English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News &
Editorials
For June 23/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.june23.26.htm
News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Click On The Below Link To Join Elias Bejjaninews whatsapp group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/FPF0N7lE5S484LNaSm0MjW
اضغط على الرابط في أعلى للإنضمام لكروب Eliasbejjaninews whatsapp group
Elias Bejjani/Click on the below link to subscribe to my youtube channel
الياس بجاني/اضغط على الرابط في أسفل للإشتراك في موقعي ع اليوتيوب
https://www.youtube.com/@eliasbejjani8036
Bible Quotations For today
When they bring you to trial and hand you over, do not
worry beforehand about what you are to say; but say whatever is given you at
that time, for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Mark 13/09-13:”‘As for
yourselves, beware; for they will hand you over to councils; and you will be
beaten in synagogues; and you will stand before governors and kings because of
me, as a testimony to them. And the good news must first be proclaimed to all
nations. When they bring you to trial and hand you over, do not worry beforehand
about what you are to say; but say whatever is given you at that time, for it is
not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit. Brother will betray brother to death,
and a father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put
to death; and you will be hated by all because of my name. But the one who
endures to the end will be saved.”
Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials
published on 22-23 June/2026
The Sin, Ignorance, and Subservience of Equating the Jihadi
Iranian Occupier & The Terrorist Hezbollah with the Saving-Liberating Israeli
Army/Elias Bejjani/June 22/2026
Elias Bejjani/ English Verbatim Text: The Sin, Ignorance, and Subservience of
Equating the Jihadi Iranian Occupier and Its Terrorist Party with the Liberating
and Saving Israeli Army/Elias Bejjani/June 22, 2026
Celebrating Fathers Day: A Biblical Perspective on Duty, Honor, and
Sacrifice/Elias Bejjani/June 21/2026
Trump on Israel's Refusal to Withdraw Troops from Lebanon: I'm Working to
Resolve Problems, Including Those Related to Netanyahu
Vance: A Mechanism to Disarm Hezbollah; We Are Working to Protect Israel's
Security and Lebanon's Sovereignty
Lebanon Demands to Be a Key Partner in Any Process Concerning It in the
Washington-Tehran Negotiations
Netanyahu: We Have "Complete Freedom" to Act in Southern Lebanon... Washington
Warns: The Green Light Is Over!
Aliko: The scale of destruction in the south is far greater than previously
estimated
Ben-Gvir: Lebanon should be a "playground" for Israel
Iran Threatens Israel with a Repeat of its 2000 Withdrawal from Lebanon
A tripartite working group to ensure a halt to military operations in Lebanon
Aoun receives a US-Qatari call: No conflict with Washington negotiations
Vance: We are working on a mechanism to disarm Hezbollah... Salam praises
Sharaa's positions
Berri Engaged in Washington Negotiations, His Ideas Present: Why the Accusations
of Treason Continue?
United Nations: Building Damage in South Lebanon Exceeds $1.3 Billion
Geagea to Vance: Confining Weapons to the Country is the Greatest Contribution
We Can Offer to Lebanon and Its Christians
Heroes never die; they live on in our consciences, hearts, and souls.
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on
22-23 June/2026
Including the Suspect... Three Dead in Canada Shooting;
Canadian Police Urged Residents to Shelter in Place
Trump: If Iran Does Not Comply with the Agreement, I Will Do What I Have to
Do... Trump: Iran is Doing Very Well Regarding the Strait of Hormuz
Trump: Iran Will Agree to Inspections to Ensure "Nuclear Transparency"...
Baghaei: Cooperation with the "IAEA" Continues Within Existing Frameworks
Switzerland Negotiations Achieve "Significant Progress"... Iran: We Have
Officially Entered the Lebanese Security Equation!
Baghaei: Cooperation with the "IAEA" Continues Within Existing Frameworks,
Commenting on Vance's Statements
U.S. President Donald Trump, America, and Trump
Traffic Increases in the Strait of Hormuz as Maritime Threats Recede;
International Maritime Information Center Lowers Threat Level in the Strait to
"Moderate"
U.S. Secretary of State Visists UAE, Kuwait, and Bahrain... Will Attend a GCC
Meeting
Arab League Foreign Ministers Approve Nabil Fahmy as the Organization's New
Secretary-General... Nabil Fahmy Will Hold This Position for Five Years
Britain Prepares for Seventh Prime Minister in 10 Years... Keir Starmer
Announces His Resignation
Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous
sources published on 22-23 June/2026
The Equation of Fall: How Did Michel Rouhana Transform from
Shattering the Image of "Bashir the Dream" to Bearer of Incense for the
Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist?/Edmond Chidiac / June 22, 2026
The Deep State That Controls Lebanon/Saleh Al-Mashnouq/Nidaa Al-Watan/June 23,
2026
Lebanon... Restoring Confidence and Controlling the Southern Front!/Hassan
Al-Mustafa/Al-Nahar/June 22, 2026
On the Airport Road/Imad Moussa/Nidaa Al Watan/June 23, 2026
Hezbollah is more important than the Strait of Hormuz/Tony Francis/Independent
Arabia/June 23, 2026
Divorce the "legitimate marriage of pleasure" with hell
Aql Al-Awit/Al-Nahar/June 22, 2026
La déconstruction de l'accord américano-iranien/Dr. Charles Chartouni/Ici
Beyrouth/June 22/2026
The Deconstruction of the US-Iranian Agreement/Dr. Charles Chartouni /June 22,
2026
MIGA: Making Iran's Regime Great Again': Why Many Arabs Vehemently Oppose
Trump's MOU/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/June 22, 2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on 22 June/2026
Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on
22-23 June/2026
The Sin, Ignorance, and Subservience of Equating the
Jihadi Iranian Occupier & The Terrorist Hezbollah with the Saving-Liberating
Israeli Army
Elias Bejjani/June 22/2026
A statement was recently issued by so-called "national figures and civil society
groups," filled with the same old clichés that have brought nothing but ruin to
Lebanon. At a time when the nation is passing through a historic crossroads that
determines its very existence, the authors of this statement fell into the trap
of "malicious equality" and hollow, repetitive language. They demonstrated the
height of subservience, ignorance, and political cowardice by placing Israel,
Iran, and its Hezbollah militias on the same level of responsibility for
Lebanon’s destruction.
This desperate attempt to equate a jihadi, colonial Iranian project—which has
devoured the Lebanese state and swallowed its sovereignty—with the State of
Israel, whose existential interests today align 100% with Lebanon's independence
and sovereignty, is a blatant distortion of reality and history.
1. The Shared Fate and Lebanese-Israeli Mutual Interest
Hezbollah is not a Lebanese party; it is merely a military brigade in the
Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). For decades, this Jihadi Armed Iranian
Army has posed a direct existential threat to the Jews and their state, while
simultaneously serving as the primary tool to suffocate Lebanon. This is exactly
where Lebanon's supreme interest meets what Israel is doing today: uprooting
this military cancer is the only way to revive the Lebanese Republic.
Iran and its local army (Hezbollah) completely occupy Lebanon. They did not
leave a single inch of its land without turning it into tunnels, weapons depots,
and gunpowder stores, hijacking the decision of peace and war, and turning the
state into a lifeless skeleton. The Israeli military action to dismantle this
terrorist infrastructure is not an aggression against Lebanon, but rather an
"existential service" that opens the door to cleansing the land and restoring
stolen national decision-making.
2. The Tragedy of the Hijacked Shiites Community
The greatest sin of the Iranian occupation was not just hijacking the Lebanese
state, but also hijacking the honorable Lebanese Shiites community and turning
it into fuel for the "Wilayat al-Faqih" project. This criminal Iranian plot has
caused the killing of thousands of Shiites, impoverished them, destroyed their
areas and villages, and ultimately turned them into a devastated and displaced
community. The Terrorist Hezbollah dragged them into absurd wars in which they
had no stake, simply to serve Tehran's imperial illusions. How do the authors of
the statement dare to equate those who turned the homes of the Lebanese into
rocket storehouses with those who seek to get rid of this threat?
3. Historical Facts: Israel's Wars Are Reactions
The historical ignorance in the statement ignores a fact as clear as day: all of
Israel’s wars on Lebanon since its establishment as a state were legitimate
"reactions" to protect its security against threats and wars launched from
Lebanese territory.
For decades, Israel endured attacks launched by Palestinian organizations,
leftist gangs, Arab nationalist factions, Nasserists, groups funded by Gaddafi,
and eventually Sunni and Shiites political Islam sponsored by Iran and Syria.
Israel was never the initiator of aggression; it was always defending itself
against the chaos of both Lebanese and foreign weapons.
4. No Land Ambitions: History Bears Witness
Israel has proven in words and actions throughout history that it has no
ambitions for a single inch of Lebanese land. In the year 2000, Israel withdrew
completely from South Lebanon to the international borders, leaving behind no
colonies or settlers. It has always withdrawn after its military operations
ended, as soon as its borders were secured. In the current war, Tel Aviv
reaffirmed the same principle: entry is not for occupation, but to eliminate
Hezbollah’s infrastructure and ensure the return of northern residents. This
time, Israel will not withdraw before completely ending this existential threat,
which directly serves the interest of building a real Lebanese state with no
illegal weapons sharing its authority.
5. Classifying the Pretenders of Sovereignty
Those who drafted this statement and equated the actual Iranian occupier and its
terrorist Hezbollah with Israel, which is uprooting this occupier, can only be
classified into one of four categories:
The Ignorant: They do not read history and do not understand geopolitics or the
intersection of international interests.
The Coward: They tremble with fear of calling things by their true names,
resorting to grey language to protect themselves from the militia's brutality.
The Subservient (Dhimmi): They live with a mindset of historical dependency and
submission, ready to accept a masked Iranian occupation under the slogan of
"coexistence."
The Opportunist: They sell national sovereignty in political bazaars, looking
for personal gains or electoral seats at the expense of the vital truth.
To all those who signed, supported and promoted the shamefull statement: Stop
crying with hollow language. Saving Lebanon requires recognizing reality and
welcoming the uprooting of those who caused the national disaster, not hiding
behind suspicious statements that equate the victim with the executioner, and
occupation with liberation.
Moving Toward the State Requires Courage, Not Evasion
Crossing over to a stable homeland and a state that matches the ambitions of the
Lebanese people cannot be achieved by hiding behind faded formulas that equate
the real killer, who suffocated the country and tore its social fabric, with the
surgeon who is removing this malignant tumor. By refusing to acknowledge
reality, this statement proves that its signers are still trapped in past
psychological complexes and outdated slogans. Saving the Lebanese Republic
requires intellectual and political courage to admit the facts as they are: the
real threat to Lebanon is Iranian in identity and origin, and saving Lebanon
from this nightmare is a Lebanese interest first and foremost, even if it
intersects with the interests of others. Evasion and false equality do not build
a nation; they only prolong the crisis and legitimize foreign guardianship under
new masks.
Elias Bejjani/ English Verbatim
Text: The Sin, Ignorance, and Subservience of Equating
the Jihadi Iranian Occupier and Its Terrorist Party with the Liberating and
Saving Israeli Army
Elias Bejjani/June 22, 2026
Below is the full literal text of the audio commentary, originally delivered in
Lebanese spoken dialect:
Introduction: A Statement Drowned in “Subservience” and Hollow Clichés
I am Elias Bejjani, greeting you from “Voice of Phoenicia” in Canada as we share
this commentary.
Today, I received a statement titled “A National Statement for Restoring
Sovereignty and Independence.” It consists of several clauses demanding the
implementation of international resolutions, the preservation of Lebanon’s
borders, and the restoration of the state, its sovereignty, and its
independence. However, the fundamental problem with this statement lies in its
introduction, where it subserviently equates Israel on one side with Iran and
Hezbollah on the other.
The authors of the statement admit that Hezbollah is destroying the country and
hijacking national decision-making. Yet, at the same time, they claim that
Israel is occupying precious parts of Lebanon, killing our people, and
destroying our regions, driven by historical ambitions. This reading represents
the height of subservience and dependency. A rational human being, gifted by God
with the capacity for sound and healthy thinking, must possess the ability to
distinguish between right and wrong, good and evil, enemy and friend, and
between the deceiver, the hypocrite, and the truthful. This group who drafted
and signed the statement are drowned in subservience and fear. It would have
been far better for them not to mention Israel with any condemnation or blame,
because Israel is not the one occupying Lebanon today.
Israel’s Wars: Legitimate Reactions Against Terrorism
Israel has never launched an attack on Lebanon without a reason. If we look back
at history since the founding of the Hebrew state in the 1940s, we find that all
its military operations and wars in Lebanon were reactions to attacks by armed
groups and organizations that used Lebanese territory as a launching pad to
attack it. These aggressions began with the self-loathing and destructive
“rotten Left,” moving through the “Arab nationalist” factions loyal to Gaddafi,
Nasser, the Ba’athist Assad regime, or Saddam Hussein. Most dangerous of all
were the actions of Palestinian organizations during the days of Yasser Arafat,
who turned South Lebanon into “Fatah Land,” forced the ill-fated “Cairo
Agreement” upon the Lebanese state, and canceled the armistice agreement. Today,
we are living through the exact same result with political Islam in both its
Sunni and Shia branches, and specifically with the absolute control of Shia
political Islam represented by the Iranian project.
Hezbollah: A Military Brigade in the Iranian Army
We must name things by their true names with courage. Hezbollah is not a
Lebanese faction at all; it is a fully-fledged Iranian army operating on
Lebanese soil under the command of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
Its goals, origin, funding, and doctrine are entirely Iranian, and it has
absolutely nothing to do with resistance, liberation, or Palestine. The Syrian
Ba’athist regime created this organization in coordination with the Tehran
mullahs during its occupation of Lebanon. This party then liquidated and
assassinated everyone who believed they were practicing resistance, including
leftists, communists, and others. We remember vividly the bloody battle of
“Iqlim al-Tuffah,” which left thousands wounded and around 1,400 dead. This
battle resulted in the taming of the “Amal” movement and reduced Nabih Berri to
a mere “protocol facade.” They shared shares and state jobs with him, while the
Iranians kept the real leadership, the arena, and the decision of war and peace.
The Iranian project is a jihadi, colonial, and destructive project built on
eliminating the other. It poses an existential threat to Lebanon’s sovereignty
and independence and to all its communities without exception, including the
Shias, many of whom reject this approach of the mullahs based on the concepts of
“Wilayat al-Faqih”—concepts of illusions, ideological hallucinations, and deadly
sectarianism.
The Tragedy of the Hijacked Shia Community
The Shia community in Lebanon suffers the most today due to the Iranian project.
