English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For  June 17/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.june17.26.htm

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

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

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

Bible Quotations For today
For the Son of Man came to seek and save those who are lost
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Matthew 18/11-14:”What do you think? If a shepherd has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go in search of the one that went astray?And if he finds it, truly I tell you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that never went astray. So it is not the will of your Father in heaven that one of these little ones should be lost.

Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 16-17 June/2026
A prayer for the freedom, safety, sovereignty, and independence of Lebanon/Elias Bejjani/June 16/2026
Israel remains tasked with eradicating Hezbollah from all of Lebanon, and its army will not withdraw before that/Elias Bejjani/June 15/2026
Gebran Bassil and Walid Jumblatt are enemies of Lebanon and are Trojan-horse mercenaries working for Hezbollah/Elias Bejjani/June 13, 2026
Trump Says Syria ‘Will Do the Job’ with Hezbollah if Israel Unable
Hezbollah's Financial Arm Referred to Lebanese Prosecutors
Iran Races against Lebanese Negotiators to Secure Israeli Withdrawal from South
Israel targets van in south and shells al-Rihan and Kfartebnit
4 killed in Israeli strikes on south, Israel says intercepted Hezbollah rockets
Qassem thanks Iran negotiator for help stopping Israel's Lebanon war
Iran FM says ending war including in Lebanon 'most important issue' in US deal
Aoun and Salam discuss preparations for new round of Israel talks
UN chief: Israel and Hezbollah must stop fighting
Hezbollah believes Iran will not sign final nuclear deal if Israel stays in Lebanon
What is the cost to Lebanon of the latest Israel-Hezbollah war?
Lebanese leaders discuss preparations for new round of Israel talks
Berri says phased, 60-day Israel pullout mentioned in Iran-US deal
Lebanon’s sixty days to choose statehood/Makram Rabah/Al Arabiya English/June 16/2026

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 16-17 June/2026
Al Arabiya English obtains 14-point draft of US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding
Trump says Iran deal to be public soon and will rule out nuclear weapon for Tehran
US-Iran deal to be signed at Switzerland’s Burgenstock resort on Friday
US Senate narrowly blocks new bid to rein in Trump war powers
US President Donald Trump invokes Defense Production Act, citing ‘fragile supply chains’
Israel condemns Lukashenko remarks to Al Arabiya English as ‘deeply disturbing’
China warns next phase of US-Iran talks will be ‘more difficult’
Saudi Cabinet, chaired by MBS, welcomes US-Iran agreement
Israel Seizes Powers over Hebron Shrine from Palestinian Authority
Israeli Military Takes More Territory, Kills Two People in Gaza, Medics and Witnesses Say
After 'Blank Ballot' Round, Hamas Resumes Vote for New Leader
Türkiye Opposes Iraq Pipeline Deal Extension under Current Conditions, Official Says
Tension in Samarra Tests Iraq Govt's Plan to Impose State Monopoly over Arms
ISIS Claims Responsibility for Attack on Police Camp in Syria’s Raqqa
Arab League Condemns Opening of Embassy for So-Called 'Somaliland Region' in Occupied Jerusalem

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 16-17 June/2026
Bitter Victory or Sweet Defeat in the Middle East, But Whose?/Alberto M. Fernandez/National Catholic Register/June 16/2026
The Ceasefire Between Iran and the United States and Its Impact on Lebanon/Colonel Charbel Barakat/June 16/2026
Can Iraq’s New Prime Minister Thread the US-Iran Needle?/Bridget Toomey/The National Interest/June 16/2026
Be Optimistic/Samir Atallah/Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
On a Changing Iran/Hanna Saleh/Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
Saudi Arabia and the Art of Statecraft/Mishary Dhayidi/Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on 16 June/2026

Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 16-17 June/2026
A prayer for the freedom, safety, sovereignty, and independence of Lebanon
Elias Bejjani/June 16/2026
In these difficult and painful times through which Lebanon is passing, the homeland of saints, martyrs, holiness, freedom, and coexistence, prayer for its salvation acquires a special urgency and importance.
Today, Lebanon suffers from various forms of domination, political paralysis, economic collapse, and social hardship. Its sovereignty, national identity, and historic mission continue to face serious challenges, while its people endure poverty, emigration, uncertainty, and the loss of hope.
The prayers of the Lebanese people for the salvation, liberation, and renewal of their country are not merely a patriotic duty; they are also an act of faith, hope, and trust in God. If the Lord Jesus responded to the faith of those who carried the paralytic to Him, if He healed the centurion's servant in response to the centurion's request, and if He raised Lazarus from the dead in answer to the pleas of Martha and Mary, then surely the prayers of believers on behalf of their homeland, their families, and their people are heard and welcomed by God.
The Church throughout its history has witnessed the power of intercessory prayer and the countless blessings that flow from faithful supplication offered for others. Lebanon today is in great need of such prayer. Its salvation begins with the conversion of hearts, with a renewed commitment to faith, truth, freedom, and moral responsibility. It also begins with the conviction that God never abandons those who place their trust in Him and seek His help with sincerity and perseverance.
Therefore, praying for Lebanon—for its freedom, sovereignty, peace, stability, and liberation from corruption, injustice, fear, and every form of domination—is both a spiritual and national responsibility entrusted to every Lebanese who believes in God's love and justice.
Let us therefore raise our hearts together and pray: A Prayer for Lebanon
Lord God, Father of mercy, love, and peace, look with compassion upon Lebanon and its people.
Bless its land and preserve its heritage. Protect it from violence, division, oppression, and all who seek to diminish its freedom and dignity. Enlighten the minds and consciences of its leaders so that they may serve the common good with wisdom, integrity, and courage.
Strengthen the faith of its people, comfort those who suffer, give hope to the discouraged, and bring back those who have been forced to leave their homeland. Heal the wounds of the nation, unite its children in truth and reconciliation, and restore to Lebanon its historic mission as a beacon of freedom, faith, culture, and coexistence in the Middle East.
Free Lebanon from corruption, injustice, dependency, and fear. Grant its people perseverance, patience, and confidence in Your providence. Through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Our Lady of Lebanon, and all the saints of Lebanon, protect this beloved nation and grant it lasting peace, security, sovereignty, dignity, and prosperity.
For Yours is the glory, now and forever. Amen.

Israel remains tasked with eradicating Hezbollah from all of Lebanon, and its army will not withdraw before that
Elias Bejjani/June 15/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155280/
The era of the criminal, terrorist, and theocratic jihadist Hezbollah is over. It should be noted that despite all the illusory Iranian jubilation following the signing of the Iranian-American agreement, Israel remains tasked with eradicating Hezbollah from all of Lebanon, and its army will not withdraw from Lebanon before that. The bluster of the mullahs is empty and nothing but delusions.
Do not believe any leaks about the terms of the US-Iranian agreement currently circulating in Arab media.
Most of these leaks originate from the Iranian Mehr News Agency, known as a propaganda platform for the Iranian regime, and not a reliable source for revealing details of an agreement of this magnitude. Trump has not yet announced all the actual terms and details of the agreement, and there is still a 60-day period during which sensitive and crucial issues will be addressed, most notably:
- The ballistic missile program.
- Support for armed proxies and militias.
- Support for Hezbollah.
- The negotiations between Lebanon and Israel.
- Israel's conditions for withdrawing from southern Lebanon.
Therefore, everything published today about the final and decisive details of the agreement should be treated with extreme caution until the full official statements and documents are released.

Gebran Bassil and Walid Jumblatt are enemies of Lebanon and are Trojan-horse mercenaries working for Hezbollah.
Elias Bejjani/June 13, 2026
Gebran Bassil has been, still is, and will remain tied by the neck and tongue to the humiliating ropes of the Party of Satan (a derogatory reference to Hezbollah). His continued presence as a politician is an insult to free people, the martyrs, and history.
Walid Jumblatt, a man of abandonment and opportunistic transformations—an opportunist, a chameleon, and a submissive figure—is alienated and estranged from the Druze community (Bani Ma‘ruf), their values, pride, patriotism, dignity, and honor.

Trump Says Syria ‘Will Do the Job’ with Hezbollah if Israel Unable
Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
US President Donald Trump said Tuesday he had suggested to Israel that Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa should deal with Lebanon's Tehran-backed Hezbollah group as the Israeli campaign was causing too many casualties. Praising Sharaa as doing an "amazing job", Trump said at a G7 summit: "If Israel can't do the job (against Hezbollah) without killing everyone else, than he (Sharaa) will do the job. Syria will do the job."Sharaa last week quelled renewed speculation that Syria could become involved in the war in Lebanon, saying reports that Damascus intends to intervene militarily are “mere rumors.”Sources in Damascus told Asharq Al-Awsat at the time: “So far, there has been no official US request to Damascus related to any form of Syrian military intervention in Lebanon.”They said Tom Barrack, Trump’s envoy to Syria and Iraq and Washington’s ambassador in Ankara, had previously asked Damascus “to take a clear, explicit and serious position against Hezbollah.”They added that “entering the quagmire of war and sending military forces unilaterally is completely ruled out,” and that it was “very, very early” to discuss the possibility of Syrian forces entering Lebanon in support of the Lebanese army. Syria’s Interior Ministry said, “Lebanon is a sovereign state and not a backyard, as the former regime viewed it,” stressing that “coordination with Lebanon is the basic pillar for any assistance Syria provides to Lebanon.”Brigadier General Hassan Abdul Ghani, commander of the Border Guard Forces in the Syrian Arab Army, met last Thursday with a Lebanese army delegation headed by liaison official Brigadier General Michel Boutros.The talks focused mainly on “enhancing cooperation and coordination between the two sides in border control and combating smuggling activities, in a way that contributes to strengthening border security between the two countries.”

Hezbollah's Financial Arm Referred to Lebanese Prosecutors
Beirut: Youssef Diab//Asharq Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
In a move carrying legal, financial, and political implications, Lebanon's justice minister has referred Al-Qard Al-Hassan, Hezbollah's financial arm, to the Public Prosecutor's Office, requesting the opening of an investigation into its financial activities.
The step revives a longstanding dispute between Hezbollah and state institutions over financial operations that function outside Lebanon's banking system and the extent to which they comply with the country's laws and regulations.
The referral comes as Lebanon faces growing international pressure over anti-money laundering and counterterrorism financing measures, alongside repeated calls for all financial and lending activities to be brought under the supervision of Banque du Liban and the relevant regulatory authorities. Justice Minister Adel Nassar said the decision followed a ministry review of the matter. "Based on a study conducted by the ministry, we reached conclusions and identified grounds that warranted placing the case before the Public Prosecutor's Office, which will now take the necessary steps," Nassar told Asharq Al-Awsat. He added that the ministry had examined more than one issue and found sufficient reasons to make the referral, stressing that determining whether any offense had been committed was a matter for prosecutors."The ministry's role is limited to making a referral when information emerges that warrants an investigation," he said.
Internal Initiative, Not External Pressure
Al-Qard Al-Hassan has for years been subject to sanctions imposed by the US Treasury Department, which accuses it of providing financial services that support Hezbollah and its illicit activities. The institution is neither licensed nor recognized by Lebanon's banking authorities, while Banque du Liban has previously issued directives prohibiting licensed banks and financial institutions from dealing with it. Asked whether the move resulted from requests by foreign parties, Nassar insisted that it stemmed from the ministry's own responsibilities and was not prompted by any external approach or demand. "This is not limited to Al-Qard Al-Hassan," he said. "It also involves other entities, including Joud."Nassar said the ministry's internal review had identified questions regarding the nature of the activities carried out by these entities and the financial operations that could stem from them. He stressed that the judiciary would independently determine whether any violations or crimes had occurred and whether prosecution was warranted. "That is a matter for the courts to decide, independently and without interference from any authority, including the Ministry of Justice," he said.
Investigation Taking Shape
Attention is now focused on the course of the judicial proceedings and whether they will lead to concrete decisions or legal measures against the institution or those responsible for running it. A judicial source said Public Prosecutor Judge Rami Hajj received the referral on Monday and is currently reviewing it before setting dates for investigative sessions. The source said the inquiry was likely to be complex and involve multiple authorities. "Part of it may fall within the jurisdiction of General Security, while another part may involve the Interior Ministry in order to determine whether Al-Qard Al-Hassan's association license remains valid or has been suspended," the source told Asharq Al-Awsat. The source added that if financial violations are established, part of the investigation would involve Banque du Liban and the Special Investigation Commission to determine the origin of the funds involved. The move is widely seen as an important test of the Lebanese state's ability to enforce regulatory oversight over all financial institutions operating within the country, particularly after the financial collapse that struck the traditional banking sector in 2019. That collapse was accompanied by the expansion of alternative financial networks, most notably Al-Qard Al-Hassan, which Hezbollah used to circumvent US sanctions. Over time, the institution developed into a de facto banking system serving the party and its support base, providing loans to thousands of clients in exchange for collateral including jewelry and real estate.
ATMs and Transfers Under Scrutiny
The case is also expected to trigger political controversy and draw a response from Hezbollah, which views mounting pressure on Al-Qard Al-Hassan as part of a broader campaign of sanctions and financial restrictions imposed on the group and its constituency for years. That perception has been reinforced during the recent conflict, as the institution played a role in providing assistance to large numbers of displaced residents from southern Lebanon, Beirut's southern suburbs, and the Bekaa Valley. The judicial source said Hezbollah was expected to cooperate with the investigation and provide evidence to demonstrate that the institution had not engaged in unlawful activity. The source also disclosed that a delegation of Hezbollah lawmakers met the Public Prosecutor around two weeks ago and pledged to suspend the institution's ATM operations, as well as any transfer or deposit activities that might conflict with the scope of its authorized license.

