English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News &
Editorials
For June 29/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.june29.26.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 tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my
church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Matthew
16/13-20/:'When Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his
disciples, ‘Who do people say that the Son of Man is?’And they said, ‘Some say
John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the
prophets.’He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’Simon Peter answered,
‘You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.’And Jesus answered him,
‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this
to you, but my Father in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock
I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. I
will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth
will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in
heaven.’Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the
Messiah."
Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials
published on 28-29 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
Casualties Since March 2 War: A Health Ministry Report
Israeli Airstrike Targets Hezbollah in Nabatieh Amidst Peace Framework
Israel Secures Ali Al-Taher Heights, Cutting Hezbollah's Vital Supply Lines in
Lebanon
Trump Responds to Lebanese Woman: I Will Make Lebanon Great Again!
The funeral is a show of force, but the deceased is a dog”… Hezbollah MP reveals
what Aoun asked of the army commander
Israel Announces Destruction of a 200-Meter Hezbollah Tunnel in Southern Lebanon
Zamir: The Agreement with Lebanon is Historic… Implementation is the True Test
Katz: We Will Continue Military Operations in Lebanon Until Hezbollah Is
Disarmed
Four Days of Tension: How Was the Israel-Lebanon Agreement Reached?
Israeli Army Announces Death of Golani Brigade Commander and Wounding of Soldier
in Direct Clash with Hezbollah Fighter
Israeli Army: We Targeted the Element Involved in the Killing of a Golani
Brigade Officer in the South!
Israel Postpones Withdrawal from Southern Lebanon: Army Retains Freedom of
Action
Iran: Implementing the Lebanon Clause is a Prerequisite for a Permanent
Agreement and Regional Stability
Slogan Conflict on Airport Road: Two Arrested for Burning Lebanese Flag After
Removal of “Thank You Iran” Banners
Between Appeasing Iran and Lebanon’s Interests: The Enigma of Double Standards
in the Resistance Discourse
Israeli Violations in the South 48 Hours After the Signing of the Washington
Understanding
President Aoun condemns the attacks on Bahrain and Kuwait: a violation of
sovereignty and an undermining of regional calm efforts
The Lebanese Army responds to the Israeli allegations about the division of the
military institution: They are rejected, condemned, and not based on facts
Berri and Qalibaf discuss implementing the memorandum of understanding and
demand Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon
Berri and Abdel-Aty Talk: Priority is a Complete Israeli Withdrawal!
UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert's Farewell Message
to Lebanon: Weapons Outside State Control Deepened Divisions!
Al-Shaibani to Visit Beirut Soon… Who Will He Meet and What Are the Key Issues?
/ Speaker of Parliament to Meet with the First Lebanese Shiite Leader
Patriarch Rai on the Lebanon-Israel Agreement: The Path to Peace is Difficult…
and the Lebanese Have Yearned for It Since 1975
Lebanese Political Leader Samir Geagea Calls Framework Agreement a Historic
Opportunity
The Washington Framework offers Lebanon a brutal but necessary lifeline out of
the abyss/Ibrahim Rihan (Editor in Chief)/Waradana site/28 June 2026
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 28-29 June/2026
Iran attacks Bahrain and Kuwait following US strikes and threatens to halt talks
US Official: Technical Talks with Iran Proceeding as Scheduled
Tehran reiterates: Crossing the Strait of Hormuz requires coordination with the
Revolutionary Guard
US Strikes Exchanged with Iran, Missile Interceptions in Kuwait and Bahrain, and
Trump Threatens to Remove Them
Mojtaba Khamenei: Prosecute Those Responsible for Crimes Against Iran!
Saudi-French Affirmation of Freedom of Navigation and Support for Diplomacy to
De-escalate Tensions
Night of the MPs' Arrests: An Earthquake Shakes the Foundations of the Iraqi
Political Process... Raids Arrest MPs and Businessmen
Iraq: Dozens Arrested, Including MPs and Governors, on Corruption Suspicions...
Raids in Baghdad, Maysan, Babylon, Diyala, and Salah al-Din Based on al-Jumaili's
Confessions
120 Accused of Corruption in Iraq… Integrity Commission Affirms “They Will Be
Held Accountable Under the Law”
US Sanctioned: Who is Ali Ma'araj, Arrested by Baghdad?
Baghdad Calls on Tehran to Adopt Dialogue to Enhance Regional Stability /
Araqchi Thanks Iraq for “Coordinating Khamenei’s Funeral”
Putin: Ukraine Negotiations Continue, New Proposals on the Table
Zelensky Announces Targeting of Two Oil Refineries in Russia
Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous
sources published
on 28-29 June/2026
Iran's 'Deal': What Happens After Trump?/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Gatestone
Institute/June 28, 2026
There Is No Security for You Except by Islam or Jizya [Protection Tax]’:
Extremist Persecution of Christians, February 2026/Raymond Ibrahim/Gatestone
Institute/June 28, 2026
What Is Wilayat al-Faqih? A Simple Definition/Janoubia Website, June 28, 2026
How did Hezbollah's rhetoric shift the focus from land to weapons?/Yassin Shibli,
Janoubia/June 28, 2026
Jamil Mroueh: The Framework Agreement Between Lebanon and Israel Is a
Preliminary Political Document, Not a Binding Treaty/Jamil Mroueh/Janoubia/June
28, 2026
Double Standards!/Mahmoud Al-Qaisi/Janoubia Website/June 28, 2026
On “The Image” in Politics and Negotiations/Hazem Saghieh/Al-Sharq Al-Awsat/June
28, 2026
Ending the Battle or Postponing It?!/Mishari Al-Zaydi/Asharq Al-Awsat/June 28,
2026
The Story of the Meeting of Saints Peter and Paul in Sidon!/George Hayek/Facebook/June
28, 2026
In Defense of Article 13 of the Washington Agreement/Nadim Koteich/Asas
Media/June 29, 2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on 28 June/2026
Latest English LCCC Lebanese &
Lebanese Related News & Editorials published
on 28-29 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.
Casualties Since March 2 War: A Health Ministry Report
Waradana site/28 June 2026
The Emergency Health Operations Center of the Ministry of Public Health has
released a statement announcing the cumulative total casualties of the
aggression from March 2 to June 28. The numbers reach 4,247 deaths and 12,195
injuries.
Israeli Airstrike Targets Hezbollah in Nabatieh Amidst
Peace Framework
Waradana site/28 June 2026
Just two days after the signing of a framework agreement between Lebanon and
Israel, the Israeli military announced it had 'eliminated armed Hezbollah
members equipped with rocket-propelled grenades, targeting a rocket-launching
platform in Nabatieh, southern Lebanon, to eliminate threats to its troops.
The military further stated, in a release shared by spokesperson Ella Waawia on
'X', that it 'targeted a building from which the armed members were operating
and dismantled a rocket-launching platform that posed a threat,' and released
footage of the strikes. The statement clarified that 'on Saturday, the Eagles
Unit of the 36th Division spotted several Hezbollah members with RPGs near the
security area where army forces operate' in southern Lebanon. It added that 'in
another operation in the area, the multi-dimensional unit destroyed a
Hezbollah-operated rocket launcher threatening their forces.' The statement
concluded by reaffirming that it 'will not allow Hezbollah to endanger Israeli
citizens or its forces and will continue to act against any threats.'
Framework Agreement Signed
The airstrikes followed a framework agreement signed between Lebanon and Israel
in Washington following five rounds of negotiations between the two countries,
who have no diplomatic relations. It specifically called for the disarmament of
Hezbollah and gradual Israeli withdrawal from areas it moved into in the south,
as well as the deployment of the Lebanese army beginning with two 'pilot'
regions. This agreement, brokered by the United States last Friday, is aimed at
paving the way for a ceasefire following the conflict that erupted on March 2.
This started when Hezbollah launched rockets and drones towards northern Israel
after the assassination of former Iranian guide Ali Khamenei, prompting Israel
to unleash an intensive air campaign on southern Lebanon and the southern
suburbs of Beirut, as well as the Bekaa Valley in eastern Lebanon.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the framework agreement as
'historic' on Saturday evening, viewing it as a 'blow to Iran and Hezbollah.'
Israel Secures Ali Al-Taher Heights, Cutting Hezbollah's Vital Supply Lines in
Lebanon
Waradana site/28 June 2026
On June 26, 2026, the Israeli army seized control of Ali Al-Taher Heights, a key
strategic point in southern Lebanon. This move has sparked questions regarding
its geographical significance and the strategic advantages it offers, thereby
impacting Hezbollah, which has relied on this "hill" as a crucial supply artery.
Military sources close to the Lebanese army argue that control over these
heights provides commanding fire control over the road stretching from southern
Litani towards western Bekaa, passing through Kfar Kila Bridge and reaching the
valley leading to the western Bekaa.
The Israeli army noted that the hill, previously regarded by Hezbollah as a
fortified military hideout and base, is now fully under Israeli security
control. Furthermore, it claimed that "ongoing operations establish a new
security reality, definitively curtailing Hezbollah's influence in this crucial
area," emphasizing that Israeli forces will not allow the hill to once again
pose a threat to Israel's security.
Significance of Ali Al-Taher Heights
Situated at about 600 meters above sea level, Ali Al-Taher Heights offers
stationed forces superior observation and fire direction capability. The area of
operations spans approximately 4-7 square kilometers, located 12-15 kilometers
from the Israeli border, making it strategically significant in southern
Lebanon. The heights hold special importance as they oversee five critical areas
in southern Lebanon, including Nabatieh, Kfar Tebnit, Litani Valley, the
Beaufort Castle, and supply routes in the eastern sector, crucial for monitoring
movement within the region. The location provides a direct view of several
strategic regions, allowing the monitoring of movements across surrounding
roads, expanding field visibility, and observing supply lines along the eastern
sector. Therefore, Israel's success in gaining control will sever supply lines
and aid in linking the western Bekaa with the south, given its role as a
sensitive military node with infrastructure, tunnels, and Hezbollah elements,
alongside other foreign entities.
The Role of Tunnels and Fortifications
Unofficial estimates suggest the presence of dozens of Hezbollah fighters in the
area, taking advantage of a network of fortifications and tunnels established at
the site, serving to bolster defensive capabilities. This network includes
command rooms, ammunition storage, sniper positions, and anti-armor missile
platforms, forming an integrated field structure within the area.The Ali Al-Taher
Heights emerge as one of the elevated points in southern Lebanon, granting
oversight over a broad area, thereby enhancing their importance in military
operations that hinge on controlling high grounds and vantage points. Control
over these heights enables Israel to secure the north against drone and missile
threats, rendering areas like the Zahrani – Nabatieh link effectively under
military control, marking a significant strategic loss for Hezbollah.
Information indicates that tunnels and fortifications in the area include
command facilities, ammunition storage, sniper points, and anti-armor missile
platforms, with unofficial estimates citing the presence of dozens of Hezbollah
fighters within this network.
Monitoring Supply Lines
The strategic importance of securing Ali Al-Taher Heights lies in providing
superior intelligence and firepower capabilities, enabling the detection of
Hezbollah fighter movement around Nabatieh and tracking supply lines linked to
the area. The site combines geographical elevation and the oversight of several
critical roads, alongside a network of tunnels and fortifications, underscoring
Ali Al-Taher Heights' significance in the southern Lebanon military landscape.
Political experts believe that the importance of "Ali Al-Taher Heights" stems
from its role as an advanced logistical base within Hezbollah's network, in
addition to its function in connecting supply lines between the western Bekaa
and the south. Hence, controlling these heights would deal a significant blow to
Hezbollah's military and logistical structure and limit its ability to transport
equipment and fighters while providing launch platforms towards sensitive areas
in Israel, particularly the Galilee Finger, according to observers. Observers
add that Israel will maintain its forces at the strategic points it has seized
within the border strip, continuing to carry out localized military operations
and persistent breaches including directed artillery fire and intensive drone
patrols, citing the protection of northern towns and preventing Hezbollah
elements from approaching the borders.
Trump Responds to Lebanese Woman: I Will Make Lebanon Great Again!
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
After finishing his round of golf at his private club, US President Donald Trump
was surprised when a woman, believed to be of Lebanese origin, shouted to him:
“Let’s make Lebanon great again!” Trump responded to the shout as he was going
up the stairs, saying: “Yes, I will,” in a scene that caught the attention of
those present and was widely shared on social media.
The funeral is a show of force, but the deceased is a
dog”… Hezbollah MP reveals what Aoun asked of the army commander
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
MP Nawaf al-Moussawi, from the Loyalty to the Resistance bloc, stated that the
President of the Republic asked the army commander to resign, adding, “If he’s a
tough guy, let him say it’s not true.” In a statement broadcast on Al-Manar TV,
al-Moussawi asserted that “the framework agreement is neither here nor there,”
using a colloquial expression: “The funeral is a show of force, but the deceased
is a dog.” He emphasized that talk of pushing Lebanon toward civil war is
unacceptable, adding, “I want to reassure our people… a civil war? Whoever is
thinking of taking things that way is dreaming.”
Israel Announces Destruction of a 200-Meter Hezbollah Tunnel in Southern Lebanon
Riyadh - Al Arabiya.net/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz
announced on Sunday that the Israeli army had destroyed an underground
infrastructure belonging to Hezbollah in the area of the town of Majdal Zoun
in southern Lebanon. According to the joint statement, the tunnel was more than
200 meters long, located at a depth of more than 25 meters, and contained
hundreds of weapons and several launch platforms intended for targeting Israel.
The statement added that Israel had informed the United States and its
representative in Lebanon in advance of the infrastructure destruction
operation. Netanyahu and Katz confirmed that Israeli forces would continue their
operations in the security zone in southern Lebanon, indicating that the army
would persist in destroying what they termed "terrorist infrastructure,"
removing threats to northern towns, and maintaining the security of Israelis.
Earlier today, Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz affirmed that the Israeli
army would continue its military operations inside Lebanon, emphasizing that
ensuring the security of northern Israel could only be achieved through the
disarmament of Hezbollah and the removal of what he described as threats on the
border, according to Israel's Channel 15. He also accused Iran and Hezbollah of
"violating Lebanese sovereignty," at a time when American and international
efforts continue to solidify the ceasefire and push for new security
arrangements in the south of the country. A security agreement reached between
Lebanon and Israel, brokered by the United States on Friday, stipulates a phased
Israeli withdrawal from certain areas of southern Lebanon, alongside the
deployment of the Lebanese army. However, Israeli forces will be permitted to
remain in an expanded security zone for the time being.
Zamir: The Agreement with Lebanon is Historic… Implementation is the True Test
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
During the approval of plans to continue operations at the Northern Command,
Israeli Chief of Staff, General Eyal Zamir, described the agreement signed with
the Lebanese government as “historic and important.” He noted that the
operational strength and military achievements of the Israeli army in recent
months paved the way for its conclusion. Zamir affirmed that Israel “will
respect the agreement and work to ensure its success,” considering the next
phase a test of its practical application by both sides, and that the results of
its implementation will determine the features of the next stage. He added that
the safety of Israeli forces is a top priority, noting that the 36th Division
and commando forces continue to control the Beaufort Castle hill area and are
equipped with all the necessary means to carry out their missions. He emphasized
that the army’s various capabilities will continue to support the forces
deployed in the area.
Katz: We Will Continue Military Operations in Lebanon Until
Hezbollah Is Disarmed
Riyadh - Al-Arabiya.net/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz affirmed that the Israeli army will
continue its military operations inside Lebanon, emphasizing that ensuring the
security of northern Israel will only be achieved through the disarmament of
Hezbollah and the removal of what he described as threats on the border. Katz
stated on Sunday that "the army's commanders and soldiers will continue to act
decisively in Lebanon to eliminate threats and work to ensure the security of
the residents of the north," adding that "there is no security on our northern
border except through the disarmament of Hezbollah," according to Israel's
Channel 15. He also accused Iran and Hezbollah of "violating Lebanese
sovereignty," at a time when American and international efforts continue to
solidify the ceasefire and push for new security arrangements in the south of
the country. Katz's statements came after a fifth round of Lebanese-Israeli
negotiations held in Washington, which focused on solidifying the ceasefire,
mechanisms for the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon, and strengthening
the deployment of the Lebanese army in the border areas. In this context,
Israel's Channel 15 reported that the ceasefire agreement granted the Israeli
army the right to enter designated sites to verify they were cleared of weapons
and military infrastructure. However, Lebanese authorities have not issued an
official comment on this account. Katz's statements reflect the continued
divergence between the two sides. Israel links any withdrawal to a guarantee of
Hezbollah's disarmament, while Lebanon demands first the end of the Israeli
military presence and respect for its sovereignty. Meanwhile, US mediation is
hoping to narrow the gap and push both sides toward gradual understandings that
will prevent a renewed escalation on the border. In contrast to Katz's hardline
stance, the Israeli Chief of Staff described the agreement signed with Lebanon
as "historic," emphasizing that the Israeli army will respect its terms and work
to ensure its success. This indicates the continuation of the negotiation
process while maintaining military readiness.
Four Days of Tension: How Was the Israel-Lebanon Agreement
Reached?
Riyadh - Al-Arabiya.net/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
The behind-the-scenes negotiations that preceded the signing of the framework
agreement between Israel and Lebanon revealed four days of intensive talks in
Washington. These talks were marked by sharp disagreements that nearly derailed
the first political agreement between the two countries in over four decades,
before American mediation succeeded in bridging the gaps, according to Axios,
which cited six American, Israeli, and Lebanese sources familiar with the
negotiations. The Lebanese-Israeli negotiations began at the US State Department
amidst a tense atmosphere, following the understandings reached between the
United States and Iran in Switzerland regarding Lebanon, which had provoked the
ire of both Beirut and Tel Aviv. During the first session, the Israeli
ambassador to Washington, Yehiel Leiter, described these understandings as
"disastrous," questioning the American mediators whether Washington remained
committed to the objective of the negotiations: limiting Iran's influence within
Lebanon. The Lebanese delegation also requested clarifications regarding these
understandings, while the American mediators emphasized that their goal was to
reach an agreement between Israel and Lebanon without external interference.
Axios quoted a US official as saying that the first day of negotiations was
"difficult," and that the discussions seemed to be stalling due to security
disagreements. The second day saw progress in the talks, before disagreements
resurfaced concerning the terms and locations of the Israeli withdrawal from
southern Lebanon. Consequently, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun requested more time to consult with their
respective leaderships, and the American mediators agreed to extend the
negotiations for an additional day. During this period, US Secretary of State
Marco Rubio held approximately eight phone calls with Netanyahu and Aoun, and
Vice President J.D. Vance also contacted both sides. Rubio stressed that
President Donald Trump wanted to finalize the agreement before the end of the
week. In the final session, Rubio joined the negotiations to help resolve the
outstanding issues. The US administration asked Israel to make two amendments to
the text of the agreement to ensure a final understanding was reached. The first
condition is the withdrawal of Israeli forces from a village in southern Lebanon
that remains under their control. This withdrawal is to be explicitly stated as
the beginning of a broader Israeli redeployment from Lebanese territory. Media
reports also indicate that Washington has asked Israel to pave the way for the
implementation of what are known as "pilot zones," where the Lebanese army is
supposed to deploy during the first phase of the agreement. These reports
suggest that Israel views these zones as a mechanism to verify the
implementation of security arrangements before proceeding to further phases of
redeployment. The negotiations resulted in a 14-point framework agreement, which
includes a cessation of hostilities, the redeployment of the Lebanese army in
border areas, a phased Israeli withdrawal according to agreed-upon arrangements,
and a mechanism for monitoring the agreement's implementation. The agreement
also stipulates that Israel has the right to respond if attacked by Hezbollah,
and that both sides will form working groups to draft a comprehensive peace
agreement. Despite reaching the agreement, Axios, citing informed sources,
reports that all parties recognize the real challenge begins with the
implementation phase, given the ongoing internal divisions in Lebanon and
Hezbollah's rejection of the agreement, which could put the new understandings
to an early test.
