English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For June 28/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.june28.26.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
I am sending you out like sheep into the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Matthew 10/16-25:”‘See, I am sending you out like sheep into the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Beware of them, for they will hand you over to councils and flog you in their synagogues; and you will be dragged before governors and kings because of me, as a testimony to them and the Gentiles. When they hand you over, do not worry about how you are to speak or what you are to say; for what you are to say will be given to you at that time; for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. 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. When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next; for truly I tell you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes. ‘A disciple is not above the teacher, nor a slave above the master; it is enough for the disciple to be like the teacher, and the slave like the master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household!”

Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 27-28 June/2026
In Memory of Blessed Father Yaacoub the Capuchin, The Mind of Christ Written in Deeds and Mercy/Elias Bejjani/June 26/ 2026
The Jihadists of Political Islam, Both Sunni and Shiite, Are Dragging the Middle East Back to the Stone Age/Elias Bejjani/June 26/2026
Nadim Koteich reads in "The Washington framework signed between Israel, Lebanon, and the US"
Video link and complete text of a highly important commentary by journalist Ali Hamadeh
Video Link to an Interview with Hassan Abdul-Hussein, a researcher at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Hotline between the Israeli and Lebanese Armies?
Netanyahu Calls Agreement with Lebanon “Historic”... Ben-Gvir Deems it a “Grave Mistake”
Katz: Army Orders to Prepare for a 'Long Stay' in Lebanon... Vows a 'Strong Response' if Iran Attacks Israel
Widespread Lebanese Welcome for the Framework Agreement... Emphasis on Restoring the State, Sovereignty, and the State's Monopoly on Weapons
Trump Calls Aoun: See You Soon and I Will Support Lebanon
Berri: Oh my people in Lebanon, all of Lebanon, this is sedition!
Berri raises the banners of political objection… and calls for calming the streets… He told Asharq Al-Awsat: “I read the agreement… and I saw sedition in it.”
Lebanese Army Warns Against Any Reckless Actions Threatening Civil Peace / Lebanese Army: We Will Not Allow Any Breach of Security
Egypt Welcomes the "Lebanon Framework" and Calls for a "Gradual" Israeli Withdrawal, Affirming Full Support for the Army's Control
Pope Leo XIV Concludes Cardinals' Meeting and Meets with Patriarch Rai: God Desires Peace for Every Nation and Every People
Free Patriotic Movement on Framework Agreement: It Does Not Mention Israeli Withdrawal from Lebanese Territory
Qabalan on the agreement between Lebanon and Israel: This heinous deal will not pass.
Jumblatt: The strange thing about the framework agreement is the omission of the Armistice Agreement.
Raad: The Framework Agreement is a “Doomsday” for Lebanon and the Region
Qassem: Linking Israeli Withdrawal to Hezbollah's Disarmament Crosses Red Lines

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 27-28 June/2026
The Desired Peace/Nawal Al-Jabr/Elaph Website/June 26, 2026
Iran's 'Deal': What Happens After Trump?/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Gatestone Institute/June 27, 2026
The Mufti as a Prisoner/Samir Attallah/Al-Sharq Al-Awsat/June 27, 2026
War, the Gulf States, and the Balance of Gains and Losses/Mishari Al-Zaydi/Al-Sharq Al-Awsat/June 27, 2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on 27 June/2026

Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 27-28 June/2026
In Memory of Blessed Father Yaacoub the Capuchin, The Mind of Christ Written in Deeds and Mercy
Elias Bejjani/June 26/ 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155563/
In the spiritual depths of Christianity, faith does not stop at the boundaries of theoretical contemplation or passing emotional sentiments. Rather, it is a permanent movement of love—constantly ascending toward God and constantly bending down toward humanity. Saint James formulated this essential truth with a decisive, definitive phrase in his epistle when he said: “Faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead” (James 2:17).
This living faith, which does not settle for saying “Lord, Lord,” is the very divine spark that ignited the heart of Blessed Father Yaacoub the Capuchin. Khalil Haddad (Father Yaacoub) was not a monk who locked the Gospel between the covers of a book; rather, he embodied it as a “living Gospel” walking upon the earth. He realized that words without actions are an empty echo, so he translated his watchful prayers into writing—penned with the sweat of his brow and the tears of service—upon the bodies of the sick, the tears of the hungry, the elderly priests, and the abandoned.
The faith-driven motivation for Father Yaacoub sprang from seeing the face of Christ mysteriously present in every broken human being. He did not view a psychiatric patient at “The Convent of the Cross” or an elderly priest at “Christ the King” as a social burden. Instead, he saw Christ Himself in them, who said: “Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me” (Matthew 25:40). Therefore, his faith transformed into a silent, mighty “revolution of love,” mirroring the commandment of John the Apostle: “Let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth” (1 John 3:18).
Identity and Roots: Who is Khalil Haddad?
Blessed Father Yaacoub the Capuchin (Khalil Haddad) whose feast the Church celebrates today was born in the historic Keserwan town of Ghazir, Lebanon, on February 01, 1875. His real name before donning the monastic habit was Khalil Haddad. Khalil grew up in a pious family that taught him the love of God and self-sacrificing service. He received his early education in the town’s school, then moved to La Sagesse (Al-Hikma) School in Beirut, where he stood out for his sharp intelligence and linguistic eloquence. In the midst of his successes, he felt a powerful monastic calling pressing upon his heart. He did not hesitate; he chose the path of poverty, humility, and hard labor with the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin.
The Secret of the Altar: When and how was he ordained a priest?
After completing his deep monastic and theological studies and professing his solemn vows, Khalil Haddad was ordained a priest on November 01, 1901, in the Church of Saint Anthony of Padua of the Capuchin Fathers in Beirut. On that sacred day, he took the name “Father Yaacoub” (known popularly as “Abouna Yaacoub”). From the moment he wore the priestly vestments, he launched into a continuous workshop of spiritual and social labor whose flame never dimmed throughout the long decades of his life.
A Revolution of Love: What are his most prominent achievements?
Father Yaacoub was not a monk content with contemplative prayers within the walls of a cell; he was a man of the field who ran after human pain wherever it was found. The medical and educational institutions he scattered across the hills of Lebanon were not merely administrative achievements, but a practical rendering of his deep-rooted faith. Among his most prominent achievements were:
*Establishing the Congregation of the Franciscan Sisters of the Cross (1930): Which became the executive and spiritual arm managing his massive institutions and caring for the abandoned.
*Launching a Comprehensive Educational Renaissance: By establishing free schools in remote villages and towns to empower children of the poor classes to receive an education.
*Establishing the “Library of Love”: As a tool to spread culture, awareness, and spiritual and moral literacy.
*Building the Monument of “Our Lady of the Mountain” and the “Shrine of the Cross of Lebanon”: In the Jal El Dib region, to serve as a unifying spiritual beacon gathering the Lebanese people around the Cross.
Citadels of Humanity: The institutions he built and helped launch
He believed that every stone he raised to shelter an orphan or an elderly person was a physical prayer ascending to heaven. By virtue of this faith, Father Yaacoub became a complete “social and health safety net” embodied in a single man. Here are the humanitarian citadels he constructed:
*The Convent of the Cross Hospital (Jal El Dib): The most prominent and largest institution, dedicated to receiving psychiatric and mental health patients, as well as those abandoned on the streets whom society had cast away and who had no breadwinner.
*Our Lady of the Sea Hospital (Byblos/Jbeil): A distinguished health center fully dedicated to the care of chronic patients and the elderly.
*Saint Joseph Hospital and School (Dora): To serve working-class and poor families in the suburbs of Beirut, securing free medical care and education for their children.
*Christ the King Convent (Zouk Mosbeh): A unique, exceptional institution dedicated exclusively to housing elderly and sick priests and monks, honoring their old age and long service to the parish.
*Our Lady of Hope Hospital (Baalbek): To extend the bridges of care and medical services to the beloved Beqaa region.
*The Home for the Elderly (Al-Mina, Tripoli): To serve the elderly and the homeless abandoned in northern Lebanon.
*Free Schools: He founded more than 15 free schools in various Lebanese regions to support the families most in need.
The Embracing Father: The humanitarian role of Yaacoub the Capuchin
Father Yaacoub’s role as a true social safety valve manifested during difficult periods that Lebanon endured, particularly following the aftermath of World War I and the Great Famine. He never discriminated based on sect, denomination, or religion. He used to roam the country gathering donations with the boldness of a defender of truth and the humility of a monk, until he was nicknamed in popular circles as the “Beggar of Charity.” Through his life, he proved that a priest is not just someone who preaches from a pulpit, but someone who washes the wounds of humanity with the shroud of mercy, walking in the footsteps of his Master who “went about doing good” (Acts 10:38). He focused his utmost attention on the groups from which society turned away in shame or marginalized, restoring human dignity to their hearts.
The Crossing to Heaven: A legacy renewed every year
After a journey filled with total self-giving and supreme benevolence, Father Yaacoub the Capuchin slept in the odor of sanctity on June 26, 1954, at the age of 79. Given his pure life overflowing with miracles and signs of grace, Pope Benedict XVI declared him Blessed upon the altars of the Universal Catholic Church in a historic and solemn celebration witnessed at Martyrs’ Square in Beirut on June 22, 2008. The Church designated June 26 as his annual feast day, which is the day of his crossing into the heavenly chambers.
Father Yaacoub the Capuchin remains the greatest witness in our modern history that deeds are the soul and pulse of faith, and that true faith is the one that speaks the language of tireless giving.
The Prayer of Father Yaacoub from His Heavenly Abode for Suffering Lebanon
From the heights of your heaven, O Father of the Poor and Apostle of Mercy, where you stand today alongside the righteous and the saints in the presence of the Lord of Glory, look down with a tender, fatherly gaze upon your homeland, which lies beneath the Golgotha of pain. Lebanon—whose hills you stamped with the kisses of prayer and above whose peaks you raised the Cross of Redemption—groans today under the weight of suffering, its dignity gnawed at by forces of occupation, injustice, and displacement.
O Beggar of Charity, we implore you today to be our fervent intercessor before the Divine Throne:
Intercede for the suffering and the displaced: O you who sheltered the abandoned without a home, wipe away the tears of families that have been displaced, protect the children whose innocence has been stolen, and be a support for every soul broken by hunger and oppression.
Liberate this occupied nation: O you who fought with your free faith against injustice and reliance on mortals, pray so that Lebanon may shake off from its shoulders the dust of dependency and occupation, and that its plundered sovereignty and dignity may return to it, so that it remains a nation of freedom and a message.
Cultivate within us the spirit of solidarity and action: Just as you transformed your faith into citadels of mercy and institutions, pray so that faith does not die in our hearts, but rather embodies itself in deeds of love and steadfastness, so that we may support one of another in these difficult days.
O our Father Yaacoub, you who closed your eyes upon the land of Lebanon while commanding love, do not leave the Land of the Cedars to fall into the abyss of oblivion. Be a safety valve for us from your heavenly abode, and pray to Christ the King to dispel the darkness of this long night, so that Lebanon may rise from the tomb of its suffering victorious, with a glorious resurrection that bears witness to the power of life and truth.
Amen.
NB: The information in this study is cited from various documented ecclesiastical, theological, research, and media references.

