English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For July 14/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.july14.26.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
 Jesus Stresses the Importance Of persistence in life
Luke 11/05-08: “And he said to them, ‘Suppose one of you has a friend, and you go to him at midnight and say to him, “Friend, lend me three loaves of bread; for a friend of mine has arrived, and I have nothing to set before him.” And he answers from within, “Do not bother me; the door has already been locked, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot get up and give you anything.”I tell you, even though he will not get up and give him anything because he is his friend, at least because of his persistence he will get up and give him whatever he needs.”

Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 13-14 July/2026
Lebanon and the Free Lebanese People Mourn Senator Lindsey Graham Alongside All Lovers of Peace and Freedom/Elias Bejjani/July 12/2026
Conscience in Faith Concepts: The Divine Voice Dwelling in Man/Elias Bejjani/July 12/2025
A Testimony of Faith: The Story of the Three Massabki Brothers and Enduring Sacrifices/Elias Bejjani/July 10/2026
Pilot Zones: Netanyahu Rejects Simultaneous Israeli Withdrawal, Lebanese Army Deployment/Mohamed Choucair/13 July 2026
Hezbollah Insists on Linking Lebanon to Iran-US Negotiations
Leiter says to withdraw only if Hezbollah is removed from pilot zones
Health Ministry: 4,324 killed and 12,221 wounded in Israeli attacks since March 2
Israel’s Lebanon dilemma: Withdrawals, border security and reserve force concerns
President Aoun, PM Salam discuss new Rome negotiations and upcoming U.S. visit
Israeli army shells Kfartebnit, detonates houses in Haddatha and Bint Jbeil
Iran tells Hezbollah, Berri that ending war, withdrawal are priorities in talks with US
LBCI source: Lebanese delegation in Rome seeks agreement on start of pilot zones implementation
Post-UNIFIL: Lebanon debates future of international forces in south
Israel drags feet on Lebanon troop pullout ahead of legislative vote
Berri claims 'vast majority of Muslims', half of Christians against framework agreement
Hajj Hassan says framework agreement is an 'Israeli-Israeli agreement'
Sovereignty is No Longer the Goal of Settlements, but One of their Terms/Sam Menassa/Asharq Al Awsat/July 13/2026
New Sanctions, Old Challenge: Hezbollah’s Bank Still a Problem for Lebanon/Ralph Atrach & Jeremy Brecher/This Is Beirut/July 13/2026

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 13-14 July/2026
Trump says Lindsey Graham’s sister should be interim South Carolina senator
Trump says US reinstating Iran naval blockade after new clashes
Trump Suggests a Standing Order to Attack Iran if it Assassinates Him. But Vance Would Make the Call
US Military Says It Struck Iran Port with Sea Drones
US hits Iran, Iran retaliates on Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait and Jordan
Trump Says US will Be 'Paid' for Guarding Strait of Hormuz
ISF says detained Islamic State commander
Iran says continuing talks with mediators to 'prevent escalation'
Trump Says US Reinstates Blockade of Strait of Hormuz After New Clashes with Iran
US Vows Campaign to End ICC ‘Threat’ to Americans
UK Unveils Plan to Ban Iran Revolutionary Guards
Nine European Countries and Ukraine Form Anti-Ballistic Missile Coalition
Oil prices jump nine percent on worsening US-Iran conflict
Saudi defense ministry says dealt with ballistic missiles launched by Houthis
Jordan Says it Shot Down 4 Missiles Launched by Iran
Arab League Secretary-General Reiterates Rejection of Iranian Attacks on Arab States
EU, Partners Launch $1 billion Scheme to Help Gaza Recover from War
Top UN Official Accuses Hamas of Gaza Aid Obstruction
Yemen Signals Military Action and Diplomatic Move Against Iran
Israel sought to recruit Ahmadinejad in failed plan for regime change in Iran: Report

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 13-14 July/2026
Video-Text Link from Fox News/ Extensive Interview with President Trump REVEALS what Lindsey Graham told him before his death, War with Iran & Many other interesting topics
In numbers, Hezbollah’s wars on Lebanon/Joanne Naoum/The Briruter/July 12/2026
The Great Palestinian Election Scam/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/July 13, 2026
The Memorandum of Misunderstanding/Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al Awsat/July 13/2026
Politicians and Leaders’ Funerals: The Difficulties of Continuity/Hazem Saghieh/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/July 13/2026
Abbas Throws a Stone into Still Waters/Nabil Amr/Asharq Al Awsat/July 13/2026
On the Edge of Meaning… A Word in a Time of Noise… Lebanon… A Match Without Goals/Father Tony Bou Assaf/Facebook/July 13/2026
David Schenker on Trump’s Syria delisting move/Amal Chmouny/The Beiruter/July 11, 2026
When Karbala Reached Its Limit/Nadim Koteich/Asas Media/July 13, 2026
Iran overstretching its hand: A dangerous gamble in a volatile region/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Al Arabiya English/13 July, 2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on 13 July

Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 13-14 July/2026
Lebanon and the Free Lebanese People Mourn Senator Lindsey Graham Alongside All Lovers of Peace and Freedom
Elias Bejjani/July 12/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/155874/
“The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.” (Job 01:21)
With profound sorrow and a heavy heart, we mourn the passing of Senator Lindsey Graham.
His departure leaves a deep sense of loss not only among his family, friends, colleagues, and fellow Americans, but also among countless Lebanese who regarded him as a sincere friend, steadfast supporter, and courageous advocate for Lebanon's sovereignty, independence, freedom, and democratic values.
Throughout the years, Senator Graham stood firmly in support of Lebanon's right to remain a free and independent nation. He consistently voiced his support for the Lebanese people's aspirations for dignity, liberty, self-determination, and the preservation of their national integrity. His friendship toward Lebanon and his concern for its future earned him the respect and gratitude of many Lebanese across generations.
Today, Lebanon and its free people mourns the loss of a friend whose voice was often raised in defense of freedom and whose commitment to democratic principles resonated far beyond the borders of the United States. His legacy of public service, conviction, and dedication to the values he cherished will long be remembered.
In this moment of grief, our thoughts and prayers are with his family, loved ones, friends, and the American people. We pray that God grants them strength, comfort, and peace. As Christians, we find solace in the words of Holy Scripture: “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in Me will live, even though they die.” (John 11:25) And: “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.” (Matthew 5:4)
We also remember the comforting promise: “He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain.” (Revelation 21:4)
May the soul of Senator Lindsey Graham rest in eternal peace, and may perpetual light shine upon him. His memory will remain alive in the hearts of those who cherished freedom and in the gratitude of the Lebanese people who considered him a dear friend.
May God receive him into His heavenly kingdom and grant him everlasting rest.

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

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.

Pilot Zones: Netanyahu Rejects Simultaneous Israeli Withdrawal, Lebanese Army Deployment
Mohamed Choucair/13 July 2026
Implementation of the “pilot zones” in southern Lebanon under the Framework Agreement remains stalled by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s refusal to allow the Lebanese army to deploy simultaneously with an Israeli troop withdrawal, a move intended to prevent a security vacuum.
The issue has become a top US priority as Washington presses Netanyahu to facilitate the Lebanese army’s deployment ahead of the sixth round of US-mediated Lebanese-Israeli talks, scheduled for July 15-16 in Rome. The negotiations are expected to discuss the formation of joint committees, including a coordination committee headed by US General Joseph Clearfield, to oversee the Lebanese army’s deployment in the areas covered by the agreement and coordinate field operations to ensure smooth implementation. The talks are also expected to consider expanding the pilot zones beyond southern towns already under Lebanese state control to include, in phases, towns that remain under Israeli occupation. The proposed committee would intervene immediately to address any operational problems that could disrupt the deployment. A ministerial source told Asharq Al-Awsat that a recent meeting between the Lebanese army command and the US monitoring team overseeing the deployment ended with an understanding that Lebanese forces should deploy simultaneously with an Israeli withdrawal. The plan would extend beyond areas already under state control to include occupied towns. According to the source, the main obstacle remains Netanyahu himself, who opposes both the concept of pilot zones and the gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces from occupied Lebanese towns. The source said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio intervened during the fourth and fifth negotiating rounds to pressure the Israeli delegation into making the pilot zones a main clause because they would pave the way for the Lebanese army’s deployment up to the international border. The source argued that Netanyahu’s position is shaped by domestic politics as he prepares for parliamentary elections and therefore opposes any explicit commitment in the Framework Agreement requiring an Israeli withdrawal. Instead, Netanyahu insists that the Lebanese army first deploy only in towns outside the occupied areas to test its ability to establish full control and prevent any armed Hezbollah presence before considering subsequent phases. Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, however, continues to insist on simultaneous deployment and withdrawal, the source underlined, adding that his position has received backing from the US monitoring team following a meeting with Admiral Brad Cooper, commander of US Central Command (CENTCOM).
The source added that Aoun reiterated the same position during talks with US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa, who expressed understanding for Lebanon’s insistence on simultaneity and did not object to amending certain provisions of the Framework Agreement, describing it as a negotiating roadmap rather than a final accord. In practical terms, the source said, any amendments would facilitate implementation on the ground with US support. Lebanese and American preparations for the deployment plan are complete, pending Netanyahu’s approval of simultaneous implementation.
Issa is said to view the planned July 21 meeting in Washington between US President Donald Trump and Aoun as an opportunity to gauge whether the US administration is prepared to back Lebanon with concrete action rather than rhetoric. The source said Washington’s military pressure on Iran serves two objectives: compelling Tehran to honor its commitments under its memorandum of understanding with the US and ending its interference in Lebanon by encouraging Hezbollah to facilitate implementation of the Framework Agreement, now viewed as the only viable path after the military option collapsed. According to the source, Trump remains committed to supporting Lebanon, while Washington continues to pressure Iran to curb the Revolutionary Guard’s role in Lebanese affairs and remove obstacles to implementing the agreement, seen as the only route toward an Israeli withdrawal.

Hezbollah Insists on Linking Lebanon to Iran-US Negotiations
Beirut: Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
As Lebanon places its hopes on direct negotiations with Israel, Hezbollah continues to insist that the Lebanese file be tied to Iran-US talks, with party officials declaring Sunday that Lebanon would be the first item in any final agreement. Days before a sixth round of Lebanese-Israeli negotiations expected in Rome, Hezbollah MP Hussein Hajj Hassan said Iranian officials had assured Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem that Lebanon would top the agenda of any potential final agreement with Washington. “The first item will be a permanent ceasefire, an end to the war and an Israeli withdrawal,” Hajj Hassan told a memorial ceremony, calling this a clear and sufficient Iranian commitment. He also denounced the Framework Agreement between Lebanon and Israel as “full of sins, flaws and loopholes.” It linked redeployment to pilot zones whose number and size remained unclear, he argued, while making disarmament dependent on Israeli satisfaction with the outcome. Hajj Hassan renewed Hezbollah’s refusal to surrender its weapons. “Disarmament is unattainable,” he told Lebanese officials. “You will not be able to achieve it, and we will not hand over our weapons.” Fellow Hezbollah MP Ibrahim Mousawi likewise reaffirmed support for the “resistance and its leadership,” maintaining that its popular base would remain steadfast despite mounting pressure. Mousawi claimed Lebanon was the first item in the memorandum of understanding signed by Iran and the United States in Islamabad. He also criticized Lebanon’s negotiating track, arguing that sovereignty was achieved through defending and sacrificing for the country, not through slogans. President Joseph Aoun, however, has insisted on keeping the Lebanese and Iranian tracks separate. “Under no circumstances will I allow anyone to negotiate on Lebanon’s behalf,” Aoun said recently, adding that Lebanon had secured Israeli recognition that it had no territorial ambitions in the country. “The state’s train has left the station, and the decision to establish a state monopoly on weapons will be implemented,” he added. Meanwhile, Israeli violations continued across southern Lebanon early Sunday. Israeli forces demolished homes in Majdal Zoun, fired toward houses in Mansouri and carried out explosions in Bint Jbeil. Artillery struck Kfar Tibnit, while machine-gun fire was reported from Qantara. An Israeli aircraft also dropped a stun grenade near Mansouri, and artillery fire sparked blazes around Hamra Farm, between Zawtar al-Sharqiya, Arnoun and Yohmor al-Shaqif. Lt. Col. Ella Waweya, the Israeli military’s Arabic-language spokesperson, maintained that Israel would not allow Hezbollah to rebuild. She wrote on X that the 551st Brigade, under the 91st Division, had completed a two-month deployment in southern Lebanon, during which Israeli troops killed more than 80 Hezbollah members and destroyed over 200 sites, including underground routes, launchers, weapons depots and observation posts. The developments came as a US military delegation visited Beirut to discuss implementing an Israeli withdrawal from the first pilot zone.Lebanon, Israel and the United States signed the Framework Agreement in Washington on June 26. It provides for a phased Israeli withdrawal alongside Lebanese Army deployment. Implementation, however, remains stalled by Israel’s demand that further withdrawals be tied to Hezbollah’s disarmament, which the group rejects while continuing to rely on Iran’s role in any future settlement.

Leiter says to withdraw only if Hezbollah is removed from pilot zones
Naharnet/13 July 2026
Israeli Ambassador to the United States Yechiel Leiter has said that the Israeli army will only withdraw from Lebanon if Hezbollah is removed from pilot zones in the country's south. "If Hezbollah is going to stay there, we haven't accomplished anything, and that's why they're called pilot zones," Leiter told U.S. TV network CBS. "If it works, then we continue the withdrawal. If it doesn't work, then we stay where we are."Leiter, one of the lead representatives on the matter in Washington, stressed that the withdrawal plan is not delayed and that the framework hinges on the Lebanese Army being "receptive" to the pilot zones. "Hezbollah has no business in Lebanon," he said. "As a matter of fact, Israel and Lebanon are on the same page. We want Hezbollah out for our security and for their sovereignty. We can withdraw the moment that Hezbollah is dismantled," Leiter added. He referred to himself as "leading the negotiations on Israel's behalf with Lebanon," adding that he knows "a thing or two about the trilateral agreement."Leiter emphasized Israel's refusal to return to a situation where it is threatened by a possible October 7-like attack by Hezbollah. He added that talks between Israel and Lebanon are set to continue in Rome, noting that his attendance will depend on plans for the funeral of the late U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, who died on Saturday following health complications. When asked about the relationship between the U.S.-Iran Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) and Israel's negotiations with Lebanon, Leiter responded that Tehran has "no business" in the region. "What the agreement with Lebanon does is completely remove Iran from the paradigm," said Leiter. "Iran is not to be involved in Lebanon."

Health Ministry: 4,324 killed and 12,221 wounded in Israeli attacks since March 2
LBCI/13 July 2026
Lebanon’s Health Ministry said the cumulative toll from the hostilities since March 2 through July 13 has reached 4,324 killed and 12,221 wounded.

Israel’s Lebanon dilemma: Withdrawals, border security and reserve force concerns
LBCI/13 July 2026
Israeli security agencies consider the situation in southern Lebanon to have entered a highly complex phase, amid U.S. and international pressure to reach diplomatic understandings with Beirut, including Israeli withdrawals from areas entered by the army. Amid the evolving situation and time pressure, the Israeli military has developed an intensive plan aimed at strengthening what it describes as its defense of the international border line between Lebanon and Israel, including communities near the border fence. As part of the plan, the army is reinforcing its presence along the Yellow Line to counter potential infiltration attempts, gunfire, drone activity and anti-tank missile launches by Hezbollah. The military plan coincides with the presence of a U.S. military team that has been traveling between Tel Aviv and Beirut since the beginning of July. U.S.-Israeli coordination extends beyond Lebanon and also includes Iran-related issues. Despite Israeli reports that U.S. President Donald Trump does not want Israel to participate in the current confrontation with Iran, the two countries' air forces are conducting joint exercises. Meanwhile, Israel has promoted its involvement in strikes against Iran by highlighting the intelligence it has provided to the U.S. military regarding targets there. Amid preparations by the air force for a possible attack on Iran and increased ground forces activity to achieve objectives in southern Lebanon, Israeli Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir has presented decision-makers with a new challenge: the reserve forces. Zamir has ordered reductions in the military presence in Gaza and Lebanon in preparation for strengthening the West Bank front. The military establishment has warned decision-makers that the operational capacity of reserve soldiers has reached its limits and is close to collapse.

President Aoun, PM Salam discuss new Rome negotiations and upcoming U.S. visit
LBCI/13 July 2026
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun met with Prime Minister Nawaf Salam at Baabda Palace on Monday to discuss the general situation in the country, particularly in the south, amid the continuation of Israeli hostilities. The meeting also focused on the new round of Lebanese-U.S.-Israeli negotiations scheduled to take place in Rome on Tuesday and Wednesday. Aoun was briefed on the instructions given to the Lebanese delegation to demand the immediate start of an Israeli withdrawal from the two pilot areas before addressing any other issues. Salam also briefed Aoun on the outcome of his official visit to Turkey and his talks with Turkish officials, including President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The discussions also covered Aoun’s upcoming visit to the United States and his planned meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump.

Israeli army shells Kfartebnit, detonates houses in Haddatha and Bint Jbeil
Naharnet/13 July 2026
Israeli forces detonated and burned houses in the southern town of Haddatha, on Monday, and carried out at dawn massive explosions in Bint Jbeil. Israeli artillery later shelled the Nabatieh-Kfartebnit region, the National News Agency said. Lebanon would take part in planned talks with Israel next week in Rome, after Beirut conditioned participation on Israel withdrawing from certain areas it occupies in the south. A U.S. military delegation visited the country Saturday to discuss implementing a framework agreement that stipulates Israel's withdrawal from pilot zones it occupies in south Lebanon.