Iran Races against Lebanese Negotiators to Secure Israeli Withdrawal from South
Beirut: Nazir Rida/Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
Two tracks are moving in parallel to secure Israel’s withdrawal from occupied Lebanese territory. The first is Lebanon’s direct negotiations with Israel, which are scheduled for their fifth session next Monday in Washington. The second is Iranian pressure to complete the withdrawal before Tehran reaches a nuclear agreement with Washington within a 60-day window. Iran has told Hezbollah it will not sign the agreement before Israel fully withdraws from Lebanese territory, a source from the “Shiite duo” in Lebanon told Asharq Al-Awsat. The duo is comprised of Hezbollah and its ally the Amal movement headed by parliament Speaker Nabih Berri. Lebanon has insisted from the start that direct talks with Israel address a package of demands, led by the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanese territory they occupied during the war. The declared understanding between Washington and Tehran made no mention of the issue, according to leaks. But Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Tuesday that ending the war would not be complete “without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories they occupied in this war.”“Any military attack by the Zionist entity against Lebanon from now on, and any continued occupation of Lebanese territory from now on, will be considered, from our point of view, a violation of the memorandum of understanding,” he told a meeting with foreign diplomats broadcast by state television. A displaced woman holds an Iranian flag as she makes her way back to her home in southern Lebanon, on the highway of Sidon, Lebanon, June 16, 2026. (Reuters)
Lebanon’s negotiation track
The Lebanese state, meanwhile, is pressing ahead with a new round of negotiations due to open next Monday in Washington and run until Wednesday, with developments to be discussed in security and diplomatic sessions. The Lebanese presidency said President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam discussed the preparations on Tuesday. Aoun and Salam described the US-Iranian understanding as “a positive factor” in easing regional tensions and pushing toward peaceful solutions and an end to the war. At the same time, they reaffirmed “Lebanon’s firm position in the Washington negotiations” on a final ceasefire, the withdrawal of Israeli forces, the deployment of the Lebanese army up to the international border, the release of Lebanese prisoners and the start of reconstruction.
Gradual withdrawal within 60 days
Iran and Hezbollah are pursuing a parallel track. A source, who requested anonymity, told Asharq Al-Awsat that the agreement between Iran and the United States “stipulates a ceasefire, a halt to Israeli attacks and a guarantee of Lebanon’s territorial integrity.”
The source said this would require Israeli commitment, “guaranteed by the United States.”“Hezbollah was informed by the Iranian side that Israel, after the agreement is signed next Friday, must begin a gradual withdrawal from inside occupied Lebanese territory and complete the withdrawal before the date of signing the nuclear agreement with Iran,” the source said, referring to the 60-day deadline. “The party was informed that Tehran will not sign the nuclear agreement with Washington before Israel’s full withdrawal,” the source added. Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem on Tuesday sent a message of thanks to Iranian parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Ghalibaf “for obliging the Israeli entity to immediately and permanently halt military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon, in connection with the end of the war on Iran, as the first and fundamental clause of the agreement between Iran and America.” Lebanese Speaker Nabih Berri and Ghalibaf discussed, in a phone call, field and political developments linked to the deal between the United States and Iran, especially the clause on ending Israel’s war on Lebanon.
A statement from the Lebanese parliament said Ghalibaf and Berri “stressed the need for the United States, the guarantors of the memorandum of understanding and the international community to assume their responsibility to compel Israel to end its war, stop demolishing villages, respect Lebanon’s sovereignty and withdraw immediately from the territories it occupied.”
Hezbollah’s opponents doubtful
Inside Lebanon, Hezbollah’s opponents questioned Iran’s ability to force an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon. Members of the Strong Republic parliamentary bloc and the executive body of the Lebanese Forces party said after an extraordinary meeting that any agreement between the United States and Iran “remains a matter concerning the two states involved.”“The ceasefire mentioned in the agreement is general and concerns the Middle East region. It has no practical repercussions for Lebanon because the party fighting in Lebanon is Israel, not the US,” they said in a statement. They accused Tehran of “providing verbal services to Hezbollah so that it can continue fighting to achieve Iran’s objectives.”They said that “what is required after all the suffering endured by the Lebanese people is not merely a ceasefire while keeping the old order in place, with Iran and Hezbollah forming an essential part of that old order, but a complete end to the successive wars that have torn Lebanon apart and impoverished it.”They said the time had come to achieve that by dissolving illegal military organizations, “foremost among them Hezbollah.”
They also backed the direct negotiation track with Israel, describing it as “the only gateway to ending the wars in Lebanon and reaching an actual state that restores Lebanon’s Arab and international relations.”The Kataeb Party stressed that Lebanon “is not concerned with any agreement involving Lebanon except one in which the Lebanese state and its legitimate institutions elected by the Lebanese people are involved, through the parties officially authorized to negotiate on their behalf in Washington.”The party said those representatives were carrying out their role to restore Lebanon’s sovereignty and free decision-making, secure the Israeli withdrawal, halt attacks and complete government decisions to confine arms to the state and restore security decision-making to the official authorities.

Israel targets van in south and shells al-Rihan and Kfartebnit
Naharnet/June 16/2026
An Israeli drone strike targeted a van on the Harees-Hadatha road in the Bint Jbeil district on Tuesday, as Israeli artillery shelling hit the vicinity of al-Rihan in the Jezzine district and the town of Kfartebnit in the Nabatieh region. Violence seems to have abated between Israel and Hezbollah since an Iranian-American peace deal was announced two days ago. Hezbollah said on Monday that it had attacked an Israeli force trying to advance in southern Lebanon in response to three Israeli drone attacks and artillery shellinh. Fighters from the group "using rockets and drones" blocked an Israeli force consisting of an excavator and two Merkava tanks that was "advancing" in the vicinity of Kfartebnit, Hezbollah said in a statement. In another statement late Monday, it added: "The enemy army regrouped its forces in the vicinity of the crossing area by bringing in an armored force consisting of five Merkava tanks and four vehicles. "The mujahideen of the Islamic Resistance targeted them with rocket barrages and artillery shells, and the clashes are still ongoing."Earlier on Monday, an Israeli drone targeted a car in the same area "killing its driver," Lebanon's National News Agency (NNA) reported, marking the first deadly strike since the agreement was announced. Details of the agreement to end the Middle East war on all fronts have not been made public, but Iran and mediator Pakistan have both said it includes Lebanon. Hezbollah drew the country into the Middle East war on March 2 with rocket fire at Israel to avenge the killing of Iran's supreme leader in U.S.-Israeli strikes. Israel responded with airstrikes and a ground invasion that Lebanon says have killed more than 3,700 people and displaced more than one million others. An official source told AFP that "Lebanon was not informed of the terms of the agreement or the time of the ceasefire."

4 killed in Israeli strikes on south, Israel says intercepted Hezbollah rockets
Agence France Presse/June 16/2026
Lebanon said Israeli strikes killed four people in the country's south on Tuesday as Israel said it intercepted Hezbollah rockets and launched raids, despite a U.S.-Iran deal that includes Lebanon. Lebanon's official National News Agency (NNA) said Israeli drone strikes targeted two vehicles in the town of Mayfadoun and another in nearby Shukeen, both in the Nabatieh area, "leading to an initial toll of four dead" and others wounded. The Israeli military said it conducted a strike in south Lebanon after it "identified a suspicious vehicle" where its soldiers were operating, without specifying where. It also said its forces intercepted several rockets fired at Israeli soldiers in south Lebanon, following which the air force "struck and dismantled" a launcher. Hezbollah has so far not issued any statements on Tuesday claiming attacks on Israeli targets in south Lebanon. While violence declined in Lebanon after the U.S.-Iran agreement to end the Middle East war was announced on Monday, Israeli strikes on the south have now killed at least five people since, according to the NNA. The reduction in violence has allowed some south Lebanon residents to return and inspect their towns and villages, but the Lebanese army has urged locals to delay their return, citing "the risk of Israeli violations and attacks". Lebanon's health ministry on Tuesday raised the death toll in Israeli attacks since March 2 to 3,826, as rescuers pull bodies from the rubble. Hezbollah drew Lebanon into the Middle East war by firing rockets at Israel to avenge the killing of Iran's supreme leader in U.S.-Israeli strikes. Israel responded with a massive campaign of airstrikes and a ground invasion. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Tuesday that an end to the conflict would be incomplete "without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories it occupied in this war"."Any military attack by the Zionist regime on Lebanon from now on and the continued occupation of Lebanese territories from now on will be considered a violation of the memorandum of understanding in our view," he added. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday that the country's forces would remain in Lebanon "for as long as necessary".

Qassem thanks Iran negotiator for help stopping Israel's Lebanon war
Agence France Presse/June 16/2026
Hezbollah's chief on Tuesday thanked Iran's top negotiator for helping stop the "Israeli-American aggression" on Lebanon, after the announcement of a U.S.-Iran deal on ending the Middle East war that includes Lebanon. In a message to Iranian parliament speaker and top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Hezbollah's leader Sheikh Naim Qassem expressed "profound gratitude" for Iran's efforts "to compel the Israeli entity to an immediate and permanent cessation of military operations on all fronts including in Lebanon". "You have transformed the only effective glimmer of hope in ending the Israeli-American aggression on Lebanon into a reality that has proved to the world that Iran is the champion of truth and the resistance," he said, according to the message published by Hezbollah. "We have always said that Iran has given Hezbollah, the resistance and the Lebanese people everything, and has taken nothing in return. It has supported us in our choices and strengthened us to liberate our land," he added. Hezbollah drew Lebanon into the Middle East war on March 2 with rocket fire at Israel to avenge the killing of Iran's supreme leader in U.S.-Israeli strikes. Israel responded with a massive campaign of airstrikes and a ground invasion that Lebanese authorities say has killed more than 3,800 people. Qassem is due to make a televised address on Wednesday.

Iran FM says ending war including in Lebanon 'most important issue' in US deal
Agence France Presse/June 16/2026
Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Tuesday that ending the war on all fronts, including Lebanon, was "the most important" issue in the peace deal with the United States announced the day before. "The important point I want to emphasize here is that in our view, there are two parties to this memorandum -- one side is America and Israel, and the other side is Iran and Hezbollah," said Araghchi during a briefing with foreign diplomats broadcast on state television. "This is perhaps the most important issue in the memorandum -- the declaration of an immediate and permanent end to the war on all fronts, including in Lebanon," he said, adding that "ending the war in Lebanon is an inseparable part of the complete end of the war."His remarks came one day after Tehran and Washington announced a memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the conflict, which broke out on February 28 with U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran and engulfed the Middle East. Lebanon was pulled into the war in early March when Iran-backed Hezbollah launched rockets at Israel after the killing of Iran's supreme leader, prompting Israeli strikes and a ground invasion. Araghchi said an end to the war would not be complete "without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories it occupied in this war". "Any military attack by the Zionist regime on Lebanon from now on and the continued occupation of Lebanese territories from now on will be considered a violation of the memorandum of understanding in our view," he added. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said Israel's forces will remain in Lebanon, Syria and Gaza "as long as necessary". Following the deal announcement on Monday, Hezbollah said it had attacked Israeli forces trying to advance in southern Lebanon in response to drone attacks and artillery shelling by Israel. The deal is expected to be signed on Friday in Switzerland. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi said his country's top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf will attend the signing with an Iranian delegation, according to state television. The U.S. delegation will be headed by Vice President JD Vance, he added. "It is also not yet clear how the signing will take place, including whether it will be conducted electronically or not," he said. On Tuesday, Araghchi said the signing "will take place soon" and that talks with the United States on a final agreement covering Iran's nuclear program will begin after the signing. "Likely on Friday, at a location to be determined... a new round of negotiations between Iran and the United States to reach a final agreement will begin," Araghchi said. "In the final agreement, decisions will be made on the nuclear issues and the lifting of sanctions," he added.

Aoun and Salam discuss preparations for new round of Israel talks
Agence France Presse/June 16/2026
Lebanon's president and prime minister on Tuesday discussed preparations for a new round of talks with Israel next week, after the U.S. and Iran announced a peace deal that includes Lebanon. Lebanon and Israel have been holding direct talks in Washington since April, seeking to end hostilities and separate the Israel-Hezbollah conflict from the wider regional war. But the announcement of the U.S.-Iran deal has reshuffled the cards in Lebanon. The office of President Joseph Aoun said in a statement that he and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam discussed preparations for the fifth round of talks, scheduled to begin on June 22. The pair view the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding as "a positive factor in reducing the regional tensions and pushing towards peaceful solutions and an end to the state of war," according to the statement. They also reiterated that through the Washington talks, Lebanon continues to seek "a permanent ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the lands they occupy, the deployment of the Lebanese Army up to the international border, the return of Lebanese prisoners and launching the reconstruction process."Details circulating of the Iran-U.S. deal fail to mention a withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon. But Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Tuesday that an end to the conflict would be incomplete "without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories it occupied in this war.""Any military attack by the Zionist regime on Lebanon from now on and the continued occupation of Lebanese territories from now on will be considered a violation of the memorandum of understanding in our view," he added. Hezbollah drew Lebanon into the Middle East war on March 2 with rocket fire at Israel to avenge the killing of Iran's supreme leader in U.S.-Israeli strikes. Israel responded with a massive campaign of airstrikes and a ground invasion. Neither side has respected previous ceasefire announcements.Hezbollah on Monday thanked its backer Tehran for insisting Lebanon be included in the agreement with Washington. The militant group said it would be "wise to review all the calculations and approaches pursued by the authorities... and acknowledge that a united Lebanese position and reliance on true friends is the optimal way to safeguard national interests". Hezbollah, which has rejected a government decision to disarm the group, also repeated its demand that authorities abandon the direct talks with Israel. Since the Iran-U.S. deal announcement, hostilities and military operations between Hezbollah and Israel have declined significantly. Lebanon says Israeli attacks since March 2 have killed more than 3,700 people and displaced more than one million others.

