not through Iran," he
said.
Israel has been carrying out huge strikes on Lebanon and a ground invasion in
the country's south, while Washington and Tehran have been at odds on whether a
fragile Middle East ceasefire applies to Lebanon. Hajj Hassan accused Lebanese
officials of refusing to let the country be part of a regional ceasefire due to
"unjustified blind hatred of Iran".He urged Lebanese authorities to halt "this
series of useless concessions... to a treacherous and cunning enemy, and to a
hypocritical, deceitful, evasive and lying America.".l Iran is Hezbollah's main
backer, and for decades has supplied the group with money and weapons. On
Thursday, Iran's parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf told his Lebanese
counterpart and Hezbollah ally Nabih Berri that "for us, a ceasefire in Lebanon
is just as important as a ceasefire in Iran."
What have Lebanon and Israel agreed to?
Naharnet/April 16/2026
Lebanon and Israel have agreed to observe a 10-day ceasefire that begins at
midnight Beirut time, the United States said. Below is the full text of the
statement that was agreed to by the Government of Israel and Government of
Lebanon, as published by the U.S. State Department:"Following productive direct
talks on April 14 between the governments of the Republic of Lebanon
(hereinafter “Lebanon”) and the State of Israel (hereinafter “Israel”), brokered
by the United States of America, Lebanon and Israel have reached an
understanding in which both nations will work to create conditions conducive to
lasting peace between the two countries, full recognition of each other’s
sovereignty and territorial integrity, and establishing genuine security along
their shared border, while preserving Israel’s inherent right to self-defense.
Both countries recognize the significant challenges faced by the Lebanese state
from non-state armed groups, which undermine Lebanon’s sovereignty and threaten
regional stability. Both countries understand that those groups’ activities must
be curtailed, such that the only forces authorized to bear arms in Lebanon will
be the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), Internal Security Forces, Directorate of
General Security, General Directorate of State Security, Lebanese Customs and
Municipal Police (hereinafter “Lebanon’s security forces”). Israel and Lebanon
affirm that the two countries are not at war and commit to engaging in
good-faith direct negotiations, facilitated by the United States, with the
objective of achieving a comprehensive agreement that ensures lasting security,
stability, and peace between the two countries.To that end, the United States
understands the following:
Israel and Lebanon will implement a cessation of hostilities beginning on April
16, 2026, at 17:00 EST, for an initial period of ten days, as a gesture of
goodwill by the Government of Israel, intended to enable good-faith negotiations
toward a permanent security and peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon. This
initial period may be extended by mutual agreement between Lebanon and Israel if
progress is demonstrated in the negotiations and as Lebanon effectively
demonstrates its ability to assert its sovereignty. Israel shall preserve its
right to take all necessary measures in self-defense, at any time, against
planned, imminent, or ongoing attacks. This shall not be impeded by the
cessation of hostilities. Besides this, it will not carry out any offensive
military operations against Lebanese targets, including civilian, military, and
other state targets, in the territory of Lebanon by land, air, and sea. From
April 16, 2026, at 17:00 EST, forward, with international support, the
Government of Lebanon will take meaningful steps to prevent Hezbollah and all
other rogue non-state armed groups in the territory of Lebanon from carrying out
any attacks, operations, or hostile activities against Israeli targets. All
parties recognize Lebanon’s security forces as having exclusive responsibility
for Lebanon’s sovereignty and national defense; no other country or group has
claim to be the guarantor of Lebanon’s sovereignty. Israel and Lebanon request
that the United States facilitate further direct negotiations between the two
countries with the objective of resolving all remaining issues, including
demarcation of the international land boundary, with a view to concluding a
comprehensive agreement that ensures lasting security, stability, and peace
between the two countries. The United States understands that the above
commitments will be accepted by Israel and Lebanon concurrently with this
announcement. These commitments are designed to create the conditions necessary
for good-faith negotiations toward enduring peace and security. The United
States further intends to lead international efforts to support Lebanon as a
component of its broader efforts to advance stability and prosperity in the
region."
Army, Berri and Hezbollah tell citizens not to return south
until truce starts
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
The Lebanese Army on Thursday urged people not to return to the country's
southern villages and towns before a ceasefire with Israel takes effect at
midnight local time (2100 GMT), and warned against approaching Israeli forces
there. In a statement, the Army Command also called on citizens to heed
instructions of Lebanese soldiers deployed in the south, where Israeli troops
have invaded across the border, and to beware of unexploded ordnance and
"suspicious objects."Hezbollah for its part called on residents to postpone
their return to the country's south, the Bekaa valley, and Beirut's southern
suburbs. "In the face of a treacherous enemy accustomed to violating covenants
and agreements, we call on you to be patient and to refrain from heading to the
targeted areas in the south, the Bekaa, and Beirut's southern suburbs, until the
situation becomes completely clear," the group said in a statement. The
Hezbollah-affiliated Islamic Health Committee, in a statement, also advised
people to wait "until you are certain that a ceasefire has been officially
declared and has come into effect" and urged people to "wait until morning"
before taking to the roads. Speaker Nabih Berri had earlier urged residents to
postpone heading to towns and villages "until the situation becomes clearer in
accordance with the ceasefire agreement."
EU chief welcomes Israel-Lebanon ceasefire as 'a relief'
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
European Commission president Ursula Von Der Leyen welcomed a 10-day ceasefire
declared Thursday between Israel and Lebanon that was announced by U.S.
President Donald Trump."This is a relief, as this conflict has already claimed
far too many lives," von der Leyen wrote on X, adding that it must lead to
"permanent peace"."Europe will continue to call for the full respect of
Lebanon's sovereignty and territorial integrity," she said.
KSA lauds 'role played by Aoun, Salam, Berri' in reaching ceasefire
Agence France Presse/April
16/2026
Saudi Arabia's foreign ministry on Thursday welcomed US President Donald Trump's
announcement of a ceasefire in Lebanon, where Israel has been fighting militant
group Hezbollah since last month. "The Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed the
Kingdom's welcome of the announcement by... Trump of a ceasefire in brotherly
Lebanon. It also commended the significant positive role played by President
Joseph Aoun of the Lebanese Republic, the Lebanese government headed by Prime
Minister Nawaf Salam and Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri," state news agency
SPA reported.
Lebanon Draws a Line in Washington
Now Lebanon/April 16/2026
For the first time in years, Lebanon showed up to the negotiating table not as a
battlefield, but as a state.
The talks held in Washington this week between Lebanese, American, and Israeli
officials may not have produced an immediate ceasefire. They were never meant
to. But their significance lies elsewhere, in what they revealed about Lebanon’s
political trajectory and, more importantly, in what they quietly dismantled.
What emerged from Washington is not a peace agreement, nor even a framework for
one. It is something more foundational: a clear political demarcation between
the Lebanese state and the Iranian project that has long claimed to act in its
name.
For decades, Hezbollah has blurred this distinction, presenting itself as both a
“resistance” movement and a legitimate arm of the Lebanese political system.
This ambiguity has been the cornerstone of its power. It allowed Iran to project
influence into the Levant while shielding itself behind the façade of Lebanese
sovereignty. It also provided Israel with a convenient justification: Lebanon,
the argument went, is indistinguishable from Hezbollah.
The Washington talks disrupt this equation.
Critics will point out that Lebanon entered these talks without leverage, that
negotiations under fire are inherently unequal, and that Israel’s insistence on
continuing military operations undermines the very premise of diplomacy. These
concerns are not unfounded. Lebanon today lacks the conventional tools of
pressure that states typically wield in such negotiations.
But this critique misses the point.
The decision to negotiate, even under adverse conditions, signals a break from
the logic that has governed the country for years: that war and peace are
determined outside the institutions of the state. By sitting across the table
from Israel, Lebanon is reclaiming a role it had effectively ceded—however
imperfectly—to an armed non-state actor.
This is why the talks matter.
Equally significant is the separation of tracks that these negotiations
reinforce. For years, Iran has sought to bind Lebanon’s fate to its broader
regional agenda, using Hezbollah as both proxy and bargaining chip. Whether in
nuclear negotiations or regional de-escalation efforts, Lebanon has often been
treated as an extension of Iranian policy rather than a sovereign actor.
Washington has now drawn a line.
The Lebanese file, as these talks suggest, will not be subsumed under Iran’s
negotiations. This deprives Tehran of one of its most effective tools: the
ability to escalate or de-escalate on the Lebanese front in service of its own
strategic objectives. It also places the responsibility for Lebanon’s future
squarely back where it belongs; with the Lebanese state. Hezbollah’s rejection
of the talks must be understood in this context. It is not merely a disagreement
over tactics or timing. It is a rejection of the very premise that the Lebanese
state has the authority to negotiate on behalf of the country.
And therein lies the crux of the crisis.
Hezbollah cannot accept a process that sidelines its military role because that
role is the foundation of its political relevance. Its arsenal—supplied,
financed, and directed by Iran—is not designed to defend Lebanon in any
conventional sense. It is designed to serve a regional strategy that often comes
at Lebanon’s expense. The consequences are visible today. Israeli strikes across
Lebanese territory are not occurring in a vacuum. They are part of a broader
confrontation with Iran, one in which Lebanon has been involuntarily enlisted.
The presence of Hezbollah fighters and infrastructure within civilian areas only
deepens this tragedy, exposing ordinary Lebanese to devastating consequences.
This is not resistance. It is entanglement.
There will be no “magic potion,” no single agreement that restores Lebanon
overnight. But there can be a trajectory. If sustained, this diplomatic track
can open the door to what Lebanon desperately needs: a ceasefire anchored in
state institutions, an eventual disarmament process tied to political reform,
and a reconstruction effort supported by regional and international partners,
particularly Arab states that have long been willing to assist, but only when
Lebanon demonstrates that it is governed as a state, not as a proxy
battleground.
In Washington, Lebanon took a small but decisive step in that direction. It
chose diplomacy over denial, statehood over ambiguity, and the difficult path of
sovereignty over the false comfort of armed “protection.”
For a country long held hostage by blurred lines, that choice alone is
significant.
Transcript: Israeli
Ambassador Michael Leiter on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,"CBC/April
12, 2026
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/michael-leiter-transcript-face-the-nation-04-12-2026/
Face The Nation Transcripts
Transcript: Israeli Ambassador Michael Leiter on "Face the Nation with Margaret
Brennan," April 12, 2026
The following is the transcript of the interview with Israeli Ambassador to the
U.S. Michael Leiter that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on
April 12, 2026.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We are joined now by Israel's ambassador to the United States,
Dr. Michael Leiter. Good morning and welcome back to the program.
DR. MICHAEL LEITER: Good morning, Margaret, good to be with you.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Israel and the US have been lockstep in this war to date. You
heard the vice president sort of leave the door open to diplomacy, but President
Trump also said this morning, the US is locked and loaded for an appropriate
moment. Is it your understanding that Israel and the US will hold fire until the
end of this two week ceasefire?
MICHAEL LEITER: We have to remember that the President has been relentless in
pursuing an end to this crisis through talks. That's the talks preceded the June
war, talks preceded epic fury, the talks are going on now, and I think that if
we can conclude this crisis with Iran, with this regime, this tyrannical regime,
that's pursuing nuclear weapons without going back into kinetic activity, it
would probably be best for everyone. The president continues to pursue that. But
right now they saw face to face, the vice president sat opposite this fellow,
Qalibaf, who is directly responsible for the murder of his own people just in
January, this past January, and just saw how obdurate and obstinate they are in
pursuit of nuclear weapons.
MARGARET BRENNAN: When you said the talks are still going on, are there - is
there any level of US-Iran contact at this point?
