English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News &
Editorials
For July 11/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.july11.26.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
Martha, Martha, you are worried and distracted by many
things; there is need of only one thing. Mary has chosen the better part, which
will not be taken away from her
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Luke 10/38-42:
“Now as they went on their way, he entered a certain village, where a woman
named Martha welcomed him into her home. She had a sister named Mary, who sat at
the Lord’s feet and listened to what he was saying. But Martha was distracted by
her many tasks; so she came to him and asked, ‘Lord, do you not care that my
sister has left me to do all the work by myself? Tell her then to help me.’ But
the Lord answered her, ‘Martha, Martha, you are worried and distracted by many
things; there is need of only one thing. Mary has chosen the better part, which
will not be taken away from her.’”
Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials
published on 10-11 July/2026
A Testimony of Faith: The Story of the
Three Massabki Brothers and Enduring Sacrifices/Elias Bejjani/July 10/2026
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
Two Killed in Israeli Drone Strikes on South Lebanon's Kfarroman
Israeli Drone Strike Targets Vehicle in Southern Lebanon’s Kfarroman
US to guide Israeli withdrawal from pilot zones in coming days
What will Aoun discuss with Trump in Washington?
Aoun says won't back down from the decision to negotiate
What will Aoun tell Trump about Hezbollah’s weapons?
Lebanese President Urges Hezbollah to Cooperate, Defends U.S.-Backed Framework
Agreement/Al-Markazia/This is Beirut/10 July/2026
Rome meeting to address Israeli demands to form joint committees
How a push to disarm Hezbollah is deepening divisions in Lebanon
Geagea meets Aoun, says state should decide things, not Hezbollah
Hezbollah MP Says Resistance Will Not Be Disarmed, Even With Foreign
Interference
Rome Test: Can Lebanon Turn a Diplomatic Framework Into Reality?/Amal
Chmouny/This is Beirut/10 July/2026
How should the framework agreement be understood and interpreted?
Why Macron must reject any future for Hezbollah in Lebanon/Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab
News/July 10/2026
Lebanon and the price of peace/Nadim Shehadi/rab News/July 10/2026
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports
And News published on 10-11 July/2026
Trump speaks with Netanyahu, raises 'security concerns' about Turkey
Trump says US agreed to Iran’s request to continue talks, but ceasefire is over
Qatari negotiators in Iran for talks to de-escalate US-Iran tensions, source
says
Pakistan PM urges Iran president to preserve ‘hard-earned’ peace
Egypt, Qatar Call for Restart of US-Iran Talks
US issues fresh Iran-related sanctions after attacks in Strait of Hormuz
Tanker traffic slows in Strait of Hormuz after US and Iran clashes
IAEA has lost all knowledge on Iran’s nuclear program: UN political chief
Iran will respond against Israel if infrastructure attacked
US eases export restrictions on military items, AI chips and commercial
satellites to UAE
Bitterly divided Iran grapples with Khamenei's legacy
Iran using diplomacy to ‘manage crises, gain time,’ Bahrain tells UN Security
Council
Syrian Security Forces Arrest Entire Cell Behind July 7 Damascus Bombings
France returns 23 Syrian treasures after 15 years as Macron visits Damascus
Turkiye hopes to have US sanctions lifted soon
US senators say agreement reached with Trump on Russia sanctions bill
Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials
from miscellaneous sources published
on 10-11 July/2026
Hormuz will follow the rest of Iran's crumbling assets/Nadim Koteich/
Xplatform/July 09/2026
China Launches ICBM, Sanders Proposes Disarmament/Gordon G. Chang/Gatestone
Institute/July 10, 2026
The time for talk is over — Trump needs to get tough with Iran/Mark Dubowitz/New
York Post/July 10/2026
Board of Peace to establish ‘pilot zone’ for Gaza civilians, IDF claims 13
ceasefire violations June 30–July 9/Samuel Ben-Ur/ FDD's Long War Journal/July
10/2026
How the Houthis Could Put the World in Double Dire Straits/Bridget
Toomey/National Review/July 10/2026
US, Iran tensions remain high amid Strait of Hormuz standoff. Updates/Michael
Loria, USA TODAY/July 10, 2026
What France hopes to gain from re-engaging with Syria/ANAN TELLO/Arab News/July
10, 2026
Europe’s Taliban handshake: When values become negotiable/Yevgeniya Mikhaildi/Al
Arabiya English/10 July ,2026
The Islamic Republic Cannot Reform/This week the last man who believed otherwise
said sid so in four words/Nadim Koteich/X platform/July 10/2026
Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese
Related News & Editorials published on 10-11 July/2026
A Testimony of Faith: The Story of the Three
Massabki Brothers and Enduring Sacrifices
Elias Bejjani/July 10/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/145053/
In the bright pages of history that is filled with faith and sacrifice, shines
the story of the three Massabki brothers: Francis, Abdel Moati, and Raphael. In
Damascus in 1860, they wrote with their blood a powerful testament to spiritual
heroism. These Maronite martyrs, all over sixty years old, refused to abandon
their Christian faith despite threats of death. They became living examples of
what faith means in Christianity, proving that those who kill the body cannot
kill the believing soul. This heroic testimony still resonates today, connected
to similar sacrifices recently witnessed in Damascus, such as the bombing of St.
Elias Greek Orthodox Church.
The 1860 Massacres and an Unwavering Faith
On the night of July 10, 1860, Damascus saw bloody events targeting Christians.
The Massabki brothers, along with many other Christians and Franciscan priests,
sought refuge in a church. But the attackers broke in, demanding they change
their religion. It was then that the brothers’ strong faith shone through.
Francis spoke unforgettable words, showing their courage and resolve: “We don’t
fear those who kill the body… Our crown awaits us in heaven, and we have but one
soul, which we will not lose. We are Christians and we want to die Christians.”
Francis was a silk merchant known for his good Christian life; he’d never start
work without first visiting the church. Abdel Moati had left trade to teach at
the Franciscan school, while Raphael helped the brother in charge of the
sacristy. This good character and Christian commitment weren’t just outward
show; they were deeply rooted in their hearts, allowing them to face death with
unshakeable resolve. The three brothers were killed in the church before the
altar, their blood becoming a living testament to the power of their faith.
The Meaning of Faith in Christianity: “Whoever Acknowledges Me Before Others”
The story of the Massabki brothers clearly shows what faith means in
Christianity. In Christianity, faith isn’t just believing intellectually that
God exists. It’s a complete and total trust in God, involving surrender to His
will, obedience to His commands, and a readiness to sacrifice for Him. It’s a
living, personal relationship with God, built on love and hope.
The Bible verse: “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge
before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown
before my Father in heaven” (Matthew 10:32-33), highlights the importance of
publicly declaring one’s faith. Acknowledging Christ isn’t just words; it’s a
way of life—a willingness to face challenges and persecution for the truth. This
verse emphasizes a core principle: eternal life is the fruit of this confessed
faith, and witnessing for Christ in this world is the key to being acknowledged
by God in heaven.
Another important verse: “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot
kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body
in hell” (Matthew 10:28), points to the truth that physical death cannot end
spiritual life. For believers, physical death is a doorway to eternal life with
Christ. The Massabki brothers deeply understood this, so they didn’t fear death;
instead, they saw it as a path to the crown prepared for them in heaven.
The Continuation of Sacrifice: From the 1860 Massacres to the St. Elias Church
Bombing
Tragic events, such as the bombing of St. Elias Greek Orthodox Church in
Damascus, show that the spirit of persecution for faith has not ended with time.
Despite the significant time gap between the martyrdom of the Massabki brothers
and this horrific crime, there are strong and deep-rooted connections between
them:
Sacred Space as a Target: The Massabki brothers were martyred inside a church.
The same occurred at St. Elias Church, where terrorists stormed the building
while worshippers were inside, and one detonated an explosive belt, killing and
injuring dozens, including children, elderly, and women. In both incidents, a
house of God was turned into a scene of brutal violence against believers.
Targeted Because of Faith
The Massabki brothers paid the ultimate price for refusing to abandon their
faith. In the St. Elias Church bombing, the targets were Christian worshippers
gathered for prayer, confirming that the primary motive behind the attack was to
target the Christian faith itself. Both crimes aimed to terrorize Christians and
force them to abandon their religious identity.
Continuous Witness
The victims of St. Elias Church, like the Massabki brothers, made the ultimate
sacrifice. They became martyrs for their faith, not necessarily for verbally
refusing to deny Christ, but because they were killed for being Christians
exercising their right to worship. This embodies the profound meaning of the
verse: “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body,” for despite the killing
and destruction, faith remains alive and triumphant. Connected History of
Persecution: What happened at St. Elias Church reminds us of the persecutions
that occurred in 1860 and others throughout history. It confirms that Christian
communities in the region continue to face existential challenges that demand
steadfastness and resilience in the face of violence and extremism.
Ecclesiastical Honor: Saints on the Altar of God
In recognition of their heroic sacrifice, the Catholic Church beatified the
three Massabki brothers. On October 10, 1926, Pope Pius XI declared their
beatification. Then, on October 20, 2024, Pope Francis declared them saints,
placing them on the altar of God.
Today, the Lebanese Maronite Church, along with the entire Catholic Church,
remembers the testimony of these brothers who never abandoned Christ or their
faith in Him. They accepted martyrdom because of their unwavering belief. Their
remains are still kept in the Maronite church in Damascus, serving as a lasting
reminder of their sacrifice and unshakeable faith.
The story of the three Massabki brothers, and the sacrifices of the martyrs of
St. Elias Church, call every believer to reflect on the meaning of true faith
and to be ready to bear witness to Christ in all circumstances, understanding
that the believing soul is stronger than any attempt to destroy it. These
stories highlight that faith is not just a belief, but a life lived and
sacrificed for.
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
Two Killed in Israeli Drone Strikes on South Lebanon's
Kfarroman
This is Beirut/10 Jul 2026
Israeli strike targeted Friday a pickup truck on the outskirts of
Kounine-Kfardjal, wounding two people, and a car in Kfar Rumman.Later in the
day, another strike hit Kfar Rumman again and Israeli artillery shelled the
southern town of Deir Seryan. In another incident, a drone dropped a stun
grenade in the vicinity of al-Mansouri. Israeli forces detonated overnight
houses in the border town of al-Khiam. President Joseph Aoun called on the
United States to "exert pressure on Israel to halt military operations" during a
meeting Thursday with U.S. Ambassador Michel Issa. He told Issa that the
shelling, bombing, and bulldozing operations in southern Lebanon need to stop.
Israeli Drone Strike Targets Vehicle in Southern Lebanon’s Kfarroman
This is Beirut/10 Jul 2026
An Israeli drone strike targeted a vehicle on Friday in the town of Kfarroman,
in the Nabatieh District of southern Lebanon, according to local reports. No
immediate information was available regarding casualties or the identity of
those inside the vehicle.
US to guide Israeli withdrawal from pilot zones in coming
days
Agence France Presse/10 July/2026
The United States will oversee the withdrawal of Israeli forces from "pilot
zones" in the south, with the first to get underway within days, Lebanese and
U.S. officials said Thursday. A U.S. official said that new talks between Israel
and Lebanon would go ahead next week, after a diplomatic source earlier told AFP
that Lebanon had demanded an Israeli pullout from the zones before taking
part.Under a framework agreement reached on June 26, Israel will gradually
withdraw from areas of southern Lebanon where it has sent troops as part of its
military campaign against Hezbollah.
As part of the agreement, the long-disempowered Lebanese military will take full
control of two small areas dubbed pilot zones. The U.S. ambassador to Lebanon,
Michel Issa, told President Joseph Aoun that "an American military delegation
will arrive in Beirut in the coming days to... determine the mechanism for
implementation on the ground," according to the Lebanese presidency.
In Washington, a U.S. official said that "we have moved to the
implementation stage of the framework"."The first pilot zone will launch in a
matter of days, and further pilot zones are being mapped out and planned," the
official said on condition of anonymity. U.S. Central Command will coordinate on
the zones with both countries, he said. "We will soon begin outreach to
international partners to help the Lebanese government effectively restore
sovereignty in these zones and across their country more broadly," the official
said. The agreement says that Lebanon will exert full responsibility for the
zones only upon "confirmation of successful disarmament of non-state armed
groups", a reference to Hezbollah, for years effectively outside the control of
the Lebanese government. The agreement -- rejected by Hezbollah -- does not set
a timetable for Israel's withdrawal, and Israeli officials have also vowed that
their forces will remain in a "security zone" 10 kilometers deep as long as
Hezbollah remains armed. "It is essential to avoid any
vacuum when Israeli forces withdraw from the designated area," Issa added,
according to a statement from the Lebanese presidency.Aoun, for his part, once
again called on the United States to "exert pressure on Israel to halt military
operations and comply with the provisions of the framework". Aoun is expected to
visit Washington later this month at the invitation of his American counterpart
Donald Trump. The latest Israel-Lebanon talks will take place in Rome next
Wednesday and Thursday. The U.S. official said the talks would take place at the
level of technical teams and be closed to the press. Italy had earlier announced
that the talks would take place between ambassadors, much like previous rounds
in Washington.
What will Aoun discuss with Trump in Washington?
Naharnet/10 July/2026
President Joseph Aoun is preparing a comprehensive file ahead of his pivotal
talks with U.S. President Donald Trump, including Lebanon's requests for
international economic aid and a reconstruction fund - under the exclusive
supervision of the Lebanese state, pro-Hezbollah al-Akhbar newspaper reported
Friday. Aoun would also request additional support for the Lebanese Armed
Forces. According to Aoun's visitors and advisors, the
President considers Hezbollah to be highly weakened and entirely directed by the
Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, which itself is currently divided, al-Akhbar
said, adding that Aoun believes that the army can execute what has already been
decided in cabinet concerning Hezbollah's disarmament and does not need any new
cabinet decree. Thus, the President, according to al-Akhbar's report, is not
willing to submit a recently reached framework agreement with Israel to the
cabinet. The daily claimed that Aoun is trying to avoid a debate in cabinet that
could obstruct the implementation of the agreement and prefers to wait until
tangible progress is made toward drafting a comprehensive final deal.
Information Minister Paul Morcos said Thursday that the final deal will be sent
to cabinet for approval. "We are still dealing with a preliminary framework. At
this stage, and in accordance with Article 52 of the Constitution, we have not
yet reached the point that legally mandates its formal submission to these
(constitutional) bodies."
Aoun says won't back down from the decision to negotiate
Naharnet/10 July/2026
President Joseph Aoun on Friday assured a Lebanese Forces delegation led by
party leader Samir Geagea that he “will not back down from the decision to
negotiate” with Israel, while insisting that he will give explanations to the
Lebanese people. “I have made a difficult choice, and the road is not easy, due
to the balance of power, Israeli calculations, the Iranian-American situation,
and other complexities. This choice affirms the sovereignty of the Lebanese
state and its right to negotiate on its own behalf, and it will extricate it
from the effects of the war that was imposed upon it,” Aoun added.
“Why should the Lebanese people continue to pay the price for wars instigated
from abroad and for the interests of those abroad?” the president wondered. He
suggested that the framework agreement signed with Israel with U.S. sponsorship
“will restore Lebanon's rights through diplomatic means, provided that Israel
adheres to its terms and its implementation is successful.” “Today we have an
opportunity to reclaim the gains we lost through a senseless war, especially
given the current American focus on Lebanon and the United States' ability to
pressure Israel to remove the obstacles it is creating,” Aoun went on to say.
“Things are gradually being resolved, and all the criticism directed at this
process stems from a desire to return the Lebanese issue to Iran's control,” the
president added.
What will Aoun tell Trump about Hezbollah’s weapons?
Naharnet/10 July/2026
President Joseph Aoun has said that "as long as Hezbollah’s allegiance is to
Iran, there will be no progress.”“The issues will be resolved when the party's
allegiance becomes Lebanese, not Iranian," said Aoun in a chat with journalists.
