English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For  February 24/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.february24.26.htm

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

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

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

Bible Quotations For today
Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
Metthew 07/01-12: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces. “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on February 23-24/2026
State Department Orders Nonessential US Diplomats to Leave Lebanon as Tensions with Iran Soar
Qassem: Our right to defend and resist is legitimate
Berri rejects elections postponement, says Quintet in favor of move
U.S. Iran conflict: Will Hezbollah join the fray?
Report: Polls may be delayed as part of deal involving Taif implementation
Hezbollah vows resistance after deadly Israeli strike
Expatriate voting row adds to doubts over Lebanon’s parliamentary elections: The details
Lebanon’s human rights committee approves draft to abolish death penalty
Al Habtoor Group takes legal action against Lebanese authorities
The Party, the Storm and Lebanon/Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on February 23-24/2026
Iran May Activate Regional Allies if U.S. Launches Major Strikes
US, Iran to Meet in Geneva Thursday for Crucial Talks
Report: Trump Considers Targeted Strike Against Iran, Followed by Larger Attack
Iran: Any US Attack Including Limited Strikes Would be 'Act of Aggression'
Iranian Students Protest for Third Day as US Pressure Mounts
Risk of ‘Escalation’ if Iran Attacked, Warns Deputy Foreign Minister
Iran: Any US Attack Including Limited Strikes Would be 'Act of Aggression'
Netanyahu Says Israel Facing ‘Challenging Days’ with Iran-US Tensions
Netanyahu: Iran would make ‘worst mistake’ by attacking Israel
Rubio Trip to Israel on Iran Tensions 'Subject to Change'
Gulf Arab countries back Kuwait over maritime border dispute with Iraq

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on February 23-24/2026
Who Will Become the Biggest Beneficiary of the Billions of Dollars About To Be Invested in the Gaza Strip? The Terrorist Group Hamas/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/February 23, 2026
Iran must not be allowed to use nuclear talks as a diversion/Nadim Shehadi/Arab News/February 23/ 2026
Europe in the Eyes of Conservative America/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on February 23-24/2026
State Department Orders Nonessential US Diplomats to Leave Lebanon as Tensions with Iran Soar
/Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
The United States has ordered nonessential diplomats and their family members at the US Embassy in Beirut to leave Lebanon, the State Department said Monday, as tensions over Iran rise with the threat of a potentially imminent military strike.
The department said in an updated travel alert for US citizens in Lebanon that it “ordered the departure of non-emergency US government personnel and family members of government personnel due to the security situation in Beirut.” The alert, which was formally released several hours after word began to circulate about the move, said US personnel remaining in Lebanon would have their in-country travel restricted. A department official said earlier that a continuous assessment of the regional security environment determined it was “prudent” to draw down the US Embassy Beirut's footprint so that only essential personnel remain at their posts. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity before the move was formally announced, said that it is a temporary measure and that the embassy will remain operational. Lebanon has been the site of numerous Iran-related retaliatory attacks against US facilities, interests and personnel for decades given Tehran's support for and influence with the Hezbollah group, which is held responsible for the deadly bombings of the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983 and an embassy annex in 1984. As such, changes in the staffing status of the embassy in Beirut have often been seen as a bellwether for potential US or Israeli military action in the region, particularly against Iran. A similar ordered departure was imposed for Beirut and other embassies in the region, including in Iraq, shortly before President Donald Trump ordered military strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities last June. It was unclear if other American embassies in the Middle East would implement similar orders. Tensions have escalated between the US and Iran as Trump has built up the largest military presence in the Middle East in decades and repeatedly threatened action if Tehran does not negotiate a deal to constrain its nuclear program. A second aircraft carrier is heading to the region to join a surge of other American warships and aircraft, offering the Republican president several options for a potential strike even as talks may continue.  Oman’s foreign minister, Badr al-Busaidi, said the US and Iran plan to hold their next round of nuclear talks Thursday in Geneva. A US official, who was not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity, confirmed the meeting. Iran’s top diplomat, Abbas Araghchi, told CBS on Sunday that he expected to meet US envoy Steve Witkoff then and said a “good chance” remained for a diplomatic solution on the nuclear issue. Araghchi has said a proposed deal would be ready to share within days, and he told CBS that Iran was still working on it. Asked Friday whether the US could take limited military action as the countries negotiate, Trump said, “I guess I can say I am considering that.” He also told reporters later that Iran “better negotiate a fair deal.” Indirect talks between the longtime adversaries in recent weeks have made little visible progress. Beyond the nuclear program, Iran has refused to discuss wider US and Israeli demands that it scale back its missile program and sever ties to armed groups.
A second State Department official, also speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss plans that had not been formally announced, said Secretary of State Marco Rubio may delay his intended visit to Israel this weekend.

Qassem: Our right to defend and resist is legitimate
Naharnet/February 23/2026
Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem has emphasized that the 2025 funeral ceremony of slain Hezbollah leaders Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and Sayyed Hashem Safieddine was “a pledge and renewal of the covenant to continue the resistance, a reclaiming of the initiative in rebuilding the resistance’s capabilities, and a reaffirmation of popular unity around it.”In an interview with the Hezbollah-affiliated al-Ahed news portal marking the funeral’s first anniversary, Qassem pointed out that “its political significance is that the resistance continues -- leadership, fighters and people alike.”He added: “This ideological, national, and selfless resistance cannot be defeated, no matter the blows, sacrifices, or conspiracies against it, for it was built on right and for the sake of right, and those who believe in the resistance are worthy of victory, whether through martyrdom or triumph.”“I know that this is a difficult phase, but together we have overcome the challenges of perseverance, and we will patiently continue to address the demands of this phase as we did over the past 15 months. When the time comes for any stance, we will not hesitate. Our path is clear: the land is ours, and our right to defend and resist is legitimate. We will remain steadfast, preparing ourselves for both outcomes: victory or martyrdom,” Qassem went on to say.

Berri rejects elections postponement, says Quintet in favor of move
Naharnet/February 23/2026
Speaker Nabih Berri on Monday clarified that he has said that “the atmosphere of the five-nation group for Lebanon is in favor of postponing the elections.”Berri added that he has not at all mentioned “any ambassador, neither from the Quintet, nor from other sides.”In remarks to Asharq al-Awsat newspaper, Berri had emphasized that the elections will take place on time. “Ambassadors from the Quintet are in favor of postponement, so I informed them of my rejection. I also told the rest of the ambassadors (of the Quintet) that I do not back a technical postponement of parliamentary elections or an extension of parliament’s term,” the daily quoted Berri as saying. “I was the first to submit a nomination for the elections in order to block the way of those who try to hold me responsible for technical postponement or extending parliament’s term,” Berri added.He underscored that, in his viewpoint, there is no justification for postponing constitutional obligations, topped by the election of a new parliament. “They will take place on time and I’m keen on holding them on schedule and according to the law that is currently in effect. Those who want postponement must shoulder their responsibilities instead of blaming others,” he added.

U.S. Iran conflict: Will Hezbollah join the fray?
Naharnet/February 23/2026
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri does not seem concerned about a possible spillover of the U.S.-Iran conflict into Lebanon, sources told Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper. The sources said they sensed from Berri's attitude that Hezbollah will not take any action in the event of a strike on Iran. A report published later in Nidaa al-Watan newspaper claimed that Hezbollah has indeed vowed to Berri not to intervene in any war on Iran.Lebanon meanwhile has not received any guarantees that Israel would not target the country, despite intensified diplomacy in the past days, Asharq Al-Awsat said. Iran-backed Hezbollah also did not rule out joining the fray. Its leader Sheikh Naim Qassem said that any attack on Iran would also be an attack on the militants. But later Hezbollah MP Mohammad Raad said after meeting Berri last week that his group is keen on the security and stability of the country.