The Jihadists of Political Islam, Both Sunni and Shiite, Are Dragging the Middle East Back to the Stone Age
Elias Bejjani/June 26/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155539/
The catastrophe caused by those who are intellectually and culturally backward—the flag-bearers of Takfirism (excommunication) and fundamentalism—represents an overt practice of the culture of death and barbarism. In their dictionary, a human being is a creature stripped of any distinction that separates them from non-human entities. In their culture, human life carries no value, no dignity, no freedom, no sanctity, and no rights. Today, Takfiri and fundamentalist groups spread corruption, murder, destruction, and displacement across Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and Egypt, as well as several African nations, committing the most heinous massacres against humanity.
The forced displacement of Christians from Arab and Islamic countries is an inherently barbaric act. It is a fully-fledged crime entirely devoid of ethics, civilization, faith, and the fear of God. These groups are nothing more than instruments of slaughter, completely detached from human nature after stripping themselves of their own humanity.
One of the most profound tragedies witnessed by the Middle East in recent decades is the accelerating collapse of the historic Christian presence. From Iraq to Syria, Egypt to Gaza, and onward to Sudan, Nigeria, Turkey, and Lebanon, the Christian presence is tragically receding under the weight of religious violence, extremism, and the rise of Political Islam in its various jihadist manifestations.
Political Islam, in both its Sunni and Shiite schools, has fostered a hostile environment for religious and cultural pluralism. While Sunni Takfiri groups raised the banners of jihad, slaughter, and religious cleansing, armed Shiite factions practiced an equally dangerous sectarian approach and dominance across multiple Arab arenas. The ultimate result has been the displacement of millions, the destruction of historical communities, and the undermining of the foundations of coexistence.
In Iraq: Christians faced one of the largest uprooting operations in their modern history. Ancient towns and villages in Mosul and the Nineveh Plains were emptied of their inhabitants following terror campaigns led by jihadist organizations. Properties were confiscated, churches were torched, and families were forced to choose between displacement or death.
In Syria: The war and the rise of extremist Islamic factions drove massive numbers of Christians to emigrate. Historic Christian towns faced attacks, kidnappings, and extortion, as the Takfiri ideology transformed into a destructive force against all forms of pluralism and openness.
In Egypt: For decades, Copts have lived under the threat of sectarian assaults and terrorist attacks targeting churches, worshippers, and clergy. Despite official and security efforts, fears persist regarding an extremist ideology that views Christians as second-class citizens.
In Gaza: The Christian presence has shrunk dramatically due to being caught between the hammer of violence and wars, Islamist control, and ongoing conflict, forcing the vast majority to emigrate in search of safety.
In Turkey: The Christian presence (comprising Armenians, Greeks, and Syriacs) has dwindled to a tiny fraction of the population after a century of upheavals, displacement, and profound demographic shifts.
In Africa (Sudan and Nigeria): Decades of political Islamization contributed to tearing Sudan apart and weakening its Christian presence. Meanwhile, armed jihadist groups in Nigeria continue to attack villages and churches to sow terror across vast regions.
This catastrophe is not confined to the Middle East and Africa. Many critics of Political Islam argue that certain Islamist movements in the West seek to export these conflicts to Western societies by demanding special religious privileges or seeking to impose social and cultural norms derived from Islamic Sharia onto societies fundamentally built on secularism, democracy, and individual liberties. The danger here lies not in Muslims as individuals and citizens, but in the political ideologies that prioritize ideological allegiance over the values of citizenship and integration.
Consequently, defending persecuted Christians and minorities is not a sectarian religious issue; it is a human, cultural, and moral cause. Societies from which diversity is expelled and where religious freedoms are suppressed are societies inevitably marching toward tyranny and collapse. The Middle East will not rise as long as it remains captive to the culture of Takfirism, sectarianism, jihad, and fundamentalism. There is no future for stability except through the establishment of civil states that respect human beings, safeguard freedoms, and place the law above all religious ideologies.
The Reality of Christians in the “Land of the Cedars”
In Lebanon, facts indicate that Christians face a gradual existential threat that is no longer limited to emigration and declining numbers, but now directly endangers their land, identity, and political role. Over the past decades, large-scale demographic changes have escalated through the transfer of real estate ownership—by coercion, intimidation, or financial inducements—in predominantly Christian areas to entities linked to the political, financial, and military influence of the Shiite Duo (Amal Movement and Hezbollah).
In this context, the area known today as the Southern Suburbs of Beirut historically encompassed vast expanses and towns of a distinctly Christian character before wars, displacement, and security, political, and economic pressures led to a massive shift in its demographic fabric. Today, warnings are repeatedly raised regarding intensive purchasing operations and the expropriation of properties and real estate in regions across Keserwan, Jbeil, the Beqaa, the South, and Mount Lebanon, as part of a long-term demographic plan aimed at expanding the spheres of influence belonging to the Shiite Duo.
The existence of Hezbollah as a military and security force parallel to the state—and indeed, one that hijacks its decision-making—has created an imbalanced reality. This has left many Christians and other Lebanese powerless to confront the real estate, security, and political expansion practiced by the Iranian axis. The continuation of this trajectory threatens historic Lebanese pluralism and undermines the national partnership upon which Greater Lebanon was founded since its inception.
In conclusion: Protecting the Christian presence in Lebanon cannot be achieved through slogans, dhimmitude (subservience), and turning a blind eye to the frightening and terrorizing realities practiced by Christian political leaders and the clerical shepherds of their churches. Instead, it requires enforcing the state’s full sovereignty over all Lebanese territory, restricting weapons exclusively to legitimate state institutions, and preventing any disguised demographic changes imposed by force of influence or skewed power balances. This is vital to safeguarding the right of all Lebanese to remain in their land and preserve their historical identity and heritage.