MICHAEL LEITER: Well, you know, the President gave the issue two weeks, and
we're just into the end of the first week, so there is another week left for the
potential for continued talks. We, we know the Iranians. We know this regime. We
don't think they're going anywhere, but it's important to give it a chance.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Vance said, we need to see Iran give affirmative commitment to
not seek a nuclear weapon, or the tools that would enable them to quickly
achieve a nuclear weapon. Is your understanding that the US position is zero
enrichment or are they still leaving the door open that Iran could have a
civil-civilian nuclear program for medical purposes?
MICHAEL LEITER: Civilian nuclear program doesn't entail enrichment. There are 57
countries with a civilian nuclear program that don't have enrichment.
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- But they want a little bit, you know that.
MICHAEL LEITER: No, no, if they have a little bit then they can have a lot to
move from 60% which they had, to 90%. Look, you don't build these production
plants deep underground if you're doing it for medical purposes, you have
nothing to hide. These people lie. We shouldn't be surprised when people who
murder their own also lie. This has been their pursuit. They've been chanting
for 47 years, death to America, death to Israel. That's their goal. Let's not --
(CROSSTALK BEGINS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- But we're negotiating with that same regime, right now -
MICHAEL LEITER: -- We're trying at the same time to add we're negotiating them -
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- The very same people.
(CROSSTALK ENDS)
MICHAEL LEITER: -- We're negotiating them, after eliminating their navy, after
eliminating their air force, after degrading their leadership. Hopefully they'll
come to their knees and say, we're surrendering.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the President has said the war is won. Your Prime
Minister said the work is not yet complete. Specifically, what part of Iran
still poses a military threat to Israel? Do you still consider it an existential
threat?
MICHAEL LEITER: Well, there are three things that we have to be concerned with
from the beginning. Number one, the pursuit of a nuclear weapon, if they go back
to that pursuit that concerns us --
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- They say they aren't --
MICHAEL LEITER: Number two, ballistic missiles. Okay, these ballistic missiles,
they promised, by the way, that they don't have a ballistic missile that could
reach Europe. They lied. We saw that they do.
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- You're talking about firing on Diego Garcia?
MICHAEL LEITER: The firing on Diego Garcia. They said it was limited to 2000
kilometers. We see now they've got 4000 kilometers. It's just a sprint to 8000
kilometers and to hit Chicago or 10 to fly to New Jersey. So that has
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- US intel says nine years.
MICHAEL LEITER: -- and proxy, well, our intel says less than nine years. Okay,
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- Yeah.
MICHAEL LEITER: And our Intel has been accurate on this from the very beginning.
Okay? Now it was clear we said that they're in a sprint to achieve nuclear
weapons. And Mr. Witkoff came back from the talks beforehand and said they came
in, they walked into negotiations, said, we've got 60% ready for 11 bombs. 11
bombs at 60% means that you got a week or two until you got 90% and weapon
grade. And the last thing Margaret, are the proxies. Okay, this isn't over until
there is a complete de-linkage between Iran and its proxies which have spread
death, mayhem and destruction around the Middle East.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to come back to that in regard to Hezbollah. But just
to finish what you're talking about with intelligence, there was this highly
detailed New York Times report this past week, I know you read it, extraordinary
journalism. That detailed this February 11 meeting where your prime minister
pitched President Trump on bombing Iran. It said the Israeli plan was to kill
the Ayatollah, done. Cripple Iran's ability to threaten its neighbors, spur a
popular uprising in Iran, and then conduct regime change, leaving in place a
secular leader. Obviously, all those goals were not achieved. Can you declare an
end to the war without achieving that checklist?
MICHAEL LEITER: First of all, all of those goals have not been achieved, yet.
This is a process. This isn't instant soup, number one. Number two, I was in the
room at that meeting. The journalists who wrote that article were not and
apparently they received the information second, third hand, there's an awful
lot in that article which simply isn't true. Which is a narrative that's being
created, interesting narrative, but not accurate. So I'd be very careful about
quoting from that particular article.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, specifically, what, what did they get wrong? Because
they say your intelligence services, the Mossad argued the Iranian regime would
be so weak it could not choke off the Strait of Hormuz. That was wrong. Iran
wouldn't have--
MICHAEL LEITER: No, no we didn't argue that. We argued the potential that we've
got to work towards that, nothing was presented as a fact, that if we do this,
this will be the outcome. It's not science, politics is not science, military
operations are not science. We presented the case that this is what we think
should be done. The president makes a decision. This whole thing about the prime
minister coming in and dragging the president into this, it's - all you know for
publicity purposes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Did Mossad believe that there would be protests that would
overthrow the regime and that Kurdish fighters would enter through the north?
MICHAEL LEITER: The Mossad thought that, as we saw in January, hundreds of
thousands and millions of people rise up, the potential for that happening again
is even greater now, and we still think it's very great. We still think we
could, that could materialize over the next couple of months but there's no
guarantee -
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- Then why negotiate with the same regime that is suppressing
those people?
MICHAEL LEITER: Well, you can negotiate
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- Is Israel really really supportive of this diplomacy?
MICHAEL LEITER: You can negotiate - we're supportive of the president and his
efforts. Okay, we've been in lockstep from the beginning in the planning, in the
implementation, and we're going to end this thing together as well. So we're
completely supportive of the president's efforts, both diplomatically and
militarily.
MARGARET BRENNAN: On the proxies, the Jerusalem Post today is writing that
Israel's war in Lebanon is the price to pay for Iran reopening Hormuz. The
Israeli offensive against Hezbollah, and for our viewers, they are a political
party in Lebanon and they also are Iran's strongest militia and proxy force.
They've complicated things here. The Trump administration is holding talks
Tuesday in Washington. You'll be at the table with the ambassador from Lebanon.
Hezbollah is not part of these talks. In that lead up, is Israel going to pause,
reduce the strikes on Lebanon?
MICHAEL LEITER: If I can, a point of correction, Hezbollah is a terrorist
organization
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- It is.
MICHAEL LEITER: -- which is also a political party. It's not a political party
which also has a terrorist wing. They are a terrorist organization. They're a
proxy of Iran,
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- Yes.
MICHAEL LEITER: -- which has an agenda of destroying the state of Israel,
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- Yes.
MICHAEL LEITER: -- And they fire missiles into our towns and villages
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- Yes.
MICHAEL LEITER: And we have to respond. Now, we want to negotiate with Lebanon.
Lebanon and Israel can live in peace tomorrow. I believe, you know, we had this
initial phone call on Friday. It was a conference call, myself -
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- You and the Lebanese ambassador,
MICHAEL LEITER: The Lebanese ambassador, the US Ambassador to Beirut, all
moderated by the State Department official Mike Needham. It was a great
conversation. And the thing we all agreed upon, that, if there was, if we just
put Hezbollah on the side and just Israel and Lebanon negotiate peace. Two
months, three months, we've got a complete peace agreement.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Let me just follow up, you said Israel has to respond. That's
different when it comes to responding to a strike from Hezbollah versus the kind
of bombing that we saw this past week, particularly on Wednesday. The air
strikes killed more than 350 people that day, a third of them, women and
children and the elderly according to the Lebanese health ministry. The vice
president said Israel had agreed to check itself with these strikes. And the
President said he spoke with Bibi, your prime minister, and he said he's going
to low-key it. Can you explain what low key bombing means? Is this a reduced
cadence and volume of strikes from Wednesday. What exactly did the US and Israel
agree to?
MICHAEL LEITER: Reduce cadence, up cadence. Operational issues aren't discussed
on Sunday morning on television.
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- Well the president did
MICHAEL LEITER: -- Well, what we, we discussed is that we're going to be in
tandem with the president's efforts in the gulf, and we support the president's
efforts. Right now, we are pursuing those who are shooting missiles against our
civilians, and the operation Wednesday was targeted against operation centers of
Hezbollah. Now, what they do?
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- You dispute those Lebanese Government figures?
MICHAEL LEITER: Absolutely. Oh, of course, it's like Hamas releasing figures
from Gaza, their health ministry,
MARGARET BRENNAN: -- But you're negotiating with the Lebanese government
MICHAEL LEITER: Absolutely, absolutely. But the, sometimes, there's this attempt
to paint us as, you know, going after civilians. We're going after in a targeted
fashion, the terrorist infrastructure. That's what we focus on. Now what they do
Margaret, is they put their operation centers, their terrorist centers, among
civilians. Now we tell them to get out. They don't always get out, but we do
what we can. Hamas does this in Gaza by building their bases within civilian
centers. Hezbollah does it, and we saw the other day where Tehran sent their
civilians out to the bridges and the - energy plants so they wouldn't be, this
is a crime against humanity.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, you have your own diplomacy on Tuesday, we will be
watching for that and what happens. Thank you for your time this morning.
MICHAEL LEITER: Thank you
MARGARET BRENNAN: Be right back.
Lebanon: From 'Switzerland of the
Middle East' to Iran's Puppet
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/April 16, 2026
Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem dismissed the talks as "futile" and
reaffirmed that his organization will not disarm.
Wafiq Safa, a senior Hezbollah official, told The Associated Press that his
organization will refuse to abide by any agreements that may result from the
direct Lebanon-Israel talks: "[A]s for the outcomes of this negotiation between
Lebanon and the Israeli enemy, we are not interested in or concerned with them
at all.... We are not bound by what they agree to."
These statements are not simply rhetoric. They are a proclamation that
Hezbollah, not the Lebanese government, will determine whether Lebanon goes to
war or pursues peace.
Lebanon has effectively become a protectorate of Iran. The consequences for the
Lebanese people have been devastating.
Lebanon has effectively become a protectorate of Iran. The consequences for the
Lebanese people have been devastating. Hezbollah has dragged Lebanon into two
calamitous confrontations with Israel in just the last three years.
This week, as the Lebanese government was preparing to participate in
US-mediated talks with Israel in Washington, DC, Hezbollah, the Iran-backed
terrorist organization, delivered its verdict: No negotiations, no compromise.
Only war.
The talks, which took place on April 14, aim to ensure "long-term security of
Israel's northern border" while supporting Lebanon's efforts to "reclaim full
sovereignty over its territory."
In a televised speech, Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem dismissed the
talks as "futile" and reaffirmed that his organization will not disarm.
Referring to statements by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that
Hezbollah's weapons must be dismantled and that Israel wants a real peace
agreement with Lebanon, Qassem declared:
"We will not rest, stop or surrender. We will let the battlefield speak for
itself. We will remain in the field until our last breath."
Qassem added:
"We reject negotiations with the usurping entity... We call for a historic and
heroic stance by canceling this negotiating meeting." Wafiq Safa, a senior
Hezbollah official, told The Associated Press that his organization will refuse
to abide by any agreements that may result from the direct Lebanon-Israel talks:
"[A]s for the outcomes of this negotiation between Lebanon and the Israeli
enemy, we are not interested in or concerned with them at all.... We are not
bound by what they agree to."
These statements are not simply rhetoric. They are a proclamation that
Hezbollah, not the Lebanese government, will determine whether Lebanon goes to
war or pursues peace.
Lebanon today bears little resemblance to the country it once was.
Before the 1975-1990 civil war, Lebanon was known as the "Switzerland of the
Middle East." During the 1960s and 1970s, it enjoyed significant prosperity,
strict banking secrecy laws, and a reputation as a safe, neutral financial hub
for regional and international capital. Its banking sector was among the most
sophisticated in the Arab world. It attracted foreign investment and established
Beirut as one of the world's leading financial centers.
French journalist Julien Ricour-Brasseur wrote in Middle East Eye in 2021:
"Lebanese citizens unwilling to attempt the desperate crossing of the
Mediterranean are flocking to public offices to obtain visas to any possible
destination. They are looking to somewhere beyond the sea, where the glow of
green is beckoning, the green light of hope - and the dollar...."The story of
Lebanon could open like this: Once upon a time, there was a nation known as the
Switzerland of the Middle East. And frankly, the story ends there."