Report: Polls may be delayed as part of deal involving Taif implementation
Naharnet/February 23/2026
U.S. Ambassador Michel Issa and Saudi Ambassador Walid Bukhari have openly raised the issue of postponing the parliamentary elections with Speaker Nabih Berri but he did not show cooperation, al-Akhbar newspaper reported. “It is currently being discussed that any potential postponement of the elections might be limited to amending the current electoral law and reverting to the provisions of the Taif Agreement, with the postponement decree to be issued by the government,” the daily said. “Berri confirmed to the ambassadors that neither he nor his bloc would initiate a request for postponement, whether within the government or parliament, noting that they should approach President (Joseph) Aoun and PM (Nawaf) Salam to discuss the matter from the perspective of what the government could do,” the newspaper added. It is rumored that among the new proposals for postponing the elections through the government is Salam making the move of announcing the government's intention to enter a phase of full implementation of the Taif Agreement, resorting to Article 22 of the Constitution, which stipulates the establishment of a Senate, al-Akhbar said.
“This means that the government would request a postponement of the parliamentary elections until it drafts a new electoral law that includes the Senate on one hand, and the election of a parliament on a national, non-sectarian basis on the other -- a step that Salam does not oppose in principle,” the daily added. According to sources, those holding this view are implicitly suggesting a possible trade-off: foreign capitals might agree to a cabinet reshuffle in exchange for Salam remaining in his position. But simply proposing the application of Article 22 of the Constitution could create a crisis with the Christian forces, especially the Lebanese Forces. Article 22 of the Constitution states that “with the election of the first Parliament on a national, non-sectarian basis, a Senate shall be established in which all religious communities are represented, and its powers shall be limited to matters of national importance.”

Hezbollah vows resistance after deadly Israeli strike
Naharnet/February 23/2026
Hezbollah warned that it would have no choice but to fight on after an Israeli strike on targets in Lebanon killed eight of its operatives. Lebanon's government has vowed to disarm Hezbollah, but Israel insists it retains the right to defend itself by striking the Iran-backed militant group. On Friday, the Israeli military said it had hit Hezbollah command centres in eastern Lebanon and targets linked to the Palestinian group Hamas in the south. Hezbollah said Saturday that eight of its fighters had been killed, after Lebanon's health ministry said 10 people died in the east and two in the south. "What happened yesterday in the Bekaa is a new massacre and a new aggression," Hezbollah official Mahmoud Qamati said, in a speech broadcast by the Al-Manar network. "What option do we have left to defend ourselves and our country? What option do we have other than resistance? We no longer have any option."President Joseph Aoun also condemned the attacks, which came just days after the government said the army will start implementing the second phase of its plan to disarm Hezbollah in the south of the country. The strikes came as tensions were also building between the United States and Iran, with U.S. President Donald Trump threatening military action over the Islamic republic's nuclear program. Iran backs several armed groups in the region, including Hezbollah and Hamas. In Lebanon's eastern city of Baalbek, a mass funeral was held for commander Hussein Mohammad Yaghi and one of the fighters, with hundreds of people gathered, waving Hezbollah flags and chanting support. A Hezbollah official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told AFP all eight members of the group were attending a meeting in the eastern Bekaa region when a strike killed them. The Israeli military said it had targeted "several terrorists of Hezbollah's missile array in three different command centers in the Baalbek area." An AFP correspondent in eastern Lebanon saw a bulldozer clearing debris following the strike on Bednayel, and a heavily damaged building between Riyak and Ali al-Nahri, where the Hezbollah official said the members were meeting. The raids were against targets in residential areas, according to the correspondent. They came hours after an Israeli strike on the country's largest Palestinian refugee camp in the south killed two people, according to the health ministry, with Israel's army saying it had targeted Hamas. In a statement, Hamas condemned the attack, which it said led to civilian casualties as the targeted building "belongs to the joint security force charged with maintaining security and stability in the camp."
'Act of aggression' -
Israel has kept up regular strikes on Lebanon despite a November 2024 ceasefire that sought to halt more than a year of hostilities with Hezbollah, usually saying it is targeting the group, but occasionally also Hamas militants. Aoun called Friday's attacks "a blatant act of aggression aimed at thwarting diplomatic efforts" by the United States and other nations to establish stability. Washington is one of five members of a multinational committee overseeing the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, with the body scheduled to meet again next week. Hezbollah lawmaker Rami Abu Hamdan said the group "will not accept the authorities acting as mere political analysts, dismissing these as Israeli strikes we have grown accustomed to before every meeting of the committee." He called on authorities to "suspend the committee's meetings until the enemy ceases its attacks."Lebanon's government last year committed to disarming the group, with the army saying last month it had completed the first phase of the plan covering the area near the Israeli border. Israel, which accuses Hezbollah of rearming since the war, has called the Lebanese army's progress on disarming the militant group insufficient. Against the backdrop of the tensions between Washington and Iran, Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem said last month that any attack on the group's backer would also be an attack on the militants.

Expatriate voting row adds to doubts over Lebanon’s parliamentary elections: The details
LBCIt/February 23/2026
All discussion surrounding Lebanon’s parliamentary elections remains part of what observers describe as an inconclusive debate over whether the vote will take place as scheduled in May. Some view the ongoing debate as a distraction pending a possible decision to postpone the elections, an option that Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri said had been raised in discussions involving the Quintet Committee. Berri said he had not named any ambassador from the group or from outside it as having requested a postponement. Sources at the presidential palace in Baabda said they had not heard any proposal from the Quintet Committee's ambassadors to delay the parliamentary elections. During a January 14 meeting between President Joseph Aoun and the ambassadors, attended by French envoy Jean-Yves Le Drian and Saudi envoy Yazid bin Farhan, the French representative stressed the need to hold the elections on time, and no opposing position was recorded from any of those present. Baabda sources said they support Berri’s position in favor of holding the elections as scheduled.Against this backdrop, and with parliament yet to convene to discuss the government’s draft amendments to the election law, observers following the issue are urging Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and Interior Minister Ahmad al-Hajjar to settle the matter in the Cabinet. The government must either adopt expatriate voting for all 128 seats, in line with the opinion issued by the Legislation and Consultations Authority, or endorse the report related to the so-called 16th district, which was prepared by former Interior Minister Bassam Mawlawi and former Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habib. That report provides for six seats to be elected by Lebanese living abroad, with implementing decrees to be issued accordingly. However, this option runs counter to the electoral direction of Salam’s government. In what had been expected to be a legal challenge before the State Council by Abbas Fawaz, an ally of Berri, after the Interior Ministry rejected his request to run for the 16th district, LBCI has learned that the matter was dropped following legal consultations. This means there will be no additional legal opinion on expatriate voting beyond that issued by the Legislation and Consultations Authority. With parliament yet to convene to decide on amendments to the election law, its extraordinary session is set to end at the close of February, with the ordinary session scheduled to begin on March 17. It remains unclear whether conditions will be ripe by then for elections to proceed — or for a possible extension.

Lebanon’s human rights committee approves draft to abolish death penalty
LBCI/February 23/2026
Justice Minister Adel Nassar took part Monday morning in a meeting of the parliamentary Human Rights Committee, chaired by MP Michel Moussa and attended by committee members. The committee reviewed two draft laws submitted by members of parliament. The first concerns the abolition of the death penalty.After discussion, the committee approved the proposal to abolish capital punishment and replace it with life imprisonment under aggravated circumstances as an alternative sentence. The proposal will now be referred to the full parliament for further debate, on the basis that parliament, as the ultimate authority, will take the final decision. The second proposal grants convicted minors the right to appeal their sentences, a right they previously did not enjoy. The committee also approved this measure. Speaking after the meeting, Nassar said it was an honor to participate in the Human Rights Committee session chaired by Moussa. He explained that the issue of abolishing the death penalty was discussed and that the government expressed a positive position on the matter, which has reached an advanced stage following the committee’s approval. The proposal will now be submitted to the general assembly. “Based on that, we consider that Lebanon will take serious additional steps toward abolishing the death penalty,” Nassar said, reiterating that the final word rests with parliament.

