English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News
& Editorials
For February 28/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.february28.26.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
Whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will
be yours
Mark 11/19-25./:”And when evening came, Jesus and his disciples went out of the
city. In the morning as they passed by, they saw the fig tree withered away to
its roots. Then Peter remembered and said to him, ‘Rabbi, look! The fig tree
that you cursed has withered. ’Jesus answered them, ‘Have faith in God. Truly I
tell you, if you say to this mountain, “Be taken up and thrown into the sea”,
and if you do not doubt in your heart, but believe that what you say will come
to pass, it will be done for you. So I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer,
believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. ‘Whenever you stand
praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone; so that your Father in
heaven may also forgive you your trespasses.”.
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published
on February
27-28/2026
The Commons (Communal Lands) of Historic Mount Lebanon Belong to the Villages’
Residents Since Ottoman Times… The Iranian-Backed and Terrorist Shiite Duo Is
Attempting to Seize Them/Elias Bejjani/February 26/2026
Lebanon says Israeli strikes in Bekaa kill two, wound 29
More than 60 strikes: Israel ramps up military pressure in Lebanon’s Bekaa as
US-Iran talks loom
Parliamentary elections clock ticks: Lebanon continues to face diaspora vote
dispute
Six or 128? The 16th District law turns into legal battle between Salam and
Khalil
Lebanese Army chief receives invitation to Paris conference on army support
Yassine Jaber: Finance Ministry is working to increase state revenues by
pursuing unregistered tax evaders
U.S. Senator Blumenthal: ‘There Ought to be the Lebanese and the Israelis
Working Together Against Hezbollah’
Israeli Escalation in Lebanon Sends Warning to Hezbollah on Iran/Samar El-Kadi/This
Is Beirut/February 27/2026
Why Lebanon’s Muslims Are Key to Any Credible Peace Initiative/Marwan El
Amine/This Is Beirut/February 27/2026
Israel Follows Iran Negotiations amid its Broadest Escalation in Eastern
Lebanon/Asharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
Hezbollah has no place in the future of Lebanon/Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab
News/February 26, 2026
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous
Reports And News published
on February
27-28/2026
Trump
‘not thrilled’ with Iran but undecided on attack/“Nobody knows. There might be
and there might not be,” Trump said of regime change.
Iran agreed to ‘never, ever’ have nuclear material needed for a bomb: Omani FM
US President Donald Trump says ‘no enrichment’
Rubio Designates Iran 'State Sponsor of Wrongful Detention'
Rubio Plans to Visit Israel Next Week as US-Iran Tensions Remain High After
Latest Talks
Trump Iranian Missile Claim Unsupported by US Intelligence
UK Pulls Embassy Staff from Iran Due to ‘Security Situation’
Israel Greets Iran Talks With Pessimism, Prepares for War
What Is Israel’s Multi-Layered Defense Against Iranian Missiles?
Syrian Gov’t Takes Military Site From Kurds in Kobani
US Envoy Barrack Meets Iraq's Ex-Prime Minister Maliki
Egypt-Türkiye Military Agreement Drives Deeper Cooperation
Iraq’s Kataib Hezbollah Tells Fighters to Prepare for Long Iran-US War
Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous
sources published on February
27-28/2026
What
are the most frequently asked questions about the book of Exodus? (Part 2)/GotQuestions.org
Podcast?/February 27/2026
In major policy shift on Syria, UN Security Council lifts sanctions on Hayat
Tahrir Al-Sham/Ephrem Kossaify/Arab News/February 28, 2026
Iraq: The 2003 System and the Political Elites’ Crisis/Mustafa FahsAsharq Al
Awsat/February 28/2026
How Strong Is International Law?/Radwan al-SayyedAsharq Al Awsat/February
28/2026
Iran: Six Scenarios for Another War?Then what?/Amir TaheriAsharq Al Awsat/February
28/2026
AP reporter speaks to Iranian doctors who say agents intimidated them and
obstructed medical care/Sarah El Deeb/AP/February 27, 2026
Pakistan-Afghanistan 'open war': How and why we got here?/Leela JACINTO/France
24/February 27, 2026
President Trump's Proliferating 'Board of War'/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone
Institute/February 27, 20
President Trump's Proliferating 'Board of War'...The PA wants to return to the
Gaza Strip not to replace Hamas, but to join forces with it./Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone
Institute/February 27, 20
The Middle East: A Stack of Fake Narratives, An Attempted Fake 'Palestinian
State' and the Real Threat to the West/Guy Millière/Gatestone Institute/February
27/2026
on February
27-28/2026
The Commons (Communal Lands) of Historic Mount Lebanon Belong to
the Villages’ Residents Since Ottoman Times… The Iranian-Backed and Terrorist
Shiite Duo Is Attempting to Seize Them
Elias Bejjani/February
26/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/02/152475/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns_SMzpIKBQ
In the context of a long series of theft, usurpation, corruption, moral
decay, and blatant disregard that has, for years, been associated with Nabih
Berri and Hezbollah—terroists groups aligned with Iran and acting in hostility
to all that is Lebanese, constitutional, and rooted in respect and coexistence—
Yesterday, Finance Minister Yassine Jaber, a member of the Amal Movement led by
Nabih Berri and his circle, issued a circular that complements a previous one
released in 2015 by then–Finance Minister Ali Hassan Khalil. That earlier
circular sought to seize the commons (Communal
Lands) of Mount Lebanon and register them as state property. It
must be emphasized that the commons of historic Mount Lebanon, stretching from
Bsharri in the north to Jezzine in the south, have belonged to the residents of
the villages and towns since Ottoman rule, and subsequently during the French
Mandate and throughout the First and Second Lebanese Republics. They were
therefore preserved and never confiscated, seized, or placed under state
control—unlike commons in other Lebanese regions that are owned by the state
outside historic Mount Lebanon.In
2015, backed by the force of the Iranian jihadist-terrorist Hezbollah’s weapons
and political dominance, Berri attempted to seize these commons. At that time,
Ali Hassan Khalil issued a circular aimed at confiscating the commons and
transferring their ownership to the state. The circular was not implemented due
to widespread opposition, most of it from Christian communities. Today, Berri is
attempting once again to pursue the same objective through a new circular issued
under the tenure of Minister Yassine Jaber.
The Vatican, first and foremost, the Maronite Church in particular, and all
genuine sovereignty advocates are called upon to reject this circular publicly
and to demand the prosecution of former Minister Ali Hassan Khalil, current
Minister Yassine Jaber, and their political master Nabih Berri on charges of
abuse of office and unlawful infringement upon Christian-owned lands.
The
Commons of Mount Lebanon: A Historic Ownership Confronting an Administrative
Circular
Amid the controversy stirred by the circular issued by Finance Minister Yassine
Jaber on February 25, 2026, concerning the registration of un-surveyed
properties and commons, the issue of the historic commons of Mount Lebanon has
resurfaced. The matter carries historical, legal, and existential dimensions
that strike at the heart of collective ownership by the residents of villages
and towns extending from Bsharri in the north to Jezzine in the south.
First:
Historical Background of the Commons’ Ownership
The commons of Mount Lebanon are not abandoned or ownerless lands; they are
collective properties belonging to village communities since the era of the
Mutasarrifate of Mount Lebanon under the Ottoman Empire. During that period,
local customs and land regulations recognized the distinct nature of communal
ownership in mountain villages. Under the French Mandate over Lebanon, these
commons were not confiscated. Instead, they continued to be recognized within
the framework of land demarcation and registration systems. This recognition
persisted after Lebanon’s independence in 1943, without transferring ownership
to the state—unlike practices applied in other Lebanese regions outside historic
Mount Lebanon.
For centuries, these commons have formed an economic and social backbone for
village residents, used for grazing, agriculture, and public benefit. They have
traditionally been administered in the name of the local community rather than
the central state.
Second:
The 2026 Circular and the Revival of the 2015 Attempt
The new circular issued by Minister Jaber requires that un-surveyed properties
and commons be registered first in the name of the state, with the possibility
of later transfer to municipalities if legal documentation is provided. This
measure is justified as compliance with Decision No. 26/186 concerning land
demarcation and registration, as well as Articles 236 and 256 of the Property
Law. However, this step recalls the 2015 circular issued by then–Finance
Minister Ali Hassan Khalil, which adopted a similar approach and triggered broad
political and popular opposition, preventing its effective implementation in
many areas.
Current
concerns revolve around two key points:
Registering initial ownership in the name of the state may open the door to
altering the historic legal status of these lands. Granting the Ministry of
Finance—acting as custodian of state property—the final authority over such
properties effectively places collective ownership under direct central control.
Third:
Between Law and Historic Rights
While the Property Law prohibits acquiring ownership of abandoned attached
properties and commons through prescription, the historical specificity of Mount
Lebanon lies in the fact that these commons were never state property to begin
with. They are historically established communal properties administered in the
name of local communities.
The
distinction is fundamental between:
Public state property, and
Commons historically belonging to village residents.
Any legal approach that disregards this distinction risks triggering a
constitutional dispute affecting the principle of protecting private and
collective property as enshrined in the Lebanese Constitution.
Fourth:
Rejection and Calls for Action
Political, ecclesiastical, and popular voices have rejected the circular,
considering it an infringement on established historical rights. They have
called for:
Freezing the circular and subjecting it to transparent public legal debate.
Legislative action by Mount Lebanon MPs to clarify and explicitly safeguard the
historic status of the commons.
A clear stance from religious authorities, particularly the Maronite Church, in
defense of the communities’ historic land ownership.
Recourse to the State Council (Shura Council) to challenge the circular should
it prove inconsistent with existing laws or constitutional property protections.
Conclusion
The issue of Mount Lebanon’s commons is not a minor administrative matter. It is
intrinsically linked to history, identity, and a distinct land system that
emerged in the mountains during the nineteenth century. What is required today
is a calm, lawful, and well-documented approach grounded in archival and
cadastral records—free from arbitrariness or political manipulation. For the
people of the mountain, land is not merely real estate; it is an element of
existence and continuity. Any alteration of its legal status necessitates a
transparent national debate balancing state authority with the historic rights
of local communities.
Text of
the Circular Under Discussion
A New Financial
Circular Restricting Land Registration Powers
Agencies/February
26/2026 (Translated from Arabic)
Finance Minister Yassine Jaber issued a new circular stressing the strict
obligation to adhere to legal procedures in the registration and transfer of
ownership of un-surveyed properties, abandoned attached properties, and commons,
amid increasing violations involving the registration of such properties
contrary to applicable laws.
In the circular addressed to real estate judges, surveyors, mukhtars, and land
registry officials, the minister required refraining from directly registering
un-surveyed properties and commons in the names of municipalities or individuals
during demarcation and registration processes. These properties must first be
registered in the name of the state, and may later be transferred to the
relevant municipalities if proper legal ownership documentation is available, in
accordance with Decision No. 26/186 on land demarcation and registration.
The circular further instructed mukhtars to limit themselves strictly to their
identificatory functions and not to exceed into ownership powers, pursuant to
the Law of Mukhtars and Local Councils dated November 27, 1947. It also warned
against issuing “knowledge and acknowledgment” certificates for abandoned
attached properties and commons, as such properties cannot be acquired through
prescription, seizure, or occupation under Articles 236 and 256 of the Property
Law.
The circular clarified that determining “possession over time” falls exclusively
within the jurisdiction of the real estate judge, not the mukhtar. It also
required land registry officials not to transfer ownership of abandoned attached
properties and commons into the private ownership of municipalities before
submitting the file to the General Directorate of Real Estate Affairs for a
final decision by the Minister of Finance, given that the Ministry acts as
custodian of state properties.
The circular follows a rise in the registration and transfer of un-surveyed or
abandoned attached properties and commons to municipalities or individuals
contrary to legal procedures, as well as confirmed cases of mukhtars issuing
improper certificates. It also forms part of a series of previous circulars
issued by the Ministries of Finance and Interior and Municipalities regulating
conditions for issuing such certificates and governing the transfer of ownership
of commons.
Lebanon says Israeli strikes in Bekaa kill two, wound 29
LBCI/February 27/2026
Lebanon's Health Ministry said Israeli airstrikes in the Bekaa Valley on
Thursday killed two people, including a Syrian child and a woman, and wounded 29
others. In a statement, the Public Health Emergency Operations Center said the
updated toll confirmed two fatalities and 29 injuries. Among the wounded were
nine children—four girls and five boys—and eight women, the statement said.
More than 60 strikes: Israel ramps up military pressure in
Lebanon’s Bekaa as US-Iran talks loom
LBCI/February 27/2026
Far from its direct border with Lebanon, Israel has been striking the Bekaa
region, arguing that it is acting to safeguard its security against long-range
missiles it considers a primary threat. Regarding Iran, Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu has called for limiting the range of Iranian ballistic
missiles to 300 kilometers as part of the conditions tied to U.S.-Iran
negotiations. As for Hezbollah, Israel appears to believe it is carrying out the
task itself by targeting the Bekaa, which it views as a hub for Hezbollah
training camps and missile storage facilities. In the 21 airstrikes carried out
Thursday evening in the Bekaa, according to military sources, Israel did not
target residential buildings it claims house Hezbollah military facilities.
Instead, it launched intense strikes on remote mountainous areas in the eastern
and western mountain ranges of Lebanon, locations that had been targeted
previously, with explosions reverberating across the valley. This comes as part
of an escalation Israel has focused primarily on the region since the end of the
phase aimed at confining weapons south of the Litani River. Since the beginning
of the year, Israel has conducted more than 60 strikes on the Bekaa. The most
severe blow it said it dealt Hezbollah was the targeting of three sites where
eight Hezbollah members were present. Israel said they were part of the group’s
missile unit, including the unit’s commander in the Bekaa. By targeting the
Bekaa, Israel appears to be seeking to dismantle, or at least weaken,
Hezbollah’s long-range missile capabilities, which are believed to have been
used during the recent war. In doing so, it would be undermining any potential
capacity to back Iran in a confrontation. Hezbollah, however, views the strikes
as an attempt to trigger broader regional escalation through Lebanon in order to
derail any potential U.S.-Iran agreement. By intensifying airstrikes on the
Bekaa and exposing the area through its control of the peaks of Mount Hermon,
Israel appears to have completed a plan to strike one of Hezbollah’s most
significant sources of strength.
Parliamentary elections clock ticks: Lebanon continues to
face diaspora vote dispute
LBCI/February 27/2026
With roughly two and a half months remaining before Lebanon's scheduled
parliamentary elections, uncertainty persists over whether the vote will be held
on time. Publicly, political leaders have voiced support for conducting the
elections as planned. Members of the Quintet committee of countries have also
described the matter as a domestic Lebanese issue. However, privately, political
calculations appear to differ, with some factions seen as less enthusiastic
about proceeding. The latest dispute has centered on the voting rights of
Lebanese expatriates. Prime Minister Nawaf Salam cited an opinion by the State
Council's Legislation and Consultation Authority supporting the participation of
expatriates abroad, as occurred in the previous two election cycles, and the
suspension of the 16th electoral district, which allocates six seats to the
diaspora. His remarks were swiftly challenged by lawmaker Ali Hassan Khalil,
political aide to Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri. In a post on X, Khalil
expressed surprise at Salam's reference to suspending the 16th district. He
argued that a prime minister with a judicial background should be particularly
committed to upholding existing legal texts rather than interpreting them
politically. Khalil said a law cannot be suspended by statement nor amended by
interpretation, but only through new legislation enacted in accordance with
constitutional procedures. Any reading to the contrary, he said, undermines the
principle of legality and the executive branch's duty to apply the law as
written. The exchange highlights a broader political dispute with constitutional
implications, likely to intensify in the coming weeks. Clarification from both
parliament and the government may be required to avoid challenges to the
legitimacy of the vote before the Constitutional Council. Diplomatic sources say
questions have also been raised by more than one ambassador from the Quintet
committee regarding the feasibility of holding elections while weapons remain
outside state control north of the Litani River. No official statement has
endorsed that view, but the remarks have fueled speculation that postponing the
elections could be considered if conditions are deemed unsuitable. President
Joseph Aoun, Salam, and Berri have all publicly reaffirmed their commitment to
holding the elections. Still, parliament and the government face pressure to
resolve legal ambiguities that could open the door to appeals against the
results. Lebanon has previously extended parliament's mandate, notably in 2013,
2014, and 2017. As the May deadline approaches, the question remains whether the
elections will proceed as scheduled, face a short technical delay of two months,
or be postponed through another extension of parliament's term.
Six or 128? The 16th District law turns into legal battle
between Salam and Khalil
Naharnet/February 27/2026
Amal MP Ali Hassan Khalil hit Friday at Prime Minister Nawaf Salam for being a
judge who doesn't respect the law, after the latter said that the current
electoral law allows expatriates to vote for all 128 deputies. Salam's comments
come as Lebanon heads to parliamentary elections with ambiguity over how the
expats would vote. Amal and Hezbollah are in favor of implementing a suspended
law that only allows expats to vote for six newly-introduced seats instead of
voting for all 128 seats. They argue that they do not enjoy the same campaigning
freedom that other parties enjoy abroad. The Lebanese Forces, the Kataeb party
and the Change MPs want the law amended to allow expats to vote for all 128 MPs.
Salam said Thursday that the current law guarantees the right of expatriates to
vote in their countries of residence for the 128 deputies, as long as the
current six-seats law is suspended.
Khalil criticized Salam's comments and said he is "surprised" how the PM who
"comes from a judicial background" is not committed to respecting existing laws
and is rather "interpreting them through a political lens.""Laws are not
suspended by mere statements, amended by personal interpretations, nor altered
by political will," Khalil said. "A law can only be halted or amended by another
constitutional law." Before becoming Prime Minister, Salam served as a Judge and
then President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague. Khalil
is also a licensed lawyer. In 2018 and 2022, expats voted for the 128 seats in
Parliament. While the current law stipulates that expats should vote for six new
seats reserved for the diaspora, that provision was frozen. Sixty-five MPs,
constituting a parliamentary majority, demanded to amend the law in order to
allow expats to vote for all 128 seats but Speaker Nabih Berri refused to
discuss the amendment in parliament. He insisted that elections should be held
according to the current 6 seats law. Interior Minister Ahmad al-Hajjar said
that in order to elect according to the 6 seats law, known as the 16th District
law, executive decrees are needed, with the approval of a two-thirds Cabinet
majority. These decrees have not been issued, but Hajjar says he can't stand
idly by and wait for the legal texts, as "deadlines must be respected". Expats
would vote on May 1 and May 3, but even the interior minister himself does not
know if they can vote from abroad, or if they should come to Lebanon to vote --
the option that Speaker Berri insists on.