Lebanon was also distinguished by its sectarian diversity and religious
pluralism, a place where multiple Muslim and Christian communities coexisted
within a relatively open political system. Its geography, combining snow-capped
mountains suitable for winter sports with a Mediterranean coastline, made it a
major tourism destination. At its peak, Lebanon enjoyed one of the highest GDP
per capita levels in the region and was regarded as a rare oasis of stability in
a turbulent Middle East. This Lebanon, however, no longer exists.
Decades of civil war, corruption, and political paralysis have been a main
driving force behind its decline. Yet Hezbollah's emergence as an armed state
within the state, and its repeated wars with Israel on behalf of its patrons in
Iran, are key factors that have contributed to Lebanon's collapse.
Lebanon is currently a failing state. In 2022, the United Nations wrote:
"The destructive actions of Lebanon's political and financial leaders are
responsible for forcing most of the country's population into poverty, in
violation of international human rights law, the UN Special Rapporteur on
extreme poverty and human rights, Olivier De Schutter, said in a report
published today...
"'Impunity, corruption, and structural inequality have been baked into a venal
political and economic system designed to fail those at the bottom, but it
doesn't have to be that way,' said De Schutter, an independent expert appointed
by the UN Human Rights Council.
"'The political establishment knew about the looming cataclysm for years but did
little to avert it. Well-connected individuals even moved their money out of the
country...'
"'Central Bank policies, in particular, led to a downward spiral of the
currency, the devastation of the economy, the wiping out of people's lifetime
savings and to plunging the population into poverty.'"Worse, Lebanon has
effectively become a protectorate of Iran. The consequences for the Lebanese
people have been devastating.
Hezbollah has dragged Lebanon into two calamitous confrontations with Israel in
just the last three years. The first took place after the October 7, 2023
Hamas-led invasion of southern Israel, when Hezbollah opened fire on Israel from
Lebanon as a "support front" for its terrorist allies in the Gaza Strip.
The second war Hezbollah launched against Israel came after Israeli and American
strikes against Iranian targets in June 2025. Hezbollah again initiated rocket
and drone attacks on Israel in "solidarity" with the Iranian regime. Both rounds
of fighting brought renewed destruction, displacement, and economic collapse on
the Lebanese people.
The pattern is now clear: Hezbollah chooses death and destruction, and the
Lebanese people pay the price. Created, funded, and armed by the Iranian regime,
Hezbollah continues to operate as Iran's most powerful proxy in the Middle East.
Its leaders pledge allegiance not to Lebanon, but to mullahs in Iran. Its
weapons are not under the control of the Lebanese state. Its decisions on war
and peace are dictated by Iran's regional strategy rather than Lebanon's
national interests.
While not formal peace negotiations, the meeting in Washington this week
signaled a possible step toward more structured dialogue and normalization
between Israel and Lebanon.
Peace between Lebanon and Israel would, above all, benefit the Lebanese people.
It would stabilize Lebanon, open the door to economic recovery, attract
investment, and begin reversing decades of state collapse. More significantly,
it would restore to Lebanon what Hezbollah has taken away: the ability to act as
a sovereign state pursuing its own national interests.
The Hezbollah leader's call to cancel the Washington talks reflects the
terrorist organization's fear that diplomacy could succeed and that Lebanon
might begin to break free from the grip of the Iranian regime. For the Lebanese
people, peace with Israel could offer something more basic: a chance to reclaim
their country from the cycle of war, death and destruction. Until that reality
changes, Lebanon will remain trapped not only in conflict with Israel, but in a
deeper crisis of sovereignty, identity, and survival.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22446/lebanon-puppet-hezbollah-iran
**Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.
**Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter)
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No
part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied
or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
The case for a Lebanese
referendum on Israel peace
Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab News/April 16, 2026
I strongly agree with Marco Rubio’s opening statement during this week’s
historic negotiations between Lebanon and Israel: Hezbollah’s role in Lebanon
and beyond must be brought to an end. The Lebanese people are victims of
Hezbollah and Iranian aggression.
The Israel-Lebanon negotiations in Washington are still at an early stage and
the goal should be to achieve a long-term security arrangement and peace, rather
than a short-term ceasefire that brings us back to the same point in a few
months or years. This means, for the benefit of the Lebanese before anyone else,
disarming Hezbollah.
These first direct diplomatic engagements between the two sides in decades
remain fragile and highly contested, even in Lebanon. While the Lebanese
delegation is understandably looking to halt hostilities immediately and then
deal with Hezbollah in order to avoid any more destabilization, the US is
clearly looking to achieve a long-term agreement. And this is the right process.
While I am still optimistic about the process, I cannot help but think about
multiple instances of negotiations, especially between Israel and the
Palestinian Authority, where all the points were discussed and agreed upon, only
to hear the Palestinian leadership state that this solution would not be
accepted by the people and hence it was dropped. This has not worked to the
advantage of the Palestinians. The infighting has increased and weakened them
even more, reaching the catastrophic levels we witness today.
This is why a referendum on these negotiations is a necessity. Despite my strong
belief that Hezbollah should surrender its arsenal and that a stable peace
should be achieved with Israel, is it fair to ask if most Lebanese feel the
same? Do they really want peace and do they trust their government to achieve
it? Hence, to avoid the mistakes of the Palestinians, this should be put to the
people.
These first direct diplomatic engagements between the two sides in decades
remain fragile and highly contested. A clear referendum on peace with Israel
should be presented. Despite the war, Lebanon is today in a better situation
than the Palestinians and can still conduct this vote. One may ask: why now?
Simply because a mandate from the people prior to any agreement would solidify
the Lebanese stance. The main risk being that if an agreement were to be
reached, we would have an unrepresentative group like Hezbollah and its allies
trying to torpedo it. Even if at this stage the process of the negotiations are
still exploratory, the objective should be to reach a concrete agreement and to
resolve all major political and military disagreements. There cannot be a
half-baked solution that only temporarily stops the fighting. I am confident
that the Lebanese would overwhelmingly vote for peace and stability, as this is
the only way to move toward a better phase for the country. A negative vote
would mean that Lebanon was stuck and would probably not be able to disarm
Hezbollah anytime soon. In this scenario, the Lebanese should be ready to become
a part of the dying Iranian axis. So, this would be, in fact, a choice between
life and prosperity versus evil and destruction. Some would argue that this vote
was a question of demographics and perhaps they are right, but we can no longer
live with this hypocrisy and the people need to take responsibility.
This is not something new. The EU was built with the use of such votes. In
France, the referendum on the Maastricht Treaty in 1992 aimed to legitimize
deeper European integration, including the creation of the EU and the path
toward a single currency, by transferring significant national sovereignty to
supranational institutions. The country’s 2005 referendum on the European
Constitution, which sought to simplify and consolidate EU treaties into a single
constitutional text to improve clarity and institutional efficiency, saw a
victory for the “no” campaign, slowing the integration process.
Why now? Simply because a mandate from the people prior to any agreement would
solidify the Lebanese stance.
Similarly, the 1992 Swiss referendum on the European Economic Area aimed at
deciding whether Switzerland should more closely integrate with the EU single
market. It was narrowly rejected, meaning the country ultimately chose a more
independent, bilateral approach.
Votes can go either way, as we witnessed during the UK’s Brexit referendum of
2016, which resulted in a historic decision to leave the EU, fundamentally
reshaping the country’s political and economic relationship with Europe. The
same process has been used for constitutional referendums as well as
independence votes. Lebanon probably needs both this referendum on an agreement
with Israel and a constitutional one, but the latter is another story.
Another reason I would like to see this vote take place is that it would let the
Lebanese decide whether they agree with what Rubio said — that the country is a
victim of an Iranian occupation, which followed the Syrian one, and that
Hezbollah is an integral part of this evil force. If they voted no to peace, it
would mean that they disagreed and this would be an unfortunate scenario, as
there is little doubt it would give Hezbollah and its allies a green light for a
full takeover of the country. As the regime in Tehran is disintegrating, this
would not only be morally wrong but also the worst possible decision for peace
and the stability of future generations.It is high time to take responsibility
and give a strong mandate so that the state, not an organization, benefits from
unity during what are clearly going to be difficult but imperative negotiations.
**Khaled Abou Zahr is the founder of SpaceQuest Ventures, a space-focused
investment platform. He is CEO of EurabiaMedia and editor of Al-Watan Al-Arabi.
Links to several
important news websites
National News Agency (Lebanon)
https://www.nna-leb.gov.lb/ar
Nidaa Al Watan
https://www.nidaalwatan.com/
MTV Lebanon
https://www.mtv.com.lb/
Voice of Lebanon
https://www.vdl.me/
Asas Media
https://asasmedia.com/
Naharnet
https://www.naharnet.com/
Al Markazia News Agency
https://almarkazia.com/ar
LBCI (English)
https://www.lbcgroup.tv/news/en
LBCI (Arabic)
https://www.lbcgroup.tv/news/ar
Janoubia Website
https://www.lbcgroup.tv/news/ar
Kataeb Party Official Website
https://www.kataeb.org
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on April 16-17/2026
Trump says
Iran has agreed to hand over its enriched uranium supply
AFP, Washington/16 April/2026
US President Donald Trump said Thursday that Iran has agreed to hand over its
store of enriched uranium and that the two sides were “close” to a peace deal to
end the war that has engulfed the Middle East. The United States had earlier
threatened to resume airstrikes on the Islamic Republic and maintain a naval
blockade of its ports if Tehran refused to accept a deal to solve the conflict
that broke out on February 28. At the same time, on another front in the
conflict, US President Donald Trump announced that Israel and Lebanon had agreed
to a 10-day truce starting on Thursday and said he expected the two countries’
leaders at the White House in “four or five days.”Hezbollah lawmaker Ibrahim al-Moussawi
told AFP the Iran-backed Lebanese armed group - which has been fighting Israel
since early March - would respect the ceasefire if Israeli attacks on the
militants stopped. The Lebanese and Israeli prime ministers welcomed the
ceasefire, which came days after the US and Iran agreed a separate truce and as
Pakistan pursued diplomatic efforts to arrange a new round of talks between foes
Washington and Tehran. Iranian state television on Thursday showed Pakistan’s
army chief Asim Munir meeting Iran’s speaker of parliament, Mohammad Bagher
Ghalibaf, who led the Iranian delegation at the first round of talks last week,
which ended without a deal.The Iranian ambassador to the UN later said Tehran
was “cautiously optimistic” about its negotiations on ending hostilities with
the US and expressed hope for a “meaningful outcome.”US Defense Secretary
Hegseth had said Thursday: “If Iran chooses poorly, then they will have a
blockade and bombs dropping on infrastructure, power and energy.”Trump later
told reporters that “there’s a very good chance we’re going to make a deal” with
Tehran, adding that he would consider going to Pakistan to sign an agreement.
“They’ve agreed to give us back the nuclear dust,” he said, using his name for
the enriched uranium stockpile that the United States says could be used to
build nuclear weapons.
No nuclear weapons
Trump has insisted that any deal with Iran must permanently bar the Islamic
Republic from acquiring a nuclear weapon. He launched the war claiming that
Tehran was rushing to complete an atomic bomb, an assertion not backed by the UN
nuclear watchdog. Washington has reportedly sought a 20-year suspension of
Iran’s uranium enrichment program, while Tehran has proposed suspending nuclear
activity for five years - an offer US officials rejected. Tehran insists its
nuclear program is for civilian purposes. Its foreign ministry said Wednesday
that Iran’s right to enrich uranium was “indisputable,” although the level of
enrichment was “negotiable.”Also on Thursday, the US House of Representatives
rejected a Democratic effort to curb Trump’s authority to wage war in Iran. The
vote came as unease over the six-week conflict continued to spread on Capitol
Hill, with lawmakers wary of rising costs, an unclear endgame and the risk of a
wider war.