Israeli Army Announces Death of Golani Brigade Commander
and Wounding of Soldier in Direct Clash with Hezbollah Fighter
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The Israeli army announced today, Sunday, the death of Captain David Hazut (21
years old), from Ashkelon, a platoon commander in the 12th Battalion of the
Golani Brigade, during a battle in southern Lebanon. Another Israeli soldier was
wounded in the incident. According to Hebrew media, “During a military operation
carried out by the 12th Battalion of the Golani Brigade in the town of Deir
Siryan in the Nabatieh district, within the 36th Division's sector, the force
clashed with a Hezbollah unit that apparently attempted to ambush them in the
area.” The Israeli account added: “In an exchange of fire involving small arms
and rockets, Captain David Hazut was killed and other soldiers were wounded.
Shortly afterward, the Air Force launched an airstrike on the area to neutralize
additional sources of fire.” Channel 15, for its part, revealed details of the
incident: “Golani Brigade fighters encountered a Hezbollah operative while
entering the town of Deir Siryan. As a result of the clash, Captain David Hazut
was killed, and another soldier sustained minor injuries.” Channel 15 noted that
“following the incident, forces launched a search operation for the Hezbollah
operative and targeted locations in the area. The search operations are still
ongoing.”
Israeli Army: We Targeted the Element Involved in the
Killing of a Golani Brigade Officer in the South!
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The Israeli army announced that it targeted an element it said participated in
the clash that led to the death of Captain David Hazut, a platoon commander in
the Golani Brigade, during a nighttime operation in the Deir Siryan area of
southern Lebanon. According to the Israeli army statement, a force from the
Golani Brigade's combat team entered a location it described as suspicious in
the Deir Siryan area on Sunday night, where a clash occurred with a Hezbollah
operative, resulting in the death of Captain David Hazut and minor injuries to
another soldier. The statement added that, following extensive searches of the
area, Israeli forces located the operative inside a building near the site of
the clash and targeted him. The Israeli army affirmed that it will continue
working to eliminate what it described as threats targeting its forces,
emphasizing that it will not allow Hezbollah to harm Israeli citizens or its
forces. This announcement comes amid continued tensions on the ground in
southern Lebanon, despite talk of a "framework agreement" between Lebanon and
Israel, and the accompanying international and regional calls to solidify the
ceasefire and prevent the escalation of confrontations. Israel continues to
conduct military operations within areas of southern Lebanon, while the Lebanese
government demands a halt to Israeli attacks and a complete withdrawal from
Lebanese territory. Meanwhile, the arrangements related to the agreement still
face challenges on the ground that are hindering the transition to full
implementation.
Israel Postpones Withdrawal from Southern Lebanon: Army
Retains Freedom of Action
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Israeli media reported that the Israeli withdrawal from the two experimental
areas in southern Lebanon, which was expected to take place today, did not occur
due to incomplete preparations. The Israeli Broadcasting Corporation (Kan)
reported that the withdrawal from the two experimental areas was postponed
because the necessary arrangements for its implementation were not yet ready.
For its part, Israel's Channel 12 stated that the security annex guarantees the
Israeli army's freedom of action within what is known as the "yellow line,"
noting that the Lebanese army's entry into the experimental areas will take
several weeks. The channel added that the Israeli army's withdrawals will not be
carried out according to a specific timetable, but rather based on the
conditions and circumstances on the ground.
Iran: Implementing the Lebanon Clause is a Prerequisite for
a Permanent Agreement and Regional Stability
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The Iranian Foreign Ministry affirmed that implementing the clause pertaining to
Lebanon in the Memorandum of Understanding with the United States is a
fundamental condition for reaching a permanent agreement and achieving stability
in the region. It considered the cessation of Israeli military operations
against Lebanon and Israel's withdrawal from all Lebanese territory to be
mandatory prerequisites for any future arrangements.
The ministry stated that ending Israeli military operations against Lebanon is
essential for establishing security and stability, calling for Israel's
withdrawal from all Lebanese territories still under its control. It emphasized
that protecting Lebanon's sovereignty and territorial integrity is a fundamental
element for the sustainability of any future understandings. The Iranian Foreign
Ministry added that regional stability remains contingent upon ending the war on
Lebanon and ending the Israeli presence within Lebanese territory. It called for
continued pressure to implement the commitments stipulated in the Memorandum of
Understanding regarding Lebanon and for establishing a clear timetable for an
unconditional Israeli withdrawal. These positions come after Lebanon and Israel,
under US auspices, signed a framework agreement in Washington following the
fifth round of negotiations that began last April. These negotiations covered
security and political issues, most notably the consolidation of the ceasefire,
arrangements in southern Lebanon, and mechanisms for reducing tensions along the
border. The Iranian statements also fall within the context of the US-Iranian
memorandum of understanding announced to end the military conflict between the
two sides, which included an immediate cessation of military operations on all
fronts, including the Lebanese arena. In contrast, the Israeli position
continues to raise questions about the implementation mechanism of this
agreement, after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister
Israel Katz instructed the army to adhere to the ceasefire in Lebanon without
withdrawing from the areas it controls, while emphasizing that Israel will
respond to any ceasefire violation by Hezbollah. These developments place
Lebanon at the heart of new regional and international understandings, now that
the southern issue has become part of the US-Iranian negotiations. While Tehran
links the sustainability of any understanding to a cessation of Israeli
operations and withdrawal from Lebanese territory, Washington seeks to solidify
the truce and prevent the collapse of the political process in preparation for
testing the agreement's implementation on the ground. The success of this path
remains linked to the ability of international and regional guarantees to
translate political understandings into practical steps, starting with stopping
the attacks, establishing a clear monitoring mechanism, and creating the
conditions for the return of displaced persons to their villages and towns, in
order to enhance stability in southern Lebanon.
Slogan Conflict on Airport Road: Two Arrested for Burning
Lebanese Flag After Removal of “Thank You Iran” Banners
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
MTV reported that the Lebanese Army arrested two individuals who burned a
billboard bearing the Lebanese flag and the slogan “Lebanon First” on the road
leading to Rafik Hariri International Airport in Beirut. According to the
report, investigations revealed that the detainees are a 20-year-old Syrian
national and a 15-year-old Lebanese boy. They, along with a group of protesters,
burned the national symbol amidst heightened political and security tensions.
This incident coincided with the removal of large billboards that had been
erected days earlier on the airport road bearing the slogans “Thank You Iran”
and “Thank You to Loyal Iran,” and featuring images of the new Iranian Supreme
Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, and his predecessor, Ali Khamenei. These billboards
were replaced with new ones displaying the slogan “Lebanon First.” The “Thank
You Iran” banners sparked a wave of controversy and objections in the Lebanese
street, especially since they were raised following the announcement of the
ceasefire understandings resulting from the US-Iranian negotiations in
Switzerland. These angry reactions stemmed from the fact that displaying images
of Iranian leaders violated the strict measures recently adopted by the Lebanese
government, which mandated the removal of all political and partisan images and
slogans from the airport, considered an official facility and gateway to the
country, after it had long been used to display messages and slogans linked to
the regional axis.
Between Appeasing Iran and Lebanon’s Interests: The Enigma
of Double Standards in the Resistance Discourse
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The newspaper “Nidaa Al-Watan” quoted a political source as saying that the wave
of opposition shown by the “resistance” forces against the framework agreement
was expected, at least for media consumption before their constituents who bore
the heaviest and most direct price in the two wars of support, and the resulting
death, destruction, and widespread devastation. However, the source expressed
considerable astonishment at the inherent contradiction in the positions of
these parties. It pointed out that all the forces that vehemently rejected the
agreement outright, leveling accusations of treason against the Lebanese
government and its president, were simultaneously represented within the cabinet
by one or more ministers. The source considered this behavior a blatant double
standard and an incomprehensible political inconsistency, as they publicly wage
fierce opposition while being an integral part of the executive branch that
concluded the agreement. In the same vein, the political source expressed his
bewilderment that these parties, supposedly Lebanese forces primarily concerned
with the interests of their nation, choose to oppose the decisions of the
Lebanese state and refuse to acknowledge the validity of its sovereign choices
to protect the country, while simultaneously demonstrating a complete
willingness to build upon the outcomes of the American-Iranian negotiations and
even preemptively endorse the content of any agreement that might emerge from
those international channels, as long as it satisfies Tehran. The source
concluded that the primary objective and true driving force behind these forces
lies in attempting to preserve Iranian influence and role in Lebanon at any
cost—a role that the official Lebanese authorities are working to end and
restore independent national decision-making. The source emphasized the state's
commitment to the path of peace and salvation despite all the campaigns of
accusations of treason and threats it faces.
Israeli Violations in the South 48 Hours After the Signing
of the Washington Understanding
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Barely 48 hours had passed since the signing of the historic framework agreement
between Lebanon and Israel in Washington when the southern front erupted again
under the weight of violations and military operations, placing the nascent
understanding before its first and most severe political and security test. In
detail, the Israeli army announced the execution of a series of airstrikes and
ground operations in the Nabatieh region and adjacent to the security zone in
southern Lebanon, claiming that they were carried out "to remove direct threats
facing its forces." Israeli military spokeswoman Ella Wawiya issued a statement
via the “X” platform confirming the detection and elimination of a group of
Hezbollah militants equipped with RPGs by the 36th Division’s Egoz Unit. The
statement also confirmed the targeting of a building and the destruction of a
rocket launching platform by the “Multi-Dimensional Unit.” The statement
emphasized that Israel “will not allow harm to come to its citizens or its
forces.” These rapid developments on the ground come just two days after the
signing of the framework agreement last Friday, brokered by the United States,
following five marathon rounds of arduous negotiations in Washington, D.C. The
agreement primarily stipulates the disarmament of Hezbollah and the commencement
of a phased Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied by Israeli forces
in southern Lebanon. This withdrawal will be met with the deployment of the
Lebanese army, beginning as a first phase in two “pilot” zones. This framework
agreement is intended to pave the way for a final ceasefire in the war that
erupted on March 2nd, following the assassination of former Iranian Supreme
Leader Ali Khamenei. Hezbollah then launched waves of rockets and drones toward
northern Israel, prompting a devastating Israeli military campaign and intensive
airstrikes targeting southern Lebanon, Beirut's southern suburbs, and the Bekaa
Valley. In his first political comment on this diplomatic development, Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the agreement as "historic," stating
in a speech Saturday evening that it represented "a crushing blow to Iran and
Hezbollah." However, on the ground, negotiations and escalation continue to
unfold simultaneously in southern Lebanon.
President Aoun condemns the attacks on Bahrain and Kuwait:
a violation of sovereignty and an undermining of regional calm efforts
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The President of the Republic, General Joseph Aoun, condemned the attacks that
targeted Bahrain and Kuwait, considering that these escalatory actions
constitute a blatant violation of the sovereignty of states and a direct threat
to the security and stability of the region. President Aoun believed that the
attacks taking place fall within the framework of undermining all regional and
international efforts and endeavors aimed at stopping the war and containing
tensions, which requires urgent action from the sponsors of the American-Iranian
memorandum of understanding and the international community to put an end to
these attacks and prevent the region from sliding toward further escalation. The
President of the Republic affirmed Lebanon's full solidarity with Bahrain and
Kuwait, calling for the adoption of dialogue and diplomatic means as the only
way to resolve disputes and maintain regional security.
The Lebanese Army responds to the Israeli allegations about
the division of the military institution: They are rejected, condemned, and not
based on facts
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The Lebanese Army leadership refuted the inflammatory allegations and reports
broadcast recently by Israeli media, which attempted to cast doubt on the unity
of the military institution and its combat doctrine, in a move that political
circles considered an attempt by Tel Aviv to legitimize its direct targeting of
Lebanese military points and control the pace of its field deployment. In
details, a high-ranking Lebanese military source confirmed in exclusive
statements to Al Jazeera that the Lebanese Army represents a comprehensive and
unified national institution that operates strictly in accordance with the
provisions of the Constitution and applicable Lebanese laws, stressing that
there is no place within the ranks of the military institution for any political
or sectarian affiliation or loyalty outside the framework of the official
military doctrine of protecting the homeland and defending its sovereignty. The
military source explained that all officers and members in the various brigades
and sectors deployed carry out their field duties with complete and absolute
loyalty to the institution and the nation, categorically denying the validity of
the Israeli allegations and rumors that spoke of the existence of divisions or
“double-loyalty” cells within the army’s structure, at times by claiming the
presence of elements facilitating the movement of Hezbollah fighters in the
south, and at other times by questioning the commitment of certain units to the
leadership’s decisions based on their sectarian backgrounds; The source
described these leaks as “totally rejected and condemned,” and not based on any
concrete facts or evidence on the ground. This Israeli propaganda campaign comes
at a sensitive time. The occupation leaders, led by Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yisrael Katz, seek to impose field dictates and
require that the deployment of the Lebanese army in the south be subject to
strict Israeli security assessment and conditions within the so-called “security
zones” created, which is what Tel Aviv tried to justify by creating a
“pretextual cover” that legitimizes its repeated attacks on the centers and
sites of the Lebanese army and its border points. In the same context, the
Lebanese military source blocked these attempts, stressing through Al Jazeera
that the Lebanese army is an independent, sovereign institution that is not
subject to evaluation, dictates, or guardianship from any external party,
whatever it may be, but rather complies exclusively with the official decisions
issued by the Lebanese executive authority, stressing that the military
institution will continue to bear its full responsibilities and perform its
national tasks on all Lebanese lands, which are preserving internal security and
stability, protecting civil peace, and defending Lebanon’s sovereignty and
borders in the face of external threats.
Berri and Qalibaf discuss implementing the memorandum of
understanding and demand Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri received a phone call from the Speaker of the
Shura Council of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Muhammad Baqir Qalibaf, during
which they discussed developments in the situation in Lebanon and the region,
especially Israel’s continued attacks on southern Lebanon.
During the call, the two sides considered that Israel continues to violate the
first clause of the memorandum of understanding signed between the Islamic
Republic of Iran and the United States of America, which stipulates the
necessity of ending the war on all fronts, including Lebanon, and Israel’s
withdrawal from the lands it occupied up to the internationally recognized
borders from the first moment of signing the agreement and within the sixty-day
period, in order to achieve for Lebanon the liberation of its land and the
preservation of its sovereignty and independent national decision-making without
any concession. Qalibaf assured Speaker Berri of Iran’s keenness to continue its
efforts and intensify its efforts with the regional and international bodies
guarantor of the memorandum of understanding, in order to oblige Israel to end
its war on Lebanon in implementation of what was stated in the agreement. He
also indicated that the technical committee charged with following up on the
implementation of the memorandum of understanding, which includes Iran, the
United States of America, and Lebanon, must begin its work to discuss and follow
up on understandings related to the field situation, especially in Lebanon. For
his part, President Berri renewed his thanks to Qalibaf and the Islamic Republic
of Iran, as well as to other brotherly and friendly countries, for their
standing and tireless efforts to end the Israeli war on Lebanon, liberate its
land, and return the displaced to their villages, towns and cities.
Berri and Abdel-Aty Talk: Priority is a Complete Israeli
Withdrawal!
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdel-Aty
discussed developments in Lebanon and the region during a phone call, given the
sensitive stage the Lebanese situation is going through, particularly
developments related to the south and the de-escalation process. Abdel-Aty
affirmed Egypt's commitment to supporting Lebanon's stability, stressing that
the priority must be a complete Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon and the
deployment of the Lebanese army. He considered a complete Israeli withdrawal the
key to stability in the country.
For his part, Berri emphasized the need to avoid strife in Lebanon and to exert
every possible effort to preserve stability and maintain civil peace, given the
political and field tensions accompanying the current phase. The call comes at a
time of intensified Arab and international activity regarding the Lebanese
situation, following the announcement of the "framework agreement" between
Lebanon and Israel under US auspices, and the internal debate it has sparked
regarding implementation mechanisms, the required guarantees, and the future of
the military deployment in southern Lebanon.
UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon Jeanine
Hennis-Plasschaert's Farewell Message to Lebanon: Weapons Outside State Control
Deepened Divisions!
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
The UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, addressed a
farewell message to Lebanon, reviewing the highlights of her two years in the
country. She praised Lebanon's beauty and the generosity of its people, while
also addressing the political, economic, and security crises it has faced.
Plasschaert said that during her time there, she learned to appreciate the
beautiful details of Lebanon, from the churches and mosques standing side by
side to the ancient ruins and mountainous landscapes. She emphasized that the
Lebanese, regardless of their affiliations, are characterized by boundless
generosity and a constant willingness to share what they have. Conversely, she
described some of the lessons she learned as harsh, noting that speaking with
people who had lost access to their savings revealed the magnitude of the
economic tragedy. She also highlighted the depth of sectarian divisions and the
decline of pragmatism and empathy, in addition to the complex repercussions and
devastating effects of weapons outside the control of the state. She argued that
this has created a reality resembling a “state within a state,” coinciding with
escalating public anger due to political paralysis, corruption, and impunity.
She affirmed that Lebanon possesses the potential to be in a much better
position, thanks to its natural beauty, the creativity of its people, and their
ability to transform their diversity into a source of strength. She believes
that some of this potential began to emerge last year with the adoption by the
President and the government of what she described as bold and ambitious
agendas, outlining a vision for a strong and sovereign Lebanese state. She
concluded that the recent talks in Washington and the resulting framework
agreement, while part of a larger picture, demonstrate that Lebanon is capable
of opening new horizons for the future. She stressed the need to create a
conducive internal environment for transitioning to effective, decision-making
governance. She asserted that Lebanon requires a comprehensive approach to the
issue of weapons outside state control, one that goes beyond the military
dimension and ensures the state alone is responsible for protecting Lebanese
citizens and meeting their needs. She affirmed her conviction that establishing
a strong Lebanese state remains an achievable goal, but one that demands years
of work and patience, the participation of all political leaders and actors,
prioritizing the national interest above any partisan or sectarian affiliation,
and the continued support of international partners and friends to bolster
Lebanese state decisions. She also called for a shift away from the mentality of
relying on support networks outside the state framework, noting that what she
observed during her time in Lebanon is that the vast majority of Lebanese, from
public sector employees and business owners to vendors and taxi drivers, aspire
to a stable life and a future not held hostage to monthly developments. She
concluded her message by calling for unity around the Lebanese flag, stressing
that there is no better moment than the present time to achieve this. She added
that when her plane took off from Beirut airport, she looked out the window as
she had done during the past two years, and contemplated the Mediterranean coast
and the mountains of Lebanon, considering that Lebanon has given a lot to the
world, and it is time for it to give itself the opportunity it deserves to
become the country that it is worthy of being, describing it as “paradise on
earth.”
Al-Shaibani to Visit Beirut Soon… Who Will He Meet and What
Are the Key Issues? / Speaker of Parliament to Meet with the First Lebanese
Shiite Leader
Damascus - London/Al-Sharq Al-Awsat/June 28, 2026 (Translated by
Google from Arabic)
Lebanese presidential sources revealed to Syria TV that Syrian Foreign Minister
Asaad al-Shaibani will visit Lebanon next week. They noted that the visit comes
within the framework of reorganizing official relations between Damascus and
Beirut, and will address border issues, economic cooperation, and the activation
of bilateral agreements. Prime Minister Nawaf Salam had a telephone conversation
with Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani on June 22, during which he
"praised the brotherly and frank stance towards Lebanon" expressed by President
Ahmed al-Sharaa during his televised interview the previous day, "which put an
end to the misleading speculations and assumptions about Syria's intentions
towards Lebanon." In this context, the visit complements President al-Sharaa's
media statements and his reassurance to Lebanon that there will be no Syrian
interference, unlike the practice during the rule of the two Assads over the
past half-century. In a televised interview a few days ago, Syrian President
Ahmed al-Sharaa emphasized that the new Syria rejects a return to policies of
tutelage and interference in Lebanese affairs, and that Damascus does not seek
any military role in Lebanon, but rather supports the path of peace, stability,
and dialogue among the various Lebanese factions. Al-Sharaa's remarks were a
comment on statements by US President Donald Trump, who hinted at handing over
the Hezbollah file to Syria. In the same vein, Lebanese Deputy Prime Minister
Tarek Mitri tweeted that President Ahmed al-Sharaa's position toward Lebanon is
"no longer a secret to anyone," stressing that it reflects a clear orientation
toward respecting Lebanon's sovereignty and strengthening its territorial
integrity. It is worth noting that during his visit, al-Shaibani will meet with
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, and Prime
Minister Nawaf Salam, along with a number of other Lebanese officials, "as part
of efforts to strengthen official communication channels between the two
countries." What is noteworthy about the visit is that the Syrian Foreign
Minister will meet with Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, marking the first
meeting at this level between a Syrian official and a Lebanese Shiite leader
since the fall of the Assad regime. This move aims to broaden communication
channels with various Lebanese political forces and open a new chapter in
bilateral relations. According to sources, the visit follows up on the positive
initiative announced by Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa in his recent
interview. It aims to reaffirm Damascus's support for Lebanon and its assistance
in overcoming its crises, and to establish a cooperative approach between the
two countries, moving beyond the policies of the previous era. Among the most
important issues the Syrian official will discuss during his visit to Beirut are
border security, including strengthening joint coordination to control land
borders and combat smuggling operations.