Iran tells Hezbollah, Berri that ending war, withdrawal are priorities in talks with US
Naharnet/13 July 2026
Speaker Nabih Berri and Hezbollah’s leadership have received a “new message” from the Iranian leadership, which was sent on Sunday, al-Akhbar newspaper reported on Monday. “Tehran informed the Qatari and Pakistani mediators that ending the war on Lebanon and completing the Israeli withdrawal are priorities that are equal in importance to the issue of the Strait of Hormuz, as well as implementing the memorandum of understanding signed with the United States,” informed sources told the daily.

LBCI source: Lebanese delegation in Rome seeks agreement on start of pilot zones implementation
LBCI/13 July 2026
LBCI reported that the Lebanese delegation participating in upcoming talks in Rome will seek to secure an agreement on the launch of the pilot zones in South Lebanon. The move comes under the direction of Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, who instructed the delegation to work toward ensuring that the meetings result in a clear timeline for beginning implementation of the pilot zones along with all related requirements. According to the source, Lebanon's position is that implementation must include the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the designated areas, the redeployment of the Lebanese Army, and the start of reconstruction efforts.

Post-UNIFIL: Lebanon debates future of international forces in south
LBCI/13 July 2026
A debate is intensifying in Lebanon over the future of international military presence in the south as the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) approaches its expiration at the end of this year. Amid discussions over the future security arrangements for South Lebanon, there is a growing push for maintaining some form of foreign military presence, either under the United Nations flag, the European Union, or potentially through other international frameworks, including a possible U.S. role. With no agreed formula yet for what would replace UNIFIL, 86 Lebanese lawmakers sent a letter to the United Nations Security Council calling for the continuation of the peacekeeping force's mission.The letter was not signed by two major political parties: Hezbollah and the Lebanese Forces. Sources close to the Lebanese Forces said the south requires a different arrangement from the current UNIFIL framework, adding that Washington and several other capitals are working on an alternative formula. Meanwhile, Hezbollah has remained silent on the issue, although the group has previously expressed dissatisfaction with UNIFIL's role, and several confrontations have occurred between the force and communities in areas where Hezbollah has influence. In contrast, the Amal Movement, whose leader Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri signed the letter, strongly supports maintaining UNIFIL in its current form, considering it the most acceptable arrangement at this stage. Foreign Minister Youssef Rajji facilitated the transmission of the lawmakers' letter to the Security Council, while a delegation of parliamentarians is expected to visit member states to advocate for extending UNIFIL's mandate. French diplomatic sources told LBCI that the issue of a replacement for UNIFIL must be decided soon, but that Paris is still awaiting an official Lebanese request clarifying the type of force Beirut wants to see deployed on its territory. The sources said the decision appears linked to the outcome of Lebanon-Israel negotiations as well as U.S.-Iran talks. France, Italy, Spain, and Germany have officially expressed readiness to participate in any future international force, while Lebanese authorities have welcomed their willingness to contribute.

Israel drags feet on Lebanon troop pullout ahead of legislative vote
Naharnet/13 July 2026
Israel is still procrastinating and coming up with excuses to delay withdrawal from south Lebanon despite U.S. and Lebanese pressure in this regard, media reports said. The Israeli government wants to delay any withdrawals until after the Israeli parliamentary elections, scheduled for October, the reports said.
“So far the efforts have not reached final results, knowing that Lebanon is coordinating with the Americans over the occupied territories from which Israel is supposed to withdraw so that the Lebanese Army can enter them,” the reports added.

Berri claims 'vast majority of Muslims', half of Christians against framework agreement
Naharnet/13 July 2026
In response to questions conveyed by local and international mediators, Speaker Nabih Berri and Hezbollah have reiterated their rejection of the framework agreement with Israel, emphasizing that they would not engage with all its provisions, al-Akhbar newspaper reported on Monday.
“The Army Command is aware of this stance and understands that implementing any military action on the ground by force would be extremely difficult,” Berri and Hezbollah reportedly added. Berri has also been quoted as saying that “the framework agreement is now a thing of the past, having lost any significant support on the domestic scene.”Berri reportedly claimed that “the vast majority of Muslims oppose it, while it enjoys the support of no more than half of the Christians.”Berri has also told Druze leader Walid Jumblat that “the U.S.-Iranian communication channels remain open despite the existing tensions,” and that “the Lebanese issue would once again become a separate item on the agenda,” al-Akhbar reported.

Hajj Hassan says framework agreement is an 'Israeli-Israeli agreement'
Naharnet/13 July 2026
MP Hussein al-Hajj Hassan of Hezbollah on Monday suggested that "the Presidency and the government are committing to things they cannot implement” in the negotiations with Israel.
“They send a Lebanese delegation to Rome to continue negotiations regarding pilot zones, while at the same time Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz says that 200,000 Lebanese citizens whose villages in the south were destroyed will not return," Hajj Hassan noted.
"What is your response to this statement?" the MP added, addressing President Joseph Aoun. "In the framework agreement, you committed to disarming the resistance. You committed to something that is both wrong and sinful, and you will not be able to fulfill your commitment. You will not be able to disarm the resistance, no one will be able to disarm it, and we will not allow it,” Hajj Hassan went on to say. "The Israelis will blackmail you to the fullest extent,” the legislator warned. He considered that "the agreement between Lebanon, America, and Israel is an Israeli-Israeli agreement, and since the signing of the agreement until today, the destruction, bulldozing, and aggression have not stopped.” Hajj Hassan added that “there are developments and possibilities that will bring an agreement that includes Lebanon with a ceasefire and Israel’s withdrawal from the south without any restrictions or conditions, and this requires patience and steadfastness.”“Lebanon is the first item in the memorandum of understanding that was signed between the U.S. and Iran under Pakistani-Qatari sponsorship, with two basic conditions, which are a ceasefire without freedom of movement, and an Israeli withdrawal from all Lebanese territories,” the lawmaker added.

Sovereignty is No Longer the Goal of Settlements, but One of their Terms
Sam Menassa/Asharq Al Awsat/July 13/2026
However which way one reads the visit of Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani to Beirut, it restored Lebanese-Syrian relations to their normal course and remains a step of great importance- provided the relationship rests on cooperation and coordination between two independent states. This was no ordinary diplomatic pitstop. It came at an exceptionally sensitive regional moment, amid increasing discussion of new arrangements concerning Lebanon's future and Hezbollah's place in the regional balance of power.
Shaibani's statements about Damascus's readiness to help address the Hezbollah question cannot be understood in isolation from the positions voiced by US President Donald Trump, who has said more than once that Syria should play a role in this matter.
Damascus appears eager to present itself as a partner in building stability rather than an extension of the former era. It understands that a return to the Lebanese arena cannot be accomplished by the old methods, and it is therefore seeking to put its geographic position, its renewed Arab and international engagement, and its intimate knowledge of Lebanese affairs to work in restoring its regional role and entrenching its presence in the region's emerging security and political arrangements.
American reliance on Syria in dealing with Hezbollah, in turn, reflects a shift in Washington's approach. The United States appears to have moved from managing the war to managing its consequences. In the American reading, Israel succeeded in degrading Hezbollah's military capabilities without eliminating its political and social power. Washington is therefore leaning toward a political approach that reshapes Hezbollah’s base rather than pursuing military means alone.
In the background, Washington also appears to be encouraging expanded economic cooperation between Iraq and Syria as a way of reintegrating Damascus into its Arab surroundings, and of gradually weaning both countries off the Iranian axis. This would, in time, have implications for their political and regional alignments.Türkiye's position, by contrast, reflects concern that these arrangements could redraw the map of influence in the Levant and the eastern Mediterranean in ways that marginalize Ankara, whether through a new Syrian role or through a US-Iranian understanding that alters the region's balance of power.
Where does Lebanon stand amid this flurry of activity? From Washington to Tehran, by way of Damascus, Ankara, and Tel Aviv, everyone is discussing Lebanon's future. Lebanon’s voice remains absent from the process of shaping it. This is not merely a political irony; it is a genuine crisis of sovereignty that turns the Lebanese state into an arena where the interests of others intersect, rendering Lebanon once again the consolation prize of other parties' settlements. State-building, meanwhile, remains a distant objective, and sovereignty negotiable rather than the starting point of any settlement.
The threat is no longer confined to the substance of any agreement; it extends to the logic governing it. When Lebanon is reduced to Hezbollah within US-Iranian understandings, or when security arrangements with Israel are tied to reshaping the Lebanese reality, the issue goes the resolution of a security crisis and raises a question about the very nature of the state. The conflict is no longer solely about Hezbollah's arms. It is also a conflict between two conceptions of the state: one in which the state alone holds the power of decision, exercises sovereignty, and has the right to use force; and another in which state institutions and de facto powers share sovereignty.When settlements are built around arrangements that bypass the state's authority, when unofficial actors are treated as part of the mechanism for implementing agreements, or when a foreign state is licensed to intervene militarily, the discussion stops being about restoring sovereignty and becomes about delineating it. Sovereignty, then, is no longer the foundation on which settlements are built. It has become merely one of their terms that is subject to negotiation and redefinition with every new crisis.
It is true that Lebanon's internal divisions invite external powers to intervene to facilitate settlements. There is a fundamental difference, however, between international support for a sovereign Lebanese decision and a situation in which Lebanon's future is determined by arrangements drawn up beyond its borders and then handed to it for implementation.Imposed settlements may ease tensions for a time, but they build neither a stable state nor sustainable sovereignty. The real challenge remains changing the perception of Lebanon as an arena for managing regional balances. Lebanon must be neither within Iran’s sphere of influence nor a security zone Israel invokes to justify its interventions or a bargaining chip in regional and international deals.Restoring sovereignty does not begin with ending security crises alone. It begins with affirming a simple principle: Lebanese decisions must be made first and foremost in Beirut, not in regional and international capitals, and not as a reflection of balances of power beyond the country's borders.

New Sanctions, Old Challenge: Hezbollah’s Bank Still a Problem for Lebanon
Ralph Atrach & Jeremy Brecher/This Is Beirut/July 13/2026
On June 30, the U.S. and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries’ Terrorist Financing Targeting Center (TFTC) announced new sanctions against Hezbollah’s financial network, including its de facto bank, Al-Qard al-Hassan.
“Hezbollah uses Al-Qard Al-Hassan to facilitate its destabilizing militant activities, undermining the Lebanese people’s ability to rebuild while enabling the group’s own interests,” the U.S. Department of the Treasury said in its sanctions announcement.
First sanctioned by the U.S. in 2007, Al-Qard al-Hassan has long operated beyond Lebanon’s regulatory oversight. After Lebanon’s banking sector collapsed in 2019, a shadow cash economy expanded, creating new opportunities for Hezbollah and Al-Qard al-Hassan to exploit. Since 2024, the institution has also emerged as a major target of Israeli military operations. “By hoarding hard currency that is desperately needed by the Lebanese economy, Al-Qard al-Hassan allows Hezbollah to build its own support base and compromise the stability of the Lebanese state,” the U.S. Treasury added.
This is Beirut spoke to experts to explain Al-Qard al-Hassan’s regulatory workarounds, its operations as a lender, its role in Hezbollah’s global illicit financial networks, and the sanctions targeting the organization.
Regulatory Exploit
Exploiting its legal status as a non-governmental organization, Al-Qard al-Hassan has served as a financial workaround that allows Hezbollah to avoid regulatory scrutiny. "It functions as a bank," said Matthew Levitt, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute and a former U.S. Treasury official.
"The key difference is that it is registered as a charity—not as a licensed financial institution—which means it has largely operated outside Lebanon's financial regulatory framework," he explained. By operating outside the regulatory framework governing financial institutions, Al-Qard al-Hassan has become a powerful tool for Hezbollah’s sanctions evasion. "Unless law enforcement or intelligence services actively investigate it," Levitt said, "the government simply does not have the same visibility it would normally have over a licensed financial institution."Al-Qard al-Hassan is emblematic of Lebanon’s gray cash-based economy, according to Lebanese political activist and financial advisor Amir Mokdad. Unlike licensed banks, whose transactions are subject to anti-money laundering rules and financial reporting requirements, institutions that operate largely in cash leave few records for regulators to examine. Mokdad explained that "if an institution is not part of the national or international financial network—or even the international money transfer system—it becomes much harder for authorities to monitor or audit its financial activities.""Because Hezbollah operates outside that regulatory framework, it is able to evade sanctions, avoid audits, and remain outside both the Lebanese and the international financial system.”
Gold, Loans, and Cash
Al-Qard al-Hassan operates under a relatively simple lending model. Individuals seeking small loans provide physical gold—such as jewelry, necklaces, or gold bars—as collateral. The institution assesses the gold’s value before issuing a loan worth only a fraction of the collateral’s market price.
"If someone brings in gold worth $1,000, they may receive a loan of around $800," Mokdad explained. "If the borrower defaults, the institution simply sells the gold."The defining feature of Hezbollah's financial model, according to Mokdad, lies in its cash flow. "Hezbollah doesn't necessarily need to launder large amounts of money because it operates largely within a cash economy," he said. Cash transactions leave few electronic records, making them considerably more difficult for regulators to trace. Mokdad said that much of Hezbollah’s funding still enters Lebanon physically from Iran rather than through conventional banking channels. The remainder, he added, must be generated through domestic and international networks. Since Lebanon’s 2019 economic collapse, the party’s reliance on cash has become even more pronounced. With decreased confidence in commercial banks, Al-Qard al-Hassan increasingly positioned itself as an alternative financial institution for many within Hezbollah's support base.Beyond lending, Al-Qard al-Hassan functions as a social institution, Mokdad noted, comparing it to Hezbollah's Martyrs Foundation and Jihad al-Binaa Foundation. "These organizations don't only generate revenue. They strengthen Hezbollah's influence within society because many people benefit directly from the services they provide."
Why Sanctions Matter
While international sanctions cannot on their own dismantle Hezbollah’s illicit financial networks, they have an important role to play in constraining the party’s operations. "They reduce the number of available options and increase both the cost and the difficulty of moving funds," Mokdad said.
Beyond restricting financial flows, sanctions negatively impact client confidence in targeted institutions, such as Al-Qard al-Hassan. "If people begin to fear that branches could be targeted or that the gold they deposited may no longer be safe, they may decide not to entrust the institution with their savings," Mokdad said. Likewise, he said, Israel’s military strikes against Al-Qard al-Hassan could have further undermined confidence in the institution’s lending model and increased perceived risk in what would otherwise be low-risk financial practices.
Levitt argued that actions against Hezbollah’s financial infrastructure strengthen Lebanon’s legitimate banking sector. "There is often concern that taking action against Hezbollah financing could damage Lebanon's financial system," he said. "In reality, that concern is usually exaggerated."
Lebanese bankers welcome international enforcement efforts because they reinforce attempts to protect the country's financial system from abuse, Levitt said. "Taking action against institutions behaving illegally actually strengthens confidence in the banking sector," he said.
But Levitt stressed that international sanctions have a limited impact without complementary enforcement from local authorities. “This is the Lebanese financial system, so it would be great if we could see Lebanon taking action,” he said. He cautioned that Al-Qard al-Hassan “is not the end-all, be-all” and that a notable number of exchange houses in the country, “some of which have been sanctioned for years,” remain operational and are of high importance to Hezbollah.
Following Hezbollah's Money
Al-Qard al-Hassan is merely one node within Hezbollah’s broader financial network. The militia relies on a global illicit financial network that facilitates its money laundering processes and diversifies and expands its sources of cash revenue. Despite Hezbollah's heavy reliance on cash for its domestic operations, moving money across borders requires more sophisticated methods. Former U.S. Treasury official Hagar Chemali says that one of the most effective tools remains trade-based money laundering. Rather than transferring illicit funds directly, organizations exploit legitimate commercial transactions to disguise the movement of value. Shipments may be deliberately misdeclared, with expensive equipment falsely described as low-value goods such as office supplies. In other cases of trade-based money laundering, legitimate cargo is mixed with concealed goods, allowing transactions to pass through ordinary banking and customs procedures while appearing entirely lawful. Chemali highlighted structural weaknesses in customs enforcement in several jurisdictions, including Lebanon, all of which suffer from limited inspection capacity that reduces the likelihood of detection. She pointed to physical cash smuggling, prepaid financial cards, and cryptocurrencies as increasingly important components of illicit financial networks. Digital assets present particular challenges because identifying the beneficial owner behind a cryptocurrency wallet remains difficult. Beyond Hezbollah’s core in Lebanon, Chemali identifies several regions that continue to attract international attention as a part of the party’s global network. The tri-border area between Argentina, Paraguay, and Brazil is vulnerable due to its porous frontiers and limited regulatory oversight, allowing seemingly legitimate businesses to serve as conduits for financial transfers.
Hezbollah's Financial Global Network: The Transnational Cash Pipeline This is Beirut
Expand
Hezbollah has also utilized networks for illicit financing in West Africa—Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Senegal—tapping into significant Lebanese diasporas living and conducting business in the region. Activity in this region has been used in Hezbollah’s fundraising and money laundering endeavors, further supported by weak institutional oversight in these countries. Chemali also pointed to Venezuela, where networks allegedly involving organized crime and political actors have previously facilitated illicit financial activity. However, following the U.S. capture of former President Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela’s connections to Hezbollah and the broader Iran-led “Axis of Resistance” could be coming to an end. Syria, for its part, had long served as a hub for Hezbollah’s smuggling of cash, arms, and goods into Lebanon under the Bashar al-Assad regime. Even as Syria’s new authorities and Lebanon’s government seek to reassert state control along the border, Hezbollah has sought to preserve these networks. From these spokes to its hub in Lebanon, Hezbollah has turned its illicit financing into an ongoing contest of adaptation and evasion against the authorities trying to stop it. The persistence of Al-Qard al-Hassan, which continues operating in Lebanon after nearly two decades of U.S. sanctions, highlights the challenge of constraining the group’s financial networks.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 13-14 July/2026
Trump says Lindsey Graham’s sister should be interim South Carolina senator
Reuters/13 July, 2026
US President Donald Trump said on Monday that he had recommended Lindsey Graham’s sister to fill the late South Carolina senator's seat on an interim basis. “I recommended, to Governor Henry McMaster, Lindsey Graham’s wonderful sister, Darline, to serve as interim Senator from the Great State of South Carolina. This would be a fabulous tribute to Lindsey, who loved her dearly!” he wrote on Truth Social.