Trump: Iran has agreed to
hand over its enriched uranium supply
AFP/April 16, 2026
WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump said Thursday that Iran has agreed to hand
over its store of enriched uranium and that the two sides were “close” to a
peace deal to end the war that has engulfed the Middle East. The United States
had earlier threatened to resume airstrikes on the Islamic republic and maintain
a naval blockade of its ports if Tehran refused to accept a deal to solve the
conflict that broke out on February 28. At the same time, on another front in
the conflict, US President Donald Trump announced that Israel and Lebanon had
agreed to a 10-day truce starting on Thursday and said he expected the two
countries’ leaders at the White House in “four or five days.”The ceasefire came
days after the US and Iran agreed a separate truce and as Pakistan pursued
diplomatic efforts to arrange a new round of talks between foes Washington and
Tehran.Iranian state television on Thursday showed Pakistan’s powerful army
chief Asim Munir meeting Iran’s speaker of parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf,
who led the Iranian delegation at the first round of talks last week, which
ended without a deal. The Iranian ambassador to the UN later said Tehran was
“cautiously optimistic” about its negotiations on ending hostilities with the US
and expressed hope for a “meaningful outcome.”US Defense Secretary Hegseth had
said Thursday: “If Iran chooses poorly, then they will have a blockade and bombs
dropping on infrastructure, power and energy.” Trump later told reporters that
“there’s a very good chance we’re going to make a deal” with Tehran, adding that
he would consider going to Pakistan to sign an agreement. “They’ve agreed to
give us back the nuclear dust,” he said, using his name for the enriched uranium
stockpile that the United States says could be used to build nuclear weapons.
No nuclear weapons
Trump has insisted that any deal with Iran must permanently bar the Islamic
republic from acquiring a nuclear weapon. He launched the war claiming that
Tehran was rushing to complete an atomic bomb, an assertion not backed by the UN
nuclear watchdog. Washington has reportedly sought a 20-year suspension of
Iran’s uranium enrichment program, while Tehran has proposed suspending nuclear
activity for five years — an offer US officials rejected. Tehran insists its
nuclear program is for civilian purposes. Its foreign ministry said Wednesday
that Iran’s right to enrich uranium was “indisputable,” although the level of
enrichment was “negotiable.”Also on Thursday, the US House of Representatives
rejected a Democratic effort to curb Trump’s authority to wage war in Iran. The
vote came as unease over the six-week conflict continued to spread on Capitol
Hill, with lawmakers wary of rising costs, an unclear endgame and the risk of a
wider war.
‘Historic crossroads’
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt had told reporters on Wednesday
that further talks between the US and Iran “would very likely” be in the
Pakistani capital.Pakistani foreign ministry spokesman Tahir Andrabi said no
date had been set for the next round of talks. US Vice President JD Vance, who
led the first round, has said Iran is being offered a “grand bargain” to end the
war and address the decades-old dispute over Tehran’s nuclear program. Israel’s
defense minister Israel Katz said: “Iran is standing at a historic crossroads:
one path is renouncing the ways of terror and nuclear armament... in line with
the US proposal, the other leads to an abyss. “If the Iranian regime chooses the
second path, it will quickly discover there are even more painful targets than
those we have already struck.”Shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, through which
one-fifth of the world’s crude oil normally flows, has been disrupted by Iranian
forces since the US-Israeli offensive began and is now the focus of the US
blockade. Washington has sought to turn the screws on Tehran with a blockade of
its ports, with US Central Command claiming to have “completely halted economic
trade going into and out of Iran by sea.”CENTCOM said it had already turned back
13 vessels that tried to sail out of Iranian ports. Keeping up the pressure, the
United States slapped fresh sanctions on Iran’s oil industry on Wednesday, which
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said targeted “regime elites.” Unless
Washington relents, Iran’s armed forces “will not allow any exports or imports
to continue in the Arabian Gulf, the Sea of Oman and the Red Sea,” said the head
of the Iranian military’s central command center Ali Abdollahi. The military
adviser to Iran’s supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei also warned that Iran would
sink American ships in the strait if the United States decides to “police” the
key shipping channel.
Trump says Iran agrees to hand over enriched uranium,
believes deal 'close'
Agence France Presse/16 April/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump said Thursday that Iran has agreed to hand over its
store of enriched uranium and that the two sides were "close" to a peace deal to
end the war that has engulfed the Middle East. The United States had earlier
threatened to resume airstrikes on the Islamic republic and maintain a naval
blockade of its ports if Tehran refused to accept a deal to solve the conflict
that broke out on February 28. Iranian state television on Thursday showed
Pakistan's powerful army chief Asim Munir meeting Iran's speaker of parliament,
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who led the Iranian delegation at the first round of
talks last week, which ended without a deal. The Iranian ambassador to the U.N.
later said Tehran was "cautiously optimistic" about its negotiations on ending
hostilities with the US and expressed hope for a "meaningful outcome". U.S.
Defense Secretary Hegseth had said Thursday: "If Iran chooses poorly, then they
will have a blockade and bombs dropping on infrastructure, power and energy."
Trump later told reporters that "there's a very good chance we're going to make
a deal" with Tehran, adding that he would consider going to Pakistan to sign an
agreement. "They've agreed to give us back the nuclear dust," he said, using his
name for the enriched uranium stockpile that the United States says could be
used to build nuclear weapons.
No nuclear weapons -
Trump has insisted that any deal with Iran must permanently bar the Islamic
republic from acquiring a nuclear weapon. He launched the war claiming that
Tehran was rushing to complete an atomic bomb, an assertion not backed by the
U.N. nuclear watchdog. Washington has reportedly sought a 20-year suspension of
Iran's uranium enrichment program, while Tehran has proposed suspending nuclear
activity for five years -- an offer U.S. officials rejected. Tehran insists its
nuclear program is for civilian purposes. Its foreign ministry said Wednesday
that Iran's right to enrich uranium was "indisputable", although the level of
enrichment was "negotiable". Also on Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives
rejected a Democratic effort to curb Trump's authority to wage war in Iran. The
vote came as unease over the six-week conflict continued to spread on Capitol
Hill, with lawmakers wary of rising costs, an unclear endgame and the risk of a
wider war.
'Historic crossroads' -
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt had told reporters on Wednesday
that further talks between the U.S. and Iran "would very likely" be in the
Pakistani capital. Pakistani foreign ministry spokesman Tahir Andrabi said no
date had been set for the next round of talks. U.S. Vice President JD Vance, who
led the first round, has said Iran is being offered a "grand bargain" to end the
war and address the decades-old dispute over Tehran's nuclear program. Israel's
defense minister Israel Katz said: "Iran is standing at a historic crossroads:
one path is renouncing the ways of terror and nuclear armament... in line with
the U.S. proposal, the other leads to an abyss. "If the Iranian regime chooses
the second path, it will quickly discover there are even more painful targets
than those we have already struck."Shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, through
which one-fifth of the world's crude oil normally flows, has been disrupted by
Iranian forces since the U.S.-Israeli offensive began and is now the focus of
the U.S. blockade. Washington has sought to turn the screws on Tehran with a
blockade of its ports, with U.S. Central Command claiming to have "completely
halted economic trade going into and out of Iran by sea."
CENTCOM said it had already turned back 13 vessels that tried to sail out of
Iranian ports. Keeping up the pressure, the United States slapped fresh
sanctions on Iran's oil industry on Wednesday, which Treasury Secretary Scott
Bessent said targeted "regime elites".Unless Washington relents, Iran's armed
forces "will not allow any exports or imports to continue in the Persian Gulf,
the Sea of Oman and the Red Sea," said the head of the Iranian military's
central command center Ali Abdollahi. The military advisor to Iran's supreme
leader Mojtaba Khamenei also warned that Iran would sink American ships in the
strait if the United States decides to "police" the key shipping channel.
Israel vows 'even more painful' strikes, if Iran refuses US
proposal
Agence France Presse/16 April/2026
Israel's defense minister warned Iran on Thursday against rejecting a U.S.
proposal focused on renouncing "nuclear armament" and vowed to stage "even more
painful" strikes on new targets if it did so. "Iran is standing at a historic
crossroads: one path is renouncing the ways of terror and nuclear armament... in
line with the US proposal, the other leads to an abyss," Israel Katz said. "If
the Iranian regime chooses the second path, it will quickly discover there are
even more painful targets than those we have already struck," he said.
Senate rejects effort to halt arms sales to Israel, but
most Democrats vote to block them
Associated Press/16 April/2026
More than three dozen Democrats supported an effort by Vermont Sen. Bernie
Sanders on Wednesday to block arms sales to Israel, signaling a growing
discontent in the party with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the wars in
Gaza and Iran.
The two resolutions to block U.S. sales of bulldozers and bombs to Israel were
opposed by all Republicans and rejected 40-59 and 36-63. But Sanders has
repeatedly forced votes on the issue to put pressure on his colleagues — both
Democrats and Republicans — to oppose Netanyahu's regime. Similar resolutions
forced by Sanders in 2024 and 2025 were also rejected, but the number of
Democrats voting with the Vermont Independent has more than doubled in less than
two years amid Israeli campaigns in Gaza, Iran and Lebanon and a stepped-up
campaign by party activists who have increasingly seen support for Israel as a
litmus test for support. "It's clear that Democrats are beginning to listen to
the average American who is sick and tired of spending billions of dollars to
support Netanyahu's horrific wars when people in this country can't afford
housing or health care," Sanders said after the vote. Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly,
D-Ariz., voted in support of the two resolutions after opposing some of Sanders'
previous efforts. In a speech just before the vote, Kelly said that "the
reckless decisions being made by Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump"
led him to his decision, which he said he did not take lightly. "Under Prime
Minister Netanyahu's government, we've seen an expanded war in Lebanon that is
putting innocent Lebanese civilians at risk, and ongoing violence against
Palestinians and their homes being demolished in the West Bank," Kelly said.
"All of this has undermined the path forward for peace."
Among the Democrats voting against the resolutions were Senate Minority Leader
Chuck Schumer and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. Nearly 100 protesters were arrested
during a demonstration on Monday calling on the two New York senators to vote in
favor of Sanders' two measures. Led by the antiwar group Jewish Voice for Peace,
the crowd of hundreds initially attempted to stage a sit-in inside the senators'
offices as they said they were abetting Israel's intensifying attacks in Lebanon
and the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. But they were blocked and many of the
protesters were arrested. "The majority of Americans and New Yorkers want a
resolution to what the Israeli government is doing," said the group's
communications director, Sonya Meyerson-Knox. Democrats supported a resolution
earlier on Wednesday to halt Trump's war in Iran, though that was also rejected,
47-52. Democratic Sen. Chris Coons, a Democrat who voted against Sanders' Israel
resolutions, said he voted to end the Iran war but did not want to abandon
Israel. "My votes should be taken neither as an endorsement of the actions of
the Netanyahu government nor as an abandonment of the state of Israel, the
Jewish people, or the US-Israel relationship," Coons said in a statement after
the vote. Republicans said the vote could hurt U.S. efforts in the Iran war.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim Risch, R-Idaho, said the
resolutions could embolden Iran and "send the message that the U.S. is prepared
to leave our ally Israel vulnerable." "They will not help the United States of
America," Risch said ahead of the vote.
US forces ready to strike Iran’s power plants, energy industry if ordered:
Hegseth
Reuters/16 April ,2026
The US naval blockade of Iran is just an example of “polite” behavior during the
ongoing ceasefire and US forces are ready to strike Iran’s power plants and
energy industry if ordered, Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth said on Thursday.