Economy and Agreements: Activating bilateral agreements and opening a practical
track for the joint committees between Damascus and Beirut.
Energy Sector: Exploring avenues for cooperation in the fields of electricity,
energy, and land transport. On the political front, the visit will include
discussions with senior Lebanese officials on regulating official relations and
opening direct channels of communication with various political forces and
entities. Sources indicated that Shibani will emphasize during his meetings the
necessity of activating bilateral agreements and establishing a practical
framework for the work of joint committees between the two countries. Shibani
made his first visit to Lebanon after the fall of Assad last October, and during
a press conference with his Lebanese counterpart, Youssef Raji, he stressed his
country's respect for Lebanon and its sovereignty, and its desire to overcome
past obstacles and build a developed political and economic relationship between
the two countries. Shibani stated, "This visit reflects Syria's new approach
towards Lebanon. We hold Lebanon in the highest regard and respect, and we will
not interfere in its internal affairs."
Patriarch Rai on the Lebanon-Israel Agreement: The Path to
Peace is Difficult… and the Lebanese Have Yearned for It Since 1975
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Patriarch Cardinal Mar Bechara Boutros al-Rahi stated that the season of
Pentecost is the time of the Holy Spirit guiding the Church throughout the
world, emphasizing that the Church walks “between the persecutions of the world
and the consolations of God,” as Saint Augustine put it. During his Sunday
homily at the Maronite Institute in Rome, al-Rahi said that today’s Gospel calls
on believers to be prudent, gentle, patient, and steadfast, stressing that the
Church does not fear persecution because Christ himself was persecuted, and that
believers are called to persevere in the pursuit of good. He added that the
Church confronts persecution because it resists evil with good, hatred with
love, conflict with reconciliation, injustice with justice, and war with peace,
considering that bearing witness to the values of the Gospel has been and
remains the foundation of the Church’s growth. Regarding Lebanon, Patriarch Rai
addressed the agreement reached between Lebanon, the United States, and Israel,
saying, “We want to thank God in a special way for this 14-point agreement,” and
called for it to be placed in the heart of prayer and in the hands of God, “the
Lord of Peace and King of Peace.” He emphasized that the Lebanese people have
longed for peace since 1975 after enduring decades of war, noting that entire
generations were born into conflict and never knew the meaning of peace.
Patriarch Rai stressed that the agreement does not necessarily mean everyone
agrees with it, but he acknowledged that the path to peace is difficult, urging
people to entrust it to God, and affirming that Lebanon needs to seize any
opportunity that leads to stability and an end to the cycle of wars.
Lebanese Political Leader Samir Geagea Calls Framework
Agreement a Historic Opportunity
Waradana site/28 June 2026
The leader of the Lebanese Forces, Samir Geagea, issued a statement regarding
the recent framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel, led by President
Joseph Aoun in coordination with Prime Minister Nawaf Salam. Geagea described
this as the most significant political move by the Lebanese state in half a
century, aimed at resolving the country's dire predicament caused by repeated
conflicts in southern Lebanon. Geagea emphasized that the agreement not only
aims to remove Israeli presence from Lebanon, allowing southern residents to
return home but also seeks to permanently close the 'bleeding south,' a term he
uses to describe the ongoing conflict affecting all Lebanese, particularly
southerners. This conflict has disrupted national stability, political
functionality, and led to widespread economic and financial collapses. He
further argued that contrary to claims by various resistance groups, these
conflicts have not advanced the Palestinian cause, while repeatedly decimating
Lebanon. The framework agreement, once implemented, promises not only to rid
Lebanon of Israeli forces and close the southern front but also aims to tackle a
longstanding national issue: the presence of non-state military groups like
Hezbollah, which act independently in matters of war and peace, often serving
foreign interests rather than Lebanon's. Geagea stated that this agreement would
curtail Iran's unfettered influence over Lebanese decision-making, aligning
Lebanese-Iranian relations back to a normal state-to-state diplomatic
relationship beneficial to both nations. He also criticized those opposing the
agreement by calling it a source of strife, noting that ignoring past violations
of agreements has led to the current situation. He reminded skeptics that the
legitimate Lebanese government, comprising the President, the government, and
Parliament, sanctioned this agreement, with President Aoun elected legally and
receiving considerable support in Parliament. Finally, Geagea urged all Lebanese
to seize this unprecedented opportunity to overcome the crises of the past fifty
years and support the legitimate authorities in expediting the recovery process,
rather than waste time on outdated and ineffective arguments.
The Washington Framework offers Lebanon a brutal but
necessary lifeline out of the abyss
Ibrahim Rihan (Editor in Chief)/Waradana site/28 June 2026
Flawed as it may be under the shadow of occupation, this U.S.-brokered deal is
the only viable mechanism to stop the slaughter, reclaim territory, and restore
the state.
The signing of the "Three-Party Framework" agreement between Lebanon and Israel
in Washington has understandably provoked a storm of anxiety across a bruised
nation. Brokered under the watchful eye of the U.S. State Department, the deal
arrives at an hour of existential peril: Lebanon is enduring a devastating
military invasion, its southern villages are occupied, and its economy is
virtually non-existent. To many, any agreement signed under such duress feels
unpalatable. Yet, a cold, clear-eyed assessment of Lebanon’s immediate survival
dictates a different conclusion. This framework is not a capitulation; it is a
brutal, necessary, and deeply pragmatic lifeline designed to pull the country
back from the edge of total annihilation.
In the theater of realpolitik, moral absolutism is a luxury Lebanon simply
cannot afford. The primary, undeniable virtue of the Washington agreement is
that it establishes an immediate, structured path toward halting the slaughter.
For months, Lebanese civilians have borne the catastrophic brunt of an
asymmetrical war. By initiating the "experimental security programme," the
framework creates a tangible diplomatic mechanism to freeze hostilities. It
provides a vital pause that allows hundreds of thousands of internally displaced
persons to begin the agonizing journey back to their homes, while opening the
gates for urgently needed international humanitarian aid and reconstruction
funds.
Crucially, the agreement offers a phased, legally recognized blueprint for the
restoration of Lebanese sovereignty. The critics who dismiss the pilot zones in
the south as an Israeli trap miss the broader strategic value of the mechanism.
For the first time since the outbreak of this latest conflict, there is a signed
commitment to an Israeli military withdrawal, tied directly to the deployment of
the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF). By positioning the national army as the sole
legitimate security guarantor in these zones, the framework incrementally shifts
the balance of power back to the state. It allows the LAF to reassert its
constitutional mandate, proving to the international community that the Lebanese
state is both willing and capable of governing its own territory.
Furthermore, the agreement addresses the harsh economic reality that Lebanon
cannot rebuild itself in a vacuum. The inclusion of international oversight and
the stabilization of the security environment are essential prerequisites to
unlock global financial confidence. Without a formalized framework endorsed by
Washington, international donors and financial institutions would continue to
treat Lebanon as a toxic, lawless zone. This agreement provides the minimum
threshold of stability required to attract foreign investment, revitalize basic
infrastructure, and breathe life back into a suffocating economy.
To reject this framework in the name of ideological purity is to choose the
continuation of an unwinnable war that would leave Lebanon completely
pulverized. The agreement does not solve the region’s deep-seated geopolitical
crises, nor does it wipe away the trauma of occupation. What it does, however,
is give a collapsing nation the structural breathing room to survive.
Ultimately, the Washington framework must be viewed not as a permanent
settlement, but as an indispensable tool of crisis management. It halts the
immediate terror of bombardment, establishes a precedent for Israeli withdrawal,
and empowers the Lebanese army. In a world of deeply imperfect choices, this
agreement represents the only realistic path toward salvaging what remains of
Lebanon's sovereignty and securing a future for its people.
The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 28-29 June/2026
Iran attacks Bahrain and Kuwait following US strikes and threatens to
halt talks
JON GAMBRELL and MELANIE LIDMAN
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Iran again launched drone and missile attacks
Sunday targeting Bahrain and Kuwait in response to new U.S. airstrikes against
the Islamic Republic, and threatened a "complete halt" in negotiations to end
the war if Washington continues its attacks.
Efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz without Iran's direct oversight sparked
the days of crossfire and have imperiled the talks for a lasting ceasefire. A
multinational maritime body overseen by the U.S. Navy said Saturday it would
expand a route near Oman for inbound and outbound traffic, setting up a new
flashpoint with Tehran.
The global community has long considered the strait an international passageway,
despite its location in Iran and Oman's territorial waters. In recent days, Iran
has twice attacked vessels going through a route on the Omani side in an
evacuation effort backed by a United Nations agency.
Iran insists that it alone must govern the strait, the narrow mouth of the
Persian Gulf that once carried a fifth of the world's oil and natural gas.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reiterated the claim on Sunday.
"Any attempt to establish new or separate arrangements from those currently
being carried out by the Islamic Republic of Iran will only lead to further
complications, delay the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and increase the
level of tension," Araghchi said.
The United States and Iran have been debating the terms of an interim deal,
including shipping arrangements on the strait, the removal of a U.S. blockade on
Iranian ports and sanctions on Iran and the future of Iran's stockpile of highly
enriched uranium. Under the memorandum of understanding signed this month, they
have 60 days to iron out details.
The interim deal is meant to end fighting on all fronts before certain key
issues can be discussed. Continued fighting in Lebanon, where an Israeli soldier
was killed by Hezbollah fire early Sunday, also threatens the agreement.
Strikes target Gulf states hosting US military
Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard claimed responsibility for the attacks
in Bahrain and Kuwait.
Kuwait's military said air defenses intercepted Iranian drones and missiles just
after the U.S. strikes in Iran. Kuwait, which hosts a major U.S. military base,
said it intercepted two ballistic missiles. There were no reports of injuries or
damage.
Bahrain's Interior Ministry said the Iranian strikes damaged a residential
building near the international airport and no one was killed. The ministry
released photos of an eight-story building, its top floor destroyed and windows
blown out.
Bahrain is home to the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, whose base came under repeated
attack during the war. The damaged building was not near the fleet's
headquarters.
Bahrain's Foreign Ministry denounced what it called "a dangerous escalation that
reveals that what Tehran is doing is not a passing act, nor an isolated
incident, but rather a deliberate approach and a systematic pattern of repeated
aggression."
Trump accuses Iran of violating ceasefire with ship attack
The U.S. military's Central Command said it struck Iranian military
"surveillance infrastructure, communication systems, air defense sites, drone
storage facilities and minelayer capabilities" following an attack on a ship at
sea Saturday. The Panamanian-flagged tanker Kiku carried crude oil for the
state-run energy company of Qatar, a key mediator between Iran and the U.S.
President Donald Trump on social media accused Iran of violating the ceasefire
and warned of a point where the U.S. may no longer be reasonable "and will be
forced to militarily complete the job.""If that happens, the Islamic Republic of
Iran will no longer exist!" Trump wrote.
The exchanges of fire began when an Iranian drone struck a merchant vessel off
Oman on Thursday and the U.S. military retaliated with strikes.
Ship traffic on the strait had increased over the past 72 hours, off both Iran
and Oman, the multinational maritime body overseen by the U.S. Navy said Sunday,
adding that "U.S.-assisted commercial transits continued uninterrupted despite
the elevated threat environment."
It said 89 such transits had been made, still below the historical average of
138 vessels a day.
Iran calls for new 'conflict control unit' in Lebanon
Last week, Israel and the Lebanese government signed a framework agreement to
end the latest fighting between Israel and the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militant
group, which began two days after the Iran war began when Hezbollah fired at
Israel. Israel responded with an invasion that has occupied large swaths of
southern Lebanon, and it has said it will not withdraw until Hezbollah is
disarmed.
But last week's deal did not include Iran or Hezbollah, which has criticized the
deal and rejected calls to disarm.
On Sunday, Araghchi again said the U.S. must force Israel to halt attacks and
withdraw. Israel occupies around 600 square kilometers (231 square miles) in
southern Lebanon, which it says it needs as a security buffer.
But sporadic clashes have continued, and Hezbollah's leader said Saturday that
the group would continue fighting until Israel withdraws from Lebanon.
Key Iranian negotiator and parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf said
Sunday that a meeting of a new "conflict control unit" formed among Iran, the
United States and Lebanon should meet as soon as possible, Iran's state
broadcaster reported.
The frequency of Israeli strikes in Lebanon has decreased significantly since
the Iran-U.S. deal was signed, but two separate strikes hit southern Lebanon on
Sunday morning — one in Taybeh town and the other in the Nabatiyeh area,
according to Lebanon's National News Agency. There was no immediate word on
casualties.
Overnight, Hezbollah militants killed an Israeli soldier in Deir Siryan village
in southern Lebanon, according to Israel's military. Hezbollah did not comment.
"We are prepared to rapidly resume offensive operations in both Lebanon and Iran
if required," said Israel's military chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir.
*Lidman reported from Tel Aviv, Israel. Associated Press writer Sally Abou
AlJoud in Beirut contributed to this report.
US Official: Technical Talks with Iran Proceeding as Scheduled
Riyadh - Al Arabiya.net/June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
A White House official denied on Sunday that the talks scheduled for this week
between the United States and Iran in Switzerland had been canceled, confirming
that the technical discussions regarding the implementation of the memorandum of
understanding between the two countries are proceeding according to schedule.
Speaking to Al Arabiya/Al Hadath, the official stated that the upcoming round of
talks with Iran in Switzerland has not been canceled, contrary to reports in the
US media, specifically referencing a report in the Wall Street Journal. He
added, "Nothing has been canceled. The technical discussions regarding the
implementation of the memorandum of understanding are proceeding according to
schedule for the coming days, and the deconfliction channels are functioning
effectively following the Lucerne summit." For his part, the US Permanent
Representative to the United Nations, Mike Waltz, announced the continuation of
technical negotiations between the United States and Iran. In an interview with
Fox News, he said, "Discussions are ongoing, particularly at the technical
level, regarding access for inspectors, reducing uranium enrichment levels, and
other aspects aimed at ensuring that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon."
Waltz added that US President Donald Trump "always gives diplomacy a chance,"
but Trump's patience "won't last forever," and that he "will keep all options on
the table" to influence Tehran. For his part, a US official explained that
Washington and Tehran had agreed to halt the strikes and meet in Doha on
Tuesday, June 30. The official also stated that Tuesday's meeting with Iran in
Doha would focus on resolving the Strait of Hormuz crisis, according to Axios.
This came after The Wall Street Journal, citing informed sources, reported
earlier that day that talks between Washington and Tehran in Switzerland had
been suspended. On June 27, US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced it had
carried out a series of strikes on Iranian territory in response to an attack
targeting a commercial vessel in the Strait of Hormuz, while Iran retaliated by
targeting US military installations. The two sides continued exchanging strikes
on Sunday, with CENTCOM announcing it had targeted 10 Iranian military sites in
and around the Strait of Hormuz, while the Iranian Revolutionary Guard announced
it had carried out strikes on key US military facilities in Kuwait and Bahrain.
The United States and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding last week that
included an immediate cessation of military operations on all fronts, including
Lebanon.
Tehran reiterates: Crossing the Strait of Hormuz requires coordination with the
Revolutionary Guard
Riyadh - Al-Arabiya.net/June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
With renewed confrontations between the US and Iran following the targeting of
two ships in the Strait of Hormuz by Iranian forces and the subsequent US
military strike on Iranian positions, Tehran reiterated that "passage through
the Strait of Hormuz still requires coordination with the Revolutionary Guard."
Iranian authorities added on Sunday that "the safest passage for ships entering
the Gulf is south of Hormuz Island, and for ships leaving, south of Larak
Island," according to Iranian television. Earlier that day, Iranian Foreign
Minister Abbas Araqchi warned that any violations of the memorandum of
understanding signed with the United States regarding the Strait of Hormuz would
"increase tension" regionally, amid mutual accusations of ceasefire violations
and exchanges of fire that threaten ongoing negotiations to find a final
settlement to the Middle East conflict. During a visit to Baghdad, Araqchi
called for a "new framework" to guarantee the security of the Gulf region, just
hours after Tehran launched missile strikes on Kuwait and Bahrain in retaliation
for US strikes against Iran. Speaking at a press conference with his Iraqi
counterpart, Fuad Hussein, at the Iraqi Foreign Ministry, he said, "Any attempt
to adopt new or separate arrangements from those undertaken by Iran will only
complicate the situation, delay the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and
increase tensions, as we have witnessed over the past two nights." This comes as
Washington promotes a southern route along the coast of Oman, while Tehran wants
ships to use a northern route through its waters and under its control,
ultimately aiming to impose fees for using the strait, according to Reuters. The
United States announced that its aircraft targeted ten Iranian sites early
Sunday morning in response to an Iranian drone attack on an oil tanker as it
passed near the strait. The Revolutionary Guard responded by launching strikes
on Kuwait and Bahrain, warning that any new American aggression under any
pretext would be met with a "crushing response." Iran and the United States are
exchanging accusations of violating the ceasefire established by the memorandum
of understanding signed by the two countries on June 18, which allowed for the
start of 60 days of negotiations aimed at a final settlement to the war that
erupted at the end of February.
US Strikes Exchanged with Iran, Missile Interceptions in Kuwait and Bahrain, and
Trump Threatens to Remove Them
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
The Arabian Gulf region witnessed a military escalation on Saturday night into
Sunday, the most intense since the signing of the interim memorandum of
understanding in Switzerland about two weeks ago. This escalation threatens to
collapse the ceasefire agreements reached to end the war that erupted on
February 28 with US and Israeli strikes on Iran.
The US military launched airstrikes targeting a village on Qeshm Island and the
coastal city of Sirik inside Iran. US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that
the raids were a direct response to Iran's targeting of the oil tanker "Kiko"
(flying the Panamanian flag) with drones in the Strait of Hormuz, hours after a
similar attack on the cargo ship "Ever Lovely." Washington explained that the
strikes were successfully completed and targeted military surveillance
infrastructure, communications systems, radar sites, drone storage and
mine-laying facilities, as well as air defense platforms. In response, the
Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) confirmed launching missile and drone
attacks on US sites and bases in the Gulf in retaliation for the US bombing. It
also stated that it fired "warning shots" to compel commercial vessels to
transit through Iranian-controlled shipping lanes north of the Strait of Hormuz,
prompting ships to request prior Iranian permits. The Iranian Foreign Ministry
accused Washington of violating the UN Charter and Article 1 of the Swiss
Memorandum of Understanding, threatening to halt ongoing negotiations. Iranian
attacks extended to neighboring Gulf states hosting US military bases. The
Kuwaiti Army General Staff announced that its air defenses successfully
intercepted and destroyed hostile missiles and drones in its airspace.
