English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For  May 15/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.may15.26.htm

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

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

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

Bible Quotations For today
Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother
Mark 03/31-35//04/01-09: “Then his mother and his brothers came; and standing outside, they sent to him and called him. A crowd was sitting around him; and they said to him, ‘Your mother and your brothers and sisters are outside, asking for you.’And he replied, ‘Who are my mother and my brothers?’And looking at those who sat around him, he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother.’ Again he began to teach beside the lake. Such a very large crowd gathered around him that he got into a boat on the lake and sat there, while the whole crowd was beside the lake on the land. He began to teach them many things in parables, and in his teaching he said to them: ‘Listen! A sower went out to sow. And as he sowed, some seed fell on the path, and the birds came and ate it up. Other seed fell on rocky ground, where it did not have much soil, and it sprang up quickly, since it had no depth of soil. And when the sun rose, it was scorched; and since it had no root, it withered away. Other seed fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked it, and it yielded no grain. Other seed fell into good soil and brought forth grain, growing up and increasing and yielding thirty and sixty and a hundredfold.’And he said, ‘Let anyone with ears to hear listen!’”

Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 14-15 May/2026
Elias Bejjani/Video Link to my interview on Al-Hawiya Youtube platform
CENTCOM chief calls for more US funding to help Lebanon disarm Hezbollah
New Israel-Lebanon talks open in Washington
Report: Lebanon-Israel truce to be extended, Israel wants to continue strikes in south
Pessimism and tensions: Latest about Lebanon-Israel talks
Israel wants peace 'as if there is no Hezbollah' and war 'as if there are no peace talks'
Lebanon-Israel talks: What is expected
Aoun reportedly proposes 'Armistice Agreement+'
Lebanese official says Trump 'sincere' in his desire to help Lebanon
Three Israeli civilians injured in Hezbollah drone strike
Israel strikes south and east as Lebanon, Israel envoys meet in Washington
Israel army says striking Hezbollah in south Lebanon
Over 10,000 homes destroyed or damaged in Lebanon since Israel truce
US Senate hearing on Middle East ends with thoughts on disarming Hezbollah
Geagea says Berri and Qassem free to hold opinions, but not to obstruct talks
Berri: Lebanon needs Saudi-Iranian understanding 'under US umbrella'
Hezbollah MP says direct talks 'free concessions' to Israel
'Promised to us': Israelis dreaming of settling in south Lebanon
Hezbollah is not losing its Shiite base – rather it is entering a phase of radicalization and fortification
Washington Negotiations: “The Lebanese state negotiates by proxy for Hezbollah, and Hezbollah speaks on behalf of Tehran/Zéna Mansour​/X platform/May 14/2026
Lebanon must reclaim war, peace, and the state/Makram Rabah/Al Arabiya English/14 May ,2026

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 14-15 May/2026
Trump, Xi praise US-China ties at Beijing state banquet after talks
Trump says Xi offered help to open Hormuz, vowed not to arm Iran
Xi warns Trump on Taiwan, vows not to arm Iran
US officials flag prospect of Chinese energy purchases after Trump-Xi meeting
New attacks reported on ships near Hormuz as Trump discusses Iran with Xi
Iran calls UAE 'active partner' in US-Israel war on Iran
Top admiral says US achieved all military goals against Iran, used Ukraine advice
UAE denies Netanyahu secretly visited country during Iran war
Vessel off UAE coast 'taken', now bound for Iran waters
Iraq PM vows to ensure state monopoly on arms
Iraq's new PM vows to ensure state monopoly on arms
UK health secretary resigns and is expected to challenge Starmer's leadership
Israeli minister criticizes Barcelona star Lamine Yamal for waving Palestinian flag
Yemen’s warring parties agree to swap over 1,700 detainees

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 14-15 May/2026
Palestinian Leaders Still Reject Israel's Right to Exist/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/May 14, 2026
War on Iran no longer a short-term operation/Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab News/May 14, 2026
The growing regionalization of the Sudan conflict/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/May 14, 2026
Starmer uncertainty reflects UK’s political instability/Peter Harrison/Arab News/May 14, 2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets for May 14/2026

Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 14-15 May/2026
Elias Bejjani/Video Link to my interview on Al-Hawiya Youtube platform
Exposing and ridiculing Lebanon’s puppet rulers and the owners of their Trojan horse political party companies, affirming that Israel is an ally of Lebanon, that peace will be imposed by force, and that the decision to eradicate the cancer of Hezbollah is irreversible/Explaining the reality of the Iranian advisory government’s authority in Lebanon
Title: Netanyahu at Baabda Palace Soon? Elias Bejjani Reveals the Scenario of Peace Imposed by Force!
In a high-stakes and explosive episode of “Power of ogic” hosted by Abdel Rahman Darnika, political activist Elias Bejjani shatters all political taboos, offering a radical and unprecedented analysis of the Lebanese crisis.
Is the era of diplomacy over? Bejjani presents shocking hypotheses regarding Lebanon’s future, arguing that the “Hezb Statelet” has completely hijacked national sovereignty, rendering official institutions mere facades operated by foreign “Remote Controls.”
Key highlights of this controversial interview include:
The Baabda Scenario: How could peace with Israel be imposed by force? And why does Bejjani foresee Netanyahu reaching the heart of Lebanese decision-making?
An Alliance of Necessity: Has Israel become the “ally” required to uproot Iranian influence from Lebanon?
Unmasking the Elite: A blistering critique of the political establishment, military leadership, and even religious figures; why does Bejjani believe they are all complicit in covering up the “Iranian Occupation”?
The Diaspora’s Roadmap: Bejjani’s vision for dismantling Hezb’s infrastructure and overturning politicized judicial rulings dating back to the Syrian hegemony era.
A conversation that defies expectations and confronts the viewer with existential questions about
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/05/154394/
May 11/2026

CENTCOM chief calls for more US funding to help Lebanon disarm Hezbollah
Al Arabiya English/14 May ,2026
A top US military commander on Thursday called for additional funding for Lebanon’s army to be able to disarm Hezbollah. “Taking on the disarmament of Hezbollah is a tall order,” United States Central Command (CENTCOM) chief Adm. Brad Cooper said. Washington has provided close to $3 billion in assistance to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and the Internal Security Forces (ISF) since 2006. The main purpose of this funding was to counter Hezbollah, US officials have repeatedly said. This was reaffirmed by Cooper and Senator Roger Wicker, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), on Thursday. “[Hezbollah] has been funded by Iran for decades with billions of dollars, and Hezbollah is inculcated into every fabric of the Lebanese society,” Cooper said during the SASC hearing on Capitol Hill. Asked what the US could do to help the LAF, Cooper highlighted the “modest dollars” provided to the LAF as helpful. But he said several units with the Lebanese army could do more. “I believe our commitment could be to provide the funding necessary so that they can do more,” he said.

New Israel-Lebanon talks open in Washington
Agence France Presse/May 24/2026
Israel and Lebanon opened a new round of peace talks in Washington on Thursday as their latest ceasefire -- considered to still be in place despite hundreds of deaths in Israeli strikes -- nears its end. The two sides started discussions just after 9 am (1300 GMT) at the State Department and will meet again on Friday. Lebanon and Israel last met on April 23 at the White House, where U.S. President Donald Trump announced a three-week ceasefire extension and voiced optimism for a historic agreement. Trump at the time made the bold prediction that within the latest ceasefire period, he would welcome Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun to Washington for a historic first summit between Lebanon and Israel. The summit did not happen, with Aoun saying a security deal needed to be in place and Israeli attacks needed to end before such a landmark symbolic meeting. The ceasefire had been extended through Sunday. Since it first went into effect on April 17, Israeli strikes have killed more than 400 people, according to an AFP tally based on figures from Lebanese authorities.
Israel has vowed to keep pursuing attacks against Hezbollah, despite the ceasefire.
Hezbollah began a campaign of firing into Israel in retaliation for the killing of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, at the start of the U.S.-Israeli war on February 28. A Lebanese official told AFP that the country would seek "the consolidation of the ceasefire" during the talks in Washington. "The first thing is to put an end to the death and destruction," the official told AFP on custom of anonymity. Iran has demanded a lasting ceasefire in Lebanon before any agreement to end the wider war, as it frustrates Trump by refusing his appeals for an accord on his terms. The United States has backed Lebanon's calls to maintain sovereignty over all its territory but also repeatedly pressed it to take action against Hezbollah. The United States "recognizes that comprehensive peace is contingent on the full restoration of Lebanese state authority and the complete disarmament of Hezbollah," a State Department statement said. "These talks aim to break decisively from the failed approach of the past two decades, which allowed terrorist groups to entrench and enrich themselves, undermine the authority of the Lebanese state, and endanger Israel's northern border," it said.
It will be the third round of talks between the two countries, which have no diplomatic relations.
Unlike the last round, which Trump brought to the White House, or the first round, neither Secretary of State Marco Rubio nor Trump will participate as the president is on a state visit to China. The U.S. mediators for the two-day meeting at the State Department include the ambassadors to Israel and Lebanon -- respectively Mike Huckabee, an evangelical pastor and staunch supporter of Israel's regional ambitions, and Michel Issa, a Lebanese-born businessman and golfing partner of Trump, as well as Mike Needham, a close aide to Rubio.
Lebanon is represented by special envoy Simon Karam, a veteran lawyer and diplomat who has fiercely defended Lebanon's sovereignty, as well as its ambassador in Washington.
Israel's team includes its ambassador in Washington, Yechiel Leiter, a close Netanyahu ally who is close with the Israeli settler movement in the occupied West Bank.

Report: Lebanon-Israel truce to be extended, Israel wants to continue strikes in south
Naharnet/May 24/2026
The ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon will be extended for a period that is still unknown until the moment, Lebanese sources told Sky News Arabia as the third round of Lebanese-Israeli talks kicked off in Washington. "Israel is insisting on continuing its operations in south Lebanon and Washington has informed Lebanon that it is pressing to prevent strikes on Beirut and its southern suburbs," the sources said. "There are no sufficient guarantees from Israel to Lebanon regarding a ceasefire and Israel intends to expand the buffer zone in south Lebanon to a depth of more than 10 kilometers," the sources added. The sources also said that Israel is insisting on maintaining the security buffer zone and is considering expanding it to eliminate the threat of Hezbollah drones, noting that Israeli withdrawal from south Lebanon is "conditional on Hezbollah's disarmament."

Pessimism and tensions: Latest about Lebanon-Israel talks
Naharnet/May 24/2026
There are no indications of any serious breakthrough in the negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, a source told Al-Arabiya following around four hours of Lebanese-Israeli talks in Washington. "The atmosphere of the third round of Lebanese-Israeli negotiations does not call for optimism," the source said. "Lebanon doesn't have much to offer regarding the security files raised in the negotiations," the source added. "Lebanon's message was that any truce could open the way for strengthening the role of the state and the army," the source went on to say.
Al-Jadeed television meanwhile reported that the U.S. State Dept. is speaking of an attempt to "prevent the collapse of the truce" rather than making comprehensive peace. "Major political issues such as normalization and border demarcation will be postponed to later rounds of talks," Al-Jadeed said. U.S. sources meanwhile told MTV that "tensions" were surging at the talks' venue four hours after the start of the negotiations. MTV also reported that the presidential palace is constantly putting Speaksr Nabih Berri in the picture of the negotiations.

Israel wants peace 'as if there is no Hezbollah' and war 'as if there are no peace talks'
Naharnet/May 24/2026
Israeli Ambassador Yechiel Leiter said Israel's strategy for Lebanon is to run two different tracks simultaneously — one of peace and one of war. Ahead of direct talks Thursday between Lebanon and Israel in Washington, Leiter said there will be two Israeli tracks: one responsible for achieving peace and the other for dismantling Hezbollah. One team will work to "achieve peace, a peace treaty, full peace, as if Hezbollah doesn't exist," and the second will work to secure Israel's security goals "as if the peace talks don't exist.""This is the first time that the talks are not focused on when the IDF is going to withdraw. The focus is now on, number one, reaching a peace treaty, as if there's no Hezbollah, and fighting Hezbollah as if there's no peace treaty. And I think we're going to accomplish both," Leiter told Israeli news channel i24NEWS. This dual-track approach aims to secure a formal peace treaty while simultaneously ensuring the total dismantlement of Hezbollah, Leiter said. Leiter claimed that the Shiite community in Lebanon and public opinion in general are shifting in favor of a peace agreement with Israel. "We have to be patient, but firm at the same time. The shared interest in freeing that country from Hezbollah is ultimately going to win the day."

Lebanon-Israel talks: What is expected
Naharnet/May 24/2026
Preliminary contacts and meetings intensified behind the scenes a few hours before the third round of Lebanese-Israeli talks in Washington, amid "clear U.S. pressure to push both sides toward tangible results," MTV reported on Thursday afternoon. According to MTV, the Lebanese delegation held a series of coordination meetings that included Ambassador Simon Karam, Ambassador Nada Moawad Hamadeh, Chargé d'Affaires Wissam Boutros and Military Attaché Brigadier General Oliver Hakmeh, in preparation for the first session, which is scheduled to begin at 9:00 AM Washington time (4:00 PM Beirut time). US sources confirmed to MTV that "the issue of disarming Hezbollah tops the list of negotiations, as it is Washington's primary priority before any discussion of the issues of a full withdrawal, border demarcation, prisoners, displaced persons, and the reconstruction of Lebanon." According to the U.S. sources, the Lebanese side will enter the negotiations on Thursday and Friday focusing on several key demands, most notably the complete consolidation of the ceasefire, a halt to Israeli strikes and violations, and pressure for Israel's withdrawal from the disputed areas, in addition to opening a clear path for the reconstruction of the damaged areas in the south. The sources added that the Lebanese delegation will also emphasize support for the Lebanese Army and strengthening its capabilities, while attempting to separate the issue of Lebanese sovereignty from the pressures related to Hezbollah's weapons, by focusing on the priority of protecting stability and preventing a return to war. Informed U.S. sources meanwhile told Al-Arabiya's Al-Hadath channel that "Israel will inform the Lebanese delegation that it will not commit to a comprehensive ceasefire.""Israel will inform the Lebanese delegation that its strategy is to prevent any threat to its security," the sources said, adding that "Washington will not ask the Israeli government for a comprehensive ceasefire in Lebanon.""The only thing Israel might offer is to refrain from bombing northern Bekaa and Beirut. The Lebanese Army can make progress if Washington provides it with assistance," the sources went on to say. "Israel will inform the Lebanese delegation that it will withdraw completely once the state controls its territory," the sources added.

Aoun reportedly proposes 'Armistice Agreement+'
Naharnet/May 24/2026
President Joseph Aoun is proposing an "Armistice Agreement+" in the negotiations with Israel, whose third round begins Thursday, a media report said. An official source told Asharq al-Awsat newspaper that Aoun views the negotiations as "limited to security procedures and arrangements, ultimately leading to a formula similar to the 1949 Armistice Agreement, albeit in a more developed form, described by some close to him as "Armistice Agreement+". "This approach initially includes establishing a ceasefire, then the withdrawal of Israeli forces to the border, and a cessation of attacks, followed by the deployment of the Lebanese Army and its assumption of security control in the south, and then in all of Lebanon," the source said. The source also emphasized that Lebanon seeks from the negotiations "an end to the state of hostility, not a peace agreement."

Lebanese official says Trump 'sincere' in his desire to help Lebanon
Associated Press/May 24/2026
A senior Lebanese official familiar with the negotiations in Washington said Thursday Lebanon wants a complete ceasefire first and then would negotiate withdrawal of Israeli forces. The issue of Hezbollah’s weapons would be dealt with politically in Lebanon after that, he said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to speak frankly about the talks. He said Lebanon is “relying heavily on the U.S. administration” to provide it with leverage in the negotiations with Israel and believes that U.S. President Donald Trump is “sincere” in his desire to help Lebanon.
The official said that when Trump and President Joseph Aoun spoke recently, Trump did not pressure Aoun to meet or speak with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and was understanding when Aoun explained his reasons for declining. According to the official, Aoun told Trump that if he went to Washington and shook hands with Netanyahu and the talks later fell apart, it could have internal repercussions in Lebanon and discredit Trump. Aoun told Trump that if the two states are able to reach a security deal, he would come to the White House and “inaugurate” it and Trump responded by saying “I like that,” the official said. If Israel agrees to a ceasefire and withdraws from the territory it is occupying in southern Lebanon, the official said, he believes Hezbollah would agree to an arrangement under which it would hand over its weapons to the Lebanese army, which could keep some of them and destroy others. Under this plan, Lebanon could consider allowing individual Hezbollah fighters to join the Lebanese army if they meet eligibility requirements, he said.

Three Israeli civilians injured in Hezbollah drone strike
Associated Press/May 24/2026
A Hezbollah drone exploded inside Israel on Thursday, injuring three civilians, two of them severely, according to the Israeli military and hospitals. The incident occurred ahead of a third round of direct talks between Israel and Lebanon in Washington, as the Trump administration pushes for a breakthrough between the two neighbors that have been in a state of war since Israel was created in 1948. Hezbollah, however, is not part of those talks. Israel and the Iranian-backed militant group have traded near-constant fire across the border despite a U.S.-brokered ceasefire on April 17. Thursday's drone strike was the first instance of civilians injured by Hezbollah projectiles since the ceasefire, according to reports from Israel’s rescue service, Magen David Adom. Israel has struggled to halt frequent Hezbollah drone attacks on Israeli forces in southern Lebanon and over the border in northern Israel. The Israeli air force has struck areas across southern Lebanon. The United Nations has also accused Hezbollah of drone strikes near its peacekeeping forces in southern Lebanon. Secretary-General António Guterres’ message to both sides is that they must observe the ceasefire and stop all attacks, U.N. deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq said. Lebanon’s Health Ministry said Wednesday that since the war began on March 2, 2,896 people have been killed and 8,824 wounded. Eighteen Israeli soldiers and a defense contractor have been killed on the Israeli side, most of them in southern Lebanon.

Israel strikes south and east as Lebanon, Israel envoys meet in Washington
Naharnet//May 24/2026
Israeli strikes targeted Thursday Sinay, Teffahta, Tebna, Froun, Siