English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For July 09/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.july09.26.htm

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

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

Elias Bejjani/Click on the below link to subscribe to my youtube channel
الياس بجاني/اضغط على الرابط في أسفل للإشتراك في موقعي ع اليوتيوب
https://www.youtube.com/@eliasbejjani8036

Bible Quotations For today
 You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbour as yourself.’
Luke 10/25-28: "Just then a lawyer stood up to test Jesus. ‘Teacher,’ he said, ‘what must I do to inherit eternal life?’ He said to him, ‘What is written in the law? What do you read there?’ He answered, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbour as yourself.’And he said to him, ‘You have given the right answer; do this, and you will live.

Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 08-09 July/2026
Walid Jumblatt’s stance on the framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel is a shameful and dhimmitude capitulation to the terrorism of Berri and Hezbollah/Elias Bejjani/July 08/2026
Khamenei's Funeral Turned Quranic Verses into Diplomatic Tools Serving Iran's Terrorist, Sectarian, and Expansionist Project/Elias Bejjani/July 06/2026
Conscience in Faith Concepts: The Divine Voice Dwelling in Man/Elias Bejjani/July 05/2025
Trump thinks Israel is 'going to' withdraw from south Lebanon
It's official: Aoun to visit White House on July 21
Lebanon’s Aoun says expects positive outcomes from Trump meeting
Aoun says majority of Lebanese including Shiites support Lebanon-Israel talks
Israel shells strategic Ali al-Taher hill ahead of Rome talks
Lebanon agrees to take part in Rome talks after guaranteeing US participation
Lebanon to take part in Rome talks only if Israel withdraws from two 'pilot zones'
Diplomatic source clarifies to LBCI Washington's proposal of moving Lebanon-Israel talks to Rome
Lebanon heads into a busy July of diplomacy with a Trump meeting and Rome talks with Israel
Sami Gemayel to Hezbollah: The very least you should do is shut up
Qassem: Only solution is Israeli withdrawal, army deployment south of Litani
Riad Salameh's hearing postponed
Jumblat slams 'inexperienced' and 'power-hungry' officials who agreed Israel deal
Bassil wants Hezbollah to 'submit to state', slams 'cover' granted to Israel
Lebanese judiciary approves release of Fadl Shaker
Regional rivalries expand across multiple fronts: Israel faces growing tensions with Turkey
The Shiites Duo “Discovers” the Patriotism of Southern Christians: A Final Stance?!/Lara Yazbek/Al-Markazia/July 8, 2026
Khamenei and Lebanon: When a Corpse Becomes an Attempt to Whitewash a State-Hijacking Project/Mehdi Reda/Janoubia/July 8, 2026
Lebanon and Syria: The Fate of Geopolitics/Rafiq Khoury/Nidaa Al Watan/July 8, 2026

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published  on 08-09 July/2026
Second round of US strikes against Iran underway: CENTCOM
US forces launch new strikes on Iran
Eight Iran military personnel killed in US strikes: State media
Trump on Iran: US will probably hit them again Wednesday night
US launches more strikes on Iran with blasts reported in south of country
Eight Iranian army members killed in US attacks on southern parts of Iran
Iran says FM called Qatari PM after military flare-up with US
Mediator Pakistan urges Iran and US to exercise restraint, uphold MoU commitments
Iran attacks Kuwait, Bahrain after renewed US tension
What routes are vessels using to cross the Strait of Hormuz?
Trump informs Congress of intent to remove Syria from state sponsor of terror list
Iraq agrees to US demands to halt dollar flows to Iran-backed militias: Report
Turkey in line to receive six F-35 jets if Trump unblocks sale
Trump says US to license Ukraine to make Patriots, says Kyiv, Moscow want war settled
Arab League chief says blocked by Israel from visiting West Bank
Trump says at NATO summit he has ordered cutoff of US trade with Spain

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published  on 08-09 July/2026
Lebanon and the Enforced Decisiveness Before It Is Too Late/Colonel Charbel Barakat/July 08/2026
Jihadists Look to Kashmir, Kashmiris Look Away/Anna Mahjar-Barducci/Gatestone Institute/July 08/2026
Iraq: The Talk of Weapons and Money/Rashid Al-Khayoun/Al-Ittihad/July 8, 2026
Has the “agreement” become a “ride” to topple the state?/Abdul Wahab Badrakhan/Al-Nahar/July 8, 2026
Disagreements and a Lack of a Reference Point: An Iranian Political Crisis Erupts After the Funeral?!/Laura Yamin/Al-Markazia/July 8, 2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on 08 July

Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published  on 08-09 July/2026
Walid Jumblatt’s stance on the framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel is a shameful and dhimmitude capitulation to the terrorism of Berri and Hezbollah
Elias Bejjani/July 08/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/155776/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmpz6yGfjUA
Walid Jumblatt may be in need of psychological treatment, as he lives in a bygone era of Lebanese history that will never return. He remains a prisoner of the “worn-out” culture and mentality of the Lebanese, anti-peace, jihadist, and hypocritically Arabist “National Movement.” He has been and continues to be submerged in a culture of hatred, animosity, acrobatics, arrogance, and deception. Ever since he inherited the legacy of his father—who was assassinated by the Hafez al-Assad regime—he has humbly accepted working against the Lebanese entity, state, norms, coexistence, and diverse social segments under the umbrella of the so called “National Movement.” For this reason, he wore the Arafat-era terrorist, jihadist, and Arabist keffiyeh, alongside his friend Nabih Berri and the leftist faction that hates even itself, and he subserviently joined the criminal Assad regime that openly assassinated his father.
His positions are chameleon-like, with a hundred different colors, and cannot be understood outside the culture and mentality of opportunism, dhimmitude, personal agendas, and self-interest. Because he is a captive of feudal and arrogant thinking, he often begins his speeches by saying, “I have agreed with Taymour,” as if the country belongs to him and his son Taymour, and that they are the ones who decide for the Druze community in particular, and for the Lebanese people in general.
He has become addicted to—or rather, inherited—a worn-out culture that has become a thing of the past. Consequently, Lebanon will not see any positive change as long as he, his partner in corruption and decadence Nabih Berri, Hezbollah, and the majority of local political parties’ owners and their deep state remain in control of all state institutions.
As for the stupidity, ignorance, and sterility of the thought of those sycophantic politicians and journalists who applaud the “intelligence” and “vision” of Walid Jumblatt… words fail to describe it.
In this narcissistic context, Jumblatt’s stance on the framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel, sponsored by the United States, is the height of stupidity, opportunism, lack of vision, and hostility toward Lebanon and the Lebanese people. This disgraceful position was expressed yesterday in a memorandum he presented to the Druze Religious Council on July 07, 2026, which stated: “The framework agreement is not a tripartite agreement, but a unilateral one dictated by Israel and the United States, which is not a guarantor power to be relied upon.” “Israel dictated this agreement to a Lebanese team—both abroad and inside—with limited experience in law and diplomacy, along with some bureaucrats who met with the Baabda and Saray (PM headquarter) groups.” “I supported negotiation in principle, but not to arrive at this agreement or framework, which will not lead to a ceasefire.” He stated that “talking about peace with Israel is impossible,” citing the words of Prince Turki al-Faisal, whom he described as “very important,” regarding the policy of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel.
He said, “Let us abandon the word ‘peace’ out of respect for ourselves and history,” pointing out that “the term ‘Zionist enemy,’ which we have not heard from some in the country, was mentioned in the statement that condemned the ongoing and persistent Zionist aggression.” He considered that “the framework memorandum has overthrown all the foundations of the Taif Agreement, which is a very dangerous matter,” noting that “since the 1949 Armistice Agreement, through to the Taif Agreement and all international resolutions, a withdrawal from the South were mentioned, except in this treaty and this dictate.” He added, “This is what we have reached when the fate of the country is handed over to groups with no experience in international politics, whose only concern is power.” Jumblatt addressed the mayors in the South, calling for “rejecting calls to join Israel and showing solidarity with our people in the South.”
To begin with, any stances, regardless of their nature, content, or level, and any narative—whether negative or positive—taken by Walid Jumblatt have no value, weight, or credibility. The saying we use in the mountains applies to him 100%: “His word is not to be relied upon.”
The disaster in Lebanon with Jumblatt, and other political merchants, is that they are a group of hypocrites, frauds, opportunists who bow to the power, switch jackets, change hats, and are defined by defeatism and surrender. With them, we can only reap defeats, disasters, poverty, and misery.
If free people everywhere in the world had accepted their submissive and prostrate logic, nations would never have been liberated, democracy would not have spread, and there would be no human rights charters or United Nations.
Walid Jumblatt specifically is a strange and peculiar creature, and one of the most dangerous politicians to Lebanon in general, and to his own Druze community in particular, because he permits for himself whatever suits his personal interests, rather than what is in the interest of his sect and the homeland. Anyone who looks back at his frightening chameleon-like past and his series of fluctuations and betrayals since entering politics sees that he is opportunistic, power-seeking, inconsistent, and narcissistic. He has no permanent friendship with anyone, and he has no problem with swallowing his words at any time and replacing them with others, always under the slogan: “One hour of abandonment and one hour of manifestation.”
He fought the Lebanese using the Palestinians, the Syrians, Gaddafi, Nasserism, and Saddam Hussein—every infiltrator, invader, and occupier—and then turned against them the moment their strength waned.
He exploited the March 14 alliance, then betrayed it and the Cedar Revolution. He is now surrendering to Hezbollah’s weapons and subserviently begging for the approval of Berri and Hezbollah.
Wisdom dictates that Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf states should stop providing him with money. And in short, the man is a major Lebanese political disaster, and he is always prepared to burn Lebanon and the world for the sake of his own interests. Ultimately, containing the evil and danger of Walid Jumblatt lies in keeping him strictly in the category of “neither friend nor foe,” and keeping him in front of us, not behind us or on the side.
The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
Author’s Email: Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website: https://eliasbejjaninews.com

Khamenei's Funeral Turned Quranic Verses into Diplomatic Tools Serving Iran's Terrorist, Sectarian, and Expansionist Project
Elias Bejjani/July 06/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/155706/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuVErvArXao
Woe to you, destroyer, you who have not been destroyed! Woe to you, betrayer, you who have not been betrayed! When you stop destroying, you will be destroyed; when you stop betraying, you will be betrayed.(Isaiah 33:01)
The funeral of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was not merely a farewell ceremony for a man who ruled Iran for decades. Rather, it was a massive political and ideological display that once again exposed the essence of Iran's terrorist regime, which uses religion to serve a dictatorial authority and exploits religious texts to justify influence, expansion, and domination.
In reality, Khamenei was not a religious symbol or a spiritual authority. He was the head of a criminal and terrorist regime responsible for decades of internal repression against the Iranian people, foreign interference, and the export of the mullahs’ revolutionary project based on the doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih. During his rule, Iranians were subjected to repeated waves of killings, arrests, persecution, impoverishment, displacement, humiliation, and isolation, while the country's wealth was squandered on wars, militias, terrorism, Shiite proselytization, and expansionist projects stretching from Lebanon to Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Gaza.
Therefore, the image that Iran's rulers attempted to present as a popular referendum on Khamenei's popularity does not change the fact that millions of Iranians view his legacy very differently—as a legacy of repression, poverty, international isolation, and the squandering of the nation's resources.
Iran's Quranic Diplomacy
The most striking aspect of the funeral ceremonies was not the crowds or the foreign delegations, but what can be described as "Quranic diplomacy," whereby a specific Quranic verse was assigned to each official or political delegation attending the funeral.
The issue was not the recitation of the Quran itself, but the transformation of Quranic verses into political messages carrying meanings of endorsement, classification, criticism, or praise depending on each delegation's position toward Iran's regional project.
First: The Saudi Delegation
The following verse was recited:
"There has already been for you a sign in the two armies that met in battle: one fighting in the cause of Allah and the other disbelieving." (Quran 3:13)
From a political perspective, this verse speaks of a confrontation between believers and unbelievers. Many therefore viewed its selection during the reception of the Saudi delegation as intentional and politically insulting, suggesting an ideological and moral classification of the other side.
If this interpretation is correct, then the Iranian regime used a Quranic text to send a negative and offensive political message to a major Arab and Islamic country officially participating in the event.
Second: The Hamas Delegation
The following verse was recited:
"Among the believers are men who have been true to their covenant with Allah..." (Quran 33:23)
This verse speaks of loyalty, steadfastness, and sacrifice. Politically, it appeared to be a direct tribute to Hamas, its leaders, and its members, while reaffirming its place within the Iranian axis.
Third: Hezbollah's Delegation
The following verse was recited:
"Whoever takes Allah, His Messenger, and the believers as allies, then indeed the Party of Allah will be victorious." (Quran 5:56)
Here, the message required little interpretation. The appearance of the phrase "Party of Allah" (Hezbollah) in the verse made its selection a direct declaration of solidarity with the Lebanese group that represents one of Iran's most important political and military arms outside its borders.
It was clear that the mullahs' regime intended through this verse to reaffirm its commitment to the expansionist and sectarian project it built in Lebanon through Hezbollah, which the author views as an Iranian army made up of Lebanese mercenaries, despite the destruction, divisions, crises, displacement, poverty, and futile wars that this project has caused.
Fourth: The Official Lebanese Delegation
The following verse was recited:
"If We had prescribed for them: 'Kill yourselves' or 'Leave your homes,' they would not have done so except for a few of them." (Quran 4:66)
The verse speaks about the unwillingness of most people to endure major sacrifices or carry out difficult commands. Politically, many observers interpreted it as a message of criticism directed at the Lebanese state and as an indication that Lebanon was not moving in accordance with Tehran's wishes or providing the level of commitment expected to its regional project.
The message was viewed as arrogant, offensive, and an intrusion into Lebanese affairs, coming from a defeated, terrorist, and criminal regime that has no right to judge the patriotism of the Lebanese people or the choices of their state.
The Most Dangerous Aspect
The most dangerous aspect of the funeral was that the conduct of the mullahs' regime reflected a political and sectarian mentality immersed in illusions, delusions, and fantasies, detached from reality, while presenting itself as the guardian of truth, religion, scripture, and the classification of nations and peoples.
Instead of being a human or national occasion, the funeral became a platform for reproducing divisions and political axes, and a political festival using the Quran as a diplomatic and propaganda tool.
Turning Quranic verses into political messages does not serve religion. Rather, it places religion in the service of power and transforms sacred texts into instruments of conflict and influence.
It was neither surprising nor new that chants of "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" were repeatedly heard from participants in the funeral.
Official Lebanese Participation
In Lebanon, the decision to send an official high-level delegation to the funeral sparked criticism from many Lebanese who believe that the Iranian regime occupies Lebanon, bears responsibility for wars carried out through Hezbollah, and continues to undermine Lebanese sovereignty through its ongoing support for the group.
From this perspective, many believe that the official participation ignored the heavy price Lebanon has paid as a result of being transformed into a battleground for regional conflicts linked to Iranian policies.
Conclusion
The funeral was less a funeral ceremony than a massive political event aimed at reinforcing the image of the Supreme Leader as the symbol of a regional axis that transcends borders and at affirming the continuation of the path that has governed Iran for decades.
The clearest message emerging from the event was that the Iranian regime still views religion as a political and ideological tool used to justify influence, classify allies and opponents, and provide a religious aura to an expansionist authoritarian project that has burdened both Iran and the wider region with conflict, war, and destruction.
The question remains: When will the countries of the region free themselves from the logic of axes and foreign tutelage and build sovereign states that do not seek anyone's approval, do not submit to blackmail, and do not allow any external power, regardless of its religious or revolutionary slogans, to confiscate their national decision-making or the dignity of their peoples?
The author is a Lebanese expatriate activist.
Author's website: https://eliasbejjaninews.com
Email: phoenicia@hotmail.com