Trump says US reinstating Iran naval blockade after new clashes
Al Arabiya English/13 July, 2026
President Donald Trump said on Monday the United States was reinstating its blockade of Iranian shipping in the Gulf and would ensure the Strait of Hormuz stays open after the two sides exchanged more missile and drone attacks. The latest hostilities followed an announcement by Iran over the weekend that it was closing the strait, and cast further doubt on the viability of an interim deal to halt the war in the Middle East and drove oil prices higher. “The Hormuz Strait is OPEN, and will remain OPEN, with or without Iran. We are reinstating THE IRANIAN BLOCKADE,” Trump said on Truth Social. “The U.S.A. will be, from this point forward, known as ‘THE GUARDIAN OF THE HORMUZ STRAIT’, but as such, and as a matter of FAIRNESS, will be reimbursed, at the rate of 20 percent on all cargo shipped.”Iran’s top joint military command said the US had no role in determining the future of the vital shipping route and said in a statement on Monday it would not be allowed to intervene in the management of the strait. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed on Monday it had targeted US military facilities in Bahrain and Kuwait, destroyed radar systems in Oman and hit fuel tanks and ammunition depots at Prince Hassan Air Base in Jordan in response to US strikes. The US military said it had struck Iranian air defense systems, coastal radar sites, missile and drone capabilities and small boats on Sunday, using aircraft, naval vessels and drones. On Monday, the US attacked military sites in southern parts of Iran, including Qeshm, Bandar Abbas and Abadan, Iran’s official news agency IRNA said, citing a local official. Bahrain said its air defense systems had intercepted several Iranian missile and drone attacks early on Monday. The latest exchanges mark an escalation in both the pace and geographic reach of attacks over the past week, throwing into question an interim US-Iranian agreement signed last month to reopen the strait and halt hostilities while the sides pursued a further 60 days of negotiations.
Trump has said he considers the ceasefire over, while leaving the door open to further talks. “We had a deal. It was a done deal, and then they broke it. They always break it. We’ve had 10 deals with these people, and so we’re just going to hit them very hard,” he said in a phone interview on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” program on Monday. Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, struck a similarly defiant tone, posting on X on Sunday: “The era of one-sided deals is OVER. We told you: keep your word or pay the price. Reality is knocking.”The war launched by the United States and Israel against Iran on February 28 has destabilized the Gulf and spread across the region, with Iran attacking US bases in multiple countries. Control of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for global oil supplies, has become one of the main battlegrounds of the conflict. Iran’s effective blockade of the strait has pushed up energy prices and increased concerns about inflation globally. Brent crude jumped by more than 4 percent on Monday on Trumps’s latest comments and on fears of disruption to one of the world’s most important energy shipping routes, although prices remained below the peaks reached earlier in the conflict.
Higher energy prices, particularly gasoline costs, are politically sensitive for Trump before congressional elections in November. After announcing the strait’s closure on Saturday following what it described as an unauthorized transit, Tehran said on Monday it continued to control the channel. Thousands of people have been killed during the war, mainly in Iran and Lebanon. On Monday, Iranian state media confirmed the deaths of two people in Abadan in southwestern Iran.
Iran’s IRGC said in a statement on Monday that the only way to restore regular shipping traffic through the strait was to end US military interventions in the waterway, and warned that “continued interference could lead to greater incidents in the global oil and gas sector.”Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said Iran was seeking to establish a joint mechanism with Oman to manage traffic through the strait, adding that US pressure on Oman had hindered discussions. Iran has sought to establish a permanent fee and permit system for vessels using the strait, which before the war carried about a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments. The US, which revoked a license waiving sanctions on Iranian crude sales last week after earlier attacks on shipping, said its forces were positioned to safeguard freedom of navigation.
“Iran does not control the strait. Traffic is flowing,” it said. US officials said around 20 vessels had been escorted through the strait in the previous 24 hours, though ship-tracking data showed little traffic moving. MarineTraffic said on Monday that vessel activity through the strait declined by about 52 percent over July 10 to 12 compared to the previous week. With Reuters

Trump Suggests a Standing Order to Attack Iran if it Assassinates Him. But Vance Would Make the Call
Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
President Donald Trump is suggesting he has left standing orders for the US military to destroy Iran “at levels they've never seen before” if Tehran follows through on its long-standing threats to kill him. But the US government has no way to create an automatic, preauthorized “dead man’s switch” that would prompt immediate retaliation, The Associated Press said. Instead, if Trump were killed, the transfer of power to his successor is governed by the 25th Amendment and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947. Vice President JD Vance instantaneously would become commander in chief and have authority for any retaliation. Under such a scenario, Vance could do exactly what Trump called for, though there also is a chance he could decide not to follow his predecessor's orders — or offer a direct response in a different way. “The US has, for a whole variety of reasons, never utilized a technical ‘dead man’s switch,'” said Garrett M. Graff, author of “Raven Rock: The Story of the US Government’s Secret Plan to Save Itself -- While the Rest of Us Die.”The United States does have extensive contingency plans for continuity of government in the event of a nuclear attack or other major catastrophe that wipes out most or all of Washington. But those plans also do not allow for immediately launching retaliatory strikes upon the death of a president, even if that president had demanded that the military be ready to do so. Trump nonetheless posted on his social media website Saturday that Iran had made threats “to assassinate, or attempt to assassinate” him and he said 1,000 “missiles are Locked and Loaded and aimed at the Islamic Republic of Iran, with thousands more to immediately follow, should the Iranian Government act on its threat.”Iran's supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, said hours later that Iranians would continue to avenge the killing of his father, Ali Khamenei. The elder Khamenei died in the initial US and Israeli strikes that started the war in late February, and he was mourned in funeral events throughout Iran this week. His son said retaliation “is the will of our nation and must certainly be carried out.”“We pledge to take revenge for the pure blood of you and all the martyrs of these two wars from the criminal and disgraceful killers," he said in remarks aired on state television. "This revenge is the will of our nation and must certainly be carried out.”The White House on Saturday did not immediately answer questions about what would become of Trump's military orders should he be killed. During those recent funeral events, mourners repeatedly held posters or banners calling for Trump to be killed along with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that Israel alerted US officials to fresh Iranian plots to kill Trump. The White House has refused to comment, but Trump appeared to reference such threats in comments during this week's NATO summit in Türkiye, saying, “They want to take out the US leader — me.” Sabrina Singh, former Biden administration deputy Pentagon press secretary, said “Iran wanting to target senior American leaders is something that we know is happening."
“You have to take these as credible threats,” Singh said.
US retaliations would almost certainly come, just not automatically Trump was targeted in two domestic assassination attempts during the 2024 presidential campaign and saw a gunman storm the White House Correspondents' Association dinner he was attending in April. The US and Iran once again began trading strikes, jeopardizing last month's initial deal to end the war. Asked about Iranian threats, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One, “I’m No. 1 on their list."Graff said the US prepared years of plans for how nuclear launch authority would devolve in the event of a surprise attack. That included, during 30 years of the Cold War, the country keeping fleets of airborne command posts flying 24 hours a day with a general aboard one of them who could take over nuclear launch orders in the event Washington was lost. “What I believe Trump is saying is that he’s left standing orders to attack if he’s killed, e.g., that the Pentagon should proceed with standard launch protocols,” Graff said. “There’s a lot of reason to doubt the legality of such standing orders, since in the event of a president’s death, the nuclear launch authority would immediately pass to the vice president or designated successor — and ultimately it would be up to him or her to determine whether to proceed.”Trump’s post only refers to firing missiles at Iran, which the US has done scores of times since its war with Iran began. He did not expressly threaten involving nuclear weapons. Graff said that, in addition to leaving standing orders in case of his death, Trump also might say “something to Vance like, ‘If I’m killed, nuke Iran,'" and that would make” more sense and would be absolutely legal.”Biden administration once warned Iran about Trump, too Washington receiving credible threats against the president and top US leaders from Iran and other foreign adversaries is not uncommon and is often disclosed via national security briefings or other classified means. But far less common is Trump declaring publicly that he personally has been targeted by Iran. Still, this is not the first time Washington has threatened Iran over threats against Trump. In 2022, the Biden administration warned Iran against attacking US citizens after the Justice Department's disclosure that a member of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps had planned to assassinate John Bolton, Trump's first-term national security adviser. Now a Trump critic, Bolton last month pleaded guilty to illegally retaining classified documents in a case led by Trump’s Justice Department. President Joe Biden’s national security adviser Jake Sullivan said in 2022 that “should Iran attack any of our citizens, to include those who continue to serve the United States or those who formerly served, Iran will face severe consequences.” Two years later, in the heat of Trump’s campaign against Democrat Kamala Harris, Biden's vice president, the Biden administration again quietly warned Iran. This time, officials made clear that an attack on Trump would be considered an act of war.

US Military Says It Struck Iran Port with Sea Drones
Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
The United States used one-way attack sea drones in combat for the first time to strike the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, the US military said on Monday. Three US Corsair drones targeted "a submarine and ship maintenance facility" at the port on Sunday, marking "the first time American forces have employed sea drones in combat operations," US Central Command (CENTCOM) said on X. The strikes -- which highlight the growing role of drones in US combat operations -- "degraded Iran's ability to continue attacking commercial shipping," CENTCOM said. The military command's post included a video of sea drones exploding near two piers, sparking fires and sending smoke pouring into the air over the port. Last month, the US military used a Corsair drone to assist with the rescue of two US Army aviators whose Apache attack helicopter was shot down by Iran.
The Corsair is made by Texas-based Saronic Technologies, which says the 24-foot, diesel-powered "autonomous surface vessel" can be launched at sea, allowing larger ships to deploy and retrieve it without returning to port.

US hits Iran, Iran retaliates on Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait and Jordan
Agence France Presse/Associated Press/13 July 2026
The United States launched several waves of strikes on Iran into Monday morning over an Iranian attack on a container ship in the Strait of Hormuz that set it ablaze and left a crew member missing over the weekend. Iran retaliated by targeting countries across the Middle East. Missile alert sirens sounded at dawn Monday in Bahrain, home to the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet. There was no immediate word on damage. Iran's Revolutionary Guards claimed strikes against Bahrain and Oman, saying they destroyed radar systems in Oman and targeted U.S. military facilities on the southern edge of Manama. "In addition to targeting U.S. military facilities and infrastructure in Juffair, Bahrain, where fires are raging, the navy of the Revolutionary Guards has... targeted and destroyed the long-range airborne FPS radar and the ship-detection radar in the Sultanate of Oman," said a statement from the Guards carried by their Sepah news outlet. The Jordanian military said it had shot down four Iranian missiles over the country. "At dawn today, air defense systems intercepted and shot down four missiles that had entered Jordanian airspace from Iranian territory," an official source from the Jordanian General Staff said, adding that there were no reports of injuries or damage to property. Kuwait's armed forces also said they were responding to "hostile aerial targets" on Monday. "The Armed Forces are currently intercepting hostile aerial targets within Kuwaiti airspace," the head of Kuwait's army said in a statement published by the state-run news agency KUNA.
Iranian state media acknowledged the latest attacks on its soil early Monday, describing explosions in several locations with at least one person being killed. Iranian attacks on Sunday stretched Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan and even Oman — whose territorial waters with Iran make up the strait. The narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf, which once saw a fifth of all oil and natural gas pass through it, has become the key issue challenging an interim deal between the U.S. and Iran. Iran and the U.S. are nearly at the midway point of the 60-day period of that deal, which was supposed to set up talks for a permanent end to the war. Instead, it has devolved into a series of attacks over the strait and its future, worrying world leaders the Iran war could resume. “A return to full-scale hostilities would have catastrophic consequences,” United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said in a statement.

Trump Says US will Be 'Paid' for Guarding Strait of Hormuz
Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
US President Donald Trump said Monday that the United States would be paid for guarding the Strait of Hormuz after declaring that it would be "taking over" the strategic waterway. "We'll become the guardian of the Strait," Trump told Fox News, adding that the US had been guarding it for "nothing" but now would be reimbursed by wealthy nations, AFP reported. "We're going to get paid for guarding it. A lot of money, but we just want to be reimbursed for doing all of this, for putting our people in danger."

ISF says detained Islamic State commander
Agence France Presse/13 July 2026
Lebanese authorities said Monday they had detained a Syrian commander from the Islamic State group, as Damascus investigates an IS-linked cell accused of bombings during a visit by France's President Emmanuel Macron. In a statement, Lebanon's Internal Security Forces (ISF) said they arrested the suspect "after careful monitoring and follow-up operations" on June 30 and that he was the group's leader in central and southern Syria. The announcement comes nearly a week after two bombings hit Damascus during Macron's visit to Syria, killing one person and wounding dozens, near the hotel where the French leader spent the night. Syrian authorities had said Thursday that preliminary investigations showed IS was behind the attack. On Monday, the Syrian interior ministry published the names of three men it had interrogated, alleging that they were behind the bombings. While its grip on Syrian territory it had claimed was broken in 2019, IS remains active in some cells across the country. In Lebanon, Sunni extremist groups that pledged allegiance to IS fought several battles with the army in the 2010s and carried out a series of deadly bombings targeting Hezbollah and its supporters. But they were largely defeated militarily in 2017. Last year, Lebanon's military said it arrested the suspected leader of the IS group in the country, implicating him in planning several operations. Lebanon and Syria share a porous, 330-kilometer (205-mile) border notorious for the smuggling of people and goods.

Iran says continuing talks with mediators to 'prevent escalation'
Agence France Presse/13 July 2026
Iran said Monday it was continuing talks with mediators from Qatar, Pakistan and Oman in an effort to prevent any further escalation in its war with the United States. "The role of the mediators is to continue their efforts to prevent an escalation of tensions," said Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei.

Trump Says US Reinstates Blockade of Strait of Hormuz After New Clashes with Iran
Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
President Donald Trump said on Monday the United States was reinstating its blockade of Iranian shipping in the Gulf and would ensure the Strait of Hormuz stays open after the two sides exchanged more missile and drone attacks. The latest hostilities followed an announcement by Iran over the weekend that it was closing the strait, and cast further doubt on the viability of an interim deal to halt the war in the Middle East and drove oil prices higher. "The Hormuz Strait is OPEN, and will remain OPEN, with or without Iran. We are reinstating THE IRANIAN BLOCKADE," Trump said on Truth Social. "The USA will be, from this point forward, known as 'THE GUARDIAN OF THE HORMUZ STRAIT', but as such, and as a matter of FAIRNESS, will be reimbursed, at the rate of 20% on all cargo shipped." Iran's top joint military command said the US had no role in determining the future of the vital shipping route and said in a statement on Monday it would not be allowed to intervene in the management of the strait. The Revolutionary Guards said on Monday they had struck Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman ‌and Jordan in response to US strikes. The US military said ‌it ⁠had struck Iranian ⁠air defense systems, coastal radar sites, missile and drone capabilities and small boats on Sunday, using aircraft, naval vessels and drones. On Monday, the US attacked military sites in southern parts of Iran, including Qeshm, Bandar Abbas and Abadan, Iran's official news agency IRNA said, citing a local official. Bahrain said its air defense systems had intercepted several Iranian missile and drone attacks early on Monday. The latest exchanges mark an escalation in both the pace and geographic reach of attacks over the past week, throwing into question an interim US-Iranian agreement signed last month to reopen the strait and halt hostilities while the sides pursued a further 60 days of negotiations. Trump has said he considers the ceasefire over, while leaving the door open to further talks. "We had a deal. It was a done deal, and then they broke it. They always break it. We've had 10 deals with these ⁠people, and so we're just going to hit them very hard," he said in a phone interview on Fox News' "Fox & ‌Friends" program on Monday. Iran's top negotiator, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, struck a similarly defiant tone, posting on X ‌on Sunday: "The era of one-sided deals is OVER. We told you: keep your word or pay the price. Reality is knocking." The war launched by the United States and Israel ‌against Iran on February 28 has destabilized the Gulf and spread across the region, with Iran attacking US bases in multiple countries.
OIL PRICES JUMP
Control of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for global oil supplies, has become one of the main battlegrounds of the conflict. Iran's effective blockade of the strait has pushed up energy prices and increased concerns about inflation globally. Brent crude jumped by more than 4% on Monday on Trumps's latest comments and on fears of disruption to one of ‌the world's most important energy shipping routes, although prices remained below the peaks reached earlier in the conflict. Higher energy prices, particularly gasoline costs, are politically sensitive for Trump before congressional elections in November. After announcing the strait's closure on Saturday ⁠following what it described as an unauthorized ⁠transit, Tehran said on Monday it continued to control the channel. "We continue to assert our authority and control over the Strait of Hormuz with strength and power, and we will force foreigners and their allies to surrender to the will of the Iranian people," Hossein Mohebbi said in comments carried by state media. Thousands of people have been killed during the war, mainly in Iran and Lebanon. On Monday, Iranian state media confirmed the deaths of two people in Abadan in southwestern Iran.
IRAN SEEKS OMAN DEAL ON STRAIT TRAFFIC
Iran's Revolutionary Guards said in a statement on Monday that the only way to restore regular shipping traffic through the strait was to end US military interventions in the waterway, and warned that "continued interference could lead to greater incidents in the global oil and gas sector."
Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said Iran was seeking to establish a joint mechanism with Oman to manage traffic through the strait. Iran has sought to establish a permanent fee and permit system for vessels using the strait, which before the war carried about a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments. The US, which revoked a license waiving sanctions on Iranian crude sales last week after earlier attacks on shipping, said its forces were positioned to safeguard freedom of navigation. "Iran does not control the strait. Traffic is flowing," it said. US officials said around 20 vessels had been escorted through the strait in the previous 24 hours, though ship-tracking data showed little traffic moving. MarineTraffic said on Monday that vessel activity through the strait declined by about 52% over July 10 to 12 compared to the previous week.

