English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News &
Editorials
For August 01/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.August
01.26.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/@eliasbejjani8036
Bible Quotations For today
When they bring you before the synagogues, the rulers, and
the authorities, do not worry about how you are to defend yourselves or what you
are to say; for the Holy Spirit will teach you at that very hour what you ought
to say.’"
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 12/10-12/:"And everyone who
speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever blasphemes
against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. When they bring you before the
synagogues, the rulers, and the authorities, do not worry about how you are to
defend yourselves or what you are to say; for the Holy Spirit will teach you at
that very hour what you ought to say.’"
Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related
News & Editorials published on 31 July- August 01/2026
Erdogan the Muslim Brother is no friend of independent Lebanon.. Joseph
Aoun remains a captive of the Shiite Duo and continues to squander
opportunities/Elias Bejjani/July 31/2026
Antoine Sehnaoui Breaks the Taboo by Hosting Netanyahu: Courage Lacking in
Joseph Aoun/Elias Bejjani/July 29/2026
Berri condemns Israeli detonations near UNESCO-listed Beaufort Castle
Berri: Framework agreement was born dead and Israel has buried it
Issa stresses importance of army role in framework implementation
Lebanese military delegation to take part in Rome talks with Israel
Two Obstacles Face Seventh Round of Lebanon-Israel Talks
Israel carries out huge detonations near Beaufort castle
Israel Reshapes Lebanon’s Beaufort Area in Largest Blast Since Ceasefire
Lebanon Detains Former Central Bank Chief After Manhunt/Youssef Diab/Asharq Al-Awsat/July
31/2026
'Rome 2': Lebanon Seeks to Free Expanded 'Pilot Zones' From Israeli Election
Calculations/Mohamed Choucair/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Salam holds meeting on recovery projects in pilot zones
Geagea voices support for amnesty bill devised by Sunni MPs
Jumblat dubs Lebanon-Israel framework deal 'a huge trap'
Hezbollah condemns US strike in Iraq
Fuel prices in Lebanon surge
Reassessing the Alleged Maronite–Jewish Agency Document of 30 May 1946/Pierre A.
Maroun/Face Book/July 31/2026
Lebanon pivots toward stronger relationship with Turkiye/Dr. Sinem Cengiz/Arab
News/July 31, 2026
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 31 July-
August 01/2026
Netanyahu confronts Vance over his criticism of Israeli government/Barak
Ravid/Axios/July 31/2026
Mediator Pakistan Says US-Iran Talks Ongoing as Foes Trade Attacks
Saudi Source: Response Targeted Iraqi Militia Capabilities That Threatened Our
Security
Kuwait shoots down Iranian drones targeting military sites
Netanyahu, Vance discussed Israel criticism during Washington meeting, report
says
Will Israel Expand Incursions in Syria as Türkiye Ties Sour?
Trump says Israel 'very happy' about Hamas disarmament deal
Trump: I don’t think Iran is responsible for Minnesota cyberattack
Israel Rejects New Hamas Deal, Stays Silent to Avoid Angering Trump
Hamas Official: Israel Must Agree on Disarmament Deal before Group Implements It
EU's Kallas Welcomes Gaza Plan as "Constructive Step" Towards Peace
Palestinian Shot During Settler March Through West Bank Towns
Saudi Arabia Welcomes Historic Agreement on Decommissioning of Weapons in Gaza
Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials
from miscellaneous sources published
on 31 July-
August 01/2026
Video-Link & Text to a very important interview with Israeli Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin
Cheap Wars, Expensive Men/Amb. Alberto M. Fernandez/MEMRI/July 31/2026
Turkish F-35 Stealth Fighter Jets: A Grave Threat to Greece, Israel, the
West/Nils A. Haug/Gatestone Institute/July 31, 2026
Question: What are biblical grounds for divorce?/GotQuestions.org/July 31, 2026
As Iran batters the Gulf states, Trump’s course is beyond clear/Hussain Abdul-Hussain/
New York Post
Iran’s Iraqi Front/Abdulrahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Washington and Tehran and the Difficulty of Reaching an Understanding/Mustafa
Fahs/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Iran: Can Trump Win the War?/Amir Taheri/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on 31 July/2026
Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese
Related News & Editorials published on 31 July-
August 01/2026
Erdogan the Muslim Brother is no friend of independent Lebanon.. Joseph
Aoun remains a captive of the Shiite Duo and continues to squander opportunities
Elias Bejjani/July 31/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/156335/
President Joseph Aoun's visit to Turkey today was ill-fated, neither in its
suspicious timing nor in its superficial approaches to the Lebanese and regional
situation. In short, this visit constitutes a deliberate blindness to the
priority of liberating Lebanon from the odious Iranian occupation and the
hegemony of the Shiite Duo (Hezbollah and Amal).
As for his speech before Recep Tayyip Erdogan—known for his adoption of Muslim
Brotherhood and jihadist ideologies and his entrenched hostility toward true
peace—it completely ignored the reality of the terrorist Hezbollah and the
disguised Iranian occupation, while parroting the worn-out, monotonous record
chewed on around the clock by Nabih Berri, which sings of:
*An Israeli withdrawal from all Lebanese territories.
*The return of our displaced people to their villages, alongside their return to
the embrace of their state and homeland.
*Reconstruction, economic recovery, and the restoration of fragile confidence in
the state.
Securing the exclusive sovereignty of our legitimate armed forces alone, to
protect every inch of our land and *all our people within the framework of a
single state, a single army, and a single sovereign decision.
What is truly strange and deplorable is that Aoun did not dare utter the name of
"Hezbollah," completely ignoring Iran's destructive and cancerous role in the
Lebanese entity.
What is truly saddening is Joseph Aoun's sovereign and independent reality;
since his very first day at the Baabda Palace, he chose—perhaps within the
framework of grey arrangements and compromises as promoted by Hezbollah—to
surrender his neck as a hostage, remaining captive and bound to the directives,
policies, and edicts of a team of "deposit" advisers who are foreign and
alienated from everything connected to the culture of independence, freedom, and
absolute sovereignty.
Aoun apparently chose to appease the executioner at the expense of the victim,
turning a blind eye to the reality that Hezbollah and Nabih Berri hold the
levers of actual decision-making, thus remaining incapable of pulling the
republic out of the depths of collapse.
In short, it has become certain that under Joseph Aoun's presidency and the
government of advisors, the harvest of his term will be darnel, not wheat, and
the Lebanese will not experience with him any glimmer of salvation from Nabih
Berri's mini-state, nor from Hezbollah's occupation and violation of the
country... And the more things change, the more they stay the same.
The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
Author’s Email: Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website:
https://eliasbejjaninews.com
Antoine Sehnaoui Breaks the Taboo by Hosting
Netanyahu: Courage Lacking in Joseph Aoun
Elias Bejjani/July 29/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/156317/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp5pithqgrk
Bravo, and a thousand bravos to Antoine Sehnaoui, who shattered one of the
heretical and terrorist taboos imposed on the Lebanese by the merchants of the
"resistance" lie, ignorant pan-Arabists, demonic nationalists, and criminal,
jihadi political Islam.
Sehnaoui broke the taboo of meeting Israeli leaders openly and before the eyes
of the entire world by hosting Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu at his table in
the presence of dozens of political and media figures.
This courageous act was required of president Joseph Aoun; instead, Aoun
continues to polish the history and image of the terrorist-jihadist Hezbollah,
still justifying its existence under the pretext of the "Israeli occupation,"
despite his absolute knowledge—and that of his advisory deposits—that Hezbollah
is an Iranian military corps affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard
Corps, having no connection whatsoever, near or far, to Palestine, Jerusalem, or
any other matter concerning Arabs, liberation, or resistance.
A genuine pursuit of peace and openness to realistic solutions within a changing
regional and global environment is the only way out to save Lebanon from
collapse. This stands in total contrast to the ideologies of absurd wars that
undermine the concept of national sovereignty whenever an armed faction
monopolizes the decision of war and peace.
The scum of the Party of Satan, Hezbollah utilizing lawyers such as Wassef
Harakeh, filed a lawsuit against Sehnaoui, driven by malice, hatred, stupidity,
and blind allegiance to their masters, the mullahs of Iran.
To this day, the judiciary of the Land of Cedars remains hostage to Iranian
agents and their militia intimidation, rendering worthless any ruling issued by
it—especially by the Military Tribunal, which serves as a tool in the hands of
successive occupying forces (from the Palestinian to the Syrian to the Iranian).
The free people of Lebanon are called upon to congratulate Antoine Sehnaoui on
his courage and distinguished initiative, for he defied demonic taboos and took
a bold step toward breaking the deadlock.
As for real accountability, it must target all those who cling to stupid,
backward taboos that serve neither Lebanon, nor peace, nor any principle of
freedom and openness.
Author’s Email: Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website:
https://eliasbejjaninews.com
Berri condemns Israeli detonations near UNESCO-listed
Beaufort Castle
Naharnet/July 31/2026
Speaker Nabih Berri condemned Friday Israeli detonations near the UNESCO-listed
Beaufort Castle, and in the towns of Arnoun, Kfartibnit, Yohmor al-Shqif, and
Hadatha in south Lebanon. Israel said it destroyed tunnels used by Hezbollah in
the Beaufort area using approximately 700 tons of explosives. The tremors from
these explosions were felt in the south, and even in the capital Beirut, Berri
said, adding that these condemned actions are unacceptable and must not be met
"with silence" or treated as a fait accompli. "If these shockwaves fail to
awaken the national and moral consciousness, then humanity and its future are in
inevitable peril."A June 20 truce between Lebanon and Israel has largely held,
but the destruction of southern occupied villages has not stopped. Israeli
strikes and artillery shelling on the south have not cease, but only declined,
and are now limited mainly to villages sitting on the Israeli-declared yellow
line separating occupied villages from the rest of the south.
Berri: Framework agreement was born dead and Israel has buried it
Naharnet/July 31/2026
Speaker Nabih Berri’s meeting with President Joseph Aoun was to “clarify that
Israel has no intention of actually withdrawing from Lebanon, and that Israel's
non-compliance will prevent the agreement from being implemented,” visitors of
Berri quoted him as saying, according to al-Akhbar newspaper. In response to a
question, Berri said: "The agreement was born dead and no one is talking about
it. Israel buried it by failing to implement it."Berri added that the indicators
suggest Israel has no intention of withdrawing before the Israeli elections.
He also expressed his belief that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
faces a serious risk of being ousted in the elections. Moreover, Berri mentioned
the difficulties facing the U.S. Republican Party in the midterm elections and
also suggested that Lebanese Americans in Michigan will vote against any
candidate who supports Israel, and that U.S. President Donald Trump “will
discover this as well.”
Issa stresses importance of army role in framework
implementation
Naharnet/July 31/2026
U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa on Friday met with Army Commander General
Rodolphe Haykal in Yarze and discussed with him the latest developments in
Lebanon and the situations in the region. Issa stressed “the importance of the
army's ongoing efforts to maintain Lebanon's stability.”The two men also tackled
“the importance of the army’s role within the implementation mechanism of the
framework agreement” along with issues related to the Rome negotiations between
Lebanon and Israel. Haykal meanwhile visited Zawtar al-Gharbiyeh, a south
Lebanon town that the Lebanese Army has entered as part of the so-called pilot
zones process.
Lebanese military delegation to take part in Rome talks with Israel
Naharnet/July 31/2026
The Lebanese delegation to the upcoming Rome talks with Israel will include
members of the military delegation that had participated in one of the
Washington meetings prior to the signing of the framework agreement, al-Akhbar
newspaper reported on Friday.
“The military delegation is expected to carry with it the necessary documents to
enable the official delegation to effectively engage with the enemy delegation
and the American mediator, in order to secure a practical commitment to an
actual withdrawal from the occupied territories,” the daily said. “Given the
Washington experience, the military delegation is proceeding with extreme
caution and Lebanese authorities find themselves compelled to rely on the role
of the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) to obtain additional support for the idea
of expanding and expediting the pilot zones, especially since the enemy had
spoken of implementation conditions that would require one to two months for
each village, thus perpetuating the occupation for at least five years,” the
newspaper added. Leaks from the meetings of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu in Washington meanwhile revealed that he did not receive a direct U.S.
request to expedite the withdrawal from Lebanon, al-Akhbar said.
Two Obstacles Face Seventh Round of Lebanon-Israel Talks
Nazeer Rida/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
The seventh round of negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, scheduled to take
place in Rome next week, faces two main obstacles: the absence of an agreed
verification mechanism and Israeli violations that are hampering the Lebanese
Army’s efforts to complete its deployment and fully secure the area.
Amid political support for the army’s mission, the military has not concealed
those difficulties. Lebanese Army Commander Gen. Rodolphe Haykal said the army
remained committed to carrying out all its duties despite severe challenges,
including limited resources, the scale of its responsibilities and the
sensitivity of the circumstances. He added that the army was continuing its
deployment in South Lebanon under existing understandings, in line with national
requirements and principles, while pursuing efforts to ensure a safe return. In
a message of support marking the army’s 81st anniversary, Parliament Speaker
Nabih Berri said the Lebanese Army remained “the model that tests others rather
than being tested,” embodying unity, identity, belonging, sacrifice and loyalty
in defense of a united Lebanon—not “model areas whose borders are drawn by the
Israeli occupier through fire, killing and destruction.”
Verification Mechanism
The obstacles facing next week’s seventh session, which is expected to designate
a second pilot area, remain unresolved. Chief among them is the lack of
agreement on a mechanism to verify the Lebanese Army’s achievements following
its deployment in the first pilot area.
Lebanese sources following the preparatory talks told Asharq Al-Awsat that
proposals had included verification by the US military or a third party. Israel,
however, has rejected assigning the task to a European force and insists that
its own military conduct the verification. Lebanon rejects that demand because
its army does not coordinate directly with the Israeli military.
Army Says It Fulfilled Its Obligations
A military source told Asharq Al-Awsat that the Lebanese Army had fully carried
out its duties during the first phase and completed its mission. The source said
Israeli attacks and violations were obstructing the army’s efforts to complete
its deployment and secure towns so residents could return and live there. “The
Lebanese side has done what was required in coordination with the Military
Coordination Group for Lebanon, MCG4L, and is waiting for the other, Israeli,
side to do the same,” the source underlined. Continued occupation, repeated
attacks and violations, and Israeli political statements rejecting withdrawal
posed another challenge to the coming session.
Israel’s “Freedom of Movement”
Another obstacle is Israel’s assertion of “freedom of movement” outside the
framework of existing agreements. Lebanese sources said Israel considered itself
entitled to act, kill and carry out strikes, describing this as one of the main
impediments to the success of the pilot-area model. The Lebanese Army deployed
in the first pilot area and cleared war remnants, allowing residents to enter
Zawtar al-Gharbiyeh. It also imposed strict security measures in Srifa and Froun,
which are part of the same area. Lebanese sources said the army encountered no
problems with residents or Hezbollah during the deployment.