Standing alongside two of the US military’s most senior officers, Hegseth said
Iran needs to choose wisely as it prepares for negotiations with the United
States. “We are reloading with more power than ever before, and better
intelligence,” Hegseth said at a Pentagon news briefing. “We are locked and
loaded on your critical dual-use infrastructure, on your remaining power
generation, and on your energy industry. We’d rather not have to do
it.”President Donald Trump’s administration expressed optimism on Wednesday
about reaching a deal to end the Iran war, while also warning of increasing
economic pressure against Iran if it remains defiant. That has included a
blockade of Iran that went into effect on Monday, with the US military forcing
13 ships to turn around. Trump is hoping the blockade will force Iran to accept
US terms for ending a war, which was launched by the United States and Israel on
February 28, including opening up the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway through which
roughly one fifth of global oil and gas exports ordinarily transits. Trump has
said that was also a condition of the ceasefire due to expire next week. Hegseth,
in comments aimed at the Iranian leadership, said that the blockade “is the
polite way that this can go.” General Dan Caine, chairman of the US military’s
Joint Chiefs of Staff, said American forces are “ready to resume major combat
operations at literally a moment’s notice.”US Navy ships would pursue any
Iranian-flagged vessel or any vessel attempting to provide material support to
Iran, Caine told the briefing. Ships trying to break the blockade would be
intercepted and warned that “if you do not comply with this blockade, we will
use force,” and enforcement would occur inside Iran’s territorial seas and in
international waters, Caine said. No ships have been boarded so far, Caine said.
The US military has widened its blockade to include cargoes deemed contraband,
and any vessels suspected of trying to reach Iranian territory will be “subject
to belligerent right to visit and search,” the US Navy said in an advisory on
Thursday. “These vessels, regardless of location, are subject to visit, board,
search, and seizure,” the Navy said in an updated advisory. Contraband items
listed included weapons, weapons systems, ammunition, nuclear materials, crude
and refined oil products as well as iron, steel and aluminum.
Pakistani army chief in Iran to discuss new round of US
talks
Agence France Presse/16 April/2026
The influential chief of Pakistan's armed forces visited Iran to meet the head
of Tehran's negotiators on Thursday, as Washington considers agreeing to another
round of peace talks in Islamabad. Iranian state television showed Field Marshal
Asim Munir meeting Iran's speaker of parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who
led the Iranian delegation at the first U.S.-Iran meeting in Pakistan last week,
which ended without a deal. Earlier, in Washington, White House Press Secretary
Karoline Leavitt had told reporters that further talks "would very likely" be in
the Pakistani capital. "Those discussions are being had," Leavitt said, and "we
feel good about the prospects of a deal." Pakistani foreign ministry spokesman
Tahir Andrabi said no date had been set for the next round of talks. "Our role
as a mediator and facilitator did not stop when the Islamabad talks, this last
round, concluded -- it continued," he said. The optimism came on the back of
Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif's four-day diplomatic blitz, with the
leader meeting Wednesday with Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
U.S. Vice President JD Vance, who led the first round of talks, has said Iran is
being offered a "grand bargain" to end the six-week war with Israel and the
United States and address the decades-old dispute over Tehran's nuclear
programme. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel and the United
States have "identical" goals -- enriched material removed from Iran,
elimination of enrichment capability and reopening the Strait of Hormuz. The
strait, through which one-fifth of the world's crude oil normally flows, has
been choked by Iranian forces since the U.S.-Israeli offensive began and is now
the focus of the U.S. blockade. Optimism about an accord in the conflict sent
share prices higher on Wall Street, however, with the major stock indices
finishing at records on Wednesday while crude prices dropped.
'Zero ships have broken through' -
Washington has sought to turn the screws on Tehran with a blockade of its ports,
with U.S. Central Command claiming to have "completely halted economic trade
going into and out of Iran by sea". CENTCOM said it had turned back 10 vessels
that tried to sail out of Iranian ports during the first 48 hours of the
blockade and "zero ships have broken through". According to recent maritime
tracking data, the picture in the Strait of Hormuz was less clear-cut, and
Iran's Tasnim news agency reported shipping has continued from southern Iran.
The head of Iran's military central command center warned that a U.S. failure to
lift the blockade would constitute "a prelude" to violating the two-week
ceasefire struck on April 8. Keeping up the pressure, the United States slapped
fresh sanctions on Iran's oil industry Wednesday, which Treasury Secretary Scott
Bessent said targeted "regime elites". Unless Washington relents, Iran's armed
forces "will not allow any exports or imports to continue in the Persian Gulf,
the Sea of Oman and the Red Sea," Ali Abdollahi said. The military adviser to
Iran's supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei also warned that Iran would sink American
ships in the strait if the United States decides to "police" the key shipping
channel. "These ships of yours will be sunk by our first missiles," Mohsen
Rezaei, a former commander-in-chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guards who was named
as a military adviser by Khamenei last month, told state TV.
No nuclear weapons -
Trump has insisted that any deal with Iran must permanently bar the Islamic
Republic from acquiring a nuclear weapon. He launched the war on February 28,
claiming that Tehran was rushing to complete an atomic bomb, an assertion not
backed by the UN nuclear watchdog.
Washington has reportedly sought a 20-year suspension of Iran's uranium
enrichment program, while Tehran has proposed suspending nuclear activity for
five years -- an offer U.S. officials rejected. Tehran insists its nuclear
program is for civilian purposes and its foreign ministry said Wednesday that
Iran's right to enrich uranium was "indisputable", although the level of
enrichment was "negotiable". The latest signals on the U.S.-Iran talks came with
Israel and Lebanon reportedly agreeing to open direct negotiations after their
first high-level face-to-face meeting since 1993 took place on Tuesday in
Washington.
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will speak to Lebanese President
Joseph Aoun, one of his ministers said Thursday, in what would be a historic
first. The Israeli minister for innovation, science and technology, Gila Gamliel,
confirmed the talks after Trump said the pair would speak on Thursday. But Aoun
did not confirm the call, and, in a statement from his office, stressed the
importance of a agreeing a ceasefire as a starting point for negotiations.
US military widens blockade on Iran to include contraband
shipments, advisory says
Reuters/16 April/2026
US military forces have widened their shipping blockade on Iran to include
cargoes deemed contraband and any vessels suspected of trying to reach Iranian
territory will be “subject to belligerent right to visit and search”, the US
navy said in an advisory on Thursday.
“These vessels, regardless of location, are subject to visit, board, search, and
seizure,” the navy said in an updated advisory after a blockade was imposed on
Monday.
Contraband items included weapons, weapons systems, ammunition, nuclear
materials, crude and refined oil products as well as iron, steel and aluminum.
Pakistan army chief meets Iran speaker Ghalibaf
AFP, Tehran/16 April/2026
Pakistan’s army chief met Iran’s parliament speaker on Thursday, Iranian state
television said, after Pakistani mediators traveled to Iran to press efforts to
end the war with the United States and Israel. “Field Marshal Asim Munir,
Commander of the Pakistan Army, who traveled to our country yesterday, met and
held talks with Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf... this Thursday morning, April 16,”
the report said. After more than five weeks of war that saw the killing of
supreme leader Ali Khamenei and top security official Ali Larijni, Ghalibaf is
widely seen as Iran’s top negotiator, and he travelled last weekend to Pakistan
for a first round of talks with the United States. There were no further details
on the contents of the latest meeting, which came a day after Munir arrived in
Tehran with his delegation, bringing what Iranian state television described as
a message from the United States. The first round of talks in Islamabad ended
without any breakthrough, but White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told
reporters on Wednesday that further talks “would very likely” be in Islamabad.
Ghalibaf and his delegation had on Saturday held closed door talks in Islamabad
with US Vice President JD Vance, in the highest level Iran-US contacts since
before the 1979 Islamic revolution. Pakistani foreign ministry spokesman Tahir
Andrabi said no date had been set for the next round of talks. Further cementing
his status as Iran’s key negotiator, Ghalibaf told Lebanese parliament speaker
Nabih Berri in telephone talks on Thursday that a ceasefire in Lebanon was “as
important” as in Iran.
Merz says Germany ready to help secure Hormuz transit after end of hostilities
Reuters/16 April/2026
Germany is in principle ready to participate in securing transit routes through
the Strait of Hormuz once there is an end to hostilities and a mandate,
preferably from the United Nations, and German parliamentary approval,
Chancellor Friedrich Merz said. “We are still a long way from all of that,” Merz
said, when asked about what role Germany could play. He was speaking a day
before talks in Paris on the Strait of Hormuz which, he said, would cover the
issue of the participation of US armed forces. He declined to specifically
address a question on a newspaper report saying that Germany was prepared to
offer demining and maritime surveillance expertise. Germany’s defense ministry
did not immediately reply to an emailed request for comment on the report. The
US-Israeli war with Iran has caused unprecedented disruption of global oil and
gas. It has led to the halting of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, which
typically carries about 20 percent of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas
flows. Merz, speaking at a press conference with his Irish counterpart, stressed
that at least a provisional ceasefire would be required before any mission in
the Strait of Hormuz and that Iran’s military nuclear program must end.
World could soon face ‘energy availability’ problem amid
Iran war, Qatari minister warns
Al Arabiya English/16 April/2026
The world will soon face a problem of “energy availability,” Qatar’s finance
minister warned on Wednesday, adding that the global economy is about to feel
the full economic impact of the Iran war. “A full-fledged impact is coming, and
it is not far away,” Ali Ahmed al-Kuwari said at an IMF discussion in
Washington, describing the recent spike in global prices as just the “tip of the
iceberg.”He added that in a month or two a “huge economic impact” will be felt
globally. “Very soon you are going to have a problem of energy availability not
just prices. So even if you can afford to pay you are not going to be able to
source, which is a major, major problem,” he said. Despite his statements, the
finance minister said his country’s finances would be able to ride out the
problems for at least a year. There was also the threat that the sharp reduction
in global fertilizer production and supply from the region would see farming
seasons missed around the world, triggering a food crisis too, he added. Qatar
copingEconomists at JPMorgan have warned that Qatar’s economy is now likely to
contract by around 9 percent this year after Iranian missile strikes on the
country’s giant Ras Laffan Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) plant wiped out 17
percent of its production capacity. Al-Kuwari said the war’s overall impact on
the country’s fiscal situation remained manageable though, given its buffers.
“Managing the fiscal (situation) is fine,” he said, pointing to its
“conservative” pre-war budget and its “shock stability fund.” “We can go six
months without tapping the Qatar Investment Authority who have a high level of
reserves,” al-Kuwari said, referring to the nation’s sovereign wealth fund,
adding that it could also tighten its budget, borrow if needed and delay some
investment projects. “We are not seeing a major issue, and we can go for a full
year without this,” al-Kuwari said. With Reuters
Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant temporarily loses all off-site power,
IAEA says
Reuters/16 April/2026
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia
nuclear power plant temporarily lost all off-site power around for around 40
minutes before being restored on Thursday evening.
Links to several important news
websites
Asharq Al-Awsat Newspaper
https://aawsat.com/
National News Agency
https://www.nna-leb.gov.lb/ar
Al Arabiya/Arabic
https://www.alarabiya.net/
Sky News
https://www.youtube.com/@SkyNewsArabia
Nidaa Al Watan
https://www.nidaalwatan.com/
Al Markazia
https://www.nidaalwatan.com/
Al Hadath
https://www.youtube.com/@AlHadath
Independent Arabia
https://www.independentarabia.com/
The Latest
LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on April 16-17/2026
What the US naval blockade would mean for Iran’s economy
Miad Maleki/Iran International/April 16/2026
The US naval blockade of Iran, which started on Monday, could rapidly cripple
the country’s economy, cutting off most of its trade, halting oil exports and
triggering inflation and currency pressure within days. The blockade, targeting
Iranian ports and imposing partial restrictions in the Strait of Hormuz, took
effect at 10 a.m. Eastern Time.
Iran’s heavy reliance on southern shipping lanes leaves its economy exposed to
maritime disruption, with more than 90% of its $109.7 billion annual trade
passing through the Strait of Hormuz. The blockade is expected to cut off nearly
all of Iran’s seaborne trade, wiping out an estimated $435 million in daily
economic activity and forcing oil field shutdowns within weeks. A blockade would
effectively zero out Iran’s export revenues within days and trigger cascading
effects across its financial system.