Nadim Koteich reads in "The Washington framework signed between Israel, Lebanon, and the US"
Nadim Koteich/X platformam/June 27/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155586/
The Washington framework signed between Israel, Lebanon, and the US is being read as a ceasefire document. However, reading the whole text now, it’s actually a legal architecture for the end of the resistance paradigm.
Article 4: Lebanon doesn't just accept disarmament, it requests it. "The Government of Lebanon herewith requests the support of international and particularly Arab partners, under the leadership of the United States, to achieve this outcome." A sovereign state formally requesting external help to disarm a group on its own territory, in a signed trilateral document. That is legally and politically without precedent in Lebanese history.
3/9 Article 6 is a direct legal nullification of the "resistance" doctrine. Lebanon declares that any claim by any state or non-state actor to exercise a military or security role on its behalf "is illegal per the decisions of the Lebanese Government and contrary to Lebanese national interests." That sentence retroactively criminalizes Hezbollah's entire institutional self-justification under Lebanese law.
Article 7 goes further: "no third party may exercise the right of self-defense on their behalf." One sentence aimed simultaneously at Hezbollah acting on Lebanon's behalf and at Iran acting through Hezbollah. The Islamic Republic's military franchise in Lebanon is now illegal under Lebanese sovereign law, signed, witnessed, and deposited in Washington.
Hezbollah's response confirms they read it the same way. MP Hassan Fadlallah and apparently the speaker of the house Nabih Berri said this agreement is a prelude to civil. When a non-state actor and its allies have to threaten civil war to stop a sovereign state from signing a peace framework, that group have already lost their political legitimacy. The threat is the admission.
Article 11: Lebanon commits to blocking funds from flowing to Hezbollah-affiliated entities and to take "available legal measures to proscribe" them. This is an anti-financing commitment embedded in a bilateral framework, that gives Washington and the EU legal and political basis to press Beirut on Hezbollah's funding networks. The financial siege now has a treaty foundation.
Article 13 — the return of remains and release of detainees — is normalization language. It appears in peace treaties, not ceasefire agreements. Its presence here means the drafters are consciously building toward a full peace architecture. The word "irreversible" appears in Article 1. That word does not belong in temporary arrangements.
The central vulnerability: Article 2 conditions IDF redeployment on "verified disarmament." The verification mechanism is to be detailed in a Security Annex, not yet written. The framework signs the political commitment. The annex determines whether it's enforceable. Everything rides on a document that doesn't exist yet. That is the gap Hezbollah will try to live in.
9/9 Bottom line: this is not a ceasefire with better branding. Articles 4, 6, and 7 together constitute Hezbollah's institutional death warrant under Lebanese law. The question is no longer about legitimacy, which Hezbollah totally lost today on paper. The question is enforcement capacity. And that answer still lives in the unwritten Security Annex, and the grander geopolitical context.

Video link and complete text of a highly important commentary by journalist Ali Hamadeh from his YouTube channel, analyzing the potential stances of Berri, Hezbollah, and Iran in response to the Framework Agreement between Lebanon, Israel, and the United States: Stances of terrorism, sedition, coups, violence, chaos, and potentially assassinations.
LCCC/June 27, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155591/
Summary of the headlines featured by journalist Ali Hamadeh alongside the video on YouTube:
Washington: Observers expect the Party [Hezbollah] to resort to violence.
Observers believe that the Party may resort to violence and security operations in an attempt to abort the agreement. What are the options?
A widespread campaign by the Party, Speaker Nabih Berri, and the Amal Movement against the Tripartite Lebanese-Israeli-American Framework Agreement signed yesterday in Washington.
Speaker Nabih Berri: “It is sedition (Al-Fitna)!”
Sheikh Naim Qassem: “Retract your sins that are destroying the country.”
MP Mohammad Raad: “The authority is complicit with the enemy…”
Calls for the Party’s constituency in the Southern Suburbs of Beirut (Dahiyeh) to gather and march toward downtown Beirut to “overthrow the government”!

Video Link to an Interview with Hassan Abdul-Hussein, a researcher at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
LCCC/June 27/2026
A link to a video and full transcript of an important interview with Hassan Abdul-Hussein, a researcher at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, discussing the background and future of the framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel, the roles of the US, Iran, and Hezbollah in the coming phase, Hezbollah's weapons, the role of the Lebanese army, US distrust of General Rudolph Haykal, upcoming sanctions on Lebanese security and political figures, and the prospects for Aoun's visit to Washington.
The interview was conducted by journalist Fadi Shahwan and uploaded to his YouTube channel on June 27, 2026. The entire transcription, including the introduction, headings, sections, text, wording, and conclusion, was prepared with complete freedom by Elias Bejjani, publisher of the LCCC website and an expatriate activist
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155600/
Introduction
The interview between journalist Fadi Shahwan and researcher Hussein Abdul Hussein addressed the developments related to the framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel under US auspices and its implications for the future of southern Lebanon, the role of the United States, Iran, and Hezbollah in the next phase, the issue of Hezbollah's weapons, the role of the Lebanese army, the extent of US confidence in Lebanese security institutions, specifically in the army commander, General Rudolph Heikel, US aid to the army and the reason for its decline, the prospects of President Joseph Aoun's visit to Washington, and the role of the Lebanese diaspora in recalibrating the Trump administration's positions regarding treating Lebanon as a free, sovereign, and independent state, and not as a satellite of Iran or any other country.

Hotline between the Israeli and Lebanese Armies?
Al-Markazia/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The Israeli newspaper Maariv reported that the establishment of a direct telephone line between the Israeli General Staff headquarters or the Northern Command and the Lebanese Army Command in the south is not unlikely to be announced soon. According to the newspaper, talks have taken place in recent months between Israeli and Lebanese officers in Washington, as part of the official negotiations between the two sides, and have led to the development of a coordination mechanism that could evolve into a military hotline. The newspaper indicated that if the understandings proceed as planned, the Israeli army will begin evacuating areas in southern Lebanon and handing them over to the Lebanese army, simultaneously with Hezbollah evacuating its positions south of the Litani River, according to the maps provided by Israel. Maariv noted that the experiment remains fragile, as Israel doubts the possibility of Hezbollah elements hiding among the returning displaced persons, while the Iranian position is further complicated after Tehran, through intermediaries in Switzerland, demanded a mechanism to monitor the implementation of the understandings.

Netanyahu Calls Agreement with Lebanon “Historic”... Ben-Gvir Deems it a “Grave Mistake”
Tel Aviv: Asharq Al-Awsat/June 26, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the US-brokered agreement with Lebanon on Saturday, describing it as a “historic” achievement that dealt a blow to Iran and Hezbollah. “Yesterday… we reached a historic agreement for the State of Israel after direct negotiations between Israel and Lebanon,” Netanyahu said in a televised briefing. “This is a blow to Iran and Hezbollah.” Netanyahu reiterated that Israeli forces would remain in the so-called “security zone,” the villages they occupy approximately ten kilometers inside Lebanese territory. “We will remain in the zone until Hezbollah and the other terrorist groups are disarmed,” he said. He added, “The United States and Lebanon have recognized Israel’s right to maintain a security zone inside Lebanon as long as it is necessary to protect our security.” He continued, "We will maintain control of this security zone until Hezbollah and all other terrorist organizations are completely disarmed, and none of them poses a threat to Israel from Lebanese territory." For his part, the far-right Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir condemned the agreement signed by Israel and Lebanon, arguing that the Lebanese government cannot be trusted to disarm Hezbollah. Ben-Gvir stated via Telegram, "The agreement with Lebanon is a grave mistake... It is true that we still control most of the territory now, but the Lebanese state will not disarm Hezbollah." He added, "Some ministers in the Lebanese government are Hezbollah ministers, and Lebanon cannot be trusted to disarm Hezbollah... Only the soldiers of the Israeli army can destroy Hezbollah; no other party will do it for us." The agreement came after five rounds of talks between Lebanese and Israeli envoys, hosted by the US State Department, aimed primarily at ending the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah and paving the way for a peace agreement between the two countries.

Katz: Army Orders to Prepare for a 'Long Stay' in Lebanon... Vows a 'Strong Response' if Iran Attacks Israel
Tel Aviv: Asharq Al-Awsat/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz said on Saturday that the army had received orders to prepare for a "long stay" in the areas it occupies in southern Lebanon, following the signing of a US-brokered framework agreement between Israel and Lebanon. In a televised statement, Katz said, "The Prime Minister and I have instructed the Israeli army to prepare for a long stay in the security zone," referring to an area extending up to ten kilometers into Lebanese territory. He added, "The important principle established in the agreement is that there will be no Israeli redeployment in southern Lebanon, nor a withdrawal, as long as Hezbollah is not disarmed throughout Lebanon." The Israeli Defense Minister vowed a "strong response" if Iran attacks Israel in an attempt to prevent the implementation of the framework agreement reached between Israel and Lebanon under US auspices. Katz said, "If Iran tries to attack Israel to prevent the implementation of the agreement, we will act against it with great force," adding that the agreement with Lebanon dealt "a strategic blow to the Iranian axis."