He emphasized that "the issue of Hezbollah cannot be addressed by force,"
explaining that "the party is not just weapons, but also an environment (popular
base)," therefore, "matters cannot be resolved as easily as some imagine." In
response to a question, Aoun affirmed that if Hezbollah does not cooperate with
the efforts to end the war in the south, it will “bear the responsibility for
its decision and prove that its allegiance is to Iran, not Lebanon.”He added
that he would inform U.S. President Donald Trump in his upcoming visit to
Washington that addressing Hezbollah's weapons must be done “within Lebanon, not
from abroad, and within a comprehensive social, economic and security
strategy.”“The crucial point is to address the root cause of the weapons'
presence in the party's hands,” Aoun said.On another front, Aoun expressed
cautious optimism about the possibility of "positive steps on the ground next
week."He considered Trump's invitation to visit the White House a "positive
boost," noting that he would travel "to speak with him face-to-face" and explain
Lebanon's history from 1949 to the present. Aoun emphasized that the visit
represents a "golden opportunity" to tell the U.S. administration that
"America's credibility is at stake in implementing the framework agreement,"
urging Washington to have "stronger motivation and greater interest" in
compelling the parties to adhere to the agreement. He also stressed that he
would explain in the U.S. "how cooperation with Hezbollah should proceed to
resolve the issue of weapons," rather than talking about "disarmament," because
"it is an arduous process, especially since the weapons are not located in
specific barracks” but are rather “hidden everywhere."
Lebanese President Urges Hezbollah to Cooperate, Defends
U.S.-Backed Framework Agreement
Al-Markazia/This is Beirut/10 July/2026
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun defended Lebanon’s decision to pursue direct
negotiations with Israel, saying the move reflects the state’s sovereignty and
is necessary to end the consequences of a war imposed on the country. In a post
on X following a meeting with a delegation from the Lebanese Forces’ "Strong
Republic" bloc headed by Samir Geagea, Aoun rejected criticism of negotiations
with Israel, saying such objections "do not deserve a response" as Lebanon has
engaged in direct talks with Israel on several occasions, beginning in
1949.Speaking to VDL News, Aoun called on Hezbollah to cooperate with efforts to
implement the U.S.-backed framework agreement, saying the group must assume
responsibility toward Lebanon and its own community as the country seeks to end
months of conflict in the south. Aoun said the issue of Hezbollah’s weapons must
be addressed by tackling its root causes, arguing that "the mission of those
weapons ended in 2000."
'The Shiite Community Wants This to End'
Aoun pointed to what he described as growing war fatigue within Lebanon's Shiite
community, saying many now want the conflict to end. He added that Hezbollah is
expected to cooperate with the state's efforts, warning that if it does not, "it
will have to face its own community." Citing the late Shiite leader Imam Musa
al-Sadr, he said, "We do not want the South to remain an open battlefield,"
adding that "it is not the destiny of the Shiite community to live through death
and destruction." "The Lebanese Army is united and is carrying out the missions
assigned to it," he said, adding that no one should question the patriotism of
Shiite soldiers and officers serving in its ranks.
U.S. Support and Planned Trump Meeting
On the diplomatic front, Aoun stressed that the United States remains the
guarantor of the framework agreement and revealed that President Donald Trump
had personally invited him to Washington. He said the
visit would provide an opportunity to explain Lebanon's position directly and
seek continued U.S. support for the Lebanese Army and reconstruction efforts. He
also highlighted what he described as strong U.S. interest in Lebanon from both
President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.Aoun added that a U.S.
delegation was meeting Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal to
coordinate the next steps, saying that "practical steps" are expected to begin
on the ground.
Negotiations 'Only Solution'
Reaffirming Lebanon's commitment to diplomacy, Aoun said negotiations remain the
only viable path despite Israel's alleged failure to fully implement the
agreement. "Our primary goals are Israel's withdrawal, the return of the
captives, the return of the displaced, the recovery of the bodies, and
reconstruction," he said.While acknowledging that the framework agreement is
"not ideal" due to the imbalance of military power, Aoun argued that it has
nevertheless reduced attacks on Lebanon and dismissed claims that it does not
guarantee an Israeli withdrawal. "Our only concern is an escalation between the
United States and Iran that could derail the agreements," he added, warning that
broader regional tensions remain the main threat to the process.
Rome meeting to address Israeli demands to form joint
committees
Associated Press/10 July/2026
After weeks of stagnation, a U.S.-brokered framework agreement between Lebanon
and Israel soon will shift to technical discussions in Rome, an American
official said. The upcoming meeting in Rome on July 14 and 15 will address
Israeli demands to form joint committees to oversee the implementation of the
agreement. These would include separate committees for political affairs,
security, and the management of so-called "good neighborly relations,"
pro-Hezbollah al-Akhbar newspaper reported Friday. The proposed framework would
also expand Lebanon's delegation, adding political, diplomatic, financial,
legal, and security experts to the existing negotiating team. Head of the
Lebanese delegation, Ambassador Simon Karam, will head to Rome with Lebanon's
responses to these Israeli demands, the daily said. These committees would
follow up on the agreed-upon points in the framework deal, specifically ending
the state of hostility between Lebanon and Israel, gradually transitioning
toward a peace declaration, and taking the necessary legal and political steps
to achieve it. President Joseph Aoun, who is due in Washington on July 21 for a
meeting with U.S. counterpart Donald Trump, discussed Friday with Army chief
Rodolphe Haykal the implementation of the framework agreement. The U.S.
official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive
diplomatic details, said "pilot zones" that both sides had agreed to will launch
in the coming days while additional zones are mapped out and planned. The zones
will be where the Israeli military is to turn over control to the Lebanese army
in south Lebanon after clearing the areas of any Hezbollah presence. U.S.
Central Command is coordinating with Israel and Lebanon on the zones, the
official said. The dates of the meetings and the location of the zones were not
yet clear. A State Department spokesperson said they were not previewing those
details yet.
How a push to disarm Hezbollah is deepening divisions in
Lebanon
Associated Press/10 July/2026
A deal between Lebanon and Israel was billed as paving the way for peace. But in
Lebanon, it is deepening longtime divisions and raising fears of political
paralysis or even a return to civil war. The
U.S.-brokered deal envisions an Israeli troop withdrawal from Lebanon and an
eventual peace agreement between the two countries — which technically remain in
a state of war nearly 80 years after Israel's establishment. But the agreement
says a full Israeli withdrawal will happen only after Hezbollah is disarmed,
infuriating the Iran-backed militant group. Lebanon's Western-backed government
and Hezbollah have exchanged angry words, and the militant group's supporters
have blocked major roads in protest. One Hezbollah lawmaker said the country
would plunge into civil war if the government tries to force the group's
disarmament. The tensions have stirred up memories of Lebanon's devastating
1975-1990 civil war and reminded many of more recent clashes between Hezbollah
gunmen and pro-government fighters in 2008. They also have raised deep questions
over whether the U.S.-brokered deal will be able to get off the ground. A
resumption of the war between the U.S. and Iran would further complicate the
deal's prospects and raise the risk of renewed conflict between Israel and
Hezbollah. The deal is expected to top the agenda when Lebanese President Joseph
Aoun heads to the White House on July 21.
The deal is rooted in the US war against Iran
Lebanon's political landscape has been divided for over two decades between one
coalition that is Western-backed and another that is supported by Iran and led
by Hezbollah. Both camps see the outcome of the new agreement as existential.
The latest war between Israel and Hezbollah erupted in March, triggered by the
joint U.S.-Israel war launched against Iran days earlier. Hezbollah, which
entered the conflict without seeking approval from the government, has sought to
link the end of its war against Israel to the outcome of broader U.S.-Iran
talks. The Lebanese government, trying to minimize Iran's influence, aimed to
keep the two tracks separate and negotiate a ceasefire directly with Israel.
The Lebanon-Israel deal turned the tables
The pro-Hezbollah camp was jubilant when the ceasefire deal between Iran and the
U.S. explicitly called for an end to the war in Lebanon. That led to a truce
that has substantially reduced the intensity of the fighting between Israel and
Hezbollah. But Israeli troops continue to occupy large swaths of southern
Lebanon, and hundreds of thousands of people remain displaced from villages and
city neighborhoods that have been almost entirely demolished. The linkage to the
U.S.-Iran ceasefire was widely seen as boosting Hezbollah's standing and
cementing Iran's influence over Lebanon.
But days later, the tables turned as Israel and Lebanon announced their June 26
"framework agreement" in Washington. That deal conditioned withdrawal of Israeli
forces on disarmament of Hezbollah throughout the country.
Lebanese rivals are now at odds over the deal
Lebanese government officials have hailed the deal as a step toward liberating
occupied areas of the south and allowing the displaced to go home. But with
Israel giving no timeline for its withdrawal, Hezbollah and its supporters have
accused the government of agreeing to an open-ended Israeli occupation.
Hezbollah supporters protested and blocked roads in Beirut. Some burned banners
bearing the slogan "Lebanon First" — seen as a dig at the Iran-backed group. The
group's leader, Sheikh Naim Qassem, called the deal a "humiliation" and said
Hezbollah would not honor it.
Hassan Fadlallah, an influential Hezbollah legislator, went even further, saying
the government "will not be able to enforce the agreement signed in Washington
unless they go, with American support, to civil war."Such rhetoric brought back
memories of May 2008, when the government decided to dismantle Hezbollah's
telecommunications network. The group sent gunmen to the streets and engaged in
intense clashes with pro-government fighters in Beirut and elsewhere. The
government was forced to annul its decision. Hezbollah is now demanding that the
government abolish its March 2 decision that considered Hezbollah's military and
security activities illegal. Prime minister, Nawaf Salam, says the agreement
with Israel will restore the state's sovereignty over the entire country and has
pushed back against Hezbollah's rhetoric. "I am not looking for a confrontation
with Hezbollah but neither myself nor anyone in the government will accept to be
blackmailed by Hezbollah," Salam recently told the local LBC TV station.
In the meantime, the deal remains frozen
For now, there are no signs of the verbal threats spilling over into violence —
in large part because the deal is deadlocked. Israel and Lebanon have agreed to
establish two "pilot zones" where the Israeli military is to turn over control
to the Lebanese army after clearing the areas of any Hezbollah presence.
Salam has said the implementation could begin soon. But on the ground, there has
been little movement. "There is no schedule for the withdrawal or anything
else," said a Lebanese military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity
because he was not authorized to comment publicly. He said the army has received
no information about when or how the Israeli withdrawal will proceed.
The initial pilot zones announced by Lebanese and Israeli officials include the
towns of Froun, Ghandouriyeh and Zawtar. Israeli troops were not present in most
of that area to begin with, raising questions about how a withdrawal could take
place. The official said the Lebanese army had pushed for pilot zones that were
larger and included more area occupied by Israeli forces. An Israeli military
official, speaking on condition of anonymity under briefing guidelines, said the
army is still waiting for instructions from the political leadership on when the
withdrawal will take place.
A possible political stalemate looms
Lebanon has a history of political violence, but its sectarian power-sharing
system, divided among Shiite and Sunni Muslims, Christians and Druze, has also
been prone to deadlock.Powerful Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a Hezbollah
ally, has warned the deal "will not pass, and it will not be implemented in its
current form."Wissam Lahham, a constitutional law professor at St. Joseph
University in Beirut, said that under Lebanon's constitution, a treaty is not
legally binding until it is ratified by a two-thirds majority of the country's
Cabinet. A Cabinet vote has not been scheduled. Lahham said it's not clear if
the treaty would require parliamentary approval, another potential obstacle.
Qassem, in a speech Wednesday, aimed a message at the government. "Ultimately,
not a single clause of the framework agreement will be approved, and there will
be nothing you can do about it," he said. Michael Young, senior editor at the
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, said the Lebanese
government's desire to keep Lebanon separate from the Iranian negotiations on
national sovereignty grounds was correct "in principle" but unrealistic in
practice."You cannot reach any kind of solution with regard to Hezbollah unless
Iran is on board," he said. "The Iranians will not give up on Hezbollah, and at
the same time the Lebanese are not willing to enter into an armed conflict with
Hezbollah."
Geagea meets Aoun, says state should decide things, not
Hezbollah
Naharnet/10 July/2026
Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea on Friday stressed that "Lebanon cannot
remain in limbo,” adding that “Israel must withdraw from the south, and
reconstruction must begin, but a functioning state is essential for all of this
to happen." Following a meeting with President Joseph Aoun in Baabda, Geagea
emphasized that "we cannot accomplish anything without a truly functioning state
in Lebanon, and this requires a single army and one unified armed force." "We
urged President Aoun to continue with the framework agreement. None of us is in
love with this agreement, but at present, we have no alternative but
negotiations," Geagea said. Commenting on a question about the state making
unilateral decisions, he said: "That's how it should be done. Hezbollah doesn't
get to decide what the state should do."Regarding the "Islamabad track," he
emphasized that it "is related to U.S. and Iranian interests and has nothing to
do with Lebanese interests,” adding that “it's simply about Iran trying to
maintain its influence in Lebanon, which keeps us in the same vicious cycle."He
added: "President Aoun intends to see the framework agreement through to the
end, and we all know this isn't easy. We should all stand behind the state
instead of leveling accusations against it." Addressing “Shiite” citizens,
Geagea said it is not true that they are being “targeted.” “They are like
Christians and all other citizens, and they should stand with the state, which
is best positioned to secure their rights,” he added. MTV meanwhile reported
that Aoun and Geagea held a half-hour private meeting after a meeting in the
presence of the Strong Republic bloc and that the atmosphere was “very
positive.”
Hezbollah MP Says Resistance Will Not Be Disarmed, Even
With Foreign Interference
Al Markazia/This is Beirut/10 July/2026
Hezbollah MP Hussein Hajj Hassan on Friday dismissed the recently announced
Lebanon-Israel-U.S. framework agreement as "tripartite in form but unilateral in
substance," arguing that although it appears to involve Lebanon, the United
States and Israel, it ultimately serves only Israeli interests.
He claimed that "one other Lebanese political leader" had made the same remarks,
an apparent reference to former Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid
Jumblatt. Speaking during a Hezbollah ceremony in Beirut’s Jnah district, Hajj
Hassan said successful negotiations require leverage, accusing the Lebanese
authorities of relying solely on the United States while lacking experience in
international negotiations. He claimed the agreement had been imposed by
Washington and accepted by the Lebanese government. He also argued that the
recent U.S.-Iran negotiations had produced positive outcomes for Lebanon,
whereas the framework negotiated by the Lebanese authorities had produced the
opposite. Hajj Hassan further said the current government does not represent all
Lebanese, maintaining that opposition to the framework extends beyond Hezbollah
and the Amal Movement to other political forces. Rejecting efforts to disarm
Hezbollah, Hajj Hassan accused the authorities of threatening the “resistance”
by seeking foreign assistance to remove its weapons.
“They will not be able, even with foreign forces, to disarm the resistance,” he
said.
Rome Test: Can Lebanon Turn a Diplomatic Framework Into
Reality?
Amal Chmouny/This is Beirut/10 July/2026
Lebanon and Israel are preparing for next week's diplomatic summit in Rome,
where they will tackle the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) to
southern Lebanon, Israel’s military withdrawal, and Hezbollah's disarmament.
These are the most contentious and difficult provisions of the June 26
Trilateral Framework between Lebanon, Israel, and the U.S. Behind the diplomatic
fanfare, the framework is a test of Lebanese state authority, Israel’s
willingness to accept security compromises, and Washington’s ability to enforce
the agreement amid the challenge of Hezbollah’s potential spoiler role.
A Test of State Power
The Trilateral Framework rests on a simple sequence in which Israel will
withdraw from occupied areas only after Lebanese state authorities have
verifiably disarmed Hezbollah in those areas. The
process is structured around pilot zones, where LAF units, accompanied by
international observers, will replace Israeli troops and work to prevent
Hezbollah from reestablishing its presence. They (U.S.
administration) are giving it to the army and the state as a test to see if they
can control and prevent Hezbollah from existing in that area.
“I think the greatest strength [of the framework] is the sequencing. The
Government of Lebanon and LAF actually have to do something,” said David
Schenker, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. The
framework’s emphasis on verification, however, reflects a lack of confidence in
Lebanese institutions’ ability to deliver. Washington is therefore positioned as
both guarantor and enforcer of the agreement. “The
U.S. is going to determine whether the LAF has done its job and whether the
government of Lebanon is meeting the commitments under this agreement. Then they
will presumably ensure that Israel keeps its side of the bargain,” Schenker
explained.
The framework is, in effect, a sovereignty test, one that Lebanon has repeatedly
failed. Since the 2006 War, successive Lebanese governments have been unable or
unwilling to confront Hezbollah’s armed autonomy. The Trilateral Framework, by
design, shifts this burden squarely onto Beirut.
“In my opinion, they are giving it to the army and the state as a test to see if
they can control and prevent Hezbollah from existing in that area,” said retired
LAF general and former MP Wehbe Katicha, who spoke to This Is Beirut. “The only
real guarantor is the U.S. They’ll be on the ground to verify everything.” The
Washington framework can become a historic turning point for Lebanon, but only
if it leads to the disarmament of Hezbollah and the full restoration of Lebanese
sovereignty.