Their villages and regions have been completely destroyed, and they are now
living as displaced people in schools, tents, streets, and cars, not to mention
the theft of their money and life savings. It is a devastated, hijacked
community held hostage by Tehran. Today, there is no Shia home or family in
Lebanon that does not have an orphan, a widow, a disabled person, or a wounded
person because they were dragged into absurd wars in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq,
Yemen, and many countries around the world. In contrast, Iranian leaders boast
that this party has offered more victims and fought for more days than Iran
itself. Anyone who thinks that the party has independent Lebanese leaders, like
Naim Qassem, Mahmoud Qmati, or the current MPs, is delusional. These are merely
commanded and hired mouthpieces who own no decision of their own; the actual
orders come directly from Tehran.
The Alignment of Lebanese-Israeli Interests: The Only Opportunity for Salvation
In political and national work, when we want to liberate our country, we must be
ready to ally with any side to achieve this goal. Today, fortunately for Lebanon
and the Lebanese, Israel’s interest aligns 100% with the interest of the
sovereignists and free people in Lebanon. Israel sees Hezbollah as an
existential threat to its entity. It is determined not to repeat the scenario of
Sinwar and Gaza, and it will not accept the presence of this party on its
borders. Any rational Lebanese should welcome this alignment of interests to
save the Lebanese Republic. Hezbollah did not leave a single region in
Lebanon—whether in Keserwan, Jbeil, Beirut, the Beqaa, or the South—without
digging like a mole tunnels and weapons depots beneath schools, mosques,
churches, hospitals, and homes, placing the entire country on a barrel of
gunpowder. An example of this is what is currently happening on “Ali al-Tahir”
hill, where information indicates the existence of an unprecedented network of
tunnels in terms of depth and equipment. Who has the ability to dismantle this
terrifying arsenal? Can the current Lebanese army do it? Or those youth who
signed the statement?
The only army in the world that possesses both the interest and the capacity to
uproot this Iranian occupier and end its project is the Israeli army. The Syrian
regime is neither capable nor willing, and the Arab countries (from Saudi Arabia
to Egypt) do not allow Lebanon to conclude an independent peace agreement.
Instead, they want to tie the fate of us Lebanese to their interests, to the
myth of the “two-state solution,” and to trading with the Palestinian
cause—which is exploited by Arab nationalists, leftists, and cheap resistance
merchants to keep Lebanon an open arena and a garbage dump for their conflicts.
Israel Has No Intentions for Our Land
Israel has proven in words and actions throughout history that it has no
ambitions in Lebanon. In the year 2000, it withdrew completely to the
international borders, leaving behind not a single colony or a single soldier.
Today, all Israeli officials—from the Prime Minister to the President and the
Minister of Defense—reaffirm that they do not want to occupy Lebanon. They only
want to eliminate the threat of Hezbollah and secure their borders, and they
will withdraw as soon as this is achieved.
Conclusion: Classifying the Signatories and a Call to Speak the Truth
The figures who signed this rejected statement—even though I share friendships
with many of them and publish their articles, and I will not mention their names
out of respect (including Paula Yacoubian)—have fallen into a major national
failure. Anyone who equates the actual Iranian occupier with Israel at this
stage falls inevitably into one of four categories: either ignorant of the
Iranian project, a coward who fears the militia’s brutality and resorts to grey
language, a subservient person (dhimmi) living with a mindset of submission, or
an opportunist selling national sovereignty for a parliamentary seat or seeking
financial or political gain. The catastrophic result of these four traits is
exactly the same.
To those who wrote, signed, and promoted this statement: if you are unable to
speak the truth, silence is better for you. But if you want to speak, you must
name things by their true names with courage. The truth is clear, and Hezbollah
is not ashamed of its project. Just yesterday, Qmati openly declared his refusal
to hand over his party’s weapons and his intention to overturn previous
government decisions, returning the country to point zero.
I am publishing this statement on my website not in support of it, but to
highlight its sin and subservience. I want every sovereign Lebanese to learn how
to distinguish between the real enemy and the friend, or at least how to benefit
from the intersection of interests with the Israeli neighbor, which is
performing a mission that serves Lebanon’s freedom and independence.
To follow the full commentary in both Arabic and English and read the criticized
statement, I invite you to visit my direct website: eliasbejjaninews.com And
subscribe to my official channels and pages on WhatsApp, X, Facebook, and
LinkedIn.
Long live Lebanon, free, sovereign, and independent.
Celebrating Fathers Day: A Biblical Perspective on Duty, Honor, and Sacrifice
Elias Bejjani/June 21/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/130787/
Today, 21 June/2026 Canada celebrates The Fathers' Day. As we gather to
celebrate the importat family event, we are reminded of the pivotal role fathers
play in our lives. Fathers, both in their presence and sacrifices, mirror the
divine fatherhood of God Himself. This day is not merely about showering our
fathers with gifts and words of appreciation but also about reflecting on our
duties and obligations towards them, as underscored by biblical teachings.
The Bible provides profound insights into the importance of honoring our
fathers. Ephesians 6:2-3 commands, "Honor your father and mother"—which is the
first commandment with a promise—"so that it may go well with you and that you
may enjoy long life on the earth." This directive is clear: honoring our fathers
is not just a noble act but a divine injunction that brings blessings.
Furthermore, Proverbs 23:22 instructs us, "Listen to your father, who gave you
life, and do not despise your mother when she is old." These verses highlight
that respect and obedience to our fathers are lifelong duties. They underscore
the need to appreciate the wisdom and experience that our fathers impart,
recognizing their efforts and sacrifices in nurturing us.
Fathers, in many ways, emulate God the Father, who is described in Psalm 103:13:
"As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on those
who fear him." Just as God’s compassion and care are boundless, so too are the
efforts of our earthly fathers. They toil and labor, often in silence, to
provide for us, ensuring our well-being and success.
In honoring our fathers, we acknowledge the countless sacrifices they have made.
From working long hours to provide for the family to making tough decisions for
our betterment, fathers constantly put their children's needs before their own.
This dedication is aptly captured in the Lebanese saying, "No one is dear to my
heart more than my son, but the son of my son." It speaks to the enduring love
and legacy that fathers build, emphasizing the generational impact of their
devotion.
However, it is disheartening to see that not all children recognize or
reciprocate this dedication. Some neglect their fathers, disregarding their
wisdom and contributions. To such individuals, the biblical admonition in
Proverbs 30:17 serves as a stern reminder: "The eye that mocks a father and
scorns a mother will be pecked out by the ravens of the valley, will be eaten by
the vultures." This vivid imagery warns of the severe consequences of disrespect
and neglect towards one’s parents.
As we celebrate Fathers' Day, let us remember that honoring our fathers is not
limited to a single day of festivities. It is an ongoing commitment to show
respect, provide care, and express gratitude for all they do. Let us strive to
embody the principles of the Bible, ensuring that our fathers feel valued and
appreciated every day of their lives.
In conclusion, Fathers' Day is a powerful reminder of the immense love and
sacrifices our fathers have made for us. By honoring them, we not only fulfill
our biblical duties but also strengthen the bonds of family and faith. Let us
cherish our fathers, acknowledging their vital role in our lives and upholding
the respect and honor they rightfully deserve.
Trump on Israel's Refusal to Withdraw Troops from
Lebanon: I'm Working to Resolve Problems, Including Those Related to Netanyahu
Al-Nidaa Al-Watan/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
US President Donald Trump said he would work to resolve outstanding issues,
"including those related to Netanyahu," and the matter of the Israeli troop
withdrawal from southern Lebanon. Trump stated he would follow up on the
continued Israeli troop presence in southern Lebanon, responding to Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's assertion that his forces would not withdraw
from Lebanese territory. Speaking to reporters, Trump was asked about his stance
on Netanyahu's announcement regarding the continued Israeli troop presence in
Lebanon. He replied, "We'll look at that," adding, "I'm a problem solver, and I
can solve problems quickly, including with Bibi," referring to Netanyahu.
Trump's remarks come amidst ongoing debate about the future of the Israeli
military presence in Lebanon and diplomatic efforts to solidify the ceasefire
arrangements and implement withdrawal commitments and respect for Lebanese
sovereignty.
Vance: A Mechanism to Disarm Hezbollah; We Are Working to
Protect Israel's Security and Lebanon's Sovereignty
Al-Markazia/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
US Vice President Jay D. Vance stated that "a mechanism has been established to
monitor the ceasefire in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah, and we want the
latter to stop its attacks." He continued, "We are putting in place a mechanism
to disarm Hezbollah and are working to protect Israel's security and Lebanon's
sovereignty."While emphasizing that Iran is required to restrain Hezbollah, he
noted that significant progress has been made with Iran, affirming that "the
Strait of Hormuz is open."
Lebanon Demands to Be a Key Partner in Any Process Concerning It in the
Washington-Tehran Negotiations
Al-Markazia/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Sources told Al-Hadath that the Lebanese state is seeking official
representation in any consultations concerning Lebanon within the framework of
negotiations between Washington and Tehran. The sources confirmed that the
Lebanese Ambassador to Washington, Nada Mouawad, requested direct coordination
with President Joseph Aoun regarding any approach to Lebanese issues, noting
that the Lebanese government has demanded to be a partner in all matters
pertaining to Lebanon in the negotiations between the US and Iran. In this
context, informed sources told Al-Jadeed that “the Lebanese Ambassador to
Washington is emphasizing, during her meetings with American officials, the
necessity for the Lebanese state to be a key partner in any process concerning
Lebanon.”
Netanyahu: We Have "Complete Freedom" to Act in Southern Lebanon... Washington
Warns: The Green Light Is Over!
Al-Markazia/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu affirmed on Monday that Israeli forces
operating in southern Lebanon enjoy "complete freedom" to act against any direct
or potential threat. Netanyahu stated that Israeli soldiers are authorized to
thwart any threat targeting them or the residents of northern Israel,
emphasizing that the army "faces no restrictions" in this regard. He added, "I
stand behind our fighters, and the entire nation stands behind them." He
stressed that Israel will continue to remain in what he termed the "security
zone" in southern Lebanon as long as necessary, asserting that the objective is
to protect the residents of northern Israel and all citizens of the country. For
his part, Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz confirmed on Monday that the
Israeli army will remain in the security zone in Lebanon. In this context,
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar warned that his country will not withdraw
its forces from the "security zone" it unilaterally declared inside Lebanese
territory, extending approximately six miles north of the border. In a social
media post, Saar stated, "Israel will respect the ceasefire in Lebanon as long
as Hezbollah does not violate it. We have no territorial ambitions in Lebanon,
but we will not withdraw from the security zone, nor will we expose our citizens
to Hezbollah attacks or the possibility of infiltration." The Israeli government
spokesperson confirmed in a press conference Monday afternoon that "we are
conducting good talks with Lebanon through American mediation," adding, "Our
goal is to stop Hezbollah from threatening Israel." He continued, "Hezbollah
must be disarmed for the benefit of both Lebanon and Israel." He also asserted,
"We have eliminated the Iranian threat and will not allow it to acquire nuclear
weapons." Despite the declaration, violation, and subsequent reinstatement of
ceasefire agreements in Lebanon several times in recent weeks, fighting has
persisted due to disagreements over what constitutes defensive action for
Israeli forces. Israeli military commanders have also received new orders
restricting their operations in Lebanon to defensive actions, stipulating that
forces may only fire to repel an immediate threat, unless authorized by the
Chief of Staff. The new orders prohibit Israeli soldiers from firing warning
shots at civilians attempting to return to southern Lebanon unless they approach
too close to soldiers' positions, according to two Israeli officials who
requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. The
orders also prevent Israeli soldiers from demolishing homes or other
infrastructure within the security zone without the approval of senior officers,
the officials said. Israeli Channel 12 reported on Monday that the Israeli army
had informed its northern units that they would be demobilized starting Sunday
due to the ceasefire. The New York Times quoted Israeli officials as saying that
"field commanders received orders on Saturday to limit their operations in
Lebanon to defensive purposes." Meanwhile, the Walla! news site published what
it called Israel's conditions for withdrawing from southern Lebanon, revealing
that it might agree to a phased withdrawal from areas in the south. The site
quoted a security source as saying that "the White House is not exerting real
pressure on Israel to withdraw," adding, "Israel might withdraw from areas where
Hezbollah cannot launch attacks against Israel." The security source added, "If
the Lebanese mechanism proves effective, the Israeli army might agree to
withdraw." Meanwhile, Israel's Channel 13 reported that the Israeli security
establishment had received instructions to refrain from targeting the cities of
Beirut and Tyre. The channel added that Israel had received a message from the
United States stating that "the green light has expired."
Aliko: The scale of destruction in the south is far greater than previously
estimated
Al-Markazia/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
The UNDP Resident Representative in Lebanon, Blerta Aliko, stated via the "X"
platform that the scale of destruction in southern Lebanon is "far greater" than
the estimates contained in the latest rapid assessment. She explained that the
report, prepared in cooperation with the National Council for Scientific
Research, is limited to assessing direct damage to buildings up to the end of
April 2026 and does not include damage to public and private infrastructure or
economic losses. She added that further updates and reports will be issued as
assessments are completed and new data becomes available.
Ben-Gvir: Lebanon should be a "playground" for Israel
Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir called for Lebanon to be made
a "playground" for the Israeli army,
Al-Markazia/June 22, 2026
In a clear challenge to American and international pressure demanding a halt to
the military escalation in southern Lebanon, as reported by Russia Today. He
said he would not accept "any American restrictions on Israeli military
operations in Lebanon," adding, "If Trump tells Netanyahu to leave Lebanon, the
answer should be: Mr. President, no." He considered the distinction between
Lebanon as a state and Hezbollah "an artificial approach that cannot be
accepted," demanding that "all Lebanese territory be made a direct target for
Israeli military operations, without any exceptions or restrictions." He added,
"A thousand Lebanese mothers may weep, but not a single Israeli mother,"
categorically rejecting any "humanitarian or moral constraints on the war," and
insisting that the absolute priority is protecting Israelis at any cost, even at
the expense of Lebanese civilians.” For his part, Israeli Foreign Minister
Gideon Sa’ar asserted, “We have no designs on Lebanon, but we will not withdraw
from the security zone and we will not expose our citizens to Hezbollah
attacks.” He added, “Iran has violated Lebanon’s sovereignty for decades through
Hezbollah, and the conflict between Israel and Lebanon must be resolved through
direct negotiations between the two countries.”