Lebanese Army chief receives invitation to Paris conference
on army support
LBCI/February 27/2026
Lebanese Army Commander Rodolph Haykal received French Ambassador Hervé Magro at
his office in Yarzeh, along with an accompanying delegation. During the meeting,
Magro delivered an official invitation for Haykal to attend a conference in
support of the Lebanese Army and Internal Security Forces (ISF) scheduled for
March 5 in Paris. The two sides discussed preparations for the conference.
Haykal also met with Egyptian Ambassador Alaa Moussa. Talks focused on recent
developments and included an assessment of the results of a preparatory meeting
for the conference held in Cairo.
Yassine Jaber: Finance Ministry is working to increase
state revenues by pursuing unregistered tax evaders
LBCI/February 27/2026
Yassine Jaber: Finance Ministry is working to increase state revenues by
pursuing unregistered tax evaders Lebanese Finance Minister Yassine Jaber said
recent measures to place all payment defaulters under the customs system have
led to significant improvements in revenue collection, with many companies
responding by settling outstanding dues.Jaber said the ministry is working to
increase state revenues by pursuing unregistered tax evaders and those who fail
to declare or pay what they owe. "We are seeking to provide the necessary
resources to the directorate, given staffing shortages across the Finance
Ministry due to the emigration of qualified personnel, to activate tax
collection fully," he noted. The minister added that the value-added tax system
includes numerous exemptions and that mechanisms are in place to combat VAT
evasion. In the same context, Jaber called for the draft financial gap law to be
placed on parliament's agenda for discussion and swift approval once
deliberations are complete. He said passing the law would help Lebanon improve
its financial situation.
U.S. Senator Blumenthal: ‘There Ought to be the Lebanese
and the Israelis Working Together Against Hezbollah’
This is Beirut/February 27/2026
This is Beirut spoke with U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal and John Cornyn on
Thursday about Hezbollah and Iran, both urging stronger action in the region.
Blumenthal commented that “I think we need more aggressive action against
Hezbollah, which seems to be regaining strength in Lebanon, and the United
States needs to work more closely with Israel in making sure that Hezbollah does
not recover its strength.”He added that the U.S. must “provide more help to the
Lebanese forces to confront Hezbollah, whether it's more weapons or other kinds
of support,” and “should encourage the Lebanese Armed Forces, which are
perfectly capable of doing more, to undertake this kind of action.”“There ought
to be the Lebanese and the Israelis working together against Hezbollah,”
Bluenthal said when outlining a path forward for curbing Hezbollah’s
capabilities and influence. Cornyn spoke on the links between Hezbollah and
Iran, stating that “Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, have been occupying and
running essentially Lebanon for a long time now.”He attributed Hezbollah’s
influence and regional obstacles to Iran, adding that “Iran is really the head
of the snake or octopus, with more tentacles that's causing problems in Yemen
with the Houthis and Hamas in Gaza, and of course in Lebanon with Hezbollah.”
Cornyn mentioned the ongoing rounds of dialogue between the Trump administration
and Iran, highlighting U.S. demands regarding Iran’s nuclear program, ballistic
missile arsenal, and proxy network. “President Trump has given a major demand on
the supreme leader with regard to nuclear weapons production and ballistic
missiles. And we'll see what the regime decides to do,” he said. Mentioning that
the Trump administration maintains multiple pathways to approach Iran, Cornyn
elaborated that “President Trump has been provided with a number of different
options, and he's going to be able to decide what to do.”
Israeli Escalation in Lebanon Sends Warning to Hezbollah on
Iran
Samar El-Kadi/This Is Beirut/February 27/2026
As regional tensions mount over the possibility of U.S. military action against
Iran, Israel has escalated its operations in Lebanon, signaling that Jerusalem
will not accept any attempt by Hezbollah to open a front in support of Tehran.
Israel’s recent waves of bombardment in Lebanon’s eastern Bekaa Valley were
“clearly pre-emptive,” according to security analyst Riad Kahwaji. “Israel’s
broader goal is unmistakable. Its main target right now is Hezbollah’s missile
capability,” he added.
On February 20, eight Hezbollah members — including a military commander — were
killed in Israeli strikes in eastern Lebanon. Six days later, Israel struck
eight training compounds belonging to Hezbollah’s Radwan Forces. Notably, Israel
did not characterize its strikes last week in the Bekaa as part of its routine
operations to prevent Hezbollah from reconstituting militarily. Instead, the
Israeli military signaled that its attack was preemptive in nature, saying it
had identified Hezbollah operatives working to “accelerate the organization’s
readiness and force build up processes” while planning fire attacks on Israel.
“Hitting the command of the missile force — especially the heavy missiles — is
comparable to what we saw in the previous war with the elimination of
Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force leadership,” Kahwaji told This is Beirut.
A Western diplomatic source, speaking to This is Beirut on condition of
anonymity, said the latest attacks carried “a firm message that Israel will not
let Hezbollah rebuild itself.”Retired Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) Brig. Gen.
Hisham Jaber said Israel’s target map in Lebanon has shifted beyond the border
areas where the LAF has been conducting disarmament operations against
Hezbollah. “It is no longer south of the Litani — that phase is over. It has
moved north of the Litani and into the Bekaa,” he told This is Beirut.
However, Jaber said the strikes in the Bekaa did not carry a specific message.
“It is part of continued attacks by Israel since the November 2024 ceasefire,”
he said. He added that despite the escalation and expansion of the strikes,
“Hezbollah won’t be deterred if there is a decision to enter a potential war.”
Kahwaji argued that Israel was signaling with its recent strikes that no area in
Lebanon was beyond its reach. The operations, he said, aim to dissuade Hezbollah
and its allies, including Hamas, from opening a front in support of Iran in the
event of a U.S. attack.
On February 20, Israel’s navy fired missiles at a Hamas facility inside Ain al-Hilweh
that killed and wounded several people, including Hamas officials. Political and
security sources told the Lebanese daily Nidaa al-Watan that recent field
indicators suggest Hamas-linked elements are operating in coordination with
Hezbollah. These dynamics raise concerns that Lebanon could be drawn into a
“support war” for Tehran.
According to the sources, one scenario would see Palestinian factions launching
attacks against Israel from Lebanese territory while Hezbollah initially
distances itself, allowing it to frame any subsequent involvement as defensive
rather than offensive. “Hamas in Lebanon operates under Hezbollah,” Kahwaji
said, noting that the Palestinian faction has refused to surrender its weapons
to the Lebanese state. Hamas would comply with Lebanon’s disarmament efforts
only if Hezbollah ordered it to do so, he added. He added that Hamas has
previously carried out attacks against Israel when Hezbollah sought to avoid
direct responsibility. “If Hezbollah decides to open the front from Lebanon,
Hamas will certainly be part of it,” he said. Jaber downplayed the likelihood
that Hamas in Lebanon would join a broader confrontation if Hezbollah were to
open a front in response to a U.S. strike on Iran. “I don’t think Hamas would be
part of such a war,” he said. “If it did engage, it would disrupt the agreement
over Gaza,” he added, referring to the ceasefire inked in October 2025 that
ended hostilities in the enclave.However, Jaber acknowledged the presence of
armed Palestinian factions—including Hamas and Palestinian Islamic
Jihad—operating outside refugee camps in Lebanon. “These elements could be used
against Israel,” he said, noting that they are directed and guided by Hezbollah.
Beyond warning Hezbollah against opening a front in support of Iran, the recent
Israeli strikes also signal that the group’s internal security remains
compromised and its military leadership is vulnerable to targeted
assassinations. In recent months, Hezbollah has claimed it had rebuilt its
capabilities and purged collaborators. Yet the scale and precision of the Bekaa
strikes suggest significant infiltration at the group’s core. “It is a message
that Hezbollah is exposed and that Israel is monitoring its movements and that
of its allies closely and that it can strike them anywhere and anytime,” the
Western diplomatic source told This is Beirut. This view was echoed by Jaber,
who noted ongoing security breaches within Hezbollah’s ranks. “There are still
agents inside the group,” he said. “They have uncovered many, but they continue
to discover others every day.”Analysts also view the recent Israeli escalation
as part of mounting pressure on both the Lebanese state and Hezbollah to push
for expedited disarmament of non-state weapons. On February 16, Lebanon’s
cabinet gave tacit approval to an LAF plan for the next phase of disarmament
between the Litani and Awwali rivers. As the region holds its breath over
potential U.S. strikes on Iran, Israel’s latest operations highlight how Lebanon
could once again become a flashpoint in a regional confrontation.
Why Lebanon’s Muslims Are Key to Any Credible Peace Initiative
Marwan El Amine/This Is Beirut/February 27/2026
Lebanon once again stands on the brink of a military confrontation that
threatens to replay the all-too-familiar scenes of devastation and loss. As
regional tensions escalate and the prospect of a U.S. strike on Iran looms,
Hezbollah appears ready to place Lebanon squarely in the eye of the storm in
defense of the Iranian regime, with little regard for the country’s national
interests. Amid this rising threat, the Lebanese state and political forces
opposing Hezbollah are largely unable to exert meaningful influence. Rather than
advancing a strategy to protect the country from conflict, they have remained
spectators, offering only rhetorical objections that fall short of a proactive
political initiative.
Raising the tone of political discourse or banking on shifts in the regional
balance of power does not absolve any Lebanese party of its national
responsibilities. Lebanon’s protection will not be secured through passive
positioning or by waiting for regional settlements. It requires a bold political
initiative that reclaims sovereign decision-making and asserts that the
country’s security is not a marginal detail in geopolitical rivalries, but an
absolute, non-negotiable priority. For decades, Lebanon has existed in a state
of open hostility with Israel, punctuated by periodic wars and their staggering
costs. This reality has left the country vulnerable to every regional tremor and
perpetually at risk of becoming an arena for foreign conflicts. The political
taboos surrounding potential normalization with Israel must be confronted and
dismantled. Lebanon’s national interest should supersede all other
considerations.
These considerations include the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 and the
longstanding framework of a two-state solution between Israelis and
Palestinians. It is time to acknowledge that the Arab Peace Initiative has, in
practical terms, long since lost its momentum. This has become particularly
clear amid shifting regional priorities and the wave of bilateral normalization
agreements with Israel in recent years. As for the two-state solution, it
remains an inherently complex endeavor that ultimately depends on the two
principal parties, Israelis and Palestinians.
Lebanon has paid a heavy human and economic toll under the banner of the
Palestinian cause. Continuing to anchor its own stance on peace to Palestinian
developments is unlikely to alter outcomes on the issue. Lebanon’s refusal to
normalize ties with Israel has not facilitated the emergence of a Palestinian
state. Nor would a peace agreement be decisive in determining whether such a
state ultimately comes into being.
Accordingly, Lebanese-Israeli peace must be viewed through the lens of Lebanon’s
security, stability, and national interests, not through ideological reflexes or
regional calculations in which Beirut has little influence. Peace can no longer
remain a theoretical proposal or an isolated opinion. It must evolve into
organized political actions, such as advocacy networks and campaigns in which
political parties and public figures publicly prioritize Lebanon’s national
interests. The option of peace must be integrated into public debate as a
serious political project, one that can address ongoing crises while opening
pathways to stability, prosperity, and a more viable future.
In this regard, Sunni and Shiite Muslim figures and forces—rather than Christian
actors—should take the lead of any peace initiative. Lebanon’s historical
balance of power offers a compelling precedent. Independence from France in 1943
could not have succeeded without a clear and forward-leaning Christian position
in favor of ending the mandate. Muslim opposition was already assured, while
many Christians maintained privileged ties with France. Likewise, the end of
Syria’s hegemony over Lebanon in 2005 gained broader national legitimacy, and
ultimately succeeded, when Muslim figures joined Christian forces in that
cause.Any serious and credible strategic shift in Lebanon’s relationship with
Israel will therefore require an explicit and progressive position from Sunni
and Shia actors. In Lebanon’s delicate confessional balance, the identity of
those advancing an initiative is often as consequential as the initiative
itself.
Practically, this would entail electing Sunni and Shiite members of parliament
in the upcoming legislative elections who openly endorse peace with Israel.
These parliamentarians would present rigorous studies highlighting the positive
impacts of peace on Lebanon’s security and economy, covering tourism and
manufacturing as well as emerging opportunities in artificial intelligence and
other high-value technologies.
Crucially, these representatives must articulate how peace could serve the
interests of the Shia community and southern Lebanon, which have historically
borne the brunt of conflict with Israel. In parallel, political delegations
comprising Sunni and Shia figures should engage Arab and Islamic capitals to
present Lebanon’s perspective on peace with Israel and underscore its importance
for domestic and regional stability. In the absence of a clearly defined,
forward-looking project embraced by the state or any major political force,
Lebanese politics has deteriorated into the management of perpetual crises.
Deadlines pass without a horizon, economic and social crises deepen, and the
role of the political class is left largely to contain fallout, instead of
tackling root causes with a strategic vision. Within this dysfunctional
environment, a project for peace with Israel may be the one initiative that
articulates a fundamentally different conception of Lebanon’s future. It would
not only disentangle Lebanon from endless cycles of war, but redefine the
country’s regional posture. Lebanon stands at a crossroads between open-ended
crises and a new strategic vision. Ultimately, the wager is not on the slogan of
“peace” itself, but on Lebanon’s ability to move beyond merely surviving crises
and instead restore hope in a functioning state.
Israel Follows Iran Negotiations amid its Broadest Escalation in
Eastern Lebanon
Asharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
The intense Israeli airstrikes that targeted the Bekaa in eastern Lebanon on
Thursday evening marked the broadest aerial escalation against the Bekaa since
the ceasefire agreement entered into force. This came a week after the killing
of eight members of Hezbollah, including a commander, whom Israel said were
responsible for launching rockets. The pace of events does not reflect a clear
upward military trajectory, but is instead linked to domestic and regional
political calculations, at a moment coinciding with US-Iranian negotiations and
the possibility of changes to the rules of engagement, according to experts
following the developments.
Fire map... intensity and rapid succession
On Thursday evening, Israeli aircraft carried out eight strikes on the outskirts
of Shmustar in the Western Mountain Range. The raids also hit the outskirts of
Budai and Harbata. Less than half an hour later, shelling resumed heavily on the
outskirts of Budai and the surroundings of Baalbek, amid low-altitude drone
activity. The strikes extended to the outskirts of the city of Hermel, while the
vicinity of the town of Taminine was also targeted, in addition to another
strike on the outskirts of Budai, before new raids were launched on the
outskirts of Nabi Sheet. What stood out was not only the number of strikes, but
the speed of their succession and the breadth of the geographic area, suggesting
the management of concentrated fire rather than isolated attacks. Local sources
described the raids as “highly explosive,” telling Asharq Al-Awsat that “the
tremors were heard in towns far from the strike locations, which caused panic
and led some residents to believe that war had effectively begun, especially
amid the charged regional atmosphere.” The Ministry of Public Health announced
that the strikes resulted in two deaths, including a Syrian child and a woman,
and left 29 people wounded.
A political message
In an analytical reading linking the battlefield to politics, retired Brig. Gen.
Naji Malaeb said that targeting the Bekaa in the recent phase was not a tactical
detail, but carried clear political indications. He told Asharq Al-Awsat that
“the Israeli escalation in Lebanon has two main objectives. The first is to send
a message to those betting on the Lebanese Army’s ability to carry out the task
of disarming Hezbollah, as Israel is trying to say it will intervene if it sees
that the army has not done what it wants. The second is linked to expanding the
margin of military action in areas it considers less costly in terms of official
Lebanese reactions.”Malaeb pointed to the development in the use of concussion
bombs, considering that “Israel is seeking through this to show that the
targeted sites are weapons or ammunition storage areas.” He noted, however, that
“the Radwan Force that Israel claimed to have targeted in Thursday’s raids is an
elite unit that relies on rapid movement and guerrilla warfare, and uses medium
weapons that can be carried, not a traditional artillery or missile force that
requires large depots or fixed infrastructure.”Malaeb said that “Israel’s focus
on naming the Radwan Force in its statements serves an internal objective,
namely reassuring settlers in the Upper Galilee that the threat is under
control,” adding: “Israelis talk about the redeployment of the Radwan Force and
the possibility of it storming areas inside Israel; therefore, the focus is on
targeting it to give residents there a sense of security.”In a broader context,
Malaeb said that “the three-hour meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump constituted a pivotal moment, as
European information indicates that Israel was given a free hand in Lebanon in
particular, within a wider margin of maneuver in the Middle East.”He added: “The
decision in the region is US by nature, of course, but in Lebanon it appears to
be Israeli, and this is what we have observed on the ground, whether through the
performance of envoys who come to Beirut, or through what was called the
mechanism, whose role has effectively been canceled.”He said that “the role that
was supposed to be headed by an American party has turned into a tool of
nullification rather than activation, as we have not seen a single objection to
any of the Israeli attacks, which means that Israel is the one deciding how
escalation unfolds in Lebanon.”
Israel’s conditions
The escalation in the Bekaa coincided with political and security rhetoric
raising the level of possibilities in the region. The Israeli daily Yedioth
Ahronoth reported that “the possibility of Hezbollah entering the fighting
against Israel if Iran is attacked is worrying and is being dealt with.”Malaeb
said that “giving Israel a free hand in Lebanon is linked to what will take
place between the United States and Iran,” adding: “The decision between
Washington and Tehran is American in essence, and could lead to understandings
if interests converge, but Israel’s interest is different, as it views
long-range missiles and Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat.” He
noted that “if the elements of Iran’s nuclear capability remain in place, and a
final halt to enrichment is not achieved as Israel demands, then the likelihood
of war remains. Israel may be the one to initiate it, while the US side may
intervene later to rein in its pace, because any Iranian response would be
wide-ranging, and it cannot be ruled out that Hezbollah would become involved in
the confrontation within this context.”