Promise or Mirage
For Lebanese reformists, the Trilateral Framework offers the prospect of genuine
state restoration. “The Washington framework can become a historic turning point
for Lebanon, but only if it leads to the disarmament of Hezbollah and the full
restoration of Lebanese sovereignty,” Lebanese MP Fouad Makhzoumi told This is
Beirut. Makhzoumi’s optimism about the framework is tempered by realism, as he
calls on the LAF to assert its authority over all Lebanese territory.
“Confidence will come from implementation, not promises,” he said. He set out
strict benchmarks for measuring the Trilateral Framework’s success, including a
“clear and time-bound process for the disarmament of Hezbollah and the
progressive deployment of the LAF as the sole security authority across
Lebanon.”“The pilot zones provided for in the agreement should serve as the
first practical step, demonstrating that exclusive state authority can be
successfully established before expanding nationwide,” Makhzoumi added. All this
comes amid the challenge posed by Hezbollah’s armed autonomy. “There can be no
lasting stability while one party retains independent military capabilities or
the power to decide questions of war and peace,” he said.“Lebanon must have one
state, one army, and one legitimate chain of command,” he added.The threat of
civil war, as Hezbollah calls it, is code for resuming its campaign of
assassinations in Lebanon.
Hezbollah’s Looming Shadow
Hezbollah remains the key threat to the Trilateral Framework, with the militia
repeatedly warning that the agreement’s implementation could trigger civil
conflict. “The threat of civil war, as Hezbollah calls it, is code for resuming
its campaign of assassinations in Lebanon,” Schenker argued.
“Iran and Hezbollah have no compunction about murdering Lebanese. They murdered
two dozen Lebanese politicians, journalists, and civil society activists between
2005 and 2018. And they’re threatening to do so again,” he said. “Hezbollah has
demonstrated that they have no regard for the government of Lebanon,” Schenker
added. “They are only loyal to and implement the orders of Iran’s Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).”The Trilateral Framework’s pilot zones are
designed, in part, to limit the possibility of clashes between the LAF and
Hezbollah, according to Schenker. By entering areas from which Israel has
withdrawn, the LAF would avoid having to confront Hezbollah directly. However,
Schenker is under no illusions that Hezbollah will challenge the pilot zones.
“Hezbollah undoubtedly will try to re-infiltrate and re-establish its presence
to undermine this agreement,” he said. “The LAF will inevitably have to take
steps against Hezbollah,” Schenker added. “They still have a problem with
infiltration, with sympathizers within the ranks.”
Washington’s Role and Israel’s Calculus
The U.S. finds itself in a paradoxical position. It is the architect and
arbiter, yet also hostage to the limitations of its partners. The framework
exposes the chronic weakness of Lebanese institutions and the persistence of
Israeli security demands, making progress dependent on Washington’s continued
enforcement. Israel rejects a return to the pre-October 2023 status quo,
insisting its actions in Lebanon are a response to Hezbollah’s violations and
the Lebanese state’s inability to assert control over its territory. “If any
country was firing missiles into a neighboring state, that neighboring state
would attack them. It would respond,” Schenker said. Schenker drew an analogy
between Israel’s policy in Lebanon to that of Turkey’s in northern Iraq. In both
cases, inaction by authorities has been used to justify ongoing foreign
interventions. The Turkish military has established over 130 military bases in
northern Iraq, giving it control over 2,000 square kilometers of land, as part
of its strategy of confronting the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). This presence
has continued as Ankara and the PKK have navigated a peace process since early
2025.
Up until 2025, Turkey conducted regular airstrikes and ground operations in
northern Iraq, including in the Qandil Mountains, where the PKK is believed to
maintain its headquarters. “Turkey has been occupying Iraqi territory for
decades because the Kurdistan Regional Government refused to take any action
against the PKK,” Schenker said. A senior U.S.
military source familiar with the framework sees the agreement as an opportunity
for Lebanon, despite widespread skepticism in both Israel and Lebanon. The
source said that the framework “establishes direct talks, and creates an
irreversible political commitment,” offering Lebanon a path to sovereignty and
security. In doing so, the agreement challenges
Hezbollah’s claim to be the legitimate defender of Lebanon and frames the group
as a domestic challenge for the Lebanese state to address. Unless Lebanon
asserts full authority and confronts Hezbollah’s armed power, the agreement
risks becoming more a reflection of Lebanon’s limitations than a turning point.
How should the framework agreement be understood and
interpreted?
Former Judge and Lawyer François Daher/Facebook/ July 10, 2026
The framework agreement, in its entirety, cannot be understood or interpreted
except from the perspective that Hezbollah, which is affiliated with and
militarily supported and financially funded by the Islamic Republic of Iran's
ideological and political project, has waged three wars against the State of
Israel—in July 2006, October 2023, and February 2026—at the behest of its
patron. All three wars aimed to destabilize Israel's security and dismantle its
state and existence, under the guise of supporting the Palestinian cause,
without achieving their objectives. The continued presence of Hezbollah's
weapons on Lebanese soil, under any arrangement, means that it is entitled to
launch a new war against Israel at any time deemed appropriate by its patron,
and for the same objectives for which it waged its three previous wars. Given
that the Lebanese authorities are either incapable of or unwilling to disarm
Hezbollah by force, fearing a split within the military establishment or a
military confrontation with the group—a situation tantamount to internal civil
war—Israel is fully aware that unless the Iranian regime collapses dramatically,
Hezbollah will cling to its American-supplied weapons, which threaten Israel's
very existence and stability. This justifies, in the aftermath of the February
2016 war, Israel's continued occupation of large parts of southern Lebanon, the
destruction of its infrastructure, and the displacement of its inhabitants
without any right of return. This comes after Lebanon voluntarily withdrew from
the conflict following the July 2006 war, pursuant to UN Resolution 1701, and
again after the October 2003 war, pursuant to the November 27, 2024 agreement,
with the intention of ending hostilities with Hezbollah. As such, the Lebanese
situation is poised to continue indefinitely, marked by suffering, stagnation,
regression, impoverishment, displacement, and internal complications on all
fronts. This will remain the case unless the sovereign and independent Lebanese
decide to establish their own state in opposition to the statelet established by
Hezbollah for the benefit of the Islamic Republic of Iran on vital parts of
Lebanese territory.
Why Macron must reject any future for Hezbollah in Lebanon
Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab News/July 10/2026
French President Emmanuel Macron’s visit to Syria obviously covered many files,
from energy to geopolitical stability. It also had a message regarding Lebanon
that has been repeated several times before. Indeed, France is encouraging the
new Syrian authorities to fully respect Lebanon’s independence and end all
interference in its affairs. In other words, Macron
does not want Syria to play a role in the current back and forth taking place
regarding the disarmament of Hezbollah. Through Paris’ lens, the goal is to
empower Lebanese sovereignty and avoid new entanglements in the Levant. However,
this policy keeps Hezbollah at the center of political decision-making in
Lebanon. And this is clearly at odds with the US’ position.
During his discussion with Syrian President Ahmad Al-Sharaa on the
sidelines of the NATO Summit in Ankara this week, when it comes to Lebanon,
Donald Trump’s message was that the new Syria should play a stabilizing role in
the region by helping to reduce Hezbollah’s influence. He has repeatedly stated
that he believed Syria could “deal with Hezbollah.” Trump also claimed to have
directly asked Al-Sharaa to help contain Hezbollah, while clarifying that this
would not involve a Syrian military intervention in Lebanon but rather security
and political cooperation aimed at strengthening the authority of the Lebanese
state. But this did not seem like a red line.
“Stabilizing” is a recurrent theme in the French and US presidents’ visions for
Lebanon. The US and France seek to strengthen security along the Syrian-Lebanese
border to combat arms and drugs smuggling, as well as the activities of armed
groups, while limiting the influence of nonstate actors that destabilize the
region. This includes preventing Syrian territory from serving as a rear base
for Hezbollah’s activities. Both approaches also seek to ease the pressure of
Syrian refugees on Lebanon by creating the conditions for a gradual and safe
return to their homeland.Both Washington and Paris hope that a rebuilt Syria,
reintegrated into its regional environment, will create vast economic
opportunities and increase strong exchanges with Lebanon. They also want to
reduce the risks of military escalation with Israel. Trump even stated that
Israel should exercise restraint in Lebanon to allow Damascus to participate in
stabilizing the situation.
We are witnessing various efforts to create a new balance in the Levant, based
on sovereign states, secure borders and strengthened regional cooperation. It is
thus not surprising that, as these geopolitical shifts are being outlined, Syria
has been struck by several attacks.
Last week, a bomb attack in central Damascus killed and wounded several people,
while another attack was thwarted in the capital’s suburbs the following day.
Two explosions also occurred in Damascus during Macron’s visit, killing one and
injuring several people but not disrupting his official schedule. This might be
pure speculation on my behalf, but it is undoubtedly not always those who commit
these acts who ordered them.The new Syria is a direct threat to Iran’s goal of
continued hegemony in the Levant. For decades, Tehran benefited from access to
Syria’s Mediterranean coast, allowing it to blackmail and put pressure on Europe
and the US. It is now being cornered. I am not even sure Russia, which is
maintaining its military bases in Syria, would be totally unhappy with an
Iranian exit. There are now several questions and
scenarios. For Lebanon, one key question is how Syria will deal with the threats
to its security. Will it intervene to disarm Hezbollah, which also represents a
security threat to Damascus? And if so, how? Could it intervene militarily? The
quick answer is that, for now, as it is still bringing together all the pieces
required for its own unity and sovereignty, it is unlikely to seek conflict.
However, if clear indications were to emerge that Hezbollah was carrying out
activities that threaten the stability and security of Syria, then this position
could change and a more aggressive posture might take shape.
Another element in this equation that should be considered is what Damascus
could gain from such an intervention. What could make it appealing to take this
risk? Now, some might be surprised by this but it is an extension of a
declaration attributed to former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger that you
cannot make peace in the Middle East without Syria. This concept is what gave
the Assad regime power over both Syria and Lebanon.Through Paris’ lens, the goal
is to empower Lebanese sovereignty and avoid new entanglements in the Levant.
Are we now about to face the same situation, with a potentially greater reward
for Syria in Lebanon, if it removes Hezbollah and the Islamic Revolutionary
Guard Corps from Lebanon like Hafez Assad did with the Palestinians? Is a new
mandate for Lebanon being offered once again?
In essence, noninterference is something everyone wishes for — and it is clear
that the new leadership in Syria is sticking to this vision for now. So, it is
in alignment with Macron’s position. But the issue with France’s view is that it
goes a step further and offers Hezbollah a special status. And it is, in fact,
indirectly shielding it from pressure. This could also lead to the reverse of
its objective being achieved. Hezbollah’s arsenal has
long represented the greatest risk of further destabilizing Lebanon. Today, it
prevents Beirut from exercising full sovereignty due to its parallel power
structures. Tomorrow, it could invite renewed foreign control of the country.
This is why there can be no sustainable future for Lebanon as long as Hezbollah
remains. France needs to take note.
*Khaled Abou Zahr is the founder of SpaceQuest Ventures, a space-focused
investment platform. He is the CEO of EurabiaMedia and editor of Al-Watan
Al-Arabi.
Lebanon and the price of peace
Nadim Shehadi/rab News/July 10/2026
There are two parallel tracks through which an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon
is being discussed. One in Washington, where Lebanon, Israel and the US have
signed a trilateral framework agreement aimed at bringing about an Israeli
withdrawal and ending the state of war between Tel Aviv and Beirut. The second
track introduces complications in that, in Islamabad, Lebanon was also on the
agenda of America’s negotiations with Iran. There, it was Iran that was
negotiating an Israeli withdrawal on behalf of Lebanon. For the Lebanese state,
the process is a balancing act with local, regional and international players,
in which Lebanon is curtailed from acting as a fully sovereign state. But this
is not new and one of the country’s foundation myths explains it well.
Philippe Takla was one of the principal architects of Lebanese foreign
policy. He held the post of foreign minister in 11 governments following
independence. According to him, Lebanon’s political system was formed in the
early Ottoman era, when Fakhreddine II obtained from the sultan a special
autonomous status for the Emirate of Mount Lebanon. He then united the country
by creating a council, in which the notables of various communities and regions
met and consulted with him and with each other irrespective of their differences
and external alliances. He also established alliances with European powers and
sought guarantees for the Lebanese emirate’s existence.
For Takla, these were the foundational elements of Lebanon’s internal and
external policies: balancing special privileges and autonomy from regional
powers with internal consensus recognizing the interests of communities,
combined with the security of Western protection. The same elements existed in
the 1860s, when European protection guaranteed the autonomy of Mount Lebanon in
negotiations with the Ottomans, leading to the establishment of a council of
representatives of the communities working toward political consensus.
These elements of power-sharing also became embedded in the constitution of the
Lebanese state in 1926. After independence, maintaining Western protection was
the main task of its foreign policy. We saw these principles in action after the
1958 civil war, when American Marines disembarked in Beirut to protect the
country from Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser, who was by then the regional hegemon
and was popular in Lebanon’s streets. Internal consensus was reestablished when
Lebanese President Fouad Chehab met with Nasser on the Syrian border.
The pattern was that the establishment in Lebanon restored internal consensus by
compromising with the regional power — which elements of its population were
following — and with the leverage of Western protection. This was repeated with
the Palestine Liberation Organization in the Cairo Agreement of 1969, then with
the Syrian regime in the Taif Agreement of 1989 and with Hezbollah in the Doha
Agreement of 2008.
In the Washington talks, the Lebanese government is trying to break from that
pattern by acting independently as a sovereign state. In Islamabad, Iran is
trying to restore the pattern with itself as the regional hegemon the West has
to deal with when it comes to Lebanon’s security.
Lebanon as a state has avoided participation in any of the four major
Arab-Israeli wars, which is a recognition of its special status. But it was
often a battleground involving both internal and external players. Israel
invaded the country no less than six times without directly clashing with the
Lebanese army. The Lebanese state may have been neutral but its territory was
not. Wars with Israel were not with the Lebanese state
but with nonstate actors linked to one of its communities and external
participation. The Lebanese political system allowed for this, which was another
legacy of the Ottoman era, when communities of millets had a certain autonomy
that involved external relations and protection. The Lebanese state has been in
a state of war with Israel but never at war in practice.Officially, relations
between Lebanon and Israel were governed by the 1949 Armistice Agreements, but
these were abrogated after the 1967 war. They were to be replaced after the
Israeli invasion of 1982, when direct state-to-state talks between Israel and
Lebanon resulted in the May 17 Agreement of 1983. But this was also abrogated by
Lebanon under pressure from Syria, which was then the dominant regional power,
and its internal allies.
This was on the pretext that the Lebanese and Israeli tracks needed to be
“coupled” or coordinated with the Syrian track, as Lebanon was in its sphere of
influence. This is almost precisely what Iran is trying to establish in
Islamabad — a coordination or coupling of the two tracks that limits the ability
of Lebanon to act independently as a sovereign state.
The Hezbollah camp wants to join the Islamabad track and keep Lebanon as part of
Iran’s sphere of influence, while the anti-Hezbollah “sovereigntist” camp wants
Lebanese-Israeli relations to be settled by a sovereign Lebanese state
independently of Iranian influence.
For Lebanon, the price of peace has always involved a compromise on the
country’s sovereignty in favor of both internal and external actors. This is a
characteristic that was built into the politics of Lebanon several centuries
before the official creation of the state in 1921. It has been given the label
of hybrid sovereignty by scholars of international relations and political
geography. This is where although sovereignty is formally vested in the
government, in practice it is shared, contested and constrained by powerful
nonstate actors and external powers.
Wars with Israel were not with the Lebanese state but with nonstate actors
linked to one of its communities. The overall results have been catastrophic for
the country. The last time it tried to challenge both internal and external
forces was when it negotiated with Israel in 1983. The main element then was US
support for the agreement, as it is now, echoing the historical Western
protection for Lebanon. But that was also the element that failed and led to the
collapse of the May 17 Agreement. The stakes are very high and include the
return of more than a million displaced people. The outcome still depends either
on internal, regional and international elements coming together or on the
Lebanese government breaking that cycle and acting as a sovereign state.
In the late 1980s, I met Takla in Paris and he said that the Lebanon we
knew no longer exists — everything has changed. The price of peace today is a
choice between another compromise or a political confrontation with Hezbollah
and Iran. And it still rests on the continuity of US and Western support for the
Lebanese state.