Oil exports would be hit first
Crude oil shipments would be the first and most severe casualty. Iran has been
exporting roughly 1.5 million barrels per day, generating about $139 million
daily based on wartime pricing assumptions. Nearly all of that volume departs
via Kharg Island, which handles over 90% of crude exports and lacks viable
alternative routes outside the Persian Gulf.
A blockade would eliminate these flows almost immediately, cutting off the
Islamic Republic’s primary source of foreign currency earnings.
Petrochemicals and non-oil trade
Petrochemical exports, valued at roughly $54 million per day based on recent
trade data, would also be halted. Facilities at Assaluyeh, Imam Khomeini, and
Shahid Rajaei ports all sit within the Persian Gulf and depend on uninterrupted
maritime access.
Non-oil exports – including minerals and metals – would see similar disruption.
Of approximately $88 million in daily shipments, around 90% would be blocked,
removing another $79 million a day in revenue.
Ports play a central role in this vulnerability. Shahid Rajaei alone handles
more than half of Iran’s cargo operations, while Imam Khomeini is a key entry
point for basic goods imports.
Bushehr ports handled about 57 million tons of cargo last year, underscoring how
deeply Iran’s trade is concentrated in southern waters.
Limited alternatives beyond the region
Efforts to develop alternative export routes appear insufficient to offset
losses.
The Jask terminal, designed as a bypass to Hormuz, operates far below its
intended capacity, with effective throughput estimated at around 70,000 barrels
per day.
Chabahar port and Caspian Sea facilities handle only a fraction of the volumes
moved through Persian Gulf ports.
Combined, these routes could replace less than 10% of current volumes.
Imports and inflation pressures intensify
On the import side, Iran brings in about $159 million in goods daily, including
industrial inputs, machinery, and food.
Disruptions to these flows would likely accelerate inflation, which has already
surged. Food prices have risen sharply, with staple items such as rice
increasing up to sevenfold in recent months. Any interruption to imports would
deepen supply shortages and place further strain on household purchasing power.
Storage limits create shutdown risk
A critical constraint lies in Iran’s oil storage capacity.
Iran has approximately 50–55 million barrels of onshore oil storage capacity,
about 60% of which is already filled. Spare capacity stands at around 20 million
barrels.
With surplus production of 1.5 million barrels per day that is normally
exported, this capacity would be filled in about 13 days. After that, Iran would
be forced to shut in oil wells.
This is highly significant because when mature oil wells are shut, water from
below can intrude into the reservoir – a process known as “water coning.”
In this situation, some of the oil becomes permanently trapped within rock pores
and can no longer be recovered. Iran’s oil fields are already declining at a
rate of 5–8% per year.
Forced shutdowns could permanently eliminate 300,000 to 500,000 barrels per day
of production capacity – equivalent to $9–15 billion in annual revenue lost
forever.
Currency faces renewed pressure
The loss of export revenues would also affect Iran’s currency markets.
The rial has already weakened sharply, trading near 1.6 million per dollar in
unofficial markets, with inflation running close to 50%. A halt in foreign
exchange inflows would likely intensify depreciation, further limit access to
cash, and could push the currency toward hyperinflation. Banks have already
imposed withdrawal limits, reflecting existing financial strain.
Economic pressure builds rapidly
Taken together, the figures suggest a blockade would impose roughly $13 billion
in monthly economic damage, combining export losses and disrupted imports.
Iran’s economic structure, heavily dependent on the Persian Gulf transit routes
and energy exports, makes continued resistance economically impossible under the
US naval blockade.
The figures show how quickly pressure could build if shipping lanes are closed,
with immediate fiscal impacts followed by longer-term damage to production
capacity and financial stability.
**Miad Maleki is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD),
specializing in sanctions policy.
To Prevent Antisemitism in Schools Like Berkeley, Enforce
the Rules Already on the Books
Naomi Friedman/The Algemeiner/April 16/2026
At California’s Berkeley High School (BHS), teachers are interrupting their
normally-scheduled classroom lessons to talk about the Iran war.
Given the Berkeley school district’s dismal record on antisemitism, will BHS
once again become a venue for Israel-bashing, or even conspiracy theories that
Israel manipulated the United States into attacking Iran? If signs of such
activity emerge, what can be done to stop it? Part of the solution — at least at
the K-12 level — is simple: state and local governments must ensure that school
districts enforce pre-existing constitutional constraints, state educational
codes, and school district rules that prohibit indoctrination in the classroom.
Of course, that is not always so easy. One teachers’ group held a teach-in to
address the purported causes of the October 7 attack, during which they shared
curricular materials such as a guide to “settler colonialism” that defines Hamas
as “a resistance movement” and tells students the United States only calls Hamas
a terrorist organization because of its “measures against the occupation.”
Materials like these then make their way into BHS classrooms. One history
teacher, who reportedly used antisemitic stereotypes in class, showed an
anti-Israel video and required her students to respond to the prompt: “To what
extent should Israel be considered an Apartheid State?”
When Jewish students complained, the Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD)
simply transferred them out of her class. Also at BHS, according to the Brandeis
Center complaint, an art teacher reportedly showed the class “violent, pro-Hamas
videos.” The teacher also allegedly promoted student walkouts and
demonstrations, and projected antisemitic images such as a fist punching through
a Star of David. Jewish students were again transferred to a new class, only to
find their new teacher wore Free Palestine stickers on her clothing.
What’s especially disturbing about these incidents is that the BUSD already has
a policy in place to prevent this kind of ideological offensive material in the
classroom. According to BUSD’s “Policy 6144: Controversial Issues,” when a
teacher chooses to address such a subject, they should “ensure that all sides of
a controversial issue are impartially presented,” and, “The teacher may not use
his/her position to forward his/her own historical, religious, political,
economic or social bias.”
According to a Supreme Court decision in Garcetti v. Ceballos (2006), such rules
are consistent with freedom of speech because, when public employees are
carrying out their official duties, their speech does not have the same First
Amendment protection as private citizens. State governments have implemented
regulations based on this principle. Texas Educational Code § 28.0022 states
that when teachers discuss a controversial topic of public policy, they should
“explore that topic objectively and in a manner free from political bias.”
Moreover, the code stipulates that teachers cannot assign tasks to students that
involve political advocacy. Similarly, the Florida State Board of Education
issued Florida Administrative Code, Rule 6A-10.081, which stipulates that
teachers shall not “unreasonably deny a student access to diverse points of
view” or “intentionally distort or misrepresent facts concerning an educational
matter.”
Yet without enforcement, such policies have little value. BUSD parents have
lodged more than 100 complaints of violations targeting Jewish students. Now,
both the US Department of Education and the House of Representatives’ Education
and Workforce Committee are investigating antisemitism in the BUSD. Parents have
also brought a civil rights lawsuit against the district.
Clearly, school districts across the country should be enforcing policies
against propaganda and bigotry in the classroom. But changing the ways of a
resistant school district like BUSD is easier said than done. It will entail
investigating and then educating the community about existing laws, rules, and
codes pertaining to teachers’ speech and conduct. And it will involve persuading
parents and students to work with civil rights groups and the local, state, and
Federal governments to hold public teachers and administrators accountable.
Our country relies on its schools to endow students with the skills necessary
for critical thinking and independent thought. If teachers themselves cannot
rise above their prejudices and partisan sentiments, then American schools are
not likely to turn out students resistant to conspiracy theories and propaganda.
*Naomi Friedman is an Education Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of
Democracies.
Americans shouldn’t cry for Orban
Ivana Stradner and Peter Doran/Washington Examiner/April 16/2026
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/4528999/americans-shouldnt-cry-for-orban/
Never ignore the voters. After 16 years in power, Hungary’s corpulent Prime
Minister Viktor Orban lost touch with the conservative base that supported him
from the start, believing he could gerrymander his way to permanent victory. A
smarter conservative, incoming Prime Minister Peter Magyar, did the opposite. He
used retail politics to listen to Orban’s voters and responded to their constant
refrain: “Russia go home!”Magyar’s victory is a win for Hungary, the United
States, and smart campaigning. His victory created a political earthquake in
Hungary. Conservatives in America should cheer this result in one of our most
important Central European allies. Magyar’s new supermajority means he can amend
the Hungarian constitution and roll back Orban’s worst political excesses while
keeping the conservative movement alive in Hungary.
Orban’s political defeat is historic. Back in 1989, he jumped into politics as
an agile, free-market friend of America. He learned how to talk like an American
conservative.
When socialist politicians cratered the Hungarian economy in 2010, Orban sailed
into office by championing the everyday voter. He defended the traditional
family and questioned the EU’s federalist overreach. Once in power, he lost his
way.
As Orban and his ministers dined with Vladimir Putin and picked unnecessary
fights with neighboring Ukraine, Magyar broke ranks with Fidesz, Hungary’s
ruling conservative party, in 2024. He returned to basics, campaigning on
kitchen-table issues and highlighting malign Russian influence over Hungary in
Orban’s stronghold: the conservative heartland.
Credible reports indicate that the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence unit,
deployed to assist Orban’s campaign.
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, most of Europe has moved to isolate Moscow.
Meanwhile, Hungary has resisted that consensus, slowing or blocking EU sanctions
on Russia and other financial support for Kyiv. Orban simultaneously made his
country more dependent on Russian energy imports.
Hungary continues to rely heavily on Russian oil delivered via the Druzhba
pipeline, and Orban has emphasized Russian energy as central to Hungary’s
national security. Like Putin, Orban has portrayed Hungary as a “fortress of
conservatism” that defends traditional values. Also like Putin, he has flattered
President Donald Trump as a “truly strong and powerful leader.” Trump rightly
praised Orban for his resistance to the unexpected wave of mass migration from
the Middle East in 2015. But at the same time, Orban opened his economy to
Chinese influence on a grand scale and hardened his country’s dependency on
Russian energy. Hungary even offered to help Iran after Israel’s infamous “pager
attack” on Hezbollah terrorists. During Operation Epic Fury, Orban refused to
help the U.S. even as Trump complained that our closest friends were sitting on
their hands. Instead, Orban picked up the phone to Moscow. He complained to
Putin about the loss of energy shipments from the fighting, especially
European-bound LNG deliveries from Qatar and rising prices for consumers. Putin
lavished praise on Orban, thanking him for vetoing EU aid to Ukraine and his
“principled” foreign policy.
All eyes are now looking to Magyar for a return to predictable, pro-Western
politics in Budapest. Among voters, Magyar built his appeal on a promise to
reset Hungary’s political system by rooting out corruption, restoring
institutional checks and balances, and realigning Hungary with Europe. As the
head of the Tisza party, he has focused on bread-and-butter concerns such as
tackling inflation and unlocking frozen EU funds while deliberately sidestepping
divisive culture-war politics. His campaign suggests that he is a leader who
understands his domestic politics without the geopolitical baggage of close ties
to Russia or mischief-making in NATO. This will make him a more effective and
sustainable ally that Washington can rely on. Orban’s downfall was tragic and
predictable. After championing the everyday voter, he transformed a genuine
political mandate into a would-be monopoly on power. That is over. The U.S.
should look upon Magyar’s new government as a conservative friend with whom we
can work.
**Ivana Stradner is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of
Democracies (FDD). Peter Doran is Senior Adjunct Fellow at FDD.