Conscience in Faith Concepts: The Divine Voice Dwelling in Man
Elias Bejjani/July 05/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/146391/
The study of conscience in the evangelical tradition is not merely an inquiry in psychology or ethics, but a spiritual journey to explore the intimate relationship between Creator and creature. Conscience, in its essence, is not simply a human feeling or a product of social upbringing, but the Divine voice dwelling in man—the presence of God guiding us to discern between good and evil. It is the inner compass placed by the Creator in every human heart to be the “judge” of thoughts and actions.
Conscience as a Divine Compass and Grace
Conscience is the “presence of God” within us. This is what distinguishes it from a mere “feeling of guilt.” Saint John Chrysostom said: “Neither fame, nor wealth, nor authority, nor bodily strength, nor a splendid table, nor elegant clothes, nor any other human distinction can bring true happiness; but all these come from a pure conscience.” This teaching affirms that true happiness springs from inward harmony with God’s will, realized only through a straight conscience. Christ likened conscience to the eye, saying:
“The lamp of the body is the eye. If therefore your eye is sound, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness.” (Matthew 6:22-23)
Here the “eye” is conscience—pure and undefiled, allowing the light of God to fill the whole of life.
Conscience as an Inner Witness and the Voice of God
God, who created man in His own image and likeness (Genesis 1:27), did not abandon him in the face of trials. He gave him conscience as a living voice, a witness warning and restraining him—a kind of inner adversary against evil intentions. Christ in the Sermon on the Mount said:
“Agree with your adversary quickly… lest your adversary deliver you to the judge.” (Matthew 5:25)
This “adversary” is the conscience, confronting our wrongful desires to bring us back to repentance before standing in divine judgment. The Apostle Paul emphasized this truth, showing that conscience serves as a law written in the heart even for the nations that did not receive the written Law: “For when Gentiles, who do not have the Law, by nature do the things in the Law, these, although not having the Law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them.” (Romans 2:14-15)
The Relationship Between Conscience and Freedom
In Christian understanding, freedom is not liberation from God but liberation from sin. Jesus said:
“You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:32)
Conscience directs and guards freedom. Neglect of conscience turns freedom into demonic chaos leading to moral and social corruption. True freedom, however, is the fruit of the Holy Spirit, freeing man from slavery to passions. Paul declared:
“All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.” (1 Corinthians 6:12)
Thus, a pure conscience empowers man to exercise freedom responsibly, without falling captive to desires, while considering the weakness of others:
“Conscience, I say, not your own, but that of the other. For why is my liberty judged by another man’s conscience?” (1 Corinthians 10:29)
Conscience and Shame as Signs of Spiritual Life
Shame is the fruit of a living conscience. When man feels guilt, it is proof his conscience is still listening to God’s voice. After the Fall, Adam and Eve felt fear and shame:
“I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself.” (Genesis 3:10)
Likewise, when Jesus rebuked the scribes and Pharisees,
“Those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last.” (John 8:9)
The Apostle Paul warns against a “seared conscience”: “Speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron.” (1 Timothy 4:2)
The death of conscience is the greatest spiritual danger—losing the ability to hear God’s voice, leading to corruption and destruction.
The Saving Dimension of Conscience
A pure conscience leads to the Kingdom, for it brings repentance and holiness. True peace comes only through forgiveness and the cleansing of conscience. Paul proclaims:
“How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” (Hebrews 9:14)
Baptism is not merely an external washing but the renewal of conscience:
“There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” (1 Peter 3:21)
The Christian Mission of Conscience
The believer is called to maintain a pure conscience and bear witness to truth in a world that justifies sin under false slogans. Paul declared:
“This being so, I myself always strive to have a conscience without offense toward God and men.” (Acts 24:16)
And again: “For our boasting is this: the testimony of our conscience that we conducted ourselves in the world in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom but by the grace of God.” (2 Corinthians 1:12)
Conscience in the Qur’anic Understanding: The Voice of God Within Man
Surah Ash-Shams (91:7–8)
Qur’anic text: {وَنَفْسٍ وَمَا سَوَّاهَا • فَأَلْهَمَهَا فُجُورَهَا وَتَقْوَاهَا}/Interpretive translation in Arabic: By the soul and He who proportioned it, and inspired it with its wickedness and its righteousness.
Surah Al-Qiyamah (75:2)
Qur’anic text: {وَلَا أُقْسِمُ بِالنَّفْسِ اللَّوَّامَةِ}/Interpretive translation in Arabic: And I swear by the self-reproaching soul — the one that reproaches its owner and blames him for his deeds.
Surah Al-Hashr (59:18)
Qur’anic text: {يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَلْتَنْظُرْ نَفْسٌ مَا قَدَّمَتْ لِغَدٍ}/Interpretive translation in Arabic: O you who believe, fear Allah, and let every soul look to what it has sent forth for tomorrow (the Day of Judgment).
Surah Al-Infitar (82:10–12)
Qur’anic text: {وَإِنَّ عَلَيْكُمْ لَحَافِظِينَ • كِرَامًا كَاتِبِينَ • يَعْلَمُونَ مَا تَفْعَلُونَ}/Interpretive translation in Arabic: Indeed, over you are appointed guardians, noble recorders, who know whatever you do.
Surah Qaf (50:16)
Qur’anic text: {وَلَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنسَانَ وَنَعْلَمُ مَا تُوَسْوِسُ بِهِ نَفْسُهُ}/Interpretive translation in Arabic: We have certainly created man, and We know what his soul whispers within him.
Surah Al-Isra (17:14)
Qur’anic text: {اقْرَأْ كِتَابَكَ كَفَى بِنَفْسِكَ الْيَوْمَ عَلَيْكَ حَسِيبًا}/Interpretive translation in Arabic: Read your book; sufficient are you today against yourself as reckoner.
Surah Aal ‘Imran (3:30)
Qur’anic text: {يَوْمَ تَجِدُ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ مَا عَمِلَتْ مِنْ خَيْرٍ مُحْضَرًا وَمَا عَمِلَتْ مِنْ سُوءٍ}/Interpretive translation in Arabic: On that Day, every soul will find present whatever good it has done, and whatever evil it has done.
Surah Az-Zalzalah (99:7–8)
Qur’anic text: {فَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ خَيْرًا يَرَهُ • وَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ شَرًّا يَرَهُ}/Interpretive translation in Arabic: So whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it, and whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it.
Surah At-Takwir (81:14) Qur’anic text: {عَلِمَتْ نَفْسٌ مَا أَحْضَرَتْ} Interpretive translation in Arabic: Then every soul will know what it has brought forth.
Conclusion
In both the Bible and the Qur’an, conscience is understood as the inner voice of God.
In Scripture: a witness of truth, guiding freedom, convicting of sin, and leading to holiness.
In the Qur’an: the self-reproaching soul, the divine inspiration within man, God’s knowledge of hidden thoughts, and the call to a pure heart.
Conscience, therefore, is the sacred meeting point between Creator and creature. Whoever keeps his conscience pure lives in God’s light and tastes already the pledge of the Kingdom. Whoever silences his conscience becomes enslaved to sin and strays from God.
Let us pray to preserve this divine voice within us—alive, active, and obeyed—so that our lives may glorify God and lead us into His eternal presence.
The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
Author’s Email: Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website: https://eliasbejjaninews.com
**Elias Bejjani
Canadian-Lebanese Human Rights activist, journalist and political commentator
Email phoenicia@hotmail.com & media.lccc@gmail.com

Trump thinks Israel is 'going to' withdraw from south Lebanon
Naharnet/July 08/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday said he believes that Israel will eventually withdraw from south Lebanon. “Well, I talked to Bibi (Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu) about that. I think they’re going to, I think they want to,” Trump said in response to a reporter’s question, during a joint press conference in Turkey with Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa. “They’re getting along with Lebanon, they’re signing deals with Lebanon – first time ever … It’s a big thing; first time in many years,” Trump added about the latest Lebanese-Israeli negotiations and framework agreement. Asked about a possible Syrian intervention in Lebanon, Trump said: “They could help, we’ll find out. I think we’re making a lot of progress.”

It's official: Aoun to visit White House on July 21
Naharnet/July 08/2026
The Embassy of Lebanon in Washington announced Wednesday that the White House has officially invited President Joseph Aoun to visit Washington and meet with President Donald Trump on July 21.
"The invitation reflects the enduring partnership between Lebanon and the United States and provides an opportunity for the two leaders to discuss issues of mutual interest, including bilateral relations, regional security, and continued U.S. support for Lebanon’s sovereignty, stability, territorial integrity, and state institutions," the Lebanese Embassy said. "This visit follows an intensive period of diplomatic engagement undertaken by the Embassy of Lebanon in Washington, D.C., in close coordination with the Lebanese Presidency and top officials in the U.S. Administration. Throughout this process, the Embassy has worked to strengthen high-level bilateral dialogue and facilitate the arrangements that culminated in this official visit."The Embassy said it is coordinating all aspects of the President’s visit in close collaboration with the Lebanese Presidency, the White House, and the Department of State to ensure a successful bilateral meeting.

Lebanon’s Aoun says expects positive outcomes from Trump meeting
Al Arabiya English/08 July ,2026
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said on Tuesday he expects his upcoming visit to Washington and meeting with US President Donald Trump to yield positive results, expressing optimism over US support for efforts to end Israel’s attacks on Lebanon. Aoun said he expects positive outcomes from his trip to the United States, where he is scheduled to meet Trump during his first official visit to the White House since taking office.The Lebanese president said the United States supports efforts to find a permanent solution to Israel’s attacks on Lebanon. Aoun also defended his decision to pursue negotiations, saying he chose dialogue to prevent Lebanon from being “dragged into the abyss” in service of another country’s interests.The majority of people, including from the Shia sect, support negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, he said.Aoun’s remarks come ahead of his White House meeting with Trump, where discussions are expected to focus on the security situation along Lebanon’s southern border, bilateral ties and regional developments. The visit marks Aoun’s first trip to the White House as president and follows continued US engagement with Beirut amid efforts to stabilize the Israel-Lebanon border and support Lebanese state institutions.

Aoun says majority of Lebanese including Shiites support Lebanon-Israel talks
Naharnet/July 08/2026
President Joseph Aoun said Wednesday the majority of Lebanese people, including Shiites, back the state's move to negotiate with Israel. "I chose negotiations because I could not stand by and watch my country being led into the abyss to serve the interests of another nation," he said, adding that this step could stop the Israeli destruction and bring an end to the occupation. "This step enjoys the support of the majority of Lebanese people, including members of the Shiite community, who have paid the heaviest price for the wars in the South," Aoun said. Aoun is scheduled to visit the White House and meet with U.S. President Donald Trump this month. He said he expects his visit to Washington would bring positive outcomes for Lebanon. "This visit reflects unprecedented American interest in Lebanon and U.S. commitment to a permanent solution to the series of Israeli wars and aggressions against our country, as well as achieving stability across the entire Middle East." The Embassy of Lebanon in the U.S. announced Wednesday that the White House has officially invited President Joseph Aoun to visit Washington and meet with President Donald Trump on July 21. The Embassy said it is coordinating all aspects of the President’s visit in close collaboration with the Lebanese Presidency, the White House, and the Department of State to ensure a successful bilateral meeting.