Iran Threatens Israel with a Repeat of its 2000 Withdrawal
from Lebanon
Al-Markazia/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The commander of the Quds Force in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Brigadier
General Ismail Qaani, threatened Israel with a "repetition of its humiliating
withdrawal scenario from southern Lebanon in 2000 if it does not leave
voluntarily." In a message in Hebrew addressed to Israeli soldiers, Qaani said,
"In less than four days, you have suffered 100 dead and wounded. If you do not
withdraw of your own accord, you will be kicked out in defeat, just as happened
in the epic of 2000." In the same context, Mohsen Rezaei, advisor to the Iranian
Supreme Leader, held the United States responsible for the Israeli attacks and
provocations in Lebanon, asserting that Washington is behind the current
escalation.
A tripartite working group to ensure a halt to military operations in Lebanon
Aoun receives a US-Qatari call: No conflict with Washington negotiations
Vance: We are working on a mechanism to disarm Hezbollah... Salam praises
Sharaa's positions
Al-Markazia/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
Integration and coordination, not a monopoly on decision-making, exist between
the US-Iranian negotiations in Switzerland and the Lebanese-Israeli negotiations
in Washington. The goal is one: to solidify the ceasefire in Lebanon and halt
the Israeli military escalation. This is the official position; however, action
awaits the formation of the working group established in Burgunstock to assess
its effectiveness and its ability to compel both sides of the conflict to abide
by the decisions it will make. Concurrently with the US-Iran negotiations in
Switzerland, which resulted in the establishment of a high-level committee to
oversee the political aspects of the mediation efforts between the two
countries, and where the two sides agreed, according to a Qatari-Pakistani
statement, "to establish a working group to prevent escalation, comprising both
parties and the Lebanese Republic, facilitated by the mediators, to ensure
adherence to the cessation of military operations in the country, as stipulated
in the memorandum of understanding," international communication channels moved
towards Lebanon – the state – to inform it of the progress made and to emphasize
that the state would not be marginalized, on the eve of a Lebanese-Israeli round
of negotiations tomorrow in Washington.
International contact with Aoun: Before noon, President Joseph Aoun, during a
call he received from US Vice President J.D. Vance, Senior Advisor to the US
President Jared Kushner, and Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin
Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani, welcomed the idea of forming a cell to
guarantee a comprehensive ceasefire and Israeli withdrawal, considering that
this proposal does not contradict the course of the Lebanese-Israeli
negotiations in Washington, but rather is coordinated with the US State
Department. However, according to sources familiar with the discussions, the
idea of establishing a cell remains under consideration, and its primary role
and the countries it would include have yet to be determined. President Aoun
also briefed Speaker Nabih Berri and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam on the
tripartite call he received. The discussions focused on consolidating the
ceasefire in Lebanon, halting the Israeli military escalation, and the necessary
steps to be taken, including the possibility of forming a cell for this purpose.
"No one negotiates on our behalf": The President expressed his welcome for "any
assistance to end the war, but we distinguish between assistance and
interference in internal affairs because we are a sovereign country and no one
negotiates on our behalf." He affirmed to a delegation from the Greek Catholic
League that "the state, not the sects, protects everyone, and there is no option
but a single, strong state that represents all Lebanese. Work is ongoing to
achieve this goal." He noted that "political competition exists and is
legitimate, but this should not mean obstructing the state's progress." He
stressed that "the right to disagree is sacred, but discord among the Lebanese
is unacceptable, especially in the current circumstances the country is going
through." Regarding curbing Hezbollah, Vance said, "We are putting in place a
mechanism to disarm Hezbollah and are working to protect Israel's security and
Lebanon's sovereignty." He continued, "We have established a mechanism to
monitor the ceasefire in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah, and we want the
latter to stop its attacks," noting that "Iran is required to rein in
Hezbollah."
Foundations of the Agreement: For his part, Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign
Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani announced that the
parties involved had laid the necessary foundations, and that the current phase
is one of building the final agreement between Washington and Tehran. He
indicated that the talks addressed issues related to Lebanon and the Strait of
Hormuz, confirming that mechanisms have been put in place to address them. He
emphasized that the continued occupation of Lebanese territory must end and that
Lebanon's sovereignty must be respected.
Al-Dossari in Yarzeh: While Saudi Arabia played a significant role in ensuring
that the Lebanese state was not bypassed in any future negotiations or
arrangements within the Swiss framework, Minister of National Defense Major
General Michel Mansour received the Saudi Ambassador to Lebanon, Fahd bin Abdul
Rahman Al-Dossari (who also visited Interior Minister Ahmad Hajjar), at his
office in Yarzeh today. This was a courtesy visit to mark the ambassador's
assumption of his new post. During the meeting, both sides emphasized the
deep-rooted and historical fraternal relations between Lebanon and the Kingdom
of Saudi Arabia. The Minister of Defense commended the Kingdom's supportive
stances towards Lebanon, its people, and its institutions, and its role in
supporting Lebanon's stability and strengthening its resilience, particularly
through its participation in efforts to achieve a permanent cessation of
hostilities in Lebanon and the region. He also praised the recent decision to
reopen Saudi markets to Lebanese exports, recognizing its positive impact on the
Lebanese economy. For his part, the Saudi Ambassador affirmed his country's
commitment to continuing its support for the Lebanese state, stressing the
strength of the bonds uniting the two brotherly nations and the Kingdom's
dedication to Lebanon's security and stability.
Withdrawals: On the eve of the Washington talks, it appeared that American
pressure on Israel was having an effect. Amid a lull in the south, the Israeli
Broadcasting Corporation reported that the Israeli army was expected to reduce
its forces in southern Lebanon in the coming days, after completing most of its
offensive operations. This coincided with the meeting scheduled for this week
between the Israeli and Lebanese negotiating teams. Haaretz quoted a source as
saying that the Israeli army would be forced to partially withdraw from the
Green Line in Lebanon, noting that the Lebanese army would operate under
American supervision in the areas from which Israel would withdraw. The source
added, "The Israeli and Lebanese teams will determine in their talks the pilot
areas that will be transferred to the Lebanese army." Israeli media also quoted
an official as saying that "Washington is showing understanding for the Israeli
position regarding Lebanon." Channel 12 reported that the Israeli army was
considering allowing the Lebanese army to take control of a Hezbollah tunnel
complex.
Sound Bombs: In the afternoon, as the Lebanese army worked to reopen the Kfar
Tebnit road, reports indicated that Israeli aircraft dropped five sound bombs in
the vicinity of a Lebanese army unit stationed 300 meters from Israeli forces in
the town.
Praise for Sharaa: Amidst this atmosphere, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam made a
phone call to Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani, praising the brotherly
and frank stance towards Lebanon expressed by President Ahmed al-Sharaa during
his televised interview yesterday. This stance put an end to the misleading
speculations and assumptions about Syria's intentions towards Lebanon. The call
was an opportunity to reaffirm the strength of the relationship between the two
brotherly countries and the necessity of continuing to work on consolidating it
on new foundations of state-to-state cooperation, based on shared interests.
From Geagea to Vance: Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea sent a letter to US
Vice President Jay D. Vance in response to the latter's remarks about the
Christian presence in Lebanon. Geagea stated that "supporting the current
Lebanese state in extending its full authority over all its territory, confining
weapons to legitimate institutions alone, and ending Hezbollah's military and
security presence constitutes, in our view, the greatest contribution that can
be made to the Christians of Lebanon and to all Lebanese, because it opens the
door to building the state we all aspire to: a truly sovereign, free, and strong
state, capable of ensuring security, stability, and prosperity for all its
citizens." No excuse for the state: For his part, Kataeb Party leader MP Sami
Gemayel said at a press conference: "Let us reiterate the obvious: the land will
not be liberated, the displaced will not return, there will be no
reconstruction, we will not live in peace in Lebanon, investment and the economy
will not recover, Lebanese expatriates will not return, and we will not create
job opportunities worthy of Lebanon's youth as long as there are militia weapons
on our land." He added: "The continued existence of Hezbollah's weapons is the
primary and ultimate obstacle to Lebanon's recovery." He continued: "Iran is
trying to salvage what remains of Hezbollah's military forces so it can use them
again whenever needed and whenever Iran is in danger." He said: "Lebanon
contributed ten times more to the war than Iran, a fact confirmed by Qalibaf. We
need to calm down out of respect for the displaced and civilian martyrs." He
asserted that "the Lebanese state must demonstrate to the world that it is a
state that speaks and acts, and the time has come for the Lebanese army to
implement the decisions. There are no more excuses." He emphasized that "we will
not coexist with Hezbollah, regardless of the outcome of the negotiations, and
they must abide by the state's conditions. Most Lebanese are unwilling to live
as hostages to the party."
Berri Engaged in Washington Negotiations, His Ideas Present: Why the Accusations
of Treason Continue?
Lara Yazbek/Al-Markazia/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google
from Arabic)
Al-Markazia - On the eve of the direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel
in Washington on the 23rd of this month, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri
explained his position on the experimental zones, saying that agreeing on their
geographical boundaries could take two years, if not more, unlike adopting an
administrative division of the South based on districts, provided that the
gradual withdrawal from them begins concurrently with the deployment of the
Lebanese army. Berri pointed out that "it is not in our interest to waste time
that allows Israel to continue its aggression, and that the solution lies in
adopting a timetable for its withdrawal from each district in the South, in
exchange for the deployment of the army, because this remains the shortest path
to liberating it from occupation, instead of getting bogged down in defining the
geographical boundaries of each experimental zone, which keeps the South under
Israeli fire, under the pretext of not agreeing on its division into
experimental zones." He stressed "the necessity of adopting an administrative
division for the South, taking into account those areas that remain under
occupation. The army command would then be tasked with setting a timetable for
the phased deployment of military units in these areas, in exchange for Israel's
commitment to a similar timetable for its withdrawal, thus allowing displaced
persons from each district to return to their villages," in an indirect
reference to limiting the return to its original inhabitants. The Speaker of
Parliament is thus engaged in the Washington process initiated by the Lebanese
state months ago. According to sovereign political sources speaking to Al-Markazia,
he does not object to the idea of pilot zones proposed by the Lebanese
government, but rather to their division. He proposed "pilot districts," so to
speak, instead of the villages and other divisions that President Joseph Aoun
and the Lebanese negotiating team had been discussing. The sources added that
Berri's proposal, which he discussed with US Ambassador Michel Issa and
President Aoun, will be presented in Washington during the upcoming talks. This
means, according to sources, that Aoun is indeed coordinating with Berri, taking
his ideas into account, and respecting his demands. All these indicators suggest
that Berri is keeping abreast of the Washington negotiations, which are direct
negotiations. So why does Hezbollah accuse the Lebanese state of treason? And
why does it consider Lebanon's official position a capitulation and defeat,
given that its larger ally is present, and given that the latter's ideas—which
naturally reflect what Hezbollah accepts—are being carried by the Lebanese
negotiator to the negotiating table? This confirms that Lebanon is not subject
to American control, as the party claims. What is happening constitutes a
decisive response to the party and refutes all its narratives and accusations
against the Lebanese state. The truth is that the party does not object to
direct negotiations but fears that the "state" will propose something unsuitable
for it. It is seeking what protects it and its weapons, whether that protection
comes through Washington or Switzerland.The question remains whether the party
will actually respond to the proposal to evacuate the experimental areas or
districts of weapons and withdraw from them, first south of the Litani, and
then, more importantly, north of it and in "all of" Lebanon, where there is
great fear that it is maneuvering in coordination with Berri or behind his back,
as it has done more than once over the past few months, the sources conclude.
United Nations: Building Damage in South Lebanon Exceeds
$1.3 Billion
Al-Markazia/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), in coordination with the
Lebanese National Council for Scientific Research (CNRS-L), announced the
results of a rapid assessment of building damage in South Lebanon, covering
areas south of the Litani River, including the districts of Bint Jbeil,
Marjeyoun, Nabatieh, Tyre, and Sidon. This assessment follows a previous
assessment conducted in Beirut and Mount Lebanon. The results show that the
total direct damage to buildings in South Lebanon is estimated at approximately
US$1.38 billion, with an estimated volume of rubble of about 3.1 million cubic
meters. A total of 11,095 buildings were completely destroyed, affecting 17,891
housing units, while 2,242 buildings were partially damaged (5,219 housing
units), and 9,311 buildings sustained minor damage (18,282 housing units). The
properties most affected in terms of the number of completely destroyed
buildings in the Bint Jbeil district are Ainatha (1,658 buildings) and Bint
Jbeil (1,076 buildings), and in the Marjeyoun district, Mays al-Jabal (969
buildings) and Taybeh (824 buildings), followed by Burj al-Shamali (370
buildings) and Naqoura (216 buildings) in the Tyre district. The assessment used
a geographic artificial intelligence (GeoAI) methodology, supported by
desk-based visual verification without field verification. High-resolution
satellite imagery taken on April 29, 2026, was compared with reference imagery
from October 23, 2025, enabling the identification of visible conflict-related
damage, including collapsed roofs, structural deformations, and rubble
accumulation at the building footprint level. The volume of rubble and the cost
of damage were calculated using building footprints, number of floors, and
standard replacement costs, in line with the UNDP methodology and previous
assessments. While the assessment provides a comprehensive and reliable picture
of the extent of the damage, it does not include basements or underground
structures, nor damage to critical infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and
electricity, water, and telecommunications networks. The figures also reflect
the situation as of April 29, 2026, and do not take into account ongoing
recovery or reconstruction efforts. The assessment was conducted using
high-resolution satellite imagery taken on April 29, 2026, and compared with
reference images from October 23, 2025, based on a specially trained geographic
artificial intelligence (GeoAI) model. The model's results were subsequently
subjected to a systematic visual verification process by the UNDP team at the
building level. This process confirmed the accuracy of the methodology,
achieving an overall accuracy rate of approximately 85 percent, thus providing a
high level of confidence in the final results.
Geagea to Vance: Confining Weapons to the Country is the
Greatest Contribution We Can Offer to Lebanon and Its Christians
Al-Markazia/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
Lebanese Forces Party leader Samir Geagea addressed a letter to US Vice
President Jay D. Vance, which read:
Your Excellency, Vice President of the United States of America,Mr. Jay D.
Vance,
Greetings, I read with interest and appreciation your statement expressing your
affection and concern for the Christians of Lebanon. As the head of the Lebanese
Forces Party, the largest Christian party in Lebanon, I felt compelled to
address you with this letter to express my sincere gratitude for your words,
which reflect genuine friendship and deep concern for the Christians of Lebanon,
and by extension, for all Lebanese.Throughout the history of modern Lebanon,
Lebanese Christians have been, and will continue to be, an element of stability,
openness, moderation, and cultural and civilizational prosperity in this region.