Meanwhile, the Bahraini Ministry of Interior activated air raid sirens and urged
residents to seek shelter, asserting that its defense systems had countered
"Iranian aerial attacks," which Manama deemed a blatant violation of the
Memorandum of Understanding. US President Donald Trump entered the fray, issuing
a stern warning to Tehran via the Truth Social platform. He asserted that
continued violations could force Washington to return to the full-scale military
option and "finish the job," adding, "If that happens, Iran will not exist." In
the same vein, US Vice President and chief negotiator J.D. Vance affirmed his
country's commitment to the agreement, sending a message to Tehran via the X
platform: "Violence will be met with violence. If you have objections, you can
call us." Despite this escalation on the ground, sources from Al-Arabiya and Al-Hadath
revealed arrangements for a new round of US-Iranian negotiations in July in
Doha, Qatar, to discuss the issue of frozen assets. This will be followed by
another round in Islamabad, Pakistan, to discuss the nuclear issue. These talks
are expected to coincide with a visit by Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif
to Tehran on July 2nd, in an attempt to contain the escalation and keep the
vital waterway open for navigation and global energy supplies.
Mojtaba Khamenei: Prosecute Those Responsible for Crimes
Against Iran!
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic Republic of Iran,
Mojtaba Khamenei, issued a message on the occasion of Judiciary Week,
emphasizing the need to protect the rights of the Iranian people, strengthen
public trust in the judiciary, and continue reforming state institutions, in
addition to prosecuting those responsible for crimes committed against Iran and
its leaders. Khamenei stressed that protecting the rights of the people is one
of the most important responsibilities of the judiciary, considering the
restoration of public rights, combating corruption, establishing the rule of
law, and ensuring its proper implementation as priorities for the next phase. He
pointed out that strengthening citizens' trust in the judiciary is a fundamental
pillar for the stability of state institutions, calling for continued reform and
development of the judiciary in a way that positively impacts the performance of
the various institutions of the system. On the political front, Khamenei
considered the boasting of some American and Israeli officials about what he
called their “crimes” to be an explicit admission of guilt, emphasizing that
this paves the way for Iran to demand its rights and prosecute those
responsible. He stressed the need to pursue those responsible for crimes
committed against the Iranian people and their leaders, and to work towards
their arrest, prosecution, and punishment, reaffirming Tehran's commitment to
the legal process alongside its political stances. This message comes amidst
ongoing tensions between Iran on one side, and the United States and Israel on
the other, coinciding with the Iranian leadership's emphasis on strengthening
the domestic front through judicial reform, combating corruption, and
consolidating the rule of law.
Saudi-French Affirmation of Freedom of Navigation and Support for Diplomacy to
De-escalate Tensions
Mohammed bin Salman and Macron Discuss Latest Developments in the US-Iran
Memorandum of Understanding
Riyadh: Asharq Al-Awsat / June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
Saudi Arabia and France affirmed the importance of ensuring freedom of
navigation and supporting diplomatic efforts to de-escalate tensions during a
phone call between the French President and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin
Salman on Sunday.
Official Saudi sources stated that the two sides discussed the latest
developments regarding the memorandum of understanding signed between the United
States and Iran and the efforts being made to reach comprehensive solutions that
achieve security and stability for the region. The call also included a review
of regional and international developments, a discussion of existing areas of
cooperation between the two countries, and a number of regional and
international issues of common interest, according to the Saudi Press Agency
(SPA).
Meanwhile, the Saudi and Pakistani foreign ministers held in-depth telephone
talks, described by the Pakistani Foreign Ministry as related to recent
developments in the region. According to a statement from the Pakistani Foreign
Ministry, Dar reaffirmed his country's commitment to continuing its efforts to
establish peace in the region, in line with the Islamabad Memorandum of
Understanding.
Tehran launched new attacks targeting Bahrain and Kuwait with ballistic missiles
and drones on Sunday. The Bahraini military announced that the kingdom had been
subjected to Iranian missile and drone attacks. The Bahrain Defense Force
General Command stated that its air defenses "intercepted and destroyed a number
of treacherous Iranian aerial attacks," emphasizing the need for "the highest
levels of readiness." The Bahraini Ministry of Interior stated that "as a result
of the heinous Iranian attack... material damage occurred to a residential
building in Muharraq Governorate, with no loss of life. The relevant authorities
are taking the necessary measures at the site." In Kuwait, the Ministry of
Defense announced the interception of two ballistic missiles early Sunday
morning, with no casualties or material damage reported. Meanwhile, Manama
described the drone attacks on its territory as an assault on its sovereignty
and a direct threat to the Kingdom's security. This comes as regional and
international efforts continue to contain the escalation and prevent the
conflict from spreading further in the region.
Gulf and Arab condemnations of the Iranian attacks targeting Bahrain and Kuwait
have intensified, with emphasis on rejecting violations of state sovereignty,
warning of the repercussions of the escalation on regional security, and calls
for continued diplomatic efforts to contain the crisis.
The Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed the Kingdom's strongest
condemnation of the Iranian attacks on Kuwait and Bahrain, as well as on the
security and freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. Saudi Arabia
affirmed its categorical rejection of these attacks as violations of
international law and the UN Charter, and reiterated that these violations
undermine international efforts aimed at restoring security and stability in the
region. The Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs reiterated its solidarity with the
State of Kuwait and the Kingdom of Bahrain, and its full support for all
measures they take to safeguard their sovereignty and security. The
Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Jassem Mohammed Al-Budaiwi,
also condemned the attacks “in the strongest terms,” emphasizing that they
constitute a blatant violation of the sovereignty of Bahrain and Kuwait, and a
direct threat to their security, stability, and the safety of their citizens and
residents. He stated that the continuation of these attacks undermines regional
and international efforts aimed at consolidating security and peace, and
reiterated the GCC’s support for all measures taken by Manama and Kuwait to
protect their sovereignty and enhance their security. The State of Qatar
expressed its strong condemnation of the repeated Iranian attacks, describing
them as “a flagrant violation of the sovereignty of Bahrain and Kuwait, and a
blatant breach of international law,” stressing the importance of preventing
further escalation in the region, continuing the path of dialogue and diplomacy,
and reaffirming its solidarity.
The United Arab Emirates strongly condemned the Iranian attacks targeting
Bahrain and Kuwait with missiles and drones, affirming that they constitute a
blatant violation of the sovereignty of both countries and a threat to their
security and stability. The UAE reiterated its full solidarity with Bahrain and
Kuwait and its support for all measures aimed at preserving their security and
stability. For its part, the Sultanate of Oman, in a statement issued by its
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, affirmed its full solidarity with the State of
Kuwait and condemned the military attacks targeting its territory. Oman
reiterated its rejection of all actions that threaten the security and stability
of the region and called for restraint and prioritizing dialogue and diplomatic
means to contain the escalation. Jordan also condemned the brutal Iranian
attacks targeting Bahrain and Kuwait with missiles and drones, considering them
a flagrant violation of their sovereignty, a threat to their security,
stability, and territorial integrity, a dangerous escalation, and a blatant
breach of international law and the Charter of the United Nations. The Ministry
of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates affirmed in a statement Jordan's absolute
solidarity with the sisterly nations of Bahrain and Kuwait, and its support for
all measures they take to protect their sovereignty, security, and the safety of
their citizens and residents.
Egypt strongly condemned the Iranian attacks, deeming them an unacceptable
escalation that undermines efforts to consolidate calm and reduce tensions in
the region. Egypt reiterated its full solidarity with the two countries and its
complete support for all measures they take to maintain their security and
stability. In a statement issued by its Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Egypt
stressed the necessity of adhering to the existing negotiating track and
supporting serious efforts to de-escalate tensions in the region, resorting to
dialogue and peaceful means to resolve disputes, thereby contributing to the
enhancement of regional security and stability. Furthermore, the League of Arab
States strongly condemned the renewed treacherous Iranian attacks on both
Bahrain and Kuwait using missiles and drones, considering them a flagrant
violation of sovereignty, the provisions of international law, and the Charter
of the United Nations. In a statement issued today, Arab League
Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit stressed the need for an immediate halt to
all Iranian aggression targeting the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states and
threatening regional security and stability. He held Iran fully responsible for
its illegal actions, which undermine regional and international diplomatic
efforts to achieve peace in the region.
He affirmed the Arab League's support for Bahrain and Kuwait, both their
leadership and people, and its full solidarity with them in the measures and
steps they are taking to stop the brutal Iranian attacks against them. He called
on all concerned parties to commit to de-escalation and support efforts aimed at
achieving a lasting ceasefire. Bahrain had previously condemned the targeting of
its territory by a number of Iranian drones, considering the attack a blatant
violation of its sovereignty and a threat to the security of its citizens and
residents. Bahrain called on the international community to take action to stop
the repeated Iranian attacks and held Tehran responsible for undermining
de-escalation efforts and destabilizing regional security. Kuwait condemned the
attack that targeted its territory early Sunday morning, affirming that it
constitutes a violation of its sovereignty and a direct threat to its security
and stability, as well as a breach of international law and the UN Charter.
Kuwait stressed its full right to take all necessary measures to protect its
sovereignty and security. Kuwait also strongly condemned the renewed Iranian
attacks on Bahraini territory, asserting that Iran's continued targeting of
Bahrain represents a dangerous escalation that undermines efforts to de-escalate
tensions and destabilize the region, in clear violation of international law and
the UN Charter.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs reiterated Kuwait's full solidarity with Bahrain
and its support for all measures taken by Bahrain to protect its security,
sovereignty, and territorial integrity, emphasizing that Bahrain's security is
an integral part of the security of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states.
Night of the MPs' Arrests: An Earthquake Shakes the Foundations of the Iraqi
Political Process... Raids Arrest MPs and Businessmen
Janoubia/June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
Iraqi security forces carried out a series of extensive raids and high-profile
arrests in the heavily fortified Green Zone in central Baghdad early Sunday
morning, in a significant judicial and security development reflecting the
escalating anti-corruption campaign in the country. Sources told Al-Arabiya/Al-Hadath
that these arrests stemmed from major corruption cases, based on confessions
made by the detained Iraqi Deputy Oil Minister, Adnan al-Jumaili. The sources
indicated that the arrests targeted prominent politicians and well-known
businessmen, in addition to members of the Iraqi Parliament, following the
issuance of official arrest warrants by Judge Diaa Jaafar of the Anti-Corruption
Court. Simultaneously, footage documenting the raids, amidst a heavy security
presence throughout the Green Zone, circulated on social media. These rapid
developments come after the Iraqi judiciary announced last week the confiscation
of massive sums of money exceeding $85 million. A large portion of the stolen
funds was found hidden inside houses and in underground pits four meters deep.
The Supreme Judicial Council explained at the time that investigations into
financial mismanagement in projects carried out by the accused, Adnan al-Jumaili,
and others resulted in the seizure of more than 98 billion Iraqi dinars and 11
million US dollars in cash, in addition to the confiscation of 70 properties, 21
modern cars, and approximately 3 kilograms of gold jewelry. Adnan al-Jumaili was
arrested last May in Salah al-Din Governorate, northern Iraq, and his
confessions during interrogation also led to the dismissal of the governorate's
health director, Raed al-Jubouri. The case of al-Jumaili and the high-ranking
figures associated with him is one of the most recent and largest corruption
cases to have shocked the Iraqi public, at a time when the new government,
headed by Ali al-Zaidi, is affirming its absolute determination to dismantle
corruption networks and pursue those involved, regardless of their positions or
political influence.
Iraq: Dozens Arrested, Including MPs and Governors, on
Corruption Suspicions... Raids in Baghdad, Maysan, Babylon, Diyala, and Salah
al-Din Based on al-Jumaili's Confessions
Baghdad/Asharq Al-Awsat/June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
Iraqi authorities arrested 47 individuals accused of corruption, including
members of parliament and officials, since dawn on Sunday, as part of an ongoing
anti-corruption campaign, according to official media. The Iraqi News Agency
quoted high-level sources as saying that "47 individuals, including members of
parliament and officials, were arrested on corruption charges," including at
least 12 members of parliament. The agency noted that "operations to pursue
corrupt individuals are continuing in Baghdad and the provinces," according to
Agence France-Presse. Security sources told Asharq Al-Awsat earlier that a joint
force comprising the Counter-Terrorism Service, the Iraqi Army, and security
agencies specializing in integrity cases deployed on Saturday night to several
locations within Baghdad's Green Zone, tightening security measures at a number
of entrances and roads leading to it. Sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that the
security forces began executing arrest warrants targeting political and
government officials, members of parliament, security personnel, and
businessmen, in connection with corruption and abuse of power cases. They noted
that some of those detained had been transferred to the Integrity Commission. An
Iraqi official told Asharq Al-Awsat that the detainees included high-ranking
officials, members of parliament, and governors, based on confessions by Oil
Ministry Undersecretary Adnan al-Jumaili. A security force also raided the
headquarters of the Central Oil Company south of Baghdad, according to a
security source who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat. A government official told Asharq
Al-Awsat that Prime Minister Ali al-Zubaidi oversaw the arrest campaign
targeting those suspected of corruption, indicating that the arrests were
carried out based on judicial warrants. The official added that the Special
Forces and the Counter-Terrorism Service participated in the arrests, which were
not limited to Baghdad but extended to other cities. A security source told
Asharq Al-Awsat that the arrests in Baghdad targeted the Green Zone, Yarmouk,
Qadisiyah, Shaab, Sadr City, and Zayouna, in addition to arrests in the
provinces of Maysan, Babylon, Diyala, and Salah al-Din. Later, the Federal
Integrity Commission announced it had begun what it described as "decisive"
procedures to execute judicial arrest warrants issued against a number of
individuals accused of embezzling public funds.
The Commission affirmed that "this achievement is the result of the combined and
integrated efforts of the three branches of government—the judiciary, the
executive, and the legislature—along with the Commission's own efforts, which
directly led to the execution of these warrants. This was the culmination of
diligent and continuous monitoring, auditing, and oversight by the
aforementioned entities." The commission emphasized that “all its procedures are
conducted strictly in accordance with the law and under its auspices,” noting
that it “derives its strength and resolve from absolute public support, the rule
of law, and the unlimited support and continuous backing of the President of the
Supreme Judicial Council, the Prime Minister, and the Speaker of Parliament.” It
reiterated its complete commitment to informing the public of the details of its
work and procedures accurately and transparently, as permitted by applicable
laws and regulations. Sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that the Green Zone in
central Baghdad remains closed, while Iraqi security forces are conducting
search operations in its vicinity. Eyewitnesses reported that armored vehicles
and heavily armed security personnel were surrounding houses and villas within
the Green Zone. They also stated that a force from the Counter-Terrorism Service
clashed with the security detail of a prominent figure while attempting to
execute an arrest warrant against her, but the nature of the clash and whether
it resulted in any injuries or further arrests remain unclear. Sources reported
that the force also carried out raids in several areas of the capital, amid
reports of the arrest of a high-ranking official, though this information could
not be independently verified. A source also reported a raid on the home of a
prominent official from a previous government. A security official stated that
the overnight operations constituted an "arrest campaign" targeting individuals
and officials wanted on outstanding warrants. Social media users circulated
videos purportedly showing the closure of several main gates to the Green Zone
and the deployment of tanks, armored vehicles, and other military equipment
within it, but the authenticity of these videos could not be independently
verified.
120 Accused of Corruption in Iraq… Integrity Commission
Affirms “They Will Be Held Accountable Under the Law”
Riyadh - Al-Arabiya.net/June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
Following the arrest of 47 officials by Iraqi security forces early Sunday
morning, most of whom are members of parliament, the Federal Integrity
Commission clarified that those arrested are accused of misappropriating public
funds. In its first official statement regarding the arrests, the Commission
indicated that it has begun taking decisive measures to execute the judicial
arrest warrants issued against a number of individuals accused of
misappropriating public funds. It emphasized that this achievement is the result
of the combined and integrated efforts of the three branches of
government—judicial, executive, and legislative—along with the Commission's own
efforts, which directly led to the execution of these warrants after diligent
and continuous monitoring, auditing, and oversight by the aforementioned
authorities. Furthermore, the Commission stressed that all its actions are being
carried out meticulously in accordance with the law and under its auspices. It
noted that it derives its strength from the law and the unlimited support and
continuous backing of the President of the Supreme Judicial Council, the Prime
Minister, and the Speaker of Parliament. She concluded by noting her commitment
to keeping the public informed about the details of her work and procedures
accurately and transparently, in accordance with applicable laws and
regulations. This statement came after Iraqi authorities announced the arrest of
47 members of parliament and officials on corruption charges, according to the
Iraqi News Agency. She also indicated that Prime Minister Ali al-Zubaidi's
campaign to pursue those accused of corruption is ongoing and expanding.
Meanwhile, an Al-Arabiya/Al-Hadath correspondent reported that corruption
charges have been brought against 120 people in Iraq so far. He confirmed that
these include members of parliament, Iraqi officials, merchants, businessmen,
and brokers. The new Iraqi prime minister pledged to combat the corruption and
mismanagement that have plagued Iraq for decades. He also pledged to restrict
the weapons of groups close to Iran, a move Washington is pressuring Baghdad to
achieve. In a move demonstrating its commitment to fighting corruption,
authorities seized more than $85 million earlier this month in a corruption case
linked to Deputy Oil Minister Adnan al-Jumaili, who was arrested last May. The
Supreme Judicial Council confirmed at the time the arrest of Raed al-Jubouri,
the director of the Salah al-Din Health Department, based on "confessions made
by al-Jumaili during his interrogation." The legal proceedings in that case also
included "the seizure and confiscation of 70 properties and 21 modern vehicles,
in addition to gold jewelry estimated at approximately 3 kilograms."
US Sanctioned: Who is Ali Ma'araj, Arrested by Baghdad?
Riyadh - Al-Arabiya.net/June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
Iraqi authorities arrested the Deputy Minister of Oil, Ali Ma'araj al-Bahadli,
weeks after he was placed on the US sanctions list, as part of investigations
related to corruption and abuse of public office. A senior Iraqi security
official explained that the case involves "the financing of factions, Iranian
oil, dollar smuggling, and corruption," referring to Iranian-backed factions,
according to Agence France-Presse. The US Treasury Department had previously
accused al-Bahadli of exploiting his position to facilitate the diversion of
Iraqi oil to networks linked to Iran, and of granting sanctioned oil smuggler
Salem Ahmed Saeed, along with the Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq faction, preferential access
to Iraqi oil. The Treasury also confirmed that al-Bahadli was placed on the
sanctions list under Executive Order 13902 for providing material and financial
support to Saeed's network. According to the US Office of Foreign Assets Control
(OFAC), investigations revealed that al-Bahadli, who held several positions
within the Ministry of Oil since 2018, authorized the transfer of millions of
dollars' worth of oil daily from the Qayyarah field to VS Oil in Khor al-Zubair.
OFAC further stated that the company oversaw the blending of Iranian oil with
Iraqi oil before re-exporting it to global markets as Iraqi oil. Al-Bahadli was
also accused of falsifying origin documents. Oil was used to provide legal cover
for smuggling operations. The sanctions coincided with statements by US Treasury
Secretary Scott Bisnett, who explained that "the Iranian regime is plundering
resources belonging to the Iraqi people," emphasizing that Washington "will not
stand idly by while the Iranian military uses Iraqi oil to finance terrorism
against the United States and its partners." Bisnett also stressed the continued
targeting of networks that use the Iraqi oil sector to circumvent US sanctions.
Al-Bahadli is considered one of the most prominent executives in the Iraqi oil
sector in recent years. Born in 1966 in Maysan Governorate, he earned a
bachelor's degree in petroleum engineering from the University of Baghdad before
beginning his career at the Iraqi Drilling Company. He then rose through the
ranks, eventually managing the Maysan Fields Authority and later heading the
Maysan Oil Company. Since 2018, he has held several leadership positions within
the Ministry of Oil, including head of the Licensing and Contracts Department,
acting Minister of Oil, and Undersecretary of the Ministry of Oil. He has since
become the focus of Iraqi investigations and US sanctions related to Iraqi oil
smuggling and sanctions evasion.