Israel shells strategic Ali al-Taher hill ahead of Rome talks
Naharnet/July 08/2026
Israeli artillery shelled overnight into Wednesday the strategic hill of Ali al-Taher where Israel claims Hezbollah fighters are hiding in tunnels. Israeli warplanes also struck overnight a region between Beit Yahoun, Kounine and Baraashit. Later in the day, tanks shelled the outskirts of the southern border town of Haddatha.Israeli forces have continued to clash with Hezbollah fighters in south Lebanon despite a U.S.-brokered agreement between Israel and Lebanon intended to pave the way toward a lasting end to hostilities. Israeli and Lebanese ambassadors are due to hold direct talks in Rome this month, after several rounds of discussions in Washington. Despite the progress, the situation in South Lebanon remains incredibly fragile. On Monday, a school principal, her mother, a foreign domestic worker, and a male Syrian worker were killed when an Israeli drone targeted the car they were traveling in as they returned from inspecting their family home in Nabatieh al-Fawqa, just outside the Israeli-declared Yellow Line.

Lebanon agrees to take part in Rome talks after guaranteeing US participation
Naharnet/July 08/2026
Lebanon has agreed to participate in the Rome negotiations after its concerns were calmed and after it secured the presence and sponsorship of the United States, MTV reported on Wednesday. "This means the negotiations will not be bilateral between Lebanon and Israel, but trilateral under U.S. auspices," MTV said, adding that Lebanon will be represented at the negotiations by Ambassador Nada Moawad and Ambassador Simon Karam. A Lebanese official had told to al-Joumhouria newspaper, in remarks published Wednesday, that Lebanon had rejected an Israeli proposal to hold the sixth round of talks with Israel in Rome. Italy's foreign ministry had said Tuesday that Israeli and Lebanese ambassadors were due to hold direct talks in Rome on July 15 and 16. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar also said Tuesday that the next round of talks with Lebanon would take place in Rome.“Picking a European capital was made to shorten the distance, after Cyprus was ruled out for several reasons, including the presence of an Israeli base there. Rome was specifically chosen by the United States because its embassy there is a key regional location,” a diplomatic source told MTV. MTV added that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio will participate virtually in the meeting. The source noted that the talks are expected to achieve “significant progress, followed by implementation steps, some related to the pilot zones and the Israeli withdrawal.”The source added that the U.S. is exerting strong pressure on Israel, while the upcoming Israeli elections “are proving to be an obstacle,” to the extent that the Israeli ambassador to Washington has not hesitated to tell the Lebanese ambassador not to overlook this detail, which largely dictates what Israel agrees to or rejects. However, what is certain in this context is that “the Lebanese track will remain separate from the negotiation or escalation track on the U.S.-Iranian front,” the source said, adding that Washington is “keen to ensure that Lebanon is not affected by the negative developments occurring there.”Moreover, MTV has learned that Admiral Brad Cooper, head of the tripartite committee – comprising American, Lebanese, and Israeli officials and established under the framework agreement – will settle with his family in Lebanon and will begin his executive duties soon, following the preparations and meetings he has held. The TV network added that President Joseph Aoun's upcoming visit to the White House will be pivotal and may even be considered "historic," given “the impetus it will provide for moving forward with negotiations and taking executive measures, whether regarding the Israeli withdrawal, the ceasefire, or finding practical solutions to the issue of Hezbollah's weapons.”

Lebanon to take part in Rome talks only if Israel withdraws from two 'pilot zones'
Agence France Presse/July 08/2026
Lebanon demands Israel's withdrawal from two "pilot zones" in the south before participating in the next round of direct talks in Rome next week, a diplomatic source told AFP on Wednesday.
The source, requesting anonymity, said "Lebanon is stipulating Israel's withdrawal from two pilot zones in order to participate in the round of negotiations" that Italy and Israel said would take place in Rome on July 15 and 16, following a framework agreement signed last month.

Diplomatic source clarifies to LBCI Washington's proposal of moving Lebanon-Israel talks to Rome
LBCI/July 08/2026
The United States has proposed relocating the Lebanese-Israeli negotiations to Rome, following its usual approach of launching diplomatic tracks through the U.S. State Department before moving talks to a European capital for further discussions, a diplomatic source told LBCI. The source said Washington typically begins negotiations through its foreign policy apparatus and later transfers them to a European venue, citing previous examples in which Paris hosted talks related to Syria, while Switzerland served as the venue for discussions concerning Iran. Based on this approach, the United States suggested holding the next rounds of Lebanese-Israeli negotiations in Rome, given Italy’s close relations with Lebanon, particularly with the Lebanese military institution, the source said.

Lebanon heads into a busy July of diplomacy with a Trump meeting and Rome talks with Israel
LBCI/July 08/2026
Lebanon is set to take center stage in international diplomatic efforts this July, with key meetings scheduled in Washington and Rome focusing on security, sovereignty and relations with Israel. The most prominent event will take place in Washington on July 21, when Lebanese President Joseph Aoun is expected to visit the United States for official talks with President Donald Trump. According to the Lebanese Embassy in Washington, discussions will focus heavily on regional security, particularly developments related to Lebanon-Israel relations, as well as continued U.S. support for Lebanon’s sovereignty and stability. The summit will mark the first face-to-face meeting between Aoun and Trump following two phone calls between the two leaders. The first took place shortly after the launch of direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, while the second occurred on June 27, when Trump congratulated Aoun on the signing of the framework agreement. Ahead of the Washington meeting, Aoun discussed with Prime Minister Nawaf Salam the need to consolidate the ceasefire and begin the Israeli withdrawal from the pilot zones in South Lebanon. Aoun said he expects the summit to bring positive developments for Lebanon, reiterating that the negotiations, which have received support from a broad segment of Lebanese society, including the Shiite community, helped curb the escalation of the war. Before the Washington summit, Lebanon and Israel are expected to resume direct talks, this time in Rome rather than the U.S. capital. The next round of negotiations is scheduled for July 15 and 16, with Lebanon represented by Ambassador Simon Karam and Ambassador Nada Moawad. The composition of the delegation is expected to give the talks a political rather than military character, as discussions continue over unresolved issues between the two countries. The official invitation has not yet reached Beirut, but coordination is underway through the Lebanese Embassy in Washington. According to AFP, Lebanon has conditioned its participation in the Rome talks on Israel’s withdrawal from two pilot zones in South Lebanon. Italy has welcomed hosting the negotiations and expressed readiness to support dialogue aimed at achieving peace. The choice of Rome has raised questions, particularly over why the talks were moved away from Washington. Diplomatic sources said holding negotiations in Washington had become logistically difficult for both delegations due to the long travel distances. Israel had reportedly proposed Cyprus as an alternative venue, while Washington suggested Rome because its embassy there is equipped with the necessary facilities to host the discussions. Italy was also viewed as an acceptable venue by all parties, given its role as a key contributor to the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). However, the move to Rome does not indicate any reduction in the U.S. role, as Washington will remain present and continue serving as the main sponsor of the negotiations.

Sami Gemayel to Hezbollah: The very least you should do is shut up
Naharnet/July 08/2026
Kataeb leader Sami Gemayel lashed out at Hezbollah Wednesday, accusing the group of dragging Lebanon into occupation. "The very least you should do is shut up," he said. "Let the President and the Prime Minister do their jobs, to save you, save the people, and save Lebanon.""You are the ones who dragged us into this occupation, and you are the ones who dragged us into these wars," Gemayel said.

Qassem: Only solution is Israeli withdrawal, army deployment south of Litani
Naharnet/July 08/2026
Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem said Wednesday that "there is no solution other than an Israeli withdrawal in return for the Lebanese Army's deployment south of the Litani.""The framework agreement sells Lebanon to the Zionist entity and it does not talk about withdrawal but rather re-deployment, which means giving up a piece of Lebanon," Qassem said in an address to supporters. "Not a single article of this agreement shall pass and you won't be able to do anything," a defiant Qassem added."We're clinging to the course of the American-Iranian agreement and with it we will stay in the battlefield," he went on to say. "We won't be dragged into strife, but we will not allow anyone to insult us," he added.

Riad Salameh's hearing postponed
Agence France Presse/July 08/2026
Lebanon's judiciary postponed a hearing scheduled Wednesday for former central bank governor Riad Salameh, accused of embezzling more than $300 million, a judicial official told AFP. Salameh, who headed the central bank for three decades and was arrested in 2024, has faced numerous accusations including embezzlement, money laundering and tax evasion in separate probes in Lebanon and abroad. He has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. The judicial official said that the hearing concerned the transfer of $330 million from the central bank to Forry Associates Ltd, a British Virgin Islands-registered company, and was postponed due to a lawsuit Salameh filed against the presiding judge.The former governor and his brother Raja are also the subject of criminal proceedings in Europe, where funds embezzled from the central bank were allegedly laundered. In May 2023, a French judge issued an international arrest warrant for Salameh, who also holds French citizenship. The judicial official said a separate hearing is scheduled on July 30 regarding a complaint filed against Salameh by current central bank governor Karim Souaid. The central bank had filed a lawsuit against Salameh, without naming him, and another former banking official this year on charges related to the misappropriation of central bank funds, illicit enrichment and suspected money laundering. The investigation into ill-gotten Lebanese assets took on a new dimension with the indictment in May in Paris of the Swiss subsidiary of the British bank HSBC, suspected of having helped Salameh embezzle funds.

Jumblat slams 'inexperienced' and 'power-hungry' officials who agreed Israel deal
Naharnet/July 08/2026
Druze leader Walid Jumblat on Tuesday stated that "the framework agreement is a unilateral agreement imposed by Israel on a Lebanese faction, inside and outside the country, that has limited experience in law and diplomacy," emphasizing that peace with Israel is impossible. During a speech at a meeting of the Druze Religious Council, he explained that "this treaty is a 'dictation,' and it makes no mention of an Israeli withdrawal." "This is what happens when the fate of the country is entrusted to groups with no experience in international politics and whose only concern is power," Jumblat lamented.
Separately, he called on the state, "if it has the resources, to prepare new shelters in the south, even though they have rejected this proposal and continue to do so."

Bassil wants Hezbollah to 'submit to state', slams 'cover' granted to Israel
Naharnet/July 08/2026
Free Patriotic Movement leader Jebran Bassil has lamented that Israel has “deliberately” targeted “civilians who have no connection to the war – doctors, engineers, paramedics, students, and this time a school principal and her family."Criticizing Lebanese authorities for “standing idly by while the crime is committed,” Bassil wondered: "Is there any authority that denies a victim their right to legal recourse, abandons a ceasefire agreement and U.N. Resolution 1701, and forsakes its allies in the five-party committee, only to accept a framework agreement with a state with which it is still at war?”
“We want the state to be the one negotiating, we want the decision and weapons to be exclusive to the state, and we want Hezbollah to submit to the state, but we do not want (Israeli PM Benjamin) Netanyahu to repeat after every action he takes that the Lebanese state is the one that gave him cover.”
This puts the decision “in the hands of Israel and Iran, not in the hands of Lebanon, and that is not how the decision should be,” Bassil warned.

Lebanese judiciary approves release of Fadl Shaker
Agence France Presse/July 08/2026
The Lebanese judiciary on Wednesday approved the release of crooner-turned-fugitive militant Fadl Shaker months after he surrendered himself to authorities, a judicial official told AFP. The entertainer, born to a Lebanese father and a Palestinian mother, turned himself over to authorities in October after more than a decade in hiding in a Palestinian refugee camp. Shaker was accused of taking part in 2013 clashes in the south Lebanon city of Sidon between the military and supporters of Salafist Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir, which left more than a dozen soldiers dead. While Shaker was a supporter of Assir, he denied involvement in the violence. The judicial official, requesting anonymity, said the judiciary "approved the release of artist Fadl Shaker in the four security cases filed against him, most notably the Abra case", referring to the Sidon clashes. "The court released Fadl Shaker in three cases on bail of 100 million Lebanese pounds ($1,117) for each case, and 200 million Lebanese pounds for the Abra case," the official added. According to the official, Shaker is expected to leave prison on Wednesday after his legal team posted the bail. In 2020, Lebanon's military tribunal sentenced Shaker to 22 years in prison for providing financial and logistical support to the "terrorist" Assir-led group. During his years on the run, courts convicted him in absentia and imposed sentences ranging from five to 15 years of hard labour. Shaker was also accused, alongside Assir and four others, of the attempted murder of Hilal Hammoud, a local official with the Hezbollah-allied Lebanese Resistance Brigades. They were all acquitted in this case in May due to "insufficient evidence".In the months leading up to his surrender in October, Shaker released new songs, recorded in the refugee camp, that topped charts in the Arab world.