Hezbollah has no place in the future of Lebanon
Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab News/February 26, 2026 17:21
The world is holding its breath about the possibility of a US military attack on
Iran. As the US builds up the largest military force of warships and aircraft in
the Middle East in decades while it sits and negotiates with the Iranian regime,
the Lebanese are once again building a multitude of scenarios regarding what
might happen. But there is one certainty: Hezbollah will not be able to
participate meaningfully, if at all. If there were any doubts, Israel is erasing
them. It has intensified its airstrikes, particularly against the Iranian
proxy’s missile capacity. One attack last week killed eight Hezbollah members,
including senior commander Hussein Mohammed Yaghi. These operations are aimed at
degrading Hezbollah’s rocket and missile capabilities. Since the ceasefire came
into effect in November 2024, Israel says it has destroyed 70 percent to 80
percent of Hezbollah’s rocket fire capacity and more than 400 Hezbollah and
allied operatives have been killed. The group is still believed to be storing
thousands of missiles with various range capabilities. Tel Aviv has also
targeted Hamas command centers in the Ain El-Hilweh refugee camp. I doubt that
relations between Hezbollah and its masters in Tehran are peachy today. Beyond
precision strikes built on credible intelligence, there is no doubt that Israel
has induced doubt on both sides of the relationship. The absolute, blind
obedience and alignment that led Hezbollah fighters to Syria and to launch
attacks that destroyed Lebanon are in disarray. Just as drops of water break the
rock over time, Israel has broken this iron-clad commitment.
Just as drops of water break the rock over time, Israel has broken this
iron-clad commitment
There is a double resentment. Hezbollah can easily claim that its master did not
come to its aid when Israel hit it with deadly strikes. Even by ordering other
proxies, such as the Iraqi ones, to intervene to alleviate their own front. And
in the same way, Tehran can accuse Hezbollah of not intervening when Israel
struck it last year. In reality, both sides knew that it was useless to do so,
but it brings into question, for the first time, Hezbollah’s usefulness. The
raison d’etre of Hezbollah is to defend the Iranian regime until it can build
nuclear military capacity. Once this is done, then a new “Iron Dome” will
protect all of Tehran’s interests and aggressive, expansionist policies. Lately,
however, it has been incapable of fulfilling its designated role. In brief,
Hezbollah is expected to fight when the mullahs are attacked, but the
reciprocity does not stand. This is the role of a proxy. For many years, I have
described Hezbollah as an artificial power and have been mocked for it quite
often. Today, this has been confirmed. It has survived and thrived through the
acceptance by the US and the West of a geopolitical order in the region and of a
status quo toward Iran. This has allowed it to take control of Lebanon and kill
at its own leisure. Truth be told, this artificial power has been fueled not by
the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ billions and arsenal, but by Lebanese
blood and the destruction of a country. Ultimately, Hezbollah, which is an
integral part of the Iranian regime’s military apparatus, needs to think wisely.
Let me rephrase this: the new Hezbollah leadership, following the persistent
wave of targeted eliminations, should stop for a minute and think. All the signs
point to the end of its role. If we look at it from the Iranian side, it has
become obsolete due to Israel’s technological advances. And if we look at it
from the US or Western side, whether Iran complies with the US’ nonnegotiables
or not, Hezbollah will no longer be granted the “right to resistance” it gained
in the 1990s.
It is high time Hezbollah read this major geopolitical change and realized that
its days are numbered
This means that being the only legally permitted armed group in Lebanon has
become “caduque” (obsolete). It is high time Hezbollah read this major
geopolitical change and realized that its days are numbered. Its members whose
hands are not yet soaked in blood face a clear choice. They can either push the
group to surrender its arsenal and shift toward a new political formation, one
that would need to be described as “postreligious,” meaning it would represent
the Shiite community while not pushing a religious agenda for the entire state.
If they do not, it will face complete destruction. In both outcomes, Hezbollah
will not exist. Not in name and not in political representation.
A new Shiite political leadership needs to emerge. Hezbollah has no place in the
future of Lebanon. It can follow the example of European political parties
post-Second World War. While staying rooted in Christian values, parties in
Italy and Germany, for example, gradually evolved toward governance and economic
policy rather than explicitly religious goals. Moreover, we can no longer have a
group that follows transnational goals and whose loyalty and guidance originate
from outside Lebanon’s borders.
The clock is ticking. Hezbollah should free itself from the Iranian regime.
There is a very slight chance of this happening and one would imagine that the
IRGC would want to make sure, in case US President Donald Trump decides on
military action, that the proxy it created and invested in pays up, even if this
means it will be the last thing it does. On the other hand, there is no doubt it
will be on the menu if an agreement is reached between Washington and Tehran.
This is why fully complying with the Lebanese plan to disarm Hezbollah is now in
the group’s interest, as many see its justification for existing as being
destroyed in most of the possible scenarios facing the country. If it chooses
the hard way, it is a certainty that this would be the last time it causes
destruction and death in Lebanon.
*Khaled Abou Zahr is the founder of SpaceQuest Ventures, a space-focused
investment platform. He is CEO of EurabiaMedia and editor of Al-Watan Al-Arabi.
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports
And News published
on February 27-28/2026
Trump ‘not thrilled’ with Iran but undecided on attack
“Nobody knows. There might be and there might not be,” Trump said of regime
change.
AFP/27 February ,2026
US President Donald Trump said Friday he was frustrated by Iran’s position in
talks but added he had not yet decided whether to carry out a threatened
attack.A day after the United States and Iran held talks in Geneva, Trump said
that the cleric-run state was “not willing to give us what we have to have.”“We
haven’t made a final decision,” he told reporters when asked about the use of
force. “We’re not exactly happy with the way they negotiated. They cannot have
nuclear weapons, and we’re not thrilled with the way they’re negotiating,” Trump
said. “We want no nuclear weapons by Iran and they’re not saying those golden
words.”Iran has said repeatedly that it is not pursuing nuclear weapons and US
intelligence has found no evidence that it has made a decision to do so. But the
United States and Israel, which carried out a major bombing campaign in Iran in
June, are skeptical of the statements by Iran, which backs Palestinian militants
Hamas.Asked if an attack would trigger all-out war in the Middle East, Trump
said, “I guess you could always say there’s always a risk. “You know when
there’s war, there’s a risk in anything, both good and bad.”Trump was
circumspect on whether a US attack would bring down the Islamic Republic, a
sworn enemy of the United States and Israel. Authorities last month killed
thousands of people as they crushed mass protests in the biggest threat to the
ruling clerics since the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the pro-Western shah.
“Nobody knows. There might be and there might not be,” Trump said of regime
change.Trump in his first term ripped up a nuclear deal negotiated by his
predecessor Barack Obama in which Iran agreed to strict limits on uranium
enrichment.
Iran agreed to ‘never, ever’ have nuclear material needed for a bomb: Omani FM
US President
Donald Trump says ‘no enrichment’
Al Arabiya English/28 February ,2026
Oman’s top diplomat said Friday that Iran has agreed it would “never, ever”
possess nuclear material capable of producing a bomb, as part of an
eleventh-hour diplomatic push to avert possible US strikes.“This is something
that is not in the old deal that was negotiated during President Obama’s time.
This is something completely new,” Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said.
Speaking in an interview with CBS News after meeting Vice President JD Vance in
Washington, Albusaidi said he was confident there “peace deal is within our
reach.”sked what was new about Iran’s concessions, the top Omani diplomat said,
“Now we are talking about zero stockpiling” of enriched uranium. Pressed further
about the current stockpile of enriched uranium, he said there was agreement it
would be “blended to the lowest level possible, to a neutral level, a natural
level, which means- and converted into fuel, and that fuel will be
irreversible.”He also urged President Donald Trump to give diplomacy more
time.Separately, the US president said he was “not happy with the negotiation”
with Tehran. “I am not happy with the negotiation,” Trump said. “I say no
enrichment.”
Rubio
Designates Iran 'State Sponsor of Wrongful Detention'
Asharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
The United States on Friday designated Iran a "state sponsor of wrongful
detention," its first such move under a new blacklist that could eventually
result in a travel ban. The step comes as the United States builds up its
military near Iran and threatens to strike over concerns led by its disputed
nuclear program. "The Iranian regime must stop taking hostages and release all
Americans unjustly detained in Iran, steps that could end this designation and
associated actions," Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement, AFP
reported. If Iran makes no progress, Rubio said that the United States could
eventually decide that US passports are invalid for travel to Iran. The United
States only forbids its nationals from traveling to one country -- North Korea
-- and many Iranian-Americans routinely travel to Iran, ruled since 1979 by
clerics after the overthrow of the pro-US shah. President Donald Trump in
September signed an executive order that created the blacklist on wrongful
detention, similar to designations by the United States on terrorism. Iran
becomes the first country to be placed on the blacklist. The Islamic republican
has detained a number of Americans in recent years, usually dual nationals whom
the government considers Iranian citizens."No American should travel to Iran for
any reason. We reiterate our call for Americans who are currently in Iran to
leave immediately," Rubio said.
Rubio Plans to Visit Israel Next Week as US-Iran Tensions
Remain High After Latest Talks
Asharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
Secretary of State Marco Rubio will make a quick trip to Israel early next week,
the State Department said, as tensions between the United States and Iran remain
high after their latest nuclear talks and American forces gather in the region.
The US Embassy in Israel had earlier urged staff who want to leave to depart,
joining other nations in encouraging people to leave the region and signaling
that US military action might be imminent. The announcement of Rubio's visit
could indicate a longer timeline for any potential strike. A confidential report
from the UN nuclear watchdog meanwhile confirmed that Iran has not offered
inspectors access to sensitive nuclear sites since they were heavily bombed
during the 12-day war launched by Israel last June. As a result, it said it
could not confirm Iran's claims that it stopped uranium enrichment after the US
and Israeli strikes. The report was circulated to member countries and seen by
The Associated Press. US President Donald Trump has threatened military action
if Iran does not agree to a far-reaching deal on its nuclear program. Iran
insists it has the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes and denies
seeking a nuclear weapon.
Those wishing to leave 'should do so TODAY’
The State Department said in a statement that Rubio would visit Israel on Monday
and Tuesday to “discuss a range of regional priorities including Iran, Lebanon,
and ongoing efforts to implement President Trump’s 20-Point Peace Plan for
Gaza.” It offered no other details. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
has long urged tougher US action against Iran and has warned that Israel will
respond to any Iranian attack. The announcement of Rubio's visit came just hours
after the US Embassy in Jerusalem implemented “authorized departure” status for
non-essential personnel and family members, which means that eligible staffers
can leave the country voluntarily at government expense. In an email, US
Ambassador Mike Huckabee urged staff considering departure to do so quickly,
advising them to focus initially on getting any flight out of Israel and to then
make their way to Washington. “Those wishing to take AD should do so TODAY,”
Huckabee wrote, using an acronym for “authorized departure.” “While there may be
outbound flights over the coming days, there may not be,” he added, in an email
that was recounted to The Associated Press by someone involved with the US
mission who wasn't authorized to share details. At a town hall meeting Friday
after the email was sent, Huckabee told staff that he was encouraging airlines
to keep flying.
Vance to meet with mediator
Iran and the United States on Thursday walked away from another round of nuclear
negotiations in Geneva without a deal. Technical discussions are scheduled to
take place in Vienna next week. US Vice President JD Vance was to meet later on
Friday in Washington with Oman’s foreign minister, Badr al-Busaidi, who has been
mediating the talks, according to a person with knowledge of the meeting who
spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting is private. Earlier, al-Busaidi
said that there had been significant progress made on Thursday, though officials
from Iran and the United States haven’t announced steps forward. Iranian Foreign
Minister Abbas Araghchi on Thursday said “what needs to happen has been clearly
spelled out from our side," without offering specifics. Iran has long demanded
relief from heavy international sanctions in return for taking steps to limit
but not end its nuclear program. Flights suspended as people are urged to leave
The US has gathered a massive fleet of aircraft and warships in the Middle East,
with one aircraft carrier already in place and another heading to the region.
Iran says it will respond to any US attack by targeting American forces in the
region. Airlines such as Netherlands-based KLM have already announced plans to
suspend flights out of Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion International Airport, and other
embassies have also made plans for authorized departures from Israel and
neighboring countries. Britain’s Foreign Office said that “due to the security
situation, UK staff have been temporarily withdrawn from Iran.” It said the
embassy was operating remotely. Australia on Wednesday “directed the departure
of all dependents of Australian officials posted to Israel in response to the
deteriorating security situation in the Middle East.” China, India and several
European countries with missions in Iran have advised citizens to avoid travel
to the country. China's Foreign Ministry also advised its citizens already in
Iran to leave, according to a statement reported by Chinese state media.
Trump Iranian Missile Claim Unsupported by US Intelligence
Washington: Asharq Al Awsat/27 February 2026
US President Donald Trump’s claim that Iran will soon have a missile that can
hit the United States is not backed by US intelligence reports, and appears to
be exaggerated, according to three sources familiar with the reports, casting
doubt on part of his case for a possible attack on the country. In his State of
the Union address to Congress on Tuesday, Trump began making his case to the
American public for why the US could launch strikes against Iran, saying Tehran
was “working on missiles that will soon reach” the United States.
But there have been no changes, two sources said, to an unclassified 2025 US
Defense Intelligence Agency assessment that Iran could take until 2035 to
develop a "militarily viable intercontinental ballistic missile" (ICBM) from its
existing satellite-lofting space-launch vehicles (SLV). “President Trump is
absolutely right to highlight the grave concern posed by Iran, a country that
chants ‘death to America,’ possessing intercontinental ballistic missiles," said
. According to Reuters, one source said that even if China or North Korea -
which closely cooperate with Iran - provided technological assistance, Iran
would probably take up to eight years at the earliest to produce "something
that is actually ICBM level and operational."The sources, who spoke on
condition of anonymity in order to discuss sensitive intelligence, said they
were unaware of any US intelligence assessments that Iran was developing a
missile that could soon range the US homeland but did not rule out the
possibility of a new intelligence report they were unaware of. The New York
Times first reported that US intelligence agencies believe Iran is probably
years away from having missiles that can hit the United States. In his address
on Tuesday, Trump pointed to Tehran's support for militant groups, its killing
of protesters and the country's missile and nuclear programs as threats to the
region and the United States. Without providing evidence, Trump said that Tehran
was beginning to rebuild the nuclear program that he claimed had been
“obliterated” by US airstrikes last June on three major sites involved with
uranium enrichment. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday referred to
Iran’s ballistic missile program in less definitive terms than Trump, saying
that Tehran is "on a pathway to one day being able to develop weapons that could
reach the continental US."
In an interview with India Today TV released on Wednesday, Iranian Foreign
Minister Abbas Araghchi denied that Iran was expanding its missile
capabilities. "We are not developing long range missiles. We have limited range
to below 2000 kilometers intentionally," he said. "We don’t want it to be a
global threat. We only have (them) to defend ourselves. Our missiles build
deterrence."The US intelligence community and the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog, have said that Iran shuttered a nuclear
weapons development program in 2003. But according to the IAEA, Tehran has in
recent years continued enriching uranium, including to near weapons-grade. Trump
has threatened to attack Iran if it executes people arrested during nationwide
anti-government protests in January or fails to agree a deal on its nuclear
program in talks with the US.
David Albright, a former UN nuclear inspector, said Iran was a long way away
from being able to mount atop a missile a nuclear warhead-carrying re-entry
vehicle that could survive the extreme heat and forces of plunging through
Earth’s atmosphere.
"Iran can launch a very long-range missile because of its space launch program,"
said Albright, the president of the Institute for Science and International
Security think tank. "But it needs lots of work to develop an adequate RV
(re-entry vehicle)."
Albright and other experts noted that Israeli airstrikes last year and in 2024
had badly damaged key facilities where Tehran produces liquid- and solid-fuel
ballistic missiles.
UK Pulls Embassy Staff from Iran Due to ‘Security
Situation’
Asharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
UK embassy staff in Iran have been temporarily withdrawn from the country due to
the current "security situation", the Foreign Office said Friday. The British
embassy in Tehran -- which was temporarily closed last month -- would continue
to "operate remotely", it said.
The announcement follows repeated threats from President Donald Trump to strike
Iran as the United States conducts its biggest military build-up in decades in
the Middle East region and around the Mediterranean.
Israel Greets Iran Talks With Pessimism, Prepares for War
Tel Aviv: Nazir Magally/Asharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
Despite cautious optimism over negotiations between Iran and the US and hopes
for a new nuclear deal, Israel’s political leadership and most of its media have
struck a starkly different tone: pessimism, and open preparation for failure and
war. A growing conviction that a confrontation with Iran is inevitable has taken
hold among Israelis, with opinion polls showing broad support for military
action. Political leaders have reinforced the mood, citing what they call
“Iranian intransigence” and warning that any agreement Washington might reach
with Tehran would be a bad one. Military officials have stressed the Israeli
army’s readiness for all scenarios, while media reports describe intensified
Israeli and US military movements inside Israel. On Friday, Yedioth Ahronoth
splashed a headline reporting that US F-22 fighter jets that arrived in Israel
were placed on maximum alert on the runway at Ovda airport in the Negev desert.
The F-22 is among the most advanced aircraft in service and is not sold to any
other military because of the sensitivity of its combat technology. The
newspaper said 26 of the 45 jets produced for the US military had reached
Israel. Tensions have also been fueled by reports that the aircraft carrier
Gerald Ford docked at an Israeli port, that several airlines suspended flights
to Israel, and that large numbers of US troops are stationed at Israeli bases to
operate US air defense systems deployed to the country in recent weeks. Some
analysts say the flurry of activity could be part of a coordinated US pressure
campaign on Iran. But most argue the main aim is to prepare for negotiations
collapsing, allowing a swift pivot from diplomacy to war. Israeli media reported
that the army has privately signaled unease over what it sees as a drift toward
support for war without reckoning with the potential cost to Israel. Israeli
army spokesperson Brigadier General Effie Defrin said there had been no change
in public guidance.Arab World
What Is Israel’s
Multi-Layered Defense Against Iranian Missiles?
Asharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
Israel has multi-layered air defenses against attacks by Iranian ballistic
missiles, an umbrella it may need to lean on as the United States and Iran
teeter toward potential military conflict that could draw Iranian attacks on
Israeli territory. Here are details of Israel's defenses against drones and
missiles:
ARROW
The long-range Arrow-2 and Arrow-3 interceptors, developed by Israel with an
Iranian missile threat in mind, are designed to engage incoming targets both in
and outside the atmosphere respectively. They operate at an altitude that allows
for safe dispersal of any non-conventional warheads. State-owned Israel
Aerospace Industries is the project's main contractor while Boeing is involved
in producing the interceptors.
DAVID'S SLING
The mid-range David's Sling system is designed to shoot down ballistic
missiles fired from 100 km to 200 km (62-124 miles) away. Developed and
manufactured jointly by Israel's state-owned Rafael Advanced Defense Systems
and RTX Corp, a US company previously known as Raytheon, David's Sling is also
designed to intercept aircraft, drones and cruise missiles.
IRON DOME
The short-range Iron Dome air defense system was built to intercept the kind of
rockets fired by Palestinian group Hamas in Gaza. Developed with US backing, it
became operational in 2011. Each truck-towed unit fires radar-guided missiles to
blow up short-range threats such as rockets, mortars and drones in mid-air. A
naval version of the Iron Dome, to protect ships and sea-based assets, was
deployed in 2017. The system determines whether a rocket is on course to hit a
populated area. If not, the rocket is ignored and allowed to land harmlessly.
Iron Dome was originally billed as providing city coverage against rockets with
ranges of between 4 km and 70 km (2.5-43 miles), but experts say this has since
been expanded.
IRON BEAM
Developed by Israel for more than a decade and declared fully operational in
late 2025, the ground-based, high-power Iron Beam laser system is designed to
intercept smaller aerial threats, such as UAVs and mortars. Using lasers to
super-heat and disable aerial threats, Iron Beam's operation is expected to be
substantially cheaper than some of the other aerial defense systems that use
intercepting missiles to shoot down incoming threats.
US THAAD SYSTEM
The US military said in October 2024 that it had sent the advanced anti-missile
system THAAD - Terminal High Altitude Area Defense - to Israel. THAAD is a
critical part of the US military's air defenses and is designed to intercept and
destroy short, medium and intermediate-range ballistic missile threats in their
terminal phase of flight. The US military helped to shoot down Iranian missiles
fired at Israel, using ground-based systems, one US official said in June 2025,
after Israel attacked Iranian nuclear facilities. A US Navy destroyer in the
Eastern Mediterranean also helped to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles,
Israeli media has reported.
AIR-TO-AIR DEFENSE
Israeli combat helicopters and fighter jets have fired air-to-air missiles to
destroy drones that were heading to Israel, military officials have said.
Syrian Gov’t Takes Military Site From Kurds in Kobani
Damascus : Asharq Al Awsat/28-28 February 2026
Washington welcomed a prisoner and detainee exchange between the Syrian
government and armed factions in the predominantly Druze southern province of
Sweidah, as Damascus pressed ahead with efforts to fold Kurdish security forces
into the state apparatus.
Syria’s Interior Ministry said the Internal Security Command in Aleppo province
had taken over the Internal Security Directorate building in Ain al-Arab — known
to Kurds as Kobani — and begun operating from the site. The move is part of
steps to integrate the Kurdish Asayish forces into the government’s security
structure. The state is seeking to reassert control over official institutions
in areas that until recently were under the influence of the Kurdish-led Syrian
Democratic Forces (SDF), which had controlled large parts of northern and
northeastern Syria and established a self-administration there.
In a statement posted on Telegram on Friday, the Interior Ministry said a
security delegation toured the Internal Security Directorate in Ain al-Arab
alongside the local internal security chief, visiting the main building and
several affiliated police departments. The delegation reviewed administrative
and field operations and assessed technical and staffing readiness to ensure
services continue “efficiently and regularly,” state news agency SANA reported.
SANA said an expanded meeting with department heads from the Internal Security
Forces (Asayish) discussed unifying organizational and administrative structures
with systems adopted by the Interior Ministry and reviewed a plan to complete
the integration process in a way that strengthens institutional unity. On Jan.
30, the Syrian government announced a ceasefire agreement with the SDF as part
of a broader deal that includes a phased integration of military and
administrative bodies and the handover of all civil and government institutions,
crossings and border posts to the state. In southern Syria, US envoy for Syria
Tom Barrack welcomed an exchange that saw 25 government fighters and 61 Druze
fighters released in Sweidah. Writing on X on Friday, Barrack said the exchange
was carried out smoothly and orderly, thanks to the International Committee of
the Red Cross's valuable assistance. He described the swap as a step toward
stability and a step away from revenge, adding that the US was honored to help
facilitate these efforts. According to SANA, the exchange involved detainees and
prisoners held after events in July last year in Sweidah province. It included
86 people — 61 detainees from the province and 25 prisoners held by outlaw
groups in Sweidah — in what the agency described as a humanitarian and security
operation aimed at reuniting families. The Sweidah Media Directorate said on
Thursday that the exchange of detainees linked to the July events involved
Syrian government forces and Arab tribes on one side, and armed Druze factions
on the other. Government security forces share control of Sweidah province with
Druze factions, particularly those loyal to Sheikh al-Aql Hikmat al-Hijri.
US Envoy Barrack Meets Iraq's
Ex-Prime Minister Maliki
Asharq Al Awsat/27 February 2026
The leading candidate to become Iraq's next prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, met
with US diplomat Tom Barrack on Friday after refusing to withdraw his nomination
despite the US threatening to stop supporting the country if he returns to the
post. Barrack, the US envoy to Syria and ambassador to Türkiye, has recently
visited Iraq multiple times to meet with senior officials. Maliki's media office
said in a short statement that the PM candidate stressed during the meeting "the
need to respect Iraq's sovereignty and the will of its people". He also spoke of
the "importance of supporting the democratic process and strengthening political
stability" in Iraq. It wasn't clear what message Barrack conveyed to Maliki.
Last month President Donald Trump intervened in Iraq's affairs by issuing an
ultimatum that if Maliki -- a two-time former premier with close ties to Iran --
was named Iraq's next prime minister, the US would no longer help the country.
Trump's threat left Iraqi leaders at a loss, particularly within the
Coordination Framework -- a ruling alliance of Shiite groups with varying
degrees of links to Iran that nominated Maliki. Earlier this week, Maliki told
AFP he would not withdraw his nomination, while also seeking to allay
Washington's concerns. "I have absolutely no intention of withdrawing out of
respect for my country, its sovereignty, and its will," Maliki told AFP in an
interview.
Egypt-Türkiye Military Agreement Drives Deeper Cooperation
Cairo: Ahmad Jamal/Asharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
The Egyptian-Turkish military agreement has emerged as a key pillar of expanding
cooperation between the two countries, gaining fresh momentum after the joint
declaration issued at the second meeting of the High-Level Strategic Cooperation
Council in Cairo earlier this month.The meeting coincided with Turkish President
Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s visit to Egypt and talks with President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.
Türkiye’s ambassador to Cairo, Salih Mutlu Sen, told Asharq Al-Awsat that
following the Feb. 4 council meeting, the two presidents signed a joint
declaration and oversaw the signing of seven documents.
“This strengthened the contractual foundations of our bilateral cooperation
across many fields, including military, investment and trade,” he said. Sen
added that the military framework agreement sets out structured cooperation
through the exchange of information and expertise in specific areas, providing a
legal basis for existing military ties. Earlier this month, Egypt and Türkiye
signed a military cooperation agreement between their defense ministries in
Cairo, in the presence of Sisi and Erdogan. The move was followed by joint air
force-level talks. Egyptian Air Force Commander Lt. Gen. Amr Saqr, meeting last
week with his Turkish counterpart Gen. Ziya Cemal Kadioglu, stressed “the
importance of coordinating efforts to achieve common interests,” and voiced hope
for closer ties that would benefit both air forces. Military ties have
accelerated since 2023, when the two countries restored full diplomatic
relations and exchanged presidential visits. Cooperation has since expanded into
the defense industry, with the resumption of joint “Sea of Friendship” exercises
and an agreement on joint drone production. Cairo has also joined Türkiye’s
fifth-generation KAAN stealth fighter program.
Broadening cooperation
Beyond defense, Ankara and Cairo have moved quickly to deepen investment ties.
Sen pointed to efforts to improve the investment climate, localize production
and transfer technology in priority sectors, describing these steps as central
to the joint declaration on industrial cooperation. “The Turkish-Egyptian
partnership is advancing on the basis of mutual benefit,” he said. “Our goal is
to jointly enhance security, stability, development and prosperity for the
benefit of all countries in the region.”He added that Sisi and Erdogan place
high importance on initiatives that contribute to the welfare, stability and
security of the region’s peoples. Both countries are targeting $15 billion in
bilateral trade by 2028. “The necessary resources, capabilities and political
will are now available on both sides,” Sen said, pledging continued efforts to
accelerate progress toward that goal. At the trade level, he described the joint
ministerial declaration by the two countries’ trade ministers as a vision
document aimed at strengthening cooperation in trade, investment and industry.
High-level trade consultations will be held regularly, forming the institutional
mechanism for cooperation built on the free trade agreement.
Medical partnership
Medical cooperation has also gained traction. bFollowing talks last week on
establishing the “Egyptian Medical City,” Sen said the two sides reached a
comprehensive agreement on exchanging expertise within the framework of reforms
and advances in Türkiye’s health sector.He noted Egypt’s particular interest in
medical city hospitals developed under Türkiye’s public-private partnership
model, which has been implemented successfully. “Türkiye fully supports Egypt’s
medical city project and is open to all forms of cooperation,” he said. Egyptian
Health Minister Khaled Abdel Ghaffar met last week with a delegation from
Turkish firm YDA to discuss technical mechanisms for implementing the “Capital
Medical City,” launched last month in the New Administrative Capital east of
Cairo. The project includes hospitals, medical institutes and universities
specializing in medical sciences and technology.
Regional alignment
Alongside expanding bilateral ties, coordination on regional issues has
intensified.
Sen said consultation and coordination between Egypt and Türkiye on regional
files have seen marked progress, arguing that closer cooperation between “two
strong regional states” with deep-rooted traditions and a strong sense of
responsibility would bolster stability and prosperity at a time of serious
regional challenges. The joint declaration devoted significant attention to
regional positions, highlighting alignment on the Palestinian issue and
stressing the need to safeguard the territorial integrity of Syria, Lebanon,
Somalia, Libya and Sudan. The two sides also condemned unilateral Israeli
measures that violate the sovereignty of Syria and Lebanon and disregard
international law. Egypt and Türkiye maintain consistent support for the
Palestinian cause, Sen said, adding that both countries clearly oppose agendas
that fuel instability, divide regional states and create polarization.In a
recorded statement, he said the military was closely monitoring developments in
Iran and remained on alert, ready to defend in full coordination with partners
to bolster air defenses. If there is any change, authorities will provide the
public with an immediate update, he said. Yedioth Ahronoth reported that the
government is preventing the army from speaking openly about the risks. In a
report two days earlier, it said the army was refraining from briefing the
public under pressure from the political echelon not to disclose potential
consequences. The paper added that none of the army’s scenarios for the current
year, including the possibility of a sudden round of fighting with Iran,
envisioned a full-scale war with a major regional power like Iran, which has
drawn lessons from the previous war. It said Tehran is working to replenish its
missile arsenal and restore its air defenses. While 30 Israelis were killed in
the previous war against Iran, the army is now warning that in a future
conflict, scenarios such as an Israeli warplane being shot down inside Iran or
greater destruction inside Israel, including the deaths of dozens of civilians,
are more plausible. It also cautioned against being dragged into a “war of
attrition” lasting many months and imposing a heavy economic toll, with heavy
missiles launched from Iran at a steady pace, disrupting operations at Ben
Gurion Airport and striking the home front. Media leaks continued on Friday,
with reports that Israeli military chief of staff Eyal Zamir warned Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Hezbollah could join such a war, even though it
stayed out of the previous conflict and recently said it did not intend to take
part. Zamir was quoted as saying Iran pumped $1 billion into the party’s coffers
last year alone through smuggling operations, expanding its arsenal to include
tens of thousands of precision missiles, long-range rockets, explosive drones
and tens of thousands of fighters ready to confront Israeli forces if they enter
Lebanon — a major challenge for Israel. In contrast, Amos Harel, military
analyst for Haaretz, struck a different note. Entering a major, and possibly
prolonged, war in the Middle East runs counter to US President Donald Trump’s
instincts and everything he has advocated for years, he wrote. Trump, Harel
noted, has long argued that the United States became mired in costly wars in
Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, favoring swift, decisive outcomes that allow him
to declare victory. With US public support for war against Iran low and
Americans more concerned about the cost of living and domestic turmoil, Harel
suggested this may explain Trump’s reluctance to escalate his rhetoric and his
repeated delays, while keeping a narrow opening for Tehran to step back and
accept a new nuclear deal.
Iraq’s Kataib Hezbollah
Tells Fighters to Prepare for Long Iran-US War
Asharq Al Awsat/28-28 February 2026
The Iran-backed Iraqi Kataib Hezbollah told its fighters to prepare for the
scenario of a long war in neighboring Iran should the United States launch
strikes. It warned the US on Thursday of "immense losses" were it to start a war
in the region, while a commander in an armed faction told AFP his group was
"highly likely" to intervene in case of strikes."Amid American threats and
military build-up indicating a dangerous escalation in the region, it is
necessary" for all fighters "to prepare for a potentially long war of
attrition," Kataib Hezbollah said in a statement. The commander told AFP that
his group sees Iran as strategic to its own interests, and therefore any attack
on the country "directly threatens us".US-sanctioned Iraqi armed groups did not
intervene during the 12-day war between Israel and Iran last year. This time,
the commander said they would be "less restrained", especially in the event of
strikes seeking to overthrow the regime. For months during the Israel-Hamas war
in Gaza, Iran-backed groups carried out attacks against US troops in the region
and mostly failed attempts against Israel. Under mounting US and domestic
pressure, these attacks came to a halt, while pressure on the groups to disarm
has grown.
Iran-backed groups are part of the so-called "axis of resistance", which also
includes Lebanon's Hezbollah, Hamas in Gaza and the Houthis in Yemen. A
Hezbollah official told AFP this week that the Lebanese movement would not
intervene militarily in the event of "limited" US strikes on Iran, but would
consider any attack against supreme leader Ali Khamenei a "red line". US
President Donald Trump has deployed warships and fighter jets near Iran to back
up his threats of strikes should ongoing negotiations over Iran's nuclear
program fail to secure a deal.US and Iranian negotiators met for a third round
of talks on Thursday, with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi telling state
TV that the talks "made very good progress."
The Latest
LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on February 27-28/2026
What
are the most frequently asked questions about the book of Exodus? (Part 2)
GotQuestions.org Podcast?/February
27/2026
Question: What is the meaning of the Parable of the Prodigal Son?
Answer: The Parable of the Prodigal Son is found in Luke 15:11–32. The character
of the forgiving father, who remains constant throughout the story, is a picture
of God. In telling the story, Jesus identifies Himself with God in His loving
attitude toward the lost, symbolized by the younger son (the tax collectors and
sinners of Luke 15:1). The elder brother represents the self-righteous (the
Pharisees and teachers of the law of Luke 15:2).
The major theme of this parable is not so much the conversion of the sinner, as
in the previous two parables of Luke 15, but rather the restoration of a
believer into fellowship with the Father. In the first two parables, the owner
went out to look for what was lost (Luke 15:1–10), whereas in this story the
father waits and watches eagerly for his son’s return. We see a progression
through the three parables from the relationship of one in a hundred (Luke
15:1–7), to one in ten (Luke 15:8–10), to one in one (Luke 15:11–32),
demonstrating God’s love for each individual and His personal attentiveness
toward all humanity. We see in this story the graciousness of the father
overshadowing the sinfulness of the son, as it is the memory of the father’s
goodness that brings the prodigal son to repentance (Romans 2:4).
Jesus sets the scene for the Parable of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15:11: “There
was a man who had two sons.”
The Younger Son
In Luke 15:12, the younger son asks his father for his share of his estate,
which would have been half of what his older brother would receive (see
Deuteronomy 21:17). In other words, the younger son asked for 1/3 of the estate.
Though it was perfectly within his rights to ask, it was not a loving thing to
do, as it implied that he wished his father dead. Instead of rebuking his son,
the father patiently grants him his request. This is a picture of God letting a
sinner go his own way (Deuteronomy 30:19).
Like the prodigal son, we all possess a foolish ambition to be independent,
which is at the root of the sinner persisting in his sin (Genesis 3:6; Romans
1:28). A sinful state is a departure and distance from God (Romans 1:21). A
sinful state is also a place of constant discontent. In Luke 12:15 Jesus says,
“Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not
consist in the abundance of his possessions.” The younger son in the parable
learned the hard way that covetousness leads to a life of dissatisfaction and
disappointment. He also learned that the most valuable things in life are the
things we cannot buy or replace.
In Luke 15:13 the younger son travels to a distant country. It is evident from
his previous actions that he had already made that journey in his heart, and the
physical departure was a display of his willful disobedience to all the goodness
his father had offered (Proverbs 27:19; Matthew 6:21; 12:34). In the foreign
land, the prodigal squanders all his inheritance on selfish, shallow
fulfillment, losing everything. His financial disaster is followed by a natural
disaster in the form of a famine, which he failed to plan for. At this point he
hires himself out to a Gentile and finds himself feeding pigs, a detestable job
to the Jewish people (Leviticus 11:7). Needless to say, the prodigal must have
been incredibly desperate to willingly take such a loathsome position. He was
paid so little and grew so hungry that he longed to eat the pig’s food. To top
it off, he could find no mercy among the people he had chosen as his own: “No
one gave him anything” (verse 16). Apparently, once his wealth was gone, so were
his friends. Even the unclean animals were better off than he was at that point.
The prodigal son toiling in the pig pen is a picture of the lost sinner or a
rebellious Christian who has returned to a life of sin (2 Peter 2:19–21). The
results of sin are never pretty (James 1:14–15).
The prodigal son begins to reflect on his miserable condition, and “he came to
his senses” (Luke 15:17). He realizes that even his father’s servants have it
better. His painful circumstances help him to see his father in a new light.