Al Habtoor Group takes legal action against Lebanese authorities
Naharnet/February 23/2026/February 23/2026
Al Habtoor Group said Monday that it has appointed one of the world’s leading international law firms specializing in sovereign disputes and treaty-based investment arbitration, to take legal action against Lebanese authorities over claims of investment losses of $1.7 billion.
Al Habtoor said it has entered the final stages of preparation for the commencement of international arbitration proceedings in Washington, D.C. "This follows the expiry of the six-months treaty-mandated cooling-off period and the absence of any meaningful corrective action, settlement proposal, or institutional engagement capable of addressing the severe breaches and damages previously notified to the Lebanese authorities," it said, in a statement. "All of the Al Habtoor Group’s investments in Lebanon were made in good faith, in reliance on Lebanese law and binding international obligations. The Group exercised restraint and pursued amicable engagement for an extended period, allowing full opportunity for resolution within the treaty framework. "However, continued inaction, institutional paralysis, and the absence of remedial measures have left the Group with no alternative but to proceed through formal international legal channels to enforce and recover its rights," the statement went on to say, adding that Al Habtoor Group "remains open to any serious and structured settlement initiative that fully restores its rights and compensates the damages incurred."

The Party, the Storm and Lebanon
Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
Will it be just another round, or will it be greater and more dangerous than that? Is it the end of the war or the end of an era? Will it be a violent passing storm or a deadly earthquake that is enough to change features? Is it true that the approaching fleets are seeking to end half a century of a period in the Middle East and open a new chapter? Is it true that the world has grown tired of “resistance”, enrichment, tunnels and small armies, and preparing to return maps to governments and legitimate armies? These are questions that are being pondered in Tehran and at the heart of the Hezbollah command in Lebanon.
The 1970s were a very eventful time in Beirut. The Lebanese University campus was the stage for communists, Nasserites, nationalists and phalangists. The Islamists didn’t have much of a presence. The country was boiling. The weak republic was hosting an armed dream that was beyond its ability to contain. The world became preoccupied with Yasser Arafat, who turned southern Lebanon into a platform to launch rockets at Israel to remind the world of the injustice against his people.
At the beginning of that decade, Walid Jumblatt was a student at the American University of Beirut. At the same university was Samir Geagea, who was observing how the authority of the state withered against the armed factions. A man named Rafik al-Hariri was in Saudi Arabia where he was consolidating the pillars of his financial empire.
At the Lebanese University, there was a student who was not lured by the proposals of the left and leftists and the speeches of Mohsen Ibrahim and George Hawi. He admired Imam Moussa al-Sadr and the speeches of Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah. That student was called Naim Qassem. He was born in 1953, a year after Geagea was born, four after Jumblatt and nine after Hariri.
Fates would play their part. Kamal Jumblatt’s assassination would summon his son Walid to politics, party leadership and the war. The war summoned Geagea to the war, politics and leadership. Peace summoned Hariri, but he was assassinated after he tried to rescue Lebanon from its captors.
Qassem took the Amal movement route after he was attracted to the dream of defending the deprived. Two developments will change the future of the chemistry teacher: the Iranian revolution and the ideas it pumped into the region and Shiite groups; and the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. Islamist groups came together in wake of the invasion to establish a new entity called Hezbollah. During that time, Qassem worked with Hassan Nasrallah, Imad Mughnieh and others. The new entity was born with Iran’s direct sponsorship and help from Hafez al-Assad, who chose to align himself with Khomeini’s revolution for too many reasons to list here.
The 1980s would bring about change in Lebanon. A suicide bomber blew himself up at the Marine headquarters in Beirut in 1983, killing over 200 people. The US army consequently packed up and left the country. The American embassy in Beirut was also dealt a heavy blow. It became obvious that Khomeini’s Iran chose Lebanon to implement an article in its constitution on exporting the revolution. Under Nasrallah, Hezbollah started its upward trajectory, especially after Israel withdrew its forces from southern Lebanon in 2000 at no cost. Hezbollah became the number one player in Lebanon. It chose presidents and named governments. It then became a regional player by sending its fighters to Syria and saving Bashar al-Assad's regime. It also left its mark in Yemen and Iraq.
Qassem knows the entire story. He has been a partner from the start. He assumed the role of deputy secretary-general in 1991 and fate would summon him to the top post after the assassination of Nasrallah and Hashem Safieddine. Fate summoned him during the most trying times. He is confronted with several pressing questions. What will Hezbollah do if Donald Trump ordered the fleets to launch new strikes against the Iranian regime? Can the party remain on the sidelines if the regime started to crack under the strikes? Moreover, the attacks may summon Israeli strikes if Iran acted on its threats and chose to retaliate to the US by attacking the Jewish state. Qassem is aware that his party today is not in the same shape it was before the launch of the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation. His capabilities have been weakened and the situation in Lebanon and the region is different. Qassem knows that other Lebanese segments oppose Hezbollah joining the battle, especially after they were vocal in rejecting the “support war” that Nasrallah declared in wake of the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation. Hezbollah’s former allies have distanced themselves from it, and head of the Free Patriotic Movement Gebran Bassil washed his hands clean of the alliance that helped expand his bloc in parliament. Qassem knows that the scene has changed. He knows that Joseph Aoun did not become president because of Hezbollah as was the case with his predecessor Michel Aoun. The latter entered the presidency riding the Hezbollah horse after other parties reluctantly agreed to his election in order to end a presidential vacuum that had stretched on for too long. Qassem also knows that Assad’s Syria, which had been a route for its rockets and provided it with a strategic depth, is now Sharaa’s Syria, which is a wall blocking Qasem Soleimani’s route and surrounding Hezbollah inside Lebanon. He certainly knows that the international demand for Iran to return to the confines of its borders without a nuclear arsenal and regional proxies also demands that Hezbollah return to the “Lebanese house” without its arsenal.
Qassem is mulling difficult options. The relationship with the Wilayet al-Faqih is vital and organic and their fates are connected. However, the balance of power is vastly not in its favor, and the Lebanese people are living at the mercy of Israeli drones and their daily violations. Can Hezbollah survive the storm of the American-Iranian confrontation if it happens? Can it close the chapter on its arsenal and return to the “Lebanese house”, relying solely on its representation among its supporters? Can the Hezbollah secretary-general play a normal political role in line with the Taif Accord the way Jumblatt, Geagea and others did before him?

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on February 23-24/2026
Iran May Activate Regional Allies if U.S. Launches Major Strikes
This is Beirut/February 23/2026
Iran could direct allied armed groups to target U.S. interests worldwide if President Donald Trump authorizes large-scale military action against Tehran, according to U.S. and Western officials cited by The New York Times. The newspaper reported that while no specific attack plans have been identified, intelligence services have detected an increase in intercepted communications among extremist networks, suggesting a higher level of coordination and preparation for potential operations. Officials told the paper that Iran could respond through its regional allies, including renewed Houthi attacks on Western commercial shipping in the Red Sea or strikes by Hezbollah-linked networks against U.S. military bases and diplomatic missions in Europe and other parts of the world. Colin P. Clarke, executive director of the Soufan Center in New York, said Tehran has the capacity to use proxy forces to raise the cost of any American military campaign. He added that if Iran’s leadership, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, feels directly threatened, it could authorize attacks beyond the Middle East. A senior Western official also warned of possible “hybrid attacks” targeting American and European interests, noting that such threats are under continuous assessment.
Pentagon reinforces defenses across the region
According to the report, the U.S. Department of Defense has moved in recent days to deploy additional Patriot air-defense batteries and other missile systems to protect American forces in the Middle East. However, officials cautioned that attacks on civilians or lightly protected targets remain more difficult to prevent. The warning comes as Washington continues to expand its military presence in the region. Flight-tracking data cited by the newspaper shows the repositioning of refueling aircraft, fighter jets, and other military assets, including F-35 stealth aircraft.Current U.S. deployments include two destroyers in the Mediterranean Sea, one in the Red Sea, four in the Persian Gulf, and the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln with its escort ships in the Arabian Sea. A second carrier group, led by the USS Gerald R. Ford, has also arrived in the Mediterranean. The United States maintains military infrastructure across several countries, with fighter aircraft, drones, and helicopters stationed in Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and the United Arab Emirates.
Iranian lawmakers issue direct threats
In parallel, Iranian parliamentarian Amir Hayat Moghadam, a member of the national security and foreign policy committee, warned that Tehran would deliver a “crushing response” if attacked by the United States. Speaking to Iranian media, Moghadam said Iran could sink U.S. warships in the Sea of Oman and target American bases and personnel across the region, including senior military officers. He also suggested that Iran could expand retaliation beyond the Middle East if a war breaks out.
Talks loom as military buildup accelerates
The report comes ahead of a third round of U.S.-Iran negotiations scheduled for Thursday in Geneva, at a time when Washington is reinforcing its regional military posture. Officials cited by The New York Times said the current buildup reflects preparations for multiple scenarios, including the possibility that diplomacy fails and the confrontation escalates into open conflict.