Widespread Lebanese Welcome for the Framework Agreement... Emphasis on Restoring the State, Sovereignty, and the State's Monopoly on Weapons
Al-Sharq Al-Awsat/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The framework agreement signed in Washington between Lebanon and Israel on Friday evening was widely welcomed by most Lebanese political forces and figures, who considered it a pivotal step that opens the door to ending the war and strengthening the role of the Lebanese state. The majority of opinions converged on viewing the agreement as an opportunity to re-establish state authority over all Lebanese territory and confine the decision of war and peace to legitimate institutions, while emphasizing that the main challenge remains in its proper implementation and translating its provisions into tangible realities on the ground.
Bassil: The Agreement is Beneficial if We Regain All Our Rights
The head of the Free Patriotic Movement, MP Gebran Bassil, stated that "the framework agreement, regardless of its shortcomings, necessitates dealing with it responsibly," considering it "beneficial if we regain all our rights, and dangerous if it is a recipe for strife." He stressed that no path that liberates the land, strengthens the state, and establishes peace should be rejected, emphasizing that what is required is a guarantee of a complete Israeli withdrawal and a cessation of aggression, and questioning the fate of the refugee and resource files.
Sami Gemayel: The State Has Proven Its Ability to Serve the Interests of the Lebanese People
The head of the Kataeb Party, MP Sami Gemayel, congratulated President Joseph Aoun and the Lebanese negotiating delegation on "the achievement attained by the Lebanese state." He also thanked the United States for sponsoring the negotiations and supporting their success.
Gemayel considered the agreement to be a realization of what he has been demanding for years, foremost among them ending the war, a complete Israeli withdrawal, and Israel's official recognition that it has no ambitions in Lebanon, in addition to restoring sovereignty, extending the state's authority, establishing the state's monopoly on weapons, and ensuring that the decision of war and peace rests with the legitimate institutions. He affirmed that the Lebanese state, by negotiating on behalf of Lebanon and from a position of legitimacy, proved its ability to secure the interests of the Lebanese people. He considered what some had previously described as Israeli demands to be, in essence, what the Lebanese state should have imposed to preserve its sovereignty, by enshrining the principle of "one army, one weapon, and one authority." He added that Lebanon won because it imposed a roadmap for initiating the withdrawal, emphasizing that the success of the agreement remains contingent upon its implementation on the ground.
The Lebanese Forces: A Step in the Right Direction
MPs from the Lebanese Forces party welcomed the agreement, considering it a step forward in the process of restoring the state. MP Fadi Karam stated that one of the most significant aspects of the agreement is its linking of the end of the Israeli army's presence on Lebanese soil to the elimination of illegal weapons. He considered this a refutation of theories about Israeli expansionist projects at Lebanon's expense, and a confirmation of Lebanon's victory over "all projects of mutual deception and lies." MP Ziad Hawat considered the agreement a new step in the right direction, confirming the possibility of separating the Lebanese issue from regional conflicts in a way that serves Lebanese interests. He called for Hezbollah's weapons to be handed over to the legitimate authorities to spare Lebanon further crises.
Makhzoumi: A Chance That May Not Be Repeated
MP Fouad Makhzoumi viewed the agreement as a "historic turning point and a potentially unrepeatable opportunity" for Lebanon to regain its full sovereignty and national decision-making power, and to open a new chapter of security, stability, and peace. He emphasized that the success of this path requires confining weapons to the Lebanese state and ending the presence of any weapons outside the legitimate authority, in parallel with a complete Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Lebanese territories. He considered that Lebanon has begun the process of restoring the state with all its institutions and powers.
Mawad: A Historic Turning Point
For his part, MP Michel Mouawad described the agreement as a "historic turning point and a victory for the state project," considering it a step towards restoring full sovereignty and confining the decision of war and peace to the legitimate institutions. Mouawad praised the stance of President Joseph Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and the Lebanese negotiating delegation, considering the agreement a prelude to restoring the state's role, reviving the economy, and extricating Lebanon from the cycle of wars, occupations, and foreign tutelage.
Rifi: The Beginning of the State Project
For his part, MP Ashraf Rifi affirmed that the agreement represents the beginning of a new phase in which the Lebanese state regains its national decision-making power, asserting that experience has proven that only the state is capable of protecting the Lebanese people and preserving sovereignty. He stated that the time has come to consolidate the authority of the constitution and the law throughout all Lebanese territory, and to ensure that weapons are exclusively held by the army and security forces, emphasizing that "the mini-state project has failed, and the state project has begun." Lebanon and Israel signed a "framework agreement" in Washington, under the auspices of the United States, paving the way for a final agreement that includes a mechanism for a gradual Israeli withdrawal and the extension of the Lebanese army's authority over all Lebanese territory, thus paving the way for ending hostilities and launching a new phase of stability.

Trump Calls Aoun: See You Soon and I Will Support Lebanon
Almarkazia/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
President Joseph Aoun received a phone call this evening from US President Donald Trump, who congratulated him on the signing of the framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel under US auspices. Trump affirmed his country's support for Lebanon and the Lebanese people and its commitment to providing all necessary support for the implementation of the agreement's provisions to restore security and stability to Lebanon. President Trump emphasized that the United States wishes the Lebanese people well and progress and will spare no effort to support Lebanon's sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity, extend the authority of the state and its armed forces throughout all Lebanese territory, halt any threats to Lebanon's stability, and support the positions of the President and the decisions of the government. He affirmed that the United States will contribute to supporting the Lebanese economy and legitimate security forces so that Lebanon can regain its leading role in its region and the world. President Aoun thanked President Trump for his supportive stance towards Lebanon, its legitimate authority, and its constitutional and security institutions, foremost among them the army. He noted that the Lebanese state would fulfill its responsibilities in implementing the framework agreement and expressed his hope that the United States would contribute to preventing any violations of this agreement and ensuring the fulfillment of all agreed-upon commitments, particularly by pressuring Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories in the south to facilitate the deployment of the army to the international border.
At the end of the call, President Trump indicated that he would meet with President Aoun soon in Washington.

Berri: Oh my people in Lebanon, all of Lebanon, this is sedition!
Almarkazia/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri issued the following statement: “My people in Lebanon, all of Lebanon, this is sedition! Be in times of sedition like a young camel, neither a back to be ridden nor an udder to be milked.”

Berri raises the banners of political objection… and calls for calming the streets… He told Asharq Al-Awsat: “I read the agreement… and I saw sedition in it.”
Asharq Al-Awsat/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri’s opposition to the Lebanese-Israeli framework agreement was characterized by a call for calm in the streets, despite significantly raising the level of political objection to it. Sources within the Shiite duo confirmed to Asharq Al-Awsat that Berri was surprised by the content of the agreement and had not seen it beforehand. They said that Berri learned of the agreement through what was published in the media, and he was neither consulted beforehand nor officially informed of it afterward. Asharq Al-Awsat asked Speaker Berri if he had seen the content of the agreement, to which he replied: “I read it… and I saw sedition in it.” Later, Berri issued a brief statement, beginning with, "My people in Lebanon, all of Lebanon, this is strife." He then added a saying attributed to Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib, used as a proverb for dealing with strife: "In times of strife, be like a young camel, neither ridden nor milked." A young camel is one or two years old, whose mother has recently given birth, and is therefore not useful for riding or milk production. Lebanese politicians interpreted this as a call for reason, while various interpretations of Berri's meaning were circulated. One such interpretation was that Speaker Nabih Berri's use of this phrase "carries a message urging the Lebanese not to be drawn into internal strife or engage in any escalation that could lead to clashes between the country's citizens, while emphasizing the importance of maintaining civil peace and not becoming tools in the conflict." Sources from the “duo” said that the authority that signed the agreement must avoid its repercussions and correct the “sin,” noting that the content of this agreement aims, among other things, on the part of Israel to blow up the American-Iranian agreement by blowing up the Lebanese arena.

Lebanese Army Warns Against Any Reckless Actions Threatening Civil Peace / Lebanese Army: We Will Not Allow Any Breach of Security
Riyadh: Al-Arabiya.net / June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The Lebanese Army warned on Saturday against any reckless actions that threaten civil peace, stressing the importance of unity and solidarity. In a statement, the Lebanese Army Command called on citizens to act responsibly in light of calls for demonstrations and protests in Beirut and other areas. The Army Command affirmed its respect for the freedom of peaceful expression. It called on citizens to act responsibly in light of calls for demonstrations and protests in Beirut and other areas. It also stressed "the importance of unity and solidarity in order to overcome the dangers facing the country." The Army Command indicated that it "will not allow any breach of security or harm to civil peace through reckless actions, road blockages, or attacks on public and private property." Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem attacked the framework agreement between Israel and Lebanon, describing it as "null and void" and a "crossing of red lines." In a statement, Qassem said the framework agreement should be canceled and replaced by the memorandum of understanding between Iran and the United States. "No one has the right to deprive the Lebanese of their right to defend themselves and their land against the occupier of our land and the killer of our people," he said. Earlier on Saturday, Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri warned the Lebanese people against falling into sectarian strife. In a brief statement, Berri said, "My people in Lebanon, all of Lebanon, this is sectarian strife! Be in the midst of this strife like a young camel, neither ridden nor milked."