Hope begins to dawn in his heart (Psalm 147:11; Isaiah 40:30–31; 1 Timothy
4:10).
The prodigal’s realization is reflective of the sinner’s discovery that, apart
from God, there is no hope (Ephesians 2:12; 2 Timothy 2:25–26). When a sinner
“comes to his senses,” repentance follows, along with a longing to return to
fellowship with God.
The son devises a plan of action, and it shows that his repentance was genuine.
He will admit his sin (Luke 15:18), and he will give up his rights as a son and
take on the position of a servant (verse 19). He realizes he has no right to a
blessing from his father, and he has nothing to offer his father except a life
of service. Returning home, the prodigal son is prepared to fall at his father’s
feet and beg for mercy.
In the same way, a repentant sinner coming to God is keenly aware of his own
spiritual poverty. Laying aside all pride and feelings of entitlement, he brings
nothing of value with him. The sinner’s only thought is to cast himself at the
mercy of God and beg for a position of servitude (1 John 1:9; Romans 6:6–18;
12:1).
The Father
The father in the Parable of the Prodigal Son was waiting for his son to return.
In fact, “while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled
with compassion for him” (Luke 15:20). He runs to his wayward son, embraces him,
and kisses him. In Jesus’ day, it was not customary for a grown man to run, yet
the father runs to greet his son, breaking convention in his love and desire for
restoration (verse 20). The returning son begins his prepared speech (verse 21),
but his father cuts him off and begins issuing commands to honor his son—the
best robe, the best ring, the best feast! The father does not question his son
or lecture him; instead, he joyfully forgives him and receives him back into
fellowship.
What a picture of God’s love, condescension, and grace! God’s heart is full of
compassion for His children; He stands ready to welcome the returning sinner
back home with joyous celebration.
The prodigal son was satisfied to return home as a slave, but to his surprise
and delight he is restored back into the full privilege of being his father’s
son. The weary, gaunt, filthy sinner who trudged home was transformed into the
guest of honor in a rich man’s home. That is what God’s grace does for a
penitent sinner (Psalm 40:2; 103:4). Not only are we forgiven in Christ, but we
receive the Spirit of “adoption to sonship” (Romans 8:15). We are His children,
heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17).
The father’s command to bring the best robe for the returned son is a sign of
dignity and honor, proof of the prodigal’s acceptance back into the family. The
ring for the son’s hand is a sign of authority and sonship. The sandals for his
feet are a sign of his not being a servant, as servants did not wear shoes. The
father orders the fattened calf to be prepared, and a party is held in honor of
the returned son. Fatted calves in those times were saved for special occasions.
This was not just any party; it was a rare and complete celebration.
All these things represent what we receive in Christ upon salvation: the robe of
the Redeemer’s righteousness (Isaiah 61:10), the privilege of partaking of the
Spirit of adoption (Ephesians 1:5), and feet fitted with the readiness that
comes from the gospel of peace, prepared to walk in the ways of holiness
(Ephesians 6:15). The actions of the father in the parable show us that “the
Lord does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our
iniquities. For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his love
for those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far has he
removed our transgressions from us. As a father has compassion on his children,
so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him” (Psalm 103:10–13). Instead of
condemnation, there is rejoicing for a son who “was dead and is alive again; he
was lost and is found” (Luke 15:32; cf. Romans 8:1; John 5:24). Those words—dead
and alive, lost and found—are terms that also apply to one’s state before and
after conversion to Christ (Ephesians 2:1–5). The feast is a picture of what
occurs in heaven over one repentant sinner (Luke 15:7, 10).
The Older Son
The final, tragic character in the Parable of the Prodigal Son is the older son.
As the older son comes in from the field, he hears music and dancing. He finds
out from one of the servants that his younger brother has come home and that
what he hears is the sound of jubilation over his brother’s safe return. The
older brother becomes angry and refuses to go into the house. His father goes to
his older son and pleads with him to come in. “But he answered his father,
‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your
orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my
friends. But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with
prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’” (Luke 15:29–30).
The father answers gently: “My son, . . . you are always with me, and everything
I have is yours. But we had to celebrate and be glad” (verses 31–32).
The older son’s words and actions reveal several things about him: 1) His
relationship with his father was based on works and merit. He points out to his
father that he has always been obedient as he’s been “slaving away”; thus, he
deserves a party—he has earned it. 2) He despises his younger brother as
undeserving of the father’s favor. 3) He does not understand grace and has no
room for forgiveness. In fact, the demonstration of grace toward his brother
makes him angry. His brother does not deserve a party. 4) He has disowned the
prodigal as a brother, referring to him as “this son of yours” (verse 30). 5) He
thinks his father is stingy and unfair: “You never gave me even a young goat”
(verse 29).
The father’s words are corrective in several ways: 1) His older son should know
that their relationship is not based on performance: “My son, . . . you are
always with me, and everything I have is yours” (Luke 15:31). 2) His older son
should accept his brother as part of the family. The father refers to the
prodigal as “this brother of yours” (verse 32). 3) His older son could have
enjoyed a party any time he wanted, but he never utilized the blessings at his
disposal. 4) Grace is necessary and appropriate: “We had to celebrate” (verse
32).
The Pharisees and the teachers of the law, mentioned in Luke 15:1, are portrayed
as the older brother in the parable. Outwardly, they lived blameless lives, but
inwardly their attitudes were abominable (Matthew 23:25–28). They saw their
relationship with God as based on their performance, and they considered
themselves deserving of God’s favor—unlike the undeserving sinners around them.
They did not understand grace and were, in fact, angered by it. They had no room
for forgiveness. They saw no kinship between sinners and themselves. They viewed
God as rather stingy in His blessings. And they considered that, if God were to
accept tax collectors and sinners into His family, then God would be unfair.
The older brother’s focus was on himself and his own service; as a result, he
had no joy in his brother’s arrival home. He was so consumed with justice and
equity (as he saw them) that he failed to see the value of his brother’s
repentance and return. The older brother had allowed bitterness to take root in
his heart to the point that he was unable to show compassion toward his brother.
The bitterness spilled over into other relationships, too, and he was unable to
forgive the perceived sin of his father against him. Rather than enjoy
fellowship with his father, brother, and community, the older brother stayed
outside the house and nursed his anger. How sad to choose misery and isolation
over restoration and reconciliation!
The older brother—and the religious leaders of Jesus’ day—failed to realize that
“anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the
darkness. Whoever loves his brother lives in the light, and there is nothing in
him to make him stumble. But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness; he
does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him” (1 John
2:9–11).
The Parable of the Prodigal Son is one of Scripture’s most beautiful pictures of
God’s grace. We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans
3:23). We are all prodigals in that we have run from God, selfishly squandered
our resources, and, to some degree, wallowed in sin. But God is ready to
forgive. He will save the contrite, not by works but by His grace, through faith
(Ephesians 2:9; Romans 9:16; Psalm 51:5). That is the core message of the
Parable of the Prodigal Son.
In major policy shift on
Syria, UN Security Council lifts sanctions on Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham
Ephrem Kossaify/Arab News/February 28, 2026
NEW YORK CITY: The UN Security Council on Friday removed Al-Nusra Front, the
militant group that evolved into Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham, from its so-called Daesh
and Al-Qaeda Sanctions List. The move signals a major shift in international
policy toward Syria’s evolving political landscape in the post-Assad era, and
ends a global freeze on assets, travel ban and arms embargo that have been
imposed on the group since 2014. Al-Nusra Front and Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham were
led by Ahmad Al-Sharaa, formerly Abu Mohammed Al-Julani, who is now Syria’s
president and was a leading figure in the offensive that toppled the Assad
regime. The consensus decision by the Security Council’s sanctions committee was
announced by the UK, which holds the presidency of the Security Council this
month and was acting in the absence of the chair of the committee. It followed a
request by the new Syrian authorities to delist “Al-Nusrah Front for the People
of the Levant.”The decision means measures that were applied to Hayat Tahrir
Al-Sham under Security Council Resolution 2734, adopted in 2024, no longer
apply. As a result, UN member states are notrequired to freeze the group’s
funds, restrict the movement of its representatives, or block the supply or
transfer of arms and related materiel. Al-Nusra Front was added to the sanctions
list for its ties to Al-Qaeda and involvement in the financing and execution of
militant activities during the war in Syria. The UN initially continued to treat
the group’s successor organization, Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham, as a listed
alias.Al-Sharaa has said the group severed all prior transnational jihadist
links and is now solely focused on local Syrian matters.
Iraq: The 2003 System and
the Political Elites’ Crisis
Mustafa FahsAsharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
US President Donald Trump exposed the deep crisis of governance in Iraq with a
tweet that threatened the future of the political system and paralyzed the
towering figures of Iraqi politics. These partisan elites emerged, under
exceptional conditions, as a result of the intersecting interests of the
American occupiers and these parties’ Iranian patrons. The consensus they
developed created robust political blocs that jointly worked together to develop
a regime that served all of their interests. Over time, they turned into
oligarchic forces whose legitimacy is underpinned by a nominally democratic
process. As they vied to consolidate their power, most of these parties drew on
their historic victimization as former opposition movements to push a religious
discourse around their ethnic or doctrinal identity.
Their ideological and oligarchic bent has left these party elites captive of
their recent past and troubled present. They failed to produce a modern,
forward-looking discourse, and after two decades in power, they seem to be aging
prematurely. They have developed neither a governance framework nor a
sustainable political project, paralyzing politics, especially at the elite
level. In today’s Iraq, especially after Trump’s post and the leadership’s
failure to contain the fallout, Washington and Baghdad’s relationship is
fundamentally different from what it had been in 2003. One key difference is the
absence of an Iraqi political actor who can effectively influence US
decision-makers or build a persuasive Iraqi narrative, playing the role that the
late Ahmed Chalabi had at critical junctures in the past. The 2003 regime has
also failed to produce a political or intellectual elite committed to upholding
the national interest. This elite did not have to be partisan, and it could have
played a role similar to that of Iraqi thinkers and academics in exile,
particularly in Washington. Kanan Makiya, for example, had the mind of a
mediator and helped put Iraq on the international agenda through his clout among
intellectuals and political decision-makers in Washington.
The current crisis of the political elite is not new. It is the result of the
elite’s perverse early development, which has taken it on a trajectory that
embodies the “iron law of oligarchy” theorized by the early twentieth-century
German-Italian sociologist Robert Michels. He believed that political
organizations, even those claiming to be democratic, eventually concentrate
power in the hands of a small minority. The pillars of the 2003 regime seem to
have perfectly applied this theory of Michels, who would ironically go on to
align himself with Mussolini’s fascist regime.
This is not Iraq’s first crisis of governance, though it might be its most
perilous. In 2019, the “October uprising” forced the 2003 regime to appoint an
outsider prime minister. Mustafa al-Kadhimi was aware of the complexity of the
crisis when he took office, and he understood both the political and elite
failures. He avoided direct confrontation and sought, instead, to work with
non-partisan and non-ideological political and academic elites. For the ruling
class, these figures represented an existential threat and were not allowed to
gain real power.
A second deadlock emerged during the penultimate Iraqi parliamentary elections,
which were held when Kadhimi was in power. The ideological voter chose to
support the State of Law coalition led by Nouri al-Maliki over other ideological
or factional parties - a choice that could be interpreted as a preference for
the state over sub-state forces.
Hisham Dawood, an Iraqi academic at the French National Institute who played an
academic-political role in Kadhimi’s government, has offered a clear-eyed
characterization of the: both the partisan elites who arrived in 2003 and those
who emerged afterward, with their political discourse and paramilitary factions
and militias, have so far failed to transform into a founding civil structure.
They remain prisoners of their initial frame of mind. In Washington, no one
listens to the old Iraqi narrative. In Baghdad, no one can present a new
narrative that is convincing to Washington, which has shifted to a unilateral
regional policy. Accordingly, the survival of the current system of governance
seems impossible.
How Strong Is International Law?
Radwan al-SayyedAsharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
Iran does not have many friends, neither in the region nor internationally. Amid
American threats of war over the past couple of months, however, Iran’s
neighbors have voiced a desire to see conflict averted, as well as fears that it
could spread if it were to erupt. They have urged both sides to take a
diplomatic path. As for the broader international community, it has largely
remained silent, save for the muted objections of Russia and China. The only
party beating the drums of war alongside US President Donald Trump is Israel. It
claims that it supports a war because it is the primary target of Iran’s nuclear
and ballistic programs, as well as the proxy forces it has propped up over the
past three decades. Despite their discontent with Trump's policies, the
Europeans fear that Iran could use its nuclear and ballistic programs to
blackmail them, and they have been hardening their own sanctions since
2025.Iran’s neighbors have many grievances against it, foremost among them
Iran’s use of proxies and its interventions in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and
the Gulf states over the decades. Not only did Iran form militias and supply
them with arms; more egregious still, it fomented sectarian strife and what
resembles civil wars within these countries, preventing them from building
functional states. Nor did it stop there: the militias it formed have been used
in regional conflicts, as we saw with Hezbollah’s intervention against Israel
and its intervention (2012–2024) in Syria to help President Assad maintain
power. Iran can, for its part, respond by pointing to the eight-year war
(1980–1988) that Iraq waged against it with the support of several Arab states.
Iran, however, has not faced military or security challenges since 1988. Even
with the United States, cyclical negotiations go back and forth. Iran cooperated
(logistically, in its terms) with the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq, and
it continues to benefit from the instability that has plagued Iran since the
2003 invasion.The region has been rife with political and security skirmishes
and clashes since the 1990s. Most rounds ended in Iran’s favor, with the United
States often subsequently seeking appeasement or containment. Accordingly, Iran
appeared to be gaining ground, albeit taking small steps, until the decisive
Iraq round and its takeover of Syria. Observers offer divergent explanations for
the United States’ acquiescence to Iran until Trump arrived. In practice,
Washington ceded ground to Tehran in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. Its
destabilizing concessions culminated in the 2015 nuclear agreement, which, as
anyone familiar with the details knows, merely postponed nuclear breakout and
failed to eliminate the threat altogether. How, then, do we explain its
gentleness drive for expansion, reach, and dominance? Is it the “ideological
project” of the religious state? Or is it another version of Türkiye’s
expansion, projection of influence, and geopolitical consolidation? Either way,
Iran steadily and rapidly advanced rapidly on multiple fronts as the United
States seemed to retreat at every turn, until the Trump thunderbolt hit in 2017.
Dismantling the Iranian project took several years; the assault began by
severing its limbs and destroying its proxies and then moved to a direct strike
on Iran. The initial aim was to set al-Qaeda and ISIS against Iran and its
proxies. For its part, Iran claimed to be combating terrorism like the
international coalition led by the United States. Until only a few months ago,
Vali Nasr (author of The Shia Revival, 2007) had been framing his analysis of
regional tensions as a Sunni–Shia conflict. Yet, as Western powers have come to
realize, the two sides of this conflict were competing over their antagonization
of the West. The first rounds of strikes showed that the Iranian camp was no
less fragile than the ISIS camp. And so, Israeli action backed by the US
shattered Iran’s proxies, and its wings were clipped. The era of accommodation
or containment was over, and it was time to grip Iran by the neck, even to
threaten to suffocate it. It is a new era. New terms and conditions of hegemony
have emerged in the region and the world. Some compare the current phase to the
“East of Suez” era (today it is the Strait of Hormuz and the Arabian Sea), as
hegemony was shifting and the Americans overtook the British in the late 1960s.
The United States has not left the region since. Assuming they were untouchable-
an illusion that must end, even if this demands the use of force- Iran and
Türkiye stretched their arms. Who, then, has lost touch with reality and the
balance of power: Khosrow or Caesar? Khosrow, this time, came draped in the
Prophet’s cloak. As for Caesar, he has put his cross aside and mounted an
aircraft carrier. Iran, which does not believe in secular law, has been
protesting the violations of international law by Iraq and its allies, and now
Iranian officials decry the United States’ and Israel’s disregard for
international law. Is it the strength or weakness of the law that drives the
weak to seek its protection?
Iran: Six Scenarios for Another War?Then what?
Amir TaheriAsharq Al Awsat/February 28/2026
This is the question that theoreticians of war from Sun Tzu to Jomini and
Liddell-Hart and passing by Clausewitz advise leaders to ask before they order
the firing of the first shot in a war. Thus, one may suggest that US President
Donald Trump should also ask that question before, as many expect, he triggers a
new round of military attacks on Iran. The New York Times believes that by
assembling the largest strike force since 2003 Trump has cornered himself in a
position from which he cannot wiggle out without losing face or more. Former
State Department “strategic brain” Richard Haass claims that Trump is
sleep-walking into a war. In Tehran, officials also predict some form of
military action which they expect would clear the air without threatening the
existence of the regime.
On the opposition side, Prince Reza Pahlavi, heir to the Iranian throne and now
the most vocal challenger of Islamic regime, has hinged his strategy on the
assumption that a US attack will neutralize the regime’s security forces
allowing his “team” to enter Iran, set up a transition authority and carry out a
referendum about a future regime.
In his latest “message to the nation” he says that a US attack is likelier than
ever.
Some former regime grandees also desire such an attack which they hope will
eliminate the “hardline” faction and allow” pro-reform” groups to put the system
on a new course.
Most regional powers also believe that a US attack, something they all oppose,
may be unavoidable. Let me say at the outset that at the time of writing this
column I do not think that war is inevitable. Nevertheless, the possibility of
war should not be dismissed off hand.
Chekhov says that if a shotgun is shown in the first scene of a play you may be
sure it will be fired in the third scene. Thus, one cannot deploy two huge
aircraft carriers, hundreds of warplanes and tens of thousands of troops without
making some use of them.
The problem is that the classic “gunboat diplomacy” that worked in the 19th and
to some extent the 20th century is no longer as effective as it was. This is
because almost everyone has understood the fact that a war is never won by one
side declaring victory but when one side admits defeat. President Trump’s
semi-official foreign secretary Steve Witkoff says his boss is suprised that
having witnessed the massive military build-up all around Iran the ruling
clerics haven’t surrendered. Whether or not to attack Iran or how to do it has
become a popular topic for TV shows and dinner-table gossip across the world.