Baghdad Calls on Tehran to Adopt Dialogue to Enhance
Regional Stability / Araqchi Thanks Iraq for “Coordinating Khamenei’s Funeral”
Baghdad: Fadel Al-Nashmi / Asharq Al-Awsat / June 28, 2026 ( Google translation
from Arabic)
Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi affirmed on Sunday that Iraq prioritizes
ending wars and adopting dialogue and negotiations to establish stability in the
region, which will enhance development opportunities for neighboring peoples.
This came during al-Zaidi’s meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi
and his accompanying delegation, according to the Iraqi Prime Minister’s Media
Office. The meeting addressed the recent agreement between Iran and the United
States, which ended the war between the two countries, as well as international
and regional efforts to impose security and stability and respect the
sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity of nations.
For his part, Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein affirmed his country’s
readiness to host a meeting that includes the Gulf Cooperation Council countries
and Iran to discuss ways to end the war, stressing that the region’s security
must be the responsibility of its people. Hussein's remarks came during a joint
press conference with Araqchi, who stated that his visit aimed to thank the
Iraqi government and people for their recent stances regarding the war waged by
the United States and Israel against Iran, as well as to coordinate with Baghdad
on the funeral arrangements for former Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in
Iraq. Araqchi's visit coincided with a surge in arrests by the judiciary and the
government to combat corruption, targeting officials, members of parliament,
governors, and heads of political blocs. While the visit's connection to these
arrests is unclear, it did not garner the usual attention due to the intense
focus of Iraqis, both officially and publicly, on the latest developments in the
arrests of those accused of corruption. The Iraqi minister said, "Araqchi's
visit to Iraq is of great importance, especially after the signing of the
memorandum of understanding with Washington, as the war continues in the region,
and there are ongoing military skirmishes near the Strait of Hormuz."
He added, "We discussed with Araqchi a number of issues of mutual interest,
including the attacks Iraq suffered during the recent war, and the fact that the
closure of the Strait of Hormuz halted the flow of Iraqi oil, impacting Iraq's
financial and economic situation." Iranian-backed armed groups launched hundreds
of rocket attacks on targets inside and outside Iraq, exposing the country to
widespread security risks and drawing criticism from the Gulf states and Jordan.
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz also severely damaged the economy, costing
the country more than $37 billion due to the halt in its oil exports.
Minister Hussein called for a meeting of the Gulf states, Iraq, and Iran,
stating that his country was ready to host the Gulf states to discuss ways to
end the war. He emphasized that the region's security should be the
responsibility of its people and that ending the war in the region is a priority
for all of us. Hussein expressed regret over the attacks on Iran by the United
States and noted that Iraq played a crucial role in reaching an agreement
between Washington and Tehran.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi reiterated his country's position on the
memorandum of understanding signed with the United States, stating that it
includes a ceasefire on all fronts, particularly in Lebanon. Political sources
in Baghdad tend to believe that Araqchi's visit will address numerous issues,
including the disarmament of factions, as well as Iranian concerns about
increasing American demands on Baghdad. During the joint press conference,
Araqchi stated, "The primary objective of my visit to Baghdad is to express my
gratitude to the Iraqi government and people. My visit comes at a particularly
opportune time, and the Iraqi government has taken a significant stance in
condemning the aggression against us." The Iranian minister emphasized his
country's commitment to continuing cooperation with the Iraqi government in
strategic areas. He added that the memorandum of understanding includes a
ceasefire on all fronts, especially in Lebanon, and the necessity of halting
Israeli attacks in Lebanon and withdrawing from the occupied territories there.
This, he asserted, is the responsibility of the American government.
He addressed the details of reopening and managing the Strait of Hormuz in a
manner that contradicts the American narrative, stating that "no party should
interfere in the management of the Strait of Hormuz, that the Strait is under
Iranian administration, and that after the removal of obstacles, things will
return to normal. No other party bears responsibility for the operation of the
Strait of Hormuz, and anything to the contrary violates the memorandum of
understanding with Washington." Araghchi indicated that he had briefed Foreign
Minister Fuad Hussein on the developments in the talks with Washington and the
Hormuz issue, expressing his gratitude to Iraq for its supportive stance towards
the Iranian people. He concluded by saying, "Another objective of the visit is
to coordinate with Baghdad to establish a mechanism for the funeral procession
of the martyred Ayatollah Ali Khamenei at the holy shrines in Iraq." According
to sources, Khamenei's body may arrive in Iraq on July 8 for a funeral
procession in Najaf and Karbala with popular and official participation, but the
Iraqi government has not officially announced these ceremonies or whether it has
accepted them.
Putin: Ukraine Negotiations Continue, New Proposals on the Table
Riyadh - Al Arabiya.net/June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
Russian President Vladimir Putin confirmed that negotiations regarding Ukraine
are ongoing and that new proposals are on the table. He explained that the talks
held between Russia and the United States during the Anchorage summit addressed
ways to end the conflict in Kyiv, but did not result in any signed agreement. In
response to journalists' questions, Putin said, "No one signed anything, but we
discussed some possibilities for ending the conflict in Ukraine." He added that
the concessions presented during the discussions "were the same proposals that
the American side had put forward to Russia," without revealing further details
about the nature of those proposals or the outcome of the talks. Putin also
clarified that Russia agreed at the Anchorage summit to the compromises
formulated and proposed by the American side. On August 15, Russian President
Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump met at a military base in Alaska.
Following the talks, Putin announced at a press conference that resolving the
Ukrainian conflict was the main topic of discussion, calling for an end to
disagreements in bilateral relations and a return to cooperation. He also
extended an invitation to Trump to visit Moscow. For his part, the US president
indicated that progress had been made during the negotiations, but clarified
that the two sides had not reached a complete agreement on all issues.
Zelensky Announces Targeting of Two Oil Refineries in Russia
Kyiv: Asharq Al-Awsat/June 28, 2026 ( Google translation from Arabic)
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said on Sunday that Kyiv had targeted two
oil refineries in the Krasnodar and Yaroslavl regions of Russia overnight.
Zelensky wrote on social media, "We are continuing our operations aimed at
undermining Russia's ability to continue the war," according to Reuters. The
governor of Russia's Krasnodar region, Benjamin Kondratyev, announced on Sunday
in a Telegram post that a fire had broken out at an oil refinery in the southern
Russian region following an attack by Ukrainian drones. Kondratyev stated that
the attack resulted in one death. He added that in addition to the damage to the
refinery in the city of Sloviansk-na-Kubany, several houses, power lines, and a
gas pipeline were also damaged. Images and videos circulating online showed the
fire to be massive. The refinery has a production capacity of between 4 and 5
million tons of oil per year, according to various sources, making it a
medium-sized facility. Due to its proximity to the Ukrainian peninsula of
Crimea, which was annexed by Russia, the refinery has been targeted by Ukrainian
attacks in the past, resulting in repeated damage. Other Russian regions,
including Yaroslavl and Ivanovo northeast of Moscow, have also reported drone
attacks. For its part, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced the downing of
213 Ukrainian drones, indicating that Russia was subjected to a large-scale
attack.
The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from
miscellaneous sources published on 28-29 June/2026
Iran's 'Deal': What Happens After Trump?
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Gatestone Institute/June 28, 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.
There Is No Security for You Except by Islam or Jizya [Protection Tax]’:
Extremist Persecution of Christians, February 2026
Raymond Ibrahim/Gatestone Institute/June 28, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155613/
[A]rmed groups have repeatedly raided villages, killing
residents, burning homes, churches, and crops, and forcing survivors to flee
into the surrounding areas. Entire communities have been obliterated. Many
displaced families are unable to return: attackers reportedly seized farmland
and target those who try to come back. — International Christian Concern,
February 13, 2026, Nigeria.
Pakistan’s Federal Constitutional Court granted custody of 13-year-old Christian
girl, Maria Shahbaz, to a 30-year-old Muslim man accused of kidnapping, forcibly
converting, and marrying her. The court rejected her official birth certificate
and ignored prior findings that the marriage was illegal, instead accepting her
statement that she converted and married voluntarily—despite claims from her
family and lawyer that it was made under coercion. Rights advocates and the
girl’s family criticized the ruling, pointing to evidence that the marriage
certificate was fake and raising concerns about police inaction and possible
collusion. They argue the girl had been in the suspect’s custody for months,
making any statement unreliable. — Morning Star News, February 1, 2026,
Pakistan.
[A] blind Christian man, Nadeem Masih, was denied bail by the Lahore High Court
after being charged under Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, which carry the death
penalty. He has been in custody since August 2025 after his arrest. Police
accused him of making insulting remarks about the Prophet Muhammad. His lawyer
argues that the case is built on inconsistent statements, questionable timing,
and evidence that contradicts the official police account… — Morning Star News,
February 4, 2026, Pakistan.
“Blasphemy accusations are increasingly weaponized to incite mob violence,
displace marginalized groups and seize their property with impunity.” — Morning
Star News, February 4, 2026, Pakistan.
[A] Christian leader and former Muslim, Dedi Saputra, was arrested, based on a
TikTok video. Saputra had answered a question about religious conversion by
stating that Muhammad had only one wife before becoming a prophet, but a dozen
wives afterward. Despite the historical accuracy of the statement (corroborated
by a Suara Muhammadiyah magazine article), the Aceh Islamic Sharia Office and
several Islamic youth organizations reported him for “religious defamation” and
“hate speech,” and claimed that the video “hurt the feelings of Muslims” and
“sparked unrest.” — Morning Star News, February 27, 2026, Indonesia.
In Rome, a 35-year-old man was arrested in St. Peter’s Basilica after attempting
to enter the church while carrying flammable liquids and ignition devices during
a major Mass led by the pope. — The Observatory on Intolerance and
Discrimination against Christians in Europe, February 3, 2026, Italy.
[A]t least 20 Yemeni Christians were arrested or abducted from their homes or
off the street. While some are confirmed in Houthi-run prisons, others have
“disappeared” and face potential torture or execution for their faith. Yemen is
officially 99-100% Muslim; conversion to Christianity under Yemeni law is
punishable by death. — International Christian Concern, February 17, 2026,
Yemen.
[R]ecent legislation poses an “existential threat” to non-Muslim representation.
Parliament Bill No. 419, enacted Jan. 28, voided all sectoral certifications….”
— International Christian Concern, February 17, 2026, Philippines.
[A] Lebanese-born evangelist… was assaulted while preaching in the streets of
Utrecht. A group of Muslim men interrupted his preaching, shouting Islamist
slogans such as “Allah is one” and “Jesus is a human.” The situation escalated
when one of the men, apparently attempting to assert dominance, struck Elyas
before bystanders intervened to stop the violence. — L’Observatoire de la
Christianophobie, February 22, 2026, The Netherlands.
Khaled explicitly vowed to go on a killing spree—”I will kill everything I see
before me, women, children, and everything.” He also insulted Christianity as
the “dirtiest religion,” [and] refers to Germany as a “Nazi land”…. Despite
numerous criminal complaints for insults, threats, and property damage (such as
smashing glass bottles in the town hall parking lot), West Hesse police have
only conducted “threat talks” (Gefährderansprachen) but, as no “serious crimes”
have been committed, apparently see no legal basis yet for an arrest. —
L’Observatoire de la Christianophobie, February 27, 2026, Germany.
Jameel Masih, a 14-year-old Christian boy, forcibly converted to Islam, is being
held in illegal custody by a Muslim landlord…. Minor children from minorities
are often converted to ensure permanent control over them as laborers. — Morning
Star News, February 27, 2026, Pakistan.
Because their father is registered as Muslim, NADRA [National Database and
Registration Authority] has also been blocking his five children from
registering as Christians on their National Identity Cards (CNICs). Without
these cards, the children are barred from education, banking, voting, and
government assistance. Human rights advocates highlight that the brick kiln
sector uses financial advances (debt bondage) to trap illiterate Christian
workers, thereby making them vulnerable to forced religious identity changes.
The Masih family, living in extreme poverty, lacks the means for the lengthy
court battles required… Attempting to renounce a Muslim identity in Pakistan
carries severe risks and can trigger mob violence or accusations of blasphemy
that can result in death. — Morning Star News, February 18, 2026, Pakistan.
On February 3,Pakistan’s Federal Constitutional Court granted custody of
13-year-old Christian girl, Maria Shahbaz, to a 30-year-old Muslim man accused
of kidnapping, forcibly converting, and marrying her. Pictured: The seat of
Pakistan’s Constitutional Court, in Islamabad.
The following are among the murders and abuses Muslims inflicted on Christians
throughout the month of February 2026.
The Muslim Slaughter of Christians
Nigeria: According to a Feb. 13 report, more than 100 Christians were killed and
more than 90,000 displaced after months of coordinated attacks on rural
communities since September 2025. In areas such as Takum, Ussa, and Donga, armed
groups have repeatedly raided villages, killing residents, burning homes,
churches, and crops, and forcing survivors to flee into the surrounding areas.
Entire communities have been obliterated. Many displaced families are unable to
return: attackers reportedly seized farmland and target those who try to come
back.
A Feb. 10 report detailed that Christian communities, amid ongoing kidnappings
and killings, continue to live in fear. In one instance, more than 160
Christians were abducted during church services—particularly in regions of
Kaduna state. A Catholic priest, Bobbo Paschal, was released after spending 61
days in captivity after his abduction during an attack in which another church
member was killed and others were taken hostage.
On Feb. 6, nine Catholic worshippers were kidnapped in Benue State during a
night prayer vigil at a mission station. Armed terrorists stormed the church and
abducted them to an unknown location, prompting calls for prayer and urgent
rescue efforts from the local diocese.
On Feb. 7, coordinated terror attacks on multiple predominantly Christian
villages in Taraba State left some 70 people dead. Homes were burned, food
supplies destroyed, and property looted, forcing many residents to flee into
nearby bushes or neighboring areas. Community leaders reported that at least 35
churches were vandalized or destroyed; a pastor was among those killed. One
person was abducted; many others remain missing.
Survivors said there was no visible security presence during the attack, thereby
leaving the community defenseless.
According to a Feb. 6 report, Fulani herdsmen killed a Christian pastor, Rev.
Bulus Madaki, along with his daughter and son-in-law during an ambush in Plateau
State. Only the 3-month-old granddaughter, despite suffering a severe machete
gash, survived, but is an orphan.
On Feb. 1, in Niger State, armed militants carried out coordinated attacks,
targeting Christians. The terrorists burned a police station, destroyed homes,
kidnapped several residents, and later set fire to an evangelical church
belonging to the United Missionary Church of Africa. The violence also extended
to Mashegu, where a Catholic convent and nearby clinic were attacked; the nuns
managed to escape, but the medical facilities were looted and severely damaged.
Democratic Republic of Congo: On Feb. 6, in the northeastern region, Islamist
militants carried out coordinated attacks that killed at least 24 Christians,
while burning homes and spreading violence across the North Kivu Province. The
Islamic State Central Africa Province (ISCAP) went on to announce the massacre
of “21 Christians … praise be to Allah.” They added, “Let the Christians of
Africa know there is no security for you except by Islam or jizya.” Since late
2024, ISCAP has reportedly killed many hundreds of Christians in the area, and
worsening an already severe humanitarian crisis.
Separately, on Feb. 1, Muslim terrorists of the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF)
devastated the village of Mamove and its nearby communities.The terrorists
killed at least eight Christians, burned homes, shops, and vehicles, destroyed
the local economy and displaced residents. The terror and destruction left
communities paralyzed with widespread fear, hunger, and trauma—especially among
children who had witnessed the violence. Many Christians lost their only sources
of income, and local leaders have expressed anger and frustration at the lack of
response from authorities.
Muslim Abduction of Christian Girls
Pakistan: On February 3, Pakistan’s Federal Constitutional Court granted custody
of 13-year-old Christian girl, Maria Shahbaz, to a 30-year-old Muslim man
accused of kidnapping, forcibly converting, and marrying her. The court rejected
her official birth certificate and ignored prior findings that the marriage was
illegal, instead accepting her statement that she converted and married
voluntarily—despite claims from her family and lawyer that it was made under
coercion. Rights advocates and the girl’s family criticized the ruling, pointing
to evidence that the marriage certificate was fake and raising concerns about
police inaction and possible collusion. They argue the girl had been in the
suspect’s custody for months, making any statement unreliable.
Separately, according to a Feb. 20 report, 14-year-old Christian girl Sataish
Maryam was abducted from her home in Punjab. Her family says she was forcibly
converted to Islam and married to a 26-year-old Muslim man, Ali Haider. Despite
the family providing a birth certificate proving she is a minor, a magistrate
handed the girl over to Haider. Police reportedly failed to include charges of
child marriage, statutory rape, or forgery in the official report. The family is
facing armed intimidation from the perpetrators to withdraw their complaint,
while their legal team is petitioning the High Court to challenge the
“fabricated” conversion and marriage documents.
Egypt: According to a Feb. 16 report, Silvana Atef, a Christian minor from
Fayoum, disappeared and later appeared in a video claiming to have converted to
Islam. Under Egyptian law, because she is under 18, she lacks the legal capacity
to change her religious status. In the video, a woman standing behind Silvana
refers to Christians as “kuffar” (infidels). Lawyers argue this constitutes
sectarian incitement and points to coercion by an older man allegedly involved
in her disappearance. Although the prosecution reportedly ordered her placed in
a social care institution, her family found no record of her presence there. The
facility reportedly claimed they do not accept Christian residents. The family
fears authorities are waiting for Silvana to turn eighteen this coming March, at
which point her change of religion would become legally permanent. After staging
a silent protest for transparency at the Prosecutor General’s office, several
family members, including Silvana’s uncles, were detained by police until the
following evening. The family continues to demand why Silvana has not been
returned to her legal guardians and why her current location remains undisclosed
despite a prosecutorial order. According to some, the incident sends a troubling
message to Coptic families: all Coptic girls effectively have no protection from
the state.
Muslim Attacks on Christian Freedom: Apostates, Blasphemers, and Evangelists
Uganda: According to a Feb. 19 report, a 62-year-old Muslim, Ahammada, killed
his 33-year-old son, Juma, after the son converted to Christianity. The father,
after luring his son outside their home, used a panga (long knife) to stab him
to death. According to the victim’s wife, Nangobi, the murder appeared
premeditated: the father fled immediately and may have had help escaping. The
couple had faced ongoing threats from family members after converting from
Islam, she said:
“My father-in-law together with other family members have been insulting us…
promising to kill all of us for leaving Islam.”
The victim, a father of four young children, died, despite efforts to get him to
a hospital. As of the report, police had not conducted an investigation.
Separately, on Feb. 8, a group of masked men violently attacked two pastors,
John Michael Okoel and Abraham Omoding, as they returned from a night prayer
meeting near Pallisa. The masked men, armed with sticks and knives and dressed
in Islamic attire, accused them of blasphemy and trying to convert Muslims
before beating them severely, leaving one unconscious and the other with serious
injuries, including a fractured arm and lost teeth. In the words of Pastor Okoel,
“They began accusing us of lying about Allah, preaching that Allah has a Son and
converting their brothers and sisters. Before I could respond, one of them, Ali
Kitaali, slapped me, cut me near my mouth and hit my knee and hand. I fell
unconscious.”
The attack only stopped when a passing vehicle approached, causing the Muslims
to flee, after which the pastors were taken for medical treatment.
Egypt: On Feb. 23, an Egyptian court rejected the appeal of Coptic Christian
Augustinos Semaan and upheld his five-year prison sentence for “contempt of
religions” (blasphemy) under Article 98(f) of the Penal Code. Semaan, a scholar
of comparative religion with a master’s degree in theology and affiliated with a
prominent YouTube channel, was convicted for statements he made defending
Christianity and critiquing Islam. The core of the case was his assertion that
Islam was spread by force while Christianity was spread by preaching and love.
Semaan’s lawyers argued the conviction violated freedom of religion and belief.
They stated that his trial fell far short of the minimum standards of justice:
defense lawyers were not notified of the referral to trial, nor given copies of
the investigation or the initial ruling. The defense also proved the arrest
report had been falsified — its date shows it had been written a full week after
the arrest. Citing the Egyptian Constitution and Criminal Procedure Code, they
challenged the legality of monitoring Semaan’s social media accounts without a
warrant. part of his defense team, the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EPPR),
condemned the verdict as unconstitutional: Article 98(f) “undermines the right
to equality and non-discrimination, impedes the right to a fair trial and the
right to defense, and opens the door to inquiring into citizens’ beliefs.”