Regional rivalries expand across multiple fronts: Israel faces growing tensions with Turkey
LBCI/July 08/2026
Between insisting on maintaining security zones in Syria and Lebanon, refusing to begin implementing the framework agreement with Beirut, and preparing for possible future conflicts in Gaza and with Iran, Israel is now facing a new and increasingly challenging front: Turkey. Turkey’s efforts to strengthen its regional influence have raised concerns in Tel Aviv, particularly amid reports that Ankara is considering deploying air defense systems in Syria that could limit Israeli air operations there. The concerns have also grown following Turkey’s reported plans to acquire F-35 fighter jets, which Israeli officials view as a potential challenge to their qualitative military edge. Israeli security assessments indicate that Ankara’s expanding regional role poses challenges on four main fronts.The first is Iran. Israeli officials believe Turkey is seeking to prevent Tehran’s defeat and limit Israel’s ability to consolidate its influence in the region. Israel warns of escalation across multiple fronts, names Iran as central focus The second front is Gaza. According to Israeli assessments, Turkey has increased its support for Hamas and is allegedly allowing members of the group to operate from Turkish territory and coordinate activities targeting Israel. The third area of concern is Syria, where Israel is increasingly wary of what it views as Turkish attempts to expand its influence and presence. The fourth front involves the eastern Mediterranean, where Israeli security officials fear growing Turkish influence over waters they consider strategically important for military and economic activities, as well as for Israel’s ties with Greece and Cyprus. Despite these broader regional concerns, Lebanon remains a top priority on Israel’s agenda. Citing the discovery of weapons and Hezbollah infrastructure in areas of South Lebanon, the Israeli army has announced plans to intensify strikes and reinforce its military presence, while delaying the start of implementing the framework agreement with Beirut until it is assured that the Lebanese Army is prepared to enforce the removal of Hezbollah weapons under full U.S. supervision.

The Shiites Duo “Discovers” the Patriotism of Southern Christians: A Final Stance?!
Lara Yazbek/Al-Markazia/July 8, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Al-Markazia – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s remarks about some Christian villages demanding annexation to Israel for protection from Hezbollah did not go unnoticed by these villages. In a stance unsurprising given their unquestionable patriotism, according to sovereign political sources speaking to Al-Markazia, they responded to Netanyahu’s claims and reaffirmed their commitment to their Lebanese identity and belonging to this country. In any case, the sources continued, they did not choose to face all the challenges and hardships, which have included death, siege, and shortages of food and medicine, nor did they remain steadfast despite the missiles raining down on them from Hezbollah before the Israeli army, in order to abandon their identity or join Israel, but rather for the sake of this land and the attachment of its inhabitants to their Lebanese identity. Following the villages' response, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri praised the statements and positions issued by the heads of municipal councils and religious figures in the border villages and towns, particularly the Christian ones in the districts of Marjeyoun and Bint Jbeil. Berri affirmed that "the stances of the residents and leaders of these villages, their steadfastness, and their adherence to their land and identity reflect the authenticity of their genuine national belonging, which they will not compromise under any circumstances." He warned against falling for the lies and falsehoods promoted by Israeli political circles, which contain divisive agendas aimed at sowing discord among the residents of the border regions. He emphasized that their shared concern, their wounds, their hopes, and their pain have always been, and will remain, one: ending the war, liberating their land, returning to it, and rebuilding what the Israeli aggression has destroyed and continues to destroy daily. For his part, MP Hassan Fadlallah, a member of the Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc, stated that "these villages, like the Muslim villages, are committed to their belonging to the ultimate homeland for all its citizens and are an integral part of the national and social fabric of the South. As for the occupation and its agents, they will leave, and they will have no role in the future of our country." While the stance of the Christian villagers is natural and unsurprising, the praise it received from the two parties is perplexing, the sources add. Until very recently, the resistance factions were heaping accusations of treason and collaboration upon the inhabitants of these villages, looking down upon them as if they were first-class citizens while the Christians were second-class. They implied that the Christian villagers' continued presence on their land was a result of their dealings with the Israeli enemy, and they had already laid the groundwork for their future prosecution, threatening them with the fate of the South Lebanon Army and Antoine Lahad's army. But today, the two parties seem to have awakened and recognized the "patriotism" of the Christian villagers, because they responded to Netanyahu and refused to join Israel. But is this a temporary, seasonal stance, limited in time and place? Has the party dropped all accusations of treason and collaboration against these villagers? Or will this rhetoric resurface because the villagers reject both subservience to Israel and subservience to Iran?

Khamenei and Lebanon: When a Corpse Becomes an Attempt to Whitewash a State-Hijacking Project
Mehdi Reda/Janoubia/July 8, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The problem with Ali Khamenei is not merely that he was a despotic ruler within Iran. The deeper problem is that he transformed despotism into a regional project, turning some Arab countries into open battlegrounds for others' wars, including Lebanon, which has paid, and continues to pay, the price for the "Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist" theory beyond Iran's borders. Today, the Iranian regime is attempting to create a massive funeral spectacle around Khamenei's body, presenting his death as a symbolic event that transcends Iran. But the question that concerns the Lebanese is not how Tehran's media wants to remember Khamenei, but rather how Lebanon experienced the consequences of his policies. The man left behind not just speeches and slogans in the region, but a network of armed influence, countries burdened with crises, and societies that paid the price for political decisions that were not always made in their capitals. In Iran, Khamenei's name is synonymous with repression, executions, the 1988 massacre of political prisoners, the suppression of the 1999 student uprising, the 2009 protests, and the uprisings of 2018, 2019, 2022, and 2026. His consistent response to the demands of the Iranian people has been prisons, bullets, torture, and the gallows. But this model has not remained confined within Iran's borders; it has been exported abroad through the Revolutionary Guard, the Quds Force, and various militias. Lebanon has been one of the most prominent arenas for this export. Under Khamenei, Hezbollah has become more than just a political ally of Tehran; it has become the embodiment of what the Iranian regime sought in the region: weapons outside the control of the state, decisions regarding war and peace made outside state institutions, a national economy burdened by the cost of political alignment, and a political life suspended on a balance not solely controlled by the Lebanese people. In this sense, Khamenei has not been a friend of Lebanon; rather, he has been the architect of a situation that has rendered the Lebanese state weaker than the party's weapons and its sovereignty more limited than the party's dictates. Ironically, the Iranian regime attempts to market this legacy under the banner of “resistance.” But what kind of resistance is this that ultimately weakens the state? And what kind of defense of the people is this that drags countries into isolation and collapse? True resistance does not hijack national decision-making, nor does it make an entire nation hostage to regional calculations, nor does it transform southern Lebanon, the southern suburbs of Beirut, and Beirut itself into pawns in the hands of a regime seeking only its survival in Tehran. Khamenei has built his foreign policy on a clear equation: the tighter the noose becomes within Iran, the wider the arenas of tension expand abroad. And the more Iranians’ anger rises against poverty, oppression, and corruption, the more the regime needs to ignite grand slogans in the region to obscure the reality of its internal crisis. Therefore, the militias in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen were not merely instruments of influence, but rather safety valves for a regime that fears its own people even more than its adversaries. In Syria, the Iranian regime spent billions of dollars and the blood of its militias to protect Bashar al-Assad, even at the cost of destroying cities and displacing millions. In Iraq, it sponsored armed networks that weakened the state and participated in intimidating activists. In Yemen, support for the Houthis has prolonged the war and threatened regional security. In Lebanon, weapons linked to Tehran have become a permanent factor in paralyzing the state and disrupting its relations with its Arab and international neighbors.
None of this can be separated from the internal situation in Iran. The people, suffering from poverty, inflation, and unemployment, have seen their wealth squandered on the nuclear program, missiles, and militias, instead of on bread, medicine, and jobs. Khamenei has not only plundered the Iranian people's money but has also confiscated their future, then used some of that money to build a bloody influence in the region. Today, Tehran is trying to use Khamenei's death as a means of whitewashing its record. But death does not grant absolution. No official ceremonies, no black flags, and no pre-prepared speeches can erase the blood of political prisoners in Iran, the blood of Syrians, the crises of Iraqis, or the wounds of the Lebanese who have lived for decades under the weight of a state incomplete because of weapons that are beyond its control. For Lebanon, the lesson is clear: Khamenei's legacy is not merely an internal Iranian matter. He is present in every moment the state has failed to make its own decisions freely, in every war in which the Lebanese were not consulted, and in every crisis for which they paid the price because a decision was made elsewhere. Therefore, the post-Khamenei era should not be an occasion to glorify the man, but rather to examine his project for what it was: a project of power that used religion to consolidate rule, resistance to mask hegemony, and militias to weaken states. The Lebanese, like the Iranians, Iraqis, Syrians, and Yemenis, have the right to say that this legacy should not be celebrated with reverence, but rather subjected to political and moral scrutiny.

Lebanon and Syria: The Fate of Geopolitics
Rafiq Khoury/Nidaa Al Watan/July 8, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The new Syria is very old, in terms of its return to Salafist jihadism. It is the antithesis of what Syria was under the Ba'ath Party and the Assad family, and not the same as it was after independence, during the era of democracy, military coups, and the Egyptian-Syrian union. The new government in Lebanon is destined to coexist with the old regime, which acts as if it still owns the house. The challenge facing both countries is to work, for the first time, to establish relations between two equal states. Lebanese-Syrian relations have always been broader in terms of popular support than official relations. They have never existed between two states in the internationally recognized sense. During the Syrian tutelage, the slogan was "One people in two states," but the reality was two peoples in one state. Even after the end of the tutelage, addressing the distortions, residues, and problems it left behind will require considerable time and extraordinary effort. Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani's visit to Beirut was merely one step in a long process. Interim Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa repeatedly affirmed his lack of desire for a military role in Lebanon, a role to which he was invited by President Donald Trump to disarm Hezbollah after Tel Aviv's failure and Beirut's hesitation, and after his success in expelling Iran, Hezbollah, and the Popular Mobilization Forces from Syria. He likely knew Lebanon intimately from the days of the Nusra Front, which played a military role in Qalamoun and the Lebanese towns bordering Syria, where Abu Malek al-Talli's name rose to prominence and then faded into obscurity. However, it is difficult, perhaps impossible, for Damascus not to play a political role in Beirut, a role dictated by Syrian geopolitics, which remains constant regardless of regime changes. The "message" conveyed was more than symbolic in al-Shaibani's meetings with senior officials, political leaders, and religious figures, culminating in the scene in Tripoli. Never before had a Syrian official during the era of Syrian tutelage stood to greet a welcoming crowd. Al-Shaybani's waving from the balcony to his supporters in Tripoli was nothing more than a reminder of the era of President Gamal Abdel Nasser, when Lebanese people would flock to Damascus to welcome him and hear his speeches. Tripoli, in particular, is a special case. But Lebanon as a whole, in certain respects, is also a special case. How so? The Lebanese, from the days of the Emirate, the two Qaimaqamates, the Mutasarrifate, and Greater Lebanon, have been in a constant search for external influence to bolster one faction or another. And there are quite a few countries, each with a significant popular base in this small nation. Egypt had a substantial popular base, not only during Nasser's time but also before, during the eras of King Farouk, Saad Zaghloul, and Nahhas Pasha. Syria has a popular base whose identity has shifted under independence, then under the union with Egypt, then under the Ba'ath Party and the Assad family, and now under Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. Saudi Arabia has a stable popular base, albeit in shifting and changing locations. Iran today has a popular base and an armed party fighting on its behalf. France has a popular base that grows or shrinks depending on circumstances and Paris's capabilities. Britain's popular base has diminished over time since its role in independence. The Soviet Union had a popular base, some of which Russia has inherited. Today, America holds a significant stake in the conflict with Iran. In what the constitution defines as "the final homeland for all its sons," cross-border parties advocate for various forms of unity. And, as the historian and orientalist Bernard Lewis observed, "Lebanon has suffered because of its strengths, not its weaknesses."

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 08-09 July/2026
Second round of US strikes against Iran underway: CENTCOM
Al Arabiya English/09 July ,2026
Another round of US strikes on Iran was underway late Wednesday, the United States Central Command (CENTCOM) said. CENTCOM said the strikes were intended to further degrade Iran’s ability to threaten freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. “The United States is holding Iran accountable for recent unjustified aggression against commercial shipping and civilian crews freely navigating a vital international waterway,” CENTCOM said in a post on X. Earlier in the day, US President Donald Trump alluded to a second day of attacks on Iran and said the ceasefire with Tehran was over, in his view. He called Iranian leaders “scum” and “cuckoo.”

US forces launch new strikes on Iran
Agence France Presse/July 08/2026
The United States launched new strikes against Iran on Wednesday in a bid to curb Tehran's ability to target shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. military said. U.S. forces "have started conducting additional strikes against Iran to further degrade their ability to threaten freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz," U.S. Central Command said on X, adding that Washington is "holding Iran accountable for recent unjustified aggression against commercial shipping." A U.S. official meanwhile told U.S. news portal Axios that the strikes were wider in scope than Tuesday's strikes and that the targets include Revolutionary Guard coastal radars, anti-ship missile positions and air defense systems.