UN chief: Israel and Hezbollah must stop fighting
Associated Press/June 16/2026
U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has called on Hezbollah to allow Lebanon’s government “to have the primacy of arms and authority throughout its territory,” U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said. Guterres also called on Israel to respect Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and withdraw its troops. The U.N. peacekeeping force in Lebanon known as UNIFIL reported that from midnight until 4 p.m. local time Monday, it observed a decrease in violence and exchanges of fire between Israel and Hezbollah, Dujarric said. UNIFIL recorded 133 trajectories of projectiles and two airstrikes attributed to Israeli forces during that time period and none from Hezbollah or other armed groups, he said. It also recorded 25 violations of Lebanese airspace. Before the agreement was announced on Sunday, UNIFIL recorded 1,374 trajectories of projectiles over the weekend, with 1,328 attributed to Israeli forces and the rest “presumably” to Hezbollah, Dujarric said. It also recorded 135 Israeli violations of Lebanese airspace.

Hezbollah believes Iran will not sign final nuclear deal if Israel stays in Lebanon
Reuters/16 June ,2026
Hezbollah said on Tuesday it believes Iran will not sign a final nuclear deal with Washington unless Israel withdraws from Lebanon, as Iran’s top diplomat said Israel’s continued troop presence in Lebanon would be considered a breach of the US-Iran memorandum of understanding.
Israeli troops still occupy a swathe of territory in southern Lebanon that they seized in their three-month air and land campaign against Hezbollah, which began after the Iran-backed group fired at Israel on March 2 in support of Tehran. Fighting in Lebanon has eased significantly after the Iran-US memorandum of understanding but has not stopped in full, and Israel has said troops would remain in the country’s south. Hezbollah has objected to Israel’s continued occupation. On Tuesday, the group’s media office said it understood that Iran would demand an Israeli withdrawal as part of the next round of US-Iran talks, set to begin after the two formally sign their memorandum of understanding this coming Friday. Those talks are set to address difficult issues like the future of Iran’s nuclear program.
“We believe there will be no nuclear deal between Iran and the United States if Israel does not withdraw,” Hezbollah’s media office told Reuters, the first time the group linked Israel’s withdrawal to a possible nuclear deal. It said an Israeli withdrawal would be the result of, and not a precondition for, those talks. It said it had received Iranian assurances that any Israeli breach of the Lebanon ceasefire would affect those upcoming negotiations. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Tuesday that the end of the regional war must include the end of conflict in Lebanon, including “the end of the occupation” of Lebanese land. “Without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories they have occupied in this war, a full end to the war has not been achieved,” he said. Araghchi added that any Israeli attack on Lebanon or the continued occupation of Lebanese land “will, in our view, be considered a violation of the memorandum of understanding.”

What is the cost to Lebanon of the latest Israel-Hezbollah war?
Reuters/16 June ,2026
Lebanon has suffered the deadliest spillover of the regional war triggered by the US-Israeli strikes on Iran more than three months ago, which is set to end with a deal between Washington and Tehran. The conflict spread to Lebanon on March 2, when Iran-backed group Hezbollah fired on Israel in support of Tehran, triggering an Israeli air and ground campaign.
Here are some of the main costs for Lebanon.
Casualties
From March 2 until June 14, the night the US-Iran deal was announced, at least 3,783 people were killed and 11,699 wounded in Lebanon, according to the country’s health ministry. The death toll included 247 children, 363 women and 133 healthcare workers. The ministry’s figures do not distinguish between civilians and combatants, and Hezbollah has not said how many of its fighters were killed. The toll surpasses the 3,468 killed in Iran as of late April, when a US-Iran ceasefire was reached.
It is also higher than the ministry’s figures for the last Israel-Hezbollah conflict, which lasted from October 2023 to November 2024. That war saw 3,768 people killed, the vast majority of whom were killed after Israel went on the offensive in September 2024.
At least 28 Israeli soldiers have been killed in Lebanon in the latest war, according to a Reuters tally of Israeli military announcements, while four civilians have been killed in Hezbollah attacks. That compares with 73 Israeli soldiers and 45 civilians in northern Israel in the 2023-2024 war.
Destruction
Israel’s airstrikes have damaged and destroyed buildings across Lebanon. Most of the damage has been concentrated in the south, but buildings were also destroyed in the capital and its southern suburbs. Israeli troops occupying a southern swathe of the country have also flattened dozens of villages there, saying their aim is to keep residents of northern Israel safe from attacks by Hezbollah fighters embedded in civilian areas. Buildings damaged in the south within the first month of the war included hospitals, power stations and water pumping stations. The latest figures from Lebanon’s National Council for Scientific Research, which cover the period from March 2 until May 17, show that more than 68,000 housing units across the country have been damaged or destroyed. Nearly 30,000 of those units are in the three southernmost districts of Lebanon, and more than 8,000 in Beirut and its southern suburbs. In a report published this month, the United Nations Development Program said that in Beirut and the southern suburbs alone, the damage amounted to $365 million. Israel’s destruction of buildings and inflicting of casualties has drawn criticism from US President Donald Trump. “You don’t have to knock down an apartment house every time you’re looking for somebody, because there a lot of people in those apartment houses, and they’re not all Hezbollah, that I can tell you,” Trump told reporters at the G7 summit in France.
Displacement
More than 1.2 million people have been displaced by Israel’s airstrikes and evacuation warnings across Lebanon since March 2, according to Lebanese authorities. They include hundreds of thousands of people who fled Beirut’s southern suburbs, which Israel’s military ordered entirely evacuated for the first time during this war. Even after the announcement of the US-Iran deal, many displaced did not return home - either because they had no homes to return to or because they were skeptical the ceasefire would hold in Lebanon.
Economic impact
Lebanon’s authorities have not yet assessed the full scale of the war’s economic impact, but have said that it derailed the country’s recovery from a series of recent crises, including the 2023-2024 war, the Beirut port blast of 2020 and the financial collapse of 2019. Finance Minister Yassine Jaber told Reuters in May that the war could see Lebanon’s economy contract by at least 7 percent this year. The 2024 war cost Lebanon at least $8.5 billion in physical damage and economic losses, according to the World Bank. Lebanon’s real GDP contracted by 7.1 percent in 2024, the World Bank said, leading to a cumulative GDP decline of nearly 40 percent since 2019.

Lebanese leaders discuss preparations for new round of Israel talks
AFP/16 June ,2026
Lebanon’s president and prime minister on Tuesday discussed preparations for a new round of talks with Israel next week, after the US and Iran announced a peace deal that includes Lebanon. Lebanon and Israel have been holding direct talks in Washington since April, seeking to end hostilities and separate the Israel-Hezbollah conflict from the wider regional war. But the announcement of the US-Iran deal has reshuffled the cards in Lebanon. The office of President Joseph Aoun said in a statement that he and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam discussed preparations for the fifth round of talks, scheduled to begin on June 22. The pair view the US-Iran memorandum of understanding as “a positive factor in reducing the regional tensions and pushing towards peaceful solutions and an end to the state of war,” according to the statement. They also reiterated that through the Washington talks, Lebanon continues to seek “a permanent ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the lands they occupy, the deployment of the Lebanese army up to the international border, the return of Lebanese prisoners and launching the reconstruction process.”Details circulating of the Iran-US deal fail to mention a withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon. But Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Tuesday that an end to the conflict would be incomplete “without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories it occupied in this war.”“Any military attack by the Zionist regime on Lebanon from now on and the continued occupation of Lebanese territories from now on will be considered a violation of the memorandum of understanding in our view,” he added. Hezbollah drew Lebanon into the Middle East war on March 2 with rocket fire at Israel to avenge the killing of Iran’s supreme leader in US-Israeli strikes. Israel responded with a massive campaign of airstrikes and a ground invasion. Neither side has respected previous ceasefire announcements. Hezbollah on Monday thanked its backer Tehran for insisting Lebanon be included in the agreement with Washington. The militant group said it would be “wise to review all the calculations and approaches pursued by the authorities... and acknowledge that a united Lebanese position and reliance on true friends is the optimal way to safeguard national interests.”Hezbollah, which has rejected a government decision to disarm the group, also repeated its demand that authorities abandon the direct talks with Israel. Since the Iran-US deal announcement, hostilities and military operations between Hezbollah and Israel have declined significantly. Lebanon says Israeli attacks since March 2 have killed more than 3,700 people and displaced more than one million others.

Berri says phased, 60-day Israel pullout mentioned in Iran-US deal
Naharnet/June 16/2026
Speaker Nabih Berri revealed Monday that a phased, 60-day Israeli withdrawal from south Lebanon is mentioned in the latest peace deal between Iran and the U.S., whose details are yet to be officially disclosed. In remarks to the "Whyz" news portal, Berri added that he rejects the so-called "pilot zones" that have been recently proposed by Washington. "Lebanon consists of 24 districts, not 24 pilot zones," he said. Pilot zones are areas from which Israel would withdraw its forces to be replaced by Lebanese troops who would clear the area of any weapons belonging to nonstate actors. Asked what guarantees that Israel would implement the terms of any agreement, Berri said: "This agreement is bigger than Lebanon and its implementation cannot be flouted as happened in the 2024 agreement, because U.S. President Donald Trump has take it upon himself."

Lebanon’s sixty days to choose statehood
Makram Rabah/Al Arabiya English/June 16/2026
The latest agreement between the United States and Iran has produced the predictable wave of Lebanese illusions. Some have rushed to declare that the war is over. Others have convinced themselves that the next sixty days will somehow produce a miracle: Hezbollah will accept the logic of the state, Iran will abandon its Lebanese military investment, Israel will withdraw, and Lebanon will wake up to a new dawn of reconstruction, stability, and sovereignty.
This is not analysis. It is escapism.
The sixty days leading up to the memorandum of understanding will not change the fundamentals of the Lebanese crisis. They may silence some guns temporarily. They may reduce the tempo of Israeli strikes. They may give diplomats enough language to claim progress. But they will not answer the only question that matters: will Hezbollah disarm and allow the Lebanese state to become sovereign again?The answer, unless proven otherwise by facts on the ground, is no.
Iran did not build Hezbollah over four decades to dismantle it because a piece of paper was negotiated elsewhere. Hezbollah did not drag Lebanon into this war to then discover the virtues of state authority. Its weapons are not a detail. They are the core of the Iranian occupation of Lebanon. They are the instrument through which Tehran negotiates with Washington, threatens Israel, blackmails the Lebanese state, and prevents any serious recovery of the country.
As long as these weapons remain, Israel will not fully withdraw from Lebanon. And even if Israel withdraws for some magical reason, this will not mean that Lebanon has been liberated. It will simply mean that the external symptom has changed while the disease remains. No serious state, donor, investor, or institution will rebuild a country whose strategic decision is held hostage by an Iranian militia. No one will pour billions into a territory that can be destroyed again the moment Tehran needs a bargaining chip.
This is the painful truth many Lebanese refuse to confront. Reconstruction is not a technical question. It is a political question. Sovereignty is the first condition of recovery.
Many Lebanese today are frustrated because they secretly hoped Israel would do the job that the Lebanese state has failed to do. They believed that Israel would clean the Lebanese house, destroy Hezbollah’s military machine, and spare them the cost of an internal confrontation. This is both morally bankrupt and politically childish. Israel is not in Lebanon to save Lebanon. Israel is in Lebanon to protect Israel. Its war aims, its targets, and its red lines are determined by Israeli security, not Lebanese statehood.
The Lebanese must finally understand that no one will do their job for them. Not the Americans. Not the Saudis. Not the French. Not the Israelis. A state that refuses to defend its own sovereignty cannot expect others to respect it.
There is another dangerous illusion circulating in Beirut: that the problem is Benjamin Netanyahu. Some Lebanese are almost celebrating the possibility that Netanyahu might lose power, as if a change in Israeli leadership would magically spare Lebanon. This is a fatal misunderstanding of Israel. The Israeli state, regardless of who leads it, will not accept an Iranian military force on its northern border. This is not a Netanyahu position. It is an Israeli consensus.
If Netanyahu loses and someone like Gadi Eisenkot rises, Lebanon should not expect mercy. Eisenkot is not a dove in the Lebanese imagination. He is associated with the very doctrine that turned Dahiya into a military concept: overwhelming force, massive destruction, and the treatment of Hezbollah’s civilian environment as part of its war machine. Those who think Netanyahu’s departure means the end of Israeli pressure on Lebanon have understood nothing. In some scenarios, it could mean more war, more destruction, and a more disciplined Israeli campaign.
The same applies to Donald Trump. Many in Lebanon reduce Trump to his theatrics, his rashness, and his contradictions. All of that exists. But Trump’s unpredictability does not only work in favor of deals with Iran. It can also work against Iran. This is the same Trump who ordered the killing of Qassem Soleimani. This is the same Trump under whom the United States participated in the war that killed Ali Khamenei. To assume that Trump will always restrain Israel, or always spare Iran’s assets in Lebanon, is reckless.
The Lebanese cannot base their future on reading Trump’s moods, Netanyahu’s polls, or Iran’s negotiating tactics. They have sixty days, not to wait, but to act.
The real question is not whether the US-Iran deal will hold. The real question is whether Lebanon will use this window to present a clear national roadmap: disarmament, full deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces, restoration of state authority south of the Litani and beyond it, direct political engagement in Washington, and a serious commitment to peace as a sovereign Lebanese decision.
Lebanon cannot afford to remain a spectator while others decide its fate. If Beirut enters these sixty days as a bystander, it will exit them as debris. If the Lebanese state hides behind vague language, behind Nabih Berri’s maneuvers, behind Hezbollah’s threats, and behind the illusion that time alone will solve the crisis, then everything will go down in shambles.
The ceasefire may last for days, weeks, or even sixty days. But no ceasefire will save Lebanon unless Lebanon saves itself.
The choice is brutally simple: either Lebanon becomes a state, or it remains a battlefield rented out to Iran and bombed by Israel.
There is no third option.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 16-17 June/2026
Al Arabiya English obtains 14-point draft of US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding
Al Arabiya English/6 June ,2026
Al Arabiya English has obtained a copy of the 14-point agreement expected to be signed on Friday between Washington and Tehran.
1. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States, together with their allies in the current war, declare upon the signing of this Memorandum of Understanding an immediate and permanent end to the war on all fronts, including Lebanon, and undertake that from now on they will not launch any hostile action against each other, and will refrain from the threat or use of force against each other. The final agreement will confirm the provisions of this Article and the remaining Articles.
2. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States undertake to respect each other's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to refrain from interfering in each other's internal affairs.
3. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States undertake to negotiate and reach a final agreement within a maximum period of 60 days, extendable by mutual consent.
4. Immediately upon the signing of this Memorandum of Understanding, the United States Lift the naval blockade and prevent any interference or obstruction against the Islamic Republic of Iran, and restore traffic within a maximum of 30 days to its full capacity; the traffic of ships shall be proportional to the pre-war volume of traffic on the part of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States also undertakes to withdraw its forces from the surrounding areas within 30 days after the final agreement.
5. Upon signing this Memorandum of Understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran will immediately take steps to ensure that the movement of merchant ships from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman and vice versa is resumed within 30 days to the pre-war volume, taking into account the need for the removal of technical obstacles and the neutralization of mines by Iran.
6. The United States undertakes, together with its regional partners, to create a comprehensive plan agreed upon by both parties for the rehabilitation and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran, While ensuring financing of at least $300 billion. The implementation mechanism of this plan, as part of the final agreement, will be formulated within 60 days.
7. The United States commits to ending, on a schedule to be agreed upon as part of the final agreement, all types of sanctions currently facing the Islamic Republic of Iran, including resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and all unilateral U.S. sanctions, both primary and secondary.
8. The Islamic Republic of Iran reiterates that it will never produce nuclear weapons. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States have agreed that the fate of enriched material and the fate of all other mutually agreed nuclear-related issues, including Iran’s nuclear needs, will be adequately addressed in a final agreement; the final agreement will confirm the provisions of this Article.
9. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States agree that, pending a final agreement, they will maintain the status quo: Iran will maintain the status quo on its nuclear program, and the United States will not impose new sanctions on Iran or strengthen its forces in the region.
10. The United States undertakes that immediately after the signing of this Memorandum of Understanding, and until the date of the lifting of sanctions, the United States Treasury Department will issue waivers for exports of Iranian crude oil, petrochemical products and their derivatives, and all related services, including banking, insurance, transportation, and the like.
11. The United States undertakes that, in light of the progress of negotiations towards a final agreement, frozen or restricted funds and assets of the Islamic Republic of Iran will be released and made fully available. These funds, whether held in the master account or transferred, will be used for any final beneficiary payment determined by the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran and will be fully available for use. The United States undertakes to issue all necessary permits and licenses on this basis.
12. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States agree that an implementation mechanism will be established to oversee the successful implementation of and future commitment to the Final Agreement.
13. Following the signing of this Memorandum of Understanding, and upon receipt of assurances regarding the commencement of implementation of Articles 4, 5, 10, and 11 of this Memorandum of Understanding, and the continued implementation of these steps, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States will enter into negotiations for a Final Agreement solely with respect to the remaining Articles.
14. The final agreement will be approved through a binding resolution of the UN Security Council.