Thanks to its pluralism, public freedoms, open system, and cultural and economic
role, Lebanon has distinguished itself as a beacon of light in a turbulent
region. It is true that the past four decades have been among the most difficult
periods experienced by the Lebanese in general, and Christians in particular,
due to Hezbollah's usurpation of national decision-making, weakening of
legitimate institutions, and prevention of the establishment of a truly
effective and capable state. Furthermore, Hezbollah has dragged Lebanon into
conflicts and wars linked to Iranian agendas that do not reflect the interests
or aspirations of the Lebanese people. This has negatively impacted the Lebanese
economy, reduced job opportunities, and driven large numbers of Lebanese,
including a significant percentage of Christians, to emigrate in search of
security, stability, and a decent life. Nevertheless, Christians, who have faced
far more severe challenges and hardships throughout their long history, both
ancient and modern, have always managed to overcome them thanks to their
attachment to their land, their belief in freedom, and their determination to
remain in their homeland and preserve their national and cultural identity.
Today, as in the past, they remain steadfast in their faith and convictions,
resilient in the face of challenges, and determined, along with all Lebanese, to
restore their state, its institutions, and its full sovereignty, relying on the
support of their friends in the East and West, foremost among them the United
States of America.
In this context, we believe that the greatest contribution the United States can
make to Lebanon at this critical juncture is to support the Lebanese state and
its legitimate institutions as the sole national authority, confining any
negotiation or approach to the Lebanese issue to the Lebanese state alone, and
definitively excluding Iran from Lebanese affairs. This will help the Lebanese
people regain their national decision-making power once and for all and prevent
any further foreign interference in their internal affairs. Furthermore,
supporting the current Lebanese state in extending its full authority over all
its territory, confining weapons to the legitimate institutions alone, and
ending Hezbollah's military and security presence, constitutes, in our view, the
greatest contribution that can be made to the Christians of Lebanon and to all
Lebanese, because it paves the way for building the state we all aspire to: a
truly sovereign, free, and strong state, capable of ensuring security,
stability, and prosperity for all its citizens. In conclusion, allow me to
reiterate, on my own behalf and on behalf of a broad segment of the Lebanese
people in general, and Christians in particular, who yearn for a truly sovereign
and capable state in their homeland, our deepest gratitude and appreciation for
the kindness and concern you have shown towards the Christians of Lebanon. I
hope that the United States of America will remain a key partner in helping
Lebanon regain its natural role as a model of freedom, pluralism, and peace in
the Middle East.
Please accept my highest regards and appreciation.
Samir Geagea/President of the Lebanese Forces Party
Heroes never die; they live on in our consciences, hearts, and souls.
Edmond Chidiac / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
June 22 marks the anniversary of the martyrdom of Joseph Albert Qabain in the
Battle of Tel al-Zaatar. Joseph was a hero of Lebanon who offered his blood and
life on the altar of his country. He was a member of the elite Fakhr al-Din
Regiment, despite being his parents' only son.
After fighting in all the battles before Tel al-Zaatar, he was preparing to go
to France, even with his plane ticket, because he was going to study medicine
like his father, Dr. Albert Qabain. His comrades didn't tell him because they
knew his temper. By chance, he went to the headquarters to say goodbye to his
comrades and saw them preparing for battle. He refused to leave while his
comrades were defending Lebanon, so he returned to his olive-green uniform and
said, "France is waiting." And so he embarked on the path to martyrdom.
Martyrdom for Lebanon was more important to him than martyrdom in France. I hope
Lebanon will never forget him. Remember him in your prayers and keep him in your
memory, for there is no future for a people who forget their martyred heroes.
Sleep, Joseph, in the bosom of your Virgin Mother, whom you loved and to whom
you prayed kneeling whenever you prayed, for in her bosom lies the resting place
of the martyrs.
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 22-23
June/2026
Including the Suspect... Three Dead in Canada Shooting; Canadian Police
Urged Residents to Shelter in Place
Riyadh - AlArabiya.net / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
Three people, including the suspect, were killed on Monday in a shooting
incident in a Jewish neighborhood in the city of Montreal, the Canadian police
announced. No information has yet been released regarding the motive for the
attack, which claimed the lives of a police officer and a citizen and left
another police officer injured. The police have also not released details on how
the attack took place. Prior to this, the Canadian police announced that at
least one officer was injured in a shooting incident in Montreal, the details of
which were not immediately clear. The Canadian police warned residents in
Montreal's "Côte-des-Neiges" neighborhood against going out into the street and
requested them to shelter in place in their homes due to the security situation.
Canadian media sources clarified that "the suspect remains at large so far,
while security forces continue search and pursuit operations to apprehend him,
amid tightened security measures in the area surrounding the incident."
Trump: If Iran Does Not Comply with the Agreement, I Will
Do What I Have to Do... Trump: Iran is Doing Very Well Regarding the Strait of
Hormuz
AlArabiya.net and Agencies / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google
from Arabic)
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday, "I will do what I have to do" if
Iran does not comply with its agreement with Washington. Trump told reporters,
"If Iran does not comply with its agreement, or if they don't behave properly, I
will do what I have to do." He went on to say, "As long as Iran respects us, we
won't have any problem."He noted that "the U.S. negotiating team led by Vance
did a good job." Trump emphasized that his country had eliminated "a lot of
Iran's military capabilities," adding, "We got rid of the first, second, and
third tiers of Iran's leadership." The U.S. President explained that he deals
with Iran "in a completely different way than the Democrats."Regarding the
Strait of Hormuz, Trump stated: "The Strait of Hormuz is fully open. The
situation is very good in the Strait of Hormuz. Iran is doing very well
regarding the Strait of Hormuz."
The first round of U.S.-Iranian talks concluded in Switzerland with U.S. Vice
President JD Vance announcing Tehran's approval of the return of IAEA
inspectors. Meanwhile, Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi traveled to the Sultanate of Oman to discuss
arrangements related to the Strait of Hormuz and to follow up on the
understandings resulting from the Bürgenstock talks. Iranian media stated that
Ghalibaf will hold talks with Sultan Haitham bin Tariq regarding bilateral
relations and developments related to the Strait of Hormuz. He will also discuss
ways to boost cooperation between the two countries and coordination on managing
navigation in the strait, as well as establishing the mechanisms agreed upon
following the Swiss talks. Technical talks are scheduled to begin on Monday
within a 60-day negotiating track to discuss mechanisms for implementing the
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), including the nuclear file, maritime security
in the Strait of Hormuz, and other regional files. On Monday, mediators
announced the conclusion of the first round of talks between senior officials
from the United States and Iran in Switzerland. A joint statement issued by the
two mediating countries, Qatar and Pakistan, stated that the United States and
Iran agreed on a roadmap to reach a final agreement within 60 days. According to
the statement released by the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs, technical
talks will continue throughout the rest of the week at the Swiss mountain resort
of Bürgenstock.
Trump: Iran Will Agree to Inspections to Ensure "Nuclear
Transparency"... Baghaei: Cooperation with the "IAEA" Continues Within Existing
Frameworks
AlArabiya.net and Agencies / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
As technical talks continue in Switzerland, U.S. President Donald Trump said in
a post on "Truth Social" on Monday that Iran will agree to major weapons
inspections to ensure long-term "nuclear transparency." This came after his
deputy made statements to the same effect; Vance had announced hours earlier
that Iran had agreed to invite IAEA inspectors to return, noting that talks
regarding nuclear inspections could begin in the coming days, possibly as early
as this week. Vance considered the return of inspectors to be "a big step that
marks the beginning of a path" aimed at ensuring that Iran's nuclear program
does not turn into a military one. Conversely, and in comment to Vance's
statement, Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei stated that
Tehran's dealings with the IAEA will continue in accordance with current
established procedures. Baghaei stressed that any track in this regard remains
conditional upon the approval of the Iranian Parliament and the Supreme National
Security Council, in response to the U.S. announcement of Tehran's approval of
the inspectors' return. Following the Switzerland round, U.S. and Iranian
officials are expected to resume their diplomatic movements. The head of the
Iranian negotiating delegation and Speaker of Parliament, Mohammad Bagher
Ghalibaf, left Tehran heading to the Omani capital, Muscat, on an urgent
official visit. Ghalibaf is accompanied on this visit by Iranian Foreign
Minister Abbas Araghchi, where they are expected to discuss special arrangements
for managing the Strait of Hormuz. For its part, the U.S. State Department
announced an upcoming tour by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio to the Arabian
Gulf region. This visit represents Rubio's first diplomatic move in the region
following the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding between Washington and
Tehran.
Switzerland Negotiations Achieve "Significant
Progress"... Iran: We Have Officially Entered the Lebanese Security Equation!
Al-Markazia / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced that Pakistani and Qatari
mediation has achieved significant progress toward ending the war in Lebanon.
Araghchi added, "The first real test remains the success of the de-escalation
cell in Lebanon."
As Araghchi wrote on "X", the talks with the United States witnessed
"significant progress," adding that "oil and petrochemical exports have been
exempted from sanctions, the blockade has been lifted, some frozen assets have
been released, and a major reconstruction plan for Iran has been launched."
Earlier on Monday morning, the Iranian Foreign Ministry stated that "good
progress has been made in the Switzerland talks regarding the implementation of
the other party's obligations." The ministry added: "The work of the negotiating
delegation has concluded, but the technical teams will continue their work,"
noting that "an arrangement was agreed upon regarding a mechanism for the safe
passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz." It concluded by stating: "The
foundation for starting negotiations on the final agreement was discussed."
Joint Statement
On Monday, Qatar and Pakistan issued a joint statement regarding the conclusion
of the U.S.-Iranian talks in Switzerland. The first round of high-level
talks—held within the framework of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed
in Islamabad—concluded in the Swiss resort of Bürgenstock, with the
participation of representatives from Iran and the United States, alongside the
two mediating nations, Qatar and Pakistan. The Qatari Foreign Ministry released
a statement noting: "A positive and constructive atmosphere prevailed on the
first day of the Lake Lucerne summit, where encouraging progress was made,
including the establishment of a mechanism to continue technical talks." The
statement added: "Based on the MoU, the parties agreed to establish a high-level
committee to assume political oversight of the mediation efforts. The chief
negotiators will submit periodic reports to the committee, alongside leading
specialized working groups dedicated to the nuclear file and sanctions.
Additionally, a follow-up and dispute-resolution working group will be
established to ensure the effective implementation of the MoU, as well as to
consider other relevant matters."The statement continued: "The high-level
committee agreed on a roadmap aimed at reaching a final agreement within 60
days, paving the way for the immediate start of a new round of technical talks.
A communication channel between the parties was also established for the period
stipulated in paragraph five of the MoU, to avoid incidents and
misunderstandings, thereby ensuring the safe passage of commercial vessels
through the Strait of Hormuz."The statement indicated that the two parties
agreed to "establish a working group to prevent escalation, comprising both
parties and the Lebanese Republic, facilitated by the mediators, with the aim of
ensuring commitment to the cessation of military operations in Lebanon, as
stipulated in the MoU."The statement confirmed that "technical talks are
scheduled to continue throughout the remainder of the week at the Bürgenstock
resort to discuss all relevant issues. The two mediating parties will continue
to exert their best efforts to ensure that negotiations proceed in a
constructive atmosphere, leading to a final agreement." The statement expressed
Qatar and Pakistan's appreciation to "the United States and Iran for their
continuous commitment to diplomatic solutions and their pursuit of a peaceful
settlement to the conflict." According to the statement, the two mediating
parties also praised "sisterly and friendly nations for their continuous support
and valuable contributions to the ongoing negotiations."In a related context,
the Iranian negotiating delegation confirmed that during the Switzerland
negotiations, the stability of the security situation in Lebanon was maintained.
The delegation announced the establishment of a monitoring mechanism through
which Iran officially enters the Lebanese security equation. Regarding the
Iranian file, the delegation pointed out that "the working groups concerned with
the nuclear file and sanctions will begin their work after the implementation of
Article 13 of the MoU," noting that "during the talks, Washington issued
documents lifting sanctions on oil and petrochemicals for a period of 60 days."
Baghaei: Cooperation with the "IAEA" Continues Within Existing Frameworks,
Commenting on Vance's Statements
AlArabiya.net and Agencies / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The Iranian Foreign Ministry announced on Monday that any dealing between Tehran
and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will be subject exclusively to
the approval of the Iranian Parliament and the decisions of the Supreme National
Security Council. Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei also
explained that Tehran did not discuss the nuclear issue and did not accept any
new obligations during the Switzerland talks on Sunday. Baghaei stressed that
Iran's implementation of its obligations under the "Islamabad" understanding
remains contingent upon the other party fulfilling its commitments regarding
ending the war, the continuation of Iranian oil exports, and the release of
frozen funds and assets.
"A Big Step That Marks the Beginning of a Path"
Baghaei's remarks came hours after U.S. Vice President JD Vance announced that
Iran had agreed to invite IAEA inspectors to return, indicating that talks
regarding nuclear inspections could begin in the coming days, possibly as early
as this week. Vance considered the return of inspectors to be "a big step that
marks the beginning of a path" aimed at ensuring that Iran's nuclear program
does not turn into a military one. The official news agency IRNA quoted sources
familiar with the Switzerland talks as saying that during the meetings, which
lasted nearly 18 hours, the Iranian delegation did not engage in any detailed
negotiations regarding the nuclear file and did not accept any new commitments
in this area. The sources added that the commencement of nuclear negotiations
within the framework of the Islamabad understanding to end the conflict between
Iran and the United States remains conditional upon the implementation of the
thirteenth clause of the Memorandum of Understanding. In the same context,
Baghaei stressed that the talks in Switzerland did not witness detailed
negotiations on the nuclear program, and that Tehran did not pledge any new
commitments exceeding the existing legal frameworks of its relationship with the
IAEA. Furthermore, an Iranian source reported to Fars News Agency that reports
of Iran accepting the return of IAEA inspectors are untrue. For its part, Tasnim
News Agency, which is affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC),
cast doubt on American reports regarding Iran's approval of the inspectors'
return, describing such a step as "contrary to the understanding" and "highly
detrimental" to Iranian interests. The agency stated that no Iranian official or
member of the negotiating team has confirmed this narrative so far, considering
that the policy of "nuclear ambiguity" and withholding the locations or details
of enriched nuclear materials constitutes one of Iran's leverage cards against
American pressure.
U.S. President Donald Trump, America, and Trump
Washington: Bandar Al-Doshi / Al Arabiya / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google
from Arabic)
U.S. President Donald Trump has called top Pentagon officials and executives
from major defense aerospace companies to a meeting at the White House this
week, aiming to accelerate the production of missiles and ammunition amid
growing concerns over declining American stockpiles resulting from heavy use
during the recent conflict with Iran.According to a report published by The Wall
Street Journal, the meeting comes after a prior postponement originally
scheduled for mid-June, which was delayed due to the negotiations that led to
the ceasefire with Iran. Senior Pentagon officials are expected to attend the
meeting alongside the CEOs of Lockheed Martin, RTX (Raytheon), Boeing, Northrop
Grumman, and Honeywell. The discussions will focus on accelerating the
production of Patriot interceptor missiles and Tomahawk missiles, in addition to
other defense systems such as THAAD and PrSM. While the Pentagon has concluded
preliminary deals with these companies, a major expansion in production still
awaits funding from Congress. Estimates indicate that the Pentagon will request
substantial amounts within the Fiscal Year 2027 budget to support this
expansion.