US, Iran to Meet in Geneva Thursday for Crucial Talks
Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said talks between the United States and Iran would resume on Thursday in Geneva "with a positive push to go the extra mile towards finalizing” a deal on Tehran's nuclear program. Speaking to CBS News on Sunday, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said details of a possible deal were being drawn up ahead of the renewed talks, after Washington's envoy Steve Witkoff had publicly wondered why Tehran had not yet "capitulated.”Witkoff said in a Fox News interview broadcast Saturday that US President Donald Trump was questioning why Iran had not yet given in to the pressure. "He's curious as to why they haven't... I don't want to use the word 'capitulated', but why they haven't capitulated," he said. "Why haven't they come to us and said, 'We profess we don't want a weapon, so here's what we're prepared to do'?"
Meanwhile, US threats of military action have multiplied. "If the US attacks us, then we have every right to defend ourselves," Araghchi said, alluding to American interests in the region as potential targets. Still, he said, "there is a good chance to have a diplomatic solution.”
Their comments came after a senior US official told Axios that the Trump administration is prepared to consider a proposal that allows Iran “token” nuclear enrichment if it leaves no possible path to a bomb. This suggests there could be an opening, if only a small one, between the red lines set by the US and Iran for a deal to constrain Iran's nuclear capabilities and prevent war, according to Axios. A senior Iranian official also told Reuters that Tehran could seriously ⁠consider a combination of ⁠exporting part of its highly enriched uranium (HEU) stockpile, diluting the purity of its HEU and a regional consortium for enriching uranium, but in return Iran's ⁠right to "peaceful nuclear enrichment" must be recognized.
"The negotiations continue and the possibility of reaching an interim agreement exists," the official said. The senior official said Tehran will not hand over control of its oil and mineral resources but US companies can always participate as contractors in Iran’s oil and gas fields.

Report: Trump Considers Targeted Strike Against Iran, Followed by Larger Attack
Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
US President Donald Trump has told advisers that if diplomacy or any initial targeted US attack does not lead Iran to give in to his demands that it give up its nuclear program, he will consider a much bigger attack in coming months intended to drive that country’s leaders from power, people briefed on internal administration deliberations told the New York Times. Negotiators from the United States and Iran are scheduled to meet in Geneva on Thursday for what appears to be last-ditch negotiations to avoid a military conflict. But Trump has been weighing options for US action if the negotiations fail. Though no final decisions have been made, advisers said, Trump has been leaning toward conducting an initial strike in coming days intended to demonstrate to Iran’s leaders that they must be willing to agree to give up the ability to make a nuclear weapon. Targets under consideration range from the headquarters of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps to the country’s nuclear sites to the ballistic missile program. Should those steps fail to convince Tehran to meet his demands, Trump told advisers, he would leave open the possibility of a military assault later this year intended to help topple Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader.
In this handout photograph released by the US Navy, an F/A-18F Super Hornet, attached to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 41, prepares to make an arrested landing on the flight deck of Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) in the Arabian Sea on February 15, 2026. (AFP photo / US Navy)
Doubts
There are doubts even inside the administration about whether that goal can be accomplished with airstrikes alone. And behind the scenes, a new proposal is being considered by both sides that could create an off-ramp to military conflict: a very limited nuclear enrichment program that Iran could carry out solely for purposes of medical research and treatments. It is unclear whether either side would agree. But the last-minute proposal comes as two aircraft carrier groups and dozens of fighter jets, bombers and refueling aircraft are now massing within striking distance of Iran. Trump discussed plans for strikes on Iran in the White House Situation Room on Wednesday. The meeting included Vice President JD Vance; Secretary of State Marco Rubio; Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; the CIA director, John Ratcliffe; and Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff.
During the meeting, Trump pressed Caine and Ratcliffe to weigh in on the broader strategy in Iran, but neither official generally advocates a certain policy position. Caine discussed what the military could do from an operational standpoint, and Ratcliffe preferred to discuss the current situation on the ground and possible outcomes of proposed operations. During the discussions of the operation last month to seize President Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela, Caine told Trump there was a high likelihood of success. But Caine has not been able to deliver the same reassurances to Trump during the Iran discussions, in large measure because it is a far more difficult target. Vance, who has long called for more restraint in overseas military action, did not oppose a strike, but he intensely questioned Caine and Ratcliffe in the meeting. He pressed them to share their opinions of the options and wanted more of a discussion of the risks and complexity of carrying out a strike against Iran.Options against Iran. Earlier, the United States had been considering options that included putting teams of special operations forces on the ground that could carry out raids to destroy Iranian nuclear or missile facilities. That included manufacturing and enrichment operations buried far below the surface, outside the range of American conventional munitions. But any such raid would be highly dangerous, requiring special operations forces to be on the ground far longer than they were for the raid to capture Maduro. Multiple US officials said that for now, the plans for a commando raid had been shelved. Army, Navy and Air Force officials have also raised concerns about the impact that a protracted war with Iran, or just remaining poised for such a conflict, could have on the readiness of Navy ships, scarce Patriot antimissile defenses, and overstretched transport and surveillance planes.The White House declined to comment on Trump’s decision making.
“The media may continue to speculate on the President’s thinking all they want, but only President Trump knows what he may or may not do,” Anna Kelly, a White House spokeswoman, said in a statement.
Pedestrians walk past a billboard depicting a US aircraft carrier with damaged fighter jets on its deck and a sign in Farsi and English reading, "If you sow the wind, you'll reap the whirlwind," at Enqelab-e-Eslami Square in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, Feb. 22, 2026. (AP)
‘Zero enrichment’. Even before the Iranians submit what appears likely to be their last proposal — officials said they expected it to be transmitted to the Trump administration on Monday or Tuesday — the two sides appeared to be hardening their positions. Steve Witkoff, the president’s special envoy, said on Fox News that Trump’s “clear direction” to him and Jared Kushner, his co-negotiator and the president’s son-in-law, was that the only acceptable outcome for an agreement was that Iran would move to “zero enrichment” of nuclear material. But Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, insisted anew in an interview on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday that the country was not ready to give up what he said was its “right” to make nuclear fuel under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
With that statement, the decision about whether the United States was about to attack targets in Iran — with the apparent goal of further weakening the government of Khamenei — seemed to come down to whether both sides could agree to a face-saving compromise about nuclear production that Washington and Tehran could each describe as a total victory. One such proposal is being debated by both the Trump administration and the Iranian leadership. According to several officials, it emanated from Rafael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, a United Nations organization that inspects Iran’s nuclear facilities. Under the proposal, Iran would be permitted to produce very small amounts of nuclear fuel for medical purposes. Iran has been producing medical isotopes for years at the Tehran Research Reactor, a nearly 60-year-old facility outside the country’s capital that was, in one of the strange twists of modern nuclear history, first supplied to the pro-American shah of Iran by the United States under the “Atoms for Peace” program. If adapted, Iran could claim that it was still enriching uranium. Trump could make the case that Iran is shuttering all the facilities that would enable it to build a weapon — most of which were left open, operating at low levels, under the 2015 agreement between Iran and the Obama administration. Trump exited that agreement in 2018, leading the Iranians to eventually bar inspectors and produce near-bomb-grade uranium and setting the stage for the current crisis.But it is far from clear whether the Iranians are willing to shrink what is now a vast, industrial-production nuclear program, on which they have spent billions of dollars, to a tiny effort of such limited scope. And it is also unclear whether Trump would allow nuclear production limited to cancer treatment studies and other medical purposes, given his public “zero enrichment” declarations.
Araghchi made no direct mention of the proposal when he spoke from Tehran. But he said, “I believe that still there is a good chance to have a diplomatic solution,” adding, “So there is no need for any military buildup, and military buildup cannot help it and cannot pressurize us.”In fact, pressure is the key to these negotiations. What Trump calls the “vast armada” that the United States has built up in the seas around Iran is the largest military force it has concentrated in the region since it prepared for the invasion of Iraq, nearly 23 years ago.
Two aircraft carrier groups, scores of fighter jets, bombers and refueling planes, and antimissile batteries have poured into the region, a demonstration of gunboat diplomacy even larger than the one that preceded the forced extraction of Maduro from Venezuela in early January. The second carrier, the Gerald R. Ford, was steaming south of Italy in the Mediterranean Sea on Sunday, and will soon be off the coast of Israel, military officials said.Further complicating any final decision on military strikes, Arab leaders have been calling counterparts in Washington to complain about comments from Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel. In an interview with Tucker Carlson, the conservative commentator, that aired on Friday, Huckabee said Israel had a right to much of the Middle East, outraging Arab countries.Administration officials have been unclear what their objectives are as they confront Iran, a country of more than 90 million people. While Trump often talks about preventing Iran from ever being able to produce a weapon, Rubio and other aides have described a range of other rationales for military action: protecting the protesters whom Iranian forces killed by the thousands last month, wiping out the arsenal of missiles that Iran can use to strike Israel, and ending Tehran’s support for Hamas and Hezbollah. But American military action could also result in a nationalistic response, even among Iranians eager to see the end of Khamenei’s brutal hold on power. European officials attending the Munich Security Conference last weekend said they doubted that the military pressure would force the Iranian leadership to give up a program that has become a symbol of resistance to the United States.