Trump says Iran deal to be public soon and will rule out nuclear weapon for Tehran
Al Arabiya English/16 June ,2026
Doubts swirled around the US-Iran interim deal to end the war in the Middle East with warnings that shipping and energy exports could take weeks to recover, although US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday the text would be made public soon. The interim deal would extend a tenuous ceasefire announced in April by another 60 days and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran has effectively blocked since the US and Israel attacked Iran in February. Trump said the text of the deal states clearly that Tehran will not have a nuclear weapon, and the full agreement would be made public in a formal setting in a few days. Speaking at the G7 meetings in France, Trump added that he liked the idea of sending the Iran deal to Congress for review, a request by some Republican lawmakers. Negotiators would address difficult issues like the future of Iran’s nuclear program during the next phase of talks, which Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said would start in Switzerland on Friday after the formal signing of the framework deal. Two other issues that Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu used to justify the war – ending Iran’s support for regional armed proxies and curbing its missile program – are not thought to be on the agenda for those negotiations. “Iran wants to get it done,” Trump told reporters about the next phase of negotiations with Iran. “They have to get back to business, and the relationship is now normalized, so I think it’s going to go pretty quickly.” Earlier he described the deal as “a wall to a nuclear weapon” for Iran.
Vice President JD Vance and Iran’s top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf are expected to attend Friday’s formal signing.
Final deal yet to take shape
Oil prices slid more than 2 percent to new three-month lows on Tuesday, a day after tumbling nearly 5 percent following news of the deal, though industry officials say Middle East oil and gas output will take months to fully recover. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian wrote on social media Monday that the interim agreement was an “important step” toward stopping the fighting but noted a final deal for a lasting truce “has yet to take shape.”Vance told CNN that the signed memorandum was a “very general document.” Details would be released over the next two days, US officials said. Both sides still face pressures following a conflict that killed at least 7,000 people, mostly in Iran and Lebanon, and upended global energy markets.The accord exposes Trump to criticism from within his own party, while Iran’s leaders could face the risk of renewed protests if they fail to alleviate economic pressures after a destructive war. US and Iranian officials say the deal could eventually deliver substantial economic benefits to Iran by lifting sanctions and unfreezing foreign assets. US officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Iran would have to satisfy US demands never to build a nuclear weapon and cut off support for militias like Hezbollah in Lebanon in order to get those benefits. Iranian officials, who have always denied intending to build a nuclear weapon, say they have given up little by agreeing to resume diplomatic discussions over Iran’s uranium enrichment program that were interrupted by the war.
Caution over shipping
Both sides say the Strait of Hormuz, which normally carries about one-fifth of the world’s trade in oil and liquefied natural gas, will be open from Friday. On Tuesday, Iranian state television reported operations to lift its maritime blockade, while stressing that vessels must still coordinate with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Trump said earlier that tankers were starting to move out of the strait, and Reuters reported that the US – which had imposed its own blockade on Iranian ports – had been overseeing scores of secretive ship-to-ship oil transfers to keep Gulf energy exports flowing. The US said the strait will be open toll-free for 60 days and it would expect that provision to be part of a final agreement. Iran has suggested it will retain control with Oman over the strait.
Shippers say a return to normal traffic will be gradual. One concern is the possible presence of mines in the narrow waterway between Iran and Oman. A thorough minesweeping operation would “take weeks to months,” an official with Greek maritime security company Diaplous told Reuters on Tuesday.
Uncertainty over Lebanon
The conflict between US ally Israel and the Iran-allied Hezbollah militia in Lebanon, which has uprooted 1.2 million people, remains another complication. Iran has said the deal requires a full cessation of hostilities there, but Netanyahu said Israel would keep its forces in southern Lebanon and retain the right to respond to Hezbollah attacks. Trump has expressed frustration at Israel’s military campaign, saying on Tuesday he was “not happy” with the way Israel had handled itself. Israel has not directly participated in the peace talks with Iran. A US official said an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, which it invaded in March after Hezbollah joined the war, was not a condition of the deal. Araghchi said Israeli attacks must stop immediately. With Reuters

US-Iran deal to be signed at Switzerland’s Burgenstock resort on Friday
AFP/16 June ,2026: 06:07 PM GST
A US-Iran deal aimed at ending the Middle East war will be signed at Switzerland’s mountainside Burgenstock resort on Friday, the Swiss foreign ministry said. Tehran and Washington announced Sunday they had agreed a memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the conflict, which broke out on February 28 with US-Israeli strikes on Iran and engulfed the Middle East. “At this stage, the signing is scheduled for Friday, June 19, at Burgenstock,” Switzerland’s foreign ministry said in a statement. The uber-plush resort, perched high above Lake Lucerne in central Switzerland, is difficult to access, with water on three sides, and therefore easily secured. The location, the ministry said, “was proposed by the Pakistani and Qatari mediators, as well as by the US and Iran.”“Switzerland is acting as a facilitator in this process, creating the practical and diplomatic conditions necessary for this meeting to take place on Swiss territory.”The deal follows weeks of fraught negotiations and threats of renewed hostilities. According to a senior US official, the framework agreement has already been signed electronically by US President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Iran’s chief negotiator and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf. The text of the agreement has not been made public, leaving room for doubt over what specifically was agreed in the arduous negotiations to end the conflict. The sides disagreed bitterly on terms around Iran’s nuclear program, sanctions and the Strait of Hormuz. But Vance told CNN it was “about a page and a half, so it is a very general document.”

US Senate narrowly blocks new bid to rein in Trump war powers
Reuters/17 June ,2026
The US Senate on Tuesday narrowly blocked the latest Capitol Hill effort to end the Iran war until it is authorized by Congress, the ninth since Israel and the United States began their air attacks on Iran in February. The Senate voted by 48-47 to block the resolution under the war powers law, which followed a framework agreement announced this week by the White House and Tehran for a further ceasefire and talks to end the conflict. The vote was largely along party lines, as Republicans Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Rand Paul of Kentucky voted with most Democrats in favor, and Democratic Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voted no along with most Republicans. Five senators - Republicans Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Josh Hawley of Missouri, Democrats Michael Bennet of Colorado and Cory Booker of New Jersey and independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont - did not vote. The vote came as lawmakers waited for President Donald Trump’s administration to provide them with details about a memorandum of understanding announced by Trump on Sunday to end the war.Democrats and some of Trump’s fellow Republicans have called on the administration to provide them specifics about the plan. Republicans hold slim majorities in both the Senate and House of Representatives. The House also recently backed a resolution that would end the Iran war. In a sign of lawmakers’ frustration with the continuing conflict, the Senate on May 19 voted to advance the eighth war powers resolution. That measure faces another procedural vote before coming up for a vote on passage in the Senate. Congressional aides said its sponsors were still working on gathering support, while waiting for more information about peace negotiations.

US President Donald Trump invokes Defense Production Act, citing ‘fragile supply chains’
Al Arabiya English/16 June ,2026
US President Donald Trump has invoked the Defense Production Act, citing “limited production capacity, fragile supply chains, long-lead dependencies, and related production bottlenecks.”
“I hereby find that conditions exist which may pose a direct threat to the national defense or its preparedness programs,” Trump said in a memo to the Pentagon.The memo dated June 11, 2026, states that systemic constraints in the munitions industrial base may impair the ability of the US to “produce, sustain, and expand the availability of munitions, missiles, and equipment required for the national defense.”The memo orders Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth to provide plans of action to mitigate the issue.

Israel condemns Lukashenko remarks to Al Arabiya English as ‘deeply disturbing’
Al Arabiya English/16 June ,2026
Israel on Tuesday condemned remarks made by Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko during an exclusive interview with Al Arabiya English, describing them as “unacceptable and deeply disturbing.”In a post on X, Israel’s foreign ministry said: “The remarks made by the President of Belarus – a country that knows all too well the horrors of the Holocaust committed on its own soil – in his interview with Al Arabiya are unacceptable and deeply disturbing.”“Any comparison between the Holocaust of the Jewish people and Israel’s just war against terrorism must be unequivocally rejected,” the ministry added. It also criticized what it described as “the revival of vile, outdated antisemitic conspiracies that should have long been consigned to history.”During the interview, Lukashenko criticized Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, saying the country had acquired a “bad reputation” and describing the war as a “holocaust.”“Why do we speak about the Holocaust suffered by Israelis when they themselves have killed so many people?” Lukashenko said. “Women, and above all children, have died in the Gaza Strip,” he added. “They are trying to build a resort on the land where those people were killed.”Lukashenko also argued that Israel was heavily reliant on US support and would struggle to defend itself against Iranian attacks without American military assistance. “Israel is not a country with colossal resources, compared, for example, with Russia in the conflict with Ukraine, that would allow it to wage a war with Iran,” he said. “Israel has to start thinking about its future, because otherwise even nuclear weapons will not help them.”

China warns next phase of US-Iran talks will be ‘more difficult’
AFP/16 June ,2026
China’s top diplomat told his Pakistani counterpart on Tuesday that the next phase of negotiations between the United States and Iran – which Pakistan has helped mediate – will be “more difficult.”
In a phone conversation ahead of the planned signing on Friday of a US-Iran memorandum of understanding to end their war, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Pakistan’s Ishaq Dar that “it is foreseeable that, compared with the first stage, the second stage of negotiations will be more difficult.”Wang added that the United Nations Security Council “should also play a greater role” in supporting these talks, according to a statement from Beijing’s foreign ministry. “The current consensus is far from the final destination, rather it is a new starting point,” Wang said. “Achieving lasting peace in the Middle East and Gulf region still requires unremitting efforts from all parties,” Wang said, adding that China was willing to work with Pakistan to promote peace.

Saudi Cabinet, chaired by MBS, welcomes US-Iran agreement
Al Arabiya English/16 June ,2026
Saudi Arabia’s Cabinet, chaired by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, on Tuesday welcomed the agreement reached between the United States and Iran to end military operations and begin negotiations aimed at securing a permanent agreement. The Cabinet also expressed appreciation for the mediation efforts undertaken by Pakistan and Qatar to help facilitate the deal. The Cabinet reiterated the importance of restoring freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz to the conditions that existed before February 28, the first day of the war. It said it hopes peace can be achieved in a way that strengthens security in both the region and the wider world, while taking into account the security interests of regional countries and respecting their internal affairs. At its meeting in Jeddah, the Cabinet also welcomed the statement issued by International Monetary Fund experts following the conclusion of the IMF’s 2026 Article IV consultations with Saudi Arabia. The statement highlighted the resilience of the Saudi economy and its ability to withstand regional developments, supported by strong economic fundamentals, ample reserves, diversified infrastructure, and the continuation of reforms under Vision 2030. The Cabinet reviewed the outcomes of discussions and consultations held in recent days between Saudi Arabia and a number of “friendly and sister countries.” According to the Cabinet, these engagements were aimed at strengthening relations and expanding bilateral and multilateral cooperation across various fields in a manner that serves shared interests, delivers mutual benefits, and supports regional and international security and stability efforts. The Cabinet also welcomed the selection of Riyadh as the headquarters of the first office dedicated to cybersecurity at the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR). It said the move reflects Saudi Arabia’s leadership in the field of cybersecurity and builds on the Kingdom’s efforts and initiatives to enhance the stability of cyberspace while supporting the prosperity of societies and economic growth.