In a separate incident, according to a February 16 report, converts to
Christianity in Egypt face significant challenges and risks when attending
church: official identity cards list religion, and most converts are still
registered as Muslim. Since many churches require ID checks for security, this
can expose converts or prevent them from entering, thereby forcing them to rely
on methods such as attending less strict churches, using personal connections,
or informally proving their faith. Many also live in secrecy within their
families and communities, as openly converting can lead to social hostility or
even violence.
Pakistan: On February 4, a blind Christian man, Nadeem Masih, was denied bail by
the Lahore High Court after being charged under Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, which
carry the death penalty. He has been in custody since August 2025 after his
arrest. Police accused him of making insulting remarks about the Prophet
Muhammad. His lawyer argues that the case is built on inconsistent statements,
questionable timing, and evidence that contradicts the official police account,
including claims that key witnesses reported the incident long after it
allegedly took place. Masih’s family maintains that the accusation followed a
dispute with local park contractors who had previously harassed and exploited
him. They allege that after he was taken into custody, he was beaten and
coerced. Despite his disability, education, and role as the sole provider for
his family, the court rejected bail on the grounds that he might flee or
influence witnesses.
In a separate Feb. 5 report, a court acquitted two Christian nurses, Mariam Lal
and Navish Arooj, of blasphemy charges after nearly four years. The women were
arrested in 2021 after accusations by a Muslim colleague that they had
desecrated an Islamic sticker at a hospital. Although released on bail after
five months, they remained in hiding following threats while their case
proceeded. The case is notable because lower courts in Pakistan rarely acquit
blasphemy cases due to social pressure and security risks. Rights groups state
that such laws are often misused to target minorities, sometimes leading to
violence, intimidation, or personal exploitation. Despite their acquittal,
concerns remain about the women’s safety and ability to rebuild their lives.
According to Human Rights Watch,
“Blasphemy accusations are increasingly weaponized to incite mob violence,
displace marginalized groups and seize their property with impunity.”
South Sudan: According to a Feb. 24 report, Mosab Haroon Ahmed, a 31-year-old
Sudanese refugee at the Gorom Refugee Settlement near Juba, is facing credible
death threats after converting from Islam to Christianity. Ahmed’s conversion
triggered immediate hostility from Muslim extremists within the camp: “After I
believed in Jesus, radical Muslims started to persecute me and other converts,”
he said. When his family in Darfur, Sudan, was notified of his change of faith
to Christianity, they disowned him and approved his killing in accordance with
strict Islamic views on apostasy. “My family wants me dead,” Ahmed said. Fearing
an “honor killing” or mob violence, he has since taken refuge inside a church.
The local pastor confirmed that as extremists are aware of Ahmed’s whereabouts,
he is in constant danger.
In a different episode, on Feb. 19, Pastor Lino Pasquale of the Hai Baraka
Pentecostal Church was abducted while fishing. His body was discovered six days
later; church leaders said he was “targeted and killed by an unknown gunman.”
The incident follows the assassination of Rev. Christopher Maring, a senior
leader of the Africa Inland Church, who was shot and killed at his home in a
Juba suburb on January 14, 2026. Leaders of the Sudan Pentecostal Church (SPC)
expressed heartbreak over the loss of a “faithful shepherd,” calling his murder
a “heinous and targeted killing.”
Indonesia: On Feb. 18, a Christian leader and former Muslim, Dedi Saputra, was
arrested, based on a TikTok video. Saputra had answered a question about
religious conversion by stating that Muhammad had only one wife before becoming
a prophet, but a dozen wives afterward. Despite the historical accuracy of the
statement (corroborated by a Suara Muhammadiyah magazine article), the Aceh
Islamic Sharia Office and several Islamic youth organizations reported him for
“religious defamation” and “hate speech,” and claimed that the video “hurt the
feelings of Muslims” and “sparked unrest.” Advocates accused the police of
favoritism and focusing on “managing citizens’ faith” rather than protecting
constitutional religious freedom.
Muslim Attacks on Christian Churches
USA: On Feb. 28, San Francisco police arrested 51-year-old Sadat Mousa for
defacing a church with swastikas, antisemitic language, and anti-gay slurs.
Damage to the property is estimated to exceed $20,000. While not officially
confirmed by police, a social media account matching the suspect’s name and
location contains several extremist posts. These include reposts calling for
violence against Jewish people, praise for Hamas, and the slogan “Palestine from
the river to the sea.” The suspect’s social media presence reportedly includes
messages disparaging Christianity, such as “learn from your bloody Jesus,” and
assertions that Palestinians “will never share heaven with the devils.”
Syria: On Sunday, Feb. 1, a Muslim man, carrying a Koran and chanting “Allahu
akbar,” entered the Melkite Greek Cathedral of Al Zaitoun (the Patriarchate
headquarters) before the Sunday Mass.
Two weeks later, on Sunday, Feb. 15, a Muslim man entered the Syriac Catholic
Church of Our Lady of Deliverance in Qatana town, where he began to utter
“offensive remarks about their faith.”
The intruder also repeatedly recited a verse from the Koran, causing fear and
panic among the worshippers present in the church.
Armenia: According to a February 11 report, an Armenian church in Vaghuhas, in
the Artsakh region (Nagorno-Karabakh), was vandalized in January 2026. The
Church of Saint Mary was reportedly desecrated, with visible damage including a
broken khachkar, a traditional carved stone cross, an important symbol of
Armenian Christian heritage. The incident reflects ongoing cultural and
religious site damage in the region, where tensions have led to repeated
destruction of historical and religious landmarks.
Italy: According to a Feb. 22 report, the Church of San Sepolcro in Piacenza is
facing nightly “escalations” of vandalism, littering, and property damage.
Beyond the accumulation of alcohol bottles and trash, the building itself has
been targeted. Vandalism includes cracked structural columns, smashed planters,
uprooted cobblestones, and bricks ripped out of the exterior walls. Parish
priest Iuri Ursachi attributes the behavior to a specific group of youths,
noting a lack of respect for the religious site: “The fault always lies with the
same group of boys, mostly North-Africans.” He recounted confronting them by
asking, “Do you act like this in your mosque?”
A separate group of teenagers stormed the San Pietro Viminario parish center
during an event with local families. The teenagers vandalized the premises, then
occupied the cloister garden. For months, the same group has been responsible
for property damage, public disturbances (firecrackers and moped racing), and
physical harassment—including spitting in the face of a teenage girl.
Finally, on February 2 in Rome, a 35-year-old man was arrested in St. Peter’s
Basilica after attempting to enter the church while carrying flammable liquids
and ignition devices during a major Mass led by the pope. Security stopped the
man before he could enter, thereby preventing a potential catastrophe to the
large crowd present. Authorities believe the suspect is linked to earlier arson
attacks on churches in Rome, including San Giacomo in via del Corso and San
Lorenzo in Lucina.
Nigeria: On Feb. 1, Muslim bandits launched an early-morning raid on Agwara
community in Niger State, attacking a police station, burning part of a United
Methodist church, and abducting at least five people.
In a separate incident, on Feb. 26, arsonists targeted St. Mary’s Catholic
Church in Katchuan Iruan. They set fire to the sacristy and completely destroyed
all the church’s historical and religious records. In addition, two vehicles
parked on the premises were burned.
Democratic Republic of Congo: On the night of February 15–16, unknown assailants
broke into and desecrated a Catholic church in Bule. They tore off the church
shutters, forced open the tabernacle, and scattered the consecrated hosts on the
floor.
General Muslim Abuse of Christians
Yemen: According to a Feb. 17 report, at least 20 Yemeni Christians were
arrested or abducted from their homes or off the street. While some are
confirmed in Houthi-run prisons, others have “disappeared” and face potential
torture or execution for their faith. Yemen is officially 99-100% Muslim;
conversion to Christianity under Yemeni law is punishable by death. The state
and various ruling entities do not officially recognize any Christian minority.
The current indigenous church grew after the martyrdom of foreign missionaries
by Islamic extremists: In 2002, an Islamic jihadist killed three American
missionaries at Jibla Baptist Hospital to “cleanse his religion and get closer
to God.” In 2012 Al-Qaeda killed an American teacher in Taiz for “spreading
Christianity.” In 2016, Islamic State gunmen killed four nuns and 12 others at a
home for the elderly in Aden. By 2017, nearly all foreign missionaries had left
Yemen, yet various Christian ministries observe and report on the Yemeni
situation.
Iran: According to a Feb. 19 report, although fewer Christians were sentenced in
2025 (73) compared to 2024 (96), the sentences became significantly harsher,
totaling 280 cumulative years in prison. The state officially labeled many of
them as “Mossad mercenaries” and accused them of acting under a “Zionist
Christian evangelization movement” trained by the U.S. and Israel. Persecution
intensified significantly in 2025: 254 Christians were arrested — nearly double
the 139 arrests recorded in 2024. 90% of cases were brought under Article 500,
which criminalizes “propaganda contrary to the holy religion of Islam.” The
government also increasingly criminalized the possession of imported Bibles. A
Christian convert, Aida Najaflou, was sentenced to 17 years for “evangelism,
prayer, and celebrating Christmas.” She was charged with “propaganda against the
regime” and “acting against national security.” Despite sustaining a spinal
fracture in prison, she was reportedly returned to her cell on a stretcher and
denied a proper hospital recovery period. Najaflou’s case is one of many.
According to the report, Christian prisoners face serious mistreatments,
including “denial of healthcare, psychological torture, and even physical
abuse.”
Another February 5 report highlights the tightly restricted conditions a small
Orthodox Christian community experiences. Services are rare, limited mostly to
Holy Week, and must be conducted in Greek to avoid accusations of proselytism.
The community cannot freely perform sacraments such as baptisms or marriages,
and visits by the clergy are infrequent. Believers are therefore to wait years
for full participation in religious life. Priests must move discreetly, wear
civilian clothes and limit their movements for safety. Some individuals,
officially considered Muslims, practice Christianity in secret, putting
themselves at serious risk if discovered. Fr. Nikiforos illustrated the
situation:
“On Saturday night, after the end of the Resurrection service, two people of
Iranian origin approached me secretly. They begged me to give them Holy
Communion after the rest of the faithful had left the church. They lived in
Tehran and, to the outside world, they were considered Muslims! The fact that
they had received Holy Communion must not become known, because in that case
their lives would be in danger. Although officially considered Muslims, they had
been baptized as Orthodox Christians during a previous visit to an Orthodox
country.”
Philippines: A Feb. 17 report disclosed that Christian settler leaders in the
Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) warned the Senate that
recent legislation poses an “existential threat” to non-Muslim representation.
Parliament Bill No. 419, enacted Jan. 28, voided all sectoral certifications,
forcing more than 260 Christian settler groups to re-register within a strict
15-day deadline, thereby erasing “the hard-won legitimacy” of their
organizations. Leaders also opposed replacing sector-managed “reserved seats”
with region-wide elections, arguing it reduces minority protections to a
“popularity contest” and risks a “tyranny of the majority.” They warn
disenfranchisement could undermine missionary security, economic rights, and the
region’s inclusive “Tri-People” framework.
Netherlands: According to a Feb. 22 report, Elyas, a Lebanese-born evangelist
who has lived in the Netherlands for 26 years, was assaulted while preaching in
the streets of Utrecht. A group of Muslim men interrupted his preaching,
shouting Islamist slogans such as “Allah is one” and “Jesus is a human.” The
situation escalated when one of the men, apparently attempting to assert
dominance, struck Elyas before bystanders intervened to stop the violence.
Police arrived and dispersed the group, although it remains unclear if the
attacker was arrested.
Germany: A 35-year-old Afghan man attacked three Jehovah’s Witnesses at Würzburg
Central Station, attempting to stab a 68-year-old man and assaulting two others.
Bystanders, including an off-duty police officer, subdued him before serious
injuries occurred.
Separately, according to a Feb. 27 report, since 2024, a 34-year-old Syrian man
named Khaled K. has been terrorizing the Hessian municipality of Kriftel. He has
sent to the city administration more than 100 emails filled with anti-Christian
insults, hatred toward Germans, and misogyny. At the beginning of 2026, the
threats escalated. Khaled explicitly vowed to go on a killing spree—”I will kill
everything I see before me, women, children, and everything.” He also insulted
Christianity as the “dirtiest religion,” referred to Germany as a “Nazi land,”
and insulted Jesus and Mary in the most vulgar terms. Despite numerous criminal
complaints for insults, threats, and property damage (such as smashing glass
bottles in the town hall parking lot), West Hesse police have only conducted
“threat talks” (Gefährderansprachen) but, as no “serious crimes” have been
committed, apparently see no legal basis yet for an arrest.
Pakistan: Jameel Masih, a 14-year-old Christian boy, forcibly converted to Islam
, is being held in illegal custody by a Muslim landlord, Muhammad Boota Bajwa.
Due to extreme poverty, Jameel was sent five years ago. to work at Bajwa’s
cattle shed. The family was paid only in grain—roughly 200 kg of wheat annually
(worth about $58)—a practice rights activists describe as bonded labor. On
February 22, after the family managed to bring Jameel home briefly, Bajwa and
two armed men reportedly attacked the parents and forcibly snatched the boy
back. The family later saw a TikTok video of Jameel wearing an Islamic cap while
Muslim hymns were playing. Local residents confirmed the boy had been converted
to Islam. Activist Napolean Qayyum notes that minor children from minorities are
often converted to ensure permanent control over them as laborers.
In a different incident, according to a Feb. 18 report, Sadiq Masih, a Christian
brick kiln worker in Punjab, was coerced into converting to Islam and changing
his name to “Muhammad Sadiq” years ago while indebted to an employer. Although
he remains a practicing Christian, the National Database and Registration
Authority (NADRA) refuses to correct his records. Because their father is
registered as Muslim, NADRA has also been blocking his five children from
registering as Christians on their National Identity Cards (CNICs). Without
these cards, the children are barred from education, banking, voting, and
government assistance. Human rights advocates highlight that the brick kiln
sector uses financial advances (debt bondage) to trap illiterate Christian
workers, thereby making them vulnerable to forced religious identity changes.
The Masih family, living in extreme poverty, lacks the means for the lengthy
court battles required to prove “clerical error,” leaving them trapped in a
Muslim legal identity they do not profess. Attorney Lazar Allah Rakha notes that
while conversion to Islam is processed easily, conversion from Islam (apostasy)
is treated with suspicion and effectively blocked by administrative policy.
Attempting to renounce a Muslim identity in Pakistan carries severe risks under
Section 295-A (outraging religious feelings) and can trigger mob violence or
accusations of blasphemy that can result in death.
*Raymond Ibrahim, author of Defenders of the West, Sword and Scimitar, Crucified
Again, and The Al Qaeda Reader, is the Distinguished Senior Shillman Fellow at
the Gatestone Institute and the Judith Rosen Friedman Fellow at the Middle East
Forum.
*About this Series
While not all, or even most, Muslims are involved, persecution of Christians by
extremists is growing. The report posits that such persecution is not random but
rather systematic, and takes place irrespective of language, ethnicity, or
location. It includes incidents that take place during, or are reported on, any
given month.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22627/persecution-of-christians-february
Follow Raymond Ibrahim on X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.
What Is Wilayat al-Faqih? A Simple Definition
Janoubia Website, June 28, 2026 (Translated from Arabic by on line translation
sites)
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155622/
Meaning
Wilayat al-Faqih ("Guardianship of the Jurist") is the concept that a qualified
Islamic jurist (faqih) acts as the representative of Imam al-Mahdi (the Twelfth
Imam in Shi'a Islam) during the Imam's occultation, managing the affairs of
society in his absence.
The Core Dispute
The disagreement is not over the existence of some form of guardianship itself,
but rather over its scope:
Is it limited to religious guidance, issuing legal opinions (fatwas), judicial
functions, and certain necessary social responsibilities?
Or does it include absolute political authority and governance?
According to the text, the majority of Shi'a scholars and religious authorities,
both classical and contemporary, rejected the theory of General Wilayat al-Faqih,
which grants the jurist broad political and governmental powers. Instead, they
restricted the jurist's role to what are known as "hisbi matters" (al-umur al-hisbiyyah)—such
as judicial affairs, religious rulings, guardianship of minors, and management
of charitable endowments (waqf). They maintained that governing the state during
the Imam's occultation belongs exclusively to the infallible Imam.
The Jurisprudential Difference Between "Hisbi Matters" and "General Wilayat al-Faqih"
This distinction represents the central jurisprudential divide between the
traditional Shi'a school and the ruling doctrine currently adopted in Iran.
1. Hisbi Matters (The Minimum Certain Authority)
These are essential matters that Islamic law does not permit to be neglected
within society.
They include:
Care of orphans and minors
Administration of charitable endowments (waqf)
Management of the property of absent persons
Settlement of disputes through the courts
Issuing religious rulings on worship and transactions
Senior Shi'a authorities maintain that these powers are granted to jurists out
of necessity to manage people's daily lives during the Imam's absence and do not
constitute political authority.
2. General (or Absolute) Wilayat al-Faqih
This doctrine holds that a fully qualified jurist possesses the same political
and leadership powers that belonged to the Prophet and the infallible Imams.
Such powers include:
Governing the state
Declaring war and peace
Collecting public taxes
Appointing rulers and officials
Issuing governmental laws that override individual legal opinions
Under this theory, the jurist becomes the supreme political ruler of the Islamic
community, and obedience to him is considered obligatory in a manner similar to
obedience to the Prophet and the Imam.
Major Stages and Thinkers in Shi'a Jurisprudential History
Early Foundational Period
Leading early jurists, such as:
Shaykh al-Mufid
Al-Sharif al-Murtada
Shaykh al-Tusi
held that establishing and governing a state during the occultation was not
permissible. They considered the establishment of a perfectly just state and
political leadership to be exclusively tied to the return of Imam al-Mahdi.
The School of Shaykh al-Ansari (19th Century)
Murtadha al-Ansari (d. 1864) is described as one of the strongest opponents of
extending the jurist's authority beyond hisbi matters.
In his famous legal work Al-Makasib, he strongly rejected efforts to expand the
jurist's authority over people's lives and property, arguing that proving a
general guardianship for jurists was extraordinarily difficult.
Contemporary Najaf and Qom Schools
Many leading modern Shi'a authorities continued this approach and rejected
extending Wilayat al-Faqih to general political rule.
Grand Ayatollah Muhammad Kazem Shariatmadari
Muhammad Kazem Shariatmadari
His position included:
Support for a constitutional parliamentary state based on popular sovereignty.
Limiting clerics to advisory and supervisory roles.
Opposition to Article 5 of the Iranian Constitution concerning Wilayat al-Faqih,
arguing that it restricted popular freedom and could lead to religious
dictatorship.
Grand Ayatollah Hossein Borujerdi
Hossein Borujerdi
His position included:
Belief that government is a social necessity for maintaining order, security,
and justice.
Restricting juristic authority during the occultation to hisbi matters such as
judicial functions, care of orphans, and management of endowments.
Maintaining distance from direct political power and preserving the independence
of the religious seminary.
Ayatollah Mahmoud Taleghani
Mahmoud Taleghani
His views included:
Arguing that absolute Wilayat al-Faqih conflicted with democracy and civil
liberties.
Advocating governance through elected councils (shura) and broad public
participation.
Viewing the role of religious scholars as supervision and oversight rather than
direct political rule.
Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri
Hossein Ali Montazeri
Initially a theorist of Wilayat al-Faqih and a deputy to Ruhollah Khomeini, he
later revised his views.
He came to support:
An elected and constitutionally limited form of Wilayat al-Faqih.
Political legitimacy derived from popular election rather than direct divine
appointment.
Separation of religion from direct executive authority, with the jurist serving
primarily as a supervisor and monitor.