It is worth noting that President Trump previously activated the Defense
Production Act (DPA) to facilitate the surge in military production, a move that
reflects anxiety over the depletion of U.S. stockpiles. According to analyses by
the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), significant
percentages of precision missile stockpiles and air defense systems were used
during operations against Iran, which has impacted American readiness.
Traffic Increases in the Strait of Hormuz as Maritime Threats Recede;
International Maritime Information Center Lowers Threat Level in the Strait to
"Moderate"
Riyadh – Al Arabiya / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
The International Maritime Information Center reported that maritime traffic
through the Strait of Hormuz is witnessing a noticeable increase, indicating a
continued recovery of maritime shipping through one of the most important
strategic corridors for global energy trade. In an advisory note, the center
also announced that the threat level in the Strait of Hormuz has been lowered
from "high" to "moderate," amid improving security conditions and the continued
return of commercial vessels and oil tankers transiting the strait. The Maritime
Information Center stated that the strait is now open to maritime traffic
following the cessation of naval blockade operations. The center explained that
mine clearance operations are still ongoing in the area, calling on ships to
expect the presence of naval forces carrying out clearing operations, as well as
the potential for maritime congestion and ongoing traffic regulation operations.
It pointed out the necessity of avoiding the use of the international Traffic
Separation Scheme (TSS) at the current time due to the persistent risk of mines.
The center recommended using the southern route adjacent to Omani territorial
waters, confirming that it has been verified as mine-free, and identified a set
of safe transit points for vessels during the current period.
Vance: The Strait of Hormuz is Open to Maritime Traffic
In the same context, U.S. Vice President JD Vance announced that the Strait of
Hormuz is open to maritime traffic, according to the Russian news agency TASS.
JD Vance said during a press conference: "We wanted to establish a mechanism to
keep the Strait of Hormuz open, and it is open. Of course, we are seeing a drop
in gas and oil prices, as millions of barrels of oil and natural gas are passing
through the Strait of Hormuz, which was not the case before. But we also wanted
to ensure that we have actually established a coordination mechanism so that we
can clear the Strait of Hormuz of mines."The U.S. Vice President, JD Vance,
noted that the United States and Iran laid a solid foundation for a final
agreement during the negotiations that took place in Bürgenstock, Switzerland.
Vance continued in a press briefing: "We have laid a solid foundation to
successfully complete the deal. The final deal is a house, and we have laid the
foundation; we haven't built the house yet, but we have laid a solid foundation
for it."
Navigation Continues in the Strait of Hormuz
Maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz continued on Monday at a higher pace
than was the case before the announcement of the understanding between the
United States and Iran, according to maritime tracking platforms, despite
Tehran's announcement on Saturday that it was re-closing this vital artery for
global trade, according to Agence France-Presse (AFP).
On Monday until 11:00 GMT, the Kpler platform counted 15 transits of vessels
carrying raw materials during the morning period, a number parallel to that
recorded on Thursday and Saturday when traffic included around 30 transits per
day. It appears that at least five other ships also crossed the strait on
Monday, based on signals emitted by their Automatic Identification System (AIS)
according to the MarineTraffic platform, though Kpler had not yet verified them.
The Strait of Hormuz was reopened to traffic last week after Iran and the United
States reached an understanding to end the war in the Middle East, but Tehran
announced on Saturday that it would close it again in response to Israeli
attacks on Lebanon.
Tehran and Washington agreed on mechanisms to halt hostilities in Lebanon and
secure movement in the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world's
oil supply used to pass. In this regard, they agreed to establish a "hotline" to
avoid "incidents and misunderstandings" in the strait, seeking to "ensure the
safe passage of commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz," according to a
statement issued by the two mediating countries in the talks, Qatar and
Pakistan.
Nikos Pothitakis, who is in charge of media relations at Kpler, pointed out in a
post on the "X" platform on Monday that "despite the uncertainty surrounding the
talks between the United States and Iran, the Strait of Hormuz remained
operational over the weekend," explaining that many ships adopted the route
designated by Tehran or sailed with their transponders turned off. The Chairman
of Zenith Enterprise, Amr Kataya, said that transit traffic through the Strait
of Hormuz is still experiencing a state of ambiguity, with some tankers able to
cross while others wait. Kataya added, in an interview with Al Arabiya Business,
that many large companies that own ships inside the Arabian Gulf are afraid to
cross even after the negotiations between America and Iran in Switzerland. He
explained that there is still no specific rule for transiting the Strait of
Hormuz or a security mechanism for these ships during their transit through the
strait. Kataya stated that transit rates through the Strait of Hormuz over the
past few days are much lower than the level recorded before the war, which
ranged from 130 to 140 ships per day.
Iranian Oil Tankers
He added that Iran started moving Iranian oil tankers outside the Strait of
Hormuz some time ago, and transit rates are expected to rise after the issuance
of a U.S. Treasury waiver for exporting Iranian oil. He explained that the
return of safe navigation through the Strait of Hormuz will take between 6 to 8
months until full security is provided for the strait and mines are removed, as
this process requires a lot of time and various naval equipment. Kataya said
that major shipping companies are waiting for the designation of safe routes for
ship transits, especially for ultra-large crude carriers (ULCCs) with deep
drafts, to avoid the risk of running aground.
U.S. Secretary of State Visists UAE, Kuwait, and Bahrain... Will Attend a GCC
Meeting
Riyadh: AlArabiya.net / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
A U.S. State Department spokesperson reported that Secretary Marco Rubio is
scheduled to conduct a visit to three Gulf states, including the UAE, Kuwait,
and Bahrain, starting tomorrow until June 25. Reuters news agency reported that
the U.S. Secretary of State will discuss the Iranian memorandum of understanding
and the Strait of Hormuz during his brief tour of the Gulf. At the same time,
Reuters indicated that Rubio will attend a Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)
meeting in Bahrain.
Arab League Foreign Ministers Approve Nabil Fahmy as the
Organization's New Secretary-General... Nabil Fahmy Will Hold This Position for
Five Years
AlArabiya.net and Agencies / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that the foreign ministers of
the Arab League member states have approved the appointment of former Egyptian
Foreign Minister, Nabil Fahmy, to the position of the organization's new
Secretary-General.The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement
that the foreign ministers of the Arab League states, after obtaining the
necessary authorization from their countries' leaders, approved Nabil Fahmy as
Secretary-General of the Arab League, succeeding Ahmed Aboul Gheit, whose term
expires on June 30. He will hold this position for a period of five years, until
2031, and will officially assume his duties on July 1. According to the
ministry, the decision was taken during a meeting of Arab League ministers in
the Jordanian capital. The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs added that Cairo
welcomes this step and wished the new Secretary-General success in his term. The
Ministry of Foreign Affairs also expressed its gratitude to the outgoing
Secretary-General of the Arab League, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, who held the position
for the past ten years, for his valuable contribution to solving the problems of
the Arab world and defending the interests of the Arab League countries in the
face of various challenges.
Britain Prepares for Seventh Prime Minister in 10 Years...
Keir Starmer Announces His Resignation
London: (AFP) / June 22, 2026 '(Translated by Google from Arabic)
With Keir Starmer announcing his resignation from the leadership of the Labour
Party and the prime ministership of the British government, the United Kingdom
enters a new phase of political instability and prepares to name a seventh prime
minister in just ten years. With Starmer's resignation, the Labour Party follows
in the footsteps of the Conservative Party, which pursued a pattern of ousting
its leader from the prime ministership while in power.
The Prime Minister announced his resignation on Monday after months of declining
poll numbers and political maneuvering by his opponents within the party.
Veteran party member Andy Burnham confirmed that he would seek to succeed him.
The Conservatives, currently the main opposition party, had five prime ministers
between 2016 and 2024, before Starmer returned the Labour Party to power with a
landslide election victory in July. The rapid turnover of prime ministers had
prompted Starmer, before he took the helm of the executive branch, to call for
an end to the "chaos" resulting from these changes. Here is a review of the fate
of British prime ministers over the past decade: David Cameron: Brexit ended
Cameron's second term. The Conservative Prime Minister resigned after the vote
in favor of leaving the European Union in the June 2016 referendum, having led
the campaign to remain in the bloc. Theresa May: May took office amid the
fallout of Brexit, after a long tenure heading the Home Office and its thorny
tasks. She called an early election the following year to strengthen her
position in the EU exit negotiations, but it backfired; her party won the
election but lost its majority. After failing to win parliamentary ratification
for her Brexit deal, the Conservatives suffered a crushing defeat in the
European Parliament elections in May 2019, prompting her resignation. Boris
Johnson: Johnson, a politician who built his career on breaking rules, had to
deal with the COVID-19 pandemic and Brexit. He led the Conservatives to victory
in the early election in December 2019. However, a series of scandals weakened
his standing, and he was forced to step down following a string of resignations
by ministers and aides. Liz Truss: She served the shortest premiership in
history (just 49 days) and exited 10 Downing Street because of her budget built
on tax cuts. Her economic program terrified the markets and pushed the United
Kingdom to the brink of financial collapse, causing her to lose the support of
her own party. Rishi Sunak: Sunak held the prime ministership for 20 months
until he lost the election to Starmer, ending 14 years of Conservative rule. He
restored some stability after the chaos of the Truss era, but failed to stop the
bitter infighting within the Conservative Party and, ultimately, failed to win
over voters suffering from a cost-of-living crisis.
The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on
22-23 June/2026
The Equation of Fall: How Did Michel Rouhana
Transform from Shattering the Image of "Bashir the Dream" to Bearer of Incense
for the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist?
Edmond Chidiac / June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155468/
O Free People of Lebanon, O Guardians of Sovereignty and Pride:
The story of this monk-priest, and pretender to monasticism, Michel Rouhana,
begins with that shameful incident at Our Lady of Lebanon Church in Toronto on
September 16, 2001. I was an eyewitness to the incident, the day his hand, in
blind hatred, reached out to shatter the image of President Bashir Gemayel, the
dream and the martyr, whom Michel Rouhana called "the killer and the criminal."
That act was not merely the fleeting breaking of a frame and glass, but rather
the actual and public inauguration of a downward spiral of subservience; He
began by attacking a national symbol, labeling it a criminal and a murderer,
only to end up today completely embracing terrorist parties and committing the
ultimate national crime: the crime of absolute support and blind allegiance to
the Party of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist and the destructive Iranian
project!
Hear it loud and clear: This is the greatest stab in the back of the nation!
How could a monk belonging to the venerable Antonine Order, whose very essence
is sacrifice and redemption for the freedom of his people and his sacred land,
transform into someone like Michel Rouhana, from a destroyer of symbols of
sovereignty into a mouthpiece glorifying the ideology of the "Guardianship of
the Islamic Jurist," alien to Lebanese culture and identity? How could he accept
being a promoter of a policy of regional subjugation and dependence, and a
supporter of a party that mortgages the decision of peace and war to orders
coming directly from Tehran? This is abject subservience, pathological
groveling, and despicable inferiority in its most blatant form! When will
Lebanon rid itself of these cancerous tumors that are gnawing at its soul and
body? It will rid itself of them when we rise up against this intellectual
terrorism, and when we reject the projects of Islamization and Iranian
subservience promoted by this cleric. If the one who is supposed to be a
shepherd wields the pickaxe of destruction against the symbols of freedom and
bows down to Tehran's agendas, then the proverb applies to us:
If the master of the house is playing the drum... then the whole household will
dance!
O great people of Lebanon:
Silence towards the one who dared to shatter the image of the cherished Bashir
is what has opened the doors for him today to persist in his crimes of
subservience to foreign powers. We will not allow Michel Rouhana, nor anyone
like him who dons religious garb, to sell our sovereignty in the regional slave
market, and the dream of Bashir will not fall before the advance of the project
of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist. Down with blind subservience! Down
with Tehran's guardianship and its proxies! The image of Bashir, the dream, will
remain etched in our hearts, unbreakable. And Lebanon will remain free,
sovereign, and independent!
Watch the attached video with commentary to hear Michel Rouhani's words.
The Deep State That Controls Lebanon
Saleh Al-Mashnouq/Nidaa Al-Watan/June 23, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
What is the deep state? According to the dictionary definition, it is a secret
or unauthorized network of unelected government officials, along with military
or intelligence leaders, operating outside the law to influence government
policy. It is often independent of, or opposed to, the elected political
leadership of the country. Historian Ryan Gingeras, a specialist in Turkish
history, wrote that the term originated from Turkish and refers to the secret
networks fostered by the Committee of Union and Progress in the Ottoman Empire
in the early 20th century. Gingeras argues that the leaders of the association
created a shadowy alliance of militias and gangs to impose their radical
policies. In recent history, Egypt and Turkey are cited as examples of countries
with powerful and influential "deep states," given the size of their militaries
and their deeply entrenched interests and ideologies. The concept has also
gained significant traction in American political discourse, particularly with
the rise of President Trump, who made combating the perceived deep state
(especially within the judiciary and intelligence services) a central theme of
his presidential campaign. In short, the deep state is an unelected network
deeply embedded in the state structure, wielding exceptional influence over
policymaking and its implementation. This network has a set of interests
intertwined with a particular political ideology and is typically composed of
individuals within the military, intelligence and security services, judiciary,
and administration. Its "depth" stems not only from its unelected nature but
also from its persistence despite political shifts: in Britain, it's well known
that politicians are "here today, gone tomorrow," while the "administration"
remains unshaken, capable of obstructing the work of any elected government
until it is replaced. Conspiracy theories aside (secret cells controlling
states, etc.), every country has a "deep state," but the extent, nature, and
harm of its influence vary. Even the renowned academic Francis Fukuyama wrote an
article titled "In Defense of the Deep State," arguing that a non-political,
professional administration is essential to protect society from the excesses of
politics.