Second Pilot Area
Those challenges could hinder agreement on a second pilot area. Reports in
Beirut suggest Israel is pressing for it to be established in an unoccupied part
of the Nabatieh region that is subjected to daily Israeli strikes, rather than
in occupied territory. The aim, according to the reports, is to widen the
Israeli Army’s security zone around occupied positions east of Nabatieh,
including Beaufort Castle, Yohmor and Zawtar al-Sharqiyeh. Israeli forces have
also carried out incursions toward Kfar Tebnit and near the Ali al-Taher hills,
which they seek to control.
Israel carries out huge detonations near Beaufort castle
Agence France Presse/July 31/2026
Israeli forces carried out a series of powerful detonations overnight near the
UNESCO-listed Beaufort castle in southern Lebanon, Lebanese state media reported
Friday, with Israel saying it destroyed tunnels used by Iran-backed militant
group Hezbollah. "Israeli forces triggered very powerful explosions around
midnight," specifically "in the area of the Beaufort fortress," Lebanon's
National News Agency (NNA) said, adding that the huge blasts resounded over a
large area, shattering glass in nearby villages. The Crusader-era castle,
located in an area occupied by Israel, was added last week to UNESCO's List of
World Heritage in Danger. In a joint statement, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz said the army had destroyed "terror
tunnels in the Beaufort area" using approximately 700 tons of explosives.
Lebanon's culture ministry said the explosions struck "the area opposite the
fortress", warning that "the vibrations from the explosions may have caused
damage" in the castle's vicinity. It said technical teams were unable to conduct
an on-the-ground assessment because "the site is under occupation". An AFP
correspondent in a nearby village heard large explosions overnight and saw dust
covering a swathe of forest area. AFP footage showed dust blanketing the
mountaintop near where the castle sits. The Israeli army said that "the tunnel
network served as a central command center" for Hezbollah and consisted of
"several underground levels that were built over the course of two decades".
Demolitions
Lebanese parliament speaker Nabih Berri, a Hezbollah ally, condemned the
detonations and said they "must not be met with silence". Netanyahu and Katz
said the explosions followed a "blatant violation of the ceasefire agreement" by
Hezbollah, after Israel's army on Wednesday accused the militants of launching
an explosive drone at an Israeli military vehicle in southern Lebanon. Hezbollah
has not claimed any attacks since a ceasefire with Israel came into force on
June 20 after a U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding over the regional war.
While violence has declined in Lebanon since the memorandum and after a separate
Lebanon-Israel framework deal agreed later in June, Lebanon continues to report
Israeli strikes and artillery shelling on the south, as well as detonations of
buildings in southern villages.
Israel's army continues to occupy areas of southern Lebanon extending about 10
kilometers into Lebanese territory along the border. On Tuesday, U.N.
peacekeepers said they had found around four tons of mainly ammonium nitrate
explosives earlier this month in a south Lebanon border village under Israeli
occupation. A source with knowledge of the matter told AFP the containers had
Hebrew writing on them and were "likely used for demolitions".
Israel Reshapes Lebanon’s Beaufort Area in Largest Blast Since Ceasefire
Beirut: Soubhi Amhaz/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Israel launched a new phase of operations in southern Lebanon at dawn on Friday,
carrying out one of its largest demolitions since the war began. The Israeli
military said it used about 700 tons of explosives to destroy a tunnel network
it said belonged to Hezbollah near Beaufort Castle.The blasts sent tremors
across southern Lebanon and were heard in distant areas. Military experts said
the operation appeared to be part of an Israeli strategy to destroy
infrastructure before any possible withdrawal from territory under its control.
Blasts reshape Beaufort landscape
The explosions shook areas across the south, while footage from the scene showed
major changes to the landscape stretching south of Beaufort Castle toward Yohmor
al-Shaqif. Rocky hills and farmland were covered in rubble and limestone debris.
The castle itself appeared to have sustained no direct damage.The Geophysics
Center said it recorded ground waves equivalent to a magnitude 3.8 earthquake.
Lebanon’s Culture Ministry stated the castle had not been directly damaged, but
said Israeli occupation made it impossible to assess damage in the surrounding
area. The operation came a week after the castle was placed on the UNESCO List
of World Heritage in Danger. Military expert Hassan Jouni said the scale of the
blast reflected Israel’s broader strategy in areas under its control. “Israel
works to completely destroy the infrastructure in any area it controls because
it does not want to withdraw and leave behind facilities or positions that could
be restored or used again,” Jouni told Asharq Al-Awsat.
“This is a policy it is clearly pursuing.”
He described the explosion as “extremely large,” saying reports that hundreds of
tons of explosives were used pointed to the presence of military infrastructure.
“Beaufort Castle and its surroundings are a strategic location, so it is natural
for infrastructure to exist in this area,” he said.Jouni said the Israeli
military had spent weeks preparing the operation. “According to the available
information, the Israeli army had been making engineering preparations for this
operation for several weeks, but chose to carry it out now,” he said. “The
timing was not random. It suited its operational calculations.”He said the
timing could also be linked to Israel’s announcement that a drone had attacked
an engineering vehicle. Israel may also have used the operation to cause
additional environmental damage and deepen its psychological and morale impact,
he said. The blast had “clear psychological repercussions” and geological
effects because of the volume of explosives used, he added.
Possible prelude to new pilot zones
Jouni did not rule out the possibility that the demolition was linked to a new
phase involving what have been described as “pilot zones.”“If there is an
intention to withdraw from Zawtar al-Sharqiya and include it in the next phase
of the pilot zones, this explosion could be read in that context,” he said.
Zawtar al-Sharqiya borders Zawtar al-Gharbiya and had been included in the
initial plan for those areas, he added. A withdrawal from Zawtar al-Sharqiya
would restrict Israeli movement around the area, Jouni said, potentially
prompting Israel to complete demolition work before pulling back. “It may seek
to pre-empt any possible withdrawal by first completing its demolition and
blasting operations,” he said. Similar explosions elsewhere in southern Lebanon
showed that Israel was continuing the same approach, he added.“The
infrastructure in these areas no longer represents a military need that would
justify destruction on this scale,” he said. Sweeping the area to prevent
Hezbollah from rebuilding. Retired Brigadier General Saeed Qazah offered a
similar assessment, saying Israeli demolitions, including the Beaufort
operation, were part of a single strategy.
The aim, he said, was to remove any infrastructure Hezbollah could use if
Israeli forces withdrew from the areas they occupy.
“The Israeli army does not want to leave behind any infrastructure that
Hezbollah could use later, whether tunnels, operations rooms,
command-and-control centers, ammunition depots, logistical warehouses or combat
equipment,” Qazah told Asharq Al-Awsat.Such facilities had formed a central part
of Hezbollah’s military structure for years, he said. Qazah said Israel was
drawing lessons from the latest pilot war. “Not all the tunnels were destroyed
during the 15 months of fighting, and Hezbollah was later able to reuse some of
them,” he said.“The Israeli army is therefore searching the area inch by inch to
ensure the destruction of everything that could contribute to rebuilding
Hezbollah’s military strength if Israel withdraws from these areas in the
future.”He said Israel aimed to prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding the military
capabilities it had developed between 2006 and 2023. “Every area Israel
classifies as part of the Yellow Zone, or where it stations its forces, will see
similar operations to destroy the existing military infrastructure,” he said.
Field searches would continue to uncover additional facilities and equipment, he
added. Qazah said artillery fire and sweeping operations were also part of the
same strategy. “The Israeli army follows a shoot-on-suspicion policy whenever it
detects movement around its forces, whether through radar, sensors, or visual
surveillance,” he said.
“The area is immediately shelled out of concern that there may be an attempt to
infiltrate toward Israeli forces stationed inside occupied Lebanese
territory.Israel says most tunnels destroyed. The Israeli military said it had
destroyed most of the tunnel network around Beaufort Castle.It said the
operation was carried out in response to a drone that Hezbollah allegedly
launched toward an engineering vehicle on Ali al-Taher Hill.Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz said Israeli forces
would remain inside the “security zone” in southern Lebanon and continue
destroying infrastructure to prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its military
capabilities.
Operations continue across the south
Israeli military operations continued in southern Lebanon, with forces carrying
out demolitions, shelling and sweeping operations in Deir Seryan, the Dabsha
area, the Ali al-Taher heights, Kfar Tibnit, Mansouri, Majdal Zoun and Talloussa.
The blasts near Beaufort Castle caused material damage and shattered windows in
several homes in Qlayaa because of the force of the tremors. Israeli forces
continued sweeping the outskirts of Mansouri and Buyout al-Sayyad. Tanks were
heard near Baraashit Hill, while explosions were reported in both the eastern
and western sectors.
Lebanon Detains Former Central Bank Chief After Manhunt
Youssef Diab/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Lebanese security forces detained former central bank governor Riad Salameh
inside Bhannes Hospital in Mount Lebanon on Friday, enforcing a search notice
issued after he repeatedly failed to appear for questioning. Prosecutor General
at the Court of Cassation Judge Ahmad Rami al-Hajj ordered Salameh’s detention
after prosecutors received information that he was at the hospital. Al-Hajj sent
patrols from the Internal Security Forces’ Information Branch and the Central
Criminal Investigations Department to verify the report. Once they confirmed
that Salameh was inside, he ordered the execution of the search warrant, and
Salameh was formally placed under arrest. The judge also instructed security
forces to tighten security around Salameh’s hospital wing and at the hospital
entrances, and to monitor visitors to his room.
The case stems from Salameh’s refusal to appear in a lawsuit filed by Banque du
Liban against him and former Bank Audi Chairman Samir Hanna over “serious
suspicions concerning the management of financial flows at the bank during the
financial crisis that began in 2019.”
His detention marks a tougher phase in the proceedings and adds to the mounting
pressure on him inside Lebanon, alongside ongoing international cases.
Judicial source: Salameh tried every way to avoid questioning
A judicial source said the former central bank governor had “left no trick
unused” in seeking to evade questioning. The source told Asharq Al-Awsat that
al-Hajj had summoned Salameh to appear before noon on Thursday, July 30.
Although formally notified, Salameh submitted a medical excuse through his
lawyer, Wassim Ghaoui, saying his condition was serious and prevented him from
attending. Al-Hajj rejected the excuse and insisted that Salameh appear in
person. Ghaoui arrived at the Cassation Public Prosecution’s office on Thursday
morning and informed the judge that his client would not attend because of
illness. Al-Hajj then issued an order compelling Salameh to appear. Patrols from
the Information Branch and the Central Criminal Investigations Department went
to Salameh’s declared residence in Safra, Mount Lebanon, but found the villa
closed and Salameh nowhere to be seen.
With the order in force and the prospect of arrest looming, Salameh’s lawyer
told prosecutors that the former governor would appear voluntarily and asked
them to suspend the order.
Less than half an hour later, according to the judicial source, Ghaoui called
again. He said Salameh had suffered a medical episode and a sharp rise in blood
pressure while traveling to the Justice Palace and had been taken to the
hospital for emergency treatment.
He asked prosecutors to postpone the questioning until Salameh recovered. Search
notice issued Al-Hajj sent a doctor to verify the claim, but the doctor could
not find Salameh in the emergency room or at any other hospital. Security forces
then expanded their search to three properties linked to Salameh in Safra, Faqra,
and Rabieh, but failed to locate him. The judicial source said this confirmed
that Salameh was still refusing to appear.
“Following Salameh’s deliberate evasion of the investigation, Judge al-Hajj
issued a search and inquiry notice against him and instructed the security
services to arrest him immediately upon finding him and bring him before the
judiciary,” the source said.
A new phase in the case
Former Bank Audi Chairman Samir Hanna, a defendant in the same case, appeared
before prosecutors after having previously been questioned. The Cassation public
prosecutor ordered his release on $1 million cash bail and gave him until Monday
to pay. The measures push the case against Salameh into a more aggressive phase.
A senior legal source said Salameh feared being detained again and that the case
could encourage people harmed by decisions he made as central bank governor to
file dozens of lawsuits. Those cases, the source said, could leave him spending
the rest of his life in prison. The source told Asharq Al-Awsat that Salameh was
haunted by the prospect of returning to the cell where he spent 13 months in
solitary detention. He was detained in early September after former Cassation
Public Prosecutor Judge Jamal Hajjar questioned him at length in a case which
accused him of stealing $44 million in public funds belonging to the central
bank.
'Rome 2': Lebanon Seeks to Free Expanded 'Pilot Zones' From
Israeli Election Calculations
Mohamed Choucair/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Lebanese-Israeli negotiations under US sponsorship are set to resume in a
seventh round, with Rome hosting the talks for a second time on Aug. 4-6, as
southern Lebanon stands on the brink of renewed escalation. The meeting comes
after Israel carried out its threat to retaliate against Hezbollah for launching
a drone targeting an Israeli military vehicle by detonating a network of tunnels
beneath Beaufort Castle. Israel also warned of further strikes that could target
the Ali Al-Taher hills, where Hezbollah fighters are positioned despite the area
being under Israeli fire control. The "Rome 2" meeting, which will bring
together political and military representatives from the three parties that
signed the Framework Agreement, will test Washington's willingness to restrain
Israel and curb any slide toward escalation. It will also provide the Lebanese
delegation with another opportunity to demand that the ceasefire be consolidated
to include all hostile acts and for the pilot zones to be expanded to include
towns that Israel still occupies within the "Yellow Line," which Israel has
turned into a security zone while linking any withdrawal to Hezbollah's
disarmament. The talks are also expected to address the Lebanese Army's recent
statement holding Israel responsible for obstructing implementation of the
agreement. In this context, a Lebanese source directly involved in the
negotiations said the delegation would seek to add towns of symbolic importance
to the pilot zones. The source told Asharq Al-Awsat that it would propose
including the towns of Bint Jbeil and Khiam.
Betting on the Framework Agreement
The source said Lebanon has no option but to rely on the US-backed Framework
Agreement, supported by President Donald Trump, after Hezbollah's military
approach had plunged the country into a costly human and material disaster. "Who
is more capable than Washington of pressuring Israel to stop razing towns along
the Yellow Line and systematically destroying the homes that remain there, while
also expanding the pilot zones by freeing them from Israeli election
calculations? There is no interest in keeping us on a waiting list," the source
said.
The source added that Israel had been compelled to yield to US pressure by
joining the Framework Agreement, despite previously rejecting all forms of
negotiations with Lebanon. Israel had expected President Joseph Aoun and Prime
Minister Nawaf Salam to reject the deal under pressure from the Shiite Duo,
which supports the Memorandum of Understanding, but that expectation proved
unfounded, the source said, adding that Israel is now attempting to obstruct
implementation of the agreement. Asked about the agenda, the source said "Rome
2" would discuss establishing a special mechanism to verify the Lebanese Army's
deployment in the pilot zones to ensure it maintains control and that no armed
Hezbollah groups enter them. The source said the army has already taken strict
measures to extend state authority.