*Nadim Shehadi is an economist and political adviser. X: @Confusezeus
The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on 10-11 July/2026
Trump speaks with Netanyahu, raises 'security
concerns' about Turkey
Associated Press/July 10, 2026
The Israeli prime minister’s office posted on the social platform X that the
pair spoke on Thursday and that Netanyahu “raised the severity of the statements
made by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his people against the
existence of the State of Israel.”After this week’s NATO summit in Turkey, Trump
indicated he may be ready to have the U.S. sell F-35 fighter jets to Erdogan’s
country -- but he also said he’s not yet fully made up his mind. Turkey and
Israel have acrimonious relations. Netanyahu has urged Trump not to sell the
jets to Turkey, saying it would put Israel in danger.The statement from
Netanyahu’s office also said Trump had updated the prime minister on American
moves in the Persian Gulf.
Trump says US agreed to Iran’s request to continue talks,
but ceasefire is over
Reuters, Dubai/10 July ,2026
US President Donald Trump said on Friday that Iran had asked to continue talks
and the US had agreed, but that the ceasefire was over. His comments came after
three Qatari and Saudi commercial tankers came under fire this week, prompting
the US to hit Iranian sites, and Iran to respond with strikes on US military
installations in neighboring Gulf states on Thursday. “The Islamic Republic of
Iran has asked us to continue ‘talks.’ We have agreed to do so, but the United
States has stated to them, in no uncertain terms, that the Cease Fire is OVER!,”
he wrote. Qatari negotiators were meeting officials in Iran on Friday to seek to
de-escalate tensions after Iran and the US exchanged fire and to discuss
navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, a source with knowledge of the
situation told Reuters. Daily tanker traffic through
the critical waterway appeared to have slowed on Friday, after the series of
attacks stoked concerns about the recovery of global oil supplies and shipping,
and highlighted the fragility of the interim truce. Talks in Iran aim to address
the implementation of the US-Iran memorandum of understanding and the issues
that triggered the recent escalation between Washington and Tehran, including
disputes over navigation in the strait, the source said.
Oil prices eased on Friday but remained on track for weekly gains of 5
percent after the flare-up.
Qatari negotiators in Iran for talks to de-escalate
US-Iran tensions, source says
Reuters/10 July ,2026
Qatari negotiators are in Iran to meet Iranian officials in an effort to
de-escalate tensions and create conditions for broader negotiations to continue,
a source with knowledge of the situation told Reuters on Friday, adding that the
talks were being conducted in coordination with the United States.The talks aim
to address the implementation of the US-Iran memorandum of understanding and the
issues that triggered the recent escalation between Washington and Tehran,
including disputes over navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, the source said.
Pakistan PM urges Iran president to preserve ‘hard-earned’ peace
AFP/10 July ,2026
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif of Middle East conflict negotiator Pakistan on
Friday urged Iran’s president to safeguard the “hard-earned peace” after Tehran
and Washington exchanged strikes this week.“We discussed the evolving regional
situation and underscored the imperative of restraint, dialogue and diplomacy to
safeguard the hard-earned peace gains of recent months,” Sharif posted on X of
his conversation with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. Sharif added that
Pakistan remained ready to continue “as an honest and sincere mediator for
lasting regional peace.”
Egypt, Qatar Call for Restart of US-Iran Talks
AFP/10 Jul 2026
Egyptian and Qatari foreign ministers on Friday called on the United States and
Iran to resume negotiations, Cairo's foreign ministry said, as US President
Donald Trump repeated that the ceasefire between the two countries was over.
During a phone call, Egypt's Badr Abdelatty and Qatari Prime Minister and
Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani "urged all parties to
give priority to the language of diplomacy and dialogue and to return to the
negotiating table", the ministry said in a statement. They also called for
"implementing the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the US and Iranian
sides, as a prelude to reaching a final agreement between the two sides, in a
manner that contributes to de-escalation and to enhancing regional security and
stability", the statement added. In a separate statement, Qatar's foreign
ministry said Sheikh Mohammed stressed "the need for all parties to commit to
dialogue and diplomacy" and to implement what had been agreed under the US-Iran
memorandum of understanding, including "ensuring freedom of navigation in the
Strait of Hormuz" to preserve regional security and stability. On his Truth
Social platform on Friday, Trump said Iran had asked the United States to
continue talks. "We have agreed to do so, but the United States has stated to
them, in no uncertain terms, that the Cease Fire is OVER!" he added. The two
sides have exchanged fire on several occasions this week, with Tehran targeting
commercial ships, Washington carrying out strikes in response and Iran attacking
US assets in Middle Eastern countries with drones and missiles. A delegation
from mediator Qatar arrived in Iran on Friday for talks, local media reported,
following the latest escalation between the two countries.
US issues fresh Iran-related sanctions after attacks in
Strait of Hormuz
Reuters/10 July ,2026
The United States on Friday issued new Iran-related sanctions following Iran’s
resumption of attacks on international shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, the
Treasury Department said. The sanctions target Ali Ansari, an Iranian banker and
businessman based in Dubai who had previously been sanctioned by Britain for his
role in financially supporting the activities of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards,
among other individuals and entities, Treasury said. Treasury described Ansari
as a “key financier” for Iran’s new leader Mojtaba Khamenei, saying he had
diverted publicly funded wealth into an extensive overseas portfolio of real
estate and commercial holdings to enrich himself, government elites, and the
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets
Control (OFAC) also targeted key Iranian exchange houses that it said moved
billions of dollars annually on behalf of sanctioned Iranian banks, using layers
of shell companies to obscure the government’s illicit financial activity. The
fresh sanctions were announced on a day of relative calm after a week of renewed
conflict, when three Qatari and Saudi commercial tankers came under Iranian
fire, prompting the US to hit Iranian sites, and Iran to respond with strikes on
US military sites in Gulf states.
Tanker traffic slows in Strait of Hormuz after US and Iran clashes
Reuters/July 10, 2026
DUBAI: Daily tanker traffic in the Strait of Hormuz appeared to have slowed on
Friday, after the US and Iran exchanged hostilities this week and renewed their
arguments over who was in control of passage through the critical waterway. The
attacks renewed concerns about the recovery of global oil supplies and shipping,
and highlighted the fragility of an interim truce while the US and Iran hammer
out a lasting agreement. Oil prices eased on Friday but remained on track for
weekly gains of 4-5 percent after the flare-up. The International Energy Agency
said global oil supply rose by 4.1 million bpd in June as shipping through the
strait resumed, but remained 9.4 million bpd below pre-war levels.
It warned of tight diesel and gasoline supplies, and said refineries
were slower to react to the reopening of the strait than crude prices. The
Strait of Hormuz handled about a fifth of global oil supplies before the war.
Tehran has since largely taken control of the waterway, forcing a stalemate in
its confrontation with the world’s most powerful military.Under the interim
deal, the US ended its naval blockade of Iranian ports, and Iran agreed to
ensure safe passage of commercial vessels. However, this week Washington accused
Iranian forces of attacking three tankers in the area and struck military sites
on Iran’s southern coast and eastern provinces in response. While Iran has not
claimed responsibility for those attacks, analysts say Tehran uses such actions
to gain leverage in negotiations. Iran then attacked
US military sites in Gulf states on Thursday. The US said its action aimed to
keep the strait open and that Iran did not control the waterway. Tehran warned
however that the strait would only be reopened on its terms, and any US
intervention would draw a “crushing response.”The attacks on the three Qatari
and Saudi shipping vessels prompted US President Donald Trump to declare the
truce “over,” but a US official later said Washington was still committed to
finding a resolution with Iran and “technical talks continue.” The New York
Times reported that Qatar had been in talks with Washington and Tehran to
deescalate the crisis. Prior to this week’s attacks, daily tanker traffic had
risen to its highest since the war began, averaging 40 ships transiting the
strait. That was still far off the pre-conflict average of 125 to 140 daily
sailings.
IAEA has lost all knowledge on Iran’s nuclear program: UN political chief
Ephrem Kossaify/Arab News/July 10, 2026
NEW YORK: The International Atomic Energy Agency lost continuity of knowledge
across all of Iran’s declared nuclear facilities following US and Israeli
strikes that began Feb. 28, 2026, which “could not be restored,” a senior UN
official told the Security Council on Friday.
Rosemary DiCarlo, UN under-secretary-general for political and peacebuilding
affairs, said the loss extended to the production and current inventory of
centrifuges, rotors and bellows, heavy water, and uranium ore concentrate,
citing the secretary-general’s most recent report on resolution 2231. It was
adopted in 2015 and unanimously endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
nuclear deal, providing sanctions relief in exchange for curbs on Iran's nuclear
program. The IAEA also reported “a significant deterioration in its situational
awareness following the attacks against Iran by the United States and Israel,”
DiCarlo said, briefing the council on non-proliferation issues under resolution
2231. The IAEA had not conducted any in-field verification activities under
Iran’s Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Safeguards Agreement, the same
instrument that had allowed it to monitor Tehran’s commitments under the JCPOA,
DiCarlo said. She added that the situation has
been compounded by Iran’s decision to cease provisional application of its
Additional Protocol in February 2021, after which the agency received no updated
declarations from Tehran and was unable to conduct complementary access to any
sites or locations in the country. Despite the bleak assessment of the
monitoring regime, DiCarlo said parties to the dispute continue to signal
openness to a negotiated settlement. “While significant differences remain
between the relevant parties on the way forward regarding resolution 2231 and
the JCPOA, they have all underscored the importance of a diplomatic solution and
indicated readiness to engage with each other for this purpose,” she said. The
June 17 Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding between the US and Iran contains
“several important agreements” already reached on nuclear issues, including
resolving the disposition of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, on-site down
blending of enriched material under IAEA supervision, and a commitment to
discuss enrichment and other matters tied to Iran’s nuclear needs. “Today, a
framework for further negotiations remains a critical step towards the peaceful
settlement of the Iran nuclear issue,” DiCarlo said. She added that
Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was calling on all parties to engage
constructively and in good faith to reach a peaceful, comprehensive and durable
resolution consistent with the objectives of resolution 2231 and the broader
goal of strengthening international peace and security, adding that the UN
“stands ready to support these efforts.”
Iran will respond against Israel if infrastructure attacked
Agence France Presse/10 Jul 2026
The head of Iran's supreme national security council vowed to respond to any
attack on his country's infrastructure, warning Israel would not be spared
following recent exchanges of fire with the United States."As we have already
announced, any attack on infrastructure will be retaliated against, and the
criminal Zionist regime responsible for these atrocities will not be safe from
the response of our fighters," Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr said in a statement
carried by state TV.
US eases export restrictions on military items, AI chips
and commercial satellites to UAE
Reuters/10 July ,2026
The US Department of Commerce loosened export controls on the United Arab
Emirates on Friday, making it easier to export military items, certain
commercial satellites and spacecraft, according to a US government posting in
the Federal Register.The UAE government and approved companies also will now be
able to access advanced computing items license-free, the posting said. UAE
companies G42 and Core42 and US companies operating in the country, including
Amazon, Apple, and xAI, are among those that no longer need licenses for AI
chips and servers. In providing the more favorable treatment for certain exports
to the UAE, the Commerce Department said the US had worked with the country for
decades to counter Iran and its proxies, including Hamas, Hezbollah and the
Houthis. “More recently, the UAE played a key role advancing US interests during
Operation Epic Fury,” the posting said, referring to the US-Israeli strikes on
Iran that began in February. Additionally, it noted, the UAE was the largest US
trading partner in the Middle East, and that its foreign direct investment in
the United States was valued at over $1 trillion. Under the new regulation, the
Commerce Department moved the UAE into a country grouping that allows more
license exceptions for military and dual-use items controlled by the department.
The UAE will be the only country in the group that is not a member of
multilateral export control regimes.
Bitterly divided Iran grapples with Khamenei's legacy
Associated Press/July 10, 2026
He is the grandson of an influential Shiite cleric, born in Qom — the heart of
religious studies in Iran — and raised in a traditional family that embraced the
theocracy. But by his late 20s, he had stopped praying and given up on clerical
rule. Now, he can barely discuss politics or religion with his siblings and
father. The tech worker, now in his mid-30s, says Iranian society is deeply
divided, even among opponents of the Islamic Republic, and he blames one man —
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The supreme leader who ruled Iran for over three decades
will be laid to rest Thursday after being killed at the start of the war.
Processions of his coffin in Tehran and other cities brought out gigantic crowds
of supporters in a show of strength by the hard-liners at the core of the
Islamic Republic, who lionized him as a defender of clerical rule who had stood
up to the West and Israel. But underneath run deep veins of discontent that have
grown over decades of bloody repression, international sanctions and economic
mismanagement, and have widened since authorities killed thousands of
anti-government protesters in January. "A gap has opened up in homes across the
country that is really remarkable," said the tech worker by phone from Tehran,
where he now lives. Like others interviewed by The Associated Press to discuss
Khamenei's rule, he spoke on condition of anonymity out of security fears.
The funeral has brought Iran's divide into focus
Khamenei's death, in Israeli strikes on Feb. 28, crowned his legacy in the eyes
of Iran's rulers and his supporters, who consider him a martyr. Echoing the
slogans of ultra-hardliners who oppose talks with the U.S., some who turned out
for the funeral called for U.S. President Donald Trump to be killed in revenge.
"Our goal is to prove to the world that we will not submit to oppression and
tyranny, and that we will avenge the blood of our leader," said Hossein Akbari,
a 60-year-old mourner in Tehran. Khamenei took the
reins in 1989 after the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the charismatic
ideologue who had led the overthrow of the U.S.-allied shah a decade earlier and
inspired a mass following. Under the banner of resisting the West, Khamenei
defied sanctions to build up the country's nuclear program, its arsenal of
missiles and its network of militant allies across the region.
Within Iran, he entrenched hard-line clerical rule by largely
neutralizing the reform movement. He gave the Revolutionary Guard immense
military, political and economic power. As younger Iranians sought
liberalization, he tried to maintain strict control over people's personal lives
and dress codes. The 2009 protests marked a turning
point. A critical turning point came in 2009 with the
repression of protests sparked by vote-rigging allegations in that year's
presidential elections. Dozens were killed in the first major crushing of a
large protest movement. It generated widespread hopelessness, according to an
Iranian activist and former political prisoner who writes for a
reformist-leaning magazine in Tehran. A senior aide to Iran's reformist
President Masoud Pezeshkian acknowledged last month that Iran was "severely
polarized" between hard-core supporters of the Islamic Republic and those who
want its downfall. But Ali Rabiei said there was a large part of society between
the "two poles" that the government could lean on to deliver change within the
system. His remarks were carried by the state news agency IRNA.
There is no reliable polling in Iran, but elections offer a glimpse of
public opinion. Turnout in Iran's last presidential elections dropped to some of
the lowest levels ever, seen as a sign that millions hoping for change saw no
use in voting. Still, the hard-line candidate garnered 13.5 million votes, while
Pezeshkian, the reformist, received 16.3 million.
Many are scarred by January's crackdown
Repeated eruptions of protests since 2009 were met with bloody crackdowns.
January's was the deadliest, when security forces killed thousands to crush
nationwide demonstrations that started over economic woes and then snowballed
into calls for Khamenei's overthrow. The sister of a protester who was shot to
death on Jan. 9 in Tehran summarized Khamenei's legacy in one word: injustice.
For working-class families, Iran's plunging economy has only worsened
since the war. "Workers can barely afford to buy bread, everything is so
expensive," she said. "Since my sister died, mentally, financially, our life has
fallen apart. All we do is look at photos and videos of my sister and cry. What
do we have left?" she said from her home in eastern Iran. A quiet form of
dissent appeared over the past month as Iranians marked the holy period of
Ashoura, commemorated with funeral-style marches honoring a martyred 7th-century
Shiite saint. Videos posted on social media have shown some Iranians joining the
processions with photos of family members killed in the January crackdown.
Iranians feel despair, uncertainty over the future
One legacy of Khamenei is the Islamic Republic's ability to survive his death
and the massive U.S.-Israeli assault. The leadership emerged from the war with
an interim deal with the U.S. that won it some immediate gains. The deal
promises an even greater windfall — a lifting of sanctions — if Iran and the
U.S. reach a final nuclear agreement, though that is uncertain. "It's a victory
for the Islamic Republic," a 35-year-old woman who joined the January protests
said of the deal. But "for Iran's people, until we see the results, we won't
know if it is." She worries about the chasm in Iranian society and rifts among
opponents of the theocracy, some of whom hope for its quick overthrow while
others see the potential for gradual change. "The space for dialogue is very
closed, and I don't mean only the government, I mean the people," she said.
After losing his job at a tech company, a 33-year-old Tehran resident who also
joined the January protests said his main concern was the wrecked economy, where
unemployment and prices have surged. Many of his friends are now jobless, and
his wife's employer slashed salaries. "All of us, frankly, are just trying to
stay alive and all of our struggle is taken up with meeting basic needs like
rent and food," he said.