Egypt Welcomes the "Lebanon Framework" and Calls for a "Gradual" Israeli Withdrawal, Affirming Full Support for the Army's Control
Cairo: Asharq Al-Awsat / June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Egypt welcomed the "framework agreement" reached between Lebanon and Israel under US auspices, affirming that "the agreement represents an important beginning." She also stressed "the necessity of a gradual Israeli withdrawal from the areas still under Israeli occupation, allowing for the deployment of the Lebanese army and the extension of state authority over all Lebanese territory." The Egyptian assurances came during a phone call between Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdel-Aty and Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, during which they discussed the latest developments in Lebanon and the recent framework agreement reached on Friday. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on Friday that Israel and Lebanon had reached a framework agreement following talks between delegations from both countries in Washington. He said, "The Lebanese people deserve to live in security and peace," adding, "We are pleased to announce a framework agreement between the sovereign government of Lebanon and, of course, the government of Israel, mediated and supported by the United States." He noted that this agreement paves the way for "a framework for a lasting and secure peace." According to a statement issued by the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Friday evening, Minister Abdel-Aty, during his call with the Lebanese Prime Minister, emphasized the importance of building upon this development to achieve a complete Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon and the full and non-selective implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701. He also reiterated Egypt's full support for the Lebanese government and its policies aimed at extending state sovereignty over all its territory, including the deployment of the Lebanese army throughout the country and the monopoly of arms by the state, thereby strengthening Lebanon's security and stability. For his part, Salam expressed his "appreciation for the support Egypt provides to Lebanon," commending Egypt's steadfast positions in support of the Lebanese state and its institutions, and affirming "the commitment to continuing coordination and consultation with Egypt on various issues of mutual interest." Egypt has previously affirmed its commitment to continuing its support for Lebanon and its national institutions, stemming from the fraternal relations and close ties that bind the two countries, and contributing to the strengthening of Lebanon's security and stability.

Pope Leo XIV Concludes Cardinals' Meeting and Meets with Patriarch Rai: God Desires Peace for Every Nation and Every People
Almarkazia/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
His Holiness Pope Leo XIV held a private meeting with His Beatitude Patriarch Mar Bechara Boutros al-Rahi, following the conclusion of the synod meeting, as part of the ongoing dialogue between the Holy See and the Maronite Church. Pope Leo XIV concluded the two-day conclave of cardinals with an urgent appeal for world peace, according to Agence France-Presse. The Pontiff stated, "God desires peace for every nation and every people. For this reason, we must not give in to violence. Violence will not have the last word." He added, "God continues to chart paths for the future in history. God continues to open avenues for reconciliation and peace in history. It is up to us to walk them courageously and to help the world recognize them." Leo XIV concluded the two-day closed meeting, which began on Friday, aimed at discussing the role of the Church in the world.

Free Patriotic Movement on Framework Agreement: It Does Not Mention Israeli Withdrawal from Lebanese Territory
Al-Markazia/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The Free Patriotic Movement affirmed its commitment to "reaching a comprehensive and lasting peace agreement, but this is conditional on justice and the preservation of national rights," in a statement that read:
"Following the signing of the framework agreement in Washington and the potential consequences and repercussions it may have, the Free Patriotic Movement wishes to reiterate a set of principles and note the following:
- Negotiation is a legitimate means to achieve sovereign Lebanese national rights. In this context, the agreement does not explicitly and clearly mention Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Lebanese territories, nor does it specify a timetable for this. It merely uses the term 'redeployment,' which raises many ambiguities and adds further vagueness to the agreement and its outcomes. Furthermore, it constitutes a loophole that Israel can exploit to maneuver and continue its occupation of Lebanese territory. The agreement also ignores the Armistice Agreement, which is a fundamental pillar upon which any lasting solution must be built.
- All An agreement that lacks broad national support and whose clauses are divisive and exploitable to incite popular unrest and strife among the Lebanese is extremely dangerous for Lebanese society. It requires a highly responsible national approach and a broadening of dialogue and consultation, rather than resorting to mutual accusations and recriminations. In this context, the Free Patriotic Movement reiterates the government's error and the disingenuousness of its constituent parties over the past 15 months, failing to implement the monopoly on the use of force as stipulated in the ministerial statement. It also highlights the government's failure to formulate a national security strategy, which it had committed to and which should form the comprehensive framework for safeguarding Lebanon's sovereignty and strengthening its role.
- The agreement's clause stipulating "a cessation of any hostile or antagonistic actions in international political or legal forums" deprives Lebanon of a crucial and powerful tool at the human rights and international levels for upholding its rights and pursuing Israel in international courts for its crimes. Furthermore, this clause could lead to the relinquishment of the compensation Lebanon is entitled to for the immense human and material losses inflicted by Israel.
- Observations and Objections The existing situation should not lead to abandoning the option of negotiation altogether, because the alternative is the continuation of war, occupation, and destruction. However, the benefit of negotiation is contingent upon achieving national objectives, namely the complete withdrawal of the Israeli occupation, the extension of state sovereignty and the monopoly of arms and decision-making in the hands of the state and the Lebanese army, the return of displaced persons to their land, the release of prisoners, reconstruction, and the enshrining of Lebanon's right to exploit its natural resources and address the refugee issue. This is a prerequisite for reaching a just and lasting peace based on rights, security, and Lebanese sovereignty.
- The "Movement" emphasizes that moving away from alignments and axes to protect Lebanon from the repercussions of the regional conflict should not, conversely, lead to Lebanon being used to exchange messages or to undermine regional agreements, including the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran. This would consequently increase the risk of sliding back into military confrontations. Therefore, the Lebanese authorities must exercise greater awareness in dealing with the negotiation process and the implications of the spirit and provisions of the framework agreement.
- The framework agreement and its significant repercussions necessitate a reminder of the importance of adhering to constitutional principles in its discussion and ratification, rather than... This is contrary to their principles, making it vulnerable to challenges to its legitimacy by large segments of the Lebanese population, in addition to their rejection of many aspects of its content.
- The "Movement" reiterates its commitment to reaching a comprehensive and lasting peace agreement, but this is conditional on justice and the preservation of national rights. This peace cannot be achieved by surrendering to Israel's demands at the expense of Lebanon's interests. It must also be accompanied by the state's monopoly on weapons and decision-making, without sliding into internal strife and conflict.

Qabalan on the agreement between Lebanon and Israel: This heinous deal will not pass.
Al-Markazia/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The distinguished Jaafari Mufti, Sheikh Ahmad Qabalan, stated that "what was agreed upon between the current Lebanese authority and terrorist Israel, under malicious American auspices, is the worst national catastrophe to befall Lebanon, and it has absolutely no legitimacy." In a statement, he said: “The current authority, within this framework, represents itself, not Lebanon. The dangerous aspect is that this framework grants the terrorist Zionist army de facto control over the Lebanese army's operations and the occupied Lebanese territory, in addition to implicitly recognizing the Zionist army's authority over the occupied lands. What is happening behind the scenes in Washington is a catastrophe beyond compare, and we will not accept its implementation on the ground. Those who prevented the Lebanese army from defending Lebanon want to slaughter the Lebanese army through this national disaster. The current authority has placed the Lebanese state in a black box and handed over the keys to Lebanon's sovereignty to Washington and Tel Aviv. This heinous act will not be tolerated, no matter the cost.”

Jumblatt: The strange thing about the framework agreement is the omission of the Armistice Agreement.
Al-Markazia/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Former Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt wrote via “X”: “The strange thing about the tripartite agreement, which is unilateral in form and substance, is the complete absence of the Armistice Agreement.”

Raad: The Framework Agreement is a “Doomsday” for Lebanon and the Region
Al-Markazia/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
MP Mohammad Raad, head of the Loyalty to the Resistance bloc, launched a scathing attack on the framework agreement announced in Washington, considering the statement issued from it to be based on “falsification of facts and concepts.” He accused the Lebanese authorities of complete subservience to American hegemony and collusion with Israel. In a statement, Raad said that the agreement covers up the continued Israeli occupation of Lebanon and links Israeli redeployment to the disarmament of the resistance instead of a complete withdrawal, considering this a violation of Lebanese sovereignty and the rights of the Lebanese people. He added that the Lebanese authorities, by agreeing to the agreement, have crossed what he described as “shame and disgrace,” accusing them of falsifying the national will and disregarding the interests of the Lebanese people. Raad concluded by asserting that the framework agreement is “ominous and completely unacceptable, representing a doomsday for Lebanon and the region,” calling for adherence to Lebanese sovereignty and the rejection of any arrangements that legitimize the continuation of the Israeli occupation.