The source added: "We support forming it with monitors headed by a US general,"
referring to Joseph Clearfield, who had been expected to arrive in Beirut but
instead traveled to Saudi Arabia to participate in the maritime defense
conference hosted by the Kingdom to enhance the protection of maritime routes
and prevent threats to them. The source said the verification committee would
begin work immediately after it is formed. The source also praised cooperation
between army units and residents returning to their towns, saying the army has
been providing them with every possible form of assistance. Cooperation between
the two sides has been excellent, the source said, and nothing has occurred so
far to undermine the army's deployment. The source added that 15 families from
the town of Zawtar Al-Gharbiya had once again been displaced in search of safety
following fears of an Israeli response to Hezbollah's drone attack on an Israeli
military vehicle.
The source said Hezbollah is unlikely to escalate in support of Iran should the
confrontation between Tehran and Washington intensify, arguing that current
circumstances differ from those during its previous intervention on Iran's
behalf. Hezbollah, the source said, cannot withstand another wave of
displacement after hundreds of thousands of residents have returned to their
towns and homes. Such a move would also put Hezbollah at odds with Parliament
Speaker Nabih Berri, who criticized the group's previous intervention on Iran's
behalf following Israel's assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei,
despite Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem having pledged to Berri that the
group would not become involved. It would also place Hezbollah at odds with the
broader Shiite public mood, which seeks stability and opposes another round of
displacement, the source said.
The source added that the Lebanese delegation to the seventh round of
negotiations is counting on US support following the Washington summit between
Presidents Donald Trump and Joseph Aoun. The source expressed hope that the
summit's outcome would translate into concrete steps reflecting the Lebanese
Army's statement accusing Israel of obstructing implementation of the agreement
and expanding the pilot zones to include occupied towns, with Bint Jbeil and
Khiam, or one of them, among the preferred options.
The source said expanding the pilot zones would face resistance from Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who remains determined not to withdraw from
the security zone, while Defense Minister Israel Katz is seeking to impose what
the source described as the "Gaza model" there. Lebanon, meanwhile, hopes
Washington will intervene to prevent the fate of the so-called security zone
from remaining tied to Israeli elections scheduled for Oct. 27.
Lebanon, the source said, has fulfilled all of its obligations and responded to
Washington's request to engage in direct negotiations with Israel under US
sponsorship, with the United States acting as guarantor of efforts to extend
state authority across all Lebanese territory. The aim, the source said, is to
send a message to the Shiite Duo that the Lebanese state's approach is the
correct one and that there will be no retreat from the principle that arms must
remain exclusively in the hands of the state.
The source concluded by asking whether Trump would honor his commitment by
preventing Lebanon from remaining hostage to Israeli election calculations and
instead pave the way for the phased implementation of the Framework Agreement.
Leaving the process stalled, the source argued, would provide the Shiite Duo
with justification for maintaining its support for the Memorandum of
Understanding rather than strengthening President Aoun, the government, and
their supporters in defending Lebanon's decision to engage in direct
negotiations under US sponsorship, though not "the Iranian way."
Salam holds meeting on recovery projects in pilot zones
Naharnet/July 31/2026
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam on Friday held a central meeting dedicated to
discussing the launch of recovery projects in the so-called pilot zones in south
Lebanon, as part of the first phase of a return and recovery plan. Salam
stressed the importance of intensifying coordination among all relevant
ministries, government agencies, and security and military forces to ensure the
successful implementation of the first phase and “guarantee a safe and dignified
return for residents.”To avoid any obstacles on the ground, he directed that
open follow-up meetings be held at the Grand Serail to monitor progress on an
ongoing basis. The Prime Minister also emphasized the need to “expedite the
removal of rubble, reopen roads, and restore essential services and vital
infrastructure, prioritizing the provision of prefabricated housing for the
targeted towns to ensure a swift return for residents.”Salam tasked the relevant
authorities with preparing detailed plans for launching the recovery projects
and immediately commencing the reconstruction of the bridge connecting Qaqaiyat
al-Jisr to the town of Froun, given its importance in reconnecting villages and
districts in the south and facilitating the movement of citizens.
Geagea voices support for amnesty bill devised by Sunni MPs
Naharnet/July 31/2026
Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea announced in a statement Friday his support
for the draft amnesty bill agreed upon by a majority of Sunni MPs who met
Thursday in parliament.
He said: "This has been our position from the moment the amnesty bill was
proposed, and we still don't know why some MPs tried to distort our stance. But
ultimately, the distortion will fail, and the full truth will emerge."Geagea
accordingly called on Speaker Nabih Berri to convene a session as soon as
possible, with the amnesty bill agreed upon by a majority of Sunni MPs at the
top of the agenda, "to uphold justice and redress a long-standing injustice."
Jumblat dubs Lebanon-Israel framework deal 'a huge trap'
Naharnet/July 31/2026
Former Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblat once again criticized
the framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel, which he argued does not
mandate a full Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon. Speaking to a Turkish
newspaper, Jumblat called the framework deal "a huge trap" as it talks about
"redeployment" instead of a full withdrawal. The Druze leader also warned that
Israel intends to sow divisions in Syria and Lebanon by exploiting the Druze
minority to achieve political goals.
Hezbollah condemns US strike in Iraq
LBCI/July 31/2026
Hezbollah condemned what it described as a "blatant U.S. aggression" against
Iraq, saying the attack killed and wounded several people and constituted a
clear violation of international law as well as Iraq's sovereignty and
independence. In a statement, the group said the strike targeted an official
Iraqi entity and alleged that it was carried out with the participation of an
Arab state. Hezbollah warned that the attack could have serious consequences for
the wider region and claimed it served what it called the U.S.-Israeli objective
of destabilizing the Middle East, fragmenting the region and fueling conflict.
The group also criticized Saudi Arabia, saying that, given the historical and
brotherly ties between the two countries, Riyadh should have pursued dialogue
and diplomatic engagement with the Iraqi government to address any tensions
rather than aligning itself with U.S. and Israeli policies. Hezbollah further
accused the United States of seeking to undermine Iraq's stability and recovery
while weakening its national and regional role. It also alleged that
Washington's actions reflected continued ambitions to control Iraq's resources.
The group expressed solidarity with Iraq and its people, calling for an urgent,
firm and responsible Arab, Islamic and international response to what it
described as U.S. aggression. It warned that remaining silent in the face of
such actions would only increase the risk of broader regional instability and
escalation.
Fuel prices in Lebanon surge
LBCI/July 31/2026
On Friday, July 31, 2026, the prices of 95 and 98 octane fuel increased by LBP
42,000, while diesel rose by LBP 91,000.
The current prices for hydrocarbon derivatives are as follows:
Gasoline 95 octane: LBP 2,444,000
Gasoline 98 octane: LBP 2,462,000
Diesel: LBP 2,276,000
Gas canister: LBP 1,157,000
Reassessing the Alleged Maronite–Jewish Agency Document of
30 May 1946
Pierre A. Maroun/Face Book/July 31/2026
A document dated 30 May 1946 has repeatedly resurfaced in Lebanese political
debate. Some cite it as evidence that the Maronite Patriarchate, or even Lebanon
itself, recognized the Zionist project before the establishment of the State of
Israel. Others invoke it as proof of a secret political alliance between
Maronite leaders and the Jewish Agency.
The document’s existence as an archival record is not in dispute. The more
important question is what it actually proves. Properly understood, it reflects
exploratory contacts between representatives of the Jewish Agency and certain
Maronite figures. It does not establish Lebanese state recognition of the
Zionist project, nor does it prove the existence of a binding Maronite–Zionist
alliance.
Historical documents do not acquire meaning simply by existing. Their
significance depends on who produced them, under what authority, in what
historical context, and with what legal or political consequences. Detached from
those considerations, archival records can easily be turned into instruments of
contemporary political narrative rather than evidence of the past.
Judged by ordinary standards of historical inquiry, the alleged agreement of 30
May 1946 proves considerably less, and at the same time somewhat more, than its
modern advocates and critics often claim. It is less than a treaty, less than a
Lebanese state commitment, and less than proof of collective Maronite
recognition of Zionism. But it is more than a forgery or an empty rumor: it is
an authentic archival trace of unofficial political contact during a volatile
regional moment.
Historical setting
The regional context is essential. Between the end of the Second World War and
the outbreak of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, the future of Palestine remained
unsettled, the British Mandate was nearing its end, and political actors
throughout the Middle East were reassessing their strategic options. In that
period, the Jewish Agency actively sought channels of communication with a range
of political and communal figures across the region in search of possible
interlocutors before the anticipated emergence of a Jewish state.
The alleged 1946 document should therefore be read within a broader diplomatic
environment, not in isolation. It belongs to a moment of uncertainty in which
exploratory contacts, tactical conversations, and political testing were common.
That context matters because it helps explain why a draft understanding could
circulate without ever becoming a formal or binding act.
What the archive shows
The principal source for the episode is the Central Zionist Archives in
Jerusalem, which preserve the institutional records of the Jewish Agency and
related Zionist organizations. Those files include correspondence, internal
memoranda, notes of conversations, and the text of a proposed political
understanding.
Within that material appears a draft or proposed agreement involving Bernard (Dov)
Joseph, acting for the Jewish Agency, and Sheikh Toufic Aouad, who is described
as acting under some form of authorization from Patriarch Antoine Arida.
Whatever the precise status of that authorization, the archival record clearly
shows that discussions occurred.
That is the most secure historical conclusion: representatives of the Jewish
Agency engaged in exploratory contacts with certain Maronite figures. The
material does not show that those contacts were transformed into an official
Lebanese act.
What it does not show
Equally important is what the record does not establish. No evidence has been
identified of governmental authorization, cabinet approval, parliamentary
ratification where constitutionally required, or promulgation through Lebanon’s
official legal procedures. Nor has evidence surfaced that the alleged
arrangement was published in the Official Gazette, entered into Lebanon’s treaty
records, or implemented by any state institution.
The available evidence therefore supports unofficial political contact, not a
binding international agreement with Lebanese state effect. A draft or proposed
understanding is not the same thing as a treaty. A conversation is not the same
thing as a constitutional act. And the involvement of a religious authority,
however influential, is not the same thing as authority to bind the Lebanese
Republic.
Constitutional limits
This distinction matters because treaty-making is a constitutional function.
Under Article 52 of the Lebanese Constitution, the authority to negotiate and
conclude treaties belongs to the constitutional institutions of the Republic,
not to a religious body or private political intermediary. The Maronite
Patriarchate, despite its great social and political influence, possessed no
constitutional power to commit the Lebanese state to a foreign alignment.
That constitutional point is decisive. Even if the draft accurately reflects
discussions that took place, it would still not, by itself, constitute a treaty
binding on Lebanon. For that, the relevant constitutional procedures would have
had to be followed. The absence of evidence for those procedures is not a minor
technical gap; it goes to the heart of whether the document had legal effect at
all.
The 1943 National Pact had already defined the framework of the new Lebanese
republic. In that setting, any attempt by a non-state actor to commit Lebanon to
a foreign political orientation would have stood outside both the constitutional
order and the prevailing political understanding of the period.
Scholarly reading
The most careful scholarly treatment remains Laura Zittrain Eisenberg’s work,
especially *My Enemy’s Enemy* and her article on the 1946 episode. She describes
the episode as an “attempted Zionist–Maronite treaty” and concludes that it
never became official Lebanese policy, never entered into force, and left no
discernible mark on Lebanon’s decision to join the Arab side in 1948.
Eyal Zisser reaches a similar conclusion. He characterizes the contacts as
limited, exploratory, and politically marginal. Scott Abramson’s thesis on the
Zionist–Maronite relationship likewise shows that Jewish Agency representatives
explored conversations with other political figures, including Pierre Gemayel
and the Kataeb. Taken together, these contacts are best understood as political
soundings, not as negotiations that culminated in a formal alliance.
This scholarly consensus matters because it separates historical possibility
from legal conclusion. Yes, the Jewish Agency explored openings. Yes, some
Maronite figures engaged in discussion. But none of that proves that the
Lebanese state adopted the proposed understanding or that the Maronite community
as a whole endorsed Zionism.
Misuse of the record
The controversy surrounding the document illustrates a recurring problem in
Lebanese historiography: the tendency to transform isolated archival records
into evidence for contemporary political claims without sufficient attention to
authority, context, or legal effect. That is how a document that shows contact
becomes, in public debate, proof of recognition; and how a draft understanding
becomes, rhetorically, a treaty.
The leap from exploratory conversation to official Lebanese recognition of the
Zionist movement is not a historical conclusion. It is a political
interpretation. Likewise, the claim that the Maronite community as a whole
embraced Zionism simply does not follow from a record involving selected
individuals acting in a specific and uncertain diplomatic context.
Later episodes of Maronite–Israeli cooperation during the Lebanese Civil War
belong to a different historical moment and should not be projected backward
onto the mid-1940s. The political landscape, the balance of forces, and the
institutional setting were fundamentally different.
Historical significance
The document of 30 May 1946 matters because it reveals that unofficial contacts
occurred at a time of profound regional uncertainty. It sheds light on the
diplomatic improvisation of the period and on the Jewish Agency’s efforts to
identify possible interlocutors beyond the obvious Arab and British channels.
Its significance, however, is historical rather than juridical. It shows that
dialogue took place. It does not show that Lebanon recognized the Zionist
project, that the Lebanese Republic entered into a binding treaty, or that the
Maronite Patriarchate had constitutional authority to act on behalf of the
state.
That distinction is not pedantic. It is the difference between archive and law,
between contact and commitment, between possibility and policy. Responsible
historical scholarship depends on keeping those categories separate.
Conclusion
The archival record of 30 May 1946 is genuine, and its historical importance
should not be dismissed. It reflects an attempt by representatives of the Jewish
Agency to establish communication with certain Maronite figures during a period
of exceptional regional flux.
What the evidence does not establish is just as important. It does not
demonstrate the conclusion of a ratified treaty, an official commitment by the
Lebanese Republic, recognition of the Zionist project by the Lebanese state, or
a collective political position adopted by Lebanon’s Maronite community.
The document therefore proves less than its advocates often claim, but more than
its critics sometimes concede. It is not evidence of Lebanese recognition or a
binding alliance. It is evidence of exploratory diplomacy, conducted in a moment
when political actors across the region were testing possibilities that history
would not necessarily fulfill.
Distinguishing between those propositions is not advocacy. It is the essence of
historical method.
REFERENCES
1. Laura Zittrain Eisenberg, My Enemy’s Enemy: Lebanon in the Early Zionist
Imagination, 1900–1948.
2. Laura Zittrain Eisenberg, “Desperate Diplomacy: The Zionist–Maronite Treaty
of 1946.”
3. Eyal Zisser, “The Maronites, Lebanon and the State of Israel: Early
Contacts.”
4. Scott Abramson, The Promise and Failure of the Zionist–Maronite Relationship
(Brandeis University, M.A. thesis, 2012).
Pierre A. Maroun
Researcher and Strategic Analyst
President, Shields of United Lebanon (SOUL)
SOUL for Lebanon See less
Lebanon pivots toward stronger relationship with Turkiye
Dr. Sinem Cengiz/Arab News/July 31, 2026
Lebanon’s two highest-ranking officials, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and
President Joseph Aoun, each visited Turkiye in July for separate meetings with
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and senior Turkish officials, in what could be
described as a transformative diplomatic overture from Beirut to Ankara. Both
visits, not to mention their timing within three weeks of each other, could be
read as particularly crucial given that relations between the countries, though
cordial, have not reached their full potential to date. That is why Salam,
during his visit, stated bilateral relations needed to be elevated to “the level
of a strategic partnership.”