Iran: Any US Attack Including Limited Strikes Would be 'Act of Aggression'
Tehran/Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
Iran said Monday that any US attack, including limited strikes, would be an "act of aggression" that would precipitate a response, after President Donald Trump said he was considering a limited strike on Iran. "With respect to your first question concerning the limited strike, I think there is no limited strike," foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said at a briefing in Tehran attended by an AFP journalist. "An act of aggression would be regarded as an act of aggression. Period. And any state would react to an act of aggression as part of its inherent right of self-defense ferociously so that's what we would do."Trump said Friday he was considering a limited strike if Tehran did not reach a deal with the United States. "I guess I can say I am considering that," he replied following a question from reporters.The two countries concluded a second round of indirect talks in Switzerland on Tuesday under Omani mediation, against the backdrop of a major US military build-up in the region. Further talks, confirmed by Iran and Oman but not by the United States, are scheduled for Thursday. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is leading the negotiations for Iran, while the United States is represented by envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner.Trump is wondering why Iran has not "capitulated" in the face of Washington's military deployment, Witkoff said in an interview with Fox News broadcast on Sunday.
Baqaei responded Monday by saying that Iranians had never capitulated at any point in their history.

Iranian Students Protest for Third Day as US Pressure Mounts
Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
Iranian students ‌defied authorities with protests for a third day on Monday, weeks after security forces crushed mass unrest with thousands killed and as the United States weighs possible air strikes against the country. State media outlets reported students chanting anti-government slogans at Tehran University, burning flags at the all-women al-Zahra University, and scuffles at Amir Kabir University, all located in the capital. Reuters also verified video showing students at al-Zahra University chanting slogans including "we'll reclaim Iran", but was not able ‌to confirm ‌when it was recorded. In a new ‌sign ⁠of the mounting ⁠tension in the Middle East, the United States began pulling non-essential personnel and family members from the embassy in Beirut, a senior State Department official said. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened Iran since major nationwide protests across the country in January, saying on Thursday that "really bad things will ⁠happen" if talks between the countries fail ‌to produce a deal. Washington wants ‌Iran to give up much of its nuclear program, which ‌it believes is aimed at building a bomb, limit the ‌range of its missiles to short distances and stop supporting groups it backs in the Middle East.
It has built up forces across the Middle East, putting increased pressure on Iran ‌as it weighs its response to US demands amid ongoing talks. Iranian Supreme Leader Ali ⁠Khamenei ⁠already faces the gravest crisis of his 36-year tenure, with an economy struggling under the weight of international sanctions and growing unrest that broke out into major protests in January. On Sunday Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said negotiations with the US had "yielded encouraging signals" even as a second US aircraft carrier headed towards the Middle East. Trump has not laid out in detail his thinking on any possible Iran strike. A senior White House official told Reuters last week there was still no "unified support" within the administration to go ahead with an attack.

Risk of ‘Escalation’ if Iran Attacked, Warns Deputy Foreign Minister
Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
Iran's deputy foreign minister Kazem Gharibabadi warned of a wider escalation if his country was attacked, after US President Donald Trump raised the threat of strikes. Trump has sent a major deployment of air and sea power to the Middle East and has threatened to strike Iran if it does not reach a deal on key concerns starting with its nuclear program. "We call upon all nations committed to peace and justice to take meaningful steps to prevent further escalation," Gharibabadi said at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva. "The consequences of any renewed aggression wouldn't remain confined to one country -- and responsibility would rest with those who initiate or support such actions."Iranian and US negotiators held indirect talks in Geneva last week on Tehran's nuclear program, hosted by Oman. A fresh round of talks in the Swiss city this Thursday has been confirmed by Muscat, though not by Washington. "Iran remains committed to diplomacy and dialogue as the most effective path towards de-escalation and sustainable security," Gharibabadi said. "Recent diplomatic engagement here in Geneva, which will continue this Thursday, demonstrates that a new window of opportunity exists for negotiations to address differences and build confidence -- provided that they uphold mutual respect, equitable treatment and non-selective application of international norms. "Any sustainable and credible negotiation must respect the legitimate rights of all states under international law, and deliver tangible security benefits without coercion, unilateral demands or threats of force."
'Chaos and change' -
The United States and Israel threatened new military action against Iran after mass protests in the regime, which the Iranian authorities crushed at a cost of thousands of lives. After last week's indirect talks with Washington through Omani mediators in Geneva, Tehran said they had reached broad agreement on a set of guiding principles. Gharibabadi said that while Tehran sought the path of diplomacy, it was prepared to defend its sovereignty, territory and people, insisting it would exercise its right to self-defense "if necessary". He said meaningful progress in disarmament and non-proliferation could only be achieved through mutual, balanced and legally-binding commitments. He called upon nuclear weapons states to engage constructively in talks towards a comprehensive nuclear weapons convention, plus offer legally-binding security assurances for countries without nuclear weapons.
Speaking just before, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said the world was living through a period of "chaos and change", with international law being brazenly violated. "The international order that defined security relations for nearly eight decades is shifting rapidly. The reckless use of force in many regions is fomenting mistrust," he warned.

Iran: Any US Attack Including Limited Strikes Would be 'Act of Aggression'
Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
Iran said Monday that any US attack, including limited strikes, would be an "act of aggression" that would precipitate a response, after President Donald Trump said he was considering a limited strike on Iran. "With respect to your first question concerning the limited strike, I think there is no limited strike," foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said at a briefing in Tehran attended by an AFP journalist. "An act of aggression would be regarded as an act of aggression. Period. And any state would react to an act of aggression as part of its inherent right of self-defense ferociously so that's what we would do."Trump said Friday he was considering a limited strike if Tehran did not reach a deal with the United States."I guess I can say I am considering that," he replied following a question from reporters. The two countries concluded a second round of indirect talks in Switzerland on Tuesday under Omani mediation, against the backdrop of a major US military build-up in the region.Further talks, confirmed by Iran and Oman but not by the United States, are scheduled for Thursday. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is leading the negotiations for Iran, while the United States is represented by envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner. Trump is wondering why Iran has not "capitulated" in the face of Washington's military deployment, Witkoff said in an interview with Fox News broadcast on Sunday.Baqaei responded Monday by saying that Iranians had never capitulated at any point in their history.

Netanyahu Says Israel Facing ‘Challenging Days’ with Iran-US Tensions
Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday that Israel was facing "complex and challenging days" as tensions escalate between the United States and Iran following President Donald Trump's threat of strikes should Tehran refuse to accept a new nuclear agreement.
"We are in very complex and challenging days," Netanyahu told lawmakers in a brief address to parliament. "We are keeping our eyes open and are prepared for any scenario."He also reiterated a warning to Iran's leadership: "I have conveyed to the Iranian regime that if they make the gravest mistake in their history and attack the State of Israel, we will respond with a force they cannot even imagine." The premier further highlighted Israel's close military cooperation with the US, as Washington continues to build up its military presence near Iran and in the Middle East. "The alliance with the United States has never been closer," Netanyahu said. "Between the Israel forces and the United States military, between our security agencies and their security services, there has never been anything like this," he added. Arch-foes Israel and Iran faced each other in a first direct confrontation last June during a 12-day war in which the Israeli military targeted Tehran's nuclear facilities and ballistic missile arsenal. Iran responded with drone and missile strikes on Israel. Later on in the war, the United States joined Israel in targeting Iran's underground nuclear facilities.