Qassem: Linking Israeli Withdrawal to Hezbollah's Disarmament Crosses Red Lines
Al-Markazia/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Hezbollah Secretary-General, Sheikh Naim Qassem, issued a statement addressing the framework agreement between the Lebanese government and Israel, sharply criticizing the agreement's content and the associated negotiation process. Qassem stated that the Lebanese government, in his words, had abandoned its responsibilities to protect Lebanon's sovereignty, noting that it had previously rejected the ceasefire proposal put forward during the US-Iranian talks in April 2026, which he considered to have paved the way for Israeli escalation in Lebanon. He viewed the direct negotiations with Israel as "gratuitous concessions," arguing that they were subject to American and Israeli dictates and were taking place amidst internal Lebanese divisions, without the government possessing any leverage, after what he described as its abandonment of internal power elements and its designation of the resistance as illegal since the government's decision on March 2. In his remarks, Qassem pointed out that the US-Iranian memorandum of understanding stipulated a cessation of hostilities in Lebanon as a fundamental clause. He noted that Iran suspended the agreement's implementation after Israel refused to adhere to the ceasefire and continued its escalatory actions, before succumbing to US pressure that led to a halt in operations. He added that the memorandum included, according to him, guarantees for the safety and sovereignty of Lebanese territory and the reaching of a final agreement within 60 days. He considered it a "strength card" for Lebanon, but the Lebanese authorities relinquished it in the framework agreement and granted Israel what it wanted, as he put it. Qassem criticized linking any Israeli withdrawal to the disarmament of Hezbollah, considering this proposal to be crossing "red lines" and turning Lebanon into "a tool in Israel's hands." He also accused the authorities of granting Israel a role in monitoring the deployment of the Lebanese army and linking the withdrawal to an Israeli assessment, which, in his view, would perpetuate the Israeli military presence for an extended period and prevent the return of residents to their villages. He stressed that any agreement must be limited to addressing the situation south of the Litani River, without delving into internal Lebanese affairs or the issue of Hezbollah's weapons. Qassem described the framework agreement as "humiliating, shameful, and a surrender of sovereignty," deeming it "null and void." He called for adherence to the US-Iranian memorandum of understanding and for continued efforts, through all diplomatic and Arab means and pressure, to compel Israel to withdraw from Lebanese territory. He also urged the Lebanese authorities to retract what he termed "political transgressions," affirming Hezbollah's readiness to cooperate on issues such as liberating occupied land, securing the release of prisoners, facilitating the return of displaced persons, reconstruction, and developing a national security strategy.

The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 27-28 June/2026
The Desired Peace
Nawal Al-Jabr/Elaph Website/June 26, 2026
https://elaphmorocco.com/Web/newspapers/2026/06/202662.html
Peace in politics is a project forged by will, embraced by wisdom, and granted wider scope by diplomacy at every stage. The region is currently experiencing a phase where attention is focused on the capitals that have maintained their balanced presence, clear vision, and consistent political discourse throughout the crisis, to the point that their positions have become an integral part of the regional landscape and a focal point of international interest. The early days of the war witnessed extensive political activity, with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia at the heart of the scene through continuous diplomatic contacts, balanced official stances, and messages emphasizing the importance of de-escalation, regional security and stability, and the preservation of regional and international interests. This approach continued as events unfolded, and its presence gained political momentum at various junctures. Saudi initiatives continued, and coordination with sisterly and friendly nations, international organizations, and influential powers expanded, solidifying Riyadh's position as a center for dialogue, a symbol of political wisdom, and a hub enjoying growing confidence in managing regional issues. The Saudi discourse conveyed a vision that grasped the complexities of the situation, monitored its transformations, and granted diplomacy an active role in fostering stability. Saudi Arabia's welcoming of the recent understandings regarding the cessation of military operations and the commencement of a new phase of negotiations was an extension of a consistent political approach and a vision that prioritizes regional security, the safety of maritime routes, the stability of energy markets, the promotion of development, and the consolidation of regional security in all Saudi positions. The developments in the crisis reveal the value of Saudi Arabia's presence on the political scene, with the continuation of initiatives, the expansion of coordination, and the growing international attention given to Riyadh's positions, which are characterized by balance, clarity, a long-term vision, a commitment to regional security and stability, and the creation of pathways that give political settlements a prominent role in addressing crises. Saudi policy carries with it a wealth of accumulated trust, earned through years of diplomatic work and widespread international appreciation. This is evidenced by continued communication, numerous partnerships, expanding cooperation, and the Kingdom's established image as an active partner in supporting regional security, global economic stability, promoting peace, and keeping pace with global transformations. The desired peace today presents a new opportunity for the region and the international community to establish a more stable phase. Saudi Arabia remains a cornerstone of this endeavor, with a firm political presence, a clear strategic vision, extensive diplomatic experience, a respected standing, and trust that has solidified with each step. Its presence continues to shape the future and imbues peace with a value that extends beyond the end of crises.

Hussain Abdul-Hussain's Comment of the above editorial
X Platform/June 27/2026
Spotted an editorial in a Saudi newspaper with the headline: The Desired Peace. For an instant, I thought Riyadh was finally calling for peace with Israel. Turns the Saudis meant bending over backwards for Iran, describing their appeasement policy as wisdom and stability and so on, which begged the question: On Iran, Saudi Arabia takes missile fire while lying down, not even expelling the Iranian ambassador or severing ties. On Israel, which has not in its history thrown a pebble on Saudi Arabia or threatened it, Saudi Arabia thumps its chest, declaring that there will NEVER be peace until many unicorn demands are met (the imaginary Palestinian state). Saudi Arabia is in effect nice to the country that bullies it, Iran, and awful toward the country that seeks its friendship, Israel.
And Saudi Arabia calls this weird policy "wisdom."