Israel Seizes Powers over Hebron Shrine from Palestinian Authority
Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
Israel has seized planning and construction powers at a Jewish and Muslim shrine in the occupied West Bank from the Palestinian Authority, scrapping an agreement in place since the 1990s, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said on Tuesday. Under the 1997 Hebron Agreement, Palestinians controlled planning and construction in the entire city, including the Jewish Tomb of the Patriarchs and the adjoining Muslim Ibrahimi Mosque. The far-right minister said he had given the final sign-off late on Monday to the transfer of those powers as they affected the religious site and the nearby Jewish settlement to Israeli authorities. Israel's right to control the West Bank, which it captured in the 1967 Middle East War, is not recognized internationally. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's office called the seizure of powers an "infringement upon the political and legal status of Hebron", and a violation of international law. In a speech marking the establishment of a new Israeli settlement near Hebron, Smotrich said the "historic step" would deepen "Israeli sovereignty" in the West Bank, which Palestinians seek as the heart of a future independent state. Israel is due to call an election by the end of October, ahead of which Smotrich is struggling in the polls. A settler himself, he has long pushed for the annexation of the West Bank and his party draws much of its support from ideologically motivated settlers who view the West Bank as their biblical heartland. Hebron has at times been a flashpoint for Israeli-Palestinian violence. In 1994, a Jewish settler killed 29 Muslims praying at the shrine. The decision to transfer the powers was taken by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's security cabinet in February, one of a series of measures meant to make it easier for settlers to buy land and give Israeli authorities more enforcement powers in the territory. Smotrich has been key to a rapid expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which has been accompanied by a rise in violence. UN bodies and most countries have found Israel's settlements in the West Bank to be illegal. Israel disputes this view, citing biblical and historical ties, as well as security needs. Settlers have killed 13 Palestinians this year, according to UN data.

Israeli Military Takes More Territory, Kills Two People in Gaza, Medics and Witnesses Say
Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
An Israeli ‌strike killed at least two Palestinians in the central Gaza Strip, health officials said, as residents of an area in the north of the enclave fled their homes after Israeli forces expanded their control in the territory. Medics said an Israeli strike near a residential building in the Nuseirat refugee camp, in the central Gaza Strip, killed two brothers, Ahmed and Mahmoud Abu Heen. The Israeli military did not immediately comment. An October 2025 truce brokered by US President Donald Trump has so far failed to halt Israeli attacks in Gaza or to secure the disarmament of the Hamas group. The new deaths brought to nearly 1,000 the number of Palestinians killed by Israeli fire since October, according to the Gaza health ministry. Israel says four of its soldiers have been ‌killed by fighters ‌in that period. The violence comes as Nickolay Mladenov, Trump's ‌Board ⁠of Peace envoy for ⁠Gaza, arrived in Cairo to pursue talks that mediators from Egypt, Qatar and Türkiye have held with Hamas leaders over implementing the second phase of Trump's Gaza plan, sources close to the talks said. Israel and Hamas remain deadlocked over how to proceed with the next stage of Trump's Gaza plan, which involves Hamas laying down its arms and Israeli withdrawals.
ISRAEL TAKES MORE GAZA LAND
Israeli troops still control more than 60% of Gaza's territory, where they have ordered residents out ⁠and destroyed remaining buildings. On May 28, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reaffirmed ‌that he had directed Israel's military to expand its ‌hold and take control of 70% of the enclave. Witnesses in southern Gaza have said Israeli forces ‌have in the past few days expanded the "Yellow Zone" - the areas they control - in eastern ‌Khan Younis and northern Rafah, where new markers and concrete blocks have been placed. On Sunday, Israeli forces sent tanks further into the Al-Tuffah neighborhood of Gaza City in the north, forcing several families to flee. Reuters footage, taken on Monday, showed two yellow blocks used as boundary markers that had been moved ‌closer to houses. "I swear we don't know where to go," said Umm Muhammad Junaynah, a resident of Al-Tuffah, as she struggled ⁠to hold back tears. "We ⁠are getting our furniture out, we don't know where to go. We don't know where to go, we have nowhere to go." Nearly the entire population of 2 million people, most of whom have been displaced several times, now live in a tiny strip of land along the coast, mainly in makeshift tents or damaged buildings, under Hamas control. "It was a night of terror, we were scared," said Nour Shabat, a 27-year-old woman, referring to events of Sunday night in Al-Tuffah. The territory has been bombarded to ruins by Israel's two-year military assault that followed the 2023 Hamas attack on southern Israel. "I'm tired of displacement, honestly I'm tired of displacement. What is our fault that this is happening to us?" said Shabat. "Should I take my belongings, myself and go sleep in the street? I have slept in the streets many times and I have been displaced many times. I'm tired and can't handle anymore. Enough, I am tired."

After 'Blank Ballot' Round, Hamas Resumes Vote for New Leader
Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
Hamas has resumed voting to elect the head of its political bureau, the movement’s highest leadership position, after an initial round last month failed to produce a winner. The process was delayed after some voters submitted blank ballots rather than backing any candidate.
Former political bureau chief Khaled Meshaal and Khalil al-Hayya, the movement’s chief in Gaza and head of its negotiating team in ceasefire talks, are competing for the post. Two Hamas sources in Gaza told Asharq Al-Awsat that voting in the runoff round has begun in the enclave. One source said eligible voters are participating through a more secretive and complex process because of difficult security conditions and ongoing targeted killings.Hamas is facing its most severe crisis since its founding in 1987. Israeli operations launched after the October 7, 2023 attack have targeted the movement across multiple levels and branches, creating significant organizational and financial challenges. The two sources, speaking separately, said ballots are being delivered to eligible voters in sealed envelopes. After selecting a candidate, voters return their ballots through channels governed by strict security procedures designed to protect both participants and those overseeing the election process. The political bureau chief is elected by the movement’s Shura Council, a 71-member body representing Hamas’s three main constituencies: Gaza, the West Bank, and the external leadership. The council had 50 members about a decade ago, but its size was later expanded following amendments to the movement’s internal regulations. The sources said voting is also expected to take place in the West Bank and among Hamas officials abroad, although neither could confirm whether the process has already begun in those arenas. On May 16, Hamas announced that the first round of voting had failed to determine a winner and said a second round would be held in accordance with the movement’s internal rules. Under Hamas regulations, the runoff was expected to take place within 20 days. However, sources within the movement said security and political developments, including assassinations in Gaza and meetings between Hamas leaders abroad and regional mediators, delayed the process. They said the new round is being conducted under tighter secrecy than the first to prevent security breaches or media leaks. Hamas leaders agreed to elect only a political bureau chief for now, postponing broader elections for the political bureau, the Shura Council, and other administrative bodies until early next year. Israel killed Hamas political bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran in July 2024. He was succeeded by Yahya Sinwar, who was killed in Gaza in October of the same year. For roughly the past year and a half, Hamas has been run by a collective leadership council. Earlier this year, the movement launched a new effort to elect a leader to serve out the remainder of the current political bureau’s term, which was due to end in 2025 but was extended by an additional year, pending broader elections expected late this year or early next year. Sources told Asharq Al-Awsat on May 21 that some voters had cast blank ballots as a way of declining to endorse either candidate, al-Hayya or Meshaal. According to the sources, this was the first known instance of blank ballots being used in a vote for the movement’s top leadership post.
At the time, some sources interpreted the blank ballots as a sign of dissatisfaction with both candidates and possibly with the movement’s handling of certain issues, as well as an effort to encourage the emergence of a younger generation of leaders. Others said the move was not necessarily directed at the candidates themselves but reflected broader objections to some existing policies, or a preference for postponing the election of an interim leader until comprehensive elections are held and the current leadership council remains in place.

Türkiye Opposes Iraq Pipeline Deal Extension under Current Conditions, Official Says
Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
Türkiye does not want an extension of the existing Kirkuk-Ceyhan oil pipeline agreement under current conditions, a senior Turkish official said, after Baghdad asked Ankara to extend it for at least a year to allow time for more talks.The decades-old Türkiye-Iraq Crude Oil Pipeline Agreement, which governs exports through the pipeline, is due to expire on July 27. Baghdad and Ankara are still discussing a new draft agreement. "There is no point in extending an agreement that has been subject to arbitration," the Turkish official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said when asked about Iraq's extension request.Ceyhan is a crucial export outlet for Iraqi oil, with the state's main export terminal in Basra suffering from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz since US-Israeli strikes on Iran in late February. Türkiye last year announced the end of the accord covering the pipeline and asked to renew it under new conditions. Türkiye's proposal included a mechanism to ensure the full use of the pipeline and options, such as extending the pipeline to the south of Iraq. The pipeline had remained offline for 2-1/2 years after an arbitration court ruled for Ankara to pay $1.5 billion in damages for unauthorized Iraqi exports Türkiye received between 2014 and 2018. Flows began late last year. There is also a second arbitration case that covers a period from 2018 onwards and an award enforcement case running in a US court. The pipeline has a capacity of almost 1.5 million barrels per day but has been working significantly below capacity due to security and other issues. Crude exports from Kirkuk to Türkiye were at 177,000 barrels per day in April, according to shipping data reviewed by Reuters.

Tension in Samarra Tests Iraq Govt's Plan to Impose State Monopoly over Arms
Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
The Saraya al-Salam faction loyal to influential Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said on Tuesday it firmly rejected serving under the command of the pro-Iran Popular Mobilization Forces, a dispute that could pose an early test for Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi’s plan to bring arms under state control. The rejection followed reports that a new security commander had been appointed in Samarra, where Sadr’s armed wing is based. The commander is rumored to be close to the Asaib Ahl al-Haq faction. Asaib Ahl al-Haq, led by Qais al-Khazali, a leading member of the ruling Coordination Framework, has uneasy ties with the Sadrist movement and its leader, Sadr, for reasons observers describe as “political and ideological.” A Sadrist official told Asharq Al-Awsat that Samarra was witnessing a “state of severe tension” because of “deliberate friction” by some commanders and parties in the PMF with Saraya fighters.The official said the dispute erupted after PMF chief Falih al-Fayyadh dismissed Ali al-Aqili, the PMF operations commander in Samarra and a member of the Sadrist movement, and replaced him with another commander close to or affiliated with Asaib Ahl al-Haq.
The move angered Saraya fighters.
The official urged the prime minister, who is also commander-in-chief of the armed forces, to “intervene immediately to settle this matter,” saying Saraya was now under his command. At the start of June, Zaidi issued an administrative order forming a higher committee to oversee Saraya al-Salam’s integration into government security forces and place it directly under the commander-in-chief. The Joint Operations Command later said it had received the full lists and data for Saraya al-Salam formations, including personnel, weapons and equipment, to complete directives for integrating all Saraya al-Salam formations into security forces tied to the commander-in-chief. Saraya al-Salam is part of the PMF through brigades 313, 314 and 315. It carries out security duties in several areas, most notably Samarra, where it has been based since June 2007, after the bombing of the Imam al-Askari shrine. Sadr said on May 27 that he was integrating his armed wing, Saraya al-Salam, into the state and called on PMF factions to hand over their weapons. Although formally part of the PMF, Saraya al-Salam has long operated semi-independently. It does not take orders from the PMF’s commanders and has poor relations with many factions.
Test for weapons monopoly
The PMF has not commented on the tension. But Saraya al-Salam appealed to Sadr and Zaidi, stressing that it would not remain under PMF command. In a statement on Tuesday, Saraya al-Salam pointed to its voluntary disarmament and integration into other security institutions, calling the move “a practical model” for placing weapons exclusively in the state’s hands. It said the PMF’s recent dismissal of some commanders “contradicts the spirit of the integration process and the monopoly of weapons” through changes in commanders, sectors and responsibilities.
The faction said the appointment of the new security commander “conflicts with the provisions and procedures” of the integration committee formed by the government, calling it “an unjustified targeting” of Saraya personnel. It stressed its categorical rejection of “working under the command of the Popular Mobilization Forces.”Tribal sheikhs and clerics in Samarra warned on Saturday against replacing Saraya al-Salam with other factions. They called on the prime minister to visit the city personally and assess conditions on the ground. They demanded that the security file be handed to the Interior Ministry if there was any intention to replace Saraya with other factions. Observers see the standoff between Saraya al-Salam and the PMF as a challenge to the weapons control plan and to whether it is truly “serious and not merely symbolic.”
It is also a test of the prime minister’s readiness to use his powers to settle a dispute between armed groups that had already announced their integration into state institutions. Al-Zaidi, Barrack Discuss Iraq’s Plans for Disarmament of Armed Groups ahead of US Visit The agreement between the United States and Iran to end the conflict in the region has revived hopes that the Iraqi government will be able to disarm armed factions that are aligned with Iran. Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi received US Special Presidential Envoy Tom Barrack in Baghdad for talks on the “shared commitment” of the US and Iraqi governments “to a strong and mutually beneficial US-Iraq partnership, able to fulfill Iraqi aspirations for a sovereign, secure, and prosperous future and to deliver tangible benefits for Americans and Iraqis alike,” said the US Embassy in Iraq in a statement on Tuesday. Barrack said US President Donald Trump looks forward to welcoming al-Zaidi to the White House mid-July “to discuss the future of this important relationship”. The leaders discussed “the shared aspirational vision for the Iraqi government to build a brighter future free from terrorism, to implement Iraqi plans for ensuring the complete disarmament and disbandment of all armed groups and formations operating outside the authority and control of the Iraqi state, to ensure the confinement of their weapons within the authority of the Iraqi state, and to assert full sovereignty in order to keep Iraq away from conflict and ensure that Iraqi territory cannot be used by any side to threaten regional peace.”“Al-Zaidi and Barrack underscored the urgency in full completion of these efforts,” added the statement. Al-Zaidi also reaffirmed Iraq's commitment to deepening trade and investment relations between the two countries, and Barrack welcomed this shared approach. The two sides also underscored “the importance of supporting a strong, sovereign, and united federal democratic Iraq, grounded in robust constitutional institutions, and ensuring full equality for all citizens, in a manner that strengthens Iraq's unity, stability, and prosperity.”
Disarmament of factions
Efforts to impose state monopoly over arms continue to be shrouded in mystery given the lack of clear mechanism and plans to that effect. So far, the government has said that it wanted to resolve this issue when the international anti-ISIS coalition ends its mission in Iraq in September. Meanwhile, more factions have been voicing their opposition to disarmament. The Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada reneged on Sunday on its previous declaration that it would lay down its arms. Observers said it changed its position after its leader Abu Ala al-Walai was placed on a US sanctions and terrorism list. They predicted that other factions may also change their stance on disarmament. Kataib spokesman Kazem al-Fartousi told the media on Sunday that the “resistance’s weapons was too great an issue to be discussed by the Iraqi government.”Rather, he said it was the “choice of the people and nation. So we cannot comply with calls that could be attributed to the government or foreign pressure.”“The weapons are needed for one goal and purpose: the withdrawal of the occupier,” he added. “We respect al-Zaidi's government as one that represents the Iraqi people, but we do not agree to the demand of disarmament and categorically reject it,” he continued, citing “repeated attacks on Iraq’s sovereignty.”“We have several reasons to keep the weapons,” he added. The staunchly pro-Iran Kataib Hezbollah and al-Nujaba movement have been adamantly opposed to disarmament since the government expressed its determination to impose state monopoly over weapons. A source close to the factions revealed that “direct and serious threats have been made against political and government powers” against pursuing disarmament, which explains why discussions over the issue have died down somewhat in Iraq in recent days. The source, speaking on condition of anonymity, did not elaborate on the threats, but spoke of fears of “intra-Shiite strife should the authorities maintain their position on disarmament.”The source did not rule out the possibility that Iran could exert its influence over the factions to respect a long-term truce in Iraq should the agreement to end the war with the US stand. Researcher and former diplomat Ghazi al-Faisal stressed that Iran plays a decisive role in the disarmament file. He told Asharq Al-Awsat: “Any strategic shift in the Iranian policy will reflect directly on Iraq.”“Should Iran choose the path of a developed state and economic integration instead of backing cross-border armed groups, then that will pave the way for a new phase of stability in the region,” he remarked. “Iraq will benefit the most from such a shift,” he predicted.