Similar Views in Najaf
Grand Ayatollah Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei
Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei
According to the text, he restricted the jurist's authority primarily to issuing
legal rulings and judicial functions.
Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani
Ali al-Sistani
According to the text, he believes the jurist's authority does not extend beyond
hisbi matters and preservation of social order, while requiring broad public
acceptance before intervention in public affairs.
Grand Ayatollah Mohsen al-Hakim
Mohsen al-Hakim
He opposed the idea of clerics directly governing the state.
Grand Ayatollah Mohammad Ishaq al-Fayyad
Mohammad Ishaq al-Fayyad
He adheres to the traditional Najaf position, holding that:
Political authority and state establishment belong exclusively to the infallible
Imam.
The jurist's role is guidance, advice, judicial functions, and protection of
society—not divinely appointed political rule.
Grand Ayatollah Bashir al-Najafi
Bashir al-Najafi
He holds that the authority of a qualified jurist is limited to:
Hisbi matters
Judicial functions
Issuing legal opinions
Hisbi matters include public interests that cannot be neglected, such as:
Care of orphans
Management of charitable endowments
Administration of the property of absent persons and minors
How did Hezbollah's rhetoric shift the focus from land to weapons?
Yassin Shibli, Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
With the implementation of a comprehensive ceasefire – albeit selectively by the
Israeli side – following the signing of the US-Iranian memorandum of
understanding, which some, as usual, saw as a "victory" brought by Iran to
southern Lebanon and its people, based on the content of its fluctuating
rhetoric and its narrative of events that summarizes its view of the course of
the conflict, which contains much distortion of facts, not to mention outright
lies and misleading of public opinion, it has become necessary to discuss this
rhetoric, its fluctuations, and its conclusions, both in form and content, after
the tragedies and calamities it has brought upon the Lebanese Shiites, and the
southerners in particular, and consequently upon all Lebanese. We begin with the
“revenge for the Supreme Leader” war, which began with the firing of six
missiles at Israel on the night of March 2nd. While the talk began about
“revenge for the pure blood of the Supreme Leader of Muslims, Ali Khamenei,” the
phrase “and in defense of Lebanon and its people in response to the repeated
Israeli attacks” came second, as if it were unnecessary. Things took a different
turn after the reactions that followed the Zionist response and the displacement
that citizens were subjected to in the middle of one of the nights of the holy
month of Ramadan. Talk began about the “injustice” of the 15 months of patience
in the face of killing, with the claim that this patience was to give the state
and diplomacy a chance to liberate the land and stop the attacks, which failed
from his point of view, with complete disregard for the requirements of the
ceasefire that was negotiated by the “Big Brother,” which is the handover of
weapons to the state, starting from south of the Litani, which did not happen.
Thus, according to Hezbollah’s rhetoric, it appears as though the problem began
on November 27, 2024, completely ignoring the war of support that the party
launched on October 8, 2023, after about 17 years of calm following the 2006
war, which Hezbollah also launched when it kidnapped two Israeli soldiers in
clear harmony with Hamas’s kidnapping of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit in
Gaza. It appeared as though the matter was coordinated between the two sides and
that the maestro was one and the one sitting in Tehran, at a time when the
region and Lebanon were boiling with the repercussions of the assassination of
the martyred President Rafik Hariri and the withdrawal of the Syrian army from
Lebanon after three decades of occupation, in an attempt by Iran to take its
place in leading what is called the axis of resistance.
The 2006 war, which was also declared a "divine victory" at the time, is the war
that brought about Resolution 1701. This resolution has since become the
reference point for the situation in the south, after the liberation in 2000
restored the reference point for the situation in the south—relatively
speaking—to the Armistice Agreement, which everyone in Lebanon is now calling
for. However, there is disagreement over a number of points along the Blue Line
that could have been negotiated, allowing a return to the status quo before the
Palestinian guerrilla presence and the Cairo Agreement in southern Lebanon.
Thus, we see that the root of the current problem does not lie solely in the
first and second wars of support, nor in the 2006 war, but rather goes back to
2000 when the ingenuity of the resistance movement emerged to invoke the Shebaa
Farms as occupied Lebanese territory to justify maintaining arms, ignoring the
fact that they are not covered by Resolution 425, which provided the legal cover
for resistance against the occupation, but rather fall under Resolution 242 of
1967, following their occupation. The war of that year was under Syrian control
at the time. This is the fact that Hezbollah and its media always seek to
deliberately obscure or at least distort, by taking events out of context and
presenting “news” that they distribute to some of their well-known mouthpieces,
who fill the screens to throw it into the market of misinformation in a
coordinated and blatant way that may pass for the simple people, but it does not
find its way to any of the objective observers who closely follow the general
political affairs in the country and the region. The latest of these reports is
that Iran, by striking Israel recently in “defense” of the southern suburbs and
only once, entered the war in defense of Lebanon and hastened the ceasefire and
the signing of the memorandum of understanding with America. On this basis, the
party and its group declared victory as if the memorandum of understanding was
an American-Israeli surrender to it, ignorant of and most likely ignoring that
countries, including Iran, are not charitable organizations that enter wars in
defense of others, but rather they are entities with their own interests that
they will fight by all means if necessary to defend. From this standpoint came
the last and only Iranian response to the Israeli aggression on the southern
suburbs, and it was necessary to raise the stakes at a critical moment in the
course of negotiations with America. Otherwise, why didn’t Iran defend Lebanon
throughout these years or at least since the beginning of the last war? The
answer is because it fights on its own terms and solely for its own benefit, in
addition to another factor that may have escaped the minds of many, which is the
meaning of Iran, the principal party in the equation, entering the battle itself
instead of the proxy. This factor in such circumstances may indicate a weakness
and frailty that has afflicted the Lebanese proxy in its two aspects: the
military aspect, which is Hezbollah, so that it has become unable to change the
equations or harm the enemy, and its political aspect, represented by President
Nabih Berri, who appeared outside the political negotiating equation except for
his Iranian contacts, which made him appear as if he was attached to it. This
forced Iran to intervene itself in an attempt to salvage what could be salvaged
in the crucial moments of the negotiations, and so it was. The proof is that the
Zionist attacks continued afterward, even to the outskirts of Beirut through
assassinations, and are continuing in the south despite the Iranian warnings,
which have returned to their old form of threats and intimidation. With this
rhetoric and these fragmented narratives and stories disseminated by Hezbollah
and its media mouthpieces, cloaked in religious slogans promising victory and
happiness through martyrdom, logic is obscured and the thinking of the majority
of ordinary people is confused. Talking about not clinging to territory in the
face of the enemy becomes a jihadist tactic aimed at ultimate victory, while
lamenting losses and hardships becomes a disgrace deserving of reproach and, in
some cases, social ostracism. Thus, over time, since 2000, the issue has
transformed from one of land, its liberation, and holding onto it as it was
before liberation, to one of weapons and clinging to them, even at the expense
of territory, people, and their fate, in defense of Iran and its interests. This
is something Hezbollah leaders do not conceal but rather boast about, as Iranian
Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf recently boasted when he explicitly
stated that Lebanon has paid a higher price in casualties than Iran and fought
more in its defense and in defense of its interests. In the eyes of nations and
national principles, this constitutes a major condemnation of Hezbollah, which,
according to this statement, appears to be a mercenary organization. Meanwhile,
the situation continues With his misleading and illogical rhetoric, whether
through his officials or his media outlets, without any sense of "national
conscience," he should have woken up to the tragedies and calamities that this
approach has caused to the nation, the people, and the cause.
Jamil Mroueh: The Framework Agreement Between Lebanon and Israel Is a
Preliminary Political Document, Not a Binding Treaty
Jamil Mroueh/Janoubia/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
Jamil Mroueh posted a legal and constitutional analysis on Facebook of the
“Tripartite Framework Agreement between Lebanon, Israel, and the United States,”
signed in Washington on the evening of Friday, June 26, 2026. He argued that the
document, in its current form, constitutes a preliminary political instrument
and not a legally binding treaty for Lebanon. Mroueh explained that the
agreement calls itself a “framework” and refers the final commitment to a
“comprehensive and complete peace and security agreement” to be prepared later
through working groups, meaning that it paves the way for peace but does not
conclude it. He pointed out that the signature of the Lebanese ambassador in
Washington does not constitute constitutional ratification, as Article 52 of the
Constitution stipulates that negotiation and ratification are the prerogative of
the President of the Republic in agreement with the Prime Minister, and the
treaty does not become effective until approved by the Council of Ministers, and
in the case of a treaty of this type, also after approval by Parliament. He
argued that the framework binds Lebanon politically, but not legally, at this
stage, and that the constitutional “moment of truth” is postponed until the
Cabinet adopts any security annex or the comprehensive treaty stipulated in
Article 12. He noted that it remains subject to amendment or rejection at a
political cost, not through a legally binding violation. In analyzing the
articles, Marwa considered the first article, concerning mutual recognition, the
right to exist, ending the state of war, and direct negotiations, to be a
threshold Lebanon has not crossed since the 1949 armistice. He argued that it
touches upon political and constitutional principles related to Lebanon’s Arab
identity and the rejection of normalization. He also argued that the phrase
“irreversible” clashes with the precedent of the annulment of the May 17, 1983
agreement.
As for the second article, he argued that it links the Lebanese army’s
restoration of effective sovereignty to the disarmament of non-governmental
groups and the dismantling of their structures, in exchange for a gradual
Israeli redeployment according to a security annex with American support. He
considered the problem to be making sovereignty conditional on performance and
external verification. He pointed out that the third clause, concerning pilot
zones and the verification mechanism, links the return of civilians and
reconstruction to the completion of disarmament, thus transforming rights into
conditional rewards and introducing the American factor into the management of
security verification. Regarding the fourth clause, he argued that the state's
commitment to a monopoly on the use of force and the disarmament of armed groups
is constitutionally consistent with the Taif Agreement, Resolutions 1559 and
1701, and the ministerial statement. However, the problem lies in the lack of
internal consensus and Hezbollah's rejection of this approach. Marwa considered
that the fifth clause grants Israel the authority to determine when the threat
has disappeared, and consequently, when to withdraw, thus transforming
withdrawal from an international obligation and a sovereign right of Lebanon
into an Israeli discretionary decision.
In the sixth clause, he argued that the state's exclusive authority over
security and the decision of war and peace is the most consistent with the
constitution, particularly Article 65, as it reaffirms a constitutional
principle in the face of the duality of strategic decision-making. As for the
seventh clause, concerning the right to self-defense and the military
coordination group, he considered it sound in principle, but raised the issue of
sovereignty due to the American role in the security arrangement. In Article 8,
he argued that including the security of settlements in northern Israel among
the shared objectives constitutes a conceptual normalization that goes beyond
ending hostilities to adopting the security of the other side as a common goal.
Article 9, he asserted, links American aid and Lebanese control on the ground to
a rigorous performance program and continuous monitoring, thus transforming
sovereignty into a conditional grant. Article 10 ties reconstruction and
economic support to financial conditions requiring parliamentary approval, as
stipulated in Article 52. Article 11 indicates that preventing the flow of funds
to non-state armed groups imposes legislative and executive obligations, as well
as internal banking oversight, and impacts the economic and social
infrastructure associated with Hezbollah. Article 12 is considered the bridge to
a binding treaty, as it stipulates the formation of working groups and direct,
continuous communication channels with Israel, facilitated by the United
States—a move he described as a structural normalization step. He noted that
Article 13 restricts Lebanon's diplomatic and legal sovereignty by halting
hostile actions in international forums, while Article 14 is seen as political
and protocol-based, solidifying the American role and linking the agreement to
President Donald Trump's vision. Marwa concluded that the framework agreement's
provisions fall into three categories: the first aligns with the constitution,
including the state's monopoly on force and its exclusive right to decide on war
and peace; the second represents a sharp divergence, encompassing recognition,
ending the state of war, direct negotiations, and the security of northern
Israel; and the third is ambiguous, relating to conditional sovereignty, the
financial dimension, and the foreign role in implementation. He emphasized that
the agreement's constitutional fate hinges on three internal levers: a
two-thirds majority vote in the cabinet on key issues, as stipulated in Article
65; prior parliamentary approval of the treaty, as per Article 52; and the
constitutional imperative of coexistence and national unity enshrined in the
preamble to the constitution. He argued that full acceptance of the agreement
appears politically difficult given the ability of the blocking third to
obstruct government adoption, the Speaker of Parliament's control over the
agenda, and Hezbollah's declared opposition. Rejection, however, remains
possible because the framework has not yet become a binding treaty, but it
carries significant political, security, and economic costs. Therefore, Marwa
considered the most realistic path to be amendment through the security annex
and working groups, while maintaining the document as a legally non-binding
political framework.
Double Standards!
Mahmoud Al-Qaisi/Janoubia Website/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
The saying, “Life isn’t fair,” is often used to justify double standards. “The
resistance forces (headed by Nabih Berri), who granted the Karish gas field to
Israel for free, normalized relations with it regarding future gas revenues from
the Qana field, and officially recognized the State of Israel through an
official document registered with the United Nations when demarcating the
maritime borders… are now rejecting the framework agreement aimed at ending the
suffering of the southerners and returning them to their land after the greatest
military defeat Hezbollah suffered as a result of its unilateral declaration of
war on Tel Aviv.” This argument is circulating in opposition political circles
to highlight contradictions and direct sharp criticism. Critics point out that
Lebanon implicitly agreed to a parallel equation in border demarcation and
believe that Hezbollah is currently waging a destructive conflict without
official authorization. Here are the details and facts surrounding these claims:
The maritime border demarcation file: In October 2022, an agreement was signed
to demarcate the maritime border through US mediation. This agreement stipulated
that the Karish gas field falls under full Israeli control, while the Qana field
was allocated to Lebanon with revenue-sharing arrangements. Documents registered
with the United Nations address coordination regarding exclusive economic zones.
The current conflict and settlement efforts: The Lebanese arena witnessed a
military escalation, and in late June 2026, the parties involved signed a
framework agreement or understanding in Washington to end hostilities. The
agreement stipulates gradual withdrawals and the Lebanese army assuming full
control of areas south of the Litani River, amidst internal political debate and
differing positions regarding the link between this framework and the
disarmament of Hezbollah. Popular and political reactions: Opponents accuse the
resistance forces of double standards, criticizing the factions' rejection of
any framework agreement aimed at halting the bloodshed and facilitating the
return of displaced persons, while previous negotiations allowed for the
demarcation of maritime borders and gas extraction, in what these forces
describe as Hezbollah's reckless gamble. The policy of double standards (or
selective application of rules) is the application of different rules or
principles to similar situations or individuals, based on self-interest rather
than justice.
This concept can be divided into several key dimensions:
• In international relations and the policy of selective intervention: Major
powers use this policy to justify intervention in the affairs of other countries
to protect their strategic interests, while turning a blind eye to serious human
rights violations in other countries if they are allies.
• In international law: Double standards are evident when Security Council
resolutions are strictly enforced against certain parties, while political cover
and protection are provided to others to avoid sanctions.
• In societies and legal systems, there is a disparity in punishments: This
occurs when harsh penalties are applied to a certain group of people for
committing a wrong, while the same wrong is overlooked or excuses and
justifications are found for another group (often based on class or influence).
• Psychological and social aspects of justifying wrongdoing: Individuals or
groups tend to justify their own mistakes or actions as “acceptable” or
“necessary,” while condemning the same actions when committed by their opponents
or rivals.
• Roots and causes of self-interest over principle: Double standards arise when
“self-interest” becomes the primary criterion for decision-making. If principles
and values conflict with political or economic gains, the principles are
disregarded, and double standards are applied.
This policy fundamentally contradicts the principles of justice and equality,
leading to widespread frustration, loss of trust in systems and institutions,
and increased tensions. If we examine this concept ethically to understand it
clearly, we arrive at the following moral conclusion: No one should criticize
another for their reprehensible actions while their own actions are even worse.
Here, we must distinguish between hypocrisy and double standards, which means
having one standard for someone who claims to uphold a principle but, in
practice, disregards it.
On “The Image” in Politics and Negotiations
Hazem Saghieh/Al-Sharq Al-Awsat/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
With President Sadat’s initiative in 1977, and his subsequent commencement of
negotiations with the Israelis, a minority current emerged in Egyptian and Arab
cultural life, perhaps most prominently represented by the late great Fouad
Zakaria. These individuals did not necessarily agree with everything Sadat did,
but they believed he had shifted the approach to the conflict from an irrational
to a more rational level. Indeed, after the initiative and the negotiations, it
seemed, for a moment, that the conflict and its resolution now concerned land,
borders, resources, and interests, rather than greetings, handshakes, sharing a
meal, or appearing in a joint photograph. Previously, a joint photograph had
been more akin to a criminal document, irrefutably testifying to sins,
betrayals, and reprehensible acts.
However, the expectations of the few rational observers were thwarted by
reality, as is often the case in Arab experiences. Recently, the Iranians and
Americans began negotiating to end the war, conducting indirect talks in Oman.
According to Western sources, they also met face-to-face in Islamabad and
Geneva, but no photographs were taken. Iranian officials were reported to have
refused to be photographed alongside the killers of their Supreme Leader, Ali
Khamenei. Meanwhile, in Washington, military delegations from Lebanon and Israel
met, and the Lebanese refused to appear in a photograph with those who had
killed Lebanese soldiers. While the Lebanese reason stemmed from a sense of
helplessness that left them with only one option—to avoid being photographed—the
Iranian reason arose from the Iranians' reluctance to acknowledge that their
delegation had committed an act that official Tehran considered scandalous. But
the raw voice of common sense asks: if a "formal" act like taking a picture with
murderers is impermissible, how can one justify negotiating with them, a matter
that transcends "form" and enters "substance"?
However, a photograph is far more complex than a mere form. We know, for
example, of a phenomenon called "camera anxiety," which may stem from the
embarrassment of the person being photographed, perhaps due to a perceived flaw
in their appearance or body, a feeling that they are not at their best, or a
feeling that, in the photograph, they do not live up to their self-image. Thus,
photographers of old would ask their subjects to smile, to appear in a way that
would overcome the limitations of the photograph. The photograph, therefore,
becomes a predicament. Roland Barthes saw this as the anxiety that grips a
person when being photographed, as they suddenly realize that they are "merely
an object in the eyes of another." Susan Sontag, for her part, saw the
photograph as freezing a fluid and ever-changing human condition in a single
moment and a specific "shot." This, she argued, constitutes a "capture" that
usurps the freedom of the subject, making a single moment stand in for their
complex and ever-changing self and life. Because the photograph can be viewed
repeatedly, it reinforces this fleeting impression of those it depicts. Before
Barthes and Sontag, Walter Benjamin taught us that the advent of photography
shattered the "aura" and dismantled the sense of individuality. In recent
decades, the growing importance of the photograph has amplified the fear of it
and the potential for "distortion" or "diminishment" it might cause. For
example, it can transform from a picture or photograph into an image—a visual
representation that may be imagined, not necessarily actual, and may affect the
person's character or reputation, not just their outward appearance. Therefore,
when diplomacy is not secret, and its negotiations are consequently not secret,
it seizes control of the image and attempts to mold it and overcome its
challenges, much like a photographer demanding a smile from their client. This
was precisely the aim of the prolific photo album taken at the conclusion of the
American-Vietnamese peace talks in Paris in 1973, which became proof that ending
the war was now a reality. We saw the delegates seated around the negotiating
table, conversing together or separately, as if both sides were affirming their
capacity to make peace and the seriousness of the negotiations they were
conducting. Conversely, another school of thought emerged in dealing with the
difficulties of the image, teaching submission to a static image that captivates
and obliges everyone, creating a kind of cult-like relationship with it. In
1966, Abdel Halim Hafez sang a song with lyrics by Salah Jaheen, titled "Sura"
(Picture), in which the word "Sura" (picture) was repeated tirelessly as a
refrain.
"Picture, picture, picture, we all want a picture
Picture, picture, picture under the victorious banner
Picture of the joyful people under the victorious banner
Oh time, capture us, capture us, oh time
We'll get closer to each other, and whoever stays away from the square
Will never appear in the picture."