The theocracy is still under threat
Rebin Rahmani, a Kurdish activist once imprisoned in Iran and now living in
Paris, said the theocracy under Khamenei lacked any answer to multiplying
political and economic problems — except further repression. "Its insistence on
iron-fisted, security-driven approaches will only trigger further unrest," said
Rahmani, a director at the Kurdish Human Rights Network. Protests are
"reigniting every few years with renewed force." Pezeshkian and other
pragmatists within the system want to use U.S. talks to try to get sanctions
lifted and rebuild the economy. For now, they appear to have the backing of
Khamenei's son and successor, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, who is still in hiding
but lent his tentative support to talks in a written statement. Peacetime might
prove the real test of the elder Khamenei's legacy, said Ali Vaez, Iran director
at the International Crisis Group, as rival factions vie to define the future of
the Islamic Republic. "Wartime gave the system a degree of cohesion under shared
duress. But the governance challenges remain just as stark."
Iran using diplomacy to ‘manage crises, gain time,’ Bahrain tells UN Security
Council
Ephrem Kossaify/Arab News/July 10, 2026
NEW YORK CITY: Bahrain’s UN envoy has accused Iran of using diplomatic
agreements to “manage crises and gain time” while attacking Gulf states. Jamal
Al-Rowaiei was speaking in the Security Council on Friday as it reviews the
latest report on implementation of Resolution 2231, an endorsement of the JCPOA
in 2015. The meeting, held under the non-proliferation agenda item, was
requested by Bahrain and the Council’s five European members — Denmark, France,
Greece, Latvia and the UK. It addressed the secretary-general’s 21st report on
the implementation of the resolution. Al-Rowaiei said
the region has, since Feb. 28, witnessed one of the most dangerous waves of
escalation in its modern history as a result of what he described as Iran’s
brutal, unjustified attacks against Gulf Cooperation Council states and Jordan,
using ballistic missiles and drones to target civilian objects, energy
facilities and vital infrastructure. He added that Iran, by closing the Strait
of Hormuz to international navigation, created an unprecedented reality for the
global economy and trade, energy, and food supplies. The Bahraini envoy said
diplomatic efforts on Iran’s nuclear program will fail unless reflected in
Tehran’s regional conduct, adding that the problem has never been the absence of
agreements but rather Iran’s failure to implement them. His remarks came amid a
resumption of Iranian attacks against Bahrain, Kuwait and Jordan, as well as
commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, with the envoy accusing Tehran of
violating the Islamabad Memorandum, signed on June 17.
Al-Rowaiei said that Iran had likewise failed to honor commitments made under
Resolution 2817, adopted on March 11, and which called on Tehran to halt attacks
against regional states. “This reinforces the
impression that for Iran, diplomacy is not a path for resolving disputes, but
rather a means of managing crises and gaining time, while its positions and
aggressions on the ground are expressed through ballistic missiles, drones and
the support, financing, training and arming of Iran’s proxies,” he added. He
said diplomatic progress would be unsustainable without full and transparent
compliance with international obligations and cooperation with the International
Atomic Energy Agency, highlighting the secretary-general’s report that warned of
continuing challenges around verification, monitoring and loss of continuity of
knowledge regarding Iran’s nuclear program.
Restoring confidence extends beyond the nuclear file to Iran’s broader regional
conduct, including attacks on maritime passages and support for armed proxies,
which Al-Rowaiei said constitutes a single pattern undermining security and
confidence in diplomacy.He called on the Security Council to ensure full
implementation of its resolutions, including 2231, and warned against allowing
Council texts and international obligations to go unenforced.
“The Council should not allow for its resolutions or international
obligations to become mere texts without implementation,” he said, calling this
essential to preserving the Council’s credibility and promoting peace and
stability.
Syrian Security Forces Arrest Entire Cell Behind July 7 Damascus Bombings
This is Beirut/10 Jul 2026
Syrian security forces have arrested all members of the terrorist cell
responsible for the July 7 bombings in Damascus, the Syrian Interior Ministry
announced on Friday. According to the ministry, the operation followed precise
intelligence gathering and a series of simultaneous raids carried out by
Internal Security Forces, resulting in the arrest of the entire cell allegedly
behind the attacks. Two explosions shook Damascus on July 7 near a hotel where
French President Emmanuel Macron was staying, wounding at least 18 people,
during the French leader's landmark visit to Syria.
France returns 23 Syrian treasures after 15 years as Macron
visits Damascus
Associated Press/10 Jul 2026
France has finally returned 23 Syrian archaeological treasures that remained in
the country for about 15 years after being loaned for an exhibition. Their
return coincided with French President Emmanuel Macron's landmark visit to
Damascus — the first by a major Western leader since the ouster of Bashar Assad
in late 2024. The artifacts, flown aboard Macron's presidential aircraft on
Tuesday and returned to Syria's National Museum, include Roman bronze objects,
Byzantine and Islamic-era pieces and a richly colored mosaic panel that once
adorned the Umayyad Mosque. The collection was loaned in 2011 to an exhibition
of Syrian antiquities at the Arab World Institute in Paris. The Syrian Foreign
Ministry said that the artifacts belonged to museums in Damascus, Aleppo,
Latakia and Palmyra and remained in France after diplomatic ties between the two
countries were severed under Assad's rule. It described France as the first
country to cooperate with Syria under a national campaign to recover antiquities
held abroad. "Today we are unveiling a selection of archaeological artifacts
that have been returned to Syria," said Ayman al-Nabo, deputy director-general
of Syria's Directorate-General of Antiquities and Museums, at the opening of an
exhibition at the National Museum in Damascus featuring two of the returned
pieces. At the National Museum, curator Nivine Saadeddine said the returned
collection spans some of the most significant periods of Syrian civilization.
"They date from the ninth millennium B.C. to the 14th and 15th centuries
A.D. Every object represents a distinct chapter in Syria's history," she said.
For Maamoun Abdulkarim, Syria's former director-general of antiquities and
museums, the return closes a chapter that stretched across years of war,
diplomatic isolation and failed attempts to retrieve the collection. Abdulkarim,
now a professor of archaeology at the University of Sharjah in the United Arab
Emirates, said the loan was made as part of normal cultural cooperation before
the conflict. Abdulkarim said he formally requested the return of the artifacts
in 2014 but received no response. He said French officials later told Syrian
authorities they could not communicate with representatives of Assad's
government, which had become internationally isolated and subject to broad
sanctions after the crackdown on anti-government protests and the ensuing civil
war. He said UNESCO's Beirut office later tried to mediate, but the effort also
failed.
The dispute also had personal consequences, Abdulkarim said. "We were
interrogated by Bashar Assad's security forces," he said. "We were beaten and
accused of being too lenient in protecting Syria's antiquities. Had it not been
for the correspondence we had sent to the institute proving we had repeatedly
requested the artifacts' return, we could have been imprisoned."Despite the
ordeal, Abdulkarim said he welcomed the renewed cultural cooperation."I am very
happy that, despite everything that happened, the war is over, Syria is
reopening to the world and cultural exchange is returning," he said. Syria's
Ministry of Foreign Affairs said France is the first country to cooperate with
Syria under a national campaign to recover antiquities held abroad since Assad
was overthrown by insurgent forces, ending more than five decades of Assad
family rule. Despite the war and severed ties, Syrian artifacts have previously
been repatriated under formal loan agreements, Abdulkarim said. Around 2017,
Italy returned two pieces that had been damaged by the Islamic State group after
restoring them for an exhibition in Rome on the destruction of cultural
heritage, he added. Other artifacts remain in Japan under a longstanding
archaeological cooperation agreement dating back to excavations conducted there
in the 1980s. Meanwhile, Abdulkarim said, thousands of Syrian artifacts looted
from archaeological sites during the war remain scattered around the world.
"Recovering them will require years of diplomatic work," Abdulkarim said. He
said the return from France sends "a positive message for the future" and could
help encourage further international cooperation to recover Syria's stolen
heritage. Syria's cultural heritage suffered extensive damage during the
country's nearly 14-year conflict. Ancient cities, including the UNESCO World
Heritage site of Palmyra, were heavily damaged, while landmarks such as the
medieval Crusader fortress of Crac des Chevaliers bear scars from years of
fighting. IS militants also destroyed temples, tombs and monumental sculptures
in Palmyra, considering them symbols of idolatry, while trafficked antiquities
became a lucrative source of revenue for armed groups.
Turkiye hopes to have US sanctions lifted soon
Reuters/July 10, 2026
ANKARA: Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said on Friday that Turkiye hopes to
achieve a result on lifting US sanctions and its desire to purchase F-35
fighter jets soon, adding there should be no defense industry restrictions
between allies. US President Donald Trump, who visited Ankara this week for a
NATO Summit, announced on Tuesday that he would lift US sanctions imposed on
Turkiye over its purchase of Russian S-400 defense missile systems. Speaking to
state broadcaster TRT Haber, Fidan said there was political will from both
Ankara and Washington on removing the sanctions, and that the relevant
ministers were working to resolve the issue. In 2020, Washington imposed
sanctions on Turkiye under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through
Sanctions Act (CAATSA) over its acquisition of the S-400s. It also removed
Ankara from the F-35 stealth fighter jet program. The US Congress passed
legislation requiring Turkiye to end possession of the S-400s in order to
rejoin the F-35 program. Fidan said that there were two matters to be resolved
in Turkiye-US relations that are subject to US legislation. “CAATSA is one of
them. The issue of the F-35 jets is another... God willing, we will reach a
conclusion soon; in other words, I do not think there will be any problems in
this regard,” Fidan said in his remarks broadcast on TRT. Two sources told
Reuters this week that Trump was expected to throw his support behind the
potential sale of F-35s during the visit to Ankara. Trump said he “has not
totally made up his mind” on the issue. Turkish daily newspaper Hurriyet
reported on Friday that Turkiye could announce it would resell the S-400s to one
of the Gulf nations as soon as Friday in order to persuade the US to sell F-35
jets to Ankara. Asked on Friday about the media report and whether Turkiye had
sought Russia’s permission for such a deal, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov
saidMoscow had been in contact with Ankara over what he described as an
“extremely sensitive issue.
US senators say agreement reached with Trump on Russia
sanctions bill
Reuters/10 July ,2026
Friday they had reached an agreement with President Donald Trump’s
administration to move forward with updated legislation on Russia sanctions.
“We are proud to announce that we have reached an agreement with the
Trump Administration to move our updated Russia sanctions legislation forward.
We are very pleased with this significant progress and expect to roll out the
legislation very soon,” Senators Richard Blumenthal, Lindsey Graham, Jeanne
Shaheen and Roger Wicker said in a statement. “As Russia intensifies its
slaughter of civilians, it is imperative that the legislative and executive
branches work together to create tools to exact a heavy price on those who buy
Russian oil and natural gas, fueling the Putin war machine,” the statement said.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The legislation, which Graham has been working on with fellow Republicans
and Democrats for months, would impose sanctions on countries doing business
with Russia, including buyers of its energy exports, over Moscow’s failure to
negotiate a peace deal with Ukraine. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022. Trump met
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy earlier this week in Ankara. The tone of
the meeting was a sharp departure from his past harsh criticism of Zelenskyy,
which has included Trump calling him “ungrateful.”On Wednesday, Trump said the
two had developed a “very good” relationship and both Moscow and Kyiv wanted to
end the war that began with Russia’s invasion in February 2022.
The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from
miscellaneous sources published
on 10-11 July/2026
Hormuz will follow the rest of Iran's crumbling assets:
Nadim Koteich/ Xplatform/July 09/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/155831/
1/ Iran's power was built on obstinacy. Every time it dug in to
protect one of its assets, it lost that very asset. The proxies, Assad, the
nuclear program, and now Hormuz, a single chain, collapsing link by link.
2/ Iran dug in to protect its proxies, and they fell one after another. The most
striking collapse was Hezbollah's. It began with the killing of military
commander Fuad Shukr, the pager attack, assassinations that gutted the entire
military command structure the killing of Hassan Nasrallah on 27 Sep 2024. The
strongest muscle in the axis of resistance gave way.
3/ That collapse ran alongside the erosion of the proxies' claim to be national
movements. Hamas brought devastation down on Gaza. Hezbollah had sat out
"resistance" altogether, until it went back to war for Tehran alone, the day
after Khamenei's killing. It stood exposed as a full Iranian proxy, and its
"nationalist" story fell apart.
4/ Iran dug in to save Assad, and Hezbollah's collapse brought Assad down. The
muscle that had propped up Damascus since 2013 gave way, and the regime crumbled
just ten weeks after Nasrallah's death (8 December 2024). The fall of the proxy
pulled down the geography.
5/ With Syria gone, the land bridge to the Mediterranean was severed, and its
function inverted. Syrian airspace opened up, shortening the distance between
Israeli airbases and their targets deep inside Iran.
6/ Iran dug in on the nuclear program, and the open skies destroyed it. Natanz
75% destroyed and lost more than 6,000 advanced centrifuges; Esfahan 90%
destroyed; and the deep-penetration strike put Fordow largely out of service.
For the first time in twenty years, Iran has no clear path to producing
weapons-grade uranium through its own facilities, while losing roughly 2,600 kg
of highly enriched uranium.
7/ The war reached the heart of the state itself: Khamenei was killed on the
first day of "Epic Fury." As for the economy, here is a sample of the data:
$270 billion total direct and indirect economic losses from the war. 6%
projected GDP contraction, per the IMF. €85 the real monthly value of the
minimum wage (under $95). 68% national annual inflation, and 86.5% in rural
areas. 90% inflation on basic, essential goods.
8/ Now Iran digs in over Hormuz. It brandished the strait for decades, and the
war forced it to actually use it. After the renewed US strikes of the past
hours, international maritime-monitoring services reported that the strait has
once again fallen into total paralysis, with no oil tanker or commercial vessel
able to exit.
9/ This renewed resort to strangling the strait is an admission that every other
weapon is spent, and here is the crux. Closing it strangles Iran's own exports
first; it hands Washington a pretext to widen its strikes, as we're seeing now;
and it accelerates the building of routes that bypass it. The tools of closure,
mines, batteries, fast boats, are consumed as they are used. And the closure
unites every oil consumer against Iran, China foremost among them. Tehran can
disrupt; it cannot control. Hormuz will end where every asset before it ended.
10/ The funeral is the definitive theatrical performance of hollow Iranian
obstinacy. The million-strong processions for Khamenei, stretched over days,
chanting for vengeance against Trump and Netanyahu, staged a spectacle of unity
and endurance through which Iran digs in on a single claim: that nothing has
changed, when everything has. The new supreme leader, kept out of sight, is the
hole in the story. Mojtaba Khamenei assumes the office without appearing, and
his absence allows only two readings: either he holds no real power, or he fears
for his life from an enemy that can still reach him. Either way the performance
falls apart: a regime that hides its supreme leader has changed at the root, and
a power that still fears its enemies cannot call itself victorious.
China Launches ICBM, Sanders Proposes Disarmament
Gordon G. Chang/Gatestone Institute/July 10, 2026
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22687/china-launches-icbm
China's military activities have become far more brazen. Some Americans,
unfortunately, have not noticed. For instance, Senators Edward Markey and Bernie
Sanders introduced the Smarter Approach to Nuclear Expenditures Act last
September.
Richard Fisher of the International Assessment and Strategy Center looks at the
rapid increase in delivery platforms, such as missiles and submarines, and
believes China will have 7,000 [nuclear warheads].
[I]f the United States is to possess a deterrent, it will have to carry through
with existing plans to simultaneously modernize all three legs of its nuclear
"triad": missiles housed in land-based silos, weapons launched from submarines,
and nukes carried by bombers and fighters.
The U.S. does not need to match the number of China's and Russia's nukes or
delivery systems, but it does need to maintain a credible deterrent. Markey
proposes to reduce "deployed strategic warheads from approximately 1,500 to
1,000."
Markey's proposal would create an imbalance that might tempt a bold or desperate
aggressor to think it could, by making threats to launch, intimidate the U.S.
into not defending an ally or friend. Russian President Vladimir Putin made such
threats both before and after the start of his ongoing "special military
operation" against Ukraine.
More ominously, the test told the world of Chinese plans. Various publications
have said that the test showed China's second-strike — retaliatory — ability,
but it also demonstrated something else. "This test clearly indicates China's
intent to obtain a first-strike capability," said James Fanell, a former U.S.