This view was further underlined by Aoun during an interview with Turkish media
ahead of his visit to the country on Thursday. The three key points he
emphasized were: Turkiye’s central position in the regional order; the idea of
coordination with Turkiye as a strategic necessity rather than a temporary
option; and the potential support of Turkiye for efforts to strengthen the
capabilities of Lebanese military institutions.
He said Beirut was “counting on Ankara” to help secure Israel’s withdrawal from
southern Lebanon and support the implementation of the framework deal with
Israeli authorities. However, he also underlined the fact that any Turkish
support needed to be in addition to existing US and wider international support,
not an alternative to it.
For its part, Ankara has long been prepared for a deeper engagement with Beirut.
In June, Erdogan stated openly for the first time that Lebanon and Syria were
key to Turkiye’s national security. The statement came as a response to Israeli
aggression and ambitions for regional hegemony. This positions Lebanon and Syria
as strategic frontiers for Turkiye opposition to Israeli expansionism.
From the perspective of Tel Aviv, Erdogan’s warning that Turkish security
interests now stretch as far as Damascus and Beirut was not a good development.
Furthermore, Beirut’s openness to the idea of Turkiye carving out a more
functional role in Lebanon is likely to complicate Israeli calculations. From
Ankara’s perspective, Israel is trying to draw Lebanon into its rivalry with
Turkiye and Ankara not likely to allow this to happen, at any price.
Turkiye has already built strong relations with the new Syrian government, and
its footprint, both economically and security-wise, in Syria has expanded in the
post-Assad era. Ankara, now with the willingness of Beirut, also wants to
contribute to Lebanese economic recovery and security. Although Turkiye is not a
newcomer to Lebanon, it still needs strong regional support for its policies
there, and is in particular relying on its cooperative relations with Damascus
and Riyadh.
The talks last month between the Lebanese leaders and Erdogan focused in
particular on economic and infrastructural recovery. Ankara has already proved
its diplomatic worth behind the scenes, particularly in talks between Syria and
Lebanon, and even Syria and Hezbollah, to prevent the escalation of tensions in
the Levant. During Salam’s visit, Erdogan once again stressed the importance of
fostering strong neighborly relations between Beirut and Damascus for the
benefit of the entire region.
The stability of Lebanon is a critical issue that aligns with Turkish and Syrian
interests. This is why Turkiye has included Lebanon in the regional security
alliance it leads alongside Syria’s other neighbors, including Jordan and Iraq.
Within this context, Turkiye appears ready to provide all means of security
support for Beirut.
Turkish troops have already participated for years in the peacekeeping UN
Interim Force in Lebanon, which is preparing to conclude its operations when its
mandate ends in December 2026, and withdraw from the country after nearly five
decades. As a key member of NATO, Turkiye now seeks participants in the
potential deployment of a new NATO force in southern Lebanon, with a significant
Turkish contingent, to replace UNIFIL.
More importantly, however, Lebanon reportedly seeks to purchase Turkish defense
products. Such a development is closely tied to the country’s economic recovery,
which will require domestic political stability and the withdrawal of Israeli
forces. Yet the mere interest alone in defense procurement signals that Lebanon
is seeking to diversify its partnerships in the security and economic realms.
And Turkiye appears to be a strong candidate to fill that vacuum in both areas.
Given this, the talks this month between the Lebanese leaders and Erdogan
focused in particular on economic and infrastructural recovery. Lebanon seeks to
be part of the planned Hejaz Railway project through the Tripoli-Homs and
Beirut-Damascus lines.
This is why Syria and Saudi Arabia are key; they are not only part of the
railroad project but also a partner to Turkiye on several regional issues.
Lebanon is currently not involved in the Hejaz project but if it does become
part of this crucial regional logistics corridor it would significantly help its
economic and infrastructural recovery in the long term, particularly after its
railway tracks are repaired. From Lebanon’s perspective, the role of Turkiye
involves at least three main pillars: the countering of Israeli aggression
through strengthened security ties and Ankara’s leverage in Washington; support
for Lebanon’s economic and infrastructural recovery through its connectivity
projects; and humanitarian aid through soft-power initiatives.
Turkiye has already been engaged in Lebanon through the use of soft power via
the Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency, the Disaster and Emergency
Management Agency, and the Turkish Red Crescent, three institutions that provide
humanitarian aid to Lebanon.
The aid to Lebanon has even played an influential role in the Turkiye-Armenia
normalization process. For instance, the Alican/Margara border crossing between
Turkiye and Armenia, which has been closed since 1993, was opened in June to
ease the delivery of humanitarian aid from Armenia to Lebanon. For decades, the
Armenian diaspora in Lebanon was seen as one of the obstacles to stronger
Turkish-Lebanese ties; however, the normalization process between Ankara and
Yerevan is now influencing perceptions of Turkiye in Lebanon, and ultimately
their relationship.Given all of this, the visits by the top Lebanese officials
to Turkiye mark the beginning of a new and different process that will transform
Turkish-Lebanese relations and offer an opportunity that neither Beirut nor
Ankara will want to miss.
**Dr. Sinem Cengiz is a Turkish political analyst who specializes in Turkiye’s
relations with the Middle East.
X: @SinemCngz
The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on 31 July- August 01/2026
Netanyahu confronts Vance over his
criticism of Israeli government
Barak Ravid/Axios/July 31/2026
Vice President Vance and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held a
"direct" conversation about their differences in a one-on-one meeting in
Washington on Tuesday evening, Israeli and U.S. officials said.Why it matters:
Vance has been the most Netanyahu-skeptical voice in Trump's inner circle since
the beginning of the war. As the war dragged on, he became increasingly critical
of the Israeli prime minister. Vance took on a larger
role in war policy and Iran negotiations as the conflict progressed. That
culminated in the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding, which Vance took a lead
role in defending. Netanyahu opposed the agreement but didn't come out against
it publicly, hoping it would collapse on its own. It did several weeks
later.Tensions between the two have been simmering behind the scenes. Netanyahu
was unhappy about Vance's public criticism of him — the vice president accused
the Israeli leader of stoking opposition to the MOU and of being insufficiently
loyal to President Trump. Netanyahu was also privately critical of Vance's role
in the war.Vance, meanwhile, believed Netanyahu was deploying his associates and
allies in the pro-Netanyahu media in Israel and the U.S. to attack him and
undermine him politically. The meeting at Blair House
on Tuesday was a chance for the two men to try to clear the air.Inside the room:
A senior Israeli official said Netanyahu spoke to Vance about his recent
criticism of the Israeli government and Israel's standing among Republicans.
"It was a frank and candid conversation," the Israeli official said.
A U.S. official confirmed that characterization: "The conversation was
direct."The vice president's office declined to comment, but a second U.S.
official said Vance and Netanyahu had a "cordial and productive conversation
about Middle East issues that are important to both countries."
"The Vice President and the Prime Minister agreed to continue pursuing
opportunities for Israel and the United States to cooperate in areas of mutual
interest and shared goals," that person said, adding that the meeting was not
confrontational and that Vance and Netanyahu have a productive working
relationship.
Catch up quick: In March, Vance and Netanyahu had a tense phone call during
which Vance pointed out that several of Netanyahu's predictions about the war
had proved far too optimistic, particularly the prospect of a popular uprising
toppling the regime.
Since the April 8 ceasefire, Vance has become the administration's most
outspoken defender of diplomacy with Iran, repeatedly arguing that Trump's
objective should be to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon without
becoming mired in an open-ended military campaign.
In June, Vance issued a blunt public warning to members of the Israeli
government who were attacking the deal with Iran. "If I was in the cabinet of
the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally that I
have anywhere left in the entire world," Vance said.
Then, in a July interview on Joe Rogan's podcast, Vance accused some members of
the Israeli government of running an influence campaign to push the U.S. away
from diplomacy and keep the war going.
On the same podcast, Vance claimed Jeffrey Epstein had connections to "the
highest levels of Israeli intelligence."
Mediator Pakistan Says US-Iran Talks Ongoing as Foes Trade
Attacks
Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Mediator Pakistan insisted Thursday that negotiations between Iran and the
United States were ongoing, even as Washington carried out a "heavy wave of
strikes" on its foe in retaliation for fresh attacks targeting Jordan. The last
two days have seen Saudi Arabia join the US in striking armed groups in Iraq,
while Egypt has come under fire for the first time with a drone attack at a
Mediterranean port, leading its president to warn that the Middle East conflict
is facing a serious escalation. On Thursday, Jordan reported intercepting
Iranian missiles for a second day running, while Kuwait said an Iranian strike
that hit a building belonging to a Chinese company killed one person. The return
to direct hostilities followed a brief pause in fighting meant to give talks a
boost. "Negotiations between parties are ongoing, particularly on (the) Strait
of Hormuz and to de-escalate," Pakistani foreign ministry spokesman Tahir
Andrabi told reporters.
Pakistan had helped to broker a deal between the warring sides laying the
groundwork for negotiations on a permanent resolution, and Andrabi said it was
doing its "utmost to bring all parties back" to technical talks under the
agreement. Previous talks following an April truce stalled, with the ceasefire
collapsing earlier this month and Iran again slamming shut the Strait of Hormuz,
a vital conduit for oil and gas. Iran's Revolutionary Guards said Thursday that
two oil tankers attempting to transit the strait with US support turned back
after one of them caught fire.Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, said it had set up a
maritime defense alliance of 14 regional countries to secure navigation around
the strategic Bab al-Mandab Strait.
Strikes in Iran
Earlier, the US military said it had "successfully completed a heavy wave of
strikes against Iran", hitting dozens of Revolutionary Guard targets including
military command centers.
US President Donald Trump had vowed to hit Iran "hard" after Tehran's previous
attack on Jordan, its first in the region in days. The Guards' branch in the
northwestern province of Zanjan said three of its members were killed in a US
attack there. Iran's state news agency IRNA also reported hits on several cities
in the southwestern Khuzestan province, as well as on Qeshm island in the Gulf.
Areas around the cities of Abadan, Shadegan, Arvandkenar and Ahvaz -- all in
Khuzestan -- were struck, the agency said, citing provincial authorities.
Jordan's army reported a new volley of Iranian missiles on Thursday morning,
saying five had been shot down, causing no casualties. Kuwait's defense ministry
denounced a "heinous" Iranian attack that "targeted a building belonging to a
Chinese company in the north", killed one worker and caused severe material
damage.
Egypt hit -
Since it began in February with US-Israeli strikes on Iran, the Middle East war
has touched every country in the region, and some outside it. While energy
facilities elsewhere in the region have been repeatedly targeted by drones and
missiles, Egypt had been spared until Wednesday, when an attack at a gas import
hub sparked a fire that damaged two ships.
The government confirmed on Thursday that a drone was to blame for the blaze,
noting that no one had claimed responsibility. Yemen's Iran-backed Houthi
militants denied any involvement, according to their media. In a post on X,
Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said Egypt was "an important friend and
partner" and suggested the drone attack was an Israeli false-flag operation.
Egypt's government said that an inquiry was ongoing "to determine the
circumstances of the incident and to take the necessary measures to preserve
Egypt's interests and national security." During a call to Spain's Prime
Minister Pedro Sanchez, Egypt's President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi stressed the need
for "the international community to work together to halt this escalation",
according to his spokesman. Maritime trade tracking firm Kpler identified the
damaged ships as the Energos Winter storage and regasification vessel and the
GasLog Salem tanker, saying they had been moved offshore after the incident.
A private security monitor, UK-based Ambrey, reported that the
US-owned-and-operated floating storage vessel had been hit by at least one
drone. The authority that manages the port said it remained fully operational.
Saudi Source: Response Targeted Iraqi Militia Capabilities
That Threatened Our Security
Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
A Saudi official source said Friday that the recent airstrike targeted the
capabilities of an Iran-backed militia in Iraq that had threatened the Kingdom's
security and attacked its civilian and critical economic facilities. Saudi
Arabia's Ministry of Defense announced Wednesday that it had carried out
precision strikes against militia targets inside Iraq linked to attacks on the
Kingdom's oil facilities, in coordination with the US Central Command. The
source told Asharq Al-Awsat that Saudi Arabia remains committed to its
relationship with Iraq, both its government and its people, stressing that the
airstrike was not directed against either. The source said the operation was a
precise and limited response carried out only after all diplomatic and political
measures had been exhausted and after the Kingdom had exercised the utmost
restraint over recent months. The official said the response was limited to
militia military depots and was directly linked to attacks targeting Saudi
territory and its critical infrastructure and oil facilities. The source added
that the terrorist militia harms Iraq's interests and its relations with Arab
and Islamic countries by turning Iraqi territory and resources into a platform
for aggression against neighboring states. The official also said attempts by
parties inside and outside Iraq to inflame sectarian tensions would not deceive
prudent Iraqis or the Iraqi people, describing them as actors that do not want
Iraq to pursue rapprochement that would strengthen its security and stability.
Kuwait shoots down Iranian drones targeting military sites
Agence France Presse/July 31/2026
Kuwaiti forces destroyed Iranian drones targeting "vital and military
facilities", the defense ministry said on Friday. "The hostile targets were
engaged and destroyed. This resulted in material damage due to falling shrapnel,
without any human casualties being recorded," it said in a statement.
Iran says struck two tankers under US 'air escort' trying
to pass Hormuz
Agence France Presse/July 31/2026
Iran's Revolutionary Guards said Friday that they had struck two tankers
attempting to pass though the strategic Strait of Hormuz under the "air escort"
of the U.S. military. The IRGC said the "non-compliant oil tankers... were
struck and brought to a halt, while four other oil tankers quickly changed
course and returned to their previous positions".
Netanyahu, Vance discussed Israel criticism during
Washington meeting, report says
Arab News/July 31, 2026
LONDON: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu raised Vice President JD
Vance’s recent criticism of Israel during a private meeting in Washington this
week, according to a report by Axios.The two leaders met at Blair House on
Tuesday during Netanyahu’s visit to the US, which included talks with President
Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other senior
officials.According to Axios, citing Israeli and US officials, Netanyahu
addressed Vance’s recent public comments about Israel during what one Israeli
official described as a “frank and candid conversation.”A US official also
described the discussion as direct but rejected suggestions it had been
confrontational. “The vice president and the prime minister agreed to continue
pursuing opportunities for Israel and the United States to cooperate in areas of
mutual interest and shared goals,” a second US official told Axios, describing
the meeting as cordial and productive. The reported exchange comes after Vance
emerged as one of the Trump administration’s most outspoken voices urging
restraint in the Middle East. In June, he criticized Israeli officials who
opposed Washington’s diplomatic engagement with Iran, saying that if he were in
the Israeli government he would avoid attacking “the only powerful ally” Israel
had.Earlier this month, Vance also suggested on “The Joe Rogan Experience”
podcast that some Israeli leaders had encouraged Washington to move away from
diplomacy in favor of a more confrontational approach toward Tehran. Previous
media reports also suggested that Vance and Netanyahu held a tense telephone
conversation earlier this year over the conflict with Iran, with the vice
president reportedly questioning Israeli assessments that Tehran would quickly
capitulate. Despite those differences, Vance has repeatedly emphasized the
strength of the US-Israel relationship. Last month, he told CBS that while
Netanyahu had “certainly got some things wrong,” he remained “a good partner.