Eight Iran military personnel killed in US strikes: State media
LBCI/July 08/2026
The latest U.S. strikes on southern Iran killed eight military personnel, Iranian state television said on Wednesday. "Following the criminal aggression carried out this morning by the U.S. terrorist army against areas in southern Iran, eight courageous members of the air and naval forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran's military in Bandar Abbas (south) and Bushehr (southwest) fell as martyrs," state television said, citing a statement from the military. AFP

Trump on Iran: US will probably hit them again Wednesday night
Reuters/08 July ,2026
US President Donald Trump on Wednesday threatened to attack Iran again after saying an initial ceasefire deal with the Islamic Republic was “over,” though he has not made clear whether Washington would be returning to full-on war with Iran. Speaking on the sidelines of a NATO summit in Ankara, Trump slammed Iranian officials for what he described as not sticking to the deals they negotiated and warned that the United States will likely engage in additional strikes on Wednesday night after US forces carried out attacks the previous day. “I’ll give a little warning: We’re going to hit them hard tonight,” Trump told reporters at the NATO summit in Turkey before his meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. In earlier comments to reporters in Ankara, Trump said a memorandum of understanding that served as an initial ceasefire deal between the United States and Iran was “over.” His comments sent oil prices surging. But he did not explicitly say Washington would return to full-fledged war or clarify if there would be further negotiations to turn the initial ceasefire deal into a permanent agreement. He repeated his war aim that Tehran can never have a nuclear weapon but suggested that goal may need to be achieved without a deal. “They’ll never build a nuclear weapon under our deal, but I don’t know if we’re going to have a deal. We may just do it without a deal, because you know what, it’s easier, because these people, what they lie and they cheat,” Trump said. In a flare-up of hostilities that pushed oil prices up sharply, Iran said it had targeted US military sites in Bahrain and Kuwait after US forces struck Iranian targets in response to attacks on tankers in the Strait of Hormuz. The renewed hostilities have also heightened safety and security concerns around the Strait of Hormuz, with shipping data showing at least four oil and gas tankers had turned back rather than try to transit the waterway, a vital supply route.

US launches more strikes on Iran with blasts reported in south of country
Matt Spivey/BBC/July 8, 2026
The US has launched a new round of strikes on Iran after President Donald Trump signalled he'd "hit them hard again tonight" following an overnight exchange of attacks on Tuesday.Explosions have been reported by Iranian state media in parts of the country's south, including Sirik and Bandar Abbas - port cities on the Strait of Hormuz. After the latest strikes, Trump said in a post on Truth Social: "This is in retribution for yesterday's bombing of ships by Iran. If it happens again, it will get much worse!"Iran has not yet commented, but senior officials earlier warned any attack from the US would be met with an "immediate response". US Central Command (Centcom) said the strikes were carried out to "further degrade Tehran's ability to threaten freedom of navigation" in the vital waterway. In a statement it added: "The United States is holding Iran accountable for recent unjustified aggression against commercial shipping and civilian crews freely navigating a vital international waterway."Several explosions have also reportedly been heard in other parts of the Iranian coast, including the cities of Konarak and Chabahar. Iranian state TV reported eight explosions in Bandar Abbas, and said two missiles had hit the ports of both Sirik and Jask - also in southern Iran. It added that two projectiles hit the island of Abu Musa, which has been the subject of a longstanding ownership dispute between Iran and the United Arab Emirates.Air defence systems have been activated in Bandar Abbas, according to reports in Iranian state media.The extent of damage from the US strikes is not yet known, but Iranian media has reported power cuts in Chabahar and a fire at an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) barracks in Bushehr. Two of three power lines cut off in Chabahar had been restored quickly and a third would be operational soon, the Iranian Students' News Agency said. On Tuesday, the US military said it had launched "powerful" strikes in response to attacks on three tankers in the strait. On Wednesday, Iran said it targeted US military sites in Bahrain and Kuwait in retaliation.Tuesday into Wednesday saw the worst exchange of strikes between the US and Iran since the deal - known as a memorandum of understanding (MoU) - was signed on 17 June. Trump said on Wednesday that the ceasefire agreement signed last month with Iran is "over", and added the US "hit them very hard last night" and will "probably hit them hard again tonight". In response, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in a post on X: "We do not answer vulgarity with vulgarity, but with action: fearlessly and with great valour."The deal between the US and Iran included 14 points, among them a 60-day period for a ceasefire during which negotiations should continue, the safe passage of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz and the US lifting sanctions on Iran.The 60-day-period for negotiations is not yet up, but Trump has said he saw further talks as "a waste of time".These are not the first strikes since the MoU was signed. The US launched a series of strikes on Iran on 26 June after an Iranian projectile hit a cargo ship in the Strait of Hormuz.Further US strikes took place on 27 June, following an attack on a tanker. But later that month both sides had agreed to "stand down". A map of the Strait of Hormuz showing the surrounding coasts of Iran to the north and Oman and the UAE to the south. Several islands in the strait are labelled, including Hormuz, Larak, Qeshm, and Hengam near Iran, and Greater Tunb, Lesser Tunb, and Abu Musa further southwest. A small inset globe highlights the region's location. [BBC]

Eight Iranian army members killed in US attacks on southern parts of Iran
Agencies/08 July ,2026
Eight members of the Iranian army were killed in US attacks on southern parts of Iran early on Wednesday, state media reported.

Iran says FM called Qatari PM after military flare-up with US
AFP, Tehran/08 July ,2026
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi made a call on Wednesday to the prime minister of mediator Qatar, during which they called for avoiding escalation following a flare-up with the United States.
“The two parties underscored the importance of using diplomatic means to resolve regional issues and emphasized the need to maintain contact and coordination to avoid an escalation of tensions in the region,” an Iranian foreign ministry statement said of Araghchi’s call with Qatar’s Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani.

Mediator Pakistan urges Iran and US to exercise restraint, uphold MoU commitments
Reuters/08 July ,2026
Pakistan urged all sides to uphold their commitments under the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, its foreign ministry said on Wednesday, hours after US President Donald Trump said the interim deal reached with Iran last month was “over”.“Pakistan urges all sides to uphold their respective commitments under the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), which remains an enduring foundation for understanding, mutual respect and shared prosperity for the region and beyond,” the statement said. Last month, the US and Iran reached a 14-point interim agreement titled “Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America” to halt the war and open the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran attacks Kuwait, Bahrain after renewed US tension
Al Arabiya English/08 July ,2026
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Wednesday they had hit dozens of US military facilities in Bahrain and Kuwait in response to American strikes, in a statement carried by state broadcaster IRIB. “In an initial response to this aggression, the IRGC Navy and Aerospace Force carried out a joint missile and drone operation, striking 85 key US military facilities” in the two countries, while also shooting down an MQ-9 drone, the statement said. Kuwait later condemned the Iranian attacks on its soil, which it said undermined efforts to deescalate tension in the region. It said it had intercepted two ballistic missiles and 13 drones that violated the country’s airspace, adding that no damage or causalities were recorded. Kuwait’s foreign minstry said in a statement that it expresses its “strongest condemnation and denunciation of the repeated, illicit Iranian attacks,” adding that “the continuation of these brazen attacks -- at a time when regional and international efforts toward deescalation are underway -- systematically undermines efforts to lower tensions.”The Kuwaiti army had earlier said that it was responding to missile and drone attacks. “Kuwaiti air defenses are currently engaging hostile missile and drone attacks,” the army said on X, without saying where they were coming from. “The General Staff of the Army notes that any explosions heard are a result of air defense systems intercepting hostile attacks.”Separately, air sirens were activated several times in Bahrain on Wednesday, according the interior ministry posts o X. “The siren has been sounded,” the ministry said on X, without giving details of the apparent threat. “Citizens and residents are urged to remain calm and head to the nearest safe place.” Qatar condemned strikes carried out by Iran against Kuwait and Bahrain and called for diplomacy. Qatar, a key intermediary in talks between Iran and the United States, said it “emphasizes the need to spare the region the consequences of these unjustified attacks,” in a foreign ministry statement posted on X. Doha also emphasized the need to “pursue the path of dialogue and diplomacy, to de-escalate tensions, and to build upon the progress achieved under the memorandum of understanding.”With AFP

What routes are vessels using to cross the Strait of Hormuz?
AFP/08 July ,2026
Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway between Iran and Oman, has been heavily disrupted since the start of the Middle East war in late February. Daily crossings are currently around a third of pre-war figures, with the situation further complicated by rerouted shipping lanes and the ongoing risks posed by sea mines and attacks on vessels. Here is what we know about how vessels are currently crossing.
What are the different routes?
Vessels crossing the strait are using at least two different routes. One is the Iranian route, a designated corridor in Iran’s waters in the northern part of the strait near Larak Island. Around 32 percent of ships crossing the strait currently use this route, data up to July 1 from maritime tracking firm Kpler shows.
The second route is the Omani route, a very narrow southern passage “constrained by the Omani coast on one side and mine-risk areas on the other,” according to Kpler analyst Ana Subasic. Around 23 percent of vessels currently cross the strait using this temporary route announced in June and coordinated by Oman, the United Nations and the International Maritime Organization (IMO). The Joint Maritime Information Centre (JMIC), run by a Western naval coalition, as well as NATO’s Naval Cooperation Guidance for Shipping (NCAGS), also offer guidance on using the route.
Since the start of the war, around 46 percent of vessels crossed the strait with their transponders turned off, according to the Kpler data, making their itinerary difficult to track. Analysts told AFP that vessels recently crossing with their transponders turned off tended to favor the Omani route.
They likely turned off their transponders to avoid “broadcasting their position ... while passing within Iranian reach,” Subasic told AFP.
Where were recent attacks?
At least five commercial vessels have been attacked since a memorandum of understanding was signed on June 17 between the United States and Iran. These attacks have been carried out against ships transiting the strait using southern routes, which Iran has said it does not approve. Of these, three tankers were hit off Oman and the UAE between Monday and Tuesday, according to the IMO, prompting a renewed exchange of strikes between the US and Iran that led to US President Donald Trump saying the ceasefire was over.
How has traffic changed since the war?
Before the Middle East war, vessels crossed the strait freely via the Traffic Separation Scheme, a two-way route through the center of the waterway adopted by the IMO in 1968. These designated shipping lanes saw, on average, 120 daily transits in peacetime, but are not currently in use because of the risk of sea mines. Shipping experts have said that the strait was unlikely to return to normal before traffic through this main corridor was restored. However, Tehran has insisted there will be no return to pre-war arrangements, and said in June that Iran and Oman were considering charging costs related to operating the strait.
What do ships have to do to cross?
Vessels crossing the strait must follow different procedures depending on their chosen route. The Iranian route is administered by Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), which earlier in the war received fees from some vessels that were subsequently allowed to cross. To transit, ships must submit an application to the PGSA, which, if successful, grants them a permit for a single passage valid up to five days.This is a stark change from peacetime norms. Moreover, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea guarantees freedom of navigation for ships in straits used for international navigation. Iran, however, never ratified this convention. For the Omani route, ships are expected to “coordinate with the relevant coastal state, keep their transponders on, and conduct their own risk assessment,” Subasic told AFP. NCAGS coordination is encouraged but not mandatory, official guidance says. Ships passing through this narrow corridor often cross in groups to avoid congestion and collision.

Trump informs Congress of intent to remove Syria from state sponsor of terror list
Al Arabiya English/08 July ,2026
US President Donald Trump informed Congress on Wednesday of his administration’s intent to rescind Syria’s designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism (SST), Secretary of State Marco Rubio said. “This is yet another historic step by President Trump to give the Syrian people a chance at greatness,” Rubio said in a statement. The move to rescind the designation will further unlock international trade and investment, give Syria a chance to rebuild, and open up a new chapter for the Syrian people, according to the top US diplomat. ”A stable, unified Syria at peace with itself and its neighbors benefits not only the region, but the entire world,” he added. Trump issued an executive order last summer after a trip to Saudi Arabia, directing sanctions relief for Syria. He cited positive changes and counterterrorism efforts by the government under Ahmed al-Sharaa. The Syrian president, a former militant himself who had previously been a designated terrorist by Washington, vowed to never support terrorism in the future. Rubio on Wednesday commended the Syrian government for charting a new path. “Today marks a significant milestone in the revived US-Syria bilateral relationship and in Syria’s history as a nation.”

Iraq agrees to US demands to halt dollar flows to Iran-backed militias: Report
Reuters/08 July ,2026
Iraq has agreed to new controls aimed at preventing US dollars from flowing to Iran and its militia allies in exchange for the Trump administration lifting a four-month suspension in shipments of American currency to Baghdad, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday, citing US and Iraqi officials.
Reuters could not immediately verify the report.

Turkey in line to receive six F-35 jets if Trump unblocks sale
Bloomberg/08 July ,2026
Turkey is looking to secure the delivery of six F-35 jets from the US in an initial transaction, if President Donald Trump reverses a ban on Ankara buying the advanced fighter planes, according to Turkish officials familiar with the matter. While that would be fewer than the 40-odd jets Turkey has pushed for, it would be a significant geopolitical boost for President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and potentially upset other US allies in the Eastern Mediterranean such as Israel and Greece. Trump is in Ankara, Turkey’s capital, this week for a NATO summit and held a bilateral meeting on Tuesday with Erdogan, a leader he regularly says he admires. Trump indicated he is ready to lift defense-industry sanctions after years of lobbying from Turkey. Turkey has already paid $1.4 billion for six F-35s, which have been kept in storage in the US. If the sanctions are lifted, Turkey could take delivery of them quickly, said the officials, who asked not to be identified discussing private matters. They didn’t give an expected timeline. The US State Department referred Bloomberg to Trump’s comments after his meeting with Erdogan. F-35s, built by Lockheed Martin Corp., are known as the “quarterback of the skies” because of their sophistication, and the US strictly limits which governments can buy them. Israel is the only Middle Eastern country with F-35s and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reiterated in recent weeks that Turkey shouldn’t be allowed them.
Greece is similarly wary of Turkey’s military ambitions.
Washington imposed the penalties on Turkey after the country bought a Russian air-defense system known as the S-400 around a decade ago. That caused a dispute with other NATO members, who said Moscow could gain crucial intelligence if Turkey used the S-400 alongside jets like F-35s.
The US has told Turkey to remove the S-400 system to get back into the F-35 program. Ankara is seeing whether it can compromise by providing the US with technical oversight of the S-400 system while keeping the missiles in its arsenal, the people said. Turkey wants to do that for exceptional circumstances when its security is threatened, the people said. There are still many obstacles for Turkey, and the US Congress can potentially scupper any transfer of the jets. Yet some American senators attending the NATO summit signaled their support on Wednesday for such a plan.
Having Turkey back in the F-35 program “would be a positive development” if there’s an “acceptable way to deal with S-400 and the threat they pose to the technology of F-35s,” Jeanne Shaheen, a Democratic senator for New Hampshire, told reporters. Mike Rounds, a South Dakotan Republican senator, made similar comments, noting that Turkey is a major contributor to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who is also in Ankara, was expected to visit Israel on Wednesday, according to an Israeli official, and sales of F-35s to Turkey were likely to be discussed. However, Hegseth canceled his trip for unknown reasons. Turkey is building a multi-layered air-defense network in the coming years that it’s calling a “Steel Dome.” Those plans include trying to persuade France to allow it to buy a Franco-Italian system named SAMP/T. Turkey stepped up those efforts after Iran fired several missiles at its territory in recent months, during the Islamic Republic’s war with the US and Israel. NATO and Turkish forces were forced to intercept the projectiles.
Erdogan is presenting Turkey as an essential ally for NATO in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the eruption of wars in the Middle East involving Iran. Turkey says those conflicts make it essential for the US and Europe to integrate their defense industries even more with Ankara’s.