Navy captain who served as director of Intelligence and Information Operations
for the U.S. Pacific Fleet, to this publication. What
will deter our enemies from launching nuclear first-strikes? Perhaps a
sea-launched nuclear-armed cruise missile, a Golden Dome missile-defense system,
or "any number of new technologies and strategies," Peter Huessy of the National
Institute for Deterrence Studies wrote shortly before China's missile launch.
One thing Huessy knows will not work: "unilateral restraint that does not take
such threats seriously in the first place."
China's military activities have become far more brazen. On July 6, a Chinese
Navy submarine launched either a JL-2 or JL-3 nuclear-capable, intercontinental
ballistic missile, the first known Chinese submarine-launched missile test since
1982. Pictured: JL-3 missiles are displayed at a military parade in Beijing's
Tiananmen Square on September 3, 2025. (Photo by Pedro Pardo/AFP via Getty
Images)
On July 6, a Chinese Navy submarine launched either a JL-2 or JL-3
nuclear-capable, intercontinental ballistic missile. The missile, traveling in a
southeasterly direction and carrying a mock warhead, landed in the Pacific
Ocean, in the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone.
The launch was the first known Chinese submarine-launched missile test since
1982 and the first ever from a Chinese nuclear-powered sub.
"China's long-range ballistic missile launch wasn't just a routine drill," the
House Select Committee on China posted on X on July 6. "It was yet another act
of CCP aggression toward our allies and like-minded partners in the
Indo-Pacific."
"Beijing is testing global patience to its absolute limit with an alarming
nuclear-capable escalation directly in the Pacific," commented the UnveiledChina
site on X.
The official Xinhua News Agency called the launch "a routine arrangement of the
annual training of the PLA Navy" and declared it was "not directed at any
specific country or target."
Whether targeting any specific country or not, China's military activities have
become far more brazen. Some Americans, unfortunately, have not noticed. For
instance, Senators Edward Markey and Bernie Sanders introduced the Smarter
Approach to Nuclear Expenditures Act last September.
The SANE Act, as they call it, "would reduce wasteful nuclear weapons programs
and generate tens of billions of dollars in cost savings."
"It is time to halt the proliferation of wasteful nuclear weapons programs and
create a future that is safe from the dangers of nuclear conflict," Markey
stated. "Under Trump, the United States is inviting a new nuclear arms race that
will endanger the lives of Americans as well as all those around the world."
The United States is "inviting a new nuclear arms race"? The number of deployed
warheads of China, Russia, and North Korea — perhaps 6,100 — outstrips that of
the U.S., Britain, and France by about 460.
China, for one, is on a tear. It could possess far more than the 620 warheads as
currently estimated.
The current number, however, is not the issue. "I don't think I've seen anything
more disturbing in my career than the Chinese ongoing expansion of their nuclear
force," said Frank Kendall when he was secretary of the Air Force in House
testimony in March 2023.
"We are witnessing a strategic breakout by China," Admiral Charles Richard, then
commander of U.S. Strategic Command in 2021, said.
The Pentagon, in a November 2022 report, forecast that China would quadruple
warheads from about 400 then to 1,500 by 2035.
That is an underestimation. James Howe, the noted nuclear analyst, predicts
China will have between 3,390 and 3,740 weapons by that year. Richard Fisher of
the International Assessment and Strategy Center looks at the rapid increase in
delivery platforms, such as missiles and submarines, and believes China will
have 7,000.
Whatever estimate turns out to be correct, it is simply wrong to think, as
Markey does, that the United States is to blame for an arms race. In fact,
America has not been looking to increase the number of warheads.
America does plan to spend substantial sums on its arsenal. Markey reports
"approximately $1 trillion over the next decade." But if the United States is to
possess a deterrent, it will have to carry through with existing plans to
simultaneously modernize all three legs of its nuclear "triad": missiles housed
in land-based silos, weapons launched from submarines, and nukes carried by
bombers and fighters.
All three legs of the U.S. nuclear deterrent are aging; in many cases delivery
systems are already beyond useful lives. Parts of the arsenal now cost more to
sustain than to replace.
The big spend is not "wasteful," and it is not driven by Washington. It is
driven by Beijing.
There are now no more bilateral arms agreements with Russia. The last one, known
as "New START," expired in February. The U.S. did not renew it because of
blatant Russian violations and China's refusal to engage in arms-control talks.
With Russia and China cooperating militarily, the U.S. is outnumbered.
The U.S. does not need to match the number of China's and Russia's nukes or
delivery systems, but it does need to maintain a credible deterrent. Markey
proposes to reduce "deployed strategic warheads from approximately 1,500 to
1,000."
Markey's proposal would create an imbalance that might tempt a bold or desperate
aggressor to think it could, by making threats to launch, intimidate the U.S.
into not defending an ally or friend. Russian President Vladimir Putin made such
threats both before and after the start of his ongoing "special military
operation" against Ukraine.
Is China also thinking of making threats of this sort? Beijing could have tested
this missile anywhere, but its choice says much about its intentions. As the
Lexington Institute's Rebecca Grant told Gatestone, "Beijing could not have
picked a more obnoxious flight path."
The missile, for instance, overflew what the Chinese call the First Island and
Second Island Chains and was aimed in the general direction of Fiji, which on
the same day signed a landmark defense pact with Australia. The agreement had
angered Beijing.
More ominously, the test told the world of Chinese plans. Various publications
have said that the test showed China's second-strike — retaliatory — ability,
but it also demonstrated something else. "This test clearly indicates China's
intent to obtain a first-strike capability," said James Fanell, a former U.S.
Navy captain who served as director of Intelligence and Information Operations
for the U.S. Pacific Fleet, to this publication.
What will deter our enemies from launching nuke first-strikes? Perhaps a
sea-launched nuclear-armed cruise missile, a Golden Dome missile-defense system,
or "any number of new technologies and strategies," Peter Huessy of the National
Institute for Deterrence Studies wrote shortly before China's missile launch.
One thing Huessy knows will not work: "unilateral restraint that does not take
such threats seriously in the first place."
**Gordon G. Chang is the author of Plan Red: China's Project to Destroy America,
a Gatestone Institute distinguished senior fellow, and a member of its Advisory
Board.
**Follow Gordon G. Chang on X (formerly Twitter)
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No
part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied
or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
The time for talk is over — Trump needs to get tough with
Iran
Mark Dubowitz/New York Post/July 10/2026
Just three weeks after it was signed, the Memorandum of Understanding between
the United States and Iran is on life support. Tehran’s promise to keep the
Strait of Hormuz open for international shipping turned out to be about as
trustworthy as every other major promise the Islamic Republic has ever made. As
the regime was busy staging the lavish funeral for its recently eliminated
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iranian forces went ahead and attacked
three commercial vessels transiting the strait. The United States struck nearly
100 military targets across Iran in response.
Now President Trump has dismissed the negotiations as a “waste of time,” casting
aside any diplomatic niceties by describing Iran’s rulers in stark terms:
“liars,” “cuckoo,” “sick people,” “scum.”
And he’s right. Unlike much of Washington, Trump has long grasped that the
Islamic Republic negotiates only to keep itself afloat.
Get tough with regime
During his first term, Trump pulled the plug on former President Barack Obama’s
deeply flawed nuclear deal, imposed severe sanctions, and ordered the
elimination of Qassem Soleimani, the mastermind behind Iran’s global terrorist
network. In his second term, he twice deployed American military power against
the regime — first in June 2025 and again this year.
Yet Tehran seemed convinced it could simply recycle the same playbook that had
worked for decades. The strategy? Offer negotiations. Buy time. Secure sanctions
relief. Drive a wedge between the United States and its allies. Rebuild military
capabilities. Fund terrorist proxies.
Ramp up missile production.
And, of course, preserve the nuclear program until the next opportune moment.
For years, this strategy worked because Western governments were genuinely
desperate for diplomacy to succeed.
This time, however, Iran badly miscalculated. To be fair, mixed signals
emanating from Washington might have contributed to that mistake. On the one
hand, the Trump administration promised Iran major sanctions relief. At other
moments, it’s issued warnings of devastating military consequences should Iran
fail to comply. These contradictory messages apparently convinced Tehran that it
could once again manipulate the process to its advantage. The lesson for the US
is that it must stop negotiating with a regime that weaponizes negotiations. The
objective shouldn’t just be limiting uranium enrichment: It needs to end
permanently, with rigorous verification. Iran’s nuclear infrastructure must be
dismantled, and its enriched uranium stockpile completely removed. That requires
reinstating maximum pressure across every single front. We need to reimpose the
blockade on Iranian ports.
Iran’s ability to export oil must be permanently revoked. Frozen assets should
remain frozen, rather than being used to finance the regime’s next bout of
aggression. Crushing sanctions need to be enforced, with no loopholes. The
president should direct the US military to win the Battle of Hormuz. He should
establish an maritime insurance organization, backed by billions from countries
vulnerable to the closure of Hormuz and other critical maritime chokepoints.
Worth the risks
Washington also shouldn’t tolerate Tehran using proxies like Hezbollah in
Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen to bully negotiators. The regime has shown
economic incentives do not stop its revolutionary ambitions. Yes, renewed
confrontation carries risks. Oil prices could spike, and political calendars may
become more complicated. But those are manageable costs. Allowing the world’s
leading state sponsor of terrorism to rebuild its power under the guise of yet
another failed negotiation is far more dangerous. Lasting change will have to
come from the Iranian people themselves, who have consistently demonstrated
extraordinary courage in confronting their oppressors. Trump should direct his
intelligence community to develop a plan to provide maximum support to the
Iranian people, aimed at crippling the regime.Trump has recognized that the
Islamic Republic exploits diplomacy as a strategy of delay, deception and,
ultimately, survival. The mistake now would be giving Tehran another opportunity
to prove that point.
https://nypost.com/2026/07/08/opinion/the-time-for-talk-is-over-trump-needs-to-get-tough-with-iran/
Mark Dubowitz is chief executive of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
Read in New York Post
Board of Peace to establish ‘pilot zone’ for Gaza civilians, IDF claims 13
ceasefire violations June 30–July 9
Samuel Ben-Ur/ FDD's Long War Journal/July 10/2026
On July 8, the US-led Board of Peace announced that it would soon establish a
“pilot zone” in southern Gaza. Planned for Tel Sultan, near Rafah, the goal of
the zone would be to move unarmed civilians who have been vetted for Hamas
affiliations to the Israeli-controlled side of the Gaza Strip, separated by the
Yellow Line. In the first portion of July, there was an increase in Israeli
strikes and reported ceasefire violations as Hamas and other groups attempt to
reconstitute forces in the area under Hamas control.
The Tel Sultan pilot zone is planned to be the first of many. The International
Stabilization Force (ISF)—for which several countries have committed to send
troops but have yet to do so—would police the zone with non-lethal weapons. The
National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) would govern the area,
establish humanitarian services, and offer an alternative to Hamas rule. Board
of Peace officials hope the Tel Sultan zone can host tens of thousands of
civilians. If the test area is successful in separating Hamas from unarmed
Palestinian civilians, more zones could follow.
These zones would not necessarily include full reconstruction. Instead, similar
to Section 17 of US President Donald Trump’s 20-point peace plan, they would
allow for “temporary rehabilitation” in areas away from Hamas’s control. Israeli
control of the Gaza Strip, which now accounts for close to 70 percent of its
total area, would not be diminished, though the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are
not planned to have contact with the Palestinian population in these zones.
Residents would be free to leave a zone and return to other areas of Gaza,
though returning would require vetting. Should Hamas continue to refuse to
disarm, as required by the 20-point plan, the NCAG would assume full control
over these new zones.
In Hamas’s part of the Yellow Line, the IDF continued hitting terrorists
attempting to reconstitute the terror group, reporting 13 ceasefire violations
and strikes on several groups between June 30 and July 9:
On June 30, the IDF and Shin Bet intelligence agency announced that they killed
Talal Jabbar Muhammad Abd al Al, who they said “filled a series of roles” in
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Al “commanded a terror cell that raided into
the territory of the State of Israel” during the October 7 massacre and “took
part in holding the hostages” in southern Gaza, according to the IDF.Also on
June 30, the IDF announced that it eliminated Ali Kheid Mohamad Sathitan,
“commander of a Nukhba platoon” of PIJ. Sathitan “infiltrated the territory of
the State of Israel during the October 7 massacre” and “attempted to advance
terrorist attacks against IDF forces and civilians of the State of Israel,”
according to the Israeli military.
Later the same day, the IDF and Shin Bet said that they killed Muhammad Fathi
Abd al Hay Abu Fakhir, commander of Hamas’s “Yabna” Battalion of the Rafah
Brigade. Abu Fakhir had recently been “recruiting new terrorists,” “leading
their training,” and “attempting to restore the battalion’s capabilities, with
the aim of harming IDF forces,” according to the Israeli military, which added
that he was “a veteran commander in Hamas,” “one of the senior figures” in the
group’s supply department, and “a key figure” in its weapons-smuggling network
for about 20 years.
On July 1, the IDF said that it killed four Hamas military wing members in
northern Gaza who were “advancing terror plots against IDF forces.” The four
were Wael Mahmoud Ali al Bad and Muazz Muhammad Hassan Ahmad, two “anti-tank
operative[s]” in Hamas’s military wing; Samih Abu Kamil, a Hamas “platoon
commander;” and Akram Ashraf Hamad al Bad, a “sniper operative.” The IDF also
said that it destroyed “launch shafts and launchers” used by Hamas.
Also on July 1, the IDF and Shin Bet said that they eliminated Adel Jahad
Muhammad Asfour, “a squad commander” in Hamas’s military wing. Asfour had
“advanced sniper plans and IED placements against IDF forces” during the war and
had recently attempted “to rebuild the capabilities” of Hamas while advancing
attacks “in the immediate timeframe,” according to the IDF.
On July 3, the IDF and Shin Bet said that they killed Muhammad Naim Jundiya,
“head of military security” for Hamas’s Shejaiya Battalion. Jundiya served as
“head of a Nukhba squad” that raided Kibbutz Nahal Oz and “took part in the
abduction of Captain Daniel Perez” during the October 7 massacre, according to
the Israeli military. The IDF also said Jundiya was responsible for holding
Yotam Haim, Samer al Talalqa, and Alon Shmeriz “in Hamas captivity in an
underground tunnel” and had recently tried to advance attacks against Israeli
forces.
On July 5, the IDF said that it killed Muhammad Najib Ashur, “commander of a
Nukhba company” in Hamas’s military wing, and Taamir Saeed Abu Nahal, “head of a
cell” in Hamas’s military wing. Both men were “involved in advancing terror
plots against IDF forces” and were killed after “posing a threat” to Israeli
troops, according to the Israeli military.
On July 6, the IDF said that it struck five terrorists who “attempted to
rehabilitate an underground terror infrastructure” in northern Gaza, west of the
yellow line. The IDF said that Hafez Hafez Abdallah al-Houjari, “a Nukhba
terrorist” in Hamas’s Eastern Jabalia Battalion, was killed in the strike, and
that “hits were identified on additional terrorists.”
Also on July 6, the IDF said that it killed Fadi Falah Aashur Daghmash, “a
commander in the training division” of Hamas’s military wing. Daghmash “led
various training activities,” including training Hamas’s Nukhba force “in the
years leading up to the October 7 massacre,” and was “one of the managers of the
fighting” against Israeli forces in Gaza and tried “to restore the capabilities”
of Hamas, according to the IDF. On July 7, the IDF and
Shin Bet said that they killed Ahmed Yahya Ibrahim Botash, “commander of a
Nukhba squad” in Hamas. Botash “advanced terror plots against” Israeli forces
“throughout the war and also recently,” according to the IDF. In a separate
strike, the IDF said it killed Hamuda Abu Daka, “commander in the military
intelligence unit” of Hamas, who was “engaged in gathering intelligence on IDF
forces” for “directing and executing terror plots.”
On July 8, the IDF said that it killed Muhammad Imad al Rahman Abu Taima, “head
of a Nukhba cell” in Hamas’s military wing. Taima “raided Kibbutz Nir Yitzhak”
during the October 7 massacre and later “commanded a Nukhba cell in ambushes”
against Israeli forces, according to the IDF. The Israeli military said he had
recently been “promoting additional terror plots,” “maintaining the terrorists’
readiness,” and “attempting to recruit new terrorists.”
On July 9, the IDF and Shin Bet said that they killed Abu Salam, “a field
commander” who previously served as “commander of the western company in Khan
Yunis.” Salam “infiltrated the territory of the State of Israel” during the
October 7 massacre and “took part in the abduction of Israeli civilians to the
Gaza Strip,” according to the IDF, which also said he “took part in holding them
in captivity” in southern Gaza. The Israeli military added that he had recently
advanced “additional terror plots,” including an attempt “to rehabilitate combat
means” intended to harm Israeli forces.