This song was part of the celebrations commemorating the July 23, 1952
revolution, brimming with historical optimism and achievements represented by a
collective image that everyone should embrace. Those who don't will "never
appear in the picture."
The image here was intended to be the culmination of a history in which humanity
had no part. But less than a year later came the setback of June 1967.
Ending the Battle or Postponing It?!
Mishari Al-Zaydi/Asharq Al-Awsat/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from
Arabic)
President Trump and his administration, especially Vice President J.D. Vance,
are keen to ensure the continuation of the diplomatic momentum leading up to the
agreement with Iran. I believe this same keenness prevails among the rulers of
Tehran, which is currently being run by several heads, regardless of the victory
speeches and threats delivered by Qalibaf and others. However, this memorandum
of understanding is not as solid as it seems, and it has been subject to
difficult tests since the moment it was signed. While J.D. Vance was promoting
this memorandum, which paves the way for the final agreement, the Lebanese arena
became the first practical test of the agreement's strength. On one hand,
Iranian rhetoric insists on making Lebanon an integral part of the agreement,
just like the enriched uranium file, the frozen funds, and Hormuz, without
exaggeration. On the other hand, Israel insists on "finishing" the mission in
Lebanon and disarming Hezbollah, which poses a particular threat to northern
Israel. Will the major agreement signed in Washington between Lebanon and
Israel, under American auspices, be a damaging blow to the Iranian project in
Lebanon? Will Iran truly abandon its proxy and crown jewel, the Lebanese
Hezbollah? Or will it consider Hezbollah a fundamental issue, not a bargaining
chip? Control of the Strait of Hormuz, who has sovereignty over it, and who has
the right to collect "tolls" from it—this is a central issue, indeed a
cornerstone of the success or failure of the agreement itself.
The crux of the matter is: why did the war erupt in the first place? Why did
Trump tear up his predecessor Obama's agreement with the Iranians, and why was
attacking Obama's agreement with the Iranians such fertile ground in Trump's
fiery, mobilizing speeches to his base? Are there secret clauses and unannounced
understandings between the Iranians and the Americans? I listened to a
provocative comment from Lebanese politician Melhem Riachi, a leading figure in
the Lebanese Forces party and a member of parliament. He stated that Iran has
shifted from the Chinese-Russian axis to the American axis, and that Trump has
been lenient with them and offered them sufficient incentives for this shift. He
added that the features of this major transition will become clear in the coming
months! This is a provocative, dangerous, and perhaps even reckless conclusion,
but I won't blame him; because what is happening in its entirety doesn't satisfy
the curiosity and bewilderment. More importantly, the underlying causes that led
to the outbreak of war, whether the 12-day war or the 40-day war, have not been
addressed at their root. Therefore, the most accurate description of what
happened—in my opinion—is the postponement of the battle and the "consolidation
of the crisis," as the rich Lebanese political lexicon would say! This is what
appears to us from the picture, and we only testify to what we know, for we are
not guardians of the unseen!
The Story of the Meeting of Saints Peter and Paul in Sidon!
George Hayek/Facebook/June 28, 2026 (Translated by Google from Arabic)
When you cross the threshold of the shrine known as the "Room of Saints Peter
and Paul" in the Melkite Greek Catholic Archdiocese of Sidon, you feel as if
time has turned back two thousand years. The silence in that place speaks a
language unlike any other, and the stones hold a memory that still preserves the
footsteps of the apostles. There, you see not just ancient walls, but you feel
the very breath of the early Church, and the fragrance of holiness that still
fills the place, as if time has not succeeded in erasing the trace of the two
men who brought the world to Christ.
Saint Peter was traveling through the cities of the Phoenician coast,
strengthening the faithful and bolstering their resolve, as the first bishop of
Antioch before his move to Rome. According to Church tradition, he arrived at
the catacombs of Sidon, where the Christian community met in secret, far from
the eyes of the Roman Empire's soldiers. Night had fallen over the city, and the
small oil lamps flickered with light against the stone walls as the faithful
entered one by one, greeting each other with silent glances. The fear of
persecution never left them, but their faith was stronger than fear.
Peter stood among them, his face radiant with the peace that only Christ can
bestow. He spoke of the Resurrection, of the hope that death cannot defeat, and
of the Church against which the gates of hell will not prevail. His words fell
upon their hearts like the morning dew, and tears of joy mingled with smiles of
happiness in some of those present, for they saw in Peter a living witness to
the Resurrection, the man who had once walked on the waters of the lake when
Jesus called him. Then he broke the bread, raised the chalice, and celebrated
the Eucharist. In those moments, a profound silence descended upon the place, so
profound that it seemed to the observer that heaven had drawn near to earth, and
that angels were joining the faithful in their prayers. As soon as the prayer
ended, the faces of those present shone with an inner light, as if they had just
emerged from the Upper Room in Jerusalem on Pentecost. While the faithful were
exchanging greetings, Saint Evodius approached Peter and whispered in his ear
that Paul of Tarsus had arrived in the port of Sidon as a prisoner on his way to
Rome, escorted by a detachment of soldiers led by a centurion known for his
humane treatment of prisoners and his respect for Christians. Peter raised his
head to heaven for a moment of silence, then said quietly, "The Lord who
gathered us in Jerusalem is able to gather us here as well." One of the faithful
carried a message to the centurion, asking him to allow Paul to visit the
Christian community for a while under his supervision. Only a few hours passed
before Paul entered that humble house, preceded by his iron chains, but his face
radiated a freedom that the chains could not take away. Silence fell as the
apostle entered, then his eyes met Peter's. The two men needed no words; their
embrace spoke louder than any conversation. Two men, united by their love for
Christ, separated by the paths of their missions, embraced, only to be reunited
by divine providence for a final meeting in Phoenicia. Paul approached the chief
apostle and said in a humble voice, "Bless me, you who have heard directly the
voice of the Master." Peter smiled and replied, "How can I bless the one whom
the Lord has chosen to bear His name to the Gentiles? Rather, you bless me,
Paul." But Paul knelt on one knee and took Peter's hand in his, kissing it
reverently. Peter raised his hands and prayed, "May the Lord give you strength
to complete your Calvary, for the road to Rome is also the road to Heaven." Paul
smiled, his face radiant with hope, and said, "Each of us has our own Calvary,
Simon, but after Calvary comes the Resurrection, and as long as we are with
Christ, death will have no final word."
Tradition recounts that the faithful wept as they listened to this exchange, for
they felt they were witnessing the meeting of two giants of faith, a meeting
that would remain etched in the memory of the Church for generations to come.
When the time came to depart, Peter embraced Paul once more and made the sign of
the cross over his forehead. The centurion stood silently, contemplating the
scene, his eyes brimming with tears, marveling at men facing imprisonment and
death with such peace and love.
Paul left for the ship that would take him to Rome. There, on the horizon, the
sails began to recede, while Peter remained on the shore, blessing the ship with
his eyes and his heart, knowing that his companion was going to his martyrdom,
and that the blood of the apostles would be the seed from which the Church would
sprout throughout the world.
For two thousand years, Sidon has borne witness to that apostolic proclamation.
It was a station of great historical and spiritual significance, from which the
light of the Gospel spread along the Phoenician coast. According to Church
tradition, the "Room of Saints Peter and Paul" remains a testament to that
meeting, which symbolizes the unity of the two apostles and the unity of the
early Church. Today, the faithful still visit this shrine with reverence, not to
visit silent stones, but to touch a relic from the time of the Apostles and to
remember that the Church, born of love, persecution, and prayer, continues to
carry the same message to this day.
*Literary depiction inspired by Church tradition, not documented historical
facts.
In Defense of Article 13 of the Washington Agreement
Nadim Koteich/Asas Media/June 29, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/06/155625/
(Freely translated from Arabic, with some editorial
adaptation, by Elias Bejjani, with the assistance of online translation tools)
The “Washington Framework,” signed by Lebanon, Israel, and the United States, is
the boldest agreement the Lebanese state has entered into through a political
authority possessing decisive popular, parliamentary, and political
representation. The most important difference between the framework agreement
signed a few days ago and the May 17, 1983 Agreement lies in the changed
geostrategic equations and the conditions of national will that shaped both
situations. While the 1983 Agreement was born at the height of the Cold War and
under the pressure of a military invasion imposed upon a divided government, it
was later brought down by the field influence of the former Damascus regime.
The Washington Framework emerges in a completely different environment, one in
which the old axis-based conflicts have given way to pragmatism, and in which
the military influence of “Hezbollah” and its ability to impose a veto of
obstruction have declined, giving Beirut greater room for initiative. The
courage of this framework lies in breaking ideological taboos and moving from
the logic of a “pure military truce” to the logic of managing stability and
coexistence, as a necessary gateway to protecting gas investments and ensuring
the flow of international reconstruction funds. Thus, the agreement becomes a
tool for securing mutual vital interests and linking the region through the
language of prosperity rather than the language of trenches. In this context,
the exceptional importance of Article 13 of the agreement becomes apparent. It
has provoked the most dramatic objections, even from Lebanese voices opposed to
“Hezbollah” but concerned about Lebanon’s legal sovereignty and Israel’s
accountability for its actions.
Article 13 states:
“Consistent with their shared objectives of establishing stable and peaceful
relations, Israel and Lebanon commit to taking good-faith measures that
demonstrate positive intentions, including ceasing all hostile or adversarial
actions in international political or legal forums, and undertaking efforts to
locate and return remains and to secure the release of detainees.”
The critics’ objection can be summarized as follows: this article effectively
obliges Lebanon to abandon any potential referral to the International Criminal
Court or any United Nations action against Israel. However, this objection rests
on assumptions that collapse one after another upon closer examination.
1. The International Criminal Court Is Not a Path to Justice for Lebanon
It is enough for Lebanon to look at previous regional experiences with the
International Criminal Court, such as the Palestinian experience, to observe how
decisions ended up as little more than ink on paper. Accordingly, the assumption
that ICC membership represents the primary path to justice reflects a preference
for performative accountability over avenues that produce practical outcomes
serving Lebanese interests.
The victims of 2024 and 2025, wars and those before them, will not receive a
single dollar for reconstruction from a lawsuit filed in The Hague that Israel
will ignore—not only because of the fragility of international law, but because
of the nature of the conflict itself.
There is one aspect that opponents tend to ignore: Lebanon cannot claim the full
moral authority of international law against Israel while overlooking the fact
that it hosted the most heavily armed militia in the world, which operated for
decades outside any legitimate legal or institutional framework. The moral high
ground requires consistency. It is not a principled position for Lebanon to
resort to the International Court against Israel while ignoring “Hezbollah,”
which brought wars and destruction upon the country outside the framework of the
legitimate state. Rather, it is a selective and performative stance—an
ideological approach employing legal tools.
2. The Moral Structure of Article 13
Lebanon’s deeper moral obligation is toward citizens whose lives have been
eroded by decades of adherence to a model that consistently prioritized the
ideological sensitivities of certain parties over stability and prosperity. A
Lebanese government that chooses to serve its people’s future by securing
sustainable conditions for stability, at the expense of a performative legal
position, is not surrendering; rather, it is exercising the sovereign
decision-making that the state owes its citizens for the first time in decades.
Every decision, statement, or United Nations meeting that criticized Israel,
even when done fairly, was designed to serve domestic purposes, beginning with
the narrow interests of the concerned parties and ending with what is called
“protecting civil peace”—that is, submitting to a despicable game of blackmail
that prevents meaningful discussion of Lebanon’s interests and undermines any
rational vision of Lebanese-Israeli relations. This always occurred without a
genuine effort to build an army, protect borders, or provide a binding
commitment that would spare Lebanon the scourge of recurring wars.
Moreover, this article constrains “Hezbollah” in a way that military pressure
alone failed to achieve. By committing to halt hostile actions in international
forums, Lebanon implicitly withdraws the diplomatic shield it provided to the
resistance model for decades. The Lebanese state will no longer go to the United
Nations to defend the logic of arms or portray destruction as the price of
resistance. Instead, it chooses the language of sovereignty and peace, leaving
“Hezbollah” speaking a language that the Lebanese state has officially
abandoned.
3. Article 13 Is Conditional, Not Permanent
Article 13 remains a political commitment contained within a conditional and
sequential framework document, not a renunciation of sovereign rights that
cannot be revoked. Lebanon has committed to “good-faith measures” as a
confidence-building step within a framework based on reciprocity. If Israel
fails to fulfill its obligations, the entire framework collapses, and Lebanon’s
legal and political options automatically return to the table. More importantly,
the framework agreement—and Article 13 in particular—is based on a realistic
vision: sustainable stability generates cumulative growth. Once Lebanon sends a
credible signal that it is entering a stable regional order under state
authority, the investment logic of expatriates and international funds changes
fundamentally. This signal alone is worth more to economic recovery than any
lawsuit in The Hague, not to mention its decisive role in advancing the offshore
gas sector. International energy companies will not invest without a
demilitarized south and a state that exercises sovereignty and builds a secure
environment for the future.
Whether Article 13 is viewed as a realistic step or described as “surrender,”
the historical measure remains results and the welfare of people. Germany did
not litigate every decision taken by the Allies after the war, and Japan rebuilt
under conditions it did not set itself. These were not moral failures but
choices dictated by strategic wisdom—choosing the future over grievance, and the
comfort of the people over comforting narratives.
The question today is not whether injustice occurred; it clearly did, and the
record is documented. The question is whether the chosen mechanism of
accountability serves the victims or serves the political conditions that
perpetuate suffering and allow it to be exploited indefinitely. In this sense, a
Washington Framework that achieves Israeli withdrawal, the disarmament of
“Hezbollah,” the deployment of the Lebanese Army, and funding for reconstruction
would provide victims with what they actually need.
In conclusion, the “Washington Framework” represents a valuable opportunity to
restore the sovereign decision-making of the Lebanese state and move from a
cycle of performative victimhood toward the realism of sustainable stability and
economic development. True courage today lies in placing the interests of the
Lebanese citizens and their right to prosperity above comfortable ideological
narratives that have brought the country nothing but ruin, and in laying the
foundation stone for a republic governed by institutions rather than trenches.
Selected Face Book & X tweets on 28 June/2026
Benjamin Netanyahu - בנימין נתניהו
Translated from Hebrew
Israel needs a broad national government - and this is the government I will
form.
At this time, after years of harsh trials, facing enemies from outside and major
challenges from within, the State of Israel needs a government that will unite
most of the people around a clear, responsible, and national path.
It is my intention to form a broad national government, one that will rely on
the broadest possible consensus on the central issues that will determine our
future here for generations.
This government will be established on the basis of clear fundamental
principles:
Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people.
Israel will defend itself by its own forces.
Israel will ensure for itself economic, energy, and armament independence.
And no Palestinian state will arise between the sea and the Jordan.
Whoever accepts these principles is invited to join.
We are not coming to exclude, not to disqualify personally, not to deepen the
rift and not to perpetuate the schism. On the contrary: we are coming to heal,
to unite, and to lead Israel out of national responsibility and out of deep love
for our people and our country.
We have enough enemies from outside. There are still remnants of the Iranian
axis that need to be dealt with, there are heavy security challenges, and there
are also historic opportunities for peace in the region - in Lebanon and in
other places.
To defeat the threats and seize the opportunities, we first need peace within
ourselves.
This is the real choice in these elections:
A broad national government under my leadership - or a narrow left-wing
government that will be dependent on the Arab parties.
Israel needs a broad national government. With God's help - this is the
government I will form.
Anita Anand
Today I was in touch with Kuwait’s Foreign Minister, H.E. Sheikh
Jarrah Jaber AlAhmad AlSabah after Iran’s attack on Kuwaiti territory. Canada
condemns this reckless violation of Kuwait’s sovereignty and Iran’s continued
attacks on the region. As I noted in yesterday in my call with my Bahrain
counterpart, Canada stands with our partners across the Gulf and will continue
working with the international community to support de-escalation and a more
stable, secure region.
charles chartouni
A big Thanks to the Trump Administration for setting the tone and
defining the track.
Zéna Mansour ܙܺܝܢܵܐ ܡܲܢܨܘܪ
A message to Lebanon’s investigative media platforms and outlets,
noting that they are in fact few in number — a call to scrutinize and
investigate the following questions, if they are keen on maintaining a degree of
transparency in delivering facts to the public:
- Who is the "Lebanon Progress Party"?
- How did this party move from Iraq to Lebanon via Mohammed al-Halbousi, through
whom, and how does it have an MP in Parliament, specifically for the Druze seat?
- How did it transform into a "revolutionary" party within what are called
Lebanon’s revolutionary forces, raising the slogan of fighting corruption?
- How is its leader currently being tried in Iraq on corruption charges?
- And how did it come to be classified as a "change" party within Lebanon’s
"revolutionary" popular movement?
May God help this country... It’s a tragedy...
Political Pen
Saleh El Machnouk: Didn't you want a victory? This is a victory.
https://x.com/politicalpen_/status/2071253700803195298/video/1
Mossad Commentary
NETANYAHU TO ERDOĞAN:
WE TAKE YOUR THREATS SERIOUSLY.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:
"Hardly a day goes by without Erdoğan calling for the annihilation of the State
of Israel. We take these words very seriously, because if our people have
learned one thing from history, it's that when someone says they intend to
destroy you, take them seriously."»
Netanyahu added that Israel will also bring Erdoğan's repeated calls for
Israel's destruction to the attention of the United States.
"We are not ignoring them."
Mossad Commentary
https://x.com/MOSSADil/status/2071266121689210898/video/1
TERROR TUNNEL FOILED IN EAST JERUSALEM
Israeli forces uncovered a 25-meter terror tunnel in an East Jerusalem village
packed with heavy weapons and explosives. According to Israeli authorities,
Palestinian terrorists were preparing a large-scale attack targeting Israel’s
capital before the plot was disrupted.
Robert Satloff
IMPORTANT: It may have been a little slow in coming but
@DrSamirGeagea -- leader of the party with the largest bloc in the Lebanese
parliament -- made up for it with this full-throated, enthusiastic,
unconditional embrace of the #Lebanon-#Israel framework agreement as well as the
president and government that negotiated/signed it.
Hussain Abdul-Hussain
The leader of the largest Christian bloc in Lebanon, Geagea, throws his weight
behind the agreement with Israel. He rebuts the February 6 Alliance (Shia Berri
and Druze Jumblatt) that killed the 1983 Agreement for peace with Israel, and
says Lebanon is represented by its elected President Aoun, PM Salam, and the
cabinet. Those crying for restoring the 1949 Truce (instead of peace) should
have stood up for the truce during the many times it was violated by militias in
Lebanon since 1964.
Lindsey Graham
Very pleased to hear that the Trump Administration, led by Secretary Rubio,
working with Lebanon and Israel has reached an agreement between the parties
that will hopefully over time allow Lebanon and Israel to live in peace and
prosperity. This is a major achievement by Secretary Rubio, his team and the
representatives from Lebanon and Israel. I appreciate President Trump’s hands-on
approach to making this happen. As always, Hezbollah can be the spoiler. But
this agreement is a giant step forward. Well done to all.
Hiba Nasr
Readout of the call between Lebanese speaker Nabih Berry and Egyptian FM:
The Speaker of the Lebanese Parliament, Nabih Berri, held a phone call with
Egyptian Foreign Minister Dr. Badr Abdelatty, during which they discussed the
latest developments in Lebanon and the wider region. Minister Abdelatty
reaffirmed Egypt’s commitment to Lebanon’s stability, stressing that the
priority should be securing the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from
southern Lebanon and the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces. He emphasized
that a full Israeli withdrawal is the key to stability in Lebanon. For his part,
Speaker Berri reiterated the need to avoid internal strife in Lebanon and
underscored the importance of making every effort to safeguard stability and
preserve civil peace.
Nikki Haley
Iran will never follow through on any MOU.
Iran will never agree to a deal.
Iran will never give up its nuclear ambitions.
Iran will never voluntarily give up control of the Strait.
Iran will never stop supporting terrorists proxies.
Iran will never be a normal country under this regime.