Lebanon has its own deep state, a natural consequence of 15 years of Syrian
occupation and 20 years of Iranian tutelage—a total of 35 years. During those
years, anyone aspiring to advancement within the state had to pledge allegiance
and obedience to the de facto ruler. The system operated on a carrot-and-stick
approach, relying on fear and enticement: if you submitted, you were promoted;
if you disobeyed, you were ousted. This applied to three sectors: the military
and security services, the judiciary, and the administration. A select few
managed, through sheer cunning, to circumvent this equation. The rest, whether
through genuine conviction or by simply accepting the status quo, became part of
the deep state apparatus, with all the associated rhetoric and "national
sanctities" instilled in them by the Syrian and Iranian occupations. In the last
decade, the political class controlling the country—a system of mafias and
militias—has become inextricably linked to the deep state. They share the same
mindset, the same interests, and the same political principles. Today, with the
collapse of the mafia and militia system following Hezbollah's defeat in the
last war, the deep state remains the sole and last guardian of the remnants of
the era of Syrian tutelage over Lebanon. Neither objective circumstances nor an
inclusive approach allowed Presidents Aoun and Salam to uproot the deep state
following the strategic shifts resulting from the 2023 Gaza war. While many
security, judicial, and administrative appointments made last year, most
recently the appointment of Judge Rami Hajj as Attorney General, did create a
significant breach in the deep state's wall, dozens of figures from previous
appointments, and some new ones (State Security being a prime example), remain
in their positions, protected by the Secretary-General of the deep state, Nabih
Berri.
They are steeped in corruption, supportive of weapons, driven by partisan and
sectarian loyalties, and possess a "compromise" mentality under the banner of
"civil peace": they are, in effect, the administrative, security, and judicial
version of the mafia and militia. They find a "clever" way to circumvent any
reform or sovereignty effort, obstructing it under the pretext of "national
interest," most of the time framed as "preventing strife." This is why the
Israeli army discovered a tunnel kilometers long south of the Litani River, an
area the Lebanese army command was supposed to have "cleaned" of illegal
weapons. No wonder; it's the deep state, the very depth of Hezbollah's tunnels.
So, before and after the weapons issue, the state's battle remains one of
"cleaning" itself from within, through dismissals and trials: here today, gone
Lebanon... Restoring Confidence and Controlling the Southern Front!
Hassan Al-Mustafa/Al-Nahar/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Saudi Ambassador Fahd bin Abdulrahman Al-Dossari presented his credentials to
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun on June 19, days after Crown Prince Mohammed bin
Salman directed the resumption of Lebanese exports to the Kingdom.
President Aoun expressed his "deepest gratitude and appreciation" to the Saudi
Crown Prince, considering the resumption of imports of Lebanese products to the
Kingdom a manifestation of the Saudi leadership's commitment to supporting
Lebanon and its people during this recovery phase.
Foreign Minister Nawaf Salam viewed the lifting of the ban as a practical step
forward for the economy, not merely a diplomatic gesture. He saw it as
confirmation of Riyadh's efforts to support the Lebanese state through various
means, aiming to enable it to achieve security and stability.
At the Port of Beirut, as the first container departed for Jeddah Islamic Port,
Prime Minister Salam stated that Lebanon "is witnessing a moment it has long
awaited," emphasizing that Beirut will not allow "Lebanon to become a launching
pad for any harm inflicted upon our Arab brothers." Ambassador Fahd Al-Dossari
stated that the resumption of exports "confirms the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's
support for Lebanon's stability, its sovereignty over all its territory, and the
well-being of its people," and reflects its confidence in the Lebanese state's
ability to prevent its territory from being used "as a platform to harm its
brothers." In saying this, he indicates that Riyadh does not separate the
economy from security, and that while it is reopening the market to Lebanese
exports, it is doing so because Beirut has become more capable of controlling
its ports, airport, and border crossings, and is in full coordination with
Riyadh, in confronting any contraband that some parties or criminal groups might
attempt to smuggle into Saudi Arabia.
Restoring Confidence: These developments provide the Lebanese government with
room to maneuver, which, though some may consider limited, is nonetheless
important, and indicates that the state is taking steps toward broader
structural and administrative reform. The restoration of Gulf confidence will be
solidified day by day through a more efficient customs administration, technical
monitoring of shipments, direct cooperation with Saudi authorities, and the
elimination of smuggling routes. Furthermore, the success of this mechanism will
transform the Saudi decision into a broader avenue for reconnecting Lebanon with
its Arab economy, while failure will return the discussion to its initial point
of doubt, raising once again the question of the state's ability to rigorously
and precisely control its borders and ports of entry.
The Southern Front
Concurrently, the situation in southern Lebanon remains the most dangerous
factor. The ceasefire declaration between Israel and Hezbollah, brokered by the
US and Qatar, remains fragile, despite the Israeli political leadership stating
that it has informed the military command of a cessation of military operations,
while maintaining its positions within Lebanese territory. In the
Iranian-American negotiations in Switzerland, Tehran insists that its
discussions focus on implementing the first clause of the "Memorandum of
Understanding," namely a ceasefire on all fronts, including Lebanon. Meanwhile,
Tel Aviv seeks to maintain "freedom of movement," making the southern arena
resemble a "message box" exchanged between the two adversaries, Iran and Israel.
Through this exchange, each country seeks to impose a fait accompli from which
it can benefit politically and militarily, and thereby improve its future
position. The situation in Lebanon is complex, but the government still relies
on diplomacy as a way out of the war, paving the way for the withdrawal of the
Israeli occupation forces and subsequently the return of the displaced, the
start of reconstruction, and the monopolization of weapons by the state; this is
the difficult path that requires diligent work, patience, and a combination of
diplomacy and courageous national decisions supported by friendly countries.
On the Airport Road
Imad Moussa/Nidaa Al Watan/June 23, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Those who raised the image of Sayyid Ali Khamenei and his son, the heir to the
Supreme Leader's authority, Mojtaba, believe this is the least the loyal can
offer to the loyal state. The only criticism of these "loyalists" is: why only
in Beirut's southern suburbs or on the southern coast of Beirut? How much more
fitting would the gesture have been to erect a giant image of the Khamenei
family on the Bnachii road, one in Jounieh Square, one in Tariq al-Jdideh, and
one in Akkar al-Atiqa! And if gratitude is reserved for the Shiite community,
why are Haboush, Bint Jbeil, Qaqaiyat al-Jisr, Khiam, Kfar Tebnit, Arnoun, and
Majdal Zoun deprived of images of these two exceptional leaders, or at least
have them displayed at the entrances of the tunnels—tunnels for which Iran has
spent vast sums to dig, provide water and electricity, furnish, and equip with
every means of survival and even death? It's remarkable that pictures of Iranian
leaders, alongside the Lebanese and Iranian flags, are being displayed above the
rubble of destroyed buildings as a token of gratitude for a war that Sheikh Naim
and his companions have long desired and longed for. Perhaps distributing the
pictures in cemeteries would be more appropriate. Regarding the issue of
pictures, there have been reports of protests in the north and threats to take
to the streets and block roads because of pictures of Khamenei's house on the
airport highway in Beirut. The northern protesters are demanding similar
pictures be displayed on the road to René Moawad Airport (Quleiat) to attract
tourists and stimulate the economy. Nationalism at its finest was manifested in
a picture that brought together the deceased and the unknown: Mojtaba and his
father, partners in our terrible victory. This same national fervor prevented
companies that own billboards along the airport road from displaying pictures of
Presidents Salam and Aoun as part of the "We Are All With You" campaign.
Meanwhile, young men on motorcycles tore down and burned some of those pictures
that escaped the ban. Out of pure patriotic motives, altered images of Lebanese
President Joseph Aoun were recently displayed, including one showing him against
the backdrop of the Israeli flag, captioned with the phrase: "Partner in our
blood." This is all in service of thanking loyal Iran. We, as loyalists,
sacrificed ourselves for Iran, as Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf himself admitted, and
our martyrs ascended to paradise happy. So why weren't images of Sheikh Naim and
his son displayed on the Persian Gulf Highway, which connects Imam Khomeini
International Airport to central Tehran, accompanied by the words "Thank you to
loyal Lebanon"? And again, why must we Lebanese returning to our homeland travel
on Imam Khomeini Avenue in Beirut, while Iranians don't travel on Rafik Hariri
Avenue in Tehran?
Hezbollah is more important than the Strait of Hormuz
Tony Francis/Independent Arabia/June 23, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The developments of the two days between the signing of the Memorandum of
Understanding and the start of talks in Switzerland revealed that Iran's only
leverage is Hezbollah and its ability to drag the group into a war against
Israel, bringing the Jewish state to the brink of a clash with the United
States, the signatory of the Memorandum of Understanding and Iran's partner in
it. The US-Iranian Memorandum of Understanding ends nearly half a century of
conflicts between Iran and successive US administrations, and between Iran and
Israel—conflicts that, for decades, formed the core of Iran's regional
expansionist ideology in the Arab world, upon which it built its theory of
fronts and militias, tearing apart the fabric of the Levant.
The first paragraph of that Memorandum stipulated the following precisely:
"The United States of America, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and their
respective allies in the ongoing conflict, by signing this Memorandum of
Understanding, declare an immediate and permanent cessation of hostilities on
all fronts, including Lebanon, and pledge henceforth not to initiate any war or
military action against one another, and to refrain from threatening one
another." By using force or using it against each other, and by guaranteeing the
safety of Lebanon's territory and its sovereignty. The final agreement will
confirm a permanent cessation of hostilities on all fronts, including within
Lebanon, and the other provisions contained in this paragraph. No more wars,
clashes, or incitement in the future. This is what this introductory and pivotal
paragraph indicates, almost summarizing the subsequent course of relations that
should prevail in the region. In more detail, Iran, whose regime was founded on
the slogans "Death to America" and "Death to Israel," will be different after
the agreement from the existing Khomeini-Khamenei Iran. It will no longer base
its policies on fighting Israel and America, and will withdraw its proxies to
the borders of the countries where they reside. Israel, which has spent decades
preparing for and combating the Iranian threat, its proxies, and its axis, will
not need such wars in the future. In the broader regional context, Iran will
return to being an ordinary state within its borders, its regime prohibited from
plotting and conspiring against neighboring Arab states in the Gulf and the
Levant. Many were surprised, and some were astonished, that the foundations of
the conflict and its declared causes were absent from the understandings signed
by US President Donald Trump and US President Donald Trump. And the Iranian
Masoud Pezeshkian. For Iran, the common reason for its conflict with Israel was
the occupation of Palestine and Jerusalem. With the aim of ending the occupation
and eliminating the Israeli state, Iran established Hezbollah and Iraqi
factions, and supported and sponsored Palestinian factions, uniting them all in
a common front to fight Israel and ultimately eradicate it.
In contrast, Israel developed a strategy based on defeating the Iranian project
and its offshoots, preventing the Iranian regime from acquiring nuclear weapons,
and ultimately bringing about regime change. The Israeli strategy against Iran
and its proxies was based on the continuous deterioration of US-Iranian
relations since the 1980s. These relations worsened after Khomeini seized power
in Tehran and his supporters occupied the US embassy and took its diplomats
hostage. From those early years, Khomeini's Iran engaged in hybrid
confrontations with the Americans. The bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut
in October 1983 was one of the most prominent of these confrontations, resulting
in the deaths of 241 American servicemen. One. And in the shadow of the
Iran-Iraq War, US-Iranian relations fluctuated between clashes and conspiracies
to supply Iran with weapons in what later became known as "Contragate," and then
Beirut turned into an arena for kidnapping Americans and Western nationals by
organizations established by Iranian agencies cooperating with the regime of
President Hafez al-Assad, who was allied with Tehran.
Divorce the "legitimate marriage of pleasure" with hell
Aql Al-Awit/Al-Nahar/June 22, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
This article is a message to the "victors" and "vanquished" in the divine wars
waged on Lebanon, especially to Israel, Iran, and the United States, and to
Hezbollah and its allies within Lebanon, and to all those who persist in
embroiling Lebanon in a poisoned and illusory victory, and remain silent about
it. How many are silent! The witness has the right to testify, whatever the
limits of the harshness with which he testifies; it is a noble harshness that
seeks neutrality and impartiality, and the salvation of the Lebanese ship and
all those aboard it, and it does not seek any benefit, nor does it harbor any
evil, nor does it incite one group against another, nor does it side with any
party or faction. Lebanon is in grave danger, and it will not survive this time,
as long as this reckless gamble continues in this apocalyptic and debauched
manner. And I bear witness: O you who continue, both abroad and within, to
embroil Lebanon in “victory” and “defeat,” you belong to Satan, for he is the
“god” of the henchmen of death, murder, evil, suicide, subservience, money,
weapons, sects, doctrines, and obscurantism. Congratulations on your "victory"
and "defeat." Lebanon does not want to participate in the "party," nor to be
fuel for any war, any war whatsoever. It is no longer acceptable for it to be
dragged into your wars and remain a hostage in your game, or in the game of
nations. Now, immediately, and without delay, it is imperative to extricate
Lebanon from this pathetic "victory" by neutralizing it both externally and
internally. Whoever rejoices in death should do so outside of Lebanon. And
whoever considers themselves victorious is utterly defeated. There is no victory
in bloodshed, nor triumph in destruction. Only by breaking free from the axes
that make Lebanon and its people fuel for a collective inferno can the country
be saved. And everyone who truly cares about Lebanon, starting with the state
(and its people), must realize that the hour of salvation through Lebanon's
neutrality is now. Let the era of Israel, Iran, the United States, weapons, and
the incitement of sectarian and religious factions against one another in
Lebanon end. Lebanon no longer wants to be It must not be a testing ground for
anyone, a mailbox for regional and international messages, or an arena for
settling scores between powers, states, and axes. Lebanon must not remain a
barricade, a trench, a battleground, or a pawn in the game of those who gamble
with the destinies of nations.
For those who care about Lebanon, look into the eyes of the dead, the slain, and
the martyrs; into the bereaved lands, the grieving homes, the mournful books,
the groans of the stones, and the tears of the trees; and into the eyes of those
exhausted by losses, disappointments, migrations, exiles, and desolate lands. We
can no longer bear more wars and futile, suicidal acts of heroism, nor more
"victories" and "defeats" that feed on our blood, our lives, our livelihoods,
and our children. We have paid more than any people should have to pay. We have
paid with our lives, our dreams, and the future of our children, while the
monsters, the monstrous, the ravens of gods, ideologies, axes, alignments, and
fanaticisms continue to divide the spoils of destruction. And distributing
defeats among the people as victories. We are all defeated. This is a call to
courage. Courage is not in suicide and glorifying weapons; it is the courage to
acknowledge that no one owns Lebanon, and that no one has the right to take it
hostage to their project, their ideology, or their gambles. And I, in an
unprecedentedly harsh tone, call upon the President of the Republic, the Prime
Minister, the government, the Speaker of Parliament, and the members of
Parliament to submit a request to the United Nations and the Security Council to
neutralize Lebanon, even if it requires Chapter VII, and to place it under
international control temporarily. And I say to the "victors" in Lebanon, as in
Washington, Tel Aviv, and Tehran, you are defeating Lebanon, the state, and us.