ISIS Claims Responsibility for Attack on Police Camp in Syria’s Raqqa
Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
The ISIS claimed responsibility on Tuesday for an attack on a Syrian interior ministry camp in ‌the ‌city of ‌Raqqa ⁠that killed one ⁠member of the security personnel a day earlier. Syria's Interior Ministry ⁠said on ‌Monday that ‌one of ‌its security personnel ‌had been killed as its forces thwarted ‌an attack by two ISIS militants ⁠on ⁠a command headquarters of the country's internal security forces in Raqqa.

Arab League Condemns Opening of Embassy for So-Called 'Somaliland Region' in Occupied Jerusalem
Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
The General Secretariat of the Arab League strongly condemned the move by the so-called "Somaliland Region" to open an embassy in occupied Jerusalem. It described the step as a challenge to international law and international legitimacy resolutions concerning the legal status of the city. In a statement issued by the Palestine and Occupied Arab Territories Sector, the Arab League said the move further entrenches the illegal occupation and forms part of attempts to alter the legal, historical, and demographic status quo of Jerusalem and isolate it from its Palestinian surroundings. It stressed that such measures are null and void and carry no legal effect, SPA reported. The Arab League reiterated that East Jerusalem is an integral part of the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967. It also reaffirmed its commitment to the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, foremost among them the establishment of an independent state along the pre-1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital. The organization further reaffirmed its support for the unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Somalia and rejected any measures that undermine those principles. It called on the international community to uphold its responsibilities in preserving the legal and historical status quo of Jerusalem and preventing attempts to impose a new reality or legitimize the Israeli occupation and its illegal practices.
The Arab League stressed that establishing diplomatic missions in occupied Jerusalem or recognizing the city as a location for foreign missions violates the international consensus regarding the city's status. It added that such actions undermine efforts to achieve a just and comprehensive peace based on the two-state solution and international legitimacy resolutions.

The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 16-17 June/2026
Bitter Victory or Sweet Defeat in the Middle East, But Whose?
Alberto M. Fernandez/National Catholic Register/June 16/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155310/
COMMENTARY: The consequences of this war will only be revealed over time, months and even years into the future.
Did America just lose a war to Iran in the Middle East? Or was it a great American victory whose full import will only be seen over time?
Partisans of Iran were quick to claim victory — but they always say this. Some supporters of Israel are furious and fear that the deal that supposedly ended the war will only strengthen the Iranian regime. Others compared the war to the 1956 Suez Crisis that humbled the might of colonial powers Britain and France.
Vice President JD Vance went on CBS News on June 15 to shoot down some of the more extravagant claims, such as that Iran will be rewarded with $300 billion in new funding. Vance noted that the agreement “ensures that Iran will never have a nuclear weapon, while simultaneously opening the Strait of Hormuz” to transport much-needed oil to the world. In the eventuality that Iran fulfills all of its commitments, it would eventually be rewarded. Vance touted this as an opportunity for the United States and Iran — bitter adversaries for nearly half a century — “to turn over a leaf of 47 years of a failed relationship.”
In our world of instant news and instant reaction, everyone’s a pundit and everyone is sure what this war’s outcome actually means. But, of course, the reality is that some of the consequences of this war, like so many others, will only be revealed over time, months and even years into the future. It is quite possible that both those celebrating and those “dooming” will be proven wrong and there is still much of the agreement, and any possible side deals, that are still opaque.
Some results should be immediate. Gas prices will decline and inflation fears will ease. The United States will be at peace for the 250th anniversary celebration of its founding. As analyst Jonathan Spyer explained, “Trump, caricatured before his presidency as a warmonger, is nothing of the kind. The place, very clearly, where he feels comfortable is where deals are made.”
Some wanted the president to double down on the conflict but that is not a path he wanted to pursue. It seems significant that in 1956, it was President Eisenhower who forced France and Britain (and Israel) to withdraw from Suez. In 2026, it was the American president who decided not to continue.
Despite the pundits, most Americans seemed to focus on almost anything other than Iran’s fate. For Iranians, Israelis, Lebanese and Gulf Arabs — in addition to those in the Global South paying for higher energy prices — the worrying impact hits much closer to home.
As America has the luxury to step back a bit and survey the scene, some big Middle Eastern questions loom.
What will become of Lebanon? Can ongoing negotiations between Israel, the Lebanese state and the United States rescue the country from constant cycles of war and destruction or will Hezbollah’s stranglehold remain?
This is not just an academic question. For some Lebanese Christians, the breaking of Hezbollah’s hold on power is a matter of life or death, of whether or not Christians in Lebanon persist and remain in their ancient lands.
The government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is deeply skeptical, to put it mildly, about the agreement. With elections expected later this year, it could prove fatal for Israel’s longest-serving prime minister. But is Israel truly in a weaker position than when the war started? Or does it maintain its hard-fought dominance over the Levant, at least? Many, or most, in Israel believe that this war was left unfinished. Away from the battlefield, Israel faces the massive challenge of rising antisemitism and anti-Zionist fervor in the West. Although Iran is a major threat, this rising anti-Israel prejudice is a growing problem for Israel that is of and in the West.
Is Iran truly now a “top five world power,” as American academic Robert Pape has said? The answer to that is No. But is Iran better off now or in the long run as a result of the war? Some of the answers lie in how soon Iran can recover from the damage caused by the war, and what money it gets out of the deal, but Iran was already in deep economic trouble even before the war began. The currency is worthless, the country’s capital is running out of water, and no one knows what the new crop of regime leaders will actually do.
One thing that the engagement with Trump has done is expose, more clearly than before, the fissures existing within the regime, not between moderates and hardliners, but between hardliners and other hardliners.
And to what end? Has the Iranian Revolution now positioned into power younger, committed revolutionaries? Or are they the counterrevolutionaries, the Napoleons or Thermidorian Reaction, of the future?
Perhaps those expecting that a fanatical regime will inexorably return to its fanaticism, exactly like before, are exaggerating the regime’s core stability and strength?
Many Catholics criticized this war. A few defended it.
At the beginning, I wrote that “Trump will also be judged by history on how the conflict ends and what comes out of it.” We are just beginning to enter this stage, the blame game and the praise game.
Pope Leo XIV recently noted that just war theory was “outdated,” and that may certainly be the case. But the biggest, still unanswered, question coming out of this latest conflict — however one judged it — is whether or not it will engender more wars or whether anything better or different can come out of it, especially for the peoples of the Middle East.
https://www.ncregister.com/commentaries/iran-us-war-bitter-victory-or-sweet-defeat
**Alberto M. Fernandez Alberto M. Fernandez is a former U.S. diplomat and a contributor at EWTN News.

The Ceasefire Between Iran and the United States and Its Impact on Lebanon
Colonel Charbel Barakat/June 16/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155332/
Following the announcement of an agreement between Iran and the United States to halt hostilities—the full details of which have not yet been published (and will likely be released after the signing next Friday)—a media campaign has commenced in Lebanon. Led by the Iranian Embassy and echoed by Hezbollah and its allies, this campaign heralds that Lebanon is included in the agreement.
Consequently, some citizens headed back to the areas they had evacuated under Israeli military orders, believing the war had ended, and celebrations broke out to express gratitude to Iran for this achievement.
The Dilemma of the Lebanese Front and the Absence of Israel
Naturally, if the United States and Iran reach an accord to halt hostilities between them, Iran should logically stop its attacks from Lebanon as well. It is the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) fighting on Lebanese soil, and Lebanon has no stake in this conflict except for bearing its catastrophic consequences. Therefore, what is being said in this regard is logical, and the alternative would be the anomaly; if the two parties have agreed to stop fighting, why shouldn't it stop on the Lebanese front, which was ignited by the Iranians?
Iran is fighting Israel in Lebanon as part of its wider war against the United States and its allies. That conflict included strikes inside Iran, while Iranian responses against Israel and the Gulf states targeted civilian sites—such as airports, commercial centers, hotels, and residential buildings—rather than being confined to American military bases.
The Turning Point: Israel considered the targeting of its civilian population unacceptable, prompting a harsher retaliation that impacted Lebanese civilians in cities and villages sympathetic to Hezbollah, and by extension, Iran. However, the alleged agreement was brokered between the United States and Iran, and apparently does not include Israel. Hence, Lebanese citizens are left asking: Will Iran's declaration of a halt to its operations from Lebanon be enough for Israel to cease its retaliatory actions against Lebanese citizens?
The Military Background and the Balance of Power
Last June (approximately a year ago), Israel launched unilateral strikes on Iran to pressure it into halting its nuclear program. Those operations ceased after the Americans joined the final phases, striking facilities housing highly enriched nuclear materials in the Qotz and Isfahan reactors. Yet, the Iranians failed to grasp the message, escalating further until a second war erupted last March. No agreement to end it had been announced until this past weekend.
However, the Israeli player—who initiated the war on Iran—did not participate in reaching these recently announced solutions. Has Israel agreed to them? And have its objectives been secured,
both regarding the Iranian nuclear file and eliminating the threat of shelling that menaces its citizens from the Lebanese front?
Israeli Interests and the Conditions for a Sustainable Peace
President Trump may have numerous interests and priorities urging him to expedite a solution to end the conflict with Iran. However, the situation and objectives of his Israeli ally—especially regarding the security of its citizens in northern towns and cities—cannot be overlooked. Therefore, to comprehend the reality resulting from the negotiations that culminated in the ceasefire, we must examine Israel's interests in this process.
It is not enough for the Lebanese people to rejoice at the prospect of returning to their villages, even if homes have been destroyed and towns bulldozed. The more critical question remains: What about the weapons, the stockpiles, and a complete, definitive declaration ending all military action from Lebanon?
Scenario One (State-Building): If Tehran’s decision is to hand Hezbollah’s weapons over to the state and permanently end the state of war—disallowing any party from jeopardizing the agreement—then the Lebanese government will be liberated. It can then move swiftly to conclude negotiations with Israel, reaching a definitive formula that prevents Lebanon from being used as an arena for others' wars, and beginning a true path toward peace. In that case, everyone will applaud this achievement, which would lead to the rebirth of a real state in Lebanon—one no longer threatened by rogue weapons or dictates coming from across the border.
Scenario Two (Deferred Conflict): On the other hand, if the Iranians and their proxies in Lebanon believe they have merely secured a temporary halt to hostilities while retaining their weapons, fighters, and the unaccountable flow of funds—leaving Lebanon as an open arena for a continuous conflict where only names change but the substance remains the same—then this will fail. Neither the Lebanese nor the Israelis will accept it.
The destruction inflicted upon the villages of southern Lebanon, the displacement forced upon their inhabitants, and the suffering endured by the rest of the Lebanese people will not be repeated—not for the sake of the "Supreme Leader" (Wali al-Faqih), nor for President Trump, or anyone else. Similarly, Israeli citizens will not tolerate further suffering just so certain idle factions in Lebanon can pocket money from Iran and other nations that seek to impose their hegemony and fulfill their agendas by exposing the security of both Lebanese and Israelis to danger, humiliation, and displacement once again.
A Vision for the Future: From Dependency to Stability
Today, mutual solutions between Israel and Lebanon must prioritize the security, safety, stability, and prosperity of civilians on both sides of the border. The era of dependency and the sowing of hatred must end. Work must begin on spreading real peace and raising awareness of its importance among citizens, so that everyone can cooperate to rebuild villages and homes. Our people in the South must contribute to protecting the future of their children, ensuring there is no longer a need for displacement or suffering.
If the regime in Iran has finally been convinced of the futility of reviving violence and attempting to dominate its neighbors—whether in the Gulf or further west and south in Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, and other nations—the future will be bright. Hezbollah's factions must understand that wars and mobilization yield no benefits, regardless of the funds poured into them. Instead, the focus must shift entirely toward ending conflicts and building a genuine peace.
Our hope is that the rule of the Supreme Leader will come to an end after Khamenei is buried, and that Iran will join the train of cooperation with its neighbors without harboring further malice or using violence as a tool for domestic mobilization. Instead, it should focus on construction and production, which will revive the country after the destruction it has suffered. We also hope that the Lebanese people have grown weary of violence and wars, and will initiate a critical self-reflection that inspires them to move toward productive work, rather than chasing slogans that easily choose hostility over building friendships and seeking common ground for progress and prosperity.