“We’re going to keep on working together,” Vance said. “But where interests
diverge, the United States is going to pursue the best interests of our nation,
and that’s how it’s going to be.” The White House and the Israeli government
have not publicly commented on the substance of Tuesday’s private meeting. The
report was first published by Axios.
Will Israel Expand Incursions in Syria as Türkiye Ties
Sour?
Damascus : Muwafaq Mohammed/July 31/2026
Israel’s intensifying incursions into southern Syria are unfolding alongside a
deepening rift with Türkiye.The tensions were laid bare in June, when Turkish
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said his country’s security “does not begin in
Hatay province, but in Aleppo, Damascus and Beirut.”Türkiye, he said, would not
tolerate fantasies of a “Promised Land,” warning that Israeli attacks on Syria
and Lebanon had reached a point where they also threatened his country. Israeli
officials have responded with tougher rhetoric. On July 29, Israeli Energy
Minister Eli Cohen raised the prospect of establishing military bases inside
Syria if Ankara moved ahead with plans to build bases there. The escalating war
of words raises a key question: Could Israel widen the incursions it has carried
out in Syria since the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government in late 2024? Syrian
politician and lawyer Mohammed Sabra said the incursions were driven by three
factors. The first, he told Asharq Al-Awsat, was Israel’s effort to keep
southern Syria insecure and disrupt regional trade and energy supply routes
passing through the country. “Netanyahu’s government is supporting separatists
in Sweida and keeping Daraa and Quneitra under constant security pressure and
tension,” Sabra said. Any regional project linking Gulf energy sources and
logistics hubs to Syria, and from there to Türkiye or Europe by sea, would have
to pass through southern Syria, he said. “As long as the region remains
insecure, these projects will stay on hold and cannot begin.” The Trans-Arabian
Pipeline, or Tapline, is a clear example of how security conditions can shape
energy routes. It originally crossed the Syrian Golan Heights but was halted
after Israel occupied the plateau. The second factor, Sabra said, was Israel’s
legislative elections in October. The right-wing coalition is determined to win
and has placed security at the heart of the campaign by claiming that threats to
Israel are emerging from Syria, he said. The third factor was Israel’s attempt
to “keep separatist ambitions alive among some local religious leaders in Sweida,”
undermining the Syrian government’s efforts to extend its authority across the
country. Türkiye, meanwhile, is seeking a stronger role in the international
division of labor and wants to become a logistics hub for energy and trade
linking the Gulf to Europe and Asia to the European continent. That ambition
adds another layer to the dispute. “Turkish-Israeli competition — a more
accurate term than conflict — is not about Syria,” Sabra said. “It is about the
two countries’ competing visions for reshaping the region geopolitically and the
roles they seek in supply-chain networks.”Sabra said the rivalry was unlikely to
spill into armed confrontation. Türkiye is a NATO member bound by the alliance’s
charter, while Israel has an agreement with NATO that places it among the
alliance’s strategic partners outside the bloc, he said. The actions of both
countries are therefore constrained by their ties and commitments to NATO. “This
is competition over role and status, not conflict in the traditional sense,”
Sabra said. “Neither side is seeking to defeat the other. A Turkish-Israeli
military clash in Syria is therefore highly unlikely.”For Syria, he said, the
priority should be to address the urgent challenges facing the country during a
period of regional uncertainty. That means preserving national sovereignty,
refusing to surrender Syrian rights to any party, maintaining internal security
and strengthening coordination with Syria’s Arab strategic depth. “The region
must develop its own strategic vision,” Sabra said. “It must move from being an
arena where rivals compete to becoming an active force in shaping the major
strategies that will determine our future.”
Elections
Wael Alwan, executive director of the Jusoor Center for Studies, said Israeli
incursions into southern Syria were likely to continue at their current pace
until Israel’s elections in October. “Netanyahu’s government always needs
political escalation more than security or military escalation,” Alwan told
Asharq Al-Awsat. “It also needs to create a headline in Gaza, southern Lebanon
or Syria.”The current escalation, he said, was part of Israel’s effort to send
messages at home and abroad through its established political narrative.
Political and media tensions with Türkiye fit that pattern, he said, helping Tel
Aviv promote the image of an external threat for domestic political purposes.
Alwan said the United States was pressing Israel to keep the situation under
control. “These are not merely statements,” he said. “There are incursions,
escalation, provocations and attacks.”Israel, he added, was seeking to send
messages to Türkiye by undermining stability in Syria. Neither Türkiye nor
Israel appeared to be trying to defuse the tensions, Alwan said. But he expected
the confrontation to remain within the political and media boundaries seen so
far. Israeli incursions in southern Syria could nevertheless intensify, he said,
not to pressure Türkiye but to push Washington to intervene in Netanyahu’s favor
ahead of the elections.“There is American pressure on Netanyahu’s government,”
Alwan said. “But it is not enough to end the incursions, attacks, escalation and
provocations.”
Trump says Israel 'very happy' about Hamas disarmament deal
LBCI/July 31/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump said Friday that Israel is "very happy" about a deal
under which militant group Hamas will hand over its weapons and Israeli forces
will gradually withdraw from Gaza."We do have an understanding with Israel.
Israel's very happy about it. Israel helped us and they've been very good about
it," Trump said told journalists at the Camp David presidential retreat. AFP
Trump: I don’t think Iran is responsible for Minnesota cyberattack
LBCI/Reuters/July 31/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters at Camp David on Friday that he does
not believe Iran was responsible for a cyberattack targeting water systems in
the U.S. state of Minnesota.
Israel Rejects New Hamas Deal, Stays Silent to Avoid Angering Trump
Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Despite Israel's official silence and its refusal to comment on the
understandings reached by mediators and Hamas in Cairo on advancing to the
second phase of the ceasefire agreement, media leaks and developments on the
ground indicate that it opposes the deal. However, unwilling to upset US
President Donald Trump, who announced the agreement with considerable fanfare,
Israel has refrained from commenting publicly.The only official to state his
position publicly was National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, a staunch
opponent of any agreement. “Nazis should only be spoken to through the barrels
of guns,” he said, calling on the government to occupy the rest of the Gaza
Strip.Opposition Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman said any agreement
with Hamas would represent “a return to the doctrine that led to the Oct. 7
attack.”Government sources, however, circulated a uniform statement to
Hebrew-language media outlining Israel’s objections. “Hamas’ agreement to give
up its heavy weapons is meaningless,” the statement said. “If it means rockets,
we have destroyed 80% of them. But the main problem now is light weapons —
machine guns, pistols, and rifles. They are widely available and held by around
30,000 operatives. “Israel will not accept weapons remaining in Palestinian
hands. Talk of a gradual Israeli withdrawal is unrealistic. Israel will not
withdraw from the Yellow Line area — which initially covered 53% of the Gaza
Strip and has expanded to more than 60% — before disarmament takes place.” Asked
whether Trump could have announced an agreement only two days after meeting
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, one government official said Gaza had not
been discussed at all during the meeting at the White House. A US official
quickly contradicted that account in comments to Israel’s Channel 12, saying
Gaza had been discussed at the Washington meeting. The official said US envoy
Steve Witkoff had briefed Trump and Netanyahu on progress in negotiations with
Hamas over disarmament in Gaza. “Everything concerning the agreement reached
with Hamas is fully coordinated with Tel Aviv, and Israel is fully aware of all
the details,” the official said. “This is a good deal
for Israel because it resolves the Gaza problem. If Hamas plays games,
everything will stop, and Israel will make no concessions.”Israel is also
imposing a reality on the ground in Gaza that indicates its refusal to advance
Trump’s plan for the territory.
It is building a massive wall of sand mixed with reinforced concrete through the
center of the Gaza Strip, stretching from north to south. In Tel Aviv, it is
known as “Bar-Lev Line 2” because, from a distance, it resembles the defensive
line Israel built along the Suez Canal after the 1967 war. The Gaza line,
however, appears much larger, with a road built along its top for military
vehicles. Israel also continues to use Palestinian armed militias affiliated
with it, carry out strikes and assassinations, keep the Rafah crossing closed
and block the entry of the Palestinian national committee formed to administer
the territory in place of the Hamas government. All of this runs counter to the
spirit of the agreement and de-escalation. Some Israeli experts believe Israel
does not genuinely intend to end Hamas rule and is doing everything it can to
preserve it and prevent any alternative from emerging. Channel 12 reported that
Israeli officials not only doubt Hamas’ intention to disarm, arguing that the
group is carrying out a tactical maneuver to ease pressure on it, but also
distrust two of the three mediators — Türkiye and Qatar. Israeli officials say
the two countries are helping Hamas maneuver to preserve its political survival.
Hamas Official: Israel Must Agree on Disarmament Deal
before Group Implements It
Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Hamas official Ghazi Hamad told Reuters on Friday that Israel must agree to a
phased disarmament agreement backed by the Board of Peace, which US President
Donald Trump established, before Hamas implements it. Hamad, who is taking part
in the negotiations, said that once both sides approve the text of the
agreement, Israel should begin implementing its first phase. The Board of Peace
said in a post on X that Hamas had agreed to a detailed roadmap for implementing
the subsequent phases of the Gaza ceasefire agreement.
"Our focus is now on implementation," it said, adding that the National
Committee for the Administration of Gaza would soon begin a gradual transition
toward assuming full authority. On his Truth Social
platform, Trump said: “As disarmament is completed, Israeli forces will
withdraw, and the International Stabilization Force will work with a new
Palestinian police force to take responsibility for Gaza being safe for its
residents and its neighbors". He thanked the mediators from Egypt, Qatar and
Türkiye. Nickolay Mladenov, the High Representative for the Board of Peace said
in a post on X on Friday that the agreement had taken "months of very difficult
negotiations”.“What happens next matters even more. Implementation and
verification have to be real”, he added.
EU's Kallas Welcomes Gaza Plan as "Constructive Step"
Towards Peace
Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas on Friday said a proposed deal
to bring peace to Gaza, if fully implemented, would be "a constructive step." "A
lot needs to fall in place for this to work. Success depends on the full
commitment of all parties. Verifying Hamas' compliance will be a significant
challenge. Israel would need to eventually withdraw from Gaza," Kallas wrote in
a post on social media platform X, Reuters reported. Kallas added that the EU
was ready to support next steps. US President Donald Trump said his "Board of
Peace" had reached an agreement for the disarmament of Hamas and other armed
groups, though it was not immediately clear how Hamas or Israel stood behind it.
Palestinian Shot During Settler March Through West Bank
Towns
Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
One Palestinian was shot and wounded during an Israeli settler march through
several West Bank Palestinian towns Friday that sparked clashes with locals,
first responders, the army and an AFP journalist said. "Our crews in Nablus are
treating a young man who was shot with live ammunition in the abdomen during an
Israeli army and settler raid on the al-Junaid area," the Palestinian Red
Crescent said. Israeli settlers organized a march Friday morning in the northern
West Bank in memory of two Israelis killed last week during clashes in the
Palestinian town of Tell, near Nablus, during which four Palestinians were also
killed. An AFP journalist at the scene said that between 100 and 150 settlers
including women and children came near Tell from the west, the direction of
Havat Gilad, the home settlement of one of the killed Israelis.The settlers,
roughly ten of whom were armed, marched through fields near Tell, through the
nearby town of Sarra and the Nablus neighbourhood of al-Junaid, while army
troops stationed along the route periodically dispersed settlers and
Palestinians when clashes occurred, the AFP journalist said. The journalist saw
settlers raiding at least one building in Tell, and four in al-Junaid, where a
clash broke out with Palestinian youth, before the army dispersed the crowd,
firing tear gas.In a statement, the army said that in al-Junaid "Palestinians in
the area hurled rocks at the Israeli civilians, and an Israeli civilian fired
warning shots into the air.""Israeli- soldiers who had been deployed in the area
ahead of their arrival responded to disperse the gathering and evacuate the
civilians from the area," the statement said. The army
said a Palestinian was shot in a later incident in the area, when Palestinians
threw rocks at soldiers. "The soldiers responded by initiating the suspect
apprehension protocol, which included firing toward a primary instigator," the
army said. Israel has occupied the West Bank since 1967, but in recent years the
number of settlements in the Palestinian territory -- which are illegal under
international law -- has soared. Excluding east Jerusalem, more than 500,000
Israelis live in settlements in the West Bank, home to around three million
Palestinians.Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that,
following the deaths of two Israelis in Tell, he would allow the establishment
of more settlements in the region.
Saudi Arabia Welcomes Historic Agreement on Decommissioning of Weapons in Gaza
Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia welcomed US President Donald Trump's announcement of
the historic agreement on the decommissioning of weapons in the Gaza Strip. It
commended Trump's leadership and steadfast commitment, which have been
instrumental in achieving this important milestone. According to SPA, the
Kingdom expressed its appreciation to Egypt, Qatar, Türkiye, the US, the Board
of Peace, and all partners whose sustained efforts made this historic
achievement possible. In a statement, the Kingdom reaffirmed its full commitment
to the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Plan, as endorsed by United
Nations Security Council Resolution 2803, in coordination with international and
regional partners, and underscores the importance of implementing all agreed
phases in a timely, credible, and irreversible manner. It also emphasized the
importance of the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip, the
deployment of the International Stabilization Force, and the continued,
unhindered delivery of humanitarian assistance and reconstruction support to the
Palestinian people. In accordance with United Nations Security Council
Resolution 2803, the Kingdom underscored that the return of the Palestinian
Authority to the Gaza Strip and the preservation of the unity of the Occupied
Palestinian Territory are essential to the successful implementation of the
Comprehensive Peace Plan and to ensuring sustainable stability and lasting
peace. The Kingdom reiterated that this agreement
should mark the beginning of a broader political process leading to the full
implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Plan, the realization of the
inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, foremost among them the right to
self-determination and the establishment of their independent State, thereby
enabling peaceful coexistence between the State of Palestine and Israel on the
basis of mutual recognition. It also reaffirmed that a
just and lasting peace can only be achieved through a comprehensive political
settlement that brings the conflict to an end and lays the foundation for a
future defined by security, stability, and shared prosperity for all the peoples
of the region.
The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from
miscellaneous sources published
on 31 July- August 01/2026
Video-Link & Text to a very important interview with Israeli Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin
The Interview was conducted by Sean Hannity/Fox news/July 30/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/156357/
Netanyahu: What Really Happened in My Meeting With Trump | Hang Out with Sean
Hannity
Hang Out with Sean Hannity
Benjamin Netanyahu reveals the full truth about his Oval Office
meeting with President Donald Trump and Israel’s strategy to prevent a nuclear
Iran.