The other night, French General Francois Chauvancy advised Trump on Paris TV to
train and arm anti-regime Iranians before launching his attack. Franco-Iranian
academic Didier Idjadi advised Trump to deploy Special Forces to mop up
resistance after the initial destruction of key targets.
But most pontiffs avoid the key question: Then what? So, let us try to answer it
depending on the scale of the attack. A short, sharp and necessarily limited
attack will be followed by Tehran accepting a ceasefire and expressing
willingness to enter a new round of negotiations, exactly like what happened
last June. In that case the attack would have been pointless because Tehran has
already used the negotiation charade that has continued for almost half a
century. The second scenario is that the “hardline faction” is defanged and
pro-US groups seize control. That would mean returning to the good old days of
President Barack Obama when John Kerry and Mohammad Javad Zarif strolled
together along Lake Leman to ponder how to hoodwink critics at home. Trump
wouldn’t be happy about such a back-to-the-future scenario scripted by the
Obama-Joe Biden-Hillary Clinton trio.
The third scenario is that the attack causes systemic collapse and enables Reza
Pahlavi’s “team” to concoct a transitional government and organize their
referendum.
In that case, it would be important to know who will be in that transitional
government, under what law a referendum would be held and what question that
referendum will ask.
We will be in the territory of “the unknown unknowns” depicted by Donald
Rumsfeld.
A fourth scenario could plunge the US into a long and costly war leading to a
Samson Option in which everyone inside and around the temple, including the
blinded giant, will live, if they live, to regret the whole thing. Then there is
the “cake-walk” scenario, a variation on what happened in Afghanistan when
Mullah Omar fled on his motorcycle and allowed the US to decide who should rule
Kabul. Even then it would be hard to imagine a balance-sheet that shows the US
benefiting from the largest expenditure of blood and treasure it made since the
moment of madness in Indochina. A sixth scenario, though less likely, may also
be considered. This one obeys the China-shop rule: “If you break it, you own
it!”
Provided you are ready for the long haul that could produce a positive outcome
as it did in West Germany, Japan and South Korea after World War II and the
peninsular war.
In such a scenario you obey the triple “c” rule set out by the French
theoretician of war Jomini: “Conquer, cleanse, control!”. And that means
readiness to stay the course for ever if necessary. Talk of war with Iran comes
at a time we mark the fourth anniversary of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of
Ukraine; an event that has produced two contradictory results. First, it has
shown that this war isn’t winnable because the weaker side isn’t allowed to
throw in the towel by a Europe frightened of further Russian aggressions.
Paradoxically, this unwinnable war has made war more popular across the globe.
Average world expenditure on the military is showing a 40 percent increase. The
implicit message is: Spend more preparing for war but know that war may no
longer be winnable in the sense it was throughout history.
There is no doubt that Iran remains a problem if only in the sense of the
so-called Thucydides trap when an anti-status quo power tries to reshape the
balance of power in a region after its own scheme. Such a situation often leads
to war with the challenging intruder ending up as loser. However, there are also
exceptions when the trap is shut by regime change initiated by the people of the
perturbing nation.
AP reporter speaks to Iranian doctors who say agents intimidated them and
obstructed medical care
Sarah El Deeb/AP/February 27, 2026
BEIRUT (AP) — As wounded anti-government protesters poured into an Iranian
hospital during last month’s crackdown, a young doctor hurried to the emergency
room to help treat a man in his 40s who had been shot in the head at close
range. When the doctor and others tried to resuscitate the man, a group of
armed, plainclothes security agents blocked their way, pushing some back with
their rifles, the doctor told The Associated Press. “They surrounded him and
didn’t allow us to move further,” the doctor in the northern city of Rasht
said.Minutes later, the man was dead. The agents put his body in a black body
bag. Later, they piled it and other bodies into the back of a van and drove
away.
This wasn’t an isolated incident.
Over the course of a few days in early January, plainclothes agents swarmed
hospitals in multiple cities treating the thousands wounded by Iranian security
forces who fired on crowds to quash massive protests against the 47-year-old
Islamic Republic. These agents monitored and sometimes obstructed care to
protesters, intimidated staff, seized protesters and took away the dead in body
bags. Dozens of doctors were arrested. This story is based on AP interviews with
three doctors in Iran and six Iranian medical professionals living abroad who
are in contact with colleagues on the ground; reports from human rights groups;
and AP’s verification of more than a dozen videos posted on social media. All of
the doctors inside Iran spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation.
The AP worked with Mnemonic, a Berlin-based organization, to identify online
videos, posts and other material relating to violence in hospitals. The doctors
in Iran and abroad said the level of brutality and militarization of health
facilities was unprecedented in a country that for decades has experienced
crackdowns on dissent and surveillance of public institutions.
The Iran Human Rights Center, based in Oslo, has documented multiple accounts
from inside hospitals of security agents preventing medical care, removing
patients from ventilators, harassing doctors and detaining protesters. The
government has blamed the protests and ensuing violence on armed foreign-backed
“terrorists.” Health Ministry spokesman Hossein Kermanpour denied reports of
treatment being prevented or protesters being taken from hospitals, calling them
“untrue, but also fundamentally impossible.” He was quoted in state media as
saying all injured were treated “without any discrimination or interference over
political opinions.” The Iranian mission at the United Nations did not
immediately reply to a request for comment on the doctors’ accounts.
Doctors tried to protect the wounded
The crackdown, which reached its height on Jan. 8 and 9, was the deadliest since
the Islamic Republic took power in 1979. Details have been slow to emerge
because of internet restrictions imposed by authorities. The Human Rights
Activists News Agency says it confirmed more than 7,000 deaths and that it is
investigating thousands more. The government has acknowledged more than 3,000
killed, though it has undercounted or not reported fatalities from past unrest.
Once the crackdown began, the doctor in Rasht said he worked through 66 hours of
hell, moving each day to a different facility to help with the wounded — first a
trauma center, then a hospital and finally a private clinic. Armed agents
brought in wounded protesters and stood watch over them as staff worked, the
doctor said. When it came time to discharge a patient, he said, “they would take
anyone who was confirmed to be a protester.” The doctor said he and other staff
tried to hide wounded protesters by recording false diagnoses in hospital
records.
“We knew that no matter what we did for the patients, they wouldn’t be safe once
they stepped out of the hospital,” he said. The AP could not independently
confirm the doctor’s account of events at the hospital in Rasht. But it
conformed with AP’s other reporting.
AP’s reporting focused on what happened at four hospitals, a snapshot of the
Iranian security forces’ activity. Mnemonic gathered dozens of videos, posts and
other accounts it says showed forces were present in and around nine hospitals,
in some cases firing guns and tear gas. Mnemonic has been preserving digital
evidence of human rights violations in Iran since 2022, creating with partners
an archive of more than 2 million documents.
One video verified by AP shows security agents breaking through glass entrance
doors into Imam Khomeini Hospital in the western city of Ilam. They then barged
through the halls with their guns, yelling at people. The Health Ministry told
state media it was investigating the incident, saying it was committed to
protecting medical centers, staff and patients.
Treating the wounded in hiding
On the night of Jan. 8, a 37-year-old general surgeon was out for dinner in
Tehran when he received a call from a professional friend, an ophthalmologist.
The fear in her voice made clear she needed his help urgently. She gave him an
address. Just before midnight, he drove to the address, a clinic for cosmetic
procedures. Inside, he found the lobby transformed into a trauma ward, with more
than 30 wounded men, women, children and elderly on the couches and
blood-covered floor, shouting and crying, The surgeon spent nearly four days
there, treating more than 90 people, he estimates. At first, it was just him,
the ophthalmologist, a dentist and two nurses. Eventually, the surgeon summoned
three other doctors to help. He used cardboard boxes and pieces of soft metal as
splints for broken bones. With no anesthesia or strong painkillers, he used
weaker suppository analgesics. The clinic had no blood supplies or transfusion
capabilities. They couldn’t send patients to hospitals for fear they’d be
arrested. A young man in his 20s had been shot with live ammunition in his
elbow, shattering it. The surgeon sutured the wounds but knew the arm would have
to be amputated.
A family of four — a mother, father and their 8- and 10-year-old children — were
all riddled with pellets, the surgeon said. On the morning of Jan. 9, the
surgeon reached out to doctors he trusted to refer patients to them. First he
had to make sure to remove all bullets and pellets from their bodies so they
wouldn’t be detained at the hospital. He wrote referral letters saying the
patients had been in car accidents. None of the wounded died at the clinic, he
said. The AP could not independently confirm the surgeon’s account of events at
the clinic.
Doctors targeted for arrest
Since Jan. 9, at least 79 health care professionals have been detained,
including a dozen medical students, according to Homa Fathi, an Iranian dentist
pursuing a Ph.D. in Canada and member of IIPHA who has been monitoring Iranian
government action against health professionals since 2022. Around 30 have been
released, most on bail, but many of them still face charges, including one
accused of “waging war against God,” a charge that carries a death penalty,
Fathi said. The surgeon who treated protesters at the secret clinic said he was
surprised security forces never stormed that location to make arrests. But
arrests have come since. Two health care workers who volunteered at the clinic
were seized from their homes, the surgeon said. “I am waiting, too.”French
Foreign Ministry spokesperson Pascal Confavreux said the US ambassador had now
provided assurances he had not meant to interfere in “the internal sphere of
France.” As to Kushner’s initial no-show when summoned, Confavreux made
allowances for the American real-estate magnate, who only took up his functions
as ambassador to Paris in July, being relatively new to the more genteel world
of diplomacy. “To summon an ambassador is completely part and parcel of
diplomatic grammar. And so sometimes when you have ambassadors who are not
career diplomats, it can lead to some incomprehension,” he said of the father of
US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.Yet beyond the ruffling of
French feathers by a lack of diplomatic niceties lies the deeper question of how
to handle increasingly obvious American attempts to interfere in European
domestic matters – often using the very public platform X. The US Ambassador to
Poland Tom Rose recently posted that he was cutting off ties with the leader of
the lower house of parliament after he spoke out against giving President Donald
Trump the Nobel Peace Prize. In Belgium, Ambassador Bill White has repeatedly
weighed into an ongoing judicial investigation into circumcision practices in
Antwerp’s orthodox Jewish community. Most recently, he posted on X that “the
case should be immediately dropped,” although unlike Kushner, White did at least
turn up at the country’s foreign ministry when summoned.
All three cases demonstrate at once a break with traditional diplomatic form,
the use of social media rather than back channels, and a new willingness on the
part of Washington to involve itself more aggressively in the judicial or
political processes of other countries, and specifically European ones.
That, says Pierre Vimont, a former French ambassador to Washington, requires a
new kind of vigilance from the Europeans. “American foreign policy has a very
strong ideological content nowadays, and I think this is what needs to be
handled very carefully,” he told CNN. “Interference in domestic politics is not
the way diplomacy should unfold. I think it must be put very strongly to the
American side that this is not what diplomacy is all about.” As to why Europe
appears to be a particular target for the American administration, Vimont also
blames the ideology of the current American administration. “In theory, we share
a common vision of what democracy is all about, democratic rules, free speech,
the independence of the judiciary, and so on and so forth,” he said. “And we are
witnessing slowly a split between our values and the way the MAGA movement and
the current US administration see those same values.”
Which hints at why French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot reacted as furiously
as he did when the US State Department initially weighed into the controversy
over Deranque’s death, telling French media that the tragedy should not be
exploited for political ends. France, he said, had “no lessons to learn from the
reactionary international movement,” when it came to ideological violence. The
next step will be for Kushner and Barrot to meet in person, which the ministry
spokesman expects to happen within the next few days. The truth is that no one
wanted a diplomatic rupture in this of all years. In June the G7 summit of
leading economic countries, which is to be held in Evian in France, was even
moved to allow for Trump’s birthday; it will now start on June 15, rather than
the day before, as originally planned. This year also marks the 250th
anniversary of what Washington describes as its oldest alliance, with a series
of events planned on both sides of the Atlantic. “I know it’s a very important
date for the US, also for us. And so there are ups and downs in such a
relationship. We are allies, even if we are not aligned, which is also something
that helps us tell the truth, or what we think is our truth, to our allies,”
Confavreux said.
A point made repeatedly in recent months by representatives of the US: that
friendship should allow for truth to be spoken to allies. The question is how
diplomatically each truth can be told.
Pakistan-Afghanistan 'open war': How and why we got here?
Leela JACINTO/France 24/February 27, 2026
Pakistan was once viewed as the sponsor and chief backer of Afghanistan’s
Taliban movement. But when Islamabad declared “open war” on Kabul Friday, it
marked a dramatic escalation of tensions between the two countries and
underscored the regional security implications in a volatile zone. Shortly after
3am local time on Friday, Pakistani state TV broadcast a “Breaking News” red
alert following a slow buildup of tensions between Islamabad and Kabul.
Pakistani armed forces launch “Operation Ghazab lil-Haq", or "Righteous Fury" in
the local Urdu language, said the news alert. The military onslaught by
nuclear-armed Pakistan against Afghanistan, its impoverished western neighbour,
began with airstrikes destroying “key military installations of the Afghan
Taliban regime”, according to PTV News. Minutes later, Pakistani Defence
Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif took to social media to declare the casus belli
of the conflict. The wording, in Urdu, was explicit – and florid. “The Taliban
turned Afghanistan into a colony of India. They gathered all the terrorists of
the world in Afghanistan and began exporting terrorism,” said Asif on X. “Our
cup of patience has overflowed. Now it is open war between us and you,” he said
before ending with a foreboding, “Pakistan's army did not come from across the
seas. We are your neighbours; we know your ins and outs. Allahu Akbar.”In just a
few words, Asif referenced some of Islamabad’s most pressing geostrategic
concerns. These include a fear of arch foe India’s deepening ties to the
Taliban, once considered an Islamabad proxy, to the US military presence in
Afghanistan – the army “from across the seas” that challenged Pakistan’s
influence across its western border. Friday’s “open war” was the culmination of
a slow buildup of tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan following an
escalation of violence in both countries. Islamabad accuses the Taliban regime
in Kabul of harbouring terrorists. The Taliban denies the charges and says
Pakistan's security is an internal problem. The South Asia region is awash with
countries holding their neighbours responsible for militant attacks on their
soil. The latest Afghanistan-Pakistan blame game, it was hoped, could be
resolved through negotiations and dialogue. But those hopes were dashed with
Friday’s flareup across the 2,600-kilometre Pakistan-Afghanistan border, proving
that the underlying sources of the latest conflict are serious and deep.
Talks, truces, broken ceasefires
Afghanistan and Pakistan share the disputed Durand Line, a colonial-era frontier
that Kabul has never formally recognised. The Durand Line is an emotive issue,
especially for the Pashtuns, a tribal group that was split on either side of the
border by the colonial carve-up. It has been the source of simmering diplomatic
tensions between Kabul and Islamabad for decades. It also lies at the heart of
Pakistan’s bid to extend its influence in Afghanistan’s domestic politics. The
immediate, and stated, cause of the latest war goes back to a surge of terrorist
attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan last year, with both sides blaming the other
– and following it up with cross-border clashes. Since the Taliban's 2021 return
to power, relations between the two countries gradually worsened with the
deteriorating security situation. The spiralling tensions, which killed more
than 70 people on both sides last year, led Qatar and Turkey to offer to mediate
truce talks, which were held in Doha in October. Following the initial talks in
Qatar, the two countries agreed to an immediate, 48-hour ceasefire on October
19. But hours after the ceasefire expired, Pakistan conducted strikes in
Afghanistan’s eastern Paktika province. A second round of negotiations in Doha
was immediately launched, but the talks collapsed on October 29, after the two
sides could not reach common ground. A third round of negotiations saw
delegations from Pakistan and the Taliban-led Afghan government, together with
Turkish and Qatari mediators, meeting in Istanbul on November 6. But they failed
to reach a formal agreement.The agenda at the Istanbul talks included the
implementation of the Doha ceasefire, creating a joint Durand Line commission,
and reopening shuttered trade crossings. But the atmosphere at the talks was
strained, according to diplomatic sources, with Asif setting the tone with a
warning prior to the meeting. “If diplomacy fails, war will happen,” he noted.
The enemy of my enemy
Meanwhile, Pakistan was conducting another blame game across its eastern border
with its nuclear-armed arch foe, India. In an interview with FRANCE 24 last
week, for instance, Asif addressed the security situation in Pakistan, claiming
that a spate of recent terrorist attacks in the country is the result of a
"proxy war" waged by arch foe India in complicity with the Taliban government in
Kabul. The Taliban’s return to power following the disastrous US military
pullout was initially welcomed by Pakistan, with then-prime minister Imran Khan
proclaiming that Afghans had "broken the shackles of slavery". But Islamabad
soon found that the Taliban were not as pliant as it had hoped. Pakistan has
long made a distinction between what is known as the “Afghan Taliban” and the
“Pakistani Taliban”. While Islamabad supported the Afghan Taliban in the 1990s,
their Pakistani militant brethren, the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) conducts
attacks on Pakistani soil and is considered a terrorist group. After the Afghan
Taliban returned to power, Islamabad accused Kabul of sheltering TTP fighters
conducting attacks in Pakistan’s Pashtun dominated tribal areas.Violence also
flared in Pakistan’s southwestern Balochistan province, with Islamabad blaming
Kabul for harbouring Baloch separatist insurgents. Pakistan accuses India of
backing the outlawed Baloch Liberation Army, allegations New Delhi denies.
India’s recent outreach to Taliban authorities in Kabul, with a high-profile
visit by Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi to New Delhi in November, has
also increased tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Historically, India
has viewed the Taliban with hostility due to the group’s Islamist ideology and
traditional links with the Pakistani military and intelligence establishment.
But with tensions between Islamabad and Kabul increasing, New Delhi adopted an
“enemy of my enemy is my friend” strategy, according to analysts. As India
attempts to re-emerge as a development partner for Afghanistan, Pakistan is
increasingly seeing itself sidelined by its western neighbour, which it has long
viewed as inside its zone of strategic influence.