Trump says US to license Ukraine to make Patriots, says Kyiv, Moscow want war settled
Reuters/08 July ,2026
President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that the United States will give a license to Ukraine for Patriot missiles as he said both Russia and Ukraine want to see the war settled. “We’re going to give a license to you to make Patriots,” Trump said at a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the NATO summit in Ankara. Zelenskyy has repeatedly pleaded for the US-made interceptors - the only weapon in Ukraine’s arsenal that can shoot down ballistic projectiles, whose high velocity and steep flight path make them difficult to stop. He was expected to raise the issue with Trump during their meeting. Trump said both sides in the war would like to see it end, but Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Zelenskyy have both been “difficult.”“We’ve settled a lot of wars, and this one is the one that I thought maybe would be the easiest, but Putin is a difficult character, and this guy’s a difficult character,” Trump said, referring to Zelenskyy, who was sitting next to him. Zelenskyy said he wanted to discuss “some very important details” with Trump. “I’m sure you will do everything to stop this war,” he told Trump. Moscow has stepped up its air war on Ukraine in recent months as its ground advances have largely stalled and Ukrainian attacks on its military logistics and oil industry triggered widespread fuel shortages. Russia fired ballistic missiles at Kyiv again overnight, officials said on Wednesday, a third attack on the Ukrainian capital in less than a week exploiting Ukraine’s critical shortage of US-made air-defense interceptors.

Arab League chief says blocked by Israel from visiting West Bank
AFP/08 July ,2026
The new secretary general of the Arab League, Nabil Fahmy, said Wednesday Israel had blocked him from visiting Ramallah, in what would have been his first foreign trip since taking office this month. The regional bloc’s secretariat was informed by Palestinian authorities “of the Israeli occupation authorities’ rejection of a visit... to the occupied Palestinian territories” to meet with Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah, Fahmy’s office said in a statement. Abbas’s administration governs parts of the West Bank, which Israel has occupied since 1967. Since the Gaza war began in 2023, the West Bank has been rocked by Israeli military raids, deadly settler attacks and the expansion of settlements, which are illegal under international law. Fahmy said Palestinians in the territory “suffer siege in their towns and cities, surrounded by expanding settlements and settler-only roads, and are subjected to the brutality and terrorism of settlers who enjoy both the protection and encouragement of the occupying state.” The Egyptian veteran diplomat has taken the helm of the Arab League -- a 22-member bloc based in Cairo -- at a time when its function as a forum for regional solidarity has become concentrated almost entirely on the Palestinian cause. Israeli soldiers or settlers have killed at least 1,087 Palestinians in the West Bank since October 2023, including both militants and civilians, according to an AFP tally based on Palestinian health ministry data. Official Israeli figures show that at least 46 Israelis, both soldiers and civilians, have been killed in Palestinian attacks or during Israeli military operations in the West Bank since the start of the Gaza war.

Trump says at NATO summit he has ordered cutoff of US trade with Spain
Reuters/08 July ,2026
US President Donald Trump on Wednesday ordered an immediate halt to all trade with NATO ally Spain, escalating tensions over defense spending and the Iran war, despite European Union rules requiring trade negotiations to be conducted as a single bloc. During a NATO summit in Ankara, which European leaders had hoped would put a lid on rifts within the military alliance, Trump instead reignited the dispute with Spain. He also irked another NATO ally Denmark by reiterating that his country should control Greenland. Denmark promised to defend every inch of its territory. It was the second time Trump has instructed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to halt commerce with Spain over its refusal to commit to NATO’s new defense spending target of five percent of GDP. However, after his first such promise in March, trade between the two countries continued normally. “Spain doesn’t agree to anything, and you shouldn’t carry them,” Trump told NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who later tried to soothe the tension by saying that Spain “made a huge step last year” raising its spending to 2 percent, although he added that “there are still issues we have to solve.”
“I don’t want to do any trade with them, alright?” Trump said, turning to Bessent, who replied: “Yes, sir.” Trump then added, “Take it immediately. Don’t even talk to them. They’re hopeless. They’re bad people ... They make so much money with us, and we’re going to see that they make a lot less.”
The office of Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, who leads a minority leftist government, said in a statement it was treating Trump’s statements as “business as usual” and did not intend to change the “excellent” relations it enjoyed with Washington.
It pointed out that Spain had a trade deficit with the US and that economic ties were forged by private companies rather than governments, adding that as part of the customs and trade union, individual EU members could not be singled out. Trump has repeatedly expressed frustration with Spain after Sanchez, a Socialist, refused to let the US use its airspace or bases on its territory for the Iran war. Washington jointly operates with Madrid two key military bases in southern Spain for naval and air operations. Spain is the world’s largest olive oil exporter and also sells auto parts, steel, and chemicals to the United States, although analysts consider it to be less vulnerable to Trump’s threats of economic punishment than other European economies.

The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 08-09 July/2026
Lebanon and the Enforced Decisiveness Before It Is Too Late
Colonel Charbel Barakat/July 08/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/155784/
Lebanon’s proposal for experimental zones is one of the solutions that may lead to some sort of understanding regarding the gradual return of state authority to the South, and consequently, the return of residents and the initiation of reconstruction and stabilization programs. However, these matters do not please Hezbollah, because it will not accept the return of the people except through itself, rather than through the state. The party destroyed their homes and displaced them for an ulterior motive: to make them submit, accept the implementation of its policies and projects, and never again think of revolting against its authority, and by extension, the authority of its masters in Tehran. The southerners, who have suffered from successive wars because of this party time and again, no longer believe in it or its new leaders, especially since those managing the party these days have not yet gained the people's trust. Those who actually lead it are the Revolutionary Guard faction—meaning Iranian officers who know nothing but how to execute the required missions that serve Iran and its crumbling regime of the Mullahs.
The Iranians themselves no longer have a clear goal today; they obstinately block any progress in negotiations because they have nothing left to fight with, and they cannot deceive their own people all the time, for hunger is a killer. This marks the beginning of the exposed charade between the President's current and the Supreme Leader's current. The state-and-institutions faction seeks to reach a sort of agreement that satisfies the Americans and saves face for a state emerging from a war in which it lost everything and wants to rise again in one way or another. On the other hand, the fundamentalists from the remnants of the Mullah regime and the Revolutionary Guard want to maintain the narrative of the Expected Mahdi and continue the struggle until his arrival. Hence, Hezbollah falls into the trap of extremism, which leaves it no room for maneuver or concession; rather, it must continue fighting on behalf of Tehran, regardless of the destruction, casualties, and sacrifices it costs the Shia community, who no longer have any support from any faction, even within Lebanon. The Lebanese front is the only place that gives the Mullah regime some room to maneuver; it does not affect the Iranian street, while simultaneously exerting pressure on the United States, whether through Israel or through Lebanon.
The Lebanese Shia understand the situation and want to rid themselves of this dilemma, but they had grown accustomed to the political maneuvers (the "rabbits") of Speaker Berri, which no longer convince anyone. Neither his political refrain nor his statements inspire confidence anymore. None of the major powers or key players give him any weight because he has exhausted all attempts and failed to contain the “party” or even successfully pretend that he is capable of restraining it. The “party” itself does not possess the freedom of decision-making, and war has become a destiny that the Shia of Lebanon must bear, in exchange for the power and wealth they may have enjoyed during the era of dominance over the country, which opened all doors of illicit enrichment to them.
It would have been more fitting for Speaker Berri, ever since the declaration of the war to support Iran and avenge the Supreme Leader, to take a clear stance alongside the state and protect the people from the evils of dependency on a decaying, collapsing regime. In fact, he should have sought to prevent the escalation of the war and the advance of the Israelis toward the major Shia cities. The Israelis gave him plenty of time to take the initiative, but he did not. Instead, he contentedly watched from the sidelines, believing either that the party would fail quickly, allowing him to reap the rewards, or that it would succeed in resisting and preventing Israel from gaining leverage. He knew the extent of its military preparations on the ground, both in terms of manpower and equipment throughout Lebanon, and thus the impossibility of confronting it easily.
Speaker Berri monopolized power through his continuous presidency of the Parliament for over thirty years. He built a militia within it consisting of three thousand elements called the "Parliament Guard." Structurally and functionally, he added twelve directors-general to it, whereas during the era of Speaker Al-Asaad, one director-general and a handful of guards—not exceeding a company at most—were sufficient. All of these individuals belong to his faction and execute his will. At the same time, when sectarian quotas for public jobs were abolished, he opened the door for the Shia to occupy administrative positions, followed by the systematic harassment of employees from other sects to force them to resign. This cleared the path for his faction to control the state without competition, destroying the administrative organization that had been built within it. He left the party to roam freely and amuse itself with Iranian money, drug funds, and the like, while he clung to the state and seized control of its every detail; from customs to land and sea ports, and especially the Ministry of Finance, the General Directorate of General Security, and the Military Tribunal. On the other hand, to guarantee the protection of his positions, he controlled the military through recruitment and indoctrination. He allowed the party to operate freely in certain strategic locations to ensure no confrontation occurred with the army and internal security forces, as they represent the true arms of the state and its means of enforcement when necessary.
Today, the state is attempting to rise, and it will naturally clash with the party, its stubbornness, and its belief that it can exert control as it did in the past. However, recent wars have downsized the party logistically, numerically, and in terms of its popular base, which it used to gamble with. This base is no longer responsive because it has begun to realize the impending losses and the reduction of the party's role. The Iranians have lost the confrontation with the United States despite their attempts to appear otherwise. The coming days will reveal what is hidden for this regime, which is out of touch with reality and does not know how to coexist with others. Its protégé will go down with it, and the free Shia will rise all at once to confront those who brought all these disasters upon them—from suffocating them in a circle of isolation and fighting wars with everyone around them, to embroiling them in illicit activities worldwide, which tarnished their reputation, and finally, to destroying their homes, dreams, and the future of their children, whom they enrolled in "Al-Mahdi schools" to become isolated and alienated from progress and success. Lebanon, with its schools and culture, was what most equipped them to venture into career fields worldwide and opened horizons for them. However, by following the Iran of the Mullahs, they are no longer accepted in various societies. They have become rejected by Arabs and the West alike, and even in African nations, which once constituted a vast arena for them, a form of rejection has emerged due to the numerous offenses committed by the party and its masters.
Returning to the government's decisions, the "four noes" attributed to the Army Commander (meaning that he will not enter areas where the party is deployed, will not enter areas where Israel is present, will not disarm the party, and will not resign) tell the story from the party's perspective. This is what the party and certain officers—whom it bought with fixed allowances still paid monthly to ensure the continuity of this approach—are banking on to prevent the government from utilizing its own forces, namely the Army, Internal Security, and General Security. This is particularly true after the latter was "sectarianized" since the notorious Major General Jamil Al-Sayyed took control of the institution. Since then, its leadership has become exclusive to the party's clique, managing its affairs, securing the necessary paperwork for the Revolutionary Guard elements and its other affiliated factions, and hiding cosmetically behind the Lebanese government. This extends to the Military Tribunal, which acts as a disciplinary council to oppress Lebanese citizens and issue verdicts against them under the pretext of collaborating with the enemy, solely to silence voices and suppress the free opinion without which Lebanon cannot survive.
We have said that the government's decisions to classify Hezbollah as an illegal organization will be executed, whether with the approval of Rudolph Heikal or without it. The party's weapons will be collected—not because the army will become more capable of confrontation, but because the party will be completely exhausted. It will eventually seek protection and come forward voluntarily to hand over its weapons and all information regarding its bases, warehouses, and military workshops. Its members will wish to enter prison rather than face death or flight, as no escape routes will be possible. Everyone who threatened a coup and a change of government, and everyone who openly operated with the party—from its political leaders to its petty agents, the motorcycle thugs, and the cyber-bullying groups on social media—will face the legal sentences they deserve. This may reach the death penalty for the political leaders who grew accustomed to attacking dignitaries and lecturing without accountability. The faces of Fadlallah and Raad will transform, and they will regain some humanity and plea for mercy when they face the cameras.
Within a few months, there will no longer be a need to mobilize the people against the party or its masters. The train of peace will take off this time in full grandeur, carrying all adversaries together, and gathering in its decorated carriages all those who once opposed the logic of normalization and cooperation. We shall see the New Middle East arriving with all dignity, loaded with wealth and prosperity, announcing the end of all forms of fighting, and presenting a new model for the cooperation of all humanity, regardless of their backgrounds, ethnicities, religions, and beliefs. Until that day comes, hold your breath and multiply the prayers that shorten the time and accelerate the realization of dreams.