In this exclusive episode of Hang Out with Sean Hannity, Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu sits down for an in-depth conversation on the state of the
US-Israel alliance, honoring the late Senator Lindsey Graham, and confronting
threats from the Iranian regime. Netanyahu addresses the International Criminal
Court (ICC), responds directly to NYC arrest threats, and explains why strength
is the only path to lasting peace in the Middle East.
00:00 – 03:38 | Remembering Lindsey Graham & US-Israel Friendship
03:38 – 07:38 | Netanyahu on Trump Oval Office Meeting & Stopping Iran
07:38 – 14:52 | Exposing ICC Corruption & NYC Speech Announcement
14:52 – 23:18 | Expanding Middle East Peace Through Strength
23:18 – 36:17 | Border Security and European Decline
36:17 – 52:08 | Tragedy, Personal Destiny & Fighting Terror
Summary of the Netanyahu–Hannity Interview
This lengthy interview between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and
commentator Sean Hannity focused on U.S.-Israeli relations, Iran, regional
security, anti-Semitism, the International Criminal Court, the Abraham Accords,
and Netanyahu’s personal journey in public service.
Main Headlines
Strong Strategic Alliance Between Netanyahu and President Trump
Determination to Prevent Iran from Obtaining Nuclear Weapons
Tribute to Lindsey Graham and His Support for Israel
Criticism of the International Criminal Court (ICC)
Concerns About Rising Anti-Semitism Worldwide
Expansion of Middle East Peace Through Strength
The Iranian Threat to Israel, America, and the Free World
Border Security and Illegal Immigration Challenges
Netanyahu’s Personal Story and His Brother’s Legacy
Praise for President Trump’s Policies Toward Israel
Defense of Israel’s Actions After October 7
Warning Against Democratic Societies Ignoring Emerging Threats
1. Tribute to Lindsey Graham
The interview opened with an emotional discussion about the late Senator Lindsey
Graham, whom both Hannity and Netanyahu described as a devoted friend of Israel
and one of the strongest advocates of the U.S.-Israel alliance. Netanyahu
praised Graham’s courage, honesty, and unwavering support for Israel, noting
that he viewed America’s security and Israel’s security as inseparable.
2. Netanyahu–Trump Cooperation
Netanyahu emphasized that his meeting with President Donald Trump had been one
of their best. According to Netanyahu: There are no significant divisions
between him and Trump.
Both leaders are committed to preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
They share the same strategic vision regarding regional security. Their
partnership has strengthened the American-Israeli alliance. Netanyahu repeatedly
rejected media claims that disagreements exist between the two leaders.
3. Iran: The Central Threat
A major portion of the interview focused on Iran. Netanyahu argued that: Iran
remains the leading sponsor of terrorism. The regime continues to threaten both
Israel and the United States. Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons represents a
danger to global stability.
Any Iranian attack would be met with overwhelming force. He stressed that Israel
and America must remain united in confronting Tehran.
4. Peace Through Strength
Netanyahu reaffirmed his long-standing belief that peace is achieved through
strength.
He stated that: The Abraham Accords were possible because Iran was being
effectively deterred. Arab states are more willing to cooperate with Israel when
they feel protected from Iranian aggression. Weakening Iran creates
opportunities for broader regional peace agreements. He predicted that
additional Arab countries could normalize relations with Israel in the future.
5. Criticism of the International Criminal Court
Netanyahu strongly attacked the ICC. He described the court as politically
biased and accused it of unfairly targeting Israel. He specifically criticized
the arrest warrants issued against Israeli officials and argued that Israel’s
judicial system is fully capable of investigating allegations independently. The
discussion also focused on allegations against former ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan
and the controversy surrounding his actions.
6. Anti-Semitism and Information Warfare
Both participants expressed concern about what they described as a growing wave
of anti-Semitism worldwide.They argued that: Anti-Israel narratives are being
amplified through social media. Young people are being exposed to anti-Israel
propaganda.
Foreign actors exploit online platforms to influence public opinion. Netanyahu
urged audiences to examine facts carefully rather than rely on social media
narratives.
7. October 7 and Israel’s War Against Hamas
Netanyahu revisited the October 7 attacks and described them as one of the worst
tragedies in Israeli history. He argued that: Israel is fighting a defensive
war. Hamas deliberately uses civilians as human shields.Israel takes
extraordinary measures to warn civilians before military operations. Much
international criticism ignores the realities of Hamas’s tactics.
8. Border Security and Illegal Immigration
The conversation expanded beyond the Middle East to discuss immigration and
border security. Netanyahu cited Israel’s experience with illegal immigration
and explained how border barriers significantly reduced unauthorized
crossings.He argued that:
Nations have the right to control their borders.Legal immigration differs from
illegal immigration.Countries that lose control of their borders risk losing
control of their future.
9. Netanyahu’s Personal Story
One of the most personal segments involved Netanyahu discussing his late
brother, Yoni Netanyahu. He explained that: His brother’s death during the
Entebbe rescue operation profoundly changed his life. The tragedy motivated him
to dedicate himself to combating terrorism. His military service and personal
experiences shaped his political worldview.
10. Netanyahu on Donald Trump Netanyahu offered extensive praise for President
Donald Trump.
He highlighted: The relocation of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.Recognition of
Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. Withdrawal from the Iran nuclear
agreement.
Support for the Abraham Accords. Cooperation in confronting Iran. Netanyahu
described Trump as the most supportive American president toward Israel during
his lifetime.
11. The Future of Iran
Netanyahu suggested that Iran’s regime is weaker than many observers believe.
He argued that: Pressure on the regime could eventually empower the Iranian
people.
Democratic nations must remain vigilant. The international community cannot
afford to ignore the danger posed by a nuclear Iran. He expressed hope that
conditions might eventually enable political change inside Iran.
12. Final Message: Defending Civilization
The interview concluded with Netanyahu framing the conflict with Iran, Hamas,
and other extremist organizations as a broader struggle between democracy and
tyranny.
His central argument was that: Israel and the United States face common enemies.
Democracies must not underestimate ideological extremism. Preventing Iran from
acquiring nuclear weapons remains a vital strategic objective.
Peace and stability depend upon strength, deterrence, and close cooperation
among democratic allies.
Overall Assessment
The interview was primarily a strategic and political discussion centered on
four themes:
The strength of the Trump–Netanyahu partnership.
The urgency of preventing a nuclear-armed Iran.
Expanding regional peace through deterrence and strength.
Defending democratic societies against terrorism, extremism, and anti-Semitism.
Throughout the conversation, Netanyahu repeatedly emphasized that Israel views
its security partnership with the United States as indispensable and believes
the Iranian regime remains the most significant threat to regional and global
stability.
Analysis: Cheap Wars, Expensive Men
Amb. Alberto M. Fernandez/MEMRI/July 31/2026
It was a great and subtle statesman almost a century and a half ago that
remarked that the Balkans in Europe were "not worth the healthy bones of a
single Pomeranian grenadier."[1] Otto von Bismarck's famous dictum was something
a clever man would say, was true in a way, and yet less than thirty years later
millions would die in Europe during the Great War because of the Balkans.
The 2026 War in Iran is serious business, waged against a vicious, murderous
Iranian regime, but it is also, in some ways, farcical. The United States and
Israel bombed Iran for 39 days from late February to early April 2026 and yet
Iran's key lifeline, its oil exports, were untouched for that entire period. The
U.S. naval blockade came later, when ceasefire talks broke down. They were then
lifted when that Memorandum of Understanding broke down and reimposed more
recently when Iran began firing at ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz during
a ceasefire.
Nobody knows how this war will end, but the on again, off again, selective tempo
of the conflict does not bode well. It does underscore a larger point about
modern wars – not just the one in Iran – that, for the West at least, wars are
changing and perhaps have changed irrevocably. We seemingly are not able to
sacrifice or do what is needed to win but we cannot seem to avoid being dragged
into these conflicts anyway. A war important enough to be involved in but not
important enough to do everything to win is a perilous scenario.
Korea ended as a stalemate and Vietnam ended as a defeat because the United
States was willing to expend vast amounts of blood and treasure but, because of
Cold War considerations, was not able to destroy the enemy. North Korea and
North Vietnam were, or became, off limits. They could be bombed from the air
with impunity but could not be taken or overthrown from the ground. Afghanistan
and Iraq – two initial victories – morphed into a long, slow grinding defeat as
the metrics of success shifted. In Afghanistan, the Taliban, the loser of 2001,
became the winner of 2021. In Iraq, the bloody dictatorship of Saddam Hussein
was replaced by a (mostly) pro-Iranian, corrupt pseudo-democracy.
All these wars featured great American heroism and the ultimate sacrifice with,
at best, unsatisfactory political and military results. The great scholar Dr.
Edward Luttwak has suggested that we now live – at least in much of the West –
in a "post-heroic age where societies no longer accept combat casualties for any
reason – not even to resist aggression.”[2]
Dr. Luttwak sees this tied more to demographic changes rather than the withering
of martial virtues. Smaller families, less children equals fewer military age
males.[3] There is something to this. There is nothing the United States could
not do to Iran if it had the will to do so but American society – especially
after the debacles in Afghanistan and Iraq – is understandably skeptical.[4]
There is little love for the Iranian regime but great skepticism of our own
government and our own policies and objectives. Losing 18 American dead in
Operation Epic Fury is tragic but comparatively tiny in contrast to other
American wars.[5] But like Bismarck's Balkans, the cost seems too high for many.
This calculation is not limited to America's latest war. The brutal
Russia-Ukraine War may have claimed at least a horrific half a million dead so
far but neither Russia nor Ukraine was willing to go to full mobilization of
their populations.[6] Both seemed to have felt that their societies would not
accept this.[7]
Other recent battles have been almost as bad. As brutal as the war in Ukraine
has been, the death toll in two recent African wars is proportionally almost as
high. The Tigray War of 2020-2022 in Ethiopia cost at least 100,000 battlefield
deaths. Probably the same number is true in the ongoing (April 2023 to now)
Sudanese Civil War. In both Sudan and Ethiopia hundreds of thousands more
(civilians rather than soldiers) died as a result of massacre, famine or
disease.[8] This is a number much larger than the number of civilians killed in
Ukraine or Russia. Tigray and Sudan are both civil wars and, in a sense, so is
the Russia-Ukraine War.
The harsh lesson here is not that war is going away any time soon. But that
extended wars fought with humans are going to be very difficult to sustain, not
just logistically, but because of a lack of will among both America's and
Europe's Left and Right.[9] Americans still love military victory but are
dubious about conflicts that promise much and deliver little. Supposedly our
future conflicts may be "wars without soldiers.”[10]
A civil war may be different. It is intimate and immediate, involving your
family on your territory. I would classify Israel's existential fight against
various states and players seeking to destroy it as also being like a kind of
civil war – local, imposed, territorial, up close and personal. The IDF has high
morale not only because it is a professional force but because it is extremely
motivated.[11] Israel sees its very survival at risk in ways that the United
States has not really seemed to face since the Second World War. The stakes were
high during the Cold War but it was mostly fought politically or in distant
brush wars that seemed really important at the time but which have faded into
history.
Americans are still willing to fight but it is politically sustainable only if
is played to win, over quickly and cleanly, does not cost too much and is easily
understood. This is a grim reality policymakers ignore at their peril.
https://www.memri.org/reports/cheap-wars-expensive-men
*Alberto M. Fernandez is Vice President of MEMRI.
[1] Historytoday.com/archive/folly-and-failure-balkans, September 9, 1999.
[2] X.com/ELuttwak/status/2082640465631855028, July 29, 2026.
[3] Vox.com/world-politics/355547/soldiers-shortage-demographics-population-conscription,
June 18, 2024.
[4] Thehill.com/policy/international/5998865-americans-iran-war-length-survey,
July 30, 2026.
[5] Stripes.com/theaters/middle_east/2026-07-27/iran-troops-injured-war-pause-22377470.html,
July 27, 2026.
[6] Newsweek.com/new-russian-soldiers-shape-ukraine-war-12258788, July 29, 2026.
[7] Kyivindependent.com/what-the-data-says-about-ukraines-mobilization-crisis,
January 9, 2026.
[8] Csis.org/analysis/sudan-war-10-charts, April 17, 2026.
[9] Gallup-international.com/survey-results-and-news/survey-result/fewer-people-are-willing-to-fight-for-their-country-compared-to-ten-years-ago,
March 25, 2024.
[10] Mwi.westpoint.edu/war-without-soldiers-the-evolution-of-warfare-in-the-age-of-machines,
February 24, 2026.
[11] Idf.il/en/mini-sites/our-mission-our-values, accessed July 31, 2026.
Turkish F-35 Stealth Fighter Jets: A Grave Threat to Greece, Israel, the West
Nils A. Haug/Gatestone Institute/July 31, 2026
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22752/turkey-f35-threat
The main reason that the prospect of Turkey obtaining F-35 fighter jets is so
disturbing is that Turkey has revealed time and again its desire for Israel to
be eliminated. In fact, now that Iran is on the ropes, Turkey has positioned
itself as the primary enemy of Israel. Erdogan is trying to present himself as
the leader of the Muslim world and the natural Caliph of a coming Ottoman
Empire, revived by him.
Trump seems drawn to strong, ruthless dictators – such as Russia's Vladimir
Putin and Communist Chinese President Xi Jinping, as if acceptance by them
assures him that he is as strong as they are.
Similarly, he also seems drawn to jihadist leaders of countries such as Qatar,
Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Pakistan. They offer him money, gifts and
business deals, and no doubt tell him what he likes to hear – but none of us
would want to think that people are being friendly because they want something
from us.Perhaps they genuinely do like Trump; he can be delightful. That does
not necessarily mean, however, that they plan to give up their jihadist dreams
of conquest and join the West, or that they entertain no plans, when the
opportunity soon presents itself, to try to overthrow it.
The main reason that the prospect of Turkey obtaining F-35 fighter jets is so
disturbing is that Turkey has revealed time and again its desire for Israel to
be eliminated. In fact, now that Iran is on the ropes, Turkey has positioned
itself as the primary enemy of Israel. Erdogan is trying to present himself as
the leader of the Muslim world and the natural Caliph of a coming Ottoman
Empire, revived by him. Much has been written about the dangerous anti-Israel
animosity spewing from Turkey's autocratic prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
and his circle of ministers (see here, here and here).
On July 3, immediately prior to the important NATO summit in Ankara, Turkish
Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan made Turkey's view even more apparent when he said
that Israel is a "burden that humanity can no longer bear". In Hitleresque
fashion, he clearly implied that Israel and its population should no longer
exist -- meaning eliminated.
In this mode, Turkey's Interior Minister Mustafa Çiftçi said he hopes to become
governor of Jerusalem. Do you hear Israeli ministers talk about becoming
governor of Istanbul?
Israel immediately condemned such revealing threats. Israeli Foreign Minister
Gideon Sa'ar called them "horrific language from history's worst eliminationist
regimes" and noted that such "sickening words are textbook incitement to
genocide."