Netanyahu: Iran would make ‘worst mistake’ by attacking Israel
JNS Staff/February 23/2026
“No one knows what the day will bring,” said the Israeli prime minister, who declared that “Israel has never been stronger” and is “prepared for any scenario.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday that Israel has never been stronger, the bond between Washington and Jerusalem has never been tighter, and Iran would be making the worst mistake in its history were it to attack Israel. He declared this during an address to the Knesset plenum on Feb. 23. “I recently returned from my seventh meeting with the president of the United States since he was elected,” he said, describing the relationship between U.S. President Donald Trump and himself as unprecedented. That relationship extends to the Israel Defense Forces and the U.S. military, according to Netanyahu, who emphasized: “Our security agencies and their security services—there has never been anything like this.”Together, the United States and Israel have eliminated threats facing every Israeli citizen. “Israel has never been stronger,” he said. He said he relayed the message to Iran that it would make “perhaps the worst mistake in its history,” if it attacked the State of Israel. “We will respond with a force that they cannot even imagine,” he added. “This is not the time for argument. In these days, on the eve of Purim, in those days as in this time, we need to close the ranks of the people, stand shoulder to shoulder,” he said. “I trust in our strength. I trust our commanders. I trust our fighters. I trust our people. I trust you, the citizens of Israel. We have already proven that when we stand together, we achieve great achievements,” said Netanyahu. “On the eve of Purim, we will stand together, and with God’s help, we will ensure the eternity of Israel.”

Rubio Trip to Israel on Iran Tensions 'Subject to Change'
Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio may push back a trip to Israel in which he is expected to speak to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about potential strikes on Iran, a US official said Monday. "Secretary Rubio is still planning to travel to Israel but the schedule remains subject to change," the official told AFP on condition of anonymity.Rubio had earlier been expected to meet Netanyahu on Saturday, but Israeli media reports said he was now expected in the country on Monday. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi earlier told CBS News that he expected new talks on Thursday with the United States and held out hope for progress.President Donald Trump has sent a major deployment of air and sea power to the Middle East and has threatened to strike Iran if it does not reach a deal on key concerns starting with its nuclear program. Netanyahu has long advocated a hard line on Iran's clerical state and last June ordered a 12-day bombing campaign inside the country, which the United States briefly joined. Netanyahu visited Washington on February 11 to speak with Trump, who said afterward that he "insisted" on giving time for diplomacy. Iran has publicly insisted that it has a right to uranium enrichment. The United States and Israel have threatened new military action against Iran after mass protests against the Islamic republic, which authorities crushed at a cost of thousands of lives.

Gulf Arab countries back Kuwait over maritime border dispute with Iraq
Associated Press/February 23/2026
A dispute between Iraq and Kuwait over their maritime border that reignited over the weekend has prompted Gulf Arab countries to side with Kuwait, putting Baghdad on the defensive on Monday over its demand. The dispute came after Iraq recently submitted a map and geographic coordinates to the United Nations to delineate what it says are Iraqi areas in the Persian Gulf waters — some of which Kuwait claims infringe on its territory. Although relations have improved between the two countries since the 2003 ouster of former Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein's — who invaded Kuwait in 1990 — their maritime boundary has been a persistent cause of friction. Kuwait's foreign ministry said Iraq's claim infringes on Kuwait's sovereignty by placing Kuwaiti areas, including the Fasht al-Qaid and Fasht al-Aij shoals, in Iraqi territory. Kuwait's neighbors are now backing its stand, with Qatar, the United Emirates and Oman issuing statements in solidarity. Saudi Arabia said it has "serious concerns" about the Iraqi map, adding that it also encroaches on a joint Saudi-Kuwaiti zone. Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein said in a statement Monday that Kuwait had "deposited its maps with the United Nations in 2014, without consulting Iraq at the time." He said that Iraq is committed to "the provisions of international law and ... to regulating its maritime rights within the established legal frameworks, thereby contributing to the strengthening of stability and cooperation in the region."In 2019, Iraq sent complaint to the U.N., accusing Kuwait of pursuing a "policy of fait accompli by creating a new situation that changes the geography of the region" after it built a port facility on the Fasht al-Aij shoal. Iraq and Kuwait have for years wrangled over Khor Abdullah, a narrow waterway shared by Iraq and Kuwait that empties into the Persian Gulf. In 2012, they reached an agreement regulating travel in the waterway, but in 2023, two Iraqi lawmakers sued to overturn the agreement, saying that it infringed on Iraq's sovereignty and had been adopted without following proper parliamentary procedures. Iraq's Federal Supreme Court subsequently annulled the agreement.