US Vows Campaign to End ICC ‘Threat’ to Americans
Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
The United States on Monday announced a campaign against the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC), accusing the tribunal of posing "an intolerable threat to US sovereignty" and threatening sanctions. "The ICC and its friends are waging a war against our country, not with bullets or missiles, but with statutes, compacts and the force of so-called international law," Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a video statement. The State Department said in a statement the campaign will "systematically disable the ICC's ability to operate, target American servicemen or officials, or otherwise threaten American sovereignty."Relations between the government of Donald Trump and the ICC have been extremely poor, with several court officials, including its chief prosecutor, already under US sanctions. The sanctions bar the officials from entering the United States and block property and financial transactions involving them in the world's largest economy. The measures have often focused on ICC investigations involving Israel, a US ally. The court issued arrest warrants in 2024 for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others. However, in its statement, the State Department focused on what it called the ICC's "intolerable threat to US sovereignty," saying the court "claims the authority to prosecute and even imprison American servicemen and officials operating on behalf of America's national interest." "Americans never signed up for this, and all American presidents since the ICC's ratification have maintained that the ICC does not have jurisdiction over Americans," the State Department said. The department listed a range of measures it was considering against the court, including having American diplomats call other nations to urge withdrawal from the body, as well as travel bans and sanctions against ICC officials.
Established in 2002, the ICC prosecutes individuals accused of the gravest atrocities, including war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Neither Israel nor the United States is a party to the international treaty that established the ICC. Russia is also not a member, and its President Vladimir Putin has been the subject of an ICC arrest warrant since March 2023.

UK Unveils Plan to Ban Iran Revolutionary Guards
Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
The UK government announced plans on Monday to ban Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a threat to national security, alongside an Iran-linked group accused of a series of attacks against the Jewish community. "Anyone found supporting or assisting these groups will now face up to 14 years in prison," Prime Minister Keir Starmer said of a proposed law to be presented to parliament this week, AFP reported. The banned groups would also include proxies and volunteers of Russia's GRU military intelligence agency, and the Islamic Movement of Companions of the Right (IMCR), an Iran-linked group which has claimed attacks on Jewish properties in London. The new legislation gives the British government "proscription-like" powers to designate foreign state proxies deemed a threat to Britain's national security. "The move will step up the government's ability to counter state threats linked to foreign powers including espionage, foreign interference in our democracy, sabotage and physical attacks," the Home Office said in a statement. The new legislation will mean that prosecutors do not need to establish a foreign power connection in cases involving designated groups. "The United Kingdom has identified activity linked to the IRGC involving threats to life and intimidation on UK soil," Home Office minister Angela Eagle said in a written statement. The announcement comes after several antisemitic attacks struck the British capital earlier this year, including a spate of arson attacks on synagogues, community ambulances and other Jewish sites. "The government fast-tracked legislation to bring in new powers after the abhorrent antisemitic attacks in north London," the Home Office said in a statement. Last month, 22 countries including the UK, US and European nations blamed the IRGC and its foreign operations branch, the Quds Force, for plotting against Iranian dissidents, journalist and Jewish communities. The IMCR, also known as Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamiyah (HAYI), have claimed multiple attacks, including an arson attack against four ambulances of the Hatzola Jewish charity. "Iran and Russia are using proxies and thugs to do their dirty work on our shores. I have rapidly designated three groups so those working for them will be tracked down and put behind bars," Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said.

Nine European Countries and Ukraine Form Anti-Ballistic Missile Coalition
Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
Nine European countries and Ukraine on Monday announced the formation of a coalition to develop "purely defensive" anti-ballistic capabilities in Europe, citing the growing threat of ballistic missiles. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was in Paris on Monday for a meeting of Kyiv's allies to reaffirm support for the country and step up pressure on Russia to end the war, now well into its fifth year. "We believe that the protection of Europe, requires a global solution of integrated missile defense architecture to deter and defeat future missile threats," said the joint declaration by Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Ukraine and the United Kingdom. "By bringing together our defense industrial base, our research, and our operational experience, we aim to build a shared anti-ballistic missile capacity for Europe," it said. "We do this not against any people, but in defense of our own," it added, citing the "unique experience of Ukraine" whose air defenses have faced repeated Russian ballistic missile strikes in recent weeks. At least 25 heads of state were due to attend the Paris meeting, with some staying on for the military parade marking France's national public holiday on July 14 which this year will highlight support for Ukraine.

Oil prices jump nine percent on worsening US-Iran conflict
AFP, Washington/13 July, 2026
Oil prices shot up around nine percent Monday as President Donald Trump announced the reimposition of a US naval blockade on Iranian ports while the two sides traded attacks.
Near 1820 GMT, Brent oil futures jumped 9.1 percent to $82.90 a barrel while US benchmark West Texas Intermediate also climbed by 9.1 percent, to $77.87 a barrel. The surge came as the two countries clashed over control of the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway for petroleum shipments.

Saudi defense ministry says dealt with ballistic missiles launched by Houthis
Al Arabiya English/13 July, 2026
Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Defense said on Monday its air defenses dealt with ballistic missiles launched by Yemen’s Houthis toward the Kingdom’s southern region.

Jordan Says it Shot Down 4 Missiles Launched by Iran
Amman: Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
The Jordanian military said on Monday it had shot down four Iranian missiles over the country, which Tehran said were intended as retaliation for US strikes. "At dawn today, air defense systems intercepted and shot down four missiles that had entered Jordanian airspace from Iranian territory," an official source from the Jordanian General Staff said. There were no reports of injuries or damage to property.

Arab League Secretary-General Reiterates Rejection of Iranian Attacks on Arab States
Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
Arab League Secretary-General Nabil Fahmy reiterated his condemnation of Iran's continued attacks against several Arab states, affirming that such actions constitute a violation of international law and the United Nations Charter and threaten regional security, stability, and the freedom of international navigation. In a statement, Fahmy rejected any practices that infringe on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Arab states, stressing that Arab national security is indivisible and that any attack on the sovereignty of any Arab state requires a unified Arab position. The secretary-general reaffirmed the Arab League's full solidarity with the State of Kuwait, the Kingdom of Bahrain, the State of Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, the Sultanate of Oman, and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, calling on the Security Council to take effective steps to halt these violations and ensure respect for international law and the security of international navigation. Iran launched missile and drone attacks on Sunday targeting US military facilities in Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates, marking a significant escalation in regional tensions following US strikes on Iranian targets.

EU, Partners Launch $1 billion Scheme to Help Gaza Recover from War
Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
The European Commission and more than a dozen countries launched an initiative on Monday to deliver €883.6 million ($1 billion) in aid projects to help Gaza recover from war. The small coastal enclave remains in ruins more than 2-1/2 years after the conflict was triggered by the October 2023 attack on Israel by Palestinian militant group Hamas. A fragile ceasefire has been in place since last October, and the United Nations has estimated the cost of rebuilding work in Gaza at around $70 billion. The "Team Gaza Initiative", launched at a meeting of aid donors in Brussels, will support projects such as restoring water and sanitation, removing debris and re-establishing health systems, the Commission said in a statement, Reuters reported. Spain, Denmark, Britain, Germany, Norway, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, France, Japan, Switzerland, Sweden and Belgium, the World Bank and the European Investment Bank are taking part in the initiative, along with the Commission itself, the statement said. Australia and Canada are also expected to join. "Our objective is clear: to help build hope, resilience and a better future for the Palestinian people," said Dubravka Suica, the European Commissioner for the Mediterranean. The European Commission did not provide a breakdown of how much each partner would contribute to the new initiative. Israel's devastating aerial and ground bombardment of Gaza displaced nearly the entire population of 2 million people, most of whom now live in tents or damaged buildings in a greatly reduced coastal strip of territory governed by Hamas. Israeli troops control nearly 70% of Gaza, patrolling what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu describes as a buffer zone to deter Hamas attacks. Netanyahu says Israel will not withdraw from the territory.

Top UN Official Accuses Hamas of Gaza Aid Obstruction
Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
A senior UN official on Monday accused Hamas of interfering with humanitarian deliveries in Gaza and intimidating aid workers, warning that the group's actions were making relief operations increasingly dangerous. Hamas continues to control parts of Gaza, even after Israeli forces expanded their presence across more than 60 percent of the territory. In a statement, UN Deputy Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, Ramiz Alakbarov, said he "strongly" condemns the obstruction of humanitarian operations by Gaza's de facto authorities, referring to Hamas.
Hamas's actions "endangered humanitarian personnel, intimidated workers delivering life-saving food assistance and disrupted life-saving humanitarian operations", AFP quoted him as saying. Armed men linked to Hamas allegedly on Saturday forced their way into a food distribution point in Jabalia, in the northern Gaza Strip, the UN statement said. Militants "also entered a WFP (World Food Program) warehouse and reportedly assaulted two truck drivers who were delivering humanitarian supplies", it added. Alakbarov said "these incidents are not isolated" and "reflect an increasingly dangerous pattern of intimidation, violence and obstruction, including smuggling attempts, targeting and abusing humanitarian operations".He warned that such actions were hampering the delivery of life-saving assistance at a time when civilians across Gaza faced severe hardships. A ceasefire was reached in Gaza between Israel and Hamas in October following two years of war, which was sparked by the Palestinian militants' unprecedented attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. The second phase of the ceasefire, which was to involve Hamas' disarmament and a gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, has been stalled for months. Israeli forces have expanded their presence in recent months, taking control of more than 60 percent of the territory.

Yemen Signals Military Action and Diplomatic Move Against Iran
Aden: Asharq Al Awsat/13 July 2026
The Yemeni government has escalated its confrontation with Iran over the operation of a flight to Sanaa International Airport, which is under Houthi control. For the first time, it has signaled military options in response to any future violations of Yemeni airspace, while President of the Presidential Leadership Council Rashad Al-Alimi is leading a diplomatic effort with the permanent members of the UN Security Council ahead of the emergency session requested by the government to discuss what it describes as a violation of Yemen's sovereignty. Defense Minister Lt. Gen. Taher Al-Aqili announced that the armed forces would respond to any aircraft he described as "hostile" that violates Yemeni airspace "using all available means." He said the government had exhausted legal and diplomatic efforts to persuade Iran and the Houthi group not to operate flights outside the approved framework, but that the latest flight represented what he called "a challenge to international legitimacy."In a statement addressed to the armed forces and the Yemeni people, Al-Aqili said the government, in cooperation with the regional and international communities, had made every legal and diplomatic effort to deter Tehran and the Houthi group from violating Yemeni airspace. He argued that the latest incident differs from previous ones because it constitutes a direct challenge to international legitimacy. He added that "patience has run out" and that the armed forces "will deliver an appropriate response to this brutal act and confront hostile aircraft violating Yemeni airspace and sovereignty using all available means until we teach the enemy a lesson." He held the Iranian regime legally and morally responsible for any escalation that may occur in the coming period. This military escalation comes alongside intensified political efforts led by Presidential Leadership Council President Dr. Rashad Al-Alimi, who on Sunday held separate meetings with Zhao Zheng, chargé d'affaires of the Chinese Embassy in Yemen, and Yevgeny Kudrov, Russia's ambassador to Yemen, as part of the government's consultations with the permanent members of the UN Security Council ahead of the emergency session scheduled for Monday. According to the Yemeni presidency, Al-Alimi's discussions with the Chinese and Russian officials focused on bilateral relations as well as developments related to the Iranian flight to Sanaa Airport and what the Yemeni government considers a violation of its sovereign authority. Al-Alimi stressed that the Yemeni government alone is the legally authorized body to grant permits for operating international flights to Yemeni territory. He emphasized that no armed group, regardless of the territory it controls, has the right to exercise sovereign powers or establish foreign relations on behalf of the state. Al-Alimi also reaffirmed Yemen's firm commitment to the "One China" principle and its rejection of any actions that undermine China's territorial integrity or sovereignty. He expressed his government's appreciation for China's continued support for Yemen's unity and territorial integrity.
In his meeting with the Russian ambassador, Al-Alimi praised the historic ties between the two countries and Russia's role in helping build Yemen's state institutions. He stressed the importance of continuing to strengthen the partnership between the two sides. A Houthi delegation arrives in Tehran aboard an aircraft that violated Yemeni airspace (X)
A National Alternative for Flights
Al-Alimi explained to the Russian officials that the government does not oppose the operation of Sanaa Airport for civilian purposes, but rejects its use for activities that violate legal frameworks or for military purposes. He noted that the government had proposed an initiative to continue flights through Yemenia Airways to any destination agreed upon, while providing the necessary guarantees to ensure the safety of the flights and air crews. The proposal also includes the option of chartering an aircraft to transport members of the Houthi group from Tehran in accordance with legal procedures.
He argued that the rejection of this initiative showed that the issue was not humanitarian in nature, as the Houthi group claims, but rather an attempt to replace the national carrier with Iranian flights, which, he said, no responsible government could accept. Al-Alimi emphasized that managing Yemen's airspace and approving international flights are exclusive sovereign responsibilities of the Yemeni state. He warned that any violation of this principle would not affect Yemen alone, but would set a precedent that armed groups in other parts of the world could exploit to exercise sovereign functions and establish international relations outside the framework of internationally recognized states. Al-Alimi concluded his meetings by reaffirming his country's commitment to maintaining balanced relations with all countries. He expressed hope for an international position consistent with the principles of the United Nations that protects state sovereignty and prevents any attempts to undermine legitimate state institutions.

Israel sought to recruit Ahmadinejad in failed plan for regime change in Iran: Report
Al Arabiya English/13 July, 2026
Israel spent years cultivating former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as part of a failed plan to install him as Iran’s new leader during this year’s war, the New York Times reported on Monday, citing American, Israeli and Iranian officials familiar with the operation.
According to the report, Israeli intelligence maintained secret contacts with Ahmadinejad, including meetings in Budapest during trips to Hungary in 2024 and 2025 that were arranged under the cover of academic conferences. Former Mossad chief David Barnea was among those who met Ahmadinejad in the Hungarian capital, the newspaper said. The effort culminated in late February, during the opening days of the US-Israeli war against Iran, when Israeli operatives allegedly sought to extract Ahmadinejad from Tehran as part of a broader regime-change operation, the report said. The plan ultimately failed. The New York Times reported that an Israeli airstrike hit Ahmadinejad’s compound before Mossad operatives allegedly moved him to a safe house inside Iran. Ahmadinejad later left the safe house under unclear circumstances and reappeared publicly only last week at the funeral procession of Iran’s late supreme leader Ali Khamenei. The report said four senior Iranian officials believe Ahmadinejad is now under house arrest in the custody of the intelligence branch of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) after authorities uncovered details of his alleged contacts with Israel. Israeli officials did not comment on the alleged operation, while Ahmadinejad’s spokesman declined to comment, according to the newspaper.