The Risks of Chinese-Produced Cellular Modules
RADM (Ret.) Mark Montgomery and Jack Burnham/FDD/April 16/2026
When a doorbell, refrigerator, or thermostat in the United States is connected
to the internet, it may already be sending data to the Chinese government. These
“smart” devices rely on a component known as a cellular module to connect to the
internet over cellular networks. Two Chinese firms, Quectel and Fibocom, already
control nearly half the global market for cellular modules. Congressional
investigations and independent reporting suggest their units may pose a national
security threat.1
Not just America’s homes, but also its power grids, ports, hospitals,
transportation networks, and ship-to-shore cranes increasingly rely on cellular
modules. In theory, these modules can shut down their host devices in addition
to collecting massive amounts of data. This is possible because manufacturers of
cellular modules maintain remote access to the devices to provide software and
firmware updates “over the air.”2 If Beijing consolidated control of U.S.-based
modules, it could disrupt an American military mobilization in response to
Chinese efforts to coerce Taiwan. Or, amid a crisis, Beijing could hold
Washington hostage by threatening to cause massive economic disruption.
Dispensing with cellular modules is not an option. They are essential to
automation and will be critical to integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into
real-world environments, bridging the gap between frontier models and the
factory floor. The challenge ahead for the United States is how to stop and
reverse the proliferation of Chinese cellular modules. These risks are, so far,
hypothetical, but their cumulative effects could be catastrophic.
Cellular Modules May Pose a Potent Cybersecurity Risk
With an estimated 30.9 billion devices currently deployed worldwide, cellular
modules are, in effect, the backbone of the Internet of Things (IoT), an
architecture that fuses disparate devices, such as drones, security cameras,
port cranes, and manufacturing tools, into centralized hubs to enable greater
automation.3 At U.S. ports, connected and remotely controlled devices accelerate
offloading.4 American power grids use networked equipment to assist in load
management.5 Hospitals need cellular modules to streamline access to electronic
medical records.6 Farms use connected devices to guide smart tractors.7 The
private-sector logistics industry has embedded cellular modules across much of
its supply chain for asset tracking, management, and fleet communication.
Transportation systems rely on cellular modules in traffic monitoring, connected
vehicles, and the systems necessary for military mobility.8 As firms pivot
toward physical AI or combine AI with preexisting IoT infrastructure,
particularly within fields such as advanced manufacturing, the cellular module
market will continue to expand.9
Cellular modules’ access to internet traffic creates a substantial surveillance
risk. The modules are essential components of certain router systems, which use
them to connect a Wi-Fi router to a 4G or 5G network as a form of redundancy
when Wi-Fi is unavailable. Such products have become increasingly common across
IoT infrastructure, particularly in industrial systems.10 However, this feature
may exacerbate security concerns since Chinese national security law allows
Beijing to access firms’ data to assist in state surveillance efforts.11 Thus,
China could theoretically gain access to a broad swath of Americans’ information
while positioning Beijing along key connectivity nodes that could be used to
track specific individuals or identify broad patterns.12
Cellular modules are also positioned to deliver malware across the American
economy. Along with importing the physical modules, American firms are also
importing the proprietary software the devices run, creating the potential for
them to deliver un-auditable code or malware deep into sensitive systems. This
includes systems that regulate maintenance schedules, thermal management
systems, and other critical processes.13
A more sophisticated attack could immobilize connected devices. American
manufacturer John Deere revealed this type of vulnerability when it used the
cellular modules in its smart tractors and other farming equipment to immobilize
them after they were stolen by Russian forces in Ukraine seeking to ship them
eastward.14 This type of risk remains most prevalent within U.S. port
infrastructure, with Department of Defense (DOD) officials expressing concern
that Chinese cellular modules embedded in Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries
Company (ZPMC) cranes may both facilitate surveillance and allow Beijing to
paralyze them in the event of war.15
China’s State-Backed Campaign To Dominate the Global Cellular Module Market
Over the past two decades, Beijing has focused heavily on developing the
components required to deploy its vision of the IoT both domestically and
globally. As part of this effort, the Chinese Ministry of Industry and
Information Technology (MIIT) designated IoT modules as a “strategic high
ground” (“战略制高点之”), while the State Council identified IoT as a key emerging
industry in its 12th Five-Year Plan for Strategic New Emerging Industries.16
Along with directing state resources to build up China’s cellular module sector,
Beijing aims to develop a vast internal market for such technologies, having
introduced a range of subsidies and trade-in programs for consumer electronics
since the end of its “Zero-COVID” measures in late 2022.17
This support has allowed Chinese firms to win substantial market share. While
still facing competition from a range of Western firms — particularly Telit
Cinterion and Sierra Wireless (now part of Semtech) — Quectel and Fibocom
together control nearly 45 percent of the market.
Quectel, in particular, achieved a dominant position through its aggressive
lowball pricing strategy, with independent estimates suggesting that the firm
sells at 15 to 20 percent below the cost of production.
Chinese firms have also purchased international competitors to bolster their
hold on the market. In 2023, for example, Fibocom acquired Rolling Wireless, a
European firm that developed IoT products for the automotive market, giving
Beijing a greater share of Europe’s IoT market.18
Chinese Cellular Modules Pose Operational Risks to U.S. Military Mobility
Congressional investigations have alleged that Quectel is part of Beijing’s
Military-Civil Fusion (MCF) strategy and reportedly tied to other MCF firms such
as China Mobile and Huawei Technologies.19 Quectel also allegedly maintains
connections to China’s BeiDou satellite navigation system, a core component of
the PLA’s precision strike capability.20 As a result, the DOD designated Quectel
as a “Chinese military company” to highlight their risk to U.S. supply chains,
an action currently being contested by the firm.21
By exploiting the preexisting remote access that manufacturers maintain, Beijing
may be in a position to disrupt a future U.S. military mobilization. Persistent
monitoring could facilitate pattern-of-life analysis that Chinese intelligence
might leverage to gain early indications of U.S. military movements. Beijing
could also surreptitiously exploit cellular modules to collect data from cars,
routers, sensors, and other devices to map sensitive locations across the United
States, such as military facilities or oil and gas pipelines.
A 2024 congressional investigation warned that hundreds of ship-to-shore cranes
produced by ZPMC installed in ports across the United States — including those
used by the U.S. military — contained undisclosed cellular modules that China
could use for espionage.22
In particular, China could theoretically gain insight into U.S. military
operating practices, including potential access to real-time intelligence in the
event of a regional military buildup. To some extent, the United States has
mitigated the risk of surveillance from vehicle-mounted modules by imposing
restrictions on internet-connected automotive systems produced by China.23 Yet
this, at best, addresses one facet of the challenge.
Finally, the most critical risk associated with Chinese-produced cellular
modules is their integration into the critical infrastructure essential to
maintaining U.S. military mobility. Their presence opens an avenue for Beijing
to sabotage U.S. forces long before they arrive at the fight. A less severe
disruption might entail a “blinding” attack that limits owners’ capacity to
connect to their devices or prevents connected devices from functioning
properly.
Recommendations
While Chinese firms hold a dominant position in the global cellular module
market, the United States and its allies and partners have strong competitors
and notable buying power, allowing Washington to shape the market to favor U.S.
national security. By exercising this leverage through a combination of
procurement bans and trade sanctions, the United States can mitigate the risks
associated with Chinese cellular modules, limit their proliferation across
critical infrastructure systems, and offer a positive market signal to
alternative suppliers. To that end:
Congress should require the Department of Defense to audit its infrastructure to
identify embedded Chinese cellular modules and report on associated mitigation
measures. Given their ubiquity, it is highly likely that Chinese cellular
modules are embedded within DOD assets and infrastructure, including systems
critical to military mobility. The department should audit its systems to gain
comprehensive situational awareness of possible vulnerabilities. Once
identified, the department should notify Congress of ongoing and future
mitigation measures, from “rip-and-replace” programs to cycling out legacy
assets.
Congress should ban the Department of Defense from procuring Chinese cellular
modules. Congress should mandate that DOD rely on alternative suppliers that are
not subject to the jurisdiction or direction of foreign adversaries. This ban
should be phased in over the course of one year, allowing the department to
identify alternative contractors. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
should add Chinese cellular module manufacturers to its Covered List. While they
are integrated into a range of consumer products, cellular modules are
fundamentally communications devices that rely on the U.S. cellular network to
provide connectivity. The FCC should ensure that Chinese firms with ties to
Beijing are added to the Covered List, restricting the sale of their products in
America.
Conclusion
Chinese cellular modules present a clear and present national security risk to
the United States. They offer Beijing an avenue to amplify its espionage
campaigns and potentially disrupt critical infrastructure that underpins both
U.S. economic prosperity and military mobility. As Chinese firms aim to
consolidate their hold over this critical market, the U.S. government has a
limited window to safeguard defense-critical operations and promote secure
supply chains by enacting procurement bans and limiting its adversary’s market
access.
When a doorbell, refrigerator, or thermostat in the United States is connected
to the internet, it may already be sending data to the Chinese government. These
“smart” devices rely on a component known as a cellular module to connect to the
internet over cellular networks. Two Chinese firms, Quectel and Fibocom, already
control nearly half the global market for cellular modules. Congressional
investigations and independent reporting suggest their units may pose a national
security threat.1
Not just America’s homes, but also its power grids, ports, hospitals,
transportation networks, and ship-to-shore cranes increasingly rely on cellular
modules. In theory, these modules can shut down their host devices in addition
to collecting massive amounts of data. This is possible because manufacturers of
cellular modules maintain remote access to the devices to provide software and
firmware updates “over the air.”2 If Beijing consolidated control of U.S.-based
modules, it could disrupt an American military mobilization in response to
Chinese efforts to coerce Taiwan. Or, amid a crisis, Beijing could hold
Washington hostage by threatening to cause massive economic disruption.
Dispensing with cellular modules is not an option. They are essential to
automation and will be critical to integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into
real-world environments, bridging the gap between frontier models and the
factory floor. The challenge ahead for the United States is how to stop and
reverse the proliferation of Chinese cellular modules. These risks are, so far,
hypothetical, but their cumulative effects could be catastrophic.
Cellular Modules May Pose a Potent Cybersecurity Risk
With an estimated 30.9 billion devices currently deployed worldwide, cellular
modules are, in effect, the backbone of the Internet of Things (IoT), an
architecture that fuses disparate devices, such as drones, security cameras,
port cranes, and manufacturing tools, into centralized hubs to enable greater
automation.3 At U.S. ports, connected and remotely controlled devices accelerate
offloading.4 American power grids use networked equipment to assist in load
management.5 Hospitals need cellular modules to streamline access to electronic
medical records.6 Farms use connected devices to guide smart tractors.7 The
private-sector logistics industry has embedded cellular modules across much of
its supply chain for asset tracking, management, and fleet communication.
Transportation systems rely on cellular modules in traffic monitoring, connected
vehicles, and the systems necessary for military mobility.8 As firms pivot
toward physical AI or combine AI with preexisting IoT infrastructure,
particularly within fields such as advanced manufacturing, the cellular module
market will continue to expand.9
Cellular modules’ access to internet traffic creates a substantial surveillance
risk. The modules are essential components of certain router systems, which use
them to connect a Wi-Fi router to a 4G or 5G network as a form of redundancy
when Wi-Fi is unavailable. Such products have become increasingly common across
IoT infrastructure, particularly in industrial systems.10 However, this feature
may exacerbate security concerns since Chinese national security law allows
Beijing to access firms’ data to assist in state surveillance efforts.11 Thus,
China could theoretically gain access to a broad swath of Americans’ information
while positioning Beijing along key connectivity nodes that could be used to
track specific individuals or identify broad patterns.12
Cellular modules are also positioned to deliver malware across the American
economy. Along with importing the physical modules, American firms are also
importing the proprietary software the devices run, creating the potential for
them to deliver un-auditable code or malware deep into sensitive systems. This
includes systems that regulate maintenance schedules, thermal management
systems, and other critical processes.13
A more sophisticated attack could immobilize connected devices. American
manufacturer John Deere revealed this type of vulnerability when it used the
cellular modules in its smart tractors and other farming equipment to immobilize
them after they were stolen by Russian forces in Ukraine seeking to ship them
eastward.14 This type of risk remains most prevalent within U.S. port
infrastructure, with Department of Defense (DOD) officials expressing concern
that Chinese cellular modules embedded in Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries
Company (ZPMC) cranes may both facilitate surveillance and allow Beijing to
paralyze them in the event of war.15
China’s State-Backed Campaign To Dominate the Global Cellular Module Market
Over the past two decades, Beijing has focused heavily on developing the
components required to deploy its vision of the IoT both domestically and
globally. As part of this effort, the Chinese Ministry of Industry and
Information Technology (MIIT) designated IoT modules as a “strategic high
ground” (“战略制高点之”), while the State Council identified IoT as a key emerging
industry in its 12th Five-Year Plan for Strategic New Emerging Industries.16
Along with directing state resources to build up China’s cellular module sector,
Beijing aims to develop a vast internal market for such technologies, having
introduced a range of subsidies and trade-in programs for consumer electronics
since the end of its “Zero-COVID” measures in late 2022.17
This support has allowed Chinese firms to win substantial market share. While
still facing competition from a range of Western firms — particularly Telit
Cinterion and Sierra Wireless (now part of Semtech) — Quectel and Fibocom
together control nearly 45 percent of the market. Quectel, in particular,
achieved a dominant position through its aggressive lowball pricing strategy,
with independent estimates suggesting that the firm sells at 15 to 20 percent
below the cost of production.