Later the same day, the IDF said that it killed Rashid al Kaki, “head of a
department in the production apparatus” of the Popular Front for the Liberation
of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC). Kaki “played a central role” in the
group’s production apparatus, which the IDF said is responsible for “the
production and supply of all combat means” to the group’s military wing. In a
separate strike, the IDF also killed Abdullah Bahaa al Din Razq al-Suti, whom it
identified as “a sniper operative” in Hamas’s military wing.
*Samuel Ben-Ur is a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of
Democracies
How the Houthis Could Put the World in Double Dire Straits
Bridget Toomey/National Review/July 10/2026
https://www.nationalreview.com/2026/07/how-the-houthis-could-put-the-world-in-two-dire-straits/
The terror group could use the lessons it learned from the Iran war to endanger
the global community.
The Yemeni warfront, perpetually threatening and occasionally lethal for Israel,
was relatively quiet during the recent war between the United States, Israel,
and Iran. But while the Houthis, the Islamic Republic’s partner in Yemen,
weren’t firing many drones and missiles, they were watching closely.
After weathering numerous waves of American and Israeli airstrikes since 2024 —
including incurring significant damage to critical infrastructure — and facing
growing economic troubles in Yemen, the Houthis are looking for funds. Here, the
cash-strapped, Iran-backed terror group takes away two big lessons from its
patron’s experience in the war: that demanding a toll from ships passing through
the narrow strait separating the Indian Ocean from the Red Sea (the Bab
al-Mandeb) may be lucrative, and that Saudi Arabia is vulnerable.
The memorandum of understanding (MOU) between Washington and Tehran says that
Iran will permit vessels to transit the Strait of Hormuz “with no charge for 60
days only.” The Islamic Republic is already laying the groundwork for a fee
structure by mandating that shippers carry insurance approved by the new Persian
Gulf Strait Authority, which the U.S. Treasury sanctioned in late May,
describing it as “a new attempt by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
(IRGC) to monetize its campaign of state-sponsored terror by extorting vessels
transiting the Strait of Hormuz.” Iran is providing this insurance free of
charge for the 60-day window but afterward intends to charge for it. That would
effectively establish tolls in the strait under the guise of fees for a service.
President Donald Trump has insisted there will be no tolls after the 60-day
period “unless they are imposed by and for the United States of America, should
the deal not be completed.” But regardless of these assurances, the recent
conflict and MOU have eroded confidence in America’s commitment to freedom of
navigation and certainly the willingness of Washington to use force to protect
it.
Not only governments suffer from impeded maritime passageways. Private companies
in the shipping industry also pay. The failure of the international community to
decisively open the Red Sea after the Houthis began their campaign on commercial
shipping in 2023 left shipping companies hesitant to return. The UN Panel of
Experts on Yemen reported in October 2024, amid the Houthi campaign against
shipping in the Red Sea, that the group was collecting “illegal safe-transit
fees,” amounting to roughly $180 million a month, though the group denied the
claim. Concerns of Red Sea tolling resurfaced in a Lloyd’s List report in April
2026, citing security and intelligence firm Obsidian International.Despite
ongoing concerns over the Houthi threat, the Iranian closure of the Strait of
Hormuz has forced Gulf countries to reroute oil exports to the Red Sea port of
Yanbu. From March to May, Saudi Arabia exported an average of about 3.6 million
barrels per day (bpd) through the port, up from around 750,000 prior to the
conflict with Iran. It intends to increase exports to more than 5 million bpd.
Gulf countries are also trucking non-oil products, including much-needed
fertilizer, across the Arabian desert to export via the Red Sea. Although the
MOU enables a return of some shipping via the Strait of Hormuz, the Red Sea will
continue to be both an important transitway, for its connection to the Suez
Canal, and a pressure valve for Gulf exports.
The Houthis are also eyeing another potential cash cow — their neighbor to the
north. In March, the group’s leader, Abdulmalik al-Houthi, claimed more than $57
billion in an unusually detailed accounting of the damages that he blames on the
Saudi-led coalition that fought the group from 2015 until a truce in
2022.Abdulmalik’s speeches in June continue to emphasize the Houthis’ narrative
of Saudi culpability, along with the United States and Emiratis, for
“conspiracies” that have exploited and impoverished Yemen. Of course, there is
no mention of Houthi responsibility for the rampant violence, mismanagement, and
theft that have crippled the country. Previously, the
Houthis have been constrained by concerns that demanding too much too quickly
could provoke a response from Riyadh, perhaps even militarily. But Saudi Arabia
is vulnerable to Houthi threats. Saudi oil facilities, cities, and key
infrastructure are all well within reach of Houthi drones and missiles.During
Saudi-led coalition operations against the Houthis, the Iran-backed group
demonstrated its willingness and ability to attack the Gulf, particularly Saudi
Arabia, with hundreds of drone and missile attacks. Since then, the Houthis have
only improved their capabilities.
After weathering hundreds of Iranian drones and missiles after February 28,
Saudi Arabia isn’t eager to incur more damage. Iran successfully attacked
numerous Saudi refineries, oil fields, and the country’s East–West pipeline,
which enables it to export oil via the Red Sea — all affecting its ability to
produce, refine, and export oil and natural gas. While the country was able to
repair much of the damage relatively quickly, concerns related to the economic
impact of future interruptions or damage have not abated.
Riyadh is not eager to risk another conflict now. However, if Saudi Arabia’s
leadership did want to act against the Houthis, they would want assurances of
American support before undertaking substantial action against the Houthis —
assurances they are unlikely to receive as Washington hopes to avoid embroiling
itself in further regional conflict.The Houthis survived the war begun by
Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack on Israel with an elevated status in Iran’s Axis
of Resistance network of terror groups. But to continue their bid for regional
and even global influence, they will need an influx of funds. If Washington
shows it is willing to grant concessions to the patron, the proxies will likely
get greedy as well. The Houthis know they have leverage and will use that to
extort not only their neighbors but the global community.
*Bridget Toomey is a research analyst at the
Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD)
US, Iran tensions remain high amid Strait of Hormuz
standoff. Updates
Michael Loria, USA TODAY/July 10, 2026
The fragile ceasefire between the United States and Iran appears to have fallen
apart over continued strife over the Strait of Hormuz, as Iranians buried their
supreme leader, killed at the outset of the war.
A U.S. official told USA TODAY that President Donald Trump regards Iran's recent
attacks on commercial vessels in the critical shipping lane as "acts of
terrorism." But the official added that negotiations have not completely fallen
apart, saying that the "United States is still committed to finding a
resolution, and technical talks continue." Iranian officials have not given
indications in public statements that talks remain underway. The country has
been absorbed by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's burial Thursday at one of the holiest
sites for adherents of Shia Islam, where attendees carried signs offering $100
million for Trump's assassination. Experts have said locals are paid to appear
at the demonstrations.
The war has rocked the global economy since it was launched on Feb. 28. Global
fuel prices have fallen somewhat amid the on-again, off-again ceasefire. But
continued attacks threaten to drive prices back up again.
IEA says lasting peace agreement a 'must' for oil markets
08:33 AM ET, July 10 2026
A recovery in world oil demand is underway, the International Energy Agency said
Friday, but renewed U.S.-Iran hostilities this week and disrupted traffic in the
Strait of Hormuz could change its outlook for an oil market surplus next
year."While the global oil market balance looks set to swing back to surplus
towards the end of the year, the forecast hinges on the assumption that tanker
flows through the Strait will gradually recover," the International Energy
Agency said in a report. "Renewed exchanges of fire in the Gulf this week
highlight the risks of not reaching a lasting peace agreement, which is a must
for the normalisation in oil markets."
Crude oil stood above $72 a barrel on Friday morning, remaining on track for a
weekly gain of nearly 5%, according to Trading Economics. The national average
price for a gallon of regular gasoline inched up again on Friday to $3.88, up
from $3.85 the day before, according to AAA.
US official: 'Technical talks continue'
07:12 AM ET, July 10 2026, Michael Loria
A U.S. official told USA TODAY that negotiations with Iran continue on some
level.
"The United States is still committed to finding a resolution, and technical
talks continue," the U.S. official said. "Iran can never possess a nuclear
weapon."
Iranian officials did not immediately publicly confirm U.S. officials' claim
that talks were ongoing.
Crude oil stood above $72 a barrel on Friday morning, remaining on track for a
weekly gain of nearly 5%, according to Trading Economics. The national average
price for a gallon of regular gasoline inched up again on Friday to $3.88, up
from $3.85 the day before, according to AAA.
US official: 'Technical talks continue'
07:12 AM ET, July 10 2026, Michael Loria
A U.S. official told USA TODAY that negotiations with Iran continue on some
level. "The United States is still committed to finding a resolution, and
technical talks continue," the U.S. official said. "Iran can never possess a
nuclear weapon."
Iranian officials did not immediately publicly confirm U.S. officials' claim
that talks were ongoing.
"The MOU is performance-based, and Iran's actions constitute failed performance
at an unacceptable level," the U.S. official added.
Supreme leader buried
07:02 AM ET, July 10 2026, Michael Loria
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the longtime supreme leader in Iran who was killed in
U.S.-Israeli airstrikes at the outset of the war, has been buried, according to
Iranian state media.
The former leader of the Islamic Republic was buried in Mashhad in northeastern
Iran beside the shrine of Imam Reza, state media reported. The site is
considered one of the holiest among adherents of Shia Islam.
Khamenei became the second supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran in
1989.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: US, Iran tensions remain high
amid Strait of Hormuz standoff. Updates
What France hopes to gain from re-engaging with Syria
ANAN TELLO/Arab News/July 10, 2026
LONDON: French President Emmanuel Macron has become the first European head of
state to visit Damascus since the fall of President Bashar Assad in late 2024,
marking another pivotal step in Syria’s emergence from years of diplomatic
isolation. With Syria’s political transition still fragile, observers are asking
what France hopes to gain. Samy Akil, a senior adviser at The Syria Report, said
the visit reflects a long-term strategic calculation.
“Paris is trying to plan more strategically in the long term,” Akil told Arab
News. “France has long seen itself as a leading power in the Mediterranean,
especially in Lebanon and, to a lesser extent, Syria.”
In that context, Macron’s landmark visit may be “part of an effort by the French
government to position itself as the key interlocutor between the EU and Syria —
or at the very least to ensure that any future EU policy on Syria aligns with
French priorities,” Akil said.
To achieve that, France appears to be backing Syria’s institutional and
financial recovery, including, Akil said, “support for reconstruction, the
restoration of banking services, and efforts to help Syrian businesses resume
operations and revive the labor market.”
Macron arrived in Damascus on July 6 for talks with interim President Ahmad
Al-Sharaa, focusing in part on regional security ahead of the NATO summit in
Ankara. The French president was accompanied by a business delegation exploring
investment opportunities, Syria’s state news agency SANA reported. France has
taken a leading role in Europe’s outreach to Syria since Assad’s departure on
Dec. 8, 2024. Paris has pushed to ease sanctions, hosted an economic conference
in February 2025 to support Syria, and invited Al-Sharaa to Paris in May.
Economic interests are central to France’s approach in the war-weary country.
Benjamin Feve, a senior consultant at Karam Shaar Advisory, said: “France can
theoretically help in almost every sector — energy, ports, logistics, health,
education, banking and public administration, especially institutional reform.”
But, he added, the key word is “theoretically.”
“French companies remain very risk-averse,” he explained. “Like most firms, they
are still concerned about lingering US sanctions, unclear investment rules, weak
arbitration mechanisms and the disconnect in banking services.”He added that
high input costs and weak purchasing power inside Syria remain additional
obstacles. Indeed, nearly 15.6 million people in Syria, or two thirds of the
population, require humanitarian assistance, and 90 percent are living below the
poverty line, according to UN figures. The country’s GDP has shrunk by more than
half since the outbreak of the civil war in March 2011.As a result, France’s
most immediate role may be less about large-scale investment and more about
laying the groundwork for it, according to Feve.
That could include “supporting the frameworks that would make investment
possible: better laws, clearer procedures, technical assistance, and
institutions that are reliable and predictable,” he suggested.
Beyond reconstruction, France also sees Syria as a potential hub for regional
trade routes linking the Gulf to Europe, Akil said. Early examples include
commercial agreements involving shipping giant CMA CGM, aviation partnerships
and plans for dry ports.
Those ambitions were reflected in a series of agreements signed on July 7
covering transport, aviation, health, banking, trade, infrastructure and higher
education. Among them was a strategic partnership between Syria’s ports
authority and CMA CGM spanning maritime, air and logistics operations, according
to Syrian media. In addition, Syrian Foreign Minister
Asaad Al-Shaibani and his French counterpart, Jean-Noel Barrot, signed a
framework declaration on comprehensive cooperation to strengthen political,
economic and institutional ties across multiple sectors.
Macron also used the visit to return 23 Syrian archaeological artifacts that had
been in Paris for about 15 years after being loaned for an exhibition. The items
were flown to Damascus aboard his presidential aircraft and placed in the
National Museum.
Despite France’s early engagement, Nanar Hawach, senior Syria analyst at the
International Crisis Group, said its influence “may only go so far, given that
Washington, the Gulf capitals and Turkiye hold the levers that matter most to
Damascus.”
The US controls sanctions policy and access to international financial systems,
shaping whether foreign firms can invest or operate in Syria. Meanwhile, Gulf
countries, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE, have the political
willingness and the financial capacity to fund large-scale reconstruction.
Security concerns also complicate France’s approach, as Joshua Landis, director
of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, pointed
out. “As French businesses make more investments in Syria, France will be even
more concerned about terrorist activity in Syria and the possibility that it
will undermine regional stability and French investments in Syria,” Landis told
Arab News.That risk was underscored during Macron’s recent visit.
“President Macron’s trip to Syria was clearly impacted by the bombs that
exploded not far from his hotel,” Landis said, referring to two explosions near
the Four Seasons hotel in central Damascus, where Macron was staying, that
injured 18 people, according to Syrian media. “Both he and President Al-Sharaa
put their best face forward and ignored the explosions, but the visit narrowly
escaped disaster.”Macron wrote on X after the twin blast: “Nothing can smother
the aspiration of Syrian women and men to live in a fully sovereign, safe,
pluralistic, and united Syria.”
Later that day, Al-Sharaa reportedly praised Macron’s courage for continuing his
visit.
On July 9, Syrian authorities said they had arrested suspects linked to the
bombings, which officials, citing preliminary investigations, attributed to
Daesh, though the militant group did not claim responsibility. Counterterrorism
cooperation is a central pillar of France’s engagement, analysts say.
“France has been developing improved cooperation from Damascus on identifying
and neutralizing (Daesh) cells, disrupting terrorist financing, and dismantling
extremist propaganda,” Landis said. “This counterterrorism and security
collaboration involves strategic intelligence-sharing and institutional support.
In exchange, France — acting alongside the US — has moved to support
institutional security and stability.”Macron said during his visit that France
was exploring expanded security cooperation, including potential support from
special forces in the fight against Daesh.
Another priority is tracking French nationals who have joined extremist groups
in Syria.
“France is, naturally, focused on tracking and resolving their status,” Landis
said. “Al-Sharaa has promised that they will not be allowed to plot foreign
operations from Syrian soil, but that may not entirely reassure French
authorities.”He added that AFP quoted a French security source describing
cooperation between Damascus and Western countries in combating extremists as
“generally good.”
However, the continued presence of these fighters “poses a problem for Al-Sharaa
because some reject integration into the Syrian military and adopt more
extremist positions,” Landis said.
“For this reason, France wants actionable field intelligence on French nationals
who traveled to the region to join extremist groups. Paris needs Damascus to
help track, locate, or verify the status of these individuals to prevent their
return to Europe.”
Providing more detail, analyst Akil said: “There are a few dozen French
nationals or foreign fighters operating in or still present in Syria. The most
notable of them is Firqat Al-Ghuraba, which operates in Harem in Idlib and is
under the command of Omar Omsen.” The latter is the adopted name of the
Franco-Senegalese criminal-turned-preacher Oumar Diaby.
French security sources previously told AFP that “around 50” people are believed
to be part of Omsen’s group, based in a displacement camp known as the French
Migrants Camp in Idlib.
As a result, France appears focused on containment rather than repatriation,
analysts say.