The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 13-14 July/2026
Video-Text Link from Fox News/ Extensive Interview with President Trump REVEALS what Lindsey Graham told him before his death, War with Iran & Many other interesting topics
July 13/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/155901/
President Donald Trump joins ‘Fox & Friends’ by phone to honor the late Sen. Lindsey Graham, give an update on U.S. airstrikes crushing Iran and reflect on the two-year anniversary of the Butler assassination attempt.
Below Is The Entire Fox News Interview Text
Joining us by phone is one of his best friends, President Donald Trump.
I’m really sorry for our country’s loss, I know you lost a close friend and ally in the Senate.
How are you feeling?
President Trump: I don’t feel great, he was a great guy.
A friend, he called me all the time.
I would say, stop calling me, he was amazing, he just didn’t stop.
He was a worker, work-a-holic politician, some don’t call that work, some call that a lot of talking.
Everybody loved him, he was good with the other side.
If I had Democratic problems, he could solve them.
Man of all different abilities and a nice man. Great guy.
He loved playing golf, loved being outside.
He would play golf with people and you just liked him.
It wasn’t he was a great striker of the ball, he wasn’t Jack Nicklaus or Tiger, he loved it and he had fun.
He was a man who had fun with politics, he was really good at it.
When he got angry, like in the case of Brett Kavanaugh, I think it saved the Brett becoming a Justice, it was a moment in time, Democrats got so sick and crazy and angry they were going to do something very bad and Lindsey went on his tirade, one of the great 10 moments of Congress.
I said, that was one of the 10 greatest moments in Congress.
And I think you wouldn’t find 10 other cases where somebody did what he was able to do there and saved Brett from an unfair decision or they would have had turned a man down who is qualified and such a good man.
So, I do think it was one of the top 10 in Congress.
You have top 10 in sports, this was top 10 in politics, he was a good man.
He called me, came back from Ukraine and called me.
Which did not surprise me at all, he said, I’m back.
And told me a couple of things, he was strong on fighting for the Save America Act.
I’m not sure if he was at the beginning, he became primary advocate for it.
And I think he would have felt the same way about the Philadelphia, which is so important.
Republicans have to do it, it is insane.
Or we will have a shutdown in September and we have a debt ceiling problem coming and if you terminate filibuster, everything goes away and we do anything we want, pass what we want and Democrats are going to do it and he started to see that. Everybody — not everybody against, 20% and were he was one and now he was starting to say terminate the filibuster or we’ll have crazy Trump deranged, he’s people suffer from a fine disease known as Trump Derangement Syndrome, he was seeing that.
Lawrence: Mr. President, did you notice —
Long way terminating filibuster, single smartest thing you could do then you get everything.
If we took the — Save America Acts, it is very simple, voter ID, proof of citizenship and no voter — in the ballot, look what happened to the kid in California, send million ballots, nobody knew where they came from.
You don’t do mail-in ballots unless you are in military, deployment, you don’t do them if somebody is sick or disabled or if you go on vacation, you get a pass. Make it nice and easy.
Lawrence: Mr. President, did you notice anything different?
President Trump: Millions of ballots, Spencer Pratt came up to my office, thought he won, why didn’t you complain, he did not know who to complain to.
What they did to that guy, unbelievable.
They found millions of ballots and took the election from him.
They almost did it to Steve Hilton, I complained and got U.S. Attorneys involved and FBI and soon as — he was, they were putting out reports, Steve Hilton is starting to fade, he’s running for governor of California.
I said, here we go, they are going to find ballots, they said he was starting to fade. Opposite.
I put U.S. Attorney involved, we will know in two weeks, this is week after the election, say he’s starting to fade.
I got U.S. Attorney involved and they did not know they let it be known an hour later —
Lawrence: Mr. President, quickly, did you notice anything different from Lindsey on the phone.
President Trump: You can’t have a country unless you have honest election, when people don’t want voter ID or proof of citizenship, it is only for one reason because they want to cheat and they are good at it.
Griff: Mr. President, Senator Lindsey Graham was a co-sponsor of the Save America Act, let me ask you, though, we were talking about that Brett Kavanaugh moment being a top 10 moment and I would agree, we were all watching on that day in 2018 and knew we were witnessing history, I wonder whether or not that was a significant pivotal moment in your friendship, in the development of your close bond with him when you saw him standing and fighting since no other person was that delivered ultimately, Justice Brett Kavanaugh?
President Trump: No, it was a sign of respect, I knew Lindsey by that time.
There were 18 people running for president, couple dropped out early.
He was one of them, one of them running.
And he was totally against me, he was fighting me, used me as the example, I was leading in the poll by a lot.
He said, I will get you in South Carolina.
That did not work out well, I joke about it. Amazing. Whole thing amazing.
Whole career amazing, Lindsey was a big part of it.
He left the race and I became good friends with him.
He had a back moment, January 6 thing, he stood up, now I’ve had it, that’s it, I can’t do it anymore.
He called me 40 minutes later and said, did I really say that and took it back.
I give him 99 instead of 100, a lot of people are 100.
He had that one little moment, it was funny, he goes, did you see it, now I’ve had it.
He was just, too much for him. He said, this is it. I’ve had it.
I had nothing to do with that, just so you understand and people got terribly destroyed because of that, they did nothing wrong, proud to give everybody a pardon.
He goes, now I’ve had it, that is it, his only bad moment. He said, I wish I never said it.
45 minutes later, I made a big mistake, what do I do? 99.9 instead of 100.
Lawrence: Mr. President, Lindsey Graham was definitely on your side when it comes to Iran and threat, them not having a nuclear weapon.
Looks like they are back at business trying to take over the strait, what is your response?
President Trump: We’re taking over the strait, they have nothing.
Something nobody knows, yesterday they had an 11-hour meeting, can’t be one hour and one minute, it should be one minute.
Everything was agreed to yesterday and they leave the room and they call back and they say, we had to make a couple of changes.
I said, they are going to make changes? We’re not going to make changes.
Always changes, they are professional negotiators, I don’t even call them good at it. They have got nothing from me.
Look for 47 years, they have been tapping every president got tapped along and did not do anything and they became more powerful.
This should have been done 47 years ago, Clinton and Bush let them go, everybody let them go and Obama was worst of all, Obama went to their side, you know, because he’s — well, let’s not say, let’s leave that for another time.
He was terrible.
He allowed them, allowed Iran, gave them $1.7 billion in cash in satchels in an airplane and brought to Tehran. $1.7 billion.
Did you ever see a million dollars in cash, this is 1.7 billion, took up entire Boeing 757, they flew to Tehran and gave it to people waiting in a plane.
These people never saw money and now have $1.7 billion in cash and hundreds of billions in cash and everything else.
He went to their side and they built and became more powerful because of Obama.
And Biden, who was Vice President, he probably had nothing to say, he was such a stupid person.
Biden came in and I held him down, I stopped him, the JCPOA, I stopped it.
And stopped it really powerfully.
I ended that agreement was the worst, see, it ends with C, that agreement is worst agreement that has been signed by this country, a top five bad agreements and that basically gave them everything and they built and built and built and they were minutes from a nuclear weapon.
Had I not terminated the agreement, Iran nuclear deal, it is called, they would have had a weapon.
Had I not killed Khamenei, who was a brilliant but mad general, he was a crazy Soleimani, I killed Soleimani, Soleimani was like one of the really, really bad people in this whole thing.
He was good at what he did, a brilliant general. That was one of the biggest things.
Ainsley, had I not attacked B-2 bombers they would have had a weapon.
Ainsley: Last summer you destroyed their nuclear sites, it was awesome and we are hearing they are trying to rebuild again, what are you going to do about that?
President Trump: They have no chance.
Most of their equipment is gone, anti-aircraft stuff is gone. We hit them hard last night.
They send a drone, we hit hard.
We had a deal, it was a done deal and they broke it. They always break it.
We’ve had 10 deals with these people, we’re going to hit them very hard and keep the strait and probably run it.
We will become guardian of the strait, guardian angel of the strait and we should be reimbursed because other nations are wealthy, on our side and we can’t do that for nothing like we have for many years.
We guarded the strait for 50 years and never got paid for it.
They made all the money and United States, it is amazing, we never — we guarded it for nothing.
We are going to guard it and get paid a lot of money.
We want to be reimbursed for doing this, putting our people in danger. We are really saving people.
They killed 52,000 protesters so far as of this moment, 52,000 who is going to protest.
Nobody is going to protest when they get shot.
They have AK-47s and machine guns aimed at people, if you move one step further you get shot and they will shoot 10 of them and everybody flees. They don’t have guns.
They are a bad group of people, I don’t say that often.
I live with that statement, bad group of people, been this way for a long time and right now they are getting their ass kicked in the top form.
I get a kick when New York Times and CNN, you got to understand, their entire military is gone, they have nothing, no Navy, no Air Force, it is gone, anti-aircraft is gone. Leaders all killed.
Best leaders have been killed. Khamenei is gone.
The son is 99% gone and New York Times writes an article, they have inflation, 350%, used to be 5% six months ago, they have 3250% inflation and New York Times writes an article, stronger today than four months ago, these people are sick.
Lawrence: American people don’t believe that, they understand who is winning this war.
President Trump: I think it is treasonous. How good is Lawrence doing? Is he doing a good job? >> Ainsley: He’s great.
President Trump: I had my doubts, I wasn’t sure. >> Griff: Doing great.
President Trump: And Griff, you have a very good team.
Lawrence: Thank you, Mr. President, we want to ask you about something you don’t like talking about, because you don’t want to talk about yourself, today marks two years since they tried to assassinate you in Butler, Pennsylvania, Iran still trying to take you out, threat level is high, you continue to serve this country.
President Trump: I’ve known Ainsley longer than the two of you, through a great gentleman, Sean Hannity, he is attracted to him for whatever the reason.
I told her, this is a very dangerous, being President is a very dangerous profession, why didn’t you tell me that, I wouldn’t have run.
The press will take that and say, he wish he did not run. They are sick.
You can never be sarcastic when dealing with fake news.
Ainsley, if you would have told me this, I wouldn’t have run.
5.2% of Presidents are killed, 8.5 are shot at or shot like Ford was shot and Teddy Roosevelt was shot but it hits his wallet.
He took one to the heart and it did not get through, it got through, but not far enough.
5.2% are assassinated, no other industry that anybody can think of like I consider race car driving very dangerous, 1/10th of 1%, bullriding those are pretty brave guys it is 1% out of 1%, think of that. It is a very small number.
They get pretty well beat up, very small number.
Griff: Mr. President, can I just ask you — >> President Trump: 5.2%, Ainsley should have told me that right Ainsley?
Ainsley: We have you covered in prayer, most of America is praying for you, Look at George Washington, he was shot at.
How are you feeling today?
After report came back, I hate to Monday morning quarterback and put down law enforcement, they do an amazing job, they missed some thing and the report showing that, what is your response and reaction to that?
President Trump: Talking about the Butler report?
They blew Butler, they had a building empty and blew it.
David, our sniper from 300 yards able to act within less than four seconds and took out somebody he did not know existed, unbelievable.
If he did not do that, you would have had a lot of people.
Maybe not me, they were on top of me quickly and very brave.
Secret Service were on top of me very fast.
They saw what was happening, everybody saw quickly.
I knew exactly what was happening, there was nothing, it was amazing how I understood.
They thought it was over, some fact, ask your doctor, who is fantastic, just gave report on Lindsey.
You ask him, the ear bleeds, I got hit in the ear, it was a bloody mess.
I knew I only got it there, they thought many different locations because of amount of blood. They blew it.
After that, incredible and brave. They stood over.
And the — our shooter from very far away on the other side of a field, he had one shot, one bullet and it was over.
If he did not do that, this guy had 300 rounds of ammunition, 55,000 people were at that rally.
We went back and had 117,000 people show up.
I always have to go back, you can’t let crazy people win, crazy people, bad people and he was a strange cookie, very academically smart, very disturbed, very disturbed person, but academically, almost perfect boards, great student, a person who was tormented.
They should have had somebody, this is now history we’re talking about, I guess, they should have had somebody standing on that building or watching that building, that being said, after that, I got lucky God was watching.
God was watching, my son Don and Eric, both of them know they know a lot about guns, like to shot, they said from that distance, that particular gun, there is almost no chance of missing.
They considered it something maybe easier than a two-foot putt, they said from that distance with that gun, it is like, Dad sinking a two-foot putt, for nongolfer says, a two-foot putt is almost automatic.
For some people it is not, almost automatic. And so God was with me.
I turned my head to show a chart, a chart I never show on the right-hand side, I did this time and chart I don’t use that much, probably one in 10 times at rallies, always on my left, it was on my right.
If I looked left, I wouldn’t be talking right now.
So many amazing things, the chart is always at the end, I put this one at the beginning.
I start and won’t be reading things, it is more interesting, people like it. I said, I will put it there.
Felt good.
I speak the way I feel and it felt right.
I said, let’s talk about the chart and look to the right, Wow, what was that?
Either biggest most violent mosquito in history or I just got shot, I touched my ear, blood all over my ear in like slow — wasn’t a slow bleed.
I said to myself and I guess it is much as you can joke about something like this.
That is most violent mosquito in history or I got shot.
Lawrence: So glad you are still with us.
President Trump: I knew what happened, Lawrence. >> Lawrence: We pray hard.
We thank you for giving “Fox and Friends” time this morning.
Griff: Thank you, Mr. President.
President Trump: We lost a great man, a great politician, kind man.
Who lost, Israel and Ukraine, a lot of countries he fought for lost somebody very special.
Real loser was the United States of America, we lost a great person, a kind person, a very smart person and a great, great — they asked me sometimes what do you think, he was a great politician.
We have mostly bad politicians, he was a great politician, really got it and he was a nice guy.
You interviewed him probably 500,000 times, I think he got more television time than anybody in history.
Lawrence: Remarkable man.
President Trump: It was about work and loving the country.
Not easy when you do television, it is not easy to get ready, be prepared, look good, not easy.
A lot of people can’t do it at all, some people are terrible and not very good.
He did it and he did it with pride and because he loved our country.
Griff: He served his country until his death.
Mr. President, thank you for taking time and sharing your thoughts.
President Trump: Thank you, we lowered the flags for a full week for Lindsey.
Every American flag in the country is lowered until Saturday night.
He was a special man and thank you and we’ll give him a special type of funeral, he deserves it.
Thank you all very much.

In numbers, Hezbollah’s wars on Lebanon
Joanne Naoum/The Briruter/July 12/2026
For years, Hezbollah has repeatedly dragged Lebanon into wars it did not choose, fought in the name of the "Axis of Resistance," the "Unity of the Fronts," and Iran's regional agenda. The Beiruter compares the human and economic toll of the wars of 2006, 2024 and 2026, while security analyst Riad Kahwaji explains that “Hezbollah suffered tremendously and its situation is irreversible”
For years, Hezbollah has repeatedly dragged Lebanon into wars it did not choose. Fought in the name of the "Axis of Resistance," "Unity of the Fronts," and Iran's regional agenda. The slogans changed but the outcome never did. Thousands died, billions were lost and a nation pushed deeper into collapse.
Catastrophic numbers
What many Lebanese have long described as “the wars of others” on Lebanese soil has left the country exhausted. The human, economic and social costs have reached staggering levels.
The July 2006 war. According to figures provided to The Beiruter by Information International, the conflict inflicted approximately $5.3 billion in damages.
Infrastructure: $900 million
Housing: $2.2 Billion
Commercial and industrial enterprises: $470 million
Agriculture, environmental damage and fires: $450 million
Rubble removal and related expenses: $50 million
Indirect economic losses: $1.2 billion
The human toll was equally devastating:
Approximately 900 deaths and 4000 injured
Mass displacement nearly 600.000 civilians
The 2024 War “In Support of Gaza”. Eighteen years later, the scale of destruction proved even greater.
The conflict generated nearly $9.97 billion in losses:
Infrastructure: $570 million
Housing: $4.25 billion
Commercial and industrial enterprises: $470 million
Agriculture, environmental damage and fires: $900 million
Rubble removal and related expenses: $390 million
Indirect economic losses: $3.38 billion (from October 8, 2023, to September 16,2024: $6 million per day, equivalent to roughly 10% of the GDP, resulting in $2.06 billion in losses over 343 days.
From September 17 to October 31, 2024: $30 million per day, equivalent to nearly 50% of the GDP, generating an additional $1.32 billion in losses over 44 days.)
The human cost was severe:
Approximately 1.347 deaths and 2.865 injured
Mass displacement nearly 1.2 civilians
The 2026 War. The latest conflict has pushed Lebanon even deeper into crisis.
According to Information International, the war has caused approximately $10 billion in losses from March 2, 2026, until today. Combined with the economic damage accumulated between October 8, 2023, and March 1, 2026 estimated at $13 billion. The total cost reaches roughly $23 billion.
According to Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health, between March 2 and July 9, 2026:
The number of casualties reached 16.525, 12.204 injuries and 4.321 death
In 2026, The confrontation expanded beyond Lebanon into a broader regional conflict involving Israel, Iran and the United States, and targeting Arab countries.
Once again, Lebanon became an active battlefield in a conflict whose strategic decisions were taken beyond its borders and the consequences were catastrophic. These figures represent far more than destroyed infrastructure. They reflect generations of lost investment, businesses that never reopened, families forced into displacement, children whose education was interrupted, and a country repeatedly denied the opportunity to rebuild
After three wars, the question facing Lebanon is no longer only what these conflicts have cost the country, but whether they have fundamentally altered Hezbollah itself.
Security analyst Riad Kahwaji believes they have.
“Hezbollah suffered tremendously and its situation is irreversible” security analyst Riad Kahwaji told The Beiruter.
According to Kahwaji, the group's military, financial and strategic position has been transformed by a series of regional developments that extend well beyond Lebanon. Chief among them is the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria, long considered Hezbollah's strategic lifeline and Iran's main corridor for transferring weapons and military support.
"Syria was the bridge that allowed Iran to build and strengthen Hezbollah over the years," he said. "The stronger and more stable the new Syrian government becomes, the more irreversible Hezbollah's decline becomes."
He also points to a shifting political landscape in both Beirut and Damascus. With Lebanon's new leadership moving closer to Western allies and Syria increasingly distancing itself from Tehran, Hezbollah finds itself more isolated than at any point in its history.
According to Kahwaji, the group is now largely dependent on its remaining internal resources, while external supply routes continue to shrink under tighter border controls and growing international pressure.
"Financially, there is a strong chokehold by the Americans that continues to tighten," he said.
Militarily, he argues, Hezbollah has sustained losses that cannot easily be reversed.
"A significant portion of its weapons arsenal has been depleted, and its manpower has also suffered. That is why we are increasingly seeing foreigners and underage recruits on the front lines."
The changes are not limited to the battlefield. Kahwaji says discontent is also emerging within Hezbollah's traditional support base, while Iran, its principal backer, continues to face mounting military and economic pressure.
"Regionally, everything is changing," he said. "Iran is being weakened, and the stronger the Lebanese state becomes, the weaker Hezbollah becomes."
Yet Kahwaji cautions against expecting a swift resolution.
In his view, the confrontation is likely to continue intermittently until at least late 2027, shaped by broader regional dynamics, including developments in Israel, Iran and the United States.
"This is no longer only about Lebanon," he said. "The regional conflict is evolving, with new priorities emerging. But one objective has become increasingly clear: stripping Iran of its Lebanese card while minimizing the repercussions inside Lebanon."