The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on February 23-24/2026
Who Will Become the Biggest Beneficiary of the Billions of Dollars About To Be Invested in the Gaza Strip? The Terrorist Group Hamas
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/February 23, 2026
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22299/hamas-beneficiary-billions-of-dollars
Although Hamas has expressed its willingness to hand over its government institutions to the NCAG [Palestinian National Committee for the Administration of Gaza], there are indications that the terror group seeks to control the new committee and turn it into a Hamas puppet.
The NCAG is already under pressure from the terror group to incorporate thousands of Hamas terrorists into a newly established Palestinian police force in the Gaza Strip. Hamas, in addition, is seeking to ensure that its civil servants be placed on the payroll of the NCAG.
"There is a prevailing sense within the committee and other parties that Hamas is determined, by all means, to keep its members within the new administrative framework overseeing the Gaza Strip." — Asharq al-Awsat, quoting "sources close to" NCAG, February 14, 2026.
What we are currently witnessing are direct and indirect efforts by Hamas to continue governing the Gaza Strip even after the establishment of Trump's "Board of Peace" and the NCAG.
Hamas... sees itself as an essential part of the post-war arrangements in the Gaza Strip. In the viewpoint of Hamas, the role of bodies such as the "Board of Peace" and NCAG should be limited only to paying salaries, funding reconstruction and ensuring the entry of aid supplies into the Gaza Strip. Meanwhile, the terror group will focus its efforts on rearming, regrouping, rebuilding its terror infrastructure, and planning more attacks on Israel.
Anyone who believes that the NCAG will be able to operate as an independent governing body in the Gaza Strip is abysmally uninformed. Its members will undoubtedly be at the mercy of Hamas and its masked thugs.
"The image promoted by some international parties that the committee is a means to remove Hamas from power seems far removed from reality. The facts on the ground indicate that Hamas still maintains military, organizational, and ideological control within Gaza, and that any new administrative body cannot operate independently of its will or outside its sphere of influence. Real power remains in the hands of those who possess weapons, organizational networks, and the capacity for sustained popular mobilization." — Mahdi Mubarak, Arab political analyst, rumonline.net, February 16, 2026
Hamas should have been asked to end its rule over the Gaza Strip and hand over all its weapons before, and not after, the formation of the NCAG. Since that has not happened, Hamas will become the largest beneficiary of the billions of dollars that are about to be invested in the Gaza Strip.
What we are currently witnessing are direct and indirect efforts by Hamas to continue governing the Gaza Strip even after the establishment of Trump's "Board of Peace" and the Palestinian National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG).
The Palestinian National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), established last month in accordance with US President Donald J. Trump's plan to end the Israel-Hamas war, is about to assume its responsibilities in the Gaza Strip.
The NCAG's main mission is to manage the day-to-day operations of the civil service and administration in the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the war, which erupted after the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led invasion of Israel.
The committee, whose members are described as "independent technocrats," is headed by Ali Shaath, a top official of the Fatah faction headed by Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas. Shaath previously held several positions in the PA, including Deputy Minister of Planning and International Cooperation, and Undersecretary at the Ministry of Transport.
The NCAG is expected to start operating in the Gaza Strip even though Hamas continues to control nearly half of it, with more than 90% of the population still under the terror group's jurisdiction. The other half is controlled by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).
Although Hamas has expressed its willingness to hand over its government institutions to the NCAG, there are indications that the terror group seeks to control the new committee and turn it into a Hamas puppet.
The NCAG is already under pressure from the terror group to incorporate thousands of Hamas terrorists into a newly established Palestinian police force in the Gaza Strip. Hamas, in addition, is seeking to ensure that its civil servants be placed on the payroll of the NCAG.
Sources close to the NCAG revealed that Hamas "continues to insist that its security personnel remain in service within the agencies that will operate under the committee's [NCAG] leadership," according to the London-based newspaper, Asharq Al-Awsat.
"The sources said this issue further complicates the committee's ability to assume its duties in an orderly manner, explaining that Hamas, by insisting on certain demands related to its security employees and police forces, seeks to impose its presence in one way or another within the committee's work. There is a prevailing sense within the committee and other parties that Hamas is determined, by all means, to keep its members within the new administrative framework overseeing the Gaza Strip."
The news about the newly established Palestinian governance committee's preparations to enter the Gaza Strip coincided with reports that Hamas is reasserting its power in areas under its control. According to a February 18 BBC report:
"Gazans say Hamas is again extending its control over security, tax revenue, and government services, raising questions about its long-term strategy, and whether it is prepared to give up its weapons and authority, as now required under the second stage of Donald Trump's peace plan."
Mohammed Diab, an activist in the Gaza Strip, noted that Hamas "regained control of more than 90% of the areas where it is present."
"Its police and security agencies have returned, and are now present in the streets, controlling crime and pursuing those it labels as collaborators and people with opinions. Citizens must go to the Hamas authorities for identity cards or health procedures, and it is also reasserting control over the judiciary and courts."
Such reports prove that Hamas is lying when it says that it is ready to hand over its governing power to NCAG. Hamas's actions on the ground demonstrate that the terror group plans to maintain its control over the Gaza Strip in violation of Trump's plan, which states: "Hamas and other factions agree to not have any role in the governance of Gaza, directly, indirectly, or in any form." What we are currently witnessing are direct and indirect efforts by Hamas to continue governing the Gaza Strip even after the establishment of Trump's "Board of Peace" and the NCAG.
Hamas, whose members murdered, tortured, mutilated, raped and kidnapped thousands of Israelis and foreign nationals on October 7, sees itself as an essential part of the post-war arrangements in the Gaza Strip. In the viewpoint of Hamas, the role of bodies such as the "Board of Peace" and NCAG should be limited only to paying salaries, funding reconstruction and ensuring the entry of aid supplies into the Gaza Strip. Meanwhile, the terror group will focus its efforts on rearming, regrouping, rebuilding its terror infrastructure, and planning more attacks on Israel.
According to the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center:
"[D]espite Hamas' alleged willingness to transfer governance to the committee, it will have to rely on tens of thousands of employees who remain loyal to Hamas after nearly two decades of absolute Hamas control in the Strip. In such a situation, the committee will at best be able to carry out limited assistance and reconstruction activities, but most likely not to resolve core issues of control, security and demilitarization."
Needless to say, Hamas has repeatedly made it clear that it has no intention of laying down its weapons or abandoning its Jihad (holy war) to eliminate Israel.
Under current circumstances, where Hamas is quickly reasserting its control over the Gaza Strip, it is hard to see how the "Board of Peace" or the NCAG could succeed in ending the terror group's rule and implement Trump's vision, specifically that "Gaza will be a deradicalized terror-free zone that does not pose a threat to its neighbors."
So long as Hamas and thousands of its terrorists are roaming the streets, collecting taxes, intimidating the residents, and recruiting new fighters, the security and economic situation in the Gaza Strip will never improve. Anyone who believes that the NCAG will be able to operate as an independent governing body in the Gaza Strip is abysmally uninformed. Its members will undoubtedly be at the mercy of Hamas and its masked thugs.
Arab political analyst Mahdi Mubarak wrote:
"The committee's formation did not occur in a political vacuum, but rather in an environment dominated by Hamas, which ruled the Gaza Strip for many years and established a deep military, organizational, and social presence. Therefore, any realistic assessment of the committee's future cannot ignore the existing balance of power on the ground. No matter how professional the civil administration may be, its influence remains limited if it lacks the tools of actual power or if it operates within a framework defined by a more powerful party.
"The image promoted by some international parties that the committee is a means to remove Hamas from power seems far removed from reality. The facts on the ground indicate that Hamas still maintains military, organizational, and ideological control within Gaza, and that any new administrative body cannot operate independently of its will or outside its sphere of influence. Real power remains in the hands of those who possess weapons, organizational networks, and the capacity for sustained popular mobilization.
"From this, it can be said that Hamas was the biggest beneficiary of the formation of the committee, not because it relinquished its influence, but because it cleverly repositioned itself. Instead of appearing at the forefront of the scene and bearing the cost of political, security, and economic confrontation before the international community, Hamas left space for a civilian body to manage day-to-day affairs, while it retained the keys to strategic influence. The military force is still in Hamas's hands, its organizational structure has not been dismantled, and the social networks it built over the years are still active.
"If the new security apparatus relies on elements formed within an organizational environment close to Hamas, then the separation between civilian administration and Hamas's influence becomes more theoretical than practical. And if the professional cadres—engineers, doctors, and employees—work within a social system that has been influenced by Hamas for years, its indirect influence will persist even in its formal absence from the forefront."
Hamas appears to be on its way to attempting to impose the model of Lebanon, where Iran's terror proxy, Hezbollah, has for the past few decades been able to operate as a "state within a state."
Hamas should have been asked to end its rule over the Gaza Strip and hand over all its weapons before, and not after, the formation of the NCAG. Since that has not happened, Hamas will become the largest beneficiary of the billions of dollars that are about to be invested in the Gaza Strip.
**Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.
**Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter)
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.