Chinese firms have also purchased international competitors to bolster their
hold on the market. In 2023, for example, Fibocom acquired Rolling Wireless, a
European firm that developed IoT products for the automotive market, giving
Beijing a greater share of Europe’s IoT market.18
Chinese Cellular Modules Pose Operational Risks to U.S. Military Mobility
Congressional investigations have alleged that Quectel is part of Beijing’s
Military-Civil Fusion (MCF) strategy and reportedly tied to other MCF firms such
as China Mobile and Huawei Technologies.19 Quectel also allegedly maintains
connections to China’s BeiDou satellite navigation system, a core component of
the PLA’s precision strike capability.20 As a result, the DOD designated Quectel
as a “Chinese military company” to highlight their risk to U.S. supply chains,
an action currently being contested by the firm.21
By exploiting the preexisting remote access that manufacturers maintain, Beijing
may be in a position to disrupt a future U.S. military mobilization. Persistent
monitoring could facilitate pattern-of-life analysis that Chinese intelligence
might leverage to gain early indications of U.S. military movements. Beijing
could also surreptitiously exploit cellular modules to collect data from cars,
routers, sensors, and other devices to map sensitive locations across the United
States, such as military facilities or oil and gas pipelines.
A 2024 congressional investigation warned that hundreds of ship-to-shore cranes
produced by ZPMC installed in ports across the United States — including those
used by the U.S. military — contained undisclosed cellular modules that China
could use for espionage.22
In particular, China could theoretically gain insight into U.S. military
operating practices, including potential access to real-time intelligence in the
event of a regional military buildup. To some extent, the United States has
mitigated the risk of surveillance from vehicle-mounted modules by imposing
restrictions on internet-connected automotive systems produced by China.23 Yet
this, at best, addresses one facet of the challenge.
Finally, the most critical risk associated with Chinese-produced cellular
modules is their integration into the critical infrastructure essential to
maintaining U.S. military mobility. Their presence opens an avenue for Beijing
to sabotage U.S. forces long before they arrive at the fight. A less severe
disruption might entail a “blinding” attack that limits owners’ capacity to
connect to their devices or prevents connected devices from functioning
properly.
Recommendations
While Chinese firms hold a dominant position in the global cellular module
market, the United States and its allies and partners have strong competitors
and notable buying power, allowing Washington to shape the market to favor U.S.
national security. By exercising this leverage through a combination of
procurement bans and trade sanctions, the United States can mitigate the risks
associated with Chinese cellular modules, limit their proliferation across
critical infrastructure systems, and offer a positive market signal to
alternative suppliers. To that end:
Congress should require the Department of Defense to audit its infrastructure to
identify embedded Chinese cellular modules and report on associated mitigation
measures. Given their ubiquity, it is highly likely that Chinese cellular
modules are embedded within DOD assets and infrastructure, including systems
critical to military mobility. The department should audit its systems to gain
comprehensive situational awareness of possible vulnerabilities. Once
identified, the department should notify Congress of ongoing and future
mitigation measures, from “rip-and-replace” programs to cycling out legacy
assets.
Congress should ban the Department of Defense from procuring Chinese cellular
modules. Congress should mandate that DOD rely on alternative suppliers that are
not subject to the jurisdiction or direction of foreign adversaries. This ban
should be phased in over the course of one year, allowing the department to
identify alternative contractors.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should add Chinese cellular module
manufacturers to its Covered List. While they are integrated into a range of
consumer products, cellular modules are fundamentally communications devices
that rely on the U.S. cellular network to provide connectivity. The FCC should
ensure that Chinese firms with ties to Beijing are added to the Covered List,
restricting the sale of their products in America.
Conclusion
Chinese cellular modules present a clear and present national security risk to
the United States. They offer Beijing an avenue to amplify its espionage
campaigns and potentially disrupt critical infrastructure that underpins both
U.S. economic prosperity and military mobility. As Chinese firms aim to
consolidate their hold over this critical market, the U.S. government has a
limited window to safeguard defense-critical operations and promote secure
supply chains by enacting procurement bans and limiting its adversary’s market
access.
War at Hormuz is pushing
the global economy toward the brink
Cornelia Meyer/Al Arabiya English/16 April/2026
This is the week of the IMF / World Bank spring meetings, where the IMF usually
updates its World Economic Outlook. This time the update is entitled: “Global
Economy in the Shadow of War,” which says it all. At the beginning of the year,
the global economy looked on track to have a good year. Global growth was
forecasted at 3.3 percent, even set to be upgraded to 3.4 percent. Then the Iran
war broke out with a selective de facto blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, the
narrow waterway through which 20 percent of oil and oil products, including 20
percent of LNG, 30 percent of nitrogen-based fertilizer, 8 percent of aluminum,
as well as petrochemicals, helium and other vital supply chain inputs must pass.
To make matters worse, infrastructure was affected in many GCC countries, most
notably 17 percent of Qatar’s LNG processing capacity was destroyed and other
infrastructure was hit across the region. Supply disruptions of that magnitude
reverberate throughout the global economy. The verdict of the IMF was stark.
Global growth was downgraded to 3.1 percent and inflation upped to 4.4 percent.
This is the best-case scenario. There is an adverse scenario downgrading growth
to 2.5 percent and raising inflation to 5.4 percent. In case the Strait of
Hormuz stays closed for longer, the Fund delineated a severe scenario where
global economic growth shrinks to 2 percent and inflation hits 6 percent. These
numbers speak volumes. Economic forecasting takes time, which means that the
numbers were probably crunched a minimum of two weeks ago resulting in the real
scenario probably being closer to the adverse scenario and the world economy
being a good deal closer to the abyss of the severe forecast – too close for
comfort. Those are headline figures. The IMF and World Bank expect developing
economies to be hit far harder than wealthier OECD countries, with any downturn
once again falling most heavily on the poorest.Broad brushes will not do: We
have to distinguish between energy-importing countries and energy-exporting
countries and look at where the imports come from. Southeast Asia is a point in
case. Thailand and the Philippines import most of their fuel from the other side
of Hormuz and suffer acute shortages. The situation looks a little bit better
for Indonesia, which imports a lot from Africa and Malaysia – a net exporter of
LNG – is in yet another place. In that context some countries like the
Philippines urge ASEAN to deploy its Asean Petroleum Security Agreement (Apsa)
of 1986 and activate its Coordinated Emergency Response Measures (CERM). Alas
not all developing countries have the privilege of being part of a functioning
regional organization such as ASEAN, which can alleviate the burden.
We also have to look at the budgets and balance of payment situation of each
country and how much debt they have on their books. The more indebted a nation
is, the more its debt service is exposed when interest rates rise due to higher
inflation.
Food is the one resource no human being can do without: World Bank chief
economist Indermit Gill estimates that currently 300 million people suffer from
acute food insecurity and that number will increase by about 20 percent “very,
very quickly,” if the current situation persists. The developed world has
stockpiles of fertilizer and can manage. However, the planting season in the
South starts in about 3 months from now and if there is no fertilizer at
affordable prices the consequence will be hunger.
This brings us to a very important point, which aggravates this bad situation
considerably. The UN is woefully underfunded, in part courtesy of the Trump
administration. This means that important organizations such as the UN Food
Program and UNDP have much less firepower than they need in light of the grave
economic outlook. The coffers of the World Bank and regional development Banks
are also less full than they ought to be given the current crisis. Most OECD
nations are currently prioritizing defense spending over overseas development
assistance, shrinking yet another pool for development aid. Meanwhile, GCC
nations have been very generous donors of development aid either themselves or
via multilateral mechanisms like the Islamic Development Bank or the Arab
Coordination Group . We can only hope that they will continue this tradition
despite the economic suffering the war inflicted on them. The world would do
well to spare thoughts and dollars for the poorest of the poor in the developing
world: It is undeniably the right thing to do. Also, when people suffer
deprivation and hunger, they have nothing left to lose. Unrest and migration
have all too often been the result of such scenarios. Let’s come back to the
Iran war and the “double blockade” of the Strait of Hormuz, because the blockage
of that tiny waterway is at the core of the economic issues inflicted on the
global economy. Passage through international waterways must be unimpeded and
unaffected by political considerations. What is happening now is a point in
case.
Selected Face Book & X tweets for April 15/2026
Becky Anderson
Replying to @BeckyCNN and @saleh_machnouk
https://x.com/i/status/2044098246138548543
“Lebanon does need a ceasefire, but it needs a permanent ceasefire,” @saleh_machnouk
tells me, urging the international community to establish a lasting and
comprehensive framework. (3/3)
Nadim Koteich
Courageous and clear message from my dear friend @saleh_machnouk
Lebanon doesn’t need just another ceasefire. It needs a permanent solution in
the form of a security agreement that ensures wars are not just a recurrent
reality.
Hussain Abdul-Hussain
https://x.com/i/status/2044450348618629202
Told @i24NEWS_EN that for the first time since 1983, America stops talking to
regional capitals -- Damascus, Tehran or Riyadh -- about Lebanese affairs and
recognizes Beirut as an adult and a sovereign government that can hold direct
talks with Israel in pursuit of Lebanese national interests. No other country
should be invited to the Lebanon-Israel talks.
U.S. Embassy Beirut
Ambassador of the United States to Lebanon Michel Issa met with President Trump
and Secretary of State Rubio on April 15. They affirmed their commitment to
ongoing talks and the Embassy’s efforts in Beirut to support the restoration of
Lebanon’s monopoly of force and sovereignty.
Alex Rowell
Pro-Hizbullah writer threatens Lebanon's president after reports he will speak
to Netanyahu today: "If you do it, it means your presidency is finished ... if
you do it, you will have committed all the forbidden sins ... and there will no
longer be anything forbidden in response"
Ralph
The Lebanese president speaking with Netanyahu shouldn’t be
taboo.
Every war ends with dialogue, negotiations, and agreements. That’s politics.
We, the Lebanese people, are fed up with wars. We stand behind our government in
restoring sovereignty over our 10,452 km², disarming Hezbollah & working towards
lasting peace with Israel.
Nadim Koteich
I have known Jonny Gannon for a while now, and I can tell you that few
understand the Middle East and its complexities the way he does. He brings not
only extensive CIA operative experience but also the empathy and compassion
without which any understanding of the region remains incomplete. Follow his
account to benefit from his unique and profound knowledge
@jonnydgannon
Charles Elias Chartouni
The dysfunctional government is not suitable for negotiations
The formation of a new cabinet is mandatory