The Great Palestinian Election Scam
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/July 13, 2026
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22696/palestinian-election-scam
Western governments and donors will undoubtedly welcome the announcement [of presidential elections] as a sign that Abbas is finally responding to long-standing demands for reform. They should not. Holding elections for the sake of holding elections is not reform. Elections alone do not create democracy, end corruption, or establish accountability. Elections by themselves, as Natan Sharansky and Ron Dermer emphasize in A Case for Democracy, do not signify a democracy. There first need to be functioning institutions of democracy — freedom of speech, freedom of the press, separation of religion and state, freedom from religion, an independent judiciary, separation of powers, equal justice under the law, due process, and so on — and then, at the end of these processes that actually embody democracy, after they are up and running, an election can be held that represents a democracy. Otherwise, as can be seen in Russia, Iran and other dictatorships, elections are not signs of reform, at all but just choreographed burlesques.
The Palestinians desperately need transparent institutions, an independent judiciary, a free press, functioning checks and balances, and leaders who answer to the public rather than rule indefinitely by presidential decree. None of that exists under the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank or Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian parliament, known as the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), has been effectively defunct since Hamas violently seized control of the Gaza Strip in 2007, and Abbas formally dissolved it in 2018.
"[T]he clearest evidence of the slide to authoritarianism has been the decision taken by the party that lost the 2006 elections, Fatah, to dissolve the PLC in 2018. The inevitable outcome of the suspension of the PLC meetings has been the transfer of its legislative and oversight functions to the executive authority represented by the president. Since 2007, President Abbas issued more laws by decree than those ever issued by the PLC during its entire life since the first election in 1996. Most of these laws were not urgent, as required by the Basic Law, and many of them violated the terms of that law. In the absence of a parliament, the president gave himself the power to rule by decree without accountability or oversight." — Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR), January 2021.
The latest poll conducted by the PCPSR found that 80% of Palestinians want [PA President Mahmoud Abbas] to leave office. If Abbas and the Fatah leadership determine which candidates may participate, the outcome will be largely predetermined before the first ballot is cast.
Fatah remains firmly under the control of the same leadership, the same political culture, and the same patronage networks. Some names changed, but the system remained unchanged. Same old politics, decorated with a few new faces, including Abbas's son, Yasser.
For ordinary Palestinians, the choice remains essentially between Fatah and Hamas. There is no viable third force capable of competing nationally, and both movements have spent years suppressing independent political voices.
Public opinion surveys over the past two years have repeatedly shown that Hamas... enjoys greater support than Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah faction. Under these circumstances, new elections could once again hand victory to Hamas. Such an outcome would strengthen an Iran-backed terrorist group that openly seeks Israel's destruction, rejects peace, and continues to advocate armed jihad (holy war).
Democracy cannot exist when the ruling faction controls the rules, the institutions, and the political playing field. Power is concentrated in a small inner circle. There is no functioning parliament. There is no meaningful separation of powers. There is little room for genuine public debate. Journalists operate under constant pressure and fear. Political appointments often depend more on personal loyalty than merit. The question is not whether Palestinians should vote. The question is whether the conditions for free and meaningful elections exist. As long as Hamas remains an armed terrorist group with substantial public support, and as long as Fatah continues to monopolize Palestinian political life, elections are more likely to reproduce the current crisis than resolve it.
Palestinians need institutional reform. They need independent courts. They need financial transparency. They need anti-corruption mechanisms. They need genuine freedom of expression. They need political pluralism. They need peaceful transfers of power.
Only after these foundations are established can elections produce meaningful change. Otherwise, elections merely provide democratic decoration for an undemocratic system.
Western governments should therefore resist the temptation to celebrate Abbas's latest decree as evidence of reform and democratic progress. His decree should be viewed for what it most likely is: another political maneuver designed to preserve international legitimacy and secure continued Western financial support, rather than a sincere effort to bring democracy to the Palestinian people.
The question is not whether Palestinians should vote. The question is whether the conditions for free and meaningful elections exist. As long as Hamas remains an armed terrorist group with substantial public support, and as long as Fatah continues to monopolize Palestinian political life, elections are more likely to reproduce the current crisis than resolve it. The Palestinian parliament, known as the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), has been effectively defunct since Hamas violently seized control of the Gaza Strip in 2007, and Abbas formally dissolved it in 2018.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has once again announced legislative and presidential elections, presenting the move as evidence of democratic renewal. According to a presidential decree issued on July 9, legislative elections are scheduled for November 28, 2026, while presidential elections are to follow during the first quarter of 2027. The decree calls on Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Jerusalem to participate in "free and direct" elections aimed at strengthening democracy. Western governments and donors will undoubtedly welcome the announcement as a sign that Abbas is finally responding to long-standing demands for reform. They should not. Holding elections for the sake of holding elections is not reform. Elections alone do not create democracy, end corruption, or establish accountability.
Elections by themselves, as Natan Sharansky and Ron Dermer emphasize in The Case for Democracy, do not signify a democracy. There first need to be functioning institutions of democracy — freedom of speech, freedom of the press, separation of religion and state, freedom from religion, an independent judiciary, separation of powers, equal justice under the law, due process, and so on — and then, at the end of these processes that actually embody democracy, after they are up and running, an election can be held that represents a democracy. Otherwise, as seen in Russia, Venezuela, Iran and other dictatorships, elections are not signs of reform at all, but just choreographed burlesques. The Palestinians desperately need transparent institutions, an independent judiciary, a free press, functioning checks and balances, and leaders who answer to the public rather than rule indefinitely by presidential decree.
None of that exists under the Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank or under Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Abbas, now 91, is serving the twenty-first year of what was supposed to be a four-year presidential term, after being elected in January 2005. The Palestinian parliament, known as the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), has been effectively defunct since Hamas violently seized control of the Gaza Strip in 2007, and Abbas formally dissolved it in 2018.
Since then, Abbas has governed without a functioning parliament, without meaningful oversight, and without genuine public accountability.
According to the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR):
"The suspension of the activities of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) in the West Bank in 2007, in the immediate aftermath of the Hamas violent takeover of the Gaza Strip, has been one of the most damaging governance measures taken by the PA since its creation. "But the clearest evidence of the slide to authoritarianism has been the decision taken by the party that lost the 2006 elections, Fatah, to dissolve the PLC in 2018. The inevitable outcome of the suspension of the PLC meetings has been the transfer of its legislative and oversight functions to the executive authority represented by the president. Since 2007, President Abbas issued more laws by decree than those ever issued by the PLC during its entire life since the first election in 1996. Most of these laws were not urgent, as required by the Basic Law, and many of them violated the terms of that law. In the absence of a parliament, the president gave himself the power to rule by decree without accountability or oversight. Without a parliament able to defend its members, the president gave himself the power to annul the immunity of the PLC members, to suspend the payment of their salaries, to send them to court, and to close their offices ending eventually in his decision in December 2018 to dissolve the entire PLC utilizing for that mission the services of a body he created for that purpose, the constitutional court."
This is not democracy.
The latest election announcement also deserves skepticism because it is not the first time Abbas has made such promises. In 2021, he announced legislative and presidential elections, only to cancel them at the last minute, blaming Israel's refusal to allow voting in Jerusalem.
This explanation was always unconvincing. According to the Palestinian Central Elections Commission back then, 150,000 eligible voters from east Jerusalem suburbs "can vote in the upcoming elections without Israeli obstructions since they do not require Israeli approval." Abbas used the Jerusalem issue as an excuse to call off the elections because he was afraid that his Fatah faction and loyalists would not win. The reality is that Abbas has never been eager to test his popularity at the ballot box.
If Abbas truly enjoyed broad public support, he would have little reason to fear elections. The reality is that for years, Palestinian public opinion surveys have consistently shown that most Palestinians want him to resign. The latest poll conducted by the PCPSR found that 80% of Palestinians want him to leave office. Such findings explain why many Palestinians view Abbas's latest election announcement with deep skepticism. Even if elections are eventually held, another fundamental question remains unanswered: who will be allowed to run?
If Abbas and the Fatah leadership decide which candidates may participate, the outcome will be largely predetermined before the first ballot is cast. Recent internal Fatah elections offer little reason for optimism. Elections for Fatah's Central Committee and Revolutionary Council introduced several younger faces, yet they produced no meaningful political transformation. Fatah remains firmly under the control of the same leadership, the same political culture, and the same patronage networks. Some names changed, but the system remained unchanged. Same old politics, decorated with a few new faces, including Abbas's son, Yasser.
The broader Palestinian political landscape is equally bleak.
For ordinary Palestinians, the choice remains essentially between Fatah and Hamas. There is no viable third force capable of competing nationally, and both movements have spent years suppressing independent political voices.
This is perhaps the greatest tragedy of Palestinian politics.
For decades, both Fatah and Hamas have systematically prevented the emergence of alternative leadership. Independent candidates, reformists, liberals, and pragmatic figures have found little political space to organize or compete. Both factions have monopolized Palestinian political life while accusing each other of authoritarianism, even as each exercises authoritarian control over the territories it governs.
The result is a political monopoly that has suffocated Palestinian society.
Both Fatah and Hamas bear responsibility for widespread human rights abuses, political repression, arbitrary arrests of opponents, media intimidation, and corruption. Both have repeatedly placed factional interests above the welfare of their own people.
Instead of building democratic institutions, they have built systems designed to preserve their own power.
Many Westerners continue to believe that elections automatically produce moderation and legitimacy. The Palestinian, Russian, Venezuelan and Iranian experiences demonstrate otherwise.
The 2006 parliamentary election brought Hamas to power through the ballot box. Instead of strengthening democracy, the outcome triggered violent conflict between Hamas and Fatah, culminating in Hamas's bloody takeover of the Gaza Strip a year later. Since then, Palestinians have lived under two rival authoritarian administrations.
There is another compelling reason why rushing into Palestinian elections would be a grave mistake. Hamas, after nearly three years of a devastating war in the Gaza Strip and the immense suffering it has brought upon the Palestinians, continues to enjoy significant support among many Palestinians, especially in the West Bank.
Public opinion surveys over the past two years have repeatedly shown that Hamas remains one of the most popular political forces in Palestinian society and, in many cases, enjoys greater support than Abbas's Fatah faction.
Under these circumstances, new elections could once again hand victory to Hamas. Such a result would strengthen an Iran-backed terrorist group that openly seeks Israel's destruction, rejects peace, and continues to advocate armed jihad (holy war).
Repeating the same experiment while expecting different results would be idiotic. Allowing an armed organization to compete in elections without first requiring it to disarm and renounce violence would repeat one of the gravest mistakes made in 2006.
Equally dangerous would be allowing Fatah to manipulate the electoral process by deciding who may or may not compete.
Democracy cannot exist when the ruling faction controls the rules, the institutions, and the political playing field.
The deeper problem is that the Palestinian Authority continues to function less like a democratic government than a centralized political machine dominated by Abbas and his closest loyalists.
Power is concentrated in a small inner circle. There is no functioning parliament. There is no meaningful separation of powers. There is little room for genuine public debate. Journalists operate under constant pressure and fear. Political appointments often depend more on personal loyalty than merit.
The Palestinian political system has become increasingly personalized, with major decisions resting almost exclusively in the hands of Abbas and a narrow leadership elite.
This is precisely why many Palestinians no longer believe elections alone can solve their political crisis. The question is not whether Palestinians should vote. The question is whether the conditions for free and meaningful elections exist. As long as Hamas remains an armed terrorist group with substantial public support, and as long as Fatah continues to monopolize Palestinian political life, elections are more likely to reproduce the current crisis than resolve it.
Palestinians need institutional reform. They need independent courts. They need financial transparency. They need anti-corruption mechanisms. They need genuine freedom of expression. They need political pluralism. They need peaceful transfers of power.
Only after these foundations are established can elections produce meaningful change. Otherwise, elections merely provide democratic decoration for an undemocratic system.
It is also difficult to ignore the timing of Abbas's latest announcement. The PA has faced growing international pressure to demonstrate reform as Western governments continue financing it and discussing a larger role for it in governing post-war Gaza. Announcing elections helps project an image of modernization and democratic renewal precisely when international donors are demanding evidence of political change.
Yet appearances should not be confused with reality.
If Abbas genuinely believed in democracy, he could have stepped aside years ago and allowed a new generation of Palestinian leaders to emerge. Instead, he has remained in office for more than two decades while repeatedly postponing elections and concentrating power in his own hands.
Western governments should therefore resist the temptation to celebrate Abbas's latest decree as evidence of reform and democratic progress. His decree should be viewed for what it most likely is: another political maneuver designed to preserve international legitimacy and secure continued Western financial support, rather than a sincere effort to bring democracy to the Palestinian people.
*Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.
*Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter)
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. 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 Memorandum of Misunderstanding
Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al Awsat/July 13/2026
If the American-Iranian memorandum of understanding is worthy of the name it was given, why is this happening? Why does the US continue its punitive strikes on targets in Iran in response to the latter's attacks on ships attempting to cross the Strait of Hormuz? Why does Iran continue its assaults on the Gulf Cooperation Council states (including those that mediated and encouraged settlements, like Qatar and the Sultanate of Oman)? And if Tehran considers the memorandum a victory, why would it risk the memorandum’s collapse under the weight of exchanged blows?
The memorandum of understanding generated some hasty hopes. Some believed the region had escaped the trap of sliding into a chapter more destructive than the one it had witnessed. Others imagined that Iran had survived open confrontation with America and would now turn to obtaining the long-awaited funds its exhausted economy needs.Still others overshot and wondered when American companies would come streaming into Iran. However, the developments of the past two days suggest that optimism on this score is hasty, and that the dispute between Washington and Tehran is too deep and too acrimonious to end with an agreement riddled with ambiguity and equivocation. In Baghdad, I heard words that gave me pause. The man said the conditions for a grand bargain are not there, and that the current Iranian regime dreads returning to being a normal state. By a normal state, he meant a state that abides by international law in dealing not only with the Strait of Hormuz but with its neighbors and the entire world. A normal state does not fight wars by proxy. It does not raise small armies inside its neighbors' territories.
The speaker said the Iranian regime was born carrying a mission written into its constitution, "exporting the revolution" to change the region and the Islamic world. He noted that Iran's retreat into its own borders leaves the Iranian revolution waiting for a man to reconcile it with the age and the world, as Deng Xiaoping did with the Chinese revolution and the legacy of Mao Zedong. The other option is to await the appearance of Iran's Mikhail Gorbachev who opens the door to collapse on the model of what befell the Soviet Union. The issue, he reckoned, is that today's Iran does not want to change and cannot change. It has produced no Deng, and it will not allow for the emergence of an Iranian Gorbachev.
The ink of the memorandum does not change the choices of those who signed it. Donald Trump wasted no time hinting that he would wash his hands of the memorandum in response to Iran’s actions in Hormuz. Iran, for its part, demands the implementation of the agreement’s clauses (but according to its own reading, which tries to tame the ambiguities and press them into the service of its policy).
Iran behaves as though it emerged from the clash with America and Israel, which holds the title of the region's great power. It cites its clash with America as a pretext for shelling its neighbors, punishing them for hosting an American military presence or for defense and security agreements with Washington. Iran gave itself license to garrison the territory of other states without their governments' approval, while denying neighboring states the right to conclude agreements whose necessity Iran's own conduct, past and present, has helped confirm. Iran behaves as though gripping the world economy by the throat at Hormuz could become the engine of its transformation into the region's great power, after that transformation proved beyond reach under the umbrella of the nuclear project.
The message of Iran's Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, after his father's funeral rites was clear and severe. He vowed categorically to avenge his father. He wrote: "These criminals, of whose names there exists a complete list from the first of them to the last, will carry with them to their graves the wish of dying a peaceful death in their beds."He also said: "Soon, individuals from among the free people of the world will each carry out a part of this divine mission," meaning the vengeance.
And the Supreme Leader's abstention from appearing even at his father's funeral shows that Iran does not rule out new chapters of military confrontation. No one expected the Supreme Leader's words after burying his father to be moderate. Nonetheless, the insistence on vengeance, and in this form, suggests the memorandum of understanding is surrounded by mines, not only those said to have been planted in the waters of the strait. From Baghdad to Beirut, visiting journalists sense that the memorandum of understanding has done nothing to turn the page on the confrontation. The US presses on with its policy of cutting the Iranian thread that lets Tehran move certain Iraqi factions in the region's wars, and keeps the conflict between Hezbollah and Israel in south Lebanon renewable.
Iran, in turn, presses on with its traditional policy of cutting the American thread it believes lies behind Arab states' refusal to bow to Iran’s dictates on the region's security and its decisions.
Was the American-Iranian memorandum of understanding merely an attempt to avert a tunnel of vast destruction? Was it dictated by energy prices, Trump's relationship with Congress, and the approach of the midterm elections? Was it dictated, on the Iranian side, by fear of the costly destruction of bridges and power stations, which Trump had brandished more than once? The memorandum of understanding emerged as a solution, a way out, and an attempt to rescue the region from a great catastrophe. Does it now need saving?
The pessimists say diplomacy sprinkles sugar over death. It plays for time. It invents unwarranted hopes. And they say the memorandum of understanding is fragile and ambiguous and overlooked many clauses, which nominates it for the title of memorandum of misunderstanding.