Iran must not be allowed to use nuclear talks as a diversion
Nadim Shehadi/Arab News/February 23/ 2026
We are back at it — negotiations over Iran’s nuclear weapons, possibly with a limited or even a comprehensive war as the other means of dealing with the Islamic Republic. Whatever happens in the coming days and weeks, these negotiations and any resulting arrangement should not give the Tehran regime a license to kill its own population or continue destabilizing the region. To negotiate with Iran on the nuclear issue alone is to repeat the mistakes of the past, granting the regime legitimacy while ignoring the regional machinery of repression and proxy warfare that sustains it.
It has happened before. When a regime feels threatened, either by its own people or by international pressure, weapons of mass destruction become the perfect diversion. Saddam Hussein strung along UN inspectors in the 1990s while crushing uprisings. Muammar Qaddafi rehabilitated his image in the early 2000s by renouncing WMDs. Bashar Assad avoided US intervention in 2013 by agreeing to dismantle his chemical arsenal.
Then there was the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or Iran nuclear deal, a version of which is now being revived. The pattern is simple: declaring readiness to negotiate over nuclear or chemical weapons immediately triggers an administrative reaction involving international organizations and bureaucracies with inspectors, fact-finding missions and rounds of technical negotiations. This gives regimes time and credibility and diverts attention from whatever else they do to their people.
Negotiations give regimes time and credibility and divert attention from whatever else they do to their people
The trick never fails, perhaps for cultural reasons in the West, with generations raised under the influence of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. “Ban the bomb” was a powerful slogan that engaged progressives, artists and politicians around the moral urgency of preventing a nuclear war. If you were not brought up wearing the peace symbol on your blue jeans and humming John Lennon and Yoko Ono’s “Imagine,” then your parents were.
These were the icons and the hymn of CND for a rebel generation during the Cold War, the Vietnam conflict, student protests, women’s movements and beyond. Films such as “Planet of the Apes,” “Dr. Strangelove” and “Threads” further dramatized the problem and it all became the primary moral cause in the West. Nuclear talks were seen as progress. CND was synonymous with universal good.
It seems Iran’s communications experts understood that and used it effectively — and they had precedents from which to learn. One cannot exaggerate the cost of such diversions, not only for the countries involved but also the region. We are still suffering the consequences.
Saddam’s regime was at its weakest and about to fall in 1991. After the Iran-Iraq War, the invasion of Kuwait and the Gulf War that liberated Kuwait, he was facing a countrywide uprising. That is when he agreed to the WMD inspections scheme, which kept the world busy while he was allowed to brutally crush the revolt. Inspectors were in the country while this was happening. His troops entered towns and villages and executed people to reestablish terror and regain control.
The sanctions imposed on Iraq only helped Saddam consolidate his power, while they crippled the economy, destroyed the health system and resulted in poverty and malnutrition. Refugees flooded into Jordan, Syria and Lebanon and the middle class was mostly eradicated. The combined effect was a society impoverished, fragmented and terrorized, with cultural devastation layered atop humanitarian catastrophe. Iraq is still recovering from that blunder in 1991.
In 2013, Assad’s regime had lost control of most of Syria and the loyalty of the army. The country was about to fall. In addition, he had crossed a red line that US President Barack Obama had set the year before. The red line itself was an excuse not to intervene after a major massacre in Syria, a carte blanche with conditions: It allowed the regime to continue its carnage as long as it did not use chemical weapons. It was the chemical weapons that were the red line, not the massacres. But in August 2013, an attack on Ghouta, near Damascus, used sarin gas and caused mass casualties, meaning Obama was again under pressure to intervene. To avoid this, the Russians mediated and proposed a dismantling of Assad’s chemical weapons arsenal.
One cannot exaggerate the cost of such diversions, not only for the countries involved but also the region
The trick worked again: the intervention was called off and the inspectors came in, doing their work and completely ignoring the fact that Iran, Russia and Hezbollah came to the rescue. More than 6 million refugees were forced out of the country and a similar number were internally displaced, while Aleppo, Homs and Eastern Ghouta were reduced to rubble through aerial bombardment and artillery campaigns. Prolonged starvation sieges in places such as Madaya and Ghouta became notorious, while tens of thousands of Syrians disappeared into regime prisons, where torture was systemic.
Fighters affiliated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from Iraq and Hezbollah from Lebanon provided the ground forces, while Russia supplied the air power and diplomatic cover, ensuring Assad’s survival. The opposition was crushed and the country destroyed, leaving the regime entrenched but presiding over a devastated, depopulated country. When you think of the damage done to Syria, of the refugee crisis or the EU crisis itself, remember that this was the consequence of another WMD deal.
Iran perfected this tactic with the 2015 nuclear deal. While the world obsessed over centrifuges and enrichment levels, Tehran expanded its proxy network, propped up Assad and entrenched itself in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and Palestine. The nuclear deal gave Iran sanctions relief and diplomatic respectability, while its IRGC grew stronger in the shadows.
The US proudly signed the JCPOA on condition that it did not bring up any of Iran’s interventions in the region. It even withdrew from Yemen in denial that Iran had anything to do with the Houthis. The consequences became clear after the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks, when Iran’s proxies acted in concert across multiple fronts. Lobbyists for the Iran deal managed to raise funds from both the isolationist right and the non-interventionist left and we are still paying the price of another WMD diversion. Military and technical experts will be turned loose to confuse us but the focus must be that the Iranian regime should be engaged on the full spectrum of its behavior — from domestic repression to proxy wars — or we risk repeating the same costly mistakes. Nobody can afford another nuclear deal charade.
The lesson is simple: Whatever happens next with Iran, nuclear diplomacy cannot be used as a diversion from regional realities. WMD diplomacy must also involve the interests of the Arab states and engage them in it. The JCPOA was neither joint nor a plan of action. Such negotiations have worked as a diversionary tactic for endangered regimes from Saddam to Assad. But for Iran, this may be one time too many.
*Nadim Shehadi is an economist and political adviser. X: @Confusezeus

Europe in the Eyes of Conservative America
Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/February 23/2026
In 2003, as the Iraq War was driving a wedge between Europeans and Americans, the American historian and commentator Robert Kagan published a book that sparked mass controversy. In “Of Paradise and Power,” Kegan elaborates his conservative view of global politics through the developments of the time. It came after he had been in the camp that had argued the end of the Cold War would not abolish power politics nor deprive it of its central role in shaping the international order.
A catchphrase meant to sum up the gist of the book was that “Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus” in terms of strategic culture. While America retains a preference for power, Europe favors diplomacy and law.
The fact is that Americans cannot deny Europe’s status as the “motherland,” though conservatives often treat her like an unhinged, overindulgent mother whose kindness borders on naivete, and who, when confronted with the cruelty of the real world, always ends up calling on the United States to come to her rescue.This is precisely what happened in the two world wars, both of which had begun as European wars. At the time, America did not limit itself to providing military assistance; it also offered, through the Marshall Plan, economic and financial assistance to support reconstruction efforts after the continent had been devastated by its wars.
Driven by a frontier culture that occupies a lot of space in the American political consciousness, the grievances against Europe often went further. In this view, Europe lives as though there were permanent peace in the world, spending on its welfare but not its defense despite the serious trouble on those borders, as demonstrated by the Russian-Ukrainian war, and as the waves of mass migration and refugee flows continue to demonstrate. Instead of fortifying its states and armies, Europe pours its energy into a transnational European Union. Amid bickering over Iraq, the hawkish US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld went so far as to call Western Europe the “old Europe,” leaving Central and Eastern Europe in the “new Europe.”
Rumsfeld was probably not one to be embarrassed by the dark chapters of the United States’ history of brutality, such as the reservations to which Native Americans were confined (or, more accurately, detained), nor the forced transfer of the Japanese in America- most of them US citizens- from the West Coast to “relocation centers” that have been described as concentration camps.
For their part, Europeans do not hide their culture’s bias for another worldview. Through their continental union, they contained the threats that some had feared following Germany’s reunification. For their part, the neighbor and “the other” are not necessarily enemies, even neighbors that have consistently been on the opposite side of wars and conflicts historically.Accordingly, seeking common ground becomes a broad and noble concern. We are taught by historians of the stature of the French scholar Fernand Braudel, to give one of many examples, that the Mediterranean region, despite its wars, was never a battlefield shared by isolated civilizations; rather, it was home to a web of interconnected societies that developed through inter dependence. The relationship among those civilizations was one of “superposition,” with each civilization constituting a layer stacked upon another, all coexisting within the same space and time.
And if America’s debt to Europe cannot be denied, another debt—Europe’s debt to America—should not be denied either. American political and social intellectual life maintained its provincialism until European intellectuals and artists, most notably German Jews, fleeing from the Nazis, emigrated to the United States.It is difficult to write the history of American culture without going over its Parisian moment in the early 20th century- a moment that inaugurated “cultural migration” to a capital that had served as a laboratory for artistic freedom and intellectual experimentation, as well as offering a space for individuality that had been stifled by the conservatism of America at the time. Without Paris, it is impossible to understand the lives and experiences of figures like Ernest Hemingway, Scott Fitzgerald, and Gertrude Stein, who founded a salon frequented by some of the leading figures of European literary and artistic modernism, among them Picasso, Matisse, and Ezra Pound- the “City of Light” thereby was an obligatory pitstop for any American creative making his way to that modernity.
That, of course, is not how Conservative America thinks. War (and everything that comes with it) is the invariable criterion by which it passes judgment. The frontier mindset born of the American domestic experience was not moderated by its good fortune of being “bordered to the north and south by weak neighbors, and to the east and west by fish,” to borrow from the French writer Andre Maurois.
On top of that, conservative America is not impressed with the intellectual and artistic gifts it has received from Europe, nor is it drawn to the idea of bartering its hard power for European soft power. One could even say that McCarthyism was, in part, a rejection of more of those European gifts and an attempt to contain their influence. The cosmopolitanism of California and New York (and the fact that the latter hosts the United Nations and international NGOs) does not spark joy in conservative America. In a previous era, conservatism even managed to prevent the US from joining the League of Nations despite the President of the United States, Woodrow Wilson, being its lead architect.While the loudest voice in Europe continues to stress that the future cannot be derived from the past because, in this event, it would not be a future, the loudest voice in America gives the future to cutting-edge technologies and anchors the mind in a past that must not pass.

 

X Platform Selected twittes for 23/2026