Can Iraq’s New Prime Minister Thread the US-Iran Needle?
Bridget Toomey/The National Interest/June 16/2026
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/middle-east-watch/can-iraqs-new-prime-minister-thread-the-us-iran-needle
Ali al-Zaidi finds himself in a seemingly untenable position between Iraq’s paramilitary groups and President Donald Trump.
The question of what to do about Iran-backed militias in Iraq threatens to derail the new government of Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi before it has time to get its feet under it.
Zaidi squeaked a partial cabinet through parliament on May 14, six months after the country’s parliamentary elections, with 14 of the 23 cabinet ministers approved and the remaining ministries operating under acting heads until a candidate is approved by parliament. Officially, the new prime minister’s next challenge is filling the nine empty ministerial seats, which he and his supporters hope to accomplish by mid-June.
However, Zaidi has a more urgent problem that will set the stage for his government’s success and, ultimately, Iraq’s political stability. Iran-backed Iraqi militias and US, Iraqi, and Iranian officials are pushing for the new government to address the issue of disarming militias first. And unfortunately for the new prime minister, the interested parties are seeking vastly different outcomes.
After months of political haggling, the Coordination Framework, the dominant Shia parliamentary bloc closely aligned with Tehran, nominated Zaidi, a businessman with no political experience, for the top job on April 27. He quickly received the blessings of both Tehran and Washington, but ongoing support from the two capitals may hinge on how he navigates their competing interests.
Just by forming a government, he cleared a hurdle that some thought insurmountable. However, Zaidi didn’t do so by resolving major issues; instead, he and his backers kicked the can down the road on several unavoidable disagreements between both foreign and domestic actors—particularly the question of militias.
The first hurdle that Zaidi sidestepped instead of clearing was an American prohibition on cabinet membership for affiliates of six Iran-backed militias that the United States has designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs). These groups have political arms that are integral to the Coordination Framework, and they seek powerful political positions in Iraq.
By leaving nine ministries—including several wanted by the militias—empty, Zaidi left this problem for another day. Asaib Ahl al-Haq (AAH), a major militia, a Coordination Framework member, and an FTO, is waiting, with Iranian approval, to decide whether it will participate in the government until the issue of militia disarmament is resolved. If AAH sticks to this position, Iraq’s next government likely will not be complete until some resolution is found on the question of militias.
The United States has been insisting that Iran-backed militias be “fully disarmed, dismantled, and disempowered” since President Donald Trump took office in January 2025. Since then, the militias have launched hundreds of attacks during the recent US conflict with Iran, including repeated strikes on the US Embassy in Baghdad, only hardening Washington’s position against them.
Meanwhile, Tehran and the Iranian regime’s partners in Iraq are hoping to institutionalize and protect the militias by strengthening the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), an official Iraqi security organization primarily comprised of Iran-backed militias, including all six FTOs. The PMF was formed in 2014 to fight ISIS, and its current legal basis is only a brief authorizing law from 2016.
Iran’s partners and other advocates of the PMF repeatedly attempted to pass robust legislation in 2025 to enshrine the organization and its funding, but the efforts failed. In its current form, the PMF’s bare-bones authorization leaves the door open to changes by a reform-minded prime minister without parliamentary approval.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio “reiterated serious US concerns” over the most recent iteration of the PMF legislation in July 2025, a month before it was pulled from parliamentary consideration. Washington’s reported counterproposal for the PMF would instead integrate it, alongside other security bodies, into a new ministry that reports to the prime minister.
While the PMF currently nominally also reports to the prime minister, it frequently conducts operations outside of Iraqi political dictates, including the recent wave of attacks against US interests and partners. In 2015, Akram al-Kaabi, the leader of the Iran-backed FTO Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba (HHN), even said that he considers Iran’s supreme leader to be the group’s “source of leadership” and indicated that the PMF could engage in a coup if “a religious authority makes a decision to change the rule in Iraq.”
“With [our weapons], we have protected Iraq from the defilement of ISIS and their American handlers,” al-Kaabi said in response to reports in early May of this year about America’s calls for disarming the militias. “[The weapons] will not be surrendered as long as we have breath, nor will they be taken even if lives are sacrificed.”
Some militias, like HHN, have opposed integration into the state. Others, such as AAH, are open to such a path because the resulting influence is crucial to the economic and political success that protects and legitimizes their weapons. Coordination Framework member and Minister of Health Abdul Hussein al-Moussawisaid that some factions would hand their weapons over to the state under the right conditions.
Shia leaders in Baghdad reportedly formed a three-man committee to address the disarmament issue around the time of Zaidi’s selection as prime minister at the end of April. The committee includes Zaidi, outgoing Prime Minister Mohammad Shia al-Sudani, and Hadi al-Ameri, the head of the Badr Organization, a large, undesignated Iran-backed militia with a political arm, which was included to ease concerns among other militia leaders.
While the details of the committee’s proposal have not been disclosed, available information indicates that it strengthens—not eliminates—the PMF. Iraqi officials, particularly those from or indebted to militias, are likely seeking to repeat past attempts that amounted to window dressing. They would offer cosmetic changes that nominally bring militias in line with official Iraqi security institutions and dictates without actually severing ties with Tehran.
The challenge for Zaidi will be to bring all actors onto the same page, including the Iran-backed militias and officials in Baghdad, Tehran, and Washington. Nearly all parties involved agree in principle to “state control of weapons.” Yet, there is no consensus on what that would look like in practice.
Unfortunately for Zaidi, he likely won’t have the luxury of time before confronting this issue. And while Washington has expressed confidence that he is the man for the job, his lack of political experience leaves his effectiveness in question. Little is known about Zaidi aside from his prominent roles across Iraq’s business sectors, which certainly helped his selection. His tenure as chairman of Al-Janoob Islamic Bank for Investment and Finance has gained the most attention.
In February 2024, the Central Bank of Iraq (CBI) banned Al-Janoob from participating in the daily dollar auction, the primary means by which Iraqi financial institutions received US dollars until the auction’s termination in early 2025. Al-Janoob was one of eight Iraqi banks that were proscribed to “reduce fraud, money laundering and other illegal uses of US currency,” part of a longstanding US focus on preventing Iranian access to dollars. Regardless, Zaidi’s apparent ties to illicit finance were not enough to prompt American objections to his selection as prime minister—despite the Trump administration’s continuing policy of countering Iran’s funding schemes through Iraq.
Zaidi emerged as a compromise solution to the five-month deadlock in forming a government, as the Coordination Framework struggled to navigate infighting and the competition between Washington and Tehran for influence. The prime minister’s lack of political experience or a popular support base satisfied Tehran and the Coordination Framework, as Zaidi is more likely to be a malleable leader. The bloc seeks to retain decision-making authority and use the prime minister as its executor.
Simultaneously, Zaidi’s business background may have appealed to President Trump, and Washington has previously had to work with other “less-bad” actors in Iraq, where Tehran-aligned Shias are the dominant political bloc. Thus, the new prime minister’s history and associations are likely less concerning to the United States than if Iraqi leaders had appointed someone with direct ties to the militias and Iran.
Nevertheless, Zaidi’s background and relationships, both inside and outside Baghdad, don’t indicate a clear path for the new leader through the muddy issue of militia disarmament, which will likely define the remainder of his tenure. If the new prime minister somehow manages to thread the needle on this issue, it won’t be smooth sailing afterward. Tehran’s partners in Iraq won’t settle for a loss of weapons and political influence, likely impacting his choices for the remaining cabinet positions.
Zaidi will have to navigate the fallout of hard decisions as well as America’s desire to counter Iranian illicit finance in Iraq, and Washington will certainly watch his performance closely, given al-Janoob’s history. Simultaneously, Iraq is facing an impending budget crisis as its oil exports, which account for 90 percent of the country’s revenue, are curtailed by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. This will only compound the existing budgetary challenges posed by Iraq’s bloated public sector.
To say that Zaidi has his work cut out for him is an understatement. Iran’s partners in Iraq, particularly their political leadership in the Coordination Framework, do not want an independent leader who will accede to Washington’s demands. Meanwhile, the United States has expressed a seemingly implacable position on Iranian influence and the fate of Tehran-backed leaders and militias.
If Zaidi proves unable to strike the right balance between the two countries, he will either lose crucial domestic political support or Washington’s initially warm reception will turn cool. And in an era where the Trump administration is increasingly willing to use the stick instead of the carrot, there could be grave consequences for Iraq.
About the Author: Bridget Toomey
Bridget Toomey is a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), focusing on Iranian proxies, specifically Iraqi militias and the Houthis. Before joining FDD, she was a Fulbright fellow in Israel, where she completed an MA in security and diplomacy at Tel Aviv University. During her undergraduate studies, she interned for the American Enterprise Institute’s Critical Threats Project, focusing on jihadi terror groups, and for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. She holds a BA in government with a minor in modern Middle Eastern studies from Harvard University.

Be Optimistic
Samir Atallah/Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
Fouad Boutros was among the most brilliant foreign ministers Lebanon ever knew. Yet President Suleiman Frangieh would constantly mock his gloomy demeanor and perennial pessimism, calling him an owl that never stopped hooting bad omens.
The difference between the two men was that the first was highly pragmatic, while the second sought to lighten people’s burdens with a measure of optimism and hopeful expectations. Yesterday, I surveyed the views of newspapers around the world on the Trump–Iran agreement and found them divided into two camps: Boutros and Frangieh. People would like to be optimistic, yet they fear a sudden shock of the kind that has struck the world repeatedly in recent years. Leading the pessimists was The Daily Telegraph, which reminded us that we live in a region where nothing can be taken for granted, a region fraught with problems and unlikely to enjoy lasting peace of mind.
The Telegraph pointed to the many occasions on which agreements were announced only to be abandoned later. Another example was the war of October 7, 2023, followed the next day by the “support war.” From there, conflicts multiplied between Gaza and Lebanon until they came to resemble a quasi-global war whose repercussions extended across the entire blue planet. Wisdom, necessity, and plain common sense all require us to side with the optimists. Many mocked the exaggerated optimism of the recipient of the “Peace Prize,” yet he proved to be right. Even the issue of nuclear fallout, which we had assumed was an insoluble problem, eventually found a formula for being quietly buried when the time comes, that is, when it is no longer a matter of Iran’s submission or America’s victory.
For that reason, both sides, by mutual consent, resorted to the formula of “constructive ambiguity” as a prelude to a long period of peace, as Abdulrahman Al-Rashed argued in his long-range reading of the agreement’s provisions.
Everyone has grown weary of a war that produces nothing but more death and more ashes. Israel’s punitive campaign is not a solution. Nor has Israeli occupation ever solved anything at any point in time. So let us try an agreement in which Donald Trump is the one delivering the rebuke, and Benjamin Netanyahu the one who deserves it, at the very least.

On a Changing Iran
Hanna Saleh/Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
Wars end at the negotiating table, and the current US-Iran conflict will be no exception. Despite the delay in signing the “memorandum of understanding” between the two countries, a deal that President Donald Trump has described as “great” and “wonderful,” while Tehran insists it has imposed its own terms, it is important, before the expiration of the 60-day deadline set for the negotiations, that oil prices fall, benefiting the American consumer; that the World Cup in the United States proceeds successfully; and that Tehran turns its attention to burying Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on July 4, 126 days after his death.
Tehran’s rulers have neither raised the white flag nor declared that they have “drunk the poison chalice,” as Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini did at the end of the Iran-Iraq War. Yet a significant shift is taking shape, one that points to geopolitical changes ahead. At its core lies an American strategy that has moved toward decisiveness, mirrored by Israel’s own approach. This makes it necessary to examine the implications of that shift and reflect carefully on where matters may stand after the war, far removed from the rhetoric of triumphal speeches.
When Khomeini announced nearly 38 years ago that he had accepted the poison chalice, that moment gave fresh momentum to the project of “exporting the revolution,” aimed at establishing an Iranian Islamic model that transcended borders and national identities. The project targeted the region from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean. Khomeini himself defined its context and objectives, promising a different Islamic model capable of confronting the prevailing international order.
The overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime provided a major boost to that project, particularly through the fateful decision by Iraq’s administrator, Paul Bremer, to dissolve the Iraqi army, allowing Tehran to begin filling the resulting vacuum. It was not long before Iranian officials boasted of controlling four Arab capitals. It can now be said with confidence that President Trump’s decision to kill Qassem Soleimani, the leading symbol of Iran’s expansionist project, was, among other objectives, an important early step toward forcing that project into retreat after it had fractured states across the region and shaken their stability and the security of their peoples.
In the weeks following the outbreak of the US-Iran war, different concerns and priorities began to emerge inside Iran. It was therefore neither insignificant nor inconsequential when Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf declared that “Iran did not win, but it endured,” and that on the basis of that endurance it could move toward “striking a deal with the Americans.” Such a deal would close the chapter on a confrontation that has lasted for decades.
Equally noteworthy was President Masoud Pezeshkian’s statement that “Iranians are hungry despite sitting atop oil and gas.” This concern is both major and central. Protecting the regime, protecting its leadership, and turning attention inward have moved to the forefront. The challenge has become how to safeguard the system and prevent “change”- a theme that featured prominently in President Trump’s rhetoric and even more so in Israeli discourse. It is still too early to conclude that Iran has fully accepted that it can no longer return to the situation that existed before Operation Al-Aqsa Flood and its consequences for Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and for Iran itself, its Revolutionary Guard, and its political order.
It is likewise premature to say that Tehran has accepted the reality that its expansionist project is no longer on the rise, or that it is unable to preserve what remains of its regional proxies and, by extension, its influence across the region. Nor should one dismiss what General Esmail Qaani proposed regarding a “new resistance security belt extending from the Strait of Hormuz to Bab el-Mandeb, and from the Gulf to the Red Sea,” because “in the blink of an eye” Tehran could return to its previous course, despite the sharp criticism voiced by President Pezeshkian, the only official elected by Iran’s people: “Martyrdom is a great triumph, but it is absolutely unacceptable for the enemy to be able to assassinate our leaders so easily.” All of this points to the growing priority of regime security and delicate internal balances, especially after Iran’s regional proxies proved unable to provide the external defense the regime had hoped for.
The question that presents itself, amid what appear to be carefully orchestrated demonstrations calling for the downfall of Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Abbas Araghchi, a member of the negotiating team, is this: Are we witnessing the beginning of the end of the era of the “Islamic Revolution,” which ushered in a period of transcending borders and national identities? Or is Iran, following a framework agreement with the Americans, moving instead toward becoming a hardline nation-state that may one day return as a source of danger to its surroundings, benefiting from the continued presence of the Supreme Leader at the center of the political scene, even if the current period has been marked by his prolonged absence from public view and public speech?
It is a strong possibility, one that may today appeal to figures who still hold power on the ground, such as General Ahmad Vahidi and his associates, though they must also fear the anger of a hungry population. Having seen their nuclear gamble fail, they are likely to cling to the “Strait of Hormuz- the second nuclear card,” which Tehran will not easily surrender as a source of strategic leverage. The strait has become one of the world’s most important arteries of trade and energy, and Washington knows that Tehran understands that a permanent American maritime stranglehold is unsustainable.