Nothing will remain for you or anyone else but a "murderous god," a wasteland,
shattered dreams, gaping graves, and the hallucinations of "you can stretch your
eyes and look." It is enough to turn Lebanon into a whore for legitimate
pleasure with hell. Nothing but the state. This is not for you or for us.
Neutralize Lebanon before it's too late!
La déconstruction de l'accord américano-iranien
Dr. Charles Chartouni/Ici Beyrouth/June 22/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155481/
Le décryptage de la diplomatie en cours nous renvoie à des retournements abrupts
qui remettent en cause les schémas d’explication du conflit en cours. Qu’est-ce
qui peut expliquer ce changement et quelle serait la finalité des négociations
projetées dans l’avenir immédiat ? Fallait-il passer par cet intermède et ses
conditions aléatoires pour reprendre les négociations ? Les réactions du côté
iranien sont de mauvais augure du fait que le régime campe sur ses positions et
ne semble pas changer de cap. Le triomphalisme creux fait écho à l’ambivalence
du régime, à la poursuite de la répression sauvage et à la stratégie galvaudée
du brouillage communicationnel.
Cette posture en dit énormément sur les dispositions du régime qui reste
inflexible sur son idéologie, alors que la diplomatie relève de l’histrionisme
le plus vulgaire. La diplomatie n’est, sous aucun rapport, reliée à un
changement de narratif ou à une volonté de paix. Le régime iranien n’est même
pas soucieux des effets destructeurs d’une guerre prolongée dont il se sert pour
mieux consolider son arbitraire au sein de l’Iran, et entretenir le climat
d’incertitude au niveau régional. En effet, il veut s’en servir pour enrayer sa
chute et jouer la carte de nouvelles alliances. Ces dernières l’aideraient à
contourner la présence américaine et à regagner sa latitude opérationnelle dès
lors que la coalition israélo-américaine s’est effilochée temporairement au
profit d’un interlude sécuritaire aux bornes imprécises.
La récapitulation des stipulations de cet arrangement sécuritaire procède à
partir des équivoques de la démarche d’ensemble : ce n'est ni un traité de paix,
ni une trêve entre armées. On est ici dans une zone d’indétermination
intentionnelle dont se sert le régime afin de maintenir sa latitude manœuvrière.
L’administration américaine se positionne à partir de son statut
d’acteur-guerrier, de diplomate-arbitre et négociateur de conflits, d’où les
équivoques de ce statut aux hybridations multiples. Les considérations
sous-jacentes sont les suivantes : 1/ La volonté américaine de mettre fin à la
guerre pour moult raisons ; 2/ l’intérêt du régime iranien à desserrer les étaux
qui le verrouillent de toutes parts ; 3/ les aléas stratégiques liés à la
gestion du détroit d’Ormuz et ses incidences sur la politique énergétique
mondiale ; 4/ les réagencements induits par la réunion du G7 et la nouvelle
architecture de défense transatlantique ; 5/ la redéfinition des priorités
stratégiques et sécuritaires des deux côtés, américain et israélien ; 6/
l’indétermination des engagements et la fluidité des cadres régulateurs des
négociations, d’où la crise de fiabilité qui les caractérise.
La labilité des cadres régulateurs nous renvoie aux questions suivantes :
1/ L'administration américaine ne tient pas compte de la victoire militaire et
minimise ses implications politiques et diplomatiques ;
2/ Les concessions concernant le détroit d'Ormuz sont inexpliquées, car la
prégnance du droit international est remplacée par le diktat iranien ;
3/ Le flou demeure quant à la question nucléaire, avec l’enrichissement et la
gestion des stocks d’uranium, la militarisation du nucléaire, ainsi que les
régimes d’inspection ;
4/ La levée hypothétique des sanctions financières, les enjeux de la
reconstruction, et les clauses de conditionnalité sont incertains ;
5/ Enfin, il y a l’occultation délibérée du peuple iranien, massacré et sacrifié
à une dictature meurtrière. Ce changement brutal est inexplicable sous l’angle
de la comptabilité démocratique ou de la mise en forme d’une diplomatie de
résolution des conflits.
Nous faisons face aux mêmes dilemmes qui ont prévalu tout au long de ce conflit.
Nous sommes également confrontés au climat d’incertitude qui a imprégné de
manière continue les rapports avec une dictature totalitaire qui opère sur la
base d’un continuum où les intérêts stratégiques et les lignes de clivage
idéologique se recoupent. Ceci nous amène à interroger la compatibilité d’une
diplomatie transactionnelle avec un impérialisme islamique de subversion.
L’intervalle des soixante jours est suffisamment étendu pour juger de
l’opportunité de cette démarche diplomatique et de son impact sur une aire
géopolitique en implosion. La critique est méthodologique au préalable dans la
mesure où les prémisses et les règles de conduite avancent de manière
désordonnée en l’absence d’un schéma régulateur qui permet d’éviter les
contradictions, les dérapages et les engagements sans lendemain. On a affaire à
des incohérences qui remettent en question la démarche dans son ensemble.
L’exemple de l'engagement diplomatique au sujet du Liban en est une
illustration. La dynamique avance de manière symétrique et insuffisamment
coordonnée entre deux trajectoires, celle des négociations américano-iraniennes
et libano-israéliennes. Autrement, l’appel lancé par le président Trump à
l’intervention du régime syrien afin de contenir les risques sécuritaires posés
par le Hezbollah est controversé à tous égards et renvoie à des contresens
stratégiques et constitutionnels. Il est inconcevable d’intégrer le Liban à la
mouvance stratégique iranienne à moins d’avaliser la mainmise de l’Iran et la
reconnaissance des relais politico-stratégiques institués par le régime iranien.
Il est impératif que les négociations libano-israéliennes se poursuivent sur une
base indépendante et que les enjeux soient traités de manière distincte. Ceci
nous ramène à la question méthodologique de départ, celle des prémisses, de leur
finalité et des logiciels mis en œuvre.
Cette rétrospective succincte soulève la question de l'opportunité de cette
démarche diplomatique, surtout que les enjeux militaires sont loin d'être
tranchés et que les dispositions du régime iranien demeurent problématiques.
L'arrêt inopportun de la guerre et ses effets pervers s'avèrent
contre-productifs quant à la possibilité d'une solution négociée. Quelles que
soient les objections faites à la guerre, elles sont difficiles à soutenir sans
propositions concrètes visant à éradiquer les causes d'un conflit aux enjeux à
la fois existentiels et stratégiques ; elles ne peuvent pas se réduire à des
pétitions de principe ou à des vœux pieux sans lendemain. Le report de la séance
de signature en Suisse met en lumière les difficultés d’une démarche
insuffisamment élaborée.
The Deconstruction of the US-Iranian Agreement
Dr. Charles Chartouni /June 22, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155481/
(Translated from French)
The deciphering of ongoing diplomacy points to abrupt reversals that challenge
the explanatory frameworks of the current conflict. What explains this shift,
and what would be the ultimate goal of the negotiations projected for the
immediate future? Was it necessary to go through this interlude and its
unpredictable conditions to resume negotiations? Reactions from the Iranian side
bode ill, as the regime is standing its ground and shows no signs of changing
course. Its hollow triumphalism echoes the regime’s ambivalence, the
continuation of savage repression, and the overused strategy of communication
blurring.
This stance speaks volumes about the disposition of a regime that remains
inflexible in its ideology, while its diplomacy amounts to the most vulgar
histrionics. Diplomacy is, by no account, linked to a change in narrative or a
desire for peace. The Iranian regime is not even concerned about the destructive
effects of a prolonged war, which it uses to better consolidate its arbitrary
rule within Iran and maintain a climate of regional uncertainty. Indeed, it
seeks to use it to halt its own downfall and play the card of new alliances. The
latter would help it bypass the American presence and regain its operational
latitude, now that the Israeli-American coalition has temporarily frayed in
favor of a security interlude with vague boundaries.
A review of the terms of this security arrangement stems from the ambiguities of
the overall approach: it is neither a peace treaty nor a truce between armies.
We are in a zone of intentional indeterminacy that the regime utilizes to
maintain its room for maneuver. The US administration positions itself based on
its status as a warrior-actor, diplomat-referee, and conflict negotiator—hence
the ambiguities of this highly hybridized status. The underlying considerations
are as follows: 1) The American desire to end the war for various reasons; 2)
The Iranian regime’s interest in loosening the tight grip locking it from all
sides; 3) The strategic uncertainties related to the management of the Strait of
Hormuz and its impact on global energy policy; 4) The realignments induced by
the G7 meeting and the new transatlantic defense architecture; 5) The
redefinition of strategic and security priorities on both the American and
Israeli sides; 6) The indeterminacy of commitments and the fluidity of the
regulatory frameworks governing the negotiations, which explains the crisis of
reliability characterizing them.
The instability of these regulatory frameworks brings us to the following
points:
The US administration is ignoring the military victory and minimizing its
political and diplomatic implications;
The concessions regarding the Strait of Hormuz are unexplained, as the weight of
international law is replaced by Iranian diktat;
Ambiguity remains regarding the nuclear issue, including uranium enrichment and
stockpile management, nuclear militarization, and inspection regimes;
The hypothetical lifting of financial sanctions, reconstruction issues, and
conditionality clauses remain uncertain;
Finally, there is the deliberate erasure of the Iranian people, massacred and
sacrificed to a murderous dictatorship. This brutal shift is inexplicable from
the standpoint of democratic accountability or the structuring of
conflict-resolution diplomacy.
We face the same dilemmas that have prevailed throughout this conflict. We are
also confronted with the climate of uncertainty that has continuously permeated
relations with a totalitarian dictatorship operating on a continuum where
strategic interests and ideological divides overlap. This leads us to question
the compatibility of transactional diplomacy with a subversive Islamic
imperialism. The sixty-day window is wide enough to judge the appropriateness of
this diplomatic approach and its impact on a geopolitical area in a state of
implosion. The critique is primarily methodological, as the premises and rules
of engagement advance in a disorganized manner without a regulatory framework to
prevent contradictions, missteps, and dead-end commitments. We are dealing with
inconsistencies that call the entire approach into question.
The example of diplomatic engagement regarding Lebanon serves as an
illustration. The dynamic moves symmetrically and with insufficient coordination
between two tracks: the US-Iranian negotiations and the Lebanese-Israeli
negotiations. Furthermore, President Trump’s call for the Syrian regime’s
intervention to contain the security risks posed by Hezbollah is controversial
in every respect, pointing to strategic and constitutional misconceptions. It is
inconceivable to integrate Lebanon into the Iranian strategic sphere unless one
endorses Iran’s stranglehold and recognizes the politico-strategic proxies
established by the Iranian regime. It is imperative that Lebanese-Israeli
negotiations continue on an independent basis and that the issues be treated
separately. This brings us back to the initial methodological question of
premises, objectives, and the underlying systems implemented.
This brief retrospective raises the question of the appropriateness of this
diplomatic approach, especially since the military stakes are far from settled
and the Iranian regime’s disposition remains problematic. The untimely cessation
of the war and its perverse effects are proving counterproductive to the
possibility of a negotiated solution. Whatever objections are raised against the
war, they are difficult to sustain without concrete proposals aimed at
eradicating the causes of a conflict with both existential and strategic stakes;
they cannot be reduced to principled platitudes or pious wishes with no future.
The postponement of the signing session in Switzerland highlights the
difficulties of an insufficiently developed approach.
MIGA: Making Iran's Regime Great Again': Why Many Arabs Vehemently Oppose
Trump's MOU
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/June 22, 2026
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22646/arabs-oppose-trump-iran-deal
[The Arabs'] objections are... the agreement strengthens Iran, weakens America's
credibility, ignores Tehran's regional proxies, and leaves America's allies
vulnerable.
"Trump and JD Vance are the OnlyFans of the Islamic regime in Iran. Trump
promised America First but delivered MIGA: Make Iran's Regime Great Again. In
this MOU, America's credibility was seated at the kids' table while the mullahs
got the VIP lounge.... It looks like date night with a regime that has spent
decades spreading war and misery across the Middle East." — Amjad Taha, Emirati
journalist, X, June 20, 2026.
"America is free to pursue its own interests with Iran in Geneva. But it has no
right to impose its decisions, laws, or interests on behalf of or upon any state
or people in the Middle East, including Israel, Syria, Lebanon, and others....
We understand the demons of the Middle East just as well as Trump understands
the hotels of New York." — Amjad Taha, X, June 20, 2026.
"To Trump: In the Middle East, loyalty is currency. If you abandon your closest
friend halfway through a fight and cut deals behind their back while leaving
them exposed, don't expect anyone to trust your guarantees again. You told the
world, 'The U.S. and Israel carried out an operation against Iran,' then walked
away and left your ally standing alone. In the Middle East... [a] person who
abandons an ally halfway and cuts deals behind their back is not someone you
call in a crisis.... You can call it 'America's interests.' We call it something
else: leaving your friends in the storm. Before asking, 'Why don't they defend
themselves?' remember that countries like Israel did and are still doing so
alone. And also remember that the UAE defended itself, struck back forcefully,
and banned the Muslim Brotherhood. Many of your countries in the West did
neither. The lesson is simple. If you can leave your closest friend exposed
today, why should anyone trust your promises tomorrow?... [W]hen Iran strikes
again, don't assume the Middle East will dial Washington. People don't call
someone who might leak information to Turkey or cut a deal with Tehran while
their friends are still under fire." — Amjad Taha, X, June 18, 2026.
[M]any Arabs [fear] that the agreement does not restrain Iran, but instead
rescues it.
Officials from the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Kuwait reportedly resent
being sidelined during the negotiations and complain that they were largely
excluded from discussions that directly affect their security.
"[A]ccording to multiple officials in the region who spoke with MS NOW: The
issue that posed the most immediate threat to Gulf security has largely been
left untouched. Iran's ballistic missile and drone programs — the very
capabilities used to strike airports, energy infrastructure, ports and U.S.
military bases across the region during the war — are absent from the
agreement." — MS NOW (formerly MSNBC) June 18, 2026.
"Vance's theory is that the Iranian regime will discover, through the Marshall
Plan-style economic bailout, that peace is its best option. Unfortunately, this
echoes what former President Obama said after the signing of the Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). In April 2015, he stated that the
agreement would 'strengthen the more moderate forces within Iran.' Obama's
theory was quickly proven wrong as the Iranian regime tightened its grip on its
citizens, taking advantage of its political victory and new money..." — Abdul
Rahman Al-Rashed, prominent Saudi former editor-in-chief of the newspaper Asharq
Al-Awsat, June 19, 2026.