“France’s priority here is to ensure that the remaining foreign fighters are
either absorbed into the state apparatus or kept under tight surveillance by
Syrian intelligence and security services, in coordination with French
counterparts,” Akil said, adding that there seems to be “little appetite in
France to bring these fighters home.”He continued: “In many Western countries,
repatriating battle‑hardened fighters generates intense domestic backlash and
negative publicity, and France is no exception. The aim instead is to keep these
individuals on a very short leash so they cannot remobilize or form new groups
that might conduct operations outside Syrian territory.
“From what we understand, coordination between Syrian intelligence authorities
and French intelligence services on this issue has so far been relatively
effective.”
Similarly, analyst Hawach said France “may want Damascus to become the partner
that keeps (Daesh) suppressed and prevents Syrian territory from again serving
as a base for attacks abroad, as the (Kurdish-led) Syrian Democratic Forces can
no longer carry that role on its own.”
He added that “cooperation would likely center on tighter state control over the
foreign fighters integrated into Syria’s armed forces and on workable custody
and prosecution arrangements for the European detainees still held in the
northeast.”
Beyond security, migration policy may be another driver of engagement.
Since the toppling of Assad, the EU has pushed to repatriate Syrian refugees.
Within days of his fall in December 2024, Germany, Denmark, Sweden and Austria
suspended asylum processing for Syrians and announced plans for “orderly
repatriation and deportation.”Multiple member states have since reviewed Syrian
protection status and begun revocation proceedings.
“Refugee return is a major structural driver behind France’s push to improve
relations and normalize diplomatic ties with Syria’s government,” Landis said.
“Facilitating the ‘safe, dignified, and voluntary return’ of Syrian refugees is
a core pillar of the EU’s and France’s renewed diplomatic approach toward
post-Assad Damascus.”However, he noted that “France and Europe have been
explicit that they do not want to force refugee return before Syria is stable
and has jobs.”Macron, Landis said, “explicitly tied refugee returns to Syria’s
internal recovery,” adding: “European leadership acknowledges that refugees will
not return home unless basic living conditions exist.”Still, Hawach argued
France’s position is more limited. “France’s shift is shaped more by security
and investment than by a mass return agenda,” he said, noting the country hosts
a comparatively small Syrian population and has kept its policies voluntary.“The
migration pressure shaping European policy on Syria comes mainly from Berlin and
The Hague, rather than Paris,” he stated. While Macron’s trip is a bet that
France can lock in influence over Syria’s reconstruction and security
architecture, whether Paris can turn early moves into lasting leverage remains
uncertain.
Europe’s Taliban handshake: When values become negotiable
Yevgeniya Mikhaildi/Al Arabiya English/10 July ,2026
6 minament and NATO headquarters. They sat down with representatives from 15 EU
member states, marking the first time the EU had hosted a Taliban delegation in
Brussels since the group returned to power in 2021.
Belgium issued the delegation five one-day visas after a security review, and
the meeting itself took place at an undisclosed location, since neither Belgium
nor the EU formally recognizes the Taliban government. Officials described it
afterward as technical, migration-focused talks, though critics saw something
else entirely – the moment Europe’s own human rights rhetoric collided with its
migration anxieties.
Commitments still unmet
Much of what Brussels chose to look past traces back to the 2020 Doha Agreement,
under which the Taliban made counterterrorism commitments not to allow Afghan
soil to be used by groups threatening the United States and its allies, while
Afghanistan’s political future was left to intra-Afghan talks that never
produced inclusive governance. Those commitments, more than six years after Doha
and nearly five years after the Taliban’s return to power, remain largely
unfulfilled. UN and US assessments continue to
document the presence or activity of TTP, al-Qaeda and AQIS, while ISIS-K
remains active despite sustained Taliban operations against it. Meanwhile,
Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu claimed in May that between
18,000 and 23,000 fighters linked to more than 20 armed groups were operating in
Afghanistan. The 2022 killing of al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri at a Kabul
property linked to a senior Haqqani figure intensified questions about Taliban
compliance with the agreement.That question resurfaced just over a week after
Brussels, when Pakistan said on July 1 that it had shot down four drones
launched from Afghanistan into Balochistan, while Afghanistan’s Taliban
authorities said they had carried out airstrikes on what they called ISIS
targets in Pakistan’s Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provinces. It was the
latest round in a longer cycle of cross-border incidents, and a reminder of how
unresolved the security guarantees under Doha remain.
Inside Afghanistan, restrictions on women have continued to widen, with more
than 2.2 million girls still barred from secondary and higher education and,
since August 2021, more than 70 decrees issued affecting women’s movement, work
and public presence, a body of policy some UN experts have described as gender
apartheid. Alongside that, around 21.9 million Afghans need humanitarian
assistance.
Migration pressure, moral cost
Brussels frames its outreach as migration arithmetic – Eurostat says Afghans
filed 63,900 first-time asylum applications in the EU in 2025, making them the
second-largest nationality group after Venezuelans. The June meeting followed a
Commission delegation’s visit to Kabul in January. A Commission spokesperson
insisted the contact remains strictly technical and “does not mean
recognition.”Kabul, however, drew a different lesson from the encounter, with
foreign ministry spokesman Abdul Qahar Balkhi calling the visit “historic,” the
first time an Islamic Emirate delegation had held talks with the European
Commission and EU states in Brussels. He described an agenda reaching well
beyond deportations, including diplomatic presence, trust-building measures and
a “dignified return process,” meaning Kabul walked away with exactly the
diplomatic foothold Brussels insists it did not grant.
Pakistan, meanwhile, has pushed its own returns even harder over the same
stretch, with more than 66,000 Afghans expelled across the border between May 30
and July 2, according to figures from the Taliban’s own refugee commission, most
forced back through Torkham, Spin Boldak and Bahramcha. Pakistan, unlike Europe,
is dealing with the direct consequences of Afghan instability, terrorism,
illegal migration and border insecurity, while Brussels is now discovering that
moral rhetoric becomes harder when migration pressure reaches home.For years,
Pakistan warned that engagement with Kabul without enforceable counterterrorism
benchmarks would embolden the Taliban, not moderate them.
That contradiction has not gone unnoticed inside Europe’s own
institutions, where Socialist MEP Cecilia Strada called the meeting “a shameful
chapter for Europe,” Green MEP Saskia Bricmont said it was unacceptable to host
a delegation from a government she considers systematically restrictive of
women’s rights, and Nobel laureate Malala Yousafzai said she was “deeply shaken”
that the EU was in talks with the Taliban, cautioning that Europe risks
legitimising a government whose rights record remains under sustained
international scrutiny.
The precedent Europe is setting
None of this is unfolding in isolation, since Russia formally recognized the
Taliban government in 2025 and China became the first country to formally name a
new ambassador to Afghanistan in 2023. Brussels’ quiet meeting simply adds
Europe to a widening column of powers that have chosen practical engagement over
continued isolation. Every concession granted without clearer movement on rights
or security sends a signal to Kabul, and to other governments watching, about
how much weight those issues still carry in international diplomacy, and
tactical convenience on migration does not resolve the underlying questions so
much as set them aside for now. Europe has spent
decades presenting human rights and democratic principles as central pillars of
its external policy, whatever the cost, which is what makes the Brussels meeting
so telling: When the pressure came from migration politics at home rather than
from Kabul, principle gave way. That looks less like diplomacy and more like
pragmatism overtaking principle, and it is Afghan women, who had no seat at that
table, who are left waiting to see what, if anything, changes.
*Yevgeniya Mikhailidi is an Istanbul-based specialist in South and Central Asian
affairs.
The Islamic Republic Cannot Reform/This week the last
man who believed otherwise said sid so in four words
Nadim Koteich/X platform/July 10/2026
1/At the G7, Trump called Iran's leaders rational, smart, strong.
Weeks later, at NATO: scum, sick, liars.
A reporter asked what changed.
"I got to know them", Trump replied.
2/Read past the classical Trumpian whiplash.
Trump staked more on an Iran deal than any president alive. He walked in certain
the regime was a counterparty, after being beaten enough.
Those four words are his lab report. He ran the experiment on himself and lost.
3/Here’s why he, or any other president, was always going to lose.
A state earns power from what it delivers. Reform makes it stronger.
A revolution earns power from what it negates. Reform makes it vanish.
Iran is a revolution wearing a state as clothing.
4/Ask Tehran to end enrichment, drop the proxies, recognize Israel, normalize
with Washington.
You have handed it one question it cannot survive:
If the rejections end, why do the mullahs still rule?
5/This is why every negotiator hits the same "bad faith."
It is arithmetic.
The honest deal on the table reads: stop being what you are. No regime signs
that.
So Tehran takes the process itself as the prize. Time. Relief. Legitimacy.
6/"But what about the moderates?" Khatami, Rouhani, Qalibaf, Pezeshkian??
The regime hosts them for a purpose.
A moderate face gives the public a hope object and the West a counterparty to
imagine. Both buy the regime time.
The moderate is the pressure valve that keeps the wall from cracking.
7/"But what about how China’s and Vietnam’s and Turkey’s revolutions reformed?"
True. Revolutions can reform. Five conditions let them:
a materialist idea, a departed enemy, delegated authority, enforcers who profit
from opening up, and a revolution that became the state.
8/Iran holds none of them.
Its idea is theological.
Its enemy, the US and Israel and the Western order, still stands.
Its authority is divine, which forecloses any Iranian Deng.
Its mafia-like governing elite, grows rich from the siege.
Its revolution polices the state instead of becoming it.
9/"But the society is young and liberal?"
A reformable society is not a reformable regime.
The regime is built to be insulated from its own people. That is the entire
purpose of the repression apparatus.
Four major uprisings, between 2009 and 2026, were suppressed.
10/Here is the tell.
The reform thesis has survived forty years only by minting a fresh excuse for
every failure. Wrong president. Bad timing. American betrayal. Not enough
understanding of the regime... etc
The unreformable thesis predicted all of it and needs no excuses.
That is what makes it fact, not forecast.
11/Unreformable does not mean eternal.
It means the regime cannot become moderate and stay itself.
Two exits exist. It persists, or it perishes.
The gradual middle path Washington chased for thirty years was always a mirage.
12/Reform was always the wrong verb.
The right verbs were succession, or collapse, or regime change.
Trump just walked into the structure, travelled by many predecessors, and
learned what it taught everyone before him.
He thought he was describing a disappointment. He was writing an epitaph.
Selected Face Book & X tweets on
10 July
The White House
https://x.com/SecRubio/status/2075567815856177323/video/1
"The Islamic Republic of Iran has asked us to continue “talks.” We have agreed
to do so, but the United States has stated to them, in no uncertain terms, that
the Cease Fire is OVER! Thank you for your attention to this matter." -
President DONALD J. TRUMP
Secretary Marco Rubio
Laotian national Tou Lue Vang was convicted of sexually abusing a 10-year-old
girl in Minnesota.
He was set to be deported until @GovTimWalz issued him a pardon.Then, I revoked
his legal status.
@ICEgov has removed him from the U.S. and he will never endanger another
American.
Masih Alinejad
Shocking ….After I went on CBS and exposed Khamenei's staged funeral, I received
over 50,000 comments from the Islamic Republic's cyber army on my instagram. I
checked their profiles. These are not bots. These are real people threatening to
kidnap me, butcher me, and paying a bounty for anyone who chops my head off.
These are the supporters of the “Supreme Leader” of the Islamic Republic who cry
for the death of a dictator.
And what is the reason of their anger?
This regime spends millions on lobbyists to normalize the Islamic Republic in
Western media. When one woman goes on mainstream media, right after their
leader's death and speaks the truth, and echoes the voices of millions inside
Iran, they lose their minds.
Because the truth terrifies them.
This is also how it works: first they harass you online. Then they send killers
to your door. They did it to Iranian journalist Rohullh Zam. First aid threaten
him on line, even some of the opposition join the Online attack against him,
then they kidnapped him from France to Iran, then they hanged him.
The Islamic CBS Republic is proud of it’s act of terrorism and publicly talk
about kidnapping and killing their opponents. Yes, the Islamic Republic doesn't
care if you're left or right. Republican or Democrat. They want to silence us
all.
My answer to all the new death threats:
I will not bow to my killers.
I will not bow to my oppressors.
I will keep echoing the voice of millions of Iranians, against this terrorist
regime, for as long as I breathe.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent
The so-called Supreme Leader is hiding in seclusion while his regime crumbles.
Treasury will continue using every tool at its disposal to isolate him and other
regime elites from the global financial system. We will preserve these assets
for the Iranian people.
Treasury Department
Today, following Iran’s resumption of attacks on international shipping in the
Strait of Hormuz, Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned
an Iranian financial facilitator who has effectively institutionalized
large‑scale embezzlement within the Iranian regime, diverting publicly funded
wealth offshore. OFAC today also targeted key Iranian exchange houses that move
billions of dollars annually on behalf of sanctioned Iranian banks.
Israel Army
BREAKING:
Iranian media: IRGC leaders are hiding in deep underground bunkers.
Pete Hegseth: Next-generation 'bunker-busting' weapons are being deployed
that will turn these bunkers into graveyards. There is nowhere left to hide.
There is a multi-generational gap in technology between Washington and Tehran.
mjad Taha أمجد طه
We are about to see Israel joining the battle once again against the Islamic
regime. Israel has stronger intelligence on the IRGC and the ability to
eliminate its leaders, strengthening America's position at the negotiating
table. This time, everything will be different. One operation in defense of
humanity against terrorism. For the lefties who are anti-war, step aside. If you
truly care, go stop the war in Sudan, run by Muslim Brotherhood terrorists, or
help solve the Kashmir, India-Pakistan conflict. We know the Middle East. We are
Middle Easterners. We are the Arabs who have to live next to the evil Islamic
regime NOT YOU. So keep chanting "from the river to the sea" and eating shish
kebab, and leave the brave Iranian people alone. They want to be free from this
Islamic regime.
One thing Trump needs to do: close that phone where he receives calls from
mediators.
Mike Pompeo
https://x.com/mikepompeo/status/2075611723168428408/video/1
As recent intelligence from Israel shows, the Iranian regime remains determined
to kill President Trump and destroy the United States. For the sake of American
security and global stability, we need to make sure this evil dictatorship is
permanently defanged.
Khamenei.ir
In the early hours of Friday, July 10, 2026, the pure body of the martyred
Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Hosseini Khamenei
(may Allah sanctify his pure soul), was laid to rest in the luminous shrine of
Imam Reza (pbuh).
Ora Levitt חיילת צה"ל עם ישראל חי
Mohammad Tawhidi, popularly known as Imam of Peace, answered the
question of who owns The Land in a religious context : "How can we claim
Palestine is ours when it is Jewish land? In the Quran, it is Jewish land.
According to history, it is Jewish land. Israel has every right to have a
country on Jewish land. It is their land. And what do we have now from
Palestine? Show me one good thing from Palestine. All that they have given us is
the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, and Hamas, and their leaders are robbing
them.These are the facts.I strongly believe in good relationships with the
Jewish community.
Dennis Ross
Iran never knows when to say when. The MOU gave Iran a basis to manage the
Straits. Iran did not need to fire on ships, but by firing on ships, they took
away Trump’s only achievement in the MOU.Maybe Trump will grow weary and just
declare victory, but Iran overplayed its hand
Hussain Abdul-Hussain
The idea that Israel’s strength is totally reliant on external imperial powers
is one of the laziest ideas that the Arabs invented to justify their colossal
failures, over the past century, in their bid to destroy Israel that’s a
fraction of their size. This lazy and incorrect idea is today informing some
Americans, who are influencing US policy on Isrsel. In 1939, fearing that the
major Arab bloc population would side with Nazi Germany, England abandoned Jews
in Palestine and aided with the Arabs. Israel prevailed. Eli Cohen, before he
became a spy in Syria, was one of the Jews who scoured the Egyptian desert,
collecting leftover from WWII battles that he shipped to Israel to fight the
Arabs for its survival in 1948. After England ejected France from Lebanon and
Syria in 1943, France allied with Israel as revenge. In 1967, Israel crushed
three major Arab armies without having a single American bullet in its arsenal.
Impressed and looking for strong allies in the war against Soviet Russia,
America sought out Israel as an ally. Bottom line is: Israel’s strength has been
always from within, and this has attracted the attention and won it alliances
with major powers, which ally with Israel to serve their own national interests,
not as charity to Jews. The same applies to big countries with major alliances,
like Egypt and the Soviets or Saudi and America, that despite all the imperial
sponsorship, have not won a war over the past century because of internal
weakness.The U.S. alliance with Israel is a mutual partnership that serves the
interests of both countries. Weakening it does America a disservice and doesn’t
undermine Israel. But when the mob is running our foreign policy, our national
interests come second to our demagoguery.