Politicians and Leaders’ Funerals: The Difficulties of Continuity
Hazem Saghieh/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/July 13/2026
The funerals of politicians and leaders grow out of their immediate occasion to become political spectacle — a platform for staking out public positions, issuing pledges, and shoring up particular states of affairs. Some funerals, deny any attachment to continuity and genuinely build the foundations for a new order that breaks with part of the past. Into this category falls, for example, the funeral of Jan Palach, the young Czech who set himself alight in 1969 in protest at the Soviet invasion of his country in 1968- a funeral that outlined the path to independence which triumphed two decades later. The funeral of the Lebanese politician Rafik Hariri in 2005, for its part, triggered a movement that led to the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon.
Most grand political funerals, however, transform into occasions for affirming continuity and fidelity to the prevailing order. The protagonists and setting of this genre, in most cases we encounter, share more or less of the following features:
The man being buried may be the founder of a state, a revolution, or a mass party. This holds for the funerals of Vladimir Lenin in 1924, Sun Yat-sen in 1925, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in 1938, Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1970, Mao Zedong in 1976, and Ayatollah Khomeini in 1989 (as we know, the crush at Khomeini’s funeral tore the shroud and sent the body tumbling to the ground, and more than 10 people died in the event).
Often, the deceased is a father-leader who infantilizes his children and plays on their emotions: a leader who ruled for a long time, and whose name monopolized public life and became the central axis of this life, whereby the future, in his absence, looms like a cloud of uncertainty that threatens potential violence and chaos.When Joseph Stalin died in 1953, he was closing three decades of personal rule in the Soviet Union. When Gamal Abdel Nasser passed, it had been 18 years since his military coup and 16 since he took sole power. Before them, Atatürk's death came after 15 years in the presidency. The same holds, of course, for Ali Khamenei, who was president of the republic in Iran from 1981 and then named supreme leader in 1989. In such cases, moreover, the tools and traditions of expression are likely weak and scarce, if not absent altogether. With institutions frail or elections abolished, funerals become one of the few legitimate occasions for mass political mobilization, demonstrations, referendums, and the founding of political and party projects. These occasions thereby seem like a kind of constitutional moment standing as an alternative to constitutionalism and its mechanisms.
The leader's death may, in turn, crown a tragedy, such as assassination or defeat. Lenin had spent the last two years of his life suffering from wounds he had suffered as a result of successive attempts on his life. Nasser was weighed down by the enormous defeat he had suffered three years before his death. Khomeini, for his part, had announced a year before his passing that his approval of Resolution 598 was a "drinking of the chalice of poison," which was considered as an admission of defeat in the war with Iraq. And Khamenei, who was assassinated, had his funeral riddled with images and specters: the destruction visited on Iran by two successive wars, the killing of commanders and scientists, its shrinking regional role, and perhaps the struggles among the ruling wings.
It seems that the question of continuity these funerals affirm remains highly problematic. What is sought, here, is to stress that the departed leaders bequeath the future and to turn the individual into an institution and an icon by way of a carefully staged spectacle in which collective emotions are churned by symbols, speeches, processions, flags, uniforms, and stirring anthems... The political order is thereby symbolically reconfigured, and the funeral turns from a commodity produced by the regime into a factory that produces the regime, while the deceased is painted as immortal, undying. The authorities, in such contexts, are the ones engineering the mourning ritual in the way Emile Durkheim explains when he argues that funeral rites rebuild solidarity and mend the social fabric that death seemed to have torn. The grief of sons bereft of the father and their tears, here, become one more element of unity and continuity, exhorting the living to complete the work of the dead.
Many scholars have stressed that modern nationalism is not built by armies and constitutions alone: collective public mourning, military cemeteries, and commemorative rituals share in the same task, whereby modern states take on the "nationalization of death."
The bottom line of these acts is denial of the death. Stalin, in a literal application of the notion, insisted on embalming Lenin's body over the objection of his widow, Nadezhda Krupskaya. It is not wholly unrelated that Mojtaba Khamenei was chosen as Supreme Leader to succeed his slain father despite lacking the "scholarly" credentials the post requires (bearing in mind that the father himself had not possessed them either). Here, the new leader is bound biologically to the legacy and estate of the departed, to affirm that the assassination has done nothing to shake the existing system and its institutions- indeed, not the slightest change in the pillars of power. As such, it became necessary to summon the chants that intimate continuity: "Death to America and Israel," the demand for vengeance on the father's killers, and the rest of the stockpile of chants and phrases of such occasions. "We will complete the journey.We remain.We continue." All of them dispel the fear of change death might bring. Even so, experience shows that change defeats continuity more often than continuity defeats change. Leninism, in the eyes of many, did not survive under Stalin- though many others saw it as the field in which Stalinism sprouted. Sun Yat-sen's all-embracing nationalism split between nationalists and communists. Maoism was soon undone by Deng Xiaoping in late 1978, when the Communist Party installed "economic development" in place of "class struggle" as "the Party's central priority," and the program of "reform and opening up" was set in motion in the making of policy. In Egypt, Anwar Sadat pursued sweeping economic and political liberalization, as in foreign alliances and the questions of war and peace. It has become a fixture of conversations around Iran to note the growing weight of the IRGC and the waning importance of the "House of the Leader," to say nothing of the many large question marks still hanging over Mojtaba himself. So does the din of great funerals, and the affirmation of continuity that comes with it, leave the general principle as Sigmund Freud formulated it unaltered? Death is a moment of farewell, while mourning- a natural response to loss- detaches the bereaved, emotionally and gradually, from the deceased, enabling him to carry on with his life. As for those who cannot see in mourning rites a rite of passage, and in funerals an oblique public proclamation of it, they end in melancholia, their grief transmuted into illness.

Abbas Throws a Stone into Still Waters
Nabil Amr/Asharq Al Awsat/July 13/2026
President Mahmoud Abbas has issued a decree setting a date for presidential and legislative elections, reversing a course he himself had previously charted toward elections for the Palestinian National Council, an alternative widely viewed as a substitute for long-overdue national elections.
Since the last general elections, Palestinian political life, long known for its vitality and dynamism, has sunk into a state of deadly stagnation. The affairs of the Palestinian Authority have been managed through ad hoc administrative measures and improvised decisions, while presidential decrees have gradually become a substitute for elected institutions, the only bodies with the legitimate authority to enact legislation governing the affairs of both the Authority and Palestinian society.
Since the last legislative elections in 2006, and the presidential election of 2005 held after the death of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian national movement has endured some of the gravest crises in its history. The internal division that emerged during that period remains unresolved. The promise of peace born of the Oslo Accords gave way instead to a brutal conflict imposed on Palestinians across the West Bank, Gaza, and Jerusalem, culminating in Israel's war of annihilation in Gaza and its campaign to tighten its grip on the West Bank.
At the same time, the threats of displacement and annexation have intensified dramatically. Together, they represent different expressions of a single objective: the liquidation of the Palestinian cause through the destruction of the two foundations upon which any future solution depends, the land and its people. During years of internal paralysis, as every avenue for completing the process launched by Oslo gradually closed, Palestinians increasingly focused on preserving whatever remained of the very possibility of the Palestinian cause's survival. Internationally, meanwhile, attention shifted toward demands for reforming the Palestinian Authority so that it could credibly represent the Palestinians in matters concerning both their national cause and their political future.
The reform agenda promoted by the principal external actors involved in Palestinian affairs, the United States, Europe, and Israel, consisted largely of measures the Palestinian Authority could neither realistically nor fully implement in the form demanded of it. By contrast, the reform that commands broad Palestinian consensus is fundamentally different. It is also the approach preferred by Europe and much of the wider international community: genuine reform rooted in presidential and legislative elections. The Palestinian leadership attempted to chart an alternative path to reform, one that differed substantially in both substance and procedure from the internationally preferred approach. Rather than holding general presidential and legislative elections, it proposed elections for the Palestinian National Council. At the same time, it launched a parallel process beginning with elections for Fatah's youth movement, followed by local elections and internal Fatah elections.
Important as these measures were at the local level, they nevertheless appeared to the outside world as an attempt to play the wrong game altogether. They were never accepted as a substitute for presidential and legislative elections. President Emmanuel Macron captured this reality when he asked President Abbas: If you are capable of organizing all of these elections, why not hold presidential and legislative elections as well?
Everything associated with the Palestinian cause is now viewed negatively in Washington and Israel. Elsewhere, however, it continues to command support, even if that support has become less influential than before. Arab and Islamic countries remain at the forefront, joined by many other states that continue to express solidarity with the Palestinians. All seek to see a Palestinian political order capable of placing this long-running national cause on a realistic path toward a sovereign state.
That objective requires genuine reform of the Palestinian Authority, reform that equips it to participate meaningfully in efforts to resolve the crisis, beginning with the deadlock in Gaza and extending to the unresolved questions surrounding the future of the West Bank.
It would be a denial of both reality and common sense to ignore the influence of external actors on Palestinian internal affairs, down to the smallest details. That influence is a consequence of the Palestinian need for political and financial support. In today's world, no assistance is given purely out of humanitarian concern or moral sympathy. Every form of support carries a political price, and those who depend on it are expected to pay it. Otherwise, they must rely solely on their own resources, if they are capable of doing so.
President Abbas remains the official face of the Palestinian political system and the central figure through whom its crises are managed and its possible solutions pursued. He possesses enough realism and pragmatism to distinguish between populist slogans repeated in statements and speeches and the politically difficult obligations that must be met if any opportunity for a solution is to emerge, however uncertain or difficult that prospect may be.
The Palestinian Authority, trapped beneath a thick layer of internal paralysis and external political constraints, cannot afford to turn its back on those whose support it seeks, particularly its Arab and Muslim partners and the Europeans. They want to see a Palestinian political system that derives its credibility and authority from the confidence of its own people, and one capable of fulfilling its responsibilities effectively.
That is a far cry from the current reality. The deepening Palestinian division has revived two questions that remain unanswered: Who should negotiations be conducted with? And who truly represents the Palestinians? Abbas's decision, long overdue by any measure, is like throwing a large stone into still water. Without reading more into it than it can reasonably bear, it should nevertheless be regarded as a step in the right direction. Yet unless the decision is implemented with the integrity, transparency, and credible procedures that genuine elections require, procedures capable of convincing Palestinians before they convince the rest of the world, the downward trajectory will continue. When that happens, even government by presidential decree will no longer be enough.

“On the Edge of Meaning”… A Word in a Time of Noise… Lebanon… A Match Without Goals
Father Tony Bou Assaf/Facebook/July 13/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/155913/
(Googl translation from Arabic)
Lebanon today is less a state and more an open football field for ninety endless minutes. Two teams have been facing off for decades, exchanging attacks and accusations, each celebrating a goal they believe to be a victory.
But the tragedy lies not in the existence of two teams, but in the fact that both have forgotten why the match was even held in the first place.
Plans are absent, vision is lost, and the objective is lost. Politics has become a game of deception rather than building a future, and defeating the opponent has become more important than protecting the field, to the point where it seems that true victory lies in defeating the other, even if the nation falls with them.
In Lebanon, the ball is no longer a means to reach the goal; rather, the nation itself has become the ball, tossed about by everyone whenever their interests are threatened. The players aren’t afraid of losing the match because they’ve grown accustomed to its continuation, while the public is the one paying the price for this absurdity.
The stands are worn down by poverty, emigration, and betrayal, and the referee doesn’t dare blow the final whistle because the continuation of the match has become a source of influence for some and a source of profit for others.
Thus, no one asks: How do we win Lebanon? Instead, they ask: How do we win over Lebanon?
The homeland has been transformed from a goal into spoils, from a mission into an arena for settling scores. The conflict is no longer between two projects for building the state, but between two wills to possess it.
The most painful truth is that Lebanon doesn’t need a team to defeat another team, but men who dare to end the match when it becomes more dangerous on the field than defeat itself.
For nothing is more dangerous to nations than for teams to disagree, but for them to master the game… and remain ignorant of the meaning of homeland.
In Lebanon, the question is no longer: Who will win the match?
But: Will there even be a field left to play on when this match, which no one wants to end, finally comes to a close? Father Tony Bou Assaf
Theology of Existence

David Schenker on Trump’s Syria delisting move
Amal Chmouny/The Beiruter/July 11, 2026
Former U.S. official David Schenker explains in an exclusive interview to The Beiruter how Trump’s Syria delisting decision could reshape regional politics, security, and economic recovery.
In a move that has already sent ripples across the Middle East and Washington alike, President Donald Trump has begun the process to rescind Syria’s designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism (SST). The July 8, 2026, announcement by Secretary of State Marco Rubio heralds a 45-day Congressional review period before the delisting becomes official, a step that could reshape Syria’s economic fortunes, recalibrate U.S. leverage in the region, and redefine how America approaches post-conflict states that once hosted terrorist networks.
To unpack the logic, stakes, and possible fallout of this historic decision, I sat down with David Schenker, former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs and now Director of the Program on Arab Politics at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Schenker, known for his clear-eyed analyses of Levantine politics, has followed Syria’s tumultuous trajectory from Bashar al-Assad’s brutal rule to the rise of President Ahmed al-Sharaa, and now to the prospect of U.S.-Syria rapprochement.
Rationale: Why Now?
Schenker begins by situating the SST designation’s origins: “Syria was an inaugural member of the State Department's state sponsor of terrorism list. They were put on in 1979, largely in response to the Assad regime's support for Palestinian terrorist organizations.” Over the decades, the Assad regime’s support for groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) entrenched Syria’s pariah status. But, Schenker notes,
these sanctions were imposed because of the Assad regime, and the Assad regime is no longer there.
With the ouster of Bashar al-Assad in 2024 and the ascent of President Ahmad al-Sharaa, the question for U.S. policymakers became whether the new government maintained those malign behaviors. “If the al-Sharaa government was sponsoring terrorism, the designation could remain in place,” Schenker explains. “But this government is not like the Assad regime supporting terrorist organizations or providing them with haven. They’re taking steps to prevent weapons transfers to Hezbollah, have no apparent relationship with Hamas, and aren’t providing safe haven to the PKK.”
That said, Schenker is careful not to paint a picture of sudden transformation. U.S. intelligence and military sources remain wary of the presence of former foreign fighters and alleged former jihadis in key military positions. “There are concerns about who holds power in the new military, and whether this will be a tolerant government going forward. But the administration has seen enough movement to justify this step.”
From Symbolism to Substance
Is this move a calculated signal, or does it reflect a deeper shift in U.S. policy? “No, I think it has substantial, substantive implications,” Schenker asserts. “Countries and companies can start more freely doing business with Damascus without concern for violating U.S. sanctions and being in violation of U.S. law. This is a significant change, not merely symbolic.”
He points to the sequential rollback of sanctions as part of a broader strategy: “Early on, the administration lifted a whole host of other sanctions against Syria to give the government a chance to develop economically and stabilize post-conflict.”
The state sponsorship of terrorism sanctions are particularly onerous—they prevent investment and economic life from resuming, which is a key element of stabilizing the country.
Congressional voices have echoed this logic. In a bipartisan letter, U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen, Elizabeth Warren, and U.S. Representative Joe Wilson argued that the legal basis for Syria’s designation no longer applies, and that continued isolation undermines U.S. interests by blocking economic recovery, impeding counterterrorism cooperation, and ceding ground to adversaries like Russia, Iran, and China.
Leverage and Conditionality: What Does the U.S. Still Hold?
If the SST designation is lifted, does Washington lose its main source of leverage? Schenker is nuanced: “There are always other sanctions. The administration would say that new sanctions can be levied against the government or individuals for human rights abuses, for example. So yes, it’s harder, but there’s a balancing act. The administration is really invested in Syria’s success and stabilization, and that requires the resumption of economic life. But the U.S. retains the ability to reimpose or target individuals if necessary.”
On whether delisting should be explicitly conditioned on further Syrian reforms like counterterrorism, chemical weapons, detainees, or humanitarian access, Schenker sees a kind of implicit conditionality at work. “The Syrians are already doing much of this. The Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons is on the ground. The new government has been open, not committed to retaining the capabilities of the Assad regime. There’s been some judicial process on past atrocities. And U.S. intelligence assesses that Syria is cooperating on counterterrorism.”
He sees the 45-day Congressional review as a critical period: “There’s an implicit understanding that the U.S. will stand by Syria if it is a responsible state that doesn’t destabilize its neighbors.”
No one expects Syria to become a Jeffersonian democracy overnight, but the bar is higher than just renouncing terrorism.
Still, some in Congress have called for explicit reporting requirements, benchmarks, or written conditions before the delisting becomes final. The concern is that premature relief could permit backsliding or impunity. “Even after delisting, the U.S. retains tools to target human rights abusers and malign actors,” Schenker notes. “But the SST designation itself had become more of a blunt instrument than a precise lever.”
Regional Reverberations: Turkey, Iran, Israel, and Beyond
Syria is not an island. Schenker underscores the regional dimensions of the move. “Turkey is pleased. They want Syria to succeed; they have significant interests and influence there. Under Assad, Syria was an adversary to Turkey, providing sanctuary and support to the PKK. Lifting sanctions helps stabilize Syria, which is in Turkey’s interest.”
On Iran, Schenker observes that “Syria considers Iran to be a destabilizing force in the region. There are no direct flights between Damascus and Tehran, and relations are chilly, and rightfully so after the role Iran played in helping Assad. Part of the expectation is that Syria will cooperate with Iraq on a pipeline to the Mediterranean, reducing reliance on the Strait of Hormuz.”
Senator Lindsey Graham, echoing this sentiment, recently praised President al-Sharaa for being a “true thorn in the side of Iran” and urged the U.S. to give him the tools to build a functioning, united Syria—a blow to Tehran’s regional ambitions.
For Israel, the message is more complex. “The U.S. is invested in Syria’s success, and the administration has pushed back on Israeli intervention in Syria,” Schenker notes. The status of the Golan Heights remains a sticking point, but al-Sharaa is seen as unlikely to escalate over that issue. “He can’t have peace with Israel as long as that remains unresolved, but he also recognizes the risks of further conflict.”
As for Lebanon and the Gulf states, the implications are mixed. Arab efforts to reintegrate Syria may find new momentum, but old suspicions linger, especially given Syria’s fraught history in Lebanon and the enduring presence of Hezbollah. Schenker is wary of proposals to deploy the Syrian army against Hezbollah, warning that such moves could “further undermine regional stability and U.S. interests” by reigniting sectarian tensions and distracting Syria from its primary goal of internal stabilization.
Success or Failure: What’s at Stake?
What would success look like? For Schenker, it’s not about instant transformation.
Success means Syria remains a responsible state, focused on internal stabilization, not exporting violence or providing haven to terrorist groups.
“It means continued cooperation on counterterrorism, accountability for past abuses, and gradual economic recovery that benefits ordinary Syrians.”
Failure, on the other hand, would be a return to impunity, either through renewed support for terrorism, resurgence of sectarian violence, or a slide back into authoritarianism. It could also mean Syria becoming a battleground for regional powers, or a source of instability for its neighbors.
Schenker’s prescription for the administration is clear. He underscores that the most important benchmark for Syria’s normalization is a sustained rejection of support for terrorism. He argues that this principle remains the foundational reason behind the original designation and should continue to serve as the minimum requirement for any future U.S.-Syria relationship.
A Calculated Strategy
As the 45-day review unfolds, the Trump administration’s move to delist Syria from the SST roster stands as a calculated strategy. The rationale is grounded in a recognition of changed realities on the ground, a desire to give Syria a chance to rebuild and reintegrate, and an acknowledgment that the old tools of leverage had become counterproductive. Yet the risks, from insufficient accountability to regional blowback, are real.
Ultimately, as Schenker emphasizes, the process is not about rewarding Syria, but about aligning U.S. policy with evolving facts, retaining the capacity to punish backsliding, and giving the Syrian people a shot at something better after years of war and isolation. “No one expects miracles,” he concludes, “but we can and should expect measurable progress.”
The next six weeks will tell whether this new chapter brings Syria closer to the community of nations or reveals the limits of American optimism and leverage in the Middle East.