Turkey's genocidal attempts to eradicate Armenians (1915-1917) and Pontic Greeks
(1914-1923) are a matter of recorded history, despite vehement, disingenuous
denials. Turkey also has a long history of persecuting Jews and other
minorities, harkening back to Ottoman times.
Israel's great prime minister of years gone by, Menachem Begin, when still
leader of the opposition, explained in 1963 the seriousness of such dangerous
threats:
"If the enemy of the Jews says that he has in his heart, in his blood, the
desire to destroy them — do not belittle, do not mock, do not doubt, but take
his desire seriously, treat his words with all the seriousness inherent in
them."
Upon hearing the possibility that US President Donald Trump might restore Turkey
to the F-35 program — enabling it to obtain the world's finest stealth
fighter-jets — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed his justified
concern:
"Turkey is a big country, but it is ruled by a man who openly calls for Israel's
destruction... it occupies half of Cyprus, a NATO member state, threatens
Greece, also a NATO member state, and speaks openly about conquering Jerusalem."
According to JNS:
"Erdoğan said U.S. President Donald Trump had made a 'promise' to sell F-35
fighter jets to his country as the two leaders met on Tuesday [July 7] ahead of
the two-day NATO summit in Ankara."
The same day, Trump told the media that he would be lifting the sanctions
against Turkey's defense industry that were imposed in 2020, due to Erdogan's
purchase, from his ally Russian President Vladimir Putin, of the S-400 air
defense system -- against President Trump's advice not to do so. Erdogan's words
were as follows:
"I believe that President Trump has made a promise on this separately... we do
hope that the promise that we have previously received is going to be
productively tested towards the future. President Trump has always been a man of
his word, and hopefully with respect to the F-35."
Trump added that the US-Turkey relationship was "better, probably, than it's
ever been," and highlighted his personal relationship with Erdogan: "You never
know why a relationship is special... it's a chemistry that works between us."
In Trump's view, Erdogan can apparently do nothing wrong.
Trump previously had commended Erdogan as a "respected man and respected
leader," and on another occasion said, "He is a very good friend of mine, and we
have worked together very well. I love him. He is a great leader and a very
strong person."
Powerful words indeed – but perturbing.
It appears that Erdogan has become Trump's new best friend. While Netanyahu
previously held that position, Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance have
strongly, and quite unjustly, recently criticized the Israeli prime minister.
Trump actually stated that Netanyahu will "do whatever I want him to do." In a
call between the two in June, Trump told Netanyahu:
"You're f**king crazy. You'd be in prison if it weren't for me. I'm saving your
ass. Everybody hates you now. Everybody hates Israel because of this."
To add insult to injury, Vance said last month to Netanyahu, who has served over
18 years as prime minister, "You can't just kill your way out of solving every
single national security problem that you have." He also said, "If I was in the
cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful
ally that I have anywhere left in the entire world."
With such nonsense, Vance exposed his skewed understanding of Middle Eastern
geopolitical events, mindsets, and relationships. In actuality, Israel is the
only true friend that the US has in the region – the rest being mere
transactional allies of convenience.
The main reason that the prospect of Turkey obtaining F-35 fighter jets is so
disturbing is that Turkey has revealed time and again its desire for Israel to
be eliminated. In fact, now that Iran is on the ropes, Turkey has positioned
itself as the primary enemy of Israel. Erdogan is trying to present himself as
the leader of the Muslim world and the natural Caliph of a coming Ottoman
Empire, revived by him.
Given the vehement hostility emanating from Turkey's leaders towards Jews and
their state, and that Turkey is the best-armed Muslim military in the Middle
East, the possession of F-35 stealth fighter jets would decidedly pose an
additional existential threat to Israel that it hardly needs.
While Israel is currently the strongest military power in the region, its edge
in hardware is predominantly founded on a superior air force, whose central jet
fighter is the F-35 – the world's most advanced attack aircraft. Should Turkey
also acquire these fighters from the US, even without the "upgrade," Israel will
be at a disadvantage. The US government had previously blocked the sale of F-35s
to Turkey, based on the Turkish purchase from Russia of its S-400 surface-to-air
missile system. Erdogan claims as a defense that Turkey's S-400 has not been
activated. So in that case, everything must be fine! Thankfully, the US is still
insisting that so long as Turkey is in possession of the S-400, it may not
re-enter the F-35 program. Erdogan seems to be counting on eventually being able
to have both.
The S-400 anti-aircraft missile defense systems would help protect Turkish
forces from Israel's air superiority. With Turkey having much larger ground
forces than Israel, the prognosis of Israel overcoming an invasion or attack by
a future Turkey using F-35s would be deeply alarming. Israel, however, is
probably the sole nuclear power in the region, but would doubtless never want to
reach for such a weapon.
In the interim, both Trump and Vance play their negotiating games with Iran,
endeavoring to conclude an elusive ceasefire agreement with an intransigent,
deceptive and wily hardcore Islamist regime – an avowed enemy – that will not
honor any agreement it signs anyway. Among Shia Muslims, advancing dissimulation
(taqiyya) is accepted Islamic doctrine to advance the greater cause of Islam.
Trump seems drawn to strong, ruthless dictators – such as Russia's Vladimir
Putin and Communist Chinese President Xi Jinping, as if acceptance by them
assures him that he is as strong as they are.
Similarly, he also seems drawn to jihadist leaders of countries such as Qatar,
Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Pakistan. They offer him money, gifts and
business deals, and no doubt tell him what he likes to hear – but none of us
would want to think that people are being friendly because they want something
from us. Perhaps they genuinely do like Trump; he can be delightful. That does
not necessarily mean, however, that they plan to give up their jihadist dreams
of conquest and join the West, or that they entertain no plans, when the
opportunity soon presents itself, to try to overthrow it.
**Nils A. Haug is an Attorney, author and columnist. He is member of the
International Bar Association, the National Association of Scholars, the Academy
of Philosophy and Letters. Among degrees in Law, Philosophy, and English
Literature, Dr. Haug holds a M.A.in Jewish Studies (cum laude) and Ph.D. in
Apologetical Theology. He is author of 'Politics, Law, and Disorder in the
Garden of Eden – the Quest for Identity'; and 'Enemies of the Innocent – Life,
Truth, and Meaning in a Dark Age.' His work has been published by First Things
Journal, The American Mind, Quadrant, Minding the Campus, Gatestone Institute,
National Association of Scholars, Jewish Journal, James Wilson Institute
(Anchoring Truths), Jewish News Syndicate, Tribune Juive,Document Danmark,
Zwiedzaj Polske,Schlaglicht Israel, The Australian Jurist,and others.
© 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.
Question: What are biblical grounds for divorce?
GotQuestions.org/July 31, 2026
Answer: When discussing what the Bible says about divorce, it is important to
keep in mind the words of Malachi 2:16, “I hate divorce, says the Lord God.”
While there is a specific context in Malachi that led God to say, "I hate
divorce," it is important to remember that whenever divorce is mentioned in
Scripture, it is spoken of negatively. Divorce is always the result of sin.
Divorce comes from hard-heartedness (Matthew 19:8). So, whatever grounds the
Bible possibly gives for divorce, that does not mean God desires a divorce to
occur in those instances. Rather than asking “is ______ a grounds for divorce,”
often the question should be “is _______ grounds for forgiveness, restoration,
and/or counseling?”
The Bible gives two clear grounds for divorce: (1) sexual immorality (Matthew
5:32; 19:9) and (2) abandonment by an unbeliever (1 Corinthians 7:15). Even in
these two instances, though, divorce is not required or even encouraged. The
most that can be said is that sexual immorality and abandonment are grounds (an
allowance) for divorce. Confession, forgiveness, reconciliation, and restoration
should always be the first steps. Divorce should almost always be viewed as the
last resort.
Are there any grounds for divorce beyond what the Bible explicitly says?
Perhaps, but it is always dangerous to presume upon the Word of God (1
Corinthians 4:6). The most frequent additional grounds for divorce that people
inquire about are spousal abuse (emotional or physical), child abuse, addiction
to pornography, drug / alcohol use, crime / imprisonment, and mismanagement of
finances (such as through a gambling addiction). None of these can be claimed to
be explicitly biblical grounds for a divorce.
That does not necessarily mean, though, that none of them are grounds for
divorce which God would approve of. For example, we cannot imagine that it would
be God’s desire for a wife to remain with a husband who physically abuses her
and/or their children. In such an instance, the wife should definitely separate
herself and the children from the abusive husband, seek safetly, and pursue
legal protection. However, even in such a situation, a time of separation with
the goal of repentance and restoration should be the ideal, not necessarily
immediately beginning divorce proceedings. Please understand, by saying that the
above are not biblical grounds for divorce, we are definitely not saying that a
man/woman whose spouse is engaging in such activities should remain in the
situation. If there is any risk to self or children, separation is a good and
appropriate step.
Another way to look at this issue is to differentiate between biblical grounds
for divorce and biblical grounds for divorce and remarriage. Some interpret the
two biblical grounds for divorce mentioned above as the only grounds for
remarriage after a divorce, but allow for divorce with no remarriage in other
instances. For more information, please read the following two articles:
What does the Bible say about divorce and remarriage?
I am divorced. Can I remarry according to the Bible?
In summary, what are the biblical grounds for divorce? The answer is sexual
immorality and abandonment. Are there additional grounds for divorce beyond
these two? Possibly. Is divorce ever to be treated lightly or employed as the
first recourse? Absolutely not. God is capable of changing and reforming any
person. God is capable of healing and renewing any marriage. Divorce should only
occur in instances of repeated and unrepentant heinous sin.
GotQuestions.org?
As Iran batters the Gulf states, Trump’s course is
beyond clear
Hussain Abdul-Hussain/ New York Post
President Donald Trump says he has “plenty of time” for talks with Iran.
That works because Washington, DC, is 7,000 miles away from the Strait of
Hormuz. But if you are in Dubai, the distance drops down to less than 50 miles.
While America can afford a protracted war far from its borders to degrade Iran’s
military capabilities, such low-intensity confrontation comes at a high cost for
the six Gulf Arab nations. Iranian strikes on civilian infrastructure like
airports and power plants along with the uncertain fate of oil exported through
the Strait of Hormuz has had a devastating economic impact. For the Gulf
countries, this war cannot end too soon. If America wants to twist Iran’s arm to
force it to concede, therefore, then Washington must apply greater military
force. The last thing Gulf countries want to live through is the current
on-again, off-again war. For Gulf economies to rebound, American consistency,
which is in short supply these days, is a necessary condition. Throughout the
war that began at the end of February, these countries have been on the
receiving end of sustained Iranian attacks.Unlike Israel, the US’s partner in
the first phase of the war, the Gulf states don’t possess the will or the means
to join the fight. Must the United States then curb its bombing of Iran so
Tehran’s immediate neighbors are spared from its wrath?
And if not, can Washington do anything to provide them with more protection?
Nearly six months into a war that all six Gulf states initially opposed, Iran’s
attacks have left them in no doubt that the regime poses the most direct and
deadliest threat to their security.That realization hasn’t resulted in a unified
Gulf policy toward Iran. Some states are more hawkish than others. But the
economic strain brought about by the war, by Iran’s blockade of the Strait of
Hormuz, and now by the growing tensions in the broader Red Sea, has forced all
of them to conclude that the current situation of “no war, no peace” isn’t
tenable.
Among the hawks, the United Arab Emirates stands out as the most strident voice.
After the Iranians pounded Abu Dhabi with ballistic missiles, the UAE broke
diplomatic ties with Iran, deported Iranian expatriates and froze Iranian bank
accounts.
Bahrain — which hosts the US Fifth Fleet and US Naval Forces Central Command —
is also a staunch opponent of Tehran.During the recent fighting, Iranian forces
attacked civilian and military installations in Bahrain. Bahrain struck Iranian
targets in response.
Nor have the remaining Gulf countries, which tend toward neutrality and have
historically had good relations with Iran, been spared. Iran pulled Kuwait into
the fray by targeting its main international airport, along with desalination
plants, power stations and offshore oil rigs.
When it comes to Qatar and Oman, both have continued to appease the mullahs
despite attacks on their soil by Tehran. Saudi Arabia has adopted a similarly
non-confrontational posture, although it joined in US attacks on Iranian-linked
sites in Iraq this week after they targeted US forces. As the US administration
deliberates on the next steps in the war, it will need to take into account
these different positions, given our close commercial and military ties in the
Gulf.None of these countries is likely to oppose a further US military offensive
outright, particularly if it ends Iran’s stranglehold on the passage of oil.
Conversely, a US pullback will send a signal to Tehran that it is the main power
in that region, to the detriment of our Gulf Arab allies.To be blunt, there is
no way of preventing Iran from retaliating against the Gulf states. The
question, therefore, is how much more pain these states are prepared to absorb.
As long as the Islamic Republic remains a threat, the Gulf States have to choose
between appeasement, which will cement Iran as the dominant power in the region,
containment, which means relying on a United States that is wary of indefinite
commitments, or confrontation, which will require them to step up their own
defense and even acquire nuclear weapons. A better option is to resolve the
problem now by urging Trump to follow through on his latest warnings to Iran’s
rulers. Because whether they like it or not, as long as the regime survives,
ultimately all the Gulf states are at risk.
**Hussain Abdul-Hussain is a research fellow at the Foundation for the Defense
of Democracies.
Iran’s Iraqi Front
Abdulrahman Al-Rashed/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
The first seventy days of Ali Falih al-Zaidi's premiership renewed significant
hope among Iraqis since he took office, before Tehran dispelled it. It was a
period marked by the pursuit of corrupt figures, the reform of crippled
government agencies, and efforts to restrict weapons to the state by demanding
militias surrender their arms, alongside launching an investment plan and a work
program that welcomed support from the White House. However, Iran fired upon the
prime minister's program and transformed Iraq into a war front, similar to
Lebanon and Yemen. It used Iraq's territory and citizens as a platform to attack
six regional countries, most recently Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and American forces.
These attacks on Saudi Arabia and its neighbors are, in reality, nothing less
than Iranian aggression against Iraq's sovereignty and territory, and an attempt
to prepare it to become another version of Lebanon and Yemen.
With the exception of militias linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, the
majority of Iraqis must feel frustrated and anxious about their country being
dragged into a war that does not serve its interests. This sentiment was
expressed by Moqtada al-Sadr, leader of the National Shiite Movement, in a
recent statement, in which he said: "Iraq and its people need peace, and enough
war that has drained all our resources."The crisis has confirmed what many have
known for years: Iraq is paying a heavy price for Iranian influence. Tehran has
used it as a corridor to bypass sanctions, a laundry for its funds, a conduit to
smuggle its oil, and a bank to finance its regional activities with billions of
dollars. It has also contributed to destabilizing Iraq's security and stability,
weakening its economy and investments, undermining successive governments, and
damaging its Arab and international relations. Today, we are witnessing a new
phase of this influence, represented by an attempt to transform Iraq into a
proxy fighting on Iran's behalf in its war against the United States and several
regional countries.