Iran's 'Deal': What Happens After Trump?
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Gatestone Institute/June 27, 2026
The Iranian regime's strategy is clear: survive the pressure of President Donald J. Trump's second term by any means necessary, secure breathing room through negotiations, and position itself for a far more aggressive posture once his administration is over.
Iranian Parliament Speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf -- Tehran's "new rational mind" -- who had just electronically signed the memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Vance, immediately went on television and called for the "liberation of Jerusalem (Quds)
Iran's officials are not bound by election cycles; their singular mission is regime preservation to bring "Death to America" and "Death to Israel."
Even if Iran's new rulers from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) temporarily say they will comply with everything in the agreement, they would view any restriction as temporary – and then wait for Trump to leave office.
Money has already started to flow again before even a single Iranian concession, especially the fake minuet of IAEA inspectors. Iran, in exchange for receiving billions of dollars, gave up precisely nothing – and the hapless US negotiators evidently agreed to that.
Post-Trump, Iran could impose tolls, "fees," and "protection payments" on ships transiting the Strait, harass shipping, and assert control over this critical chokepoint if no one has the will to stop them -- which is what Iran is probably counting on.
Why does virtually every commentator keep repeating that the Iranian people must change their regime? If even the mighty United States backs down from the task, why should anyone expect unarmed civilian protesters to do it for them? The regime mowed down more than 40,000 of its own citizens in January alone. That is precisely why the regime must be changed – the sooner the better. So long as the current regime remains in place, especially after being thoroughly enriched, there will be no peace in the Middle East.
Iran's regime, to secure the economic lifeline it needs, will probably say it agrees to any terms to outlast Trump. At the end of Trump's term, Iran's regime will be poised to reassert dominance over the Strait of Hormuz, extort regional neighbors, crush opposition at home and abroad, and race once again toward nuclear weapons breakout.
Who then will be willing to take it on?
Iran's officials are not bound by election cycles; their singular mission is regime preservation to bring "Death to America" and "Death to Israel."
The Iranian regime's strategy is clear: survive the pressure of President Donald J. Trump's second term by any means necessary, secure breathing room through negotiations, and position itself for a far more aggressive posture once his administration is over. Iran has long mastered the art of playing for time: it sees that American presidential terms are finite, while its own project is not. With Trump's decisive military actions having inflicted significant damage on Iranian capabilities and proxies, the regime finds itself economically crippled and militarily weakened, yet determined to drag out talks, extract concessions, and wait.
Last week, the U.S. and Iran signed an initial memorandum of understanding to end active hostilities, ease certain sanctions, facilitate reconstruction funds, and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Trump's team highlighted commitments on nuclear inspections. Vice President JD Vance noted progress on access for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) – to which, of course, Iran's regime has never granted real, anytime-anywhere, access, so essentially the achievement is empty.
Even so, almost immediately, tensions resurfaced. Iran's leaders threatened to reclose the Strait over alleged breaches, prompting sharp warnings from Trump.
Iranian Parliament Speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf -- Tehran's "new rational mind" -- who had just electronically signed the memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Vance, immediately went on television and called for the "liberation of Jerusalem (Quds)" :
"We must uphold that honor, remain committed to that vision, and carry out that mission. A hundred Netanyahus are not even worth the shoelace of our martyred Imam."
He also wrote on X, concerning the very first point of the 14-point memorandum of understanding:
"They can never isolate any part of the pillars of resistance alone. The jihad efforts of Lebanon's brave warriors and the powerful diplomacy of the Islamic Republic of Iran will guarantee the sovereignty and territorial integrity of dear Lebanon and will disrupt the crazy games and warmongering of the Israeli regime."
In short, the West can never separate Hezbollah in Lebanon --Iran's largest proxy and forward base right on Israel's border -- from Iran.
A few days after that - revealing the regime's confidence in extracting maximum gains at the diplomatic table even amid recent setbacks -- Ghalibaf declared :
"Everything we sought to achieve through military action, we obtained several times over through negotiation; it was not even comparable."
This pattern -- hard bargaining mixed with oscillating replies -- reflects a regime that publicly projects defiance while privately craving the financial relief that sanctions relief provides.
Iran's leaders know they cannot match Trump's strength in the near term. Unlike previous administrations, Trump, in both of his, terms has featured maximum pressure: economic pressure as well as military strikes that degraded Iran's missile arsenals, naval assets, and proxy networks.
The regime's economy is gasping: inflation has soared, foreign currency reserves are depleted, and paying soldiers and maintaining patronage networks grows harder by the day. As Trump has noted, the mullahs lack the funds to sustain their apparatus without external relief. They are at the table not out of goodwill, but for survival. They drag out negotiations, starting with maximalist demands, testing Western patience, and ultimately aiming for a deal that lifts sanctions without delivering irreversible curbs on their nuclear ambitions.
In 2015, under then President Barack Obama, Iran secured the JCPOA "nuclear deal" – a 10-year runway to acquire nuclear weapons by 2025. Iranian officials have already been boasting, as above, that diplomacy delivered more than war could have done. Trump himself, highlighting the regime's patient, long-term approach, noted that "Iran never won a war but never lost a negotiation." Iran's officials are not bound by election cycles; their singular mission is regime preservation to bring "Death to America" and "Death to Israel."
Assume that a comprehensive deal materializes: robust inspections, enrichment limits, proxy restraints, and sanctions relief in exchange for verifiable compliance. The regime's track record suggests that the probability of honoring the terms would be zero. Iran has repeatedly violated past agreements, while proclaiming adherence, as it was clandestinely advancing its nuclear weapons program. Even if Iran's new rulers from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) temporarily say they will comply with everything in the agreement, they would view any restriction as temporary – and then wait for Trump to leave office.
Money has already started to flow again before even a single Iranian concession, especially the fake minuet of IAEA inspectors. Iran, in exchange for receiving billions of dollars, gave up precisely nothing – and the hapless US negotiators evidently agreed to that. Reconstruction pledges so far amount to more than $300 billion -- twice as much as the entire Marshall Plan for Europe, updated in today's dollars.
The real danger looms after Trump's term is up. Without his willingness to wield overwhelming force, his successors — whether Republican or Democrat — may well lack the resolve for decisive action. Iran has signaled as much through figures like Ghalibaf, who declared that "Hormuz will never return to pre-war status," and, after US agreement, would take permanent control of the Strait.
Post-Trump, Iran could impose tolls, "fees," and "protection payments" on ships transiting the Strait, harass shipping, and assert control over this critical chokepoint if no one has the will to stop them -- which is what Iran is probably counting on.
Regionally, the regime would continue to expand its influence through reviving its proxies. The recent conflict revealed vulnerabilities of the Gulf states, which Iran would no doubt continue to attack or threaten to attack. A restored Iran would intensify pressure on neighbors, rebuild alliances with proxy militias, and pursue vengeance against external opponents. Domestically, the regime would continue to crush dissent, probably even more brutally. Iran has already, once again, stepped up executing its dissidents, most likely as a warning not even to think of challenging the rule of the IRGC.
Why does virtually every commentator keep repeating that the Iranian people must change their regime? If even the mighty United States backs down from the task, why should anyone expect unarmed civilian protesters to do it for them? The regime mowed down more than 40,000 of its own citizens in January alone. That is precisely why the regime must be changed – the sooner the better. So long as the current regime remains in place, especially after being thoroughly enriched, there will be no peace in the Middle East.
Above all, the regime, drawing lessons from North Korea, Libya and Ukraine, would restore and accelerate its nuclear weapons program.
Iranian regime insiders prioritize survival. Western leaders, by contrast, focus on legacy headlines within four- or eight-year windows. Trump stands out as the great exception -- prioritizing American strength and long-term global security. Iran's patience is nevertheless its greatest asset. The regime has outlasted eight presidents, who used tactics spanning from Bush-era sanctions to Obama-era diplomacy -- why not one more?
If Iran's strategy succeeds, the world after Trump will look markedly different. A regime flush with cash, dominant in the Gulf, unrestrained in its nuclear pursuits, and vengeful towards anyone it perceives as a foe poses incalculable risks. Proxies will reignite conflicts, nuclear breakout time shrinks back to near zero, and other leaders may not have the same courage as Trump to confront it. Iran plans for the day when Trump's term is at an end and American pressure along with it. The stakes extend far beyond the Middle East -- to South America and ultimately the "Great Satan," the United States.
Iran's regime, to secure the economic lifeline it needs, will probably say it agrees to any terms to outlast Trump. At the end of Trump's term, Iran's regime will be poised to reassert dominance over the Strait of Hormuz, extort regional neighbors, crush opposition at home and abroad, and race once again toward nuclear weapons breakout.
Who then will be willing to take it on?
*Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a political scientist, Harvard-educated analyst, and board member of Harvard International Review. He has authored several books on the US foreign policy. He can be reached at dr.rafizadeh@post.harvard.edu
*Follow Majid Rafizadeh on X (formerly Twitter)
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22655/iran-deal-what-happens-after-trump
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

The Mufti as a Prisoner
Samir Attallah/Al-Sharq Al-Awsat/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
I met Dr. Ahmad Hassoun when he was still the Mufti of Aleppo. We visited him in his office, and he invited us to a lunch filled with Aleppo delicacies. The Mufti had an open and straightforward personality, and he wore a wide white turban. When I pointed out his different appearance, he laughed, saying that in the past, people were accustomed to seeing religious figures traveling on animals, and there was much whispering when the people of Aleppo saw a large Mercedes parked in front of the Dar al-Ifta (House of Fatwas). A quick friendship developed between the Mufti and me. A few months later, he came to Tripoli to attend a religious conference and asked me to accompany him. A large group of distinguished scholars, all wearing turbans, were there, and I was the only one without. The group remained silent; a sense of solemnity pervaded the scene. Shortly afterward, we learned that he had become the Grand Mufti of Syria, succeeding one of its most famous Muftis at the time, Sheikh Ahmad Kuftaro. There were no more occasions for me to meet the open-minded Sheikh. His responsibilities grew, and his religious standing rose. Like everything else in Syria, politics overshadowed everything else. Syria entered a phase of chaos, turmoil, and social breakdown. We began hearing news about the Mufti amidst the difficult news, and he was given derogatory nicknames like "the Mufti of Barrel Bombs."
Last Friday, images from Damascus showed a huge man wearing a broad-striped prison shirt. The television was on silent, so I didn't recognize him. A towering figure, bareheaded, with a lost, sad, and humiliated expression. How could I have known that this man was the Mufti of Aleppo two decades ago? It's the Arab world again. A gradual, incremental path.
"Be tough, for blessings don't last." The accusations against His Eminence seem inexcusable.

War, the Gulf States, and the Balance of Gains and Losses
Mishari Al-Zaydi/Al-Sharq Al-Awsat/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Who gained and who lost from the initial memorandum of understanding between America and Iran?
Let's leave aside Iran and America, as each side is marketing this understanding as a clear victory for itself... What about the Gulf states, which are the primary stakeholders in this issue? Interpretations vary, ranging from those gloating over the Gulf Arab states, smacking their lips with glee, each gloating for their own particular reasons.Some say that the Gulf states achieved a great victory, winning the round against Iran and against the American temptation to engage in an unknown war. Others see the picture as more complex, with neither a clear gain nor a definitive loss; the matter is somewhere in between.
The losses are well-known, starting with Iran's violation of these countries' security through its missiles, drones, and sleeper cells, and ending with the seizure of the Strait of Hormuz at the entrance to the Arabian Gulf, and the resulting damage to Gulf exports, especially oil, gas, and energy products. The gains, on the other hand, are the damage inflicted on Iran's military, security, and political infrastructure over more than forty days, the loss of the regime's elite leadership, starting with the Supreme Leader himself, and the tarnishing of Iran's image and narrative, as it appeared aggressive towards the entire world. These countries also succeeded in protecting themselves from the temptation of becoming fully embroiled in an unknown war with no clear American vision. Regarding the last point, the inconsistency of the American vision, let's consider the issue of Iran's missile capabilities. Throughout the war, and even before it, eliminating these capabilities was a consistent and publicly stated American objective. However, during Trump's recent visit to Paris, he lowered his rhetoric, saying, "If other countries possess ballistic missiles, it's unfair that Iran doesn't have some." Andreas Krieg, Associate Professor of Security Studies at King's College London, told BBC News Arabic that the Gulf states' practical response after the war would involve fortifying their infrastructure, expanding missile defense systems, localizing interceptor missile production, strengthening forward defenses, and maintaining open channels with Tehran to avoid confrontation. Regarding the controversial and ambiguous clause—the reconstruction fund—Dr. Krieg noted that Gulf states like Qatar and the UAE had demanded, in return, that Iran provide compensation for all damages and losses resulting from its attacks on them.
Ultimately, as Krieg stated, the Gulf states are forced to deal with geography as it is, not as they wish it to be.
However, these Gulf states possess a lasting advantage after the war, and may even become, along with other countries in the region, a new power center. They have military bases, capital, logistical infrastructure, influence in energy markets, and diplomatic channels. But what they have often lacked, according to Dr. Krieg's conclusion, is unity.