Jihadists Look to Kashmir, Kashmiris Look Away
Anna Mahjar-Barducci/Gatestone Institute/July 08/2026
Many jihadists, building on the Palestinian model, increasingly see Kashmir as prime land to conquer: the next great cause for global jihad.
Pakistan has actively enabled and amplified this jihadist narrative by positioning itself as the foremost protector of Muslims, effectively asserting ownership over Kashmir.
In June 2026, Pakistani paramilitary forces opened fire on protesters in... Kashmir. The protesters were not armed rebels. They were ordinary Muslim residents — traders, students, lawyers, transport workers and women — demanding cheaper electricity, affordable wheat flour and fairer treatment from the authorities that rule them.
Sit-ins drew more than 70,000 people chanting "Pak Forces Out."
What began as an economic protest gradually became a broader challenge to Pakistan's administration of the territory. For nearly eight decades, the "two-nation theory" has provided the moral and political framework through which Pakistan has justified its authority over Kashmir. The Muslim crowds in Kashmir chanting "Pak Forces Out," however, have delivered their verdict on that claim. What made the protests politically significant was not their scale, but their target: Muslim Kashmiris rising against Pakistan itself.
[T]he Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)... has an established mechanism for addressing the Kashmir dispute.... The OIC's selective outrage — loud on India, silent on Pakistan's abuses — exposes its hypocrisy.
Despite Pakistan's persistent claim that it is the rightful protector of Kashmiri Muslims and that the Indian-administered portion also belongs to it, Muslims in Pakistan-administered Kashmir are openly rejecting this narrative, telling Pakistan that it is not their protector -- that they are better off without its rule. This is particularly striking given that Muslims in Indian-administered Kashmir enjoy greater political rights, economic opportunities, and development compared to those living under Pakistani administration.
By bravely confronting the very state that claims to embody Muslim "purity" and protection, the Kashmiri Muslim protesters have dismantled the moral foundation of Pakistan's narrative from within.
While jihadists, with Pakistan's active encouragement, have been attempting to turn Kashmir into the next major jihadist stronghold and battlefield against non-Muslims after Gaza, the voices of Kashmiri Muslims chanting against Pakistani forces have been rejecting the idea. The founding myth of Pakistan as the "pure" Islamic homeland and true representative and protector of Kashmiri Muslims has visibly collapsed.Many jihadists, building on the Palestinian model, increasingly see Kashmir as prime land to conquer: the next great cause for global jihad. Pictured: Indian security forces in Kashmir inspect the site of a jihadist terrorist attack carried out by Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), in which 40 Indian troops were killed, on February 14, 2019.
Many jihadists, building on the Palestinian model, increasingly see Kashmir as prime land to conquer: the next great cause for global jihad.
Hamas leaders themselves have explicitly framed the Palestinian and Kashmiri causes as one struggle. High-ranking Hamas envoys who traveled to Kashmir in 2025 to headline the "Kashmir Solidarity and Hamas Operation 'Al-Aqsa Flood' Conference." The message stressed at the conference was "The mujahideen of Kashmir and Palestine have become united."
Soon after October 7, 2023, on November 6, during a meeting with Pakistani politician Fazal-ur-Rehman in Qatar, Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal framed the "Palestine and Kashmir issues" as a shared "litmus test" for "human rights" advocates. In international forums, Pakistan-based jihadi groups and Pakistani political parties have long treated "Palestine and Kashmir" as aligned. Pakistan has actively enabled and amplified this jihadist narrative by positioning itself as the foremost protector of Muslims, effectively asserting ownership over Kashmir. Their claim is rooted in the "two-nation theory," articulated by the founding fathers of Pakistan — Syed Ahmad Khan, Muhammad Iqbal, and Muhammad Ali Jinnah. This ideology framed Hindus and Muslims as two incompatible nations, with Pakistan ("the Land of the Pure") ordained as a superior homeland to safeguard Muslim identity against Hindu-majority India.
It was Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, however, who translated this into a concrete political demand. He argued that Hindus and Muslims were two separate nations and that Muslims required a sovereign homeland to safeguard their identity. This framed the "two-nation theory" not just as a partition plan but as a claim about the nature of cultures that are incompatible. Jinnah's view has served as Pakistan's founding principle and permanent foreign policy.
This ideology does not belong to the past. Pakistan's army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, declared last year:
"Our forefathers believed that we were different from Hindus in every possible aspect of life. Our religion is different. Our customs are different. Our traditions are different. Our thoughts are different. Our ambitions are different... That was the foundation of the Two-Nation Theory. It was laid on the belief that we are two nations, not one." On another occasion, Munir said that Kashmir "was our jugular vein, it will remain our jugular vein, and that Pakistan was prepared to fight additional wars over the territory.
80 years after partition, however, the claim is collapsing in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir —a region that is almost entirely Muslim. At partition, Pakistan argued that the Muslim-majority Kashmir should all be part of Pakistan. However, after the 1947-48 war, also known as the first Kashmir war, the territory was divided between Indian- and Pakistan-administered regions. Pakistan has continued to insist that the Indian-administered part rightfully belongs to it. Today, it is Muslim Kashmiris themselves who are clearly expressing their rejection of Pakistani rule.
In June 2026, Pakistani paramilitary forces opened fire on protesters in Muzaffarabad and Rawalakot, the principal towns of Pakistani-administered Kashmir. The protesters were not armed rebels. They were ordinary Muslim residents — traders, students, lawyers, transport workers and women — demanding cheaper electricity, affordable wheat flour and fairer treatment from the authorities that rule them.
The International Human Rights Foundation accused authorities of carrying out a "violent crackdown on peaceful protesters in Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir, which has resulted in over 32 civilian deaths, including at least one woman, between June 8 and 16, 2026."
Protest groups and local media claim the total number of wounded ranged between 200 and 300. Amnesty International documented internet shutdowns, arbitrary mass arrests, and the application of anti-terrorism law against a grassroots civic coalition. Sit-ins drew more than 70,000 people chanting "Pak Forces Out."These were the very people Pakistan claims to represent internationally when it speaks on behalf of Kashmiris. The events in Kashmir since 2023 challenge the "two-nation theory." The unrest began with protests over electricity tariffs and flour shortages in May 2023, organized through the Awami Action Committee, a coalition of traders, lawyers, transporters, students and civil society groups, which formulated a 38-point charter of demands, including subsidized essentials and local electoral reforms.
Years of economic frustration boiled over when residents complained that although their territory generates substantial hydroelectric power, they were being charged electricity rates they considered unfair while also struggling with rising food prices and shortages. What began as an economic protest gradually became a broader challenge to Pakistan's administration of the territory. Pakistan's response has been harsh. The Awami Action Committee was banned on June 5 under anti-terror provisions. Its leaders face sedition charges. Internet and mobile communications were suspended. Federal paramilitary forces were deployed. Reuters reported a 10-million-rupee ($36,000) bounty for the arrest of the committee's leaders.
Pakistan has built its international position on Kashmir on the premise that it speaks for Kashmiri Muslims. This premise is now contradicted by the conditions in the territory that Pakistan itself administers.
For nearly eight decades, the "two-nation theory" has provided the moral and political framework through which Pakistan has justified its authority over Kashmir. The Muslim crowds in Kashmir chanting "Pak Forces Out," however, have delivered their verdict on that claim. What made the protests politically significant was not their scale, but their target: Muslim Kashmiris rising against Pakistan itself.
The contrast between international responses to the areas of Kashmir under Indian administration and those under Pakistani administration is further underscored by the role of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which has an established mechanism for addressing the Kashmir dispute. Its Contact Group on Kashmir meets periodically and issues statements on the situation in Indian-administered Kashmir. It did not convene specifically to address the unrest in Pakistan-administered areas, or to issue a separate condemnation of the massacre there. The OIC's Kashmir position has historically been shaped by consensus language influenced heavily by Pakistan, aligning the organization's public messaging with Islamabad's diplomatic priorities. The OIC's selective outrage — loud on India, silent on Pakistan's abuses — exposes its hypocrisy.
In the end, the courageous demonstrations by ordinary Muslim Kashmiris represent a powerful popular rejection of the "two-nation theory," exposing the failure and unsustainability of Pakistan's founding ideology. That ideology underpins Pakistan's claim that it should control the whole Muslim-majority region of Kashmir. Yet India today is home to almost the same number of Muslims as Pakistan and continues to administer part of Kashmir. Despite Pakistan's persistent claim that it is the rightful protector of Kashmiri Muslims and that the Indian-administered portion also belongs to it, Muslims in Pakistan-administered Kashmir are openly rejecting this narrative, telling Pakistan that it is not their protector -- that they are better off without its rule. This is particularly striking given that Muslims in Indian-administered Kashmir enjoy greater political rights, economic opportunities, and development compared to those living under Pakistani administration.By bravely confronting the very state that claims to embody Muslim "purity" and protection, the Kashmiri Muslim protesters have dismantled the moral foundation of Pakistan's narrative from within.
While jihadists, with Pakistan's active encouragement, have been attempting to turn Kashmir into the next major jihadist stronghold and battlefield against non-Muslims after Gaza, the voices of Kashmiri Muslims chanting against Pakistani forces have been rejecting the idea. The founding myth of Pakistan as the "pure" Islamic homeland and true representative and protector of Kashmiri Muslims has visibly collapsed.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22681/kashmir-jihadists
© 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.

Iraq: The Talk of Weapons and Money
Rashid Al-Khayoun/Al-Ittihad/July 8, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Weapons and money (the economy) are the pillars of the state; its existence and strength depend on them. If these fall into the hands of individuals, the state is merely a shell on paper. This is what the Iraqi state reached at one point after 2003. Groups and factions seized control of its institutions, swelling with money and weapons, making it difficult to hold them accountable. Any understanding reached between them and the state was on equal footing. Before the recent regional events, the external circumstances provided these groups with a stronger refuge than the Iraqi state itself. However, the situation has changed, and the state's reach has extended. Now, the state is leading the battle to restore its prestige and presence through weapons and money. While the discussion in Iraq about the state's right and monopoly over money and weapons has never ceased, the primary and serious topic today is corruption. This corruption is not limited to financial matters; the presence of weapons outside the state's control means that the management of money and the economy is not in its hands. The first imposes itself as the state's absolute right, while the second presents itself as the standard of justice and stability. Caught between these two forces, the citizen wonders: Which governs Iraq, the law or force, and who wields it? Weapons in Iraq are no longer merely tools for defense or means of confronting dangers; they have become a political tool where internal agendas and external calculations intersect. Since 2003, centers of power have proliferated, and legitimacy has become intertwined, to the point that talk of restricting weapons to the state is frequent, yet it clashes with a reality far more complex than slogans. The state does not regain its prestige through pronouncements, but through its legitimate monopoly on force—the very principle upon which modern states are founded. Conversely, in Iraq, money is no less important than weapons; indeed, the two often go hand in hand. Public funds have remained a focal point of political conflict, a source of influence, and sometimes a means of perpetuating loyalties. Corruption has not been merely administrative violations; it has become a political culture that has eroded trust between Iraqi citizens and state institutions. Therefore, any talk of reform remains incomplete without transparent management of national wealth and genuine accountability for those who squander it. Oil, for example, which was supposed to be the cornerstone of development, has often become a subject of political competition rather than a national economic project. Between financial abundance and mismanagement, Iraq has lost significant opportunities that could have transformed its services, education, healthcare, and infrastructure. The sheer volume of money lost in the country has only recently been discovered through fires and buried treasures. In the eyes of those who plunder public funds, Iraq lives in a pre-banking era; money is hoarded in homes and consumed by fire in times of danger. This is what happens when the state begins serious investigations into Iraqi state funds, and individuals have acquired considerable wealth. When the legal monopoly on force is absent, corruption flourishes, the state's authority declines, and a vacuum is created that is filled by unofficial forces, creating states within a state. It is a vicious cycle that can only be broken by a political will that believes state-building takes precedence over any other form of influence. Despite all that has transpired, Iraq still possesses, in addition to its immense wealth, significant human resources and an academic and cultural elite capable of contributing to a comprehensive national project, provided the appropriate political environment is in place. Furthermore, Iraqi society, despite the wars, crises, and divisions it has endured, retains a vitality that enables it to regain its trust in the state once it feels that the law is applied equally to all, and that it is not powerless before blocs and groups that are essentially entrenched bases for corruption in money and weapons. In conclusion, what the Iraqi citizen fears, due to the infiltration of corrupt individuals into state institutions, is that the methods and tactics of yesterday's thieves will be adopted. Among them was the notorious thief, Ibn al-Naqqash, who ran his gang from inside prison without any shame. The story of this leader is intriguing, and its details are recounted in "Nishwar al-Muhadara."