When Asif made his “open war” declaration early Friday, his references to
Afghanistan being India’s “colony” and “proxy” were rightly viewed as the war
rhetoric of defence minister rallying troops and the populace. But it also
underscored the serious security issues confronting a region that has two
nuclear-armed neighbours vying for influence in a country that has been the
birthplace of global jihadism, including the September 11, 2001, attacks in the
US. On paper, the military might of the two belligerents in the latest war is
asymmetrical. In addition to its nuclear arms, Pakistan's armed forces include
more than 600,000 active personnel, possess over 6,000 armoured fighting
vehicles and more than 400 combat aircraft, according to the International
Institute for Strategic Studies. The Taliban, in contrast, are believed to have
around 172,000 fighters, less than a third of Pakistan's personnel. After a US
military operation that lasted two decades, the Taliban today are believed to
possess at least six aircraft and 23 helicopters but their condition is unknown
and they have no fighter jets or effective air force. The asymmetry has
prompted fears of “unconventional warfare” in Pakistan, noted FRANCE 24’s
Shahzaib Wahlah, reporting from Islamabad on Friday. “The main fear among the
local population here is that there will be a development of unconventional
warfare,” he said. “Many dread the possibility of major terrorist attacks in
large cities.”
President Trump's Proliferating 'Board of War'
The PA wants to
return to the Gaza Strip not to replace Hamas, but to join forces with it.
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/February 27, 20
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22312/gaza-board-of-war
Recently, there have been attempts to give Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority
(PA) a role in post-war management of the Gaza Strip -- along with Qatar, Turkey
and Pakistan, all Islamists and long-term adversaries of Israel.
Earlier this week, the office of UN Special Coordinator for Gaza Nikolay
Mladenov, who was appointed by the US as the Director-General of Trump's "Board
of Peace," revealed the establishment of a "Liaison Office" for the PA.
Mladenov seems to believe that the PA can play a positive role in the Gaza
Strip, even though polls published by the Palestinian Center for Policy and
Survey Research have consistently shown that more than 80% of Palestinians
believe it is corrupt.
Unsurprisingly, Palestinian officials were quick to welcome Mladenov's
announcement: it whitewashes the PA and makes it appear as a legitimate and
credible party in post-war Gaza arrangements.
Meanwhile, a senior Palestinian official closely associated with PA President
Mahmoud Abbas, Azzam al-Ahmad, also Secretary-General of the Executive Committee
of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), told the Egyptian newspaper Al-Shorouq,
in an interview published on February 23, that "Hamas is not a terrorist
organization and we reject its disarmament."
Al-Ahmad also rejected [other] demands by the Trump administration....
The statements by al-Ahmad are proof that the PA leadership continues to talk in
two voices: one in Arabic intended for Arab audiences and the second in English
directed at Westerners.
Based on public opinion polls conducted in late 2025, a large majority of
Palestinians share al-Ahmad's opposition to the disarmament of Hamas. Just
because many Palestinians might be enraged at Hamas does not mean they are ready
to live peacefully side-by-side with Israel.
What we are currently witnessing is an attempt to bring the PA back into the
Gaza Strip through the back door. If the PA does not consider Hamas a terror
organization and wants it to keep its weapons, what exactly is it going to do in
the Gaza Strip? Pay salaries to Hamas and its employees? Or perhaps serve as a
channel for transferring billions of dollars in aid to Hamas?
In light of al-Ahmad's statements, it is clear that the PA's return to the Gaza
Strip would only help Hamas and other terror groups maintain their political and
security control of the territory. Al-Ahmad is currently trying to convince
Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terror groups to join the PLO.
According to reports, that is why he recently met in Egypt with representatives
of the terror groups.
The PA wants to return to the Gaza Strip not to replace Hamas, but to join
forces with it.
Earlier this week, the office of UN Special Coordinator for Gaza Nikolay
Mladenov, who was appointed by the US as the Director-General of Trump's "Board
of Peace," revealed the establishment of a "Liaison Office" for the PA.
Pictured: Mladenov speaks at the "Board of Peace" meeting in Davos, Switzerland
on January 22, 2026. (Photo by Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)
Recently, there have been attempts to give Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority
(PA) a role in post-war management of the Gaza Strip -- along with Qatar, Turkey
and Pakistan, all Islamists and long-term adversaries of Israel.
Earlier this week, the office of UN Special Coordinator for Gaza Nikolay
Mladenov, who was appointed by the US as the Director-General of Trump's "Board
of Peace," revealed the establishment of a "Liaison Office" for the PA.
Mladenov seems to believe that the PA can play a positive role in the Gaza
Strip, even though polls published by the Palestinian Center for Policy and
Survey Research have consistently shown that more than 80% of Palestinians
believe it is corrupt.
According to Mladenov's office:
"The Liaison Office will provide an official and organized channel for
communication and coordination between the office of the UN Special Coordinator
and the Palestinian Authority, ensuring that correspondence is received and
transmitted through a clear institutional mechanism...
"The office of the UN Special Coordinator looks forward to working with the
liaison office to implement the twenty-point peace plan announced by President
Trump, in alignment with UN Security Council Resolution 2803 (2025), and to
build a brighter future for the people of Gaza and the entire region."
Unsurprisingly, Palestinian officials were quick to welcome Mladenov's
announcement: it whitewashes the PA and makes it appear as a legitimate and
credible party in post-war Gaza arrangements.
In a letter to Mladenov, the PA's No. 2, Hussein al-Sheikh, wrote:
"I am pleased to express our welcome of the statement issued by your Office
regarding the establishment of a Palestinian Authority Liaison Office and your
affirmation of the importance of this institutional framework for communication
and coordination. In this context, we wish to reaffirm that the contacts held
with you, as well as the ongoing consultations with Mr. Steve Witkoff, Mr. Jared
Kushner, and a number of partners, have all taken place within the framework of
ensuring the success of the efforts led by President Donald Trump and supporting
the political track aimed at achieving stability and peace."
Meanwhile, a senior Palestinian official closely associated with PA President
Mahmoud Abbas, Azzam al-Ahmad, also Secretary-General of the Executive Committee
of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), told the Egyptian newspaper Al-Shorouq,
in an interview published on February 23, that "Hamas is not a terrorist
organization and we reject its disarmament."
Al-Ahmad also rejected demands by the Trump administration that the PA implement
significant structural, financial, educational, and security reforms and end its
"Pay-for-Slay" program to reward Palestinians involved in terrorism as a
precondition for playing a role in the management of the Gaza Strip.
Both Fatah and the PLO, headed by Abbas, dominate the PA, which was established
in accordance with the 1993 Oslo Accord signed between Israel and the PLO. As
such, the PA is often labeled by some Israelis and Westerns as Israel's "peace
partner" due to its alleged readiness to make peace with Israel.
Al-Ahmad dismissed the demand that Hamas have no role in the Gaza Strip and said
the terror group was "part of the Palestinian national movement." He went on to
reject demands by the Trump Administration for the PA to implement reforms.
"All talk about disarming Hamas and labeling them a terrorist organization is
unacceptable to us," al-Ahmad announced.
"Hamas is not a terrorist organization. We have never considered them a
terrorist organization, and we always reject any decision issued by any
international institution or government to classify them as a terrorist
organization, as they are part of the Palestinian national fabric."
Hamas, incidentally, has been designated as a terrorist organization by several
countries and international bodies, including the US, the European Union, the
United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, in addition to Israel.
Al-Ahmad said the Palestinian leadership was opposed to any attempt to exclude
Hamas from participating in the management of the Gaza Strip:
"They don't want Hamas to have any role in the Gaza Strip, and we completely
reject this because Hamas is part of the Palestinian national movement."
Al-Ahmad also rejected demands by the Trump administration that the PA implement
significant structural, financial, educational, and security reforms and end its
"Pay-for-Slay" program to reward Palestinians involved in terrorism as a
precondition for playing a role in the management of the Gaza Strip.
"It is impossible to tamper with the [Palestinian] school curriculum, and we
will not allow any modifications," al-Ahmed stressed.
"The changes they are demanding include removing the word 'Palestine' and the
map of Palestine from the curriculum and prohibiting the display of the
Palestinian flag in textbooks. This is unacceptable. What they are calling for
is a contrived reform, and we tell them that we have more intelligent and
educated people than they do, and we have more scholars than they do, some of
whom are relied upon by America. Therefore, we believe that the main purpose of
these demands is simply to waste time."
The PA ruled the Gaza Strip from 1994 until 2007, when Hamas seized the entire
territory from the PA in a violent and bloody coup. Since 2007, the PA (together
with Fatah and the PLO) has been operating only in the West Bank, where Hamas
has no substantial political or military activities thanks to the presence there
of the Israel Defense Forces.
The PA, an extremely corrupt and unpopular regime, has indicated its eagerness
to return to the Gaza Strip to assist in the management of day-to-day affairs
and reconstruction after two years of a war that began on October 7, 2023, when
thousands of Hamas terrorists and other Palestinians invaded Israel and
murdered, wounded, tortured, mutilated and kidnapped thousands of Israelis and
foreign nationals.
The statements by al-Ahmad are proof that the PA leadership continues to talk in
two voices: one in Arabic intended for Arab audiences and the second in English
directed at Westerners.
To his credit, al-Ahmad, unlike many senior PA officials, does not mince words
when it comes to the true position of the Palestinian leadership.
When he says that Hamas is not a terror organization, he is reflecting the views
of the majority of Palestinians who, according to polls, continue to support
Hamas and its October 7 atrocities. Based on public opinion polls conducted in
late 2025, a large majority of Palestinians share al-Ahmad's opposition to the
disarmament of Hamas. Just because many Palestinians might be enraged at Hamas
does not mean they are ready to live peacefully side-by-side with Israel.
Al-Ahmad's remarks about rejecting the Trump administration's demands for
reforms in PA government institutions also show that the Palestinian leadership
has no intention of changing.
What we are currently witnessing is an attempt to bring the PA back into the
Gaza Strip through the back door. If the PA does not consider Hamas a terror
organization and wants it to keep its weapons, what exactly is it going to do in
the Gaza Strip? Pay salaries to Hamas and its employees? Or perhaps serve as a
channel for transferring billions of dollars in aid to Hamas?
In light of al-Ahmad's statements, it is clear that the PA's return to the Gaza
Strip would only help Hamas and other terror groups maintain their political and
security control of the territory. Al-Ahmad is currently trying to convince
Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terror groups to join the PLO.
According to reports, that is why he recently met in Egypt with representatives
of the terror groups.
The PA wants to return to the Gaza Strip not to replace Hamas, but to join
forces with it.
*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.
President Trump's Proliferating 'Board of War'...The PA
wants to return to the Gaza Strip not to replace Hamas, but to join forces with
it.
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/February 27, 20
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22312/gaza-board-of-war
Recently, there have been attempts to give Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority
(PA) a role in post-war management of the Gaza Strip -- along with Qatar, Turkey
and Pakistan, all Islamists and long-term adversaries of Israel.
Earlier this week, the office of UN Special Coordinator for Gaza Nikolay
Mladenov, who was appointed by the US as the Director-General of Trump's "Board
of Peace," revealed the establishment of a "Liaison Office" for the PA.
Mladenov seems to believe that the PA can play a positive role in the Gaza
Strip, even though polls published by the Palestinian Center for Policy and
Survey Research have consistently shown that more than 80% of Palestinians
believe it is corrupt.
Unsurprisingly, Palestinian officials were quick to welcome Mladenov's
announcement: it whitewashes the PA and makes it appear as a legitimate and
credible party in post-war Gaza arrangements.
Meanwhile, a senior Palestinian official closely associated with PA President
Mahmoud Abbas, Azzam al-Ahmad, also Secretary-General of the Executive Committee
of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), told the Egyptian newspaper Al-Shorouq,
in an interview published on February 23, that "Hamas is not a terrorist
organization and we reject its disarmament."
Al-Ahmad also rejected [other] demands by the Trump administration....
The statements by al-Ahmad are proof that the PA leadership continues to talk in
two voices: one in Arabic intended for Arab audiences and the second in English
directed at Westerners.
Based on public opinion polls conducted in late 2025, a large majority of
Palestinians share al-Ahmad's opposition to the disarmament of Hamas. Just
because many Palestinians might be enraged at Hamas does not mean they are ready
to live peacefully side-by-side with Israel.
What we are currently witnessing is an attempt to bring the PA back into the
Gaza Strip through the back door. If the PA does not consider Hamas a terror
organization and wants it to keep its weapons, what exactly is it going to do in
the Gaza Strip? Pay salaries to Hamas and its employees? Or perhaps serve as a
channel for transferring billions of dollars in aid to Hamas?
In light of al-Ahmad's statements, it is clear that the PA's return to the Gaza
Strip would only help Hamas and other terror groups maintain their political and
security control of the territory. Al-Ahmad is currently trying to convince
Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terror groups to join the PLO.
According to reports, that is why he recently met in Egypt with representatives
of the terror groups.
The PA wants to return to the Gaza Strip not to replace Hamas, but to join
forces with it.
Earlier this week, the office of UN Special Coordinator for Gaza Nikolay
Mladenov, who was appointed by the US as the Director-General of Trump's "Board
of Peace," revealed the establishment of a "Liaison Office" for the PA.
Pictured: Mladenov speaks at the "Board of Peace" meeting in Davos, Switzerland
on January 22, 2026. (Photo by Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)
Recently, there have been attempts to give Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority
(PA) a role in post-war management of the Gaza Strip -- along with Qatar, Turkey
and Pakistan, all Islamists and long-term adversaries of Israel.
Earlier this week, the office of UN Special Coordinator for Gaza Nikolay
Mladenov, who was appointed by the US as the Director-General of Trump's "Board
of Peace," revealed the establishment of a "Liaison Office" for the PA.
Mladenov seems to believe that the PA can play a positive role in the Gaza
Strip, even though polls published by the Palestinian Center for Policy and
Survey Research have consistently shown that more than 80% of Palestinians
believe it is corrupt.
According to Mladenov's office:
"The Liaison Office will provide an official and organized channel for
communication and coordination between the office of the UN Special Coordinator
and the Palestinian Authority, ensuring that correspondence is received and
transmitted through a clear institutional mechanism...
"The office of the UN Special Coordinator looks forward to working with the
liaison office to implement the twenty-point peace plan announced by President
Trump, in alignment with UN Security Council Resolution 2803 (2025), and to
build a brighter future for the people of Gaza and the entire region."
Unsurprisingly, Palestinian officials were quick to welcome Mladenov's
announcement: it whitewashes the PA and makes it appear as a legitimate and
credible party in post-war Gaza arrangements.
In a letter to Mladenov, the PA's No. 2, Hussein al-Sheikh, wrote:
"I am pleased to express our welcome of the statement issued by your Office
regarding the establishment of a Palestinian Authority Liaison Office and your
affirmation of the importance of this institutional framework for communication
and coordination. In this context, we wish to reaffirm that the contacts held
with you, as well as the ongoing consultations with Mr. Steve Witkoff, Mr. Jared
Kushner, and a number of partners, have all taken place within the framework of
ensuring the success of the efforts led by President Donald Trump and supporting
the political track aimed at achieving stability and peace."
Meanwhile, a senior Palestinian official closely associated with PA President
Mahmoud Abbas, Azzam al-Ahmad, also Secretary-General of the Executive Committee
of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), told the Egyptian newspaper Al-Shorouq,
in an interview published on February 23, that "Hamas is not a terrorist
organization and we reject its disarmament."
Al-Ahmad also rejected demands by the Trump administration that the PA implement
significant structural, financial, educational, and security reforms and end its
"Pay-for-Slay" program to reward Palestinians involved in terrorism as a
precondition for playing a role in the management of the Gaza Strip.
Both Fatah and the PLO, headed by Abbas, dominate the PA, which was established
in accordance with the 1993 Oslo Accord signed between Israel and the PLO. As
such, the PA is often labeled by some Israelis and Westerns as Israel's "peace
partner" due to its alleged readiness to make peace with Israel.
Al-Ahmad dismissed the demand that Hamas have no role in the Gaza Strip and said
the terror group was "part of the Palestinian national movement." He went on to
reject demands by the Trump Administration for the PA to implement reforms.
"All talk about disarming Hamas and labeling them a terrorist organization is
unacceptable to us," al-Ahmad announced.
"Hamas is not a terrorist organization. We have never considered them a
terrorist organization, and we always reject any decision issued by any
international institution or government to classify them as a terrorist
organization, as they are part of the Palestinian national fabric."
Hamas, incidentally, has been designated as a terrorist organization by several
countries and international bodies, including the US, the European Union, the
United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, in addition to Israel.
Al-Ahmad said the Palestinian leadership was opposed to any attempt to exclude
Hamas from participating in the management of the Gaza Strip:
"They don't want Hamas to have any role in the Gaza Strip, and we completely
reject this because Hamas is part of the Palestinian national movement."
Al-Ahmad also rejected demands by the Trump administration that the PA implement
significant structural, financial, educational, and security reforms and end its
"Pay-for-Slay" program to reward Palestinians involved in terrorism as a
precondition for playing a role in the management of the Gaza Strip.
"It is impossible to tamper with the [Palestinian] school curriculum, and we
will not allow any modifications," al-Ahmed stressed.
"The changes they are demanding include removing the word 'Palestine' and the
map of Palestine from the curriculum and prohibiting the display of the
Palestinian flag in textbooks. This is unacceptable. What they are calling for
is a contrived reform, and we tell them that we have more intelligent and
educated people than they do, and we have more scholars than they do, some of
whom are relied upon by America. Therefore, we believe that the main purpose of
these demands is simply to waste time."
The PA ruled the Gaza Strip from 1994 until 2007, when Hamas seized the entire
territory from the PA in a violent and bloody coup. Since 2007, the PA (together
with Fatah and the PLO) has been operating only in the West Bank, where Hamas
has no substantial political or military activities thanks to the presence there
of the Israel Defense Forces.
The PA, an extremely corrupt and unpopular regime, has indicated its eagerness
to return to the Gaza Strip to assist in the management of day-to-day affairs
and reconstruction after two years of a war that began on October 7, 2023, when
thousands of Hamas terrorists and other Palestinians invaded Israel and
murdered, wounded, tortured, mutilated and kidnapped thousands of Israelis and
foreign nationals.
The statements by al-Ahmad are proof that the PA leadership continues to talk in
two voices: one in Arabic intended for Arab audiences and the second in English
directed at Westerners.
To his credit, al-Ahmad, unlike many senior PA officials, does not mince words
when it comes to the true position of the Palestinian leadership.