Selected Face Book & X tweets on 27 June/2026
Robert Satloff
IMPORTANT: After a rocky start and a delayed finish, negotiators from #Lebanon and #Israel – with US mediation – concluded their fifth round of talks by signing a trilateral “Framework Agreement.” This is a major breakthrough and substantial upgrade from previous statements of intent and represents the first “agreement” between the two sides since their short-lived May 1983 peace accord and, potentially, the most significant accord since their armistice, 77 years ago. (For those who want to check, the 2022 maritime deal was a series of letters each side sent to US mediators and UN officials. in other words, it was a far cry from a signed agreement between the parties.)The message of the “agreement” is as important as its details. Both Lebanon and Israel were shaken by the insertion of the Lebanese issue into the Iran MOU and the inclusion of Iran in the Lebanon “deconfliction mechanism,” suggesting that the US recognized some legitimate Iranian role in determining Lebanon’s fate. This agreement was a direct riposte to that idea, underscoring that – whatever their differences -- #Beirut and #Jerusalem want to solve their problems themselves, not with #Hezbollah’s patron enjoying a seat at their bargaining table.
The agreement also strengthens those in the US policy process who have championed precedent-shattering Lebanon-Israel negotiations -- which @POTUS inaugurated in April, with the active guidance of @SecRubio– as the vehicle for solving the conundrum of Hezbollah and perhaps even building a new Arab-Israeli peace agreement. Indeed, there are echoes of past American successes in using the terminology of a “framework agreement,” which is the formal title of the original #Egypt-Israel Camp David Accords, the granddaddy of all #MiddleEast peace agreements.
Hopefully, today’s agreement has a better fate than the May 1983 agreement, providing a firm foundation for lasting security, prosperity and peace. Enemies will try to undermine it, as they did 44 years ago. The need to be strong and resolute is clear. Even with today’s achievement, enthusiasm needs to be tempered by the political reality of a buoyant Iran and the need to move to full and swift implementation of the terms of the agreement, especially regarding the disarmament of Hezbollah. But now that those promises are spelled out – and with Washington’s active support – the critical next step is clear: translating words on paper into actions on the ground.

Nawfal Daw
(Google translation from Arabic)
The 1949 Armistice Agreement, which Walid Jumblatt finds surprising to see omitted from the framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel, stipulates that the Lebanese army is entitled to deploy south of the Qasmiyeh-Nabatieh-Hasbaya line at 1,500 soldiers, 4 artillery pieces, 12 armored vehicles armed with machine guns, and 6 tanks armed with light cannons!
Is this still valid for 2026?

Kamal Risha
(Google translation from Arabic)
The Israeli withdrawal begins tomorrow.
No one should mention the so-called resistance or the motorcycles blocking the roads as the reason for the withdrawal.Thank you to His Excellency the President, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and Ambassadors Simon Karam and Nada Mouawad.

The removal of "Thank You Iran" slogans and their replacement with "Lebanon First" slogans on the airport road encapsulates the reality of the ongoing war.
Introduction to the evening news bulletin from LBCI/Saturday, June 27, 2026  (Google translation from Arabic)
The removal of "Thank You Iran" slogans and their replacement with "Lebanon First" slogans on the airport road encapsulates the reality of the ongoing war. It is an American-Iranian war being waged on Lebanese soil. Lebanon wants to reclaim its leverage from Iran, while Iran clings to this leverage through Hezbollah. How telling were the words of Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem today in response to the agreement: "The framework agreement between Israel and Lebanon is null and void, an insult, and a surrender of sovereignty. It should be replaced by a memorandum of understanding between Iran and the United States." But what has been signed has been signed. What is the limit of the objections? Hezbollah took to the streets, but in a limited way. Speaker Nabih Berri warned against sectarian strife. The question remains: What comes after the signing? The United States considers this an achievement, and a call is expected between today and next Monday between US President Donald Trump and President Joseph Aoun. Israel is pleased with the agreement.
In Lebanon, everyone is waiting to see how Hezbollah will express its objections without resorting to accusations of treason. After the agreement and its signing, it might be beneficial to look ahead and try to bridge or narrow the catastrophic gap represented by the massive destruction and the need to begin thinking about reconstruction. If this reconstruction begins tomorrow, it will take decades. Will those concerned refrain from self-flagellation and start thinking about the future?
On the ground, the Israeli army announced that it carried out an airstrike targeting suspected militants in the Nabatieh area of ​​southern Lebanon. An Israeli army spokeswoman told AFP that the strike targeted what she described as "suspected terrorists who posed a threat to Israeli soldiers," adding that "the results of the strike are still being assessed." Switzerland's path is faltering, as Iran on Saturday accused the United States of violating the memorandum of understanding signed between the two countries last week, after Washington launched strikes on sites in Iran following an attack on a cargo ship in the Strait of Hormuz the previous day, and Tehran responded with attacks on Gulf states.

A Vision Ahead of Its Time
Abu Arz/Facebook/June 27, 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
More than fifty years ago, we said that Lebanon's salvation lies only in the establishment of one state, one army, one sovereignty, and a peace that ends our fabricated enmity with Israel.
Back then, they mocked us, accused us, fought us, and sentenced us to life imprisonment and death…And today, the world is adopting, clause by clause, what we called for half a century ago.
Ah… how much blood would have been spared, how many lives would have been saved, and how much destruction would have been averted for Lebanon, if those in power back then had possessed clarity of vision and courage of principle, instead of political obstinacy.
Truly, the power of right is stronger than the right of power.
At your service, Lebanon!

By your offer, Sheikh Naim, stop the victories!!!
Alfred Madi/Facebook/June 27, 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
With your display, Sheikh Naim, you've stopped your victories!!!
You triumphed over America and Israel...
And you triumphed in Khiam, Kfar Tebnit, Zawtar, Kfar Remman, Nabatieh, Bint Jbeil, Ali Taher, and... and... and...
But your greatest "victory," the one the whole world witnessed and stood for, was the day you dragged the Christian soldier who was going to check on his house in Dbayn, beat him, and told him, "You don't want Christians in Dbayn"...
And that's how you justify Israel's "dragging" you out of the South...
Shame on such victories!!!
And shame on you already...
Go hand over your weapons to the state... and get your act together!!!

There's no civil war
Bassam Abouzeid/Facebook/June 27, 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
There's no civil war
No one wants to fight you
Now, if you insist on war, you have several options:
You can wage a war of illusions, meaning fight windmills, shouting, screaming, threatening, and making dire pronouncements. This is all part of your game with your people so they don't wake up to the disaster they're in.
You can wage war on the state if you can bear it, but everyone will be against you, both inside and outside Lebanon.
You can wage a new war with the enemy as long as you don't want an agreement.
But I want to tell you that the Lebanese are fed up with wars, destruction, killing, and chaos. They want peace and stability, and that's it.

For the first time since the collapse of the May 17, 1983 agreement, Lebanon is back on the right track.
Nadim Gemayel/Facebook/June 27, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
For the first time in over four decades, Lebanon has signed a direct agreement with Israel, in a clear declaration that the era of “resistance” has ended, and that the chapter opened after the collapse of the May 17 agreement has closed today. This agreement establishes a new and unequivocal equation:
Disarming Hezbollah in exchange for the return of the land.
As the disarmament process progresses, so too will Israel's withdrawal and the complete return of the South to Lebanese sovereignty.
The agreement also definitively refutes the Iranian narrative that claimed to have returned the land or imposed the withdrawal. Today, it is the Lebanese state, through its legitimate institutions and its army, that is reclaiming the South, not any external force.
The greatest challenge remains for the Lebanese army, which bears a historic responsibility:
* Firmly implementing the agreement;
* Guaranteeing the security of all citizens;
* Imposing the state's authority and sovereignty over the entire South, and reclaiming every inch of Lebanese territory.
It is no longer acceptable for this phase to be managed in the same way as over the past twenty months. What is needed is an army that will be decisive, enforce the law, and restore the state's authority.
May God protect Lebanon on its path toward freedom, sovereignty, and peace.

What sovereignty are they talking about?
Karine Abdel Nour/Facebook/June 27, 2026  (Google translation from Arabic)
A state that lives on loans, grants, and begging from abroad, that is governed by borrowing and waiting for aid, and that squanders what it receives through waste, corruption, cronyism, and the systematic plundering of public funds, has no right to boast of sovereignty as if it were a self-sufficient and capable nation. This state doesn't need more nationalistic slogans; it needs to actually become a state. Sovereignty is not a speech to be delivered or a slogan to be raised, but rather the ability to manage the country with its resources and institutions, to protect people's money instead of wasting it, and to build a productive economy that doesn't live on borrowing and political and financial begging. As for the sovereignty that is invoked in speeches while the treasury is bankrupt, corruption is rampant, and the state waits for grants and loans to survive, it is nothing but a slogan for domestic consumption. The corruption that plunders the state, impoverishes its people, and destroys its institutions is more dangerous to the nation than any weapon, because it kills the state from within.