Has the “agreement” become a “ride” to topple the state?
Abdul Wahab Badrakhan/Al-Nahar/July 8, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
In all the options adopted by Washington, there is an escape from the real dilemma it knows, even if it doesn't admit it: the unbridled military doctrine, the expansionist wars, Netanyahu's behavioral problems, and his reliance on his extremist coalition.
Since the United States drafted that “paper” between Lebanon and Israel, taking care to consider Benjamin Netanyahu's sensitivity to the word “withdrawal” during his election season, it has trapped what is called a “framework agreement” (or “the framework agreement”) in the two pitfalls of “prolonged occupation” and “perpetual war,” which direct negotiations are supposed to end. Despite claims of serious or feigned disagreements, the United States and Israel share a consistent and unwavering agreement on eliminating Hezbollah, the Lebanese proxy, along with its weapons and "resistance." They have meticulously focused on "complete and verifiable disarmament" and the role of the Lebanese army in this task throughout the document. This effectively returns the issue to its pre-invasion, pre-occupation, and pre-displacement status, reviving the debate over empowering the army and bolstering its capabilities—a process that Washington and Israel have consistently obstructed. Given that the Israeli army concluded weeks ago that disarmament necessitates "the complete occupation of Lebanese territory"—an unattainable and impossible under any circumstances—the convergence of American and Israeli objectives has led Donald Trump to suggest, or rather, request, that Syria intervene to assist the Lebanese army in dismantling Hezbollah's military infrastructure. This would be an unwelcome entanglement for Damascus, which is still in the process of normalizing the new Syrian order. In every option adopted by Washington, there is an escape from the real dilemma it knows, even if it refuses to acknowledge it: the unbridled military doctrine, the wars of expansion, Netanyahu's behavioral problems, and his reliance on his extremist coalition. These afflictions, armed with the latest and most lethal American weapons, have already shattered any "good faith" the United States might claim, and have branded it and its Congress as complicit in supporting Israel's "genocidal" approach and protecting it from any international accountability. In Gaza and then in southern Lebanon, the daily killing, systematic destruction, bombings, and bulldozing amount to nothing less than the annihilation of both people and property. On the other hand, what does Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf mean when he says that "peace in Lebanon is impossible except through Iran"? This is an operational order for Hezbollah and is no different from any formal Israeli "commitment" to "peace." The Iranian negotiator is not seeking peace with America, but rather betting on his ability to bargain and pressure America into pressuring Israel, ignoring the fact that Washington does not prioritize an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon and that it has adopted the "framework agreement" with all its implications of denigrating Hezbollah and seeking to expel Iran from Lebanon. However, Tehran, now emboldened by the Israeli occupation and viewing it as a renewed justification for Hezbollah's presence and activities, is increasingly distancing itself from the Lebanese state and strengthening Hezbollah as a substitute for the state. Worse still, it has only two options: igniting a civil war to save Hezbollah and its weapons, or imposing years of "resistance" to achieve an Israeli withdrawal. There is no point in arguing over who deserves credit for the ceasefire, because that ceasefire never actually materialized. There is a difference between those who criticize the "framework agreement" because it is not "perfect"—a fact acknowledged by key figures in the state who are negotiating with clear objectives and in Lebanon's best interest—and those who want it to be a "ride" to dismantle the state itself for the benefit of Iran. The most dangerous aspect of what we are witnessing is that Iran and Israel want Lebanon to remain an arena for their conflict. Will America be content with merely managing this conflict?

Disagreements and a Lack of a Reference Point: An Iranian Political Crisis Erupts After the Funeral?!
Laura Yamin/Al-Markazia/July 8, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Al-Markazia – Four well-informed Iranian officials revealed to the American newspaper "The New York Times" the turbulent political maneuvering that took place behind closed doors in Tehran. They indicated that Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian informed the new Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, that he would officially resign from his position if the Supreme Leader refused to proceed with ratifying the diplomatic agreement with the United States. This extraordinary move reflected the extent of the sharp divisions and immense pressures that preceded the signing of the memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington last June. The "New York Times" quoted the same sources as saying that Pezeshkian informed Khamenei that the strict American naval blockade imposed on Iranian shores had led to a complete and widespread paralysis of the national economy, and that the continuation of the current situation directly threatened the country's stability and the survival of the regime. He emphasized that his government was no longer capable of managing the crisis using traditional mechanisms and usual maneuvers. In the same vein, intelligence reports revealed that a secret and urgent message from the Governor of the Central Bank of Iran, Abdolnasser Hemmati, played a crucial and pivotal role in shifting the hardline leadership's stance. In the message, he warned that Iran was facing an unprecedented financial and economic crisis. The newspaper also explained that Pezeshkian, in close cooperation with Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, succeeded in building a solid tactical alliance within the government institutions. This alliance supports the option of direct negotiations, considering it "an absolute strategic necessity to ensure the stability of the regime," not merely a temporary political maneuver. Despite fierce attacks and accusations of treason from the hardline faction, this pragmatic camp managed to pass fateful and historic resolutions, including the immediate acceptance of a ceasefire and direct meetings with American officials. These developments point to a dire and multifaceted Iranian crisis, both economically and politically, which the Iranian authorities are trying, as much as possible, to conceal and prevent from coming to light, according to diplomatic sources speaking to Al-Markazia. Despite its bravado, Iran is suffering financially, economically, and in terms of daily life. The American embargo on its ports has dealt it a crippling blow, forcing it to accept the option of negotiation. Politically, decision-making appears difficult and requires a painful process after the absence of the supreme leader, Ali Khamenei. The power struggle within Iran has intensified to an unprecedented degree, with Pezeshkian even threatening to resign in order to secure a deal with the Americans. Today, sources continue, even the hardline faction in Tehran is divided between pragmatists who support negotiations and hardliners who reject them and do not hesitate to accuse the negotiators of treason and capitulation to the Americans. This division threatens the future of the negotiations, especially since a large portion of the hardliners are in the Revolutionary Guard, meaning they hold the reins of military power and are capable of reigniting the conflict, as happened in the Strait of Hormuz in recent hours, thus derailing the talks. This reality presents Iran with a serious test that will become even greater and more critical after the conclusion of Ali Khamenei's funeral. What if his son Mojtaba did not appear, and what if he was unable to unify the Iranian leadership and put an end to the conflict between the pragmatists and the hardliners, especially since it is said that Khamenei the son is subject to the Revolutionary Guard instead of the opposite?

Selected Face Book & X tweets on 08 July
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis Office
I continue to strongly urge the administration not to move forward with any sale of our most advanced F-35 jets. Erdogan has aligned himself with Iran and Russia, harbored Hamas, refused to sanction Russia, undermined American counter-ISIS operations, continues to illegally occupy part of Cyprus, and has repeatedly directed illegal military jet overflights above the Greek Islands, and called for the destruction of Israel. Additionally, he continues to jail his political opponents and has denied dozens of journalists access to the NATO Summit. Providing Turkey with our most advanced fighter jet would jeopardize U.S. national security, risk sensitive technology falling into the wrong hands, and endanger our allies in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. https://wsj.com/politics/national-security/trumps-push-for-turkey-f-35-deal-sets-up-showdown-with-congress-bc87a2b8?eafs_enabled=false

Nadim Koteich
https://x.com/WSJ/status/2074799101158265176/video/1
🇮🇷🇺🇸 Trump just declared the June MOU clinically dead, out loud, at NATO.
He called the Islamabad framework "over" and the negotiations a "waste of time", all while ordering, from inside the summit, the largest strikes against Iran since the ceasefire.
Here's why the words matter more than the fire show.
That MOU only functioned as long as nobody at the top admitted what everyone already knew, which is that both sides had been cheating on it for weeks. Trump admitted it. Once the American president stops defending a deal in public, there's little left holding it up.
The vocabulary tells you where his head is. "Scum." "Sick people." He talks that way when he's decided the other guy isn't worth talking to anymore.
Watch the daylight between him and Vance here. Vance has been the salesman the whole time, "great foundation," "we have all the cards." Trump prices it differently. He treats the deal as a pause, leverage over a Tehran that's still on its feet.
Vance keeps selling it as a transformation of the region. Trump's read is the more honest one, and it usually is on Iran.
What actually lit the fuse (last 24 hours):
IRGC hit three commercial tankers around Hormuz. One was a Qatari LNG carrier that caught fire. A Saudi vessel got hit too.
CENTCOM answered big. Something like 80-plus targets near Bandar Abbas: air defenses, coastal radars, anti-ship missiles, a stack of IRGC boats. They also took a second air base over in Bushehr province. No confirmed hit on the Bushehr nuclear plant itself, which is worth knowing before that rumor spreads.
Oil waivers revoked. Both capitals now blaming the other for breaking the MOU first.
Is it salvageable?
On paper, sure. Nobody has formally torn up the MOU. In practice it runs through Islamabad, Doha, and only if both sides actually want off the ladder. Right now neither one does. So Hormuz keeps setting the terms, and everyone else reacts.
None of this rules out a swing back to the table. But the direction of travel is getting hard to miss. The MOU frays a little more every day, and it's moving toward the point where nobody can stitch it back together. And underneath all of it a starker choice keeps surfacing, the one everyone can finally see. Iran survives as it is, or it goes to the ash heap of history as a regime that has always been un-reformable.
**The Wall Street Journal@WSJ
·https://x.com/WSJ/status/2074799101158265176/video/1
President Trump said he believed his ceasefire deal with the country is over and tore into Iran’s leadership, following another round of Iranian attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz that snarled efforts to open the strategic waterway.

Mark R. Levin
Erdogan has repeatedly referred to Israel and Netanyahu as Nazis and the Third Reich. Not once has our government publicly commented let alone denounced him. His foreign minister talked about the annihilation of the Israeli people. Crickets from our government. And now we lavish them with the highest level military gifts in apparent contravention of Congressional restrictions. And I told you Netanyahu would come under attack by our government for raising concerns, which he has done politely and appropriately. He’s in the way, you see, too busy and focused on protecting his country from 100 F-35s in Erdogan’s hands. Of course, many others have challenged all this, including Greece and Cyprus, and here at home.You can all look up the long list of Erdogan provocations against Israel, Greece, and Cyprus, and his police-state oppression, and his very cozy relationship with Putin that undermines NATO.

Benjamin Netanyahu - בנימין נתניהו
https://x.com/netanyahu/status/2074888553989914858/video/1
I'm continuing the Israeli advocacy round in the world - watch my interview with the Newsmax network in the US

Israel Army
BREAKING:
6:00 PM – Netanyahu: "We will strike Iran's nuclear sites tonight. No one can stop us." 🇮🇱
7:05 PM – Pezeshkian: "Our missiles are already ready. Just press the button and see what happens to Tel Aviv." 🇮🇷
The Middle East is in a very precarious situation right now.
This is sheer madness.

Ambassador Yechiel (Michael) Leiter
In a significant demonstration of enduring trilateral cooperation, I had a working dinner tonight together with the Ambassador of Greece @alexandridisan1
, the chargé d'affaires of Cyprus, the military attaches, and Jewish and Christian leaders, to discuss the evolving security landscape and reinforce regional stability in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Mossad Commentary
RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU WERE TREATED BY A JEWISH/ISRAELI DOCTOR
According to former Ichilov Hospital spokesman Avi Shoshan, an Israeli doctor was once sent to Turkey to provide life-saving treatment to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
Shoshan said the senior physician from Tel Aviv’s Ichilov Hospital treated Erdogan after he developed cancer. His words:“An Ichilov doctor saved Erdogan. A doctor from Israel. Israel saved him.”
He added that the doctor went as a representative of Israel, at the request of the Mossad and with approval from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. NOTE: This may help explain why Erdogan is so aggressively targeting Israel. His honor was challenged. For a man like Erdogan, being treated — and allegedly saved — by a Jew, by an Israeli doctor, is not something he would see as gratitude. It could be seen as humiliation.Israel has seen this before.We have treated people who later returned to trying to kill us. We have treated young women who became suicide bombers

Israel Foreign Ministry
Following a request from Interim President @delcyrodriguezv to Foreign Minister
@gidonsaar , Israel's national aid delegation will remain in Venezuela for two additional weeks to begin implementing the reconstruction plan prepared by Israeli experts. 🇮🇱🇻🇪

John Bolton
Trump’s Iranian memorandum of understanding has been a disaster from the start. Why the White House trusted the regime to negotiate in good faith to begin with is beyond comprehension. The regime has succeeded in stalling for time and locking in financial support while the U.S. is back to square one.

Buzz Daz Jazz!
https://x.com/elenasagiadinou/status/2074160229797773635/video/1
Now the Prime Minister of Israel is openly defending both Greece and Cyprus, along with his own homeland. At some point, we must start doing the same. Openly.
Two neighboring, similar peoples, with a common great enemy. We must stand together.

Political Pen
President Joseph Aoun: “I opted for negotiations because I cannot stand idly by while my country is led toward the brink for the sake of another nation's interests. The decision to negotiate is backed by the majority of the Lebanese people, and we will remain committed to this course despite the challenges.”

Hussain Abdul-Hussain
Doubts are growing that Mujataba Khamnei is alive or functional. All that anyone has seen of him is his picture on a cardboard. History teaches us that even Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, who were running away from American justice, released voice recordings and sometimes even videos from their hideouts. Mujtaba Khamenei has not released any sign of life, and his absence or incapacitation can be further substantiated by studying the behavior of the various competing factions in Iran, with some promising a ceasefire while others persisting with war. As a scholar, Mujtaba's dad Ali Khamenei never attained seniority. He tried during his lifetime to depict himself as the global leader of all the Shia, but he could never coop Najaf, the Shia Vatican. By parading his casket in Najaf, Iranians are trying to maintain his propaganda. But this might be the end of the office of al-Wali al-Faqih.