When Karbala Reached Its Limit
Nadim Koteich/Asas Media/July 13, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/07/155909/
(Translation from Arabic by Google)
Everything in the Islamic Republic of Iran has changed, yet nothing has changed. In the first message attributed to the new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, following his father’s burial, he portrayed his father’s death as a heroic continuation of the Hussein journey and the Karbala narrative.
On the 10th of Muharram (680 AD), Hussein bin Ali, the Prophet’s grandson, stood with about seventy of his companions against the Umayyad army on the banks of the Euphrates. The battle ended in a massacre that created a clear dividing line in Islamic consciousness, establishing a distinct Shiite identity defined by grief and the narrative of the oppressed. Khomeini’s movement later successfully repackaged this historical trauma into a modern political framework.
However, Mojtaba—or whoever is speaking in his name today—has done nothing more than invoke a 1,400-year-old political rulebook that is no longer fit for the modern age.
The Karbala Narrative and Signs of Decline
In an era where power gaps are widening, the “Hussein model” offers only a way to keep an ideology alive; it is incapable of bringing prosperity to society or achieving a decisive victory for the faith. Iran’s current path, which relies solely on managing crises through the exhaustion of the “martyrdom narrative,” confirms this. Because ideas must either evolve or vanish, the Karbala narrative today shows every sign of obsolescence.
Historically, the Karbala model helped preserve a specific Islamic vision during early power struggles. It inspired various uprisings over centuries and protected a minority’s traditions against dominant central powers. Yet, even with these revolts, the Umayyad state survived for over seventy years after Karbala, until it collapsed due to deep structural, economic, and organizational factors—not just symbolic resistance.
In the past, symbolic sacrifice could undermine an opponent’s legitimacy. Today, that is no longer the case. Portraying Khamenei’s death as a “Karbala-style martyrdom” is mere ideological rhetoric that may rally the base, but it ignores a different reality:
The Imbalance of the Modern Era:
In the 7th century, battles were fought between tribal armies of similar strength, decided by individual courage and numbers. Today, Iran faces high-precision military systems and intelligence superiority—proven by the recent assassination of the Supreme Leader himself in the heart of Tehran. Relying on proxies and ballistic missiles only gives Tehran the ability to cause trouble, not true deterrence.
The Economics of Martyrdom (Slow-Motion Suicide):
The doctrine of “Resistance Economics” has turned defiance into a program for the systematic impoverishment of Iran. Annual inflation surpassed 88% in June 2026, one of the worst spikes since World War II. The IMF expects the Iranian economy to shrink by 6% this year. The Rial has plummeted, and the minimum wage no longer covers even 37% of basic living costs. More than half of Iranians suffer from some form of malnutrition, and meat and bread have become luxuries in a country sitting on the world’s second-largest gas reserve.
Governance Crisis: Mobilization Instead of Development
A country of 90 million needs institutional efficiency, transparency, and long-term planning. The Karbala model only knows how to turn sacrifice into “victory” and media manipulation into a “future.” Development is entirely outside its scope. The result is extreme wealth for a religious and military oligarchy, public misery for Iranians, and a reliance on police-state repression to survive.
Revenge as a Governing Program
Mojtaba’s rise follows the same tired scenario: funeral rituals, tears, promises of revenge, and calls to historical victimhood. Meanwhile, the economy is in freefall. Adopting the “Karbala approach” as the state’s supreme strategy is an existential risk. The cohesion that Karbala provides is short-lived; its long-term price is the draining of the civilization’s vitality.
The new leader’s first promise was revenge. Revenge may mobilize an angry generation for a day or a month, but modern states are built on electricity, bread, jobs, a stable currency, and a social contract. They crumble when managed like a funeral procession.
Mojtaba invoked Karbala to rule with it, only to find that it is now ruling him. The tragedy that gave the Shiites an identity across centuries is now setting a date for the Islamic Republic’s decline. What serves as theology for the survival of a small group becomes a burden for a state that must provide bread and jobs.
The paradox is that the regime has enough tools of repression to delay its end, but lacks everything needed to prevent it. Revenge buys time but does not build an economy. Mobilization gathers the angry but does not feed the hungry.
Bringing up the past no longer excuses Khomeini’s Iran from the judgment of the present. The Hussein narrative has reached its limit; what comes next must be written in a language other than that of mourning.
Historical Context: The Shiite Path to Power
Over several centuries, Shiites reached power through various sectarian forms. The Abbasid Revolution in 750 AD rode the wave of Alawite and Hashemite resentment to reach power, but then turned against the Prophet’s household, leaving the Caliphate in Sunni hands. The first actual Alawite entity was established in Morocco with the Idrisids around 788 AD—more than a century after Karbala—on the fringes of the Islamic world, far from the center of the Caliphate.
This was followed by the Zaydi states: the Alawites in Tabaristan (864 AD), then the Zaydi Imamate in Yemen (897 AD), which survived in various forms until the fall of the Mutawakkilite Kingdom in 1962. Shiite ambition reached its first peak with the Ismaili Fatimids, who established the first rival Shiite Caliphate in 909 AD and built Cairo in 969 AD to challenge Baghdad for the legitimacy of the Islamic world. In 945 AD, the Buyids took hold of the heart of the Caliphate itself, ruling effectively while keeping the Abbasid Caliph as a symbolic figurehead. Under their rule, public Ashura commemorations were organized in Baghdad for the first time in 963 AD.
However, all these experiences remained Zaydi, Ismaili, or Alawite, and were never fully crystallized. As for Twelver Shiism, it waited until the Safavids in 1501, when Shah Ismail imposed the Jafari school as the state religion and brought in scholars from Jabal Amel to institutionalize it, giving birth to modern Shiite Iran. Nevertheless, the Safavids built a state for the sect under royal authority, where the cleric stood beside the throne to issue fatwas and legitimize, while the Shah ruled. Only with Khomeini in 1979 did the cleric sit on the throne himself through the theory of “Absolute Guardianship of the Jurist”—a novelty with no precedent in fourteen centuries, rejected by the majority of traditional clerics.

Iran overstretching its hand: A dangerous gamble in a volatile region
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Al Arabiya English/13 July, 2026
After the funeral of slain Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Iran appeared to become more emboldened, targeting ships in the Strait of Hormuz in actions widely condemned by the international community. The multi-day ceremonies coincided with a surge in aggressive maneuvers that have heightened fears of renewed full-scale conflict. US Central Command and regional allies swiftly denounced the attacks on commercial vessels, including a Cyprus-flagged ship that suffered heavy damage and resulted in a missing crew member. Countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Kuwait, and Qatar issued strong statements condemning Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) for these blatant violations. European nations and the UN echoed calls for restraint, labeling the actions as threats to global trade and maritime security.
Escalation risks and spiral of retaliation
The problem with the current situation is that it can easily spiral out of control. One or two strikes – whether on shipping lanes or military positions – risk triggering rapid tit-for-tat retaliation, as evidenced by recent US strikes on Iranian targets in response to the Hormuz incidents. The situation remains highly volatile following earlier periods of fragile calm, with no clear path to a permanent resolution. Iran seems not to fully grasp that even limited provocations can ignite a cycle of escalation, drawing in more actors and leading to consequences far beyond its control.
This risk extends directly to the potential re-involvement of Israel. Any significant Iranian move could prompt Israeli retaliation, transforming bilateral tensions into a multi-front war. Israeli leadership has already signaled preparedness to act against perceived threats, and historical patterns suggest that proxy conflicts or direct strikes could rapidly expand the battlefield with catastrophic humanitarian and strategic fallout.
Antagonizing Gulf neighbors and breaching sovereignty
Compounding these dangers is Iran’s unneighborly posture toward Gulf states. Recent attacks have impacted Gulf states including Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and Jordan. These countries, which have often sought diplomatic off-ramps and peace initiatives without fully aligning against Tehran, have rightfully condemned the aggression. Kuwait, for example, reported interceptions of ballistic missiles and drones, with falling debris causing injuries and damage. Qatar and others faced similar threats, prompting unified Gulf Cooperation Council statements decrying the “indiscriminate and reckless” actions. By striking nations attempting to foster stability, Iran antagonizes potential mediators and isolates itself regionally. This behavior portrays the Islamic Republic as the primary bad actor, undermining its narrative of self-defense. Under international law, such attacks constitute clear violations of state sovereignty as enshrined in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. Targeting commercial shipping further breaches principles of freedom of navigation, long protected under customary international law and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. These norms exist precisely to prevent the kind of chaos now threatening global energy flows through the Strait of Hormuz.
Economic self-sabotage amid overreach
While Iran may feel temporarily emboldened by domestic rallies or perceived strategic gains, it is dangerously overstretching. Its actions target not only adversaries but also those seeking de-escalation, international commerce, and the fragile post-conflict equilibrium. This approach risks uniting a broader coalition against it. Economically, the timing could not be worse. Iran’s economy was already battered by years of sanctions, mismanagement, and prior conflict damage. Projections indicate a contraction of around 5-10 percent for the year, with inflation surging dramatically – food prices like bread and cereals have risen over 140 percent year-on-year in affected periods, while overall consumer prices hover near or above 60-70 percent. Public dissatisfaction, simmering in past uprisings, is likely to intensify as resources are diverted to military efforts and global isolation deepens. Renewed disruptions to oil exports and infrastructure repairs could set recovery back by a decade, exacerbating poverty and eroding regime legitimacy. In conclusion, Iran’s post-funeral assertiveness reveals a critical miscalculation. By targeting ships, antagonizing neighbors, violating core international laws, and courting wider war, Tehran is playing a high-stakes game with diminishing returns. The region – and the world – can ill afford another spiral. Sustainable strength lies not in provocation but in diplomatic engagement, economic reform, and respect for international norms. Without a course correction, the current path leads not to empowerment but to greater isolation, hardship for its people, and the very conflicts it claims to deter. Urgent de-escalation remains the only viable off-ramp before overstretched ambitions ignite an uncontrollable blaze.

Selected Face Book & X tweets on 13 July
Ted Cruz
https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/2076300296708370700/video/1
This was Lindsey at his very best.

Ted Cruz
https://x.com/tedcruz/status/2076718637931483622/video/1
I'll always remember Lindsey’s wit, infectious sense of humor, and the countless battles we fought side by side in the Senate. A few years ago, Lindsey was the very first guest on Verdict. I still laugh when I think about his cold open. It captured his wit perfectly and was a reminder that, even in the midst of serious fights, he never lost his sense of humor.

Secretary Marco Rubio
https://x.com/SecRubio/status/2076671740407652582/video/1
The International Criminal Court seeks to become the unaccountable arbiter of a new global law — empowered to prosecute and arrest our citizens at will and existentially threaten American sovereignty. We will teach the ICC the full meaning of American resolve.

Gideon Sa'ar | גדעון סער
's repeated attempt to impose sanctions against Israel failed again today in the EU Council of Foreign Ministers.
There was no consensus. There was no relative majority. To be honest - there was no majority at all.
But Kallas decided to continue her obsessive campaign against Israel and transfer the discussion to the forum of senior ambassadors (the COREPER) in order to try to continue the campaign against Israel and find a new way to circumvent the rules. Israel-Europe relations should be based on dialogue and fairness. Tricks of this kind do not help realize the common interests.

UN Watch
https://x.com/UNWatch/status/2076709762108998128/video/1
UN Watch mourns the passing of Senator Lindsey Graham, a great defender of freedom who confronted evil with moral clarity and courage. He never hesitated to call out those who enabled terror: “UNRWA has blood on its hands. They're part of the problem, not the solution. ”

Israel-Alma
https://x.com/Israel_Alma_org/status/2076621821638524991/video/1
A nursery, a high school, and a center for children with special needs- these are just a few of the locations Hezbollah used as human shields in Beirut during Operation Roaring Lion (March–April 2026). Hezbollah operatives and military infrastructure were positioned as close as 10 meters from these civilian institutions while the organization joined the war alongside Iran by launching rocket attacks against Israel. During our mapping of Hezbollah military targets destroyed in the Dahieh using recent satellite imagery, we identified additional sensitive civilian institutions adjacent to Hezbollah military infrastructure, further illustrating the organization's systematic use of the human shield tactic during Operation Roaring Lion. The full findings will be published in a comprehensive report in the near future.

George Deek
Israel strongly condemns the shameful decision of the Church of England
@Synod
to grant legitimacy to the extremist Kairos Palestine document. This hateful document undermines the right of the world's only Jewish state to exist, and seeks to justify the atrocities of October 7 by blaming Israel for causing it.
Even more disturbingly, it urges churches to boycott dialogue with “Zionist voices,” in practice excluding the overwhelming majority of the Jewish community in the UK from Christian-Jewish engagement unless they renounce Jewish self-determination.
The irony is striking. The Church of England has itself adopted the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism, including all of its examples without qualification. So by the Church’s own standard, its decision to delegitimize Jewish self-determination falls under the definition of antisemitism.
At a time of unprecedented hatred against Jews, and after centuries in which Christian institutions contributed to the persecution of Jews, the Church had a special responsibility to exercise moral clarity. Instead, it has chosen to reward extremism, damage Christian-Jewish relations, and bring profound shame upon the Church of England.
And on a personal note:
The Church of England had an opportunity to promote understanding by engaging the full diversity of Christian voices from the Holy Land. It did not. I say this as an Arab Christian whose family has lived in this land for centuries.
Instead, the Church opted to elevate one of the most radical and divisive theological and political manifestos produced in recent years. The consequences of that decision will echo far beyond the walls of the General Synod.

Jennifer Gingrich
Shame kept me from saying anything earlier in memoriam to Sen. Lindsey Graham, who was a truer friend to Jews & Israel than we may ever see in Congress again. I was a hard-left liberal for most of my life. I used to despise Lindsey Graham. I thought he was a hateful bigot. I mocked him and posted ugly rumors about him on social media. The Democratic party's abandonment of women's rights and embrace of antisemitism has since turned me into a slightly-left-of-center moderate. When I saw friends posting gleeful comments about Graham's death on Facebook today, I was disgusted, but I also knew that if he had died 6 or 7 years ago, I probably would have done the same.The truth is, he was never a bigot, but I was. I hated any politician on the right because Hollywood and the media told me they were all racists, homophobes and misogynists. I didn't examine their beliefs, or mine, beyond that. It took me too long to grow up. I didn't love Lindsay Graham's decision to change course and back Trump, but he was nevertheless a man of integrity who stood by Jews even when it wasn't popular to do so, and who fought for the US' alliance with Israel even when it cost him. May his memory be a blessing.

Zéna Mansour ܙܺܝܢܵܐ ܡܲܢܨܘܪ
Lebanon and future generations will never forget Senator Graham’s US-Lebanon defense treaty proposal - a turning point to end 80 years of other nations’ wars on Lebanese soil.

Shadi khalloul שאדי ח'לול
The President of Lebanon must understand and fully grasp that if he desires stability, security, and peace for his country and its citizens, he must first disarm Hezbollah and all the militias. All the rhetoric and finger-pointing—blaming the world at large or Israel (which is defending its citizens against these militias and the failure of the Lebanese state)—is nothing but empty talk. Peace between Lebanon and Israel will come through the dismantling of the militias; this will strengthen the Lebanese state and pave the way for a genuine peace.

U.S. Central Command - Arabic
https://x.com/CENTCOMArabic/status/2076685089199489385/video/1
نجحت قوات القيادة المركزية الأمريكية، يوم أمس، في ضرب منشأة لصيانة الغواصات والسفن في إيران باستخدام زوارق مُسيّرة هجومية أحادية الاتجاه. أصابت ثلاث زوارق مُسيّرة من طراز كورسير Corsair الميناء الواقع في قاعدة بندر عباس البحرية، في خطوة مثلت المرة الأولى التي تستخدم فيها القوات الأمريكية مركبات بحرية مُسيّرة في عمليات قتالية. أدت الضربات التي شُنّت الليلة الماضية إلى إضعاف قدرة إيران على مواصلة مهاجمة حركة الملاحة التجارية.

Mike Pompeo
https://x.com/mikepompeo/status/2076707910428582362/video/1
As we mourn Senator Graham, I can think of few more fitting tributes to him than winning in Iran.
Lindsey's life's work was keeping America strong and defeating the bad guys. Let's make him proud.

John Bolton
The US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding and its ceasefire were effectively dead on arrival. The MOU was never viable because Tehran does not currently have a government in any coherent sense. In national-security affairs, it has no authoritative decision maker or process that produces binding government-wide decisions.

Joseph Gebeily
Saddened by the passing of Senator Lindsey Graham. A lifelong patriot, unwavering advocate for America’s national security, steadfast defender of freedom, and a great friend of Lebanon. I was honored to know him and grateful for his unwavering support for Lebanon’s sovereignty and democracy. May he rest in peace.