When he says that Hamas is not a terror organization, he is reflecting the views
of the majority of Palestinians who, according to polls, continue to support
Hamas and its October 7 atrocities. Based on public opinion polls conducted in
late 2025, a large majority of Palestinians share al-Ahmad's opposition to the
disarmament of Hamas. Just because many Palestinians might be enraged at Hamas
does not mean they are ready to live peacefully side-by-side with Israel.
Al-Ahmad's remarks about rejecting the Trump administration's demands for
reforms in PA government institutions also show that the Palestinian leadership
has no intention of changing.
What we are currently witnessing is an attempt to bring the PA back into the
Gaza Strip through the back door. If the PA does not consider Hamas a terror
organization and wants it to keep its weapons, what exactly is it going to do in
the Gaza Strip? Pay salaries to Hamas and its employees? Or perhaps serve as a
channel for transferring billions of dollars in aid to Hamas?
In light of al-Ahmad's statements, it is clear that the PA's return to the Gaza
Strip would only help Hamas and other terror groups maintain their political and
security control of the territory. Al-Ahmad is currently trying to convince
Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terror groups to join the PLO.
According to reports, that is why he recently met in Egypt with representatives
of the terror groups.
The PA wants to return to the Gaza Strip not to replace Hamas, but to join
forces with it.
*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.
The Middle East: A Stack of Fake Narratives, An Attempted Fake 'Palestinian
State' and the Real Threat to the West
Guy Millière/Gatestone Institute/February 27/2026
In January, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk spoke of the
"unspeakable atrocities" suffered by millions of Jews, but added that the
atrocities had also been suffered by "members of other minorities." Not quite.
Although other minorities were indeed persecuted by the Nazis, none of them
faced attempted extermination. Speaking in this way trivializes the Holocaust
and makes it comparable to other crimes.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres not only also trivialized the Holocaust;
he tried to claim that the United Nations fights antisemitism. If only! The
Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs wrote in 2005 that the UN "has
become the leading global purveyor of anti-Semitism."
Italian legal scholar Francesca Albanese, the UN's "Special Rapporteur on the
Occupied Palestinian Territories" (her title already indicates a stance hostile
to Israel), has made countless antisemitic remarks. Nevertheless, in 2025, she
was kept in her position for an additional three years.
Despite a budget crisis at the UN, roughly $100 million a year is allocated just
to target Israel, along with a UN commission of inquiry that "promotes genocide
against Jews."
Historically, a "Palestinian people" – as opposed to various Arabs who happened
to be living in the area at the time along with various Jews, Christians,
Europeans and others -- was totally fabricated. There is simply no trace of a
"Palestinian people" or a "national liberation struggle" before 1964.
In the Qur'an, Israel and Israelites are mentioned 43 times, Palestine and
Palestinians zero. Moreover, the Qur'an itself states that the Land of Israel
belongs to the Children of Israel:
"And remember when Moses said to his people, 'O my people! Remember Allah's
favors upon you when He raised prophets from among you, made you sovereign, and
gave you what He had never given anyone in the world. O my people! Enter the
Holy Land which Allah has destined for you ˹to enter˺. And do not turn back or
else you will become losers." — Quran 5:20–21 (Al-Mā'idah)
"And We said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the land.'" — Quran
17:104 (Al-Isrā').
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is
only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our
Arab unity. In reality, today there is no difference between Jordanians,
Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do
we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national
interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to
oppose Zionism." — Zuheir Mohsen, a member of the PLO Executive Committee, in
1977.
"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders,
cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can
undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment
we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to
unite Palestine and Jordan." — Zuheir Mohsen, 1977.
Palestinian terrorism became treated as acceptable terrorism. The need to create
a Palestinian state to get the better of those overly successful, upstart Jews
emerged as an imperative. Consequently, it also became possible to say that the
Holocaust was just one crime among others; that Jews, too, could commit
atrocious crimes. For the Europeans, this manufactured overhaul of the facts may
have come as a relief: they could now tell themselves that if the Jews were as
bad as the Nazis, then murdering Jews was perhaps not such a terrible
undertaking.
Palestinian terrorism became treated as acceptable terrorism. The need to create
a Palestinian state to get the better of those successful, upstart Jews emerged
as an imperative.
Particularly unacceptable to many people is the Israelis refusing to sit back
and let themselves be wiped out. All the same, the Israelis would warn Gazans to
evacuate in advance of impending military strikes, with large numbers of
leaflets, text messages and phone calls in Arabic, and the IDF even organized
mass evacuations to safe zones. If Palestinians tried to leave, their own
leaders would shoot them. The international community called these Israeli
efforts to save Palestinian lives a "genocide."
"If Israel is attempting genocide, they are really, really bad at it." — US
Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee. That Israel was fighting for its survival
against a terrorist organization that itself has explicitly genocidal aims was
painstakingly ignored.
By preserving the memory of slavery in Egypt at the time of the pharaohs nearly
4,000 years ago, the memory of the Holocaust, and the many persecutions in
between, Israeli Jews maintain their determination not just to fight and
survive, but to excel.
For Westerners, Jew-hate, sadly, is just a distraction, a means of denial to
keep them from seeing the real threat to their existence: the hijrah, Muslim
migration to the West to make it Islamic.
For Westerners, Jew-hate, sadly, is just a distraction, a means of denial to
keep them from seeing the real threat to their existence: the hijrah, Muslim
migration to the West to make it Islamic. (AI image generated by Google Gemini)
General Dwight D. Eisenhower, when he liberated Europe's concentration camps,
insisted that journalists and photographers document the atrocities immediately,
or, he predicted, the world would soon say they had never actually happened. In
a few years from now, the last survivors of the Holocaust will have disappeared,
and the memory of what happened will fade even further. The Holocaust was
infinitely more than an attack on "dignity and human rights." It was a unique
crime: the attempt at the total extermination of an entire people by industrial
means in supposedly civilized countries of the West.
In January, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk spoke of the
"unspeakable atrocities" suffered by millions of Jews, but added that the
atrocities had also been suffered by "members of other minorities." Not quite.
Although other minorities were indeed persecuted by the Nazis, none of them
faced attempted extermination. Speaking in this way trivializes the Holocaust
and makes it comparable to other crimes.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres not only also trivialized the Holocaust;
he tried to claim that the United Nations fights antisemitism. If only! The
Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs wrote in 2005 that the UN "has
become the leading global purveyor of anti-Semitism." Italian legal scholar
Francesca Albanese, the UN's "Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian
Territories" (her title already indicates a stance hostile to Israel), has made
countless antisemitic remarks. Nevertheless, in 2025, she was kept in her
position for an additional three years. South African jurist Navi Pillay, UN
High Commissioner for Human Rights from 2008 to 2014, is also prone to
antisemitic remarks, and in September 2025 she submitted to the Human Rights
Council a report full of lies and overflowing with hatred towards Israel.The
United Nations now has a long history marked by the spread of antisemitic
rhetoric, antisemitic acts, and defamatory and hateful accusations against
Israel. Despite a budget crisis at the UN, roughly $100 million a year is
allocated just to target Israel, along with a UN commission of inquiry that
"promotes genocide against Jews."
Unfortunately, the trivialization of the Holocaust and the pretense of fighting
antisemitism while simultaneously fueling it through the expression of hateful
lies against Israel exist in the Western world far beyond the UN, and the
reactions observed earlier this year confirmed that. In the United States,
President Donald J. Trump published an honest, dignified message, writing:
"Today, we pay respect to the blessed memories of the millions of Jewish people
who were murdered at the hands of the Nazi Regime and its collaborators during
the Holocaust..."
Vice President J.D. Vance, however, published a message in which neither the
word "Jewish" nor the word "Nazi" appears:
"Today we remember the millions of lives lost during the Holocaust, the millions
of stories of individual bravery and heroism, and one of the enduring lessons of
one of the darkest chapters in human history: that while humans create beautiful
things and are full of compassion, we're also capable of unspeakable brutality.
And we promise never again to go down the darkest path." That was almost right
up there with Congresswoman Ilhan Omar's epic remark about the 9/11 jihadists
attacks on the US: "Some people did something."
Europe was even worse. Some presidents and prime ministers, not all, published
statements on Holocaust Remembrance Day, January 27, that were minimalist and
trivialized the Holocaust by associating it with other crimes, just as Türk and
Guterres had done. Many people who claim to be fighting antisemitism constantly
criticize Israel harshly and falsely, thus inciting hatred of Israel, which, as
Israel is a Jewish state, fuels the very antisemitism they claim to be fighting.
Some, such as Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and Irish Prime Minister
Micheál Martin, have even accused Israel of genocide.
While most mainstream American media outlets covered Holocaust Remembrance Day,
most major European media outlets did not. These same media outlets, which
regularly publish hateful and false articles about Israel, thereby fueling
antisemitism, also speak of the Holocaust as if it had been just a ho-hum crime,
similar to other crimes
Why? Well, what happened in the Western world after 1945?
Western leaders, particularly European leaders, understandably did not talk
about the Holocaust and seemed desperate to forget it. Most of the Jews sent to
the death camps did not survive. The testimonies of those who did were for years
ignored. When Primo Levi, an Italian survivor of Auschwitz, wrote If This Is a
Man in 1947, no major Italian publishing house would accept it. After a small
publisher finally did, the book sold roughly a thousand copies. When Elie
Wiesel, another Auschwitz survivor and later Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, wrote
Night in 1958, all the most prominent French publishers rejected it. Finally, it
also was finally accepted by a small publishing company; hardly any copies were
sold.
After World War II, 24 leaders of Nazi Germany were put on trial for war crimes,
crimes against humanity and mass murder. They were tried and sentenced in
Nuremberg in 1945-46. Even though the industrial-scale murder of millions of
Jews was mentioned, it was never the center of attention.
After the trial, silence surrounding the Holocaust quickly followed, as if the
page could not be turned fast enough on it. When the trial of SS officer Adolf
Eichmann in 1961 brought the subject back into the spotlight, it seemed that
talking about the Holocaust would finally become possible, but after the
interest generated by the trial's opening, the major Western media turned to
other topics, such as the Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin's space flight or the
Cuban Missile Crisis.
It was only after the broadcast of Marvin Chomsky's Holocaust television
miniseries in 1978 that the Holocaust became a widely discussed topic. Millions
of Americans and millions of Europeans watched the series. Those Europeans who
did not want to confront this chapter of European history were forced to do so.
Claude Lanzmann's documentary film Shoah, released in 1985 and broadcast
throughout Europe, also showed the horror of the Holocaust based on documents
and testimonies damning for the Nazis and everyone who collaborated with them.
Levi's If This Is a Man and Wiesel's Night began to be read more widely and
considered iconic.
In 2005 -- 60 years after the Holocaust -- the Shoah Memorial was created in
Paris; the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe erected in Berlin, and other
prominent memorials started being erected all over Europe. It was also in 2005
that International Holocaust Remembrance Day was instituted by the United
Nations. The concept of the "duty of remembrance" emerged.
And faded fast.
The fabricated "Palestinian cause," on the horizon for years, began permeating
the minds of many Westerners. Hatred of the Jew had resurfaced in a new guise.
For many years, the commitment of Arab Muslim leaders to destroy Israel and
murder Israeli Jews had not attracted the attention of the Western world. The
survival of Israel -- born in 1948 and attacked by five better-equipped Arab
armies -- even aroused astonishment and sometimes admiration in the West.
Jew-hate existed – as it has since the time of the pharaohs -- but was not
expressed in polite society. In Europe, a feeling of shame prevailed, possibly
even among some antisemites.
The creation of the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1964 changed
everything. The will of Arab Muslim leaders to destroy Israel and murder Israeli
Jews was replaced by the new narrative that Israel had monstrously dispossessed
a "small, oppressed people" of all its rights and that this "people" was waging
a supposedly justified "national liberation struggle" against an imperialist,
predatory, and criminal state: Israel. Historically, a "Palestinian people" – as
opposed to various Arabs who happened to be living in the area at the time along
with various Jews, Christians, Europeans and others -- was totally fabricated.
There is simply no trace of a "Palestinian people" or a "national liberation
struggle" before 1964.
In the year 135, Roman Emperor Hadrian renamed Judea "Syria Palaestina" in an
attempt to erase any connection of Jews to their land. After the fall of the
Ottoman Empire, the area which was never called "Palestine" by its Ottoman
rulers, was renamed "the British Mandate for Palestine." It was populated mainly
by assorted Muslims, Christians and Jews and lasted until Israel's independence
in 1948. In the Qur'an, Israel and Israelites are mentioned 43 times, Palestine
and Palestinians zero. Moreover, the Qur'an itself states that the Land of
Israel belongs to the Children of Israel:
"And remember when Moses said to his people, 'O my people! Remember Allah's
favors upon you when He raised prophets from among you, made you sovereign, and
gave you what He had never given anyone in the world. O my people! Enter the
Holy Land which Allah has destined for you ˹to enter˺. And do not turn back or
else you will become losers." - Quran 5:20–21 (Al-Mā'idah)
"And We said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the land.'" - Quran
17:104 (Al-Isrā')
The late Zuheir Mohsen, a member of the PLO Executive Committee, in 1977 said:
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is
only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our
Arab unity. In reality, today there is no difference between Jordanians,
Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do
we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national
interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to
oppose Zionism.
"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders,
cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can
undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment
we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to
unite Palestine and Jordan."
Hating Israel and Israeli Jews became possible for those who subscribe to this
concocted revision of history. The use of the term Nakba ("catastrophe") to
describe the birth of Israel as a moment of ethnic cleansing was tacked on, and
the Nakba was presented as a genocidal act similar to the Holocaust. The actions
of the Israeli army were compared to the actions of Nazi Germany's army. For
those who subscribed to that invented narrative, hatred of Israel and Israeli
Jews could now be accompanied by accusations of ethnic cleansing, genocide, and
Nazi behavior.
Consequently, it also became possible to say that the Holocaust was just one
crime among others; that Jews, too, could commit atrocious crimes. For
Europeans, this manufactured overhaul of the facts may have come as a relief:
they could now tell themselves that if the Jews were as bad as the Nazis or
worse, then murdering Jews was perhaps not such a terrible undertaking.
Organizations supporting the "small, oppressed Palestinian people" sprang up
throughout the West to spread the fake news, the number of those who subscribe
to it has grown —possibly too convenient a way to hate Jews to pass up — and
journalists and political leaders, especially those with significant Muslim
voting blocs, have run with it. Palestinian terrorism became treated as
acceptable terrorism. The need to create a Palestinian state to get the better
of those successful, upstart Jews emerged as an imperative.
The need to remember the Holocaust disappeared. One could still admire and pay
tribute to dead Jews while simultaneously hating living Jews -- Jews in Israel
and Jews everywhere.
When the terrorist group Hamas invaded Israel on October 7, 2023, murdering
1,200 Jews and others, in the eyes of many in the West, since those Jews were
Israeli they were not all that innocent. Whatever outrage there was over the
massacre was short-lived, if that. Protests against Israel began the same day as
the massacre. Any atrocities the Palestinians had committed were denied. Only
when Israel released images showing the savagery of the murderers, did the
denials slowly and temporarily diminish.
Particularly unacceptable to many people is the Israelis refusing to sit back
and let themselves be wiped out. All the same, the Israelis would warn Gazans to
evacuate in advance of impending military strikes, with large numbers of
leaflets, text messages and phone calls in Arabic, and the IDF even organized
mass evacuations to safe zones. If Palestinians tried to leave, their own
leaders would shoot them. The international community called these Israeli
efforts to save Palestinian lives a "genocide."
"If Israel is attempting genocide," US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee
remarked, "they are really, really bad at it." Although a "genocide" was
obviously not taking place, the thought that it could happen was, it seems, too
good to give up. Accusations of genocide against Israel multiplied, resembling
the deranged blood libels in medieval Europe, in which Jews were accused of
killing Christian children to bake matzah with their blood.
That Israel was fighting for its survival against a terrorist organization that
itself has explicitly genocidal aims was painstakingly ignored.
Antisemitism began surging again throughout the Western world.
The prevailing narrative now is that Jews do not have the right to say that they
are, or ever have been, victims. The US is the only country in the Western world
where sympathy for Israel remains high: 77% of Americans across all age groups
support Israel over Hamas. In Europe, sympathy for Israel and the memory of the
Holocaust are again fading fast. The increasing presence of a Muslim population,
who as polls show, loathe Israel and Jews, is not a help. When Holocaust
remembrance ceremonies are organized in Europe, they attract almost exclusively
Jews. Anti-Israel demonstrations, by contrast, attract huge crowds, along with
calls for the destruction of Israel and hatred of Jews.
Jews continue to flee Europe, with many leaving for Israel. They know that
Israel is a country disliked throughout Europe and surrounded by Muslim hatred,
but that Israel offers them a sanctuary. In Israel, the memory of the Holocaust
does not fade. Yad Vashem, the national Holocaust memorial that includes an
outsized room filled with the shoes of the murdered, was established in 1953,
five decades before Holocaust memorials were created in Europe.
Every year since 1951, Holocaust Remembrance Day is observed: sirens sound for
two minutes, and Israelis stand still in remembrance of the victims.
By preserving the memory of slavery in Egypt at the time of the pharaohs nearly
4,000 years ago, the memory of the Holocaust, and the many persecutions in
between, Israeli Jews maintain their determination not just to fight and
survive, but to excel.
Europeans, by allowing the oldest hatred to resurface, based on a fabricated
Palestinian history, and by currying favor with a growing Muslim population
marked by a seeming desire to Islamize their new European home, appear to be
embarking on a very dark path.
Anti-Semitic hatred led entire populations in Europe to crimes so huge that they
are still unable to confront them. If they can instead cast Jews today as Nazis,
it lets them believe what they did to the Jews was not so terrible, after all.
"The more the West tries to erase the Jews," wrote the journalist Melanie
Phillips last month, "the clearer its suicide note becomes for the erasure of
its own civilization." For Westerners, Jew-hate, sadly, is just a distraction, a
means of denial to keep them from seeing the real threat to their existence: the
hijrah, Muslim migration to the West to make it Islamic.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22304/palestinians-fake-narratives
*Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27
books on France and Europe.
© 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.
X Platform Selected twittes for 27/2026