Saudi Arabia and the Art of Statecraft
Mishary Dhayidi/Asharq Al-Awsat/June 16/2026
Many people imagine that courage has but one form: a raised weapon, a booming voice, striking and thrusting. There is no doubt that these are among the manifestations of courage and valor, and on the battlefield the mettle of men is tested and the heroism of warriors revealed.
Yet courage takes other forms, subtle in character and difficult to master. They are attainable only by those who place reason above emotion and make both serve their purpose until they reach their goal. It was this kind of courage that Abu al-Tayyib al-Mutanabbi had in mind when he wrote: "Judgment comes before the courage of the brave."
Indeed, this is the very essence of leadership, its heart and core. Brave men who do not fear combat are many. Men of judgment, possessed by constant caution, are also many. But those who combine courage of heart with clarity of mind, and who possess both the ability to draw the sword and the wisdom to know when to do so, are exceedingly rare throughout history.
Among them, and among the finest of them, was King Abdulaziz bin Abdulrahman Al Saud, founder of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and heir to a long legacy of glory, rule, and leadership.
Allow me to share this lesson in leadership from Abdulaziz recounted by his son, the late King Faisal bin Abdulaziz. He said:
"I remember that when a dispute arose between him and Imam Yahya, the former Imam of Yemen, he did not rush to severity. Instead, he sought to resolve their differences through patience and forbearance, to the point that we, his sons and the men of his state, were almost ready to accuse him of weakness. Yet he paid no heed to us and continued on his chosen path until no reproach could reasonably be directed at him. Only then was he compelled to take up the sword. And when prominent Arab leaders intervened between the two kings, he was quick to cease the fighting."
(Al-Musawwar (Egypt), 1948, as cited in Mohammed Mounir Al-Badawi's Al-Mutawakkil 'ala Al-Wadud: Abdulaziz Al Saud, pp. 294-295.)
Many stories are told of Abdulaziz's forgiveness and his willingness to relinquish his personal rights. But when it came to the public interest and the authority of the state itself, he neither maneuvered nor equivocated. He would not surrender so much as a mustard seed's worth of principle, and he stood firm to the very end.
This responsible spirit of leadership became woven into the DNA of Saudi leadership from Abdulaziz to the present day. It is what has preserved the Saudi state from the pitfalls of political adventurism that have brought ruin to peoples and nations across this region, from the days of the First World War, through the Second World War and the Cold War, and through all that followed, down to the present era of Iran and America, of Trump, Netanyahu, and Khamenei, and those aligned with them here and there.
War, when nothing else remains, is the inheritance of the early horsemen of the Arabian Peninsula. But politics and patience, when they offer a path to avert war, are the chosen method of this leadership. That is the golden equation, mastered only by those who can distinguish precious metals from base ones.

Selected Face Book & X tweets on 16 June/2026
Lindsey Graham
To me one of the most important things said by President Trump today is that it is his desire to expand the Abraham Accords, bringing historic stability and prosperity to the Middle East.
President Trump is correct in his analysis that this can only be achieved if the region believes Iran has been weakened or Iran has changed its behavior in terms of being a disruptive force and supporting terrorist organizations.
I sincerely hope the upcoming negotiations to forever foreclose Iran’s nuclear ambitions are a success. Due to President Trump’s actions, it is clear to me Iran and its proxies are incredibly weakened and their ability to generate another October 7 doesn’t exist, and there has been a major setback in their nuclear capability.
The ultimate win for taking on Iran is to open up a pathway to peace through Abraham Accord expansion and build on regional integration.
If the conflict with Iran yields this outcome, it will be one of the most successful military operations in American history.
Mr. President, you are right to keep your eye on the big prize: regional integration and lasting peace.

Dr Walid Phares
There is no evidence that the Islamic regime in Iran wants to change their ideology, their geopolitical ambitions, their goal for an Imamate, their support for militias. They will open the Hormuz strait, let go of the dust, and lie about the future, to obtain billions of dollars.
Giving them time and opportunities are a grave challenge to US national security.

Hussain Abdul-Hussain
For the sake of global oil prices, America is throwing Lebanon and its Christian’s under the bus by handing their country over to Islamic Iran. Arabic-speaking Christian communities have been irreversibly shrinking in Mideast, except in Israel.

Nadim Koteich
On Israeli forces in Lebanon, a senior US official told a group of journalists the following:
WITHDRAWAL WAS NOT A CONDITION OF THE DEAL.
The deal is a ceasefire, and it will not be a one-way ceasefire.
If Iran is not able to control Hezbollah, and if they attack Israeli positions or Israeli towns, Israel will have the right to defend themselves and respond.
Reported by @nahaltoosi

Mossad Commentary
HUCKABEE: ISRAEL DOES NOT NEED IRAN’S PERMISSION
U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee says Iran and Hezbollah are not linked in the reported deal. Responding to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Huckabee wrote:
“Fortunately,
@SecRubio
made clear that Iran & Hezbollah aren’t linked in a deal.
@Israel
doesn’t need Iran’s permission to defend itself. The tether of terror must end.”

Hussain Abdul-Hussain
Polls from Lebanon are consistently showing that the majority of Lebanese oppose Hezbollah and support peace with Israel. NY Post: In Lebanon, 59% of residents said Hezbollah’s military presence has a negative impact on the country’s security, against just 11% who viewed it as positive with the remaining 40% unsure. For the first time in the group’s ongoing tracking, more Lebanese residents support engagement with Israel than oppose it. A 41% plurality now considers eventual peace between Israel and Lebanon likely, versus 27% who think it unlikely and the rest unsure.

Nadim Koteich
So Iran is calling this a victory. A VICTORY.
I'd need @mb_ghalibaf to lend me the Iranian dictionary, because I want to use that definition in my next argument with my wife. However, let's review the spoils of the glorious triumph he is propagandizing.
Step one: they shut down the Strait of Hormuz, the single most important oil artery on the planet, choking the global economy … and their own. Boom! And the crown jewel of the deal? They agree to reopen it. That's the prize.
They took the world's gas pump hostage, and the ransom they collected was permission to put the nozzle back.
Oh, and the deal, Iran says, includes "reconstruction plans." RECONSTRUCTION! You know who needs reconstruction Mr. Qalibaf? The side that got deconstructed.
Honestly, though, I respect the consistency. Iran's been branding defeats as victories since 1988… if not since Karbala… Meanwhile the supreme achievement is a 60-day window to negotiate away even more. Sixty days! That's the free trial before they cancel the subscription on your entire regime. Good luck!

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, this evening at a press conference:
"Dear citizens of Israel,
For decades, I have been fighting Iran's efforts to arm itself with nuclear weapons. I can define this as the mission of my life. I have stood firm in it until today, and I will continue to stand firm in the future. With an agreement, without an agreement—Iran will not have nuclear weapons. Not today, and not tomorrow. As long as I am Prime Minister of Israel—this will not happen.
I hear people asking: What have we achieved? And I answer them: 'What have we achieved'? We have pushed away from us the immediate threat of annihilation. Together with our American friends, we launched the largest attack sortie in Israel's history. We neutralized their nuclear scientists, decapitated the leaders of the terror regime, crushed their nuclear facilities, destroyed missiles and most of the factories that produce missiles, struck countless military industries and infrastructures, destroyed their navy, their air force, neutralized Basij commanders who massacred the Iranian people, inflicted enormous damage—we estimate it at hundreds of billions of dollars, and some estimate it even close to a trillion dollars—enormous damage to Iran's economy that took them decades to build.
But here's the most important thing—we saved the State of Israel from the threat of nuclear annihilation. Because it must be understood, Iran was racing toward the nuclear bomb right before 'With a Lion'—it was racing toward the bomb and racing to bury its missile and nuclear industry deep underground.
If we had not acted at the time we did, and with the intensity we did—both in 'With a Lion' and then in 'Roar of the Lion'—in historic cooperation with President Trump and the American military—if we had not acted in this way, Iran would already have atomic bombs by now. And what does that mean? It means that millions of Israeli citizens, you who are listening to me now, all of you would have been in terrible danger of mass death. We were all in that danger. And that danger, of the extermination of Israel's population, we have pushed away from us for years. That's what we achieved—we saved the State of Israel from destruction.
But I say to you, citizens of Israel, the struggle is not over and done with. We will need to continue to stay vigilant, continue to be strong and determined to defend ourselves as much as required. This is true not only against Iran. It is true also against Iran's terror arms, which we have struck in an unprecedented manner. We did it in Gaza, we did it in Lebanon, in Syria, in Yemen, we did it in the refugee camps in Judea and Samaria—we did it everywhere.
We eliminated Deif, Haniyeh and Sinwar along with many of Hamas's leaders. In fact, almost all of them—everyone who was there in that horrific massacre, I think one is left, he will be eliminated too. We destroyed thousands of terrorists and countless terror infrastructures. We brought back all our hostages from Gaza, to the last one. No one believed we would do it. I believed.
They told me: Prime Minister, we must concede, don't enter Rafah, end the war. We'll bring back the hostages, we'll frame our exit from Gaza as a victory. I did not accept those nonsensical words. We entered Rafah, we entered the city of Gaza, against the opinion of many—and we brought back all the hostages, to the last one. And not only that, we blew up the pagers, eliminated the tyrant Nasrallah, prevented the Radwan Force's invasion of the Galilee, destroyed the overwhelming majority of the 150,000 rockets and missiles that Nasrallah built to devastate Israel's cities.
You remember what they told us—'If we enter into battle with Hezbollah, we'll have tens of thousands of dead, the towers will fall in Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jerusalem, Be'er Sheva. The cities of Israel will become a city of ruins.' You remember that. I did not accept it, we fought them, and how we fought them, we also captured key positions of theirs like Beaufort, from which Hezbollah threatened the northern settlements for years, in fact the entire country.
In parallel, we did something else: we established deep security zones around the State of Israel. We did it in Gaza, in Lebanon, in Syria—where, by the way, we eliminated all of Assad's weapons that were a central link in the axis of evil. And I want to make it clear: we will remain in the security zones as long as required to defend our country.
Because after October 7, I set a simple principle: Israel will not allow terror organizations to camp on our borders. To dig terror tunnels into our territory, to prepare for massacres near our civilians. Today, our heroic IDF fighters stand between the terrorists and our civilians. In fact, what we did, we changed our entire security doctrine. We changed ourselves too. We broke through the barrier of fear. We initiate, we attack, we surprise, and we strike hard at those who seek our souls.
Israel is stronger than ever, and Iran's axis of evil is weaker than ever. If someone had told you, at the beginning of the war, that we would achieve everything I detailed, and I didn't detail everything—you would say he is daydreaming. Well done, security experts, no. We did it.
And today, after achieving all this, there are those who want to downplay it, to dismiss our tremendous achievements. And I say to you—we are going to achieve many more great things. We will continue to thwart threats in the arena, we will build new alliances with countries in the region and outside the region. We will ensure our military independence, that's another principle I set and I am allocating an additional 350 billion shekels to the defense budget. We will develop technologies that break the boundaries of imagination, and we will turn Israel into an even stronger power. Because our strength is the key to our future, it is the key to our security, it is the key to our economy, it is the key to our alliances. Because alliances are made with the strong, and Israel today is a very strong country. It is strong thanks to you, citizens of Israel.
I want to thank you, citizens of Israel, for your steadfast stance, for the backing you give the government, for the backing you give me as Prime Minister. And above all, I want to thank our heroic fighters and female fighters in the regular and reserve forces, at sea, on land, and in the air. In the IDF and in all security branches. There is none like you, heroes of Israel.
Together we will continue to stand, and together we will continue to win.
'Fear not, My servant Jacob, and do not be dismayed, O Israel.'
Together, with the help of God, we will ensure the eternity of Israel."
Video: Omer Miron / GPO
Sound: Nir Saraf / GPO