Within a single day, Iran dispelled the reforms the new prime minister attempted
to achieve to open a different chapter in Iraq's history. It is seeking to
harness the country to be its alternative military front following the decline
of its influence in Lebanon and Gaza. Furthermore, the continuation of open
borders for the activities of the Revolutionary Guard will lead Iraq toward
further weakness and destruction.Relations between countries can only be sound
when based on mutual respect, which is what al-Sadr called for in his statement,
saying: "This holy land has never been a launching pad for bombing the Islamic
Republic. Therefore, the brothers in the 'Revolutionary Guard' must not bomb our
independent holy territories, just as the rogue militias must not provide a
pretext for the brothers in the Arab Gulf states to target our holy land."The
question remains: Can the prime minister resist the deeply entrenched Iranian
influence? Today, Iraqi leaders have an opportunity to insist on rejecting the
militarization of the state, opposing the "militiatization" of society, and
preventing Iraq from being dragged into a regional war that Iraqis do not want
and countries in the region do not desire.At a time when Tehran does not hide
its ambitions, it rather seeks to convince everyone that Iraq has become its
arena, subject to its influence, and that conceding to this reality is
inevitable. However, declaring a rejection of this "reality" and adhering to the
independence of Iraqi decision-making will enjoy broad popular and institutional
support. Iraq has been able to overcome crises and divisions over the past two
decades, and it is capable of proving that once again. The current crisis
represents a new test for the will of the Iraqi government and people, and an
opportunity to redraw the boundaries of the relationship with Tehran on
foundations that preserve Iraq's sovereignty and the independence of its
decision-making. We understand Iraq's complex geopolitical position between
competing regional powers. Tehran demands that Baghdad prevent its territory
from being used against it, yet in return, it manages and arms a number of Iraqi
militias in a clear challenge to the state's centralization and its exclusive
right to possess weapons. It also directs these groups to attack neighboring
countries, gradually pushing Iraq toward the Lebanese model - a path that
threatens state institutions and national unity, and drives the country toward
chaos.
In just two months, the prime minister succeeded in building a great deal of
hope among Iraqis, regardless of their affiliations, regarding the possibility
of restoring the state and achieving development and prosperity, while also
gaining notable popular support. He will be capable of continuing this path if
he manages to end the phenomenon of weapons outside state control and
consolidate the state's legitimate monopoly on force, as this represents the
primary gateway to building a stable and prosperous Iraq.
Washington and Tehran and the Difficulty of Reaching an
Understanding
Mustafa Fahs/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
Only a thin thread remains of the Iranian-American memorandum of understanding,
which expires on August 18, to borrow a metaphor from the diplomacy of the
Umayyad Caliphate. Today, this thread is represented by the indirect
negotiations between Washington and Tehran, which mediators are keen to keep
alive despite the dwindling chances of their revival or success. Before the
expiration of the 60-day deadline granted for the memorandum to reach a
comprehensive agreement, both parties had announced, directly or indirectly, its
failure, yet they avoided a joint declaration of abandoning it. The danger of
this controversial memorandum lies not in the difficulty of interpreting it or
the impossibility of implementing it, but rather in the inability to declare its
death, because the alternative has become clear: a return to open confrontation.
This option causes concern for everyone, even the United States, which possesses
the capability to impose it but does not appear ready to bear its strategic cost
and regional repercussions.
Washington, along with its sole ally in the region, Israel, entered the war
against Tehran betting on the day after more than it bet on the war itself.
However, it quickly backed down from many of the positions it announced at the
start of military operations, finding itself captive to the time factor, torn
between the urgency of achieving results and reaping gains. In contrast, Iran
bet on consuming time and delaying the emergence of results until it could
absorb the shock and rearrange its cards, which is exactly what the memorandum
of understanding provided, even if temporarily.
Tehran's dilemma is that it overestimated the results it achieved and sought to
convert the terms of the memorandum into gains; more seriously, it misread
Washington with a traditional mindset, just as it misread Tel Aviv in the same
manner, leading to negative calculations. Israel has been engaged in a
continuous war since October 8, 2023, while the White House administration today
appears more liberated from internal and external pressures in its management of
the confrontation with it.
When US President Donald Trump announced that the interim agreement had expired,
and Tehran responded that it had not requested the resumption of negotiations in
the first place, it became clear that a return to a peaceful track had become
more complex. The memorandum of understanding can no longer be revived except
through a radical amendment of its terms and the establishment of a clear,
binding interpretation for it - something that appears far-fetched under current
circumstances. Consequently, the region seems to be heading toward a phase of
major strategic risks that could redraw its balances anew.
Amid the caution of mediators, particularly the Pakistanis who have not
abandoned their mission, and the support of neighboring countries for their
efforts, the two parties to the conflict stand at the furthest possible point on
the negotiation table, while the confrontation arenas appear to be the real
field for managing the conflict. From the Strait of Hormuz to Bab al-Mandeb,
Tehran waves the threat of a waterway war and the possibility of disrupting the
global economy through the Houthis, using Iraqi territory to pressure
neighboring countries, and reconnecting the Lebanese track with its own through
confrontation. It is holding onto all its cards because it considers that this
battle will shape the future of the Iranian regime itself. In contrast, the
United States appears convinced that settling the confrontation is no longer a
deferred option, but rather a necessity imposed by the balance of power it
possesses, as well as by the new regional interests that have come to govern the
equations of peace and war in the Middle East.The failure of the memorandum of
understanding has proven that major wars do not stop before reaching a moment of
decisiveness. It has also proven that the "win-win" equation is no longer viable
in this conflict, and that the region is likely heading toward a harsher
equation based on a clear winner and an even clearer loser. In light of American
miscalculation on one hand, and excessive Iranian self-confidence on the other,
the risk of sliding into a wider confrontation becomes a real possibility.
Iran: Can Trump Win the War?
Amir Taheri/Asharq Al-Awsat/July 31/2026
More than a year after the latest phase of the US-Israel war against Iran
started with a 12-day mass bombing a consensus is emerging among pundits that
President Donald Trump who casts himself as the commander-in-chief in this
conflict cannot win it.
One sign that Trump himself may have reached the same conclusion is his recent
efforts to put some daylight between himself and his erstwhile ally Israeli
Premier Benjamin Netanyahu. The Israeli leader went to Washington to persuade
Trump to keep the war going even if with a lower intensity. As a sweetener for
his inveigling scheme, he even agreed to revive Trump’s moribund Peace Board for
Gaza and reopen the file for stationing international peace-keepers in that
seething inferno. Another sign that Trump may be thinking of throwing in the
towel the purge of his swearing-infested vocabulary of the catch-phrase “regime
change”.He now talks of two objectives: reopening the Strait of Hormuz and
stopping Iran’s nuclear project. The first of those objectives was achievable,
albeit as is often the case with the Iranian Republic on no firm basis under the
14-Point Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding.
Elements within the left-over Islamic regime in Tehran who thrive on the
continuation of the conflict sabotaged that by firing shots at one of the 100 or
so ships that had passed through the strait under the MoU. The aim was empty
bragging by a humiliated bunch. Yet, they succeeded in provoking Trump into
ordering a new round of aimless bombings.Tehran has made its imaginary control
of Hormuz a matter of honor but left the idea of charging a toll for an unknown
future. If and when things return to normal Iran under any regime won’t be able
to defy the whole world and become a pariah in its neighborhood by closing the
strait let alone imposing a toll. Trump’s second objective is to stop Tehran’s
nuclear project. Here, Israel seems to be on board. Defense Minister Israel Katz
says the “arrogant Persian Empire” has already been overthrown and what remains
to be done is to prevent it from getting the bomb. In that context the so-called
“Reformist wing” of the Tehran regime known as “The New York Boys” has revived
the ghost of the Obama “nuke deal”, the one that Trump tore up on the first day
if his first term as president. Former Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif who
negotiated the Obama deal has penned an article in Foreign Affairs magazine
suggesting a second life for the zombie accord. As a sweetener he suggests that
a fatwa sensibly issued by the late “Supreme Guide” AIi Khamenei forbidding the
making of the bomb be passed as a law by the Islamic Majlis (the ersatz
parliament). It is necessary to remember that Obama based his decision on that
fatwa which neither he nor anyone else has ever seen.
Will Trump rise to that bait?
I hope not.
A fatwa by a mullah could be cancelled by another mullah and a law passed by a
dubious legislature could be annulled by the next dubious parliament. The regime
that Khomeini founded has been and shall remain dangerous for the people of
Iran, the region and beyond without closing the strait of developing the bomb.
Thus, even if Trump secure paper accords on those two realities he won’t be able
to claim that he won a war that it seems he never wanted. The year-long conflict
has shown that a quick straight military victory isn’t on the cards and even if
it were it wouldn’t produce lasting results; Afghanistan and Iraq being two
examples. In fact, in the past 80 years or so the only war in which the US
achieved lasting victory was in Grenada. Having said all that I still think that
Trump can win this war provided he sets clear aims for it. The minimalist goal
could be a change of behavior by the Khomeinist regime, which is easier said
than done but not impossible.The maximalist goal could be regime change which
paradoxically may have a better chance of being achieved than any time since the
Iranian Republic was founded 47 years ago.As far as one can make out a consensus
is emerging in Iran today is that this regime must go but not thanks to foreign
military intervention. The war has done immense and, in some cases, irreparable
damage to Iranian economy and the nation’s industrial, scientific and civilian
infrastructure. People we talk to in various parts of Iran do blame the US and
Israel but end up pointing to what they term “delusional” and “provocative”
behavior of the regime. During the war the repressive machinery has been
seriously downgraded in both physical and financial terms, not to mention
political authority. One theme echoed is that a regime that couldn’t protect its
top leadership echelon had no business provoking a war that has led to so much
destruction. In this war many parts of Iran that had experienced no wars for up
to 1000 years have directly seen what war does. At least four million across the
county have lost their jobs while over a million small and medium businesses
have gone under.
The economic Mafia survives but is less able to buy loyalty or silence dissent.
The latest public executions are supposed to restore fear but have so far had
the opposite effect as seen in last week’s mass demos in Isfahan and Qazvin.
To achieve either of the goals mentioned above Trump must end this war. This
does not mean walking away with a worthless paper accord as Jimmy Carter did in
1979 and Barack Obama in 2015 thus bestowing a measure of legitimacy on a regime
that hasn’t earned it. Nor does it mean giving it a free hand to brag, browbeat
and bully people inside and outside Iran. Without throwing the buoy of
normalization at the leftover clique Trump could let the Iranian people to
settle their own score with their oppressors either by tipping the balance in
favor of those in the current power struggle who seek a change of behavior
toward a measure of normality or those who urge straight regime change. Orson
Wells once said: “In movies a happy ending is when you decide to end the story.”
That is also true of wars.
Selected Face Book & X tweets
on 31 July/2026
Ambassador Yechiel (Michael) Leiter
Wrapping up another highly productive visit to Washington from Prime Minister
@Netanyahu. Israel remains America’s only ally with the willingness and ability
to fight shoulder to shoulder against our common enemies. Our alliance is strong
and prosperous, and we will continue to cooperate closely at the highest levels.
Board of Peace
The Board of Peace and the mediating countries of Egypt, Qatar, Türkiye, and the
United States today are pleased to announce that Hamas has agreed to a detailed
Roadmap for implementing the next phases of the Gaza ceasefire.
The agreement concludes months of intensive, good faith negotiations to advance
President Donald J. Trump's vision for establishing new governance, security,
humanitarian relief, reconstruction, and economic recovery in Gaza as set out in
the Comprehensive Peace Plan and U.N. Security Council Resolution 2803.
The Roadmap represents a historic breakthrough. For the first time, Hamas
officially has committed to an actionable plan for relinquishing all its
weapons, which will be followed by Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. It holds the
promise of delivering significant benefits to the people of Gaza, who have
waited for too long for a better future, and security to the people of Israel.
Our focus now turns to implementation. The Board of Peace has worked closely
with the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG). It will soon
begin a phased transition toward full authority, backed by the International
Stabilization Force (ISF), and will accelerate implementation of the rule of
law, security, and humanitarian improvement in Gaza.
ישראל כ”ץ Israel Katz
@Israel_katz
Under the direction of Prime Minister Netanyahu and my direction, the IDF
destroyed the terror tunnels in the Beaufort area in southern Lebanon, an
underground infrastructure that was a central component of the terror
organization Hezbollah's invasion plan for the Galilee settlements.The tunnels
were detonated using approximately 700 tons of explosives, as part of the IDF's
systematic operation to destroy all of Hezbollah's terror infrastructure in
southern Lebanon. This powerful operation was carried out at this time following
the blatant violation yesterday of the ceasefire agreement by the terror
organization Hezbollah.
We will not accept any violation of the ceasefire agreement. For every attempt
by Hezbollah to harm IDF forces or Israeli civilians, there will be a harsh,
powerful response that will exact a heavy price from the terror organization.
The IDF will remain in the security zone in southern Lebanon and will continue
to destroy every terror infrastructure in order to prevent any attempt by
Hezbollah to restore its capabilities.
Hussain Abdul-Hussain
Yeah, Saddam Hussein confiscated family property in Baghdad and we ended up
emigrating. Christian militias confiscated our property in their enclave in
Lebanon. We suffered losses in half a dozen wars that we survived. We moved on.
Migrated. Raised our children to be proud of their Arab heritage but not demand
vengeance or die for the real estate that we lost.
History is riddled with such stories. Nothing makes your ancestral village more
special than mine or than that of tens of millions of others across history.
It's just another piece of real estate somewhere on this planet. Just move on
already and start looking toward a better future instead of your continued focus
on the miserable past.
Prime Minister of Israel
In accordance with the directive of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and
Defense Minister Israel Katz, the IDF has just destroyed the terror tunnels in
the Beaufort area of southern Lebanon, an underground infrastructure that was a
central part of the Hezbollah terror organization's invasion plan for the
communities of the Galilee. The tunnels were blown up
using approximately 700 tons of explosives, as part of the IDF's systematic
operation to destroy all of Hezbollah's terror infrastructure in southern
Lebanon.
The powerful operation was carried out at this time following yesterday's
blatant violation of the ceasefire agreement by the Hezbollah terror
organization. The State of Israel will not accept any violation of the ceasefire
agreement. Any attempt by Hezbollah to harm IDF forces or Israeli citizens will
be met with a harsh and powerful response that will exact a heavy price from the
terror organization. The IDF will remain in the security zone in southern
Lebanon and will continue to destroy any terror infrastructure in order to
prevent any attempt by Hezbollah to rebuild its capabilities.
Dan Burmawi
I know Pastor Nuhad Hassan personally.
He is a Kurd from a Muslim background who converted to Christianity and led a
church in Lebanon for over a decade. On July 19, Pastor Nuhad went to Syria to
visit his village, and on July 20 he was arrested by al-Julani’s government over
posts he made during the Afrin massacre against the Kurds.
I just hung up the phone with friends and family members who are seriously
concerned that he will be sentenced to death, the judges in Syria today are
former ISIS jihadists, and they will sentence him according to sharia.I will
contact the members of Congress who support al-Julani and urge them to intervene
for Pastor Nuhad’s release. Please pray for him.