""What the agreement would mean in this case is implicit American recognition of
it [Hezbollah] as a legitimate regional player, making any future pressure to
designate it as a terrorist organization or disarm it virtually impossible. We
must also remember that it would entrench the phenomenon of 'states within
states' in Lebanon, as well as in Yemen, and would threaten Iraq if it were
included in the agreement." — Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed, Asharq Al-Awsat, June 14,
2026.
If Hezbollah's role becomes linked to an American-Iranian understanding, Lebanon
risks remaining permanently hostage to Tehran's regional agenda.
"Lebanon is a strategic card in Tehran's hand, used to wage war against Israel
through Lebanon and to prevent the establishment of a fully sovereign Lebanese
state. More importantly, Tehran is determined to insert itself into any
American-Israeli arrangement for the regional order... the Lebanese state cannot
regain its sovereignty if military and security decisions remain in the hands of
a force linked to Tehran." — Raghida Dergham, Lebanese journalist, An Nahar,
June 21, 2026.
While the deal addresses certain nuclear issues, it does not dismantle
Hezbollah. It does not dismantle the Houthi militia in Yemen. It does not
eliminate Hamas in the Gaza Strip. It does not end Iran's sponsorship of
terrorist organizations and militias. It does not even end Iran's uranium
enrichment, its development of nuclear weapons, or its ballistic missile and
drone programs.
Washington is distancing itself from its closest ally while accommodating one of
its most determined enemies.
Against this backdrop, many Arabs, like many Israelis, view any agreement that
leaves the Iranian regime and its proxy network intact not as a diplomatic
breakthrough, but as a dangerous illusion.
The real question is not whether the agreement will temporarily reduce tensions.
The real question is whether it will make the Middle East safer. Many Arabs
increasingly believe the answer is no.
Many Arabs, including prominent Gulf analysts, academics, former officials, and
Lebanese commentators, have publicly voiced concerns about the Memorandum of
Understanding between the United States and the Iranian regime. Their objections
are that the agreement strengthens Iran, weakens America's credibility, ignores
Tehran's regional proxies, and leaves America's allies vulnerable. Pictured: US
Vice President JD Vance, Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif (center) and
Qatar's Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim al-Thani at a
negotiating session between the United States and Iran, near Lake Lucerne,
Switzerland, on June 21, 2026. (Photo by Nathan Howard/Pool/AFP via Getty
Images)
The prevailing narrative in much of the Western media is that opposition to US
President Donald J. Trump's new agreement with Iran comes primarily from Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his supporters.
This narrative is false.
Many Arabs, including prominent Gulf analysts, academics, former officials, and
Lebanese commentators, have publicly voiced concerns about the Memorandum of
Understanding between the United States and the Iranian regime. Their objections
are strikingly similar to those expressed in Israel: the agreement strengthens
Iran, weakens America's credibility, ignores Tehran's regional proxies, and
leaves America's allies vulnerable.
The concerns are especially pronounced in the Gulf states and Lebanon, where
people have firsthand experience with Iran's destabilizing activities.
Emirati political analyst Amjad Taha sharply criticized the agreement, writing
in a June 17 X post: "Out of 8.3 billion people on Earth, only two seem to trust
Iran: Trump and JD Vance."
On June 20, he posted:
"Trump and JD Vance are the OnlyFans of the Islamic regime in Iran. Trump
promised America First but delivered MIGA: Make Iran's Regime Great Again. In
this MOU, America's credibility was seated at the kids' table while the mullahs
got the VIP lounge. And Geneva? It no longer looks like negotiations. It looks
like date night with a regime that has spent decades spreading war and misery
across the Middle East. Either this is diplomacy from another planet, or someone
brought a magic wand to the negotiating table."
In another post the same day, Taha commented:
"America is free to pursue its own interests with Iran in Geneva. But it has no
right to impose its decisions, laws, or interests on behalf of or upon any state
or people in the Middle East, including Israel, Syria, Lebanon, and others. In
the Middle East, we know our devils. We knew that negotiating with Saddam
Hussein would not stop him from invading Kuwait. We know that making peace with
Al-Qaeda would not prevent 9/11. We know that giving Hamas territory would not
stop another October 7. We understand the demons of the Middle East just as well
as Trump understands the hotels of New York."
On June 18, Taha criticized the Trump administration for abandoning its allies
in the Middle East, including Israel:
"To Trump: In the Middle East, loyalty is currency. If you abandon your closest
friend halfway through a fight and cut deals behind their back while leaving
them exposed, don't expect anyone to trust your guarantees again. You told the
world, 'The U.S. and Israel carried out an operation against Iran,' then walked
away and left your ally standing alone.
"In the Middle East, we don't judge friends by speeches; we judge them by who
stays when the missiles fly. A person who abandons an ally halfway and cuts
deals behind their back is not someone you call in a crisis.
You will say it's about American interests. Fine. But others also have
interests, and they have memories. You can call it 'America's interests.' We
call it something else: leaving your friends in the storm.
"Before asking, 'Why don't they defend themselves?' remember that countries like
Israel did and are still doing so alone.
"And also remember that the UAE defended itself, struck back forcefully, and
banned the Muslim Brotherhood. Many of your countries in the West did neither.
"The lesson is simple. If you can leave your closest friend exposed today, why
should anyone trust your promises tomorrow? Maybe it's time for the Middle East
to start thinking about alternatives.
"And yes, when Iran strikes again, don't assume the Middle East will dial
Washington. People don't call someone who might leak information to Turkey or
cut a deal with Tehran while their friends are still under fire."
Taha's warning reflects widespread fear among many Arabs that the agreement does
not restrain Iran, but instead rescues it.
Officials from the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Kuwait reportedly resent
being sidelined during the negotiations and complain that they were largely
excluded from discussions that directly affect their security.
Many Gulf officials are particularly alarmed that the agreement fails to address
Iran's ballistic missile and drone programs.
According to MS NOW (formerly MSNBC):
"One senior official from the United Arab Emirates described the mood to MS NOW
as 'complete disappointment.' The reason is simple, according to multiple
officials in the region who spoke with MS NOW: The issue that posed the most
immediate threat to Gulf security has largely been left untouched. Iran's
ballistic missile and drone programs — the very capabilities used to strike
airports, energy infrastructure, ports and U.S. military bases across the region
during the war — are absent from the agreement."
Dr. Bader Al-Seif, a professor at Kuwait University, publicly questioned
Washington's commitment to its traditional Arab allies. The omission of missiles
and drones from the agreement, he argued, suggests that the United States
"doesn't have our best interests in mind."
Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed, a prominent Saudi media figure and former
editor-in-chief of Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper, wrote on June 19 that the
agreement rehabilitates the Tehran regime as a regional power:
"Vance's theory is that the Iranian regime will discover, through the Marshall
Plan-style economic bailout, that peace is its best option. Unfortunately, this
echoes what former President Obama said after the signing of the Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). In April 2015, he stated that the
agreement would 'strengthen the more moderate forces within Iran.' Obama's
theory was quickly proven wrong as the Iranian regime tightened its grip on its
citizens, taking advantage of its political victory and new money, and the Quds
Force and Qassem Soleimani penetrated beyond the borders of his country, and
militias poured into Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and elsewhere."
Al-Rashed pointed out that most of the funds Tehran will be able to access in
the coming weeks will likely go first to bolstering the regime's military
capabilities, rather than helping Iran's civilian population:
"The Iranian leadership fears the possibility of renewed war, and its political
doctrine views Iran as a military power, dedicating all its resources to this
strategy. Tehran's new leadership will need huge sums to rebuild its defensive
and offensive capabilities, using what it will obtain under the agreement from
frozen funds and large oil sales at high prices."
The concerns are perhaps even more pronounced in Lebanon, where many fear that
the agreement effectively legitimizes Hezbollah's status as an armed state
within a state.
On June 14, Al-Rashed warned that the Iran deal would "entrench the legitimacy
of militias such as Hezbollah."
"What the agreement would mean in this case is implicit American recognition of
it [Hezbollah] as a legitimate regional player, making any future pressure to
designate it as a terrorist organization or disarm it virtually impossible. We
must also remember that it would entrench the phenomenon of 'states within
states' in Lebanon, as well as in Yemen, and would threaten Iraq if it were
included in the agreement. The American negotiators may be aiming for
appeasement and to buy time, confident that Iran will change, and that the
proposed agreement will pave the way for a broader peace that ends numerous
conflicts, not just opens the Strait of Hormuz. I am not certain of such a rapid
change. The Iranian regime is deeply entrenched, and it will take time before we
see it transform."
If Hezbollah's role becomes linked to an American-Iranian understanding, Lebanon
risks remaining permanently hostage to Tehran's regional agenda.
As Lebanese journalist Raghida Dergham noted:
"Lebanon is a strategic card in Tehran's hand, used to wage war against Israel
through Lebanon and to prevent the establishment of a fully sovereign Lebanese
state. More importantly, Tehran is determined to insert itself into any
American-Israeli arrangement for the regional order, confident in its ability to
now rival Israel in its standing with Donald Trump.
"In other words, Iran does not want Lebanon outside of American-Iranian
understandings because it believes that the Lebanese card grants it a
negotiating position that transcends Lebanon's own size. It uses Hezbollah not
only to threaten Israel, but also to compete with Israel for influence with the
United States.
"Whenever Washington needs to control the Lebanese front, ensure the success of
Lebanese-Israeli negotiations, or guarantee an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese
territory, it turns to Tehran. Herein lies the essence of the Iranian game: to
make itself an indispensable conduit for any arrangement in Lebanon, as well as
any regional arrangement.... the Lebanese state cannot regain its sovereignty if
military and security decisions remain in the hands of a force linked to
Tehran."
The broader regional concern is that the agreement leaves untouched the network
of Iranian proxies that has been responsible for much of the Middle East's
instability over the past few decades.
While the deal addresses certain nuclear issues, it does not dismantle
Hezbollah. It does not dismantle the Houthi militia in Yemen. It does not
eliminate Hamas in the Gaza Strip. It does not end Iran's sponsorship of
terrorist organizations and militias. It does not even end Iran's uranium
enrichment, its development of nuclear weapons, or its ballistic missile and
drone programs.
Perhaps most troubling is the message the agreement sends throughout the region.
Iran and its proxies are already portraying the deal as a victory. The
perception that Iran forced Washington into concessions no doubt emboldens
jihadist groups that believe they have defeated both the United States and
Israel.
The public friction between the Trump Administration and the Israeli government
only reinforces that perception. Such disputes send a message to America's
enemies: Washington is distancing itself from its closest ally while
accommodating one of its most determined enemies.
Against this backdrop, many Arabs, like many Israelis, view any agreement that
leaves the Iranian regime and its proxy network intact not as a diplomatic
breakthrough, but as a dangerous illusion.
The real question is not whether the agreement will temporarily reduce tensions.
The real question is whether it will make the Middle East safer. Many Arabs
increasingly believe the answer is no.
**Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.
Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter)
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No
part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied
or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
Selected Face Book & X tweets on 22 June/2026
Jonathan Elkhoury- جوناثان الخوري
Translated from Hebrew
What's amazing in recent days is the official unity between the leadership in
Lebanon and Israel, who will conduct the negotiations between them without
external intervention or external decisions, especially from Iran. Countless
statements from Lebanese politicians today, exactly on this issue.
The real question: Is there anyone listening?
ܬܐܘܕܪܘܣ ܒܪܝܘܠܝܘܣ ܐܠܟܣܢܕܪ Amine Bar-Julius Iskandar
Thank you, Senator
@LindseyGrahamSC
, for being one of the most outspoken advocates for Lebanon and for the
Christians of the Levant.
Your consistent support for freedom, stability, and the preservation of the
region’s historic Christian communities is deeply appreciated. At a time of
immense challenges, your voice continues to bring attention to issues that many
choose to ignore.
Political Pen
https://x.com/politicalpen_/status/2068805007139320137/video/1
U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham:
“To Lebanon, to the people in Lebanon, help is on the way.
Hezbollah has been terrorizing your country for a long time, that's abou
Political Pen
A Message from Geagea to U.S. Vice President
Lebanese Forces Party leader Samir Geagea sent a message to U.S. Vice President
J.D. Vance, thanking him for his interest in Lebanon's Christians. He added that
Hezbollah has contributed to the seizure of the national decision-making process
and the weakening of legitimate institutions. Geagea stated that “the greatest
contribution the United States can make to Lebanon at this stage is to support
the Lebanese state and its institutions while ensuring that all arms are held
exclusively by the state.”
Ambassador Yechiel (Michael) Leiter
Hezbollah’s terror tunnel network took years to build - and substantial
financial backing from Iran to pay for. The goal was clear: prepare for an
invasion into Israel. We saw what it looked like on October 7th. Israel will not
have jihadi terrorists on our border. Period.
Fouad Makhzoumi
Lebanon cannot reclaim its sovereignty and independent national decision-making
as long as Hezbollah’s weapons remain outside the authority of the state, and as
long as decisions of war and peace are made outside the country’s legitimate
institutions.
I call on the Lebanese state to deploy the Lebanese Army throughout the Nabatieh
region and along the areas adjacent to positions that remain under Israeli
control, in order to prevent any military actions or provocations that could
provide Israel with additional pretexts to expand its military presence, in
parallel with an Israeli withdrawal from occupied Lebanese territory and the
deployment of the Lebanese Army in those areas. The restoration of state
authority begins in the South, through ensuring that all arms are exclusively in
the hands of the Lebanese Army and the legitimate security forces, and through
extending the authority of the state across its entire territory. There can be
no genuine sovereignty except through one state, one army, and one national
decision.
Lindsey Graham
If you’re looking for a U.S. Senator who understands the real nature of the
Iranian regime and the way forward for the United States, this is a must-watch
interview.
Simply put Senator @TimSheehyMT nailed it when he said the goal of the Iranian
theocracy is to create a master religion for the world. As Senator Sheehy said,
this isn’t what he thinks, it’s what Iran believes and they are acting on those
beliefs every day.Tim is a former Navy Seal and knows the dynamics in the region
as well as anyone I’ve ever met. Great interview. Very much worth watching.
Dr Walid Phares
A Table for all...
If the deal being discussed in Switzerland is about "Peace" why aren't Lebanon,
Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Saudi, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Israel, "Kurdistan", invited?
Each one of these countries and communities was targeted with missiles, drones,
artillery, militias, assassinations, and more. All victims of regime targeting
should be at the table.
TheJewishAlly
Former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who also served as CIA director,
wrote to Trump: “As CIA director, I saw with my own eyes how many American lives
were saved thanks to Israeli intelligence. We must not forget who our friends
are and who our enemies are. The bond between the United States and Israel is of
tremendous value to both partners.”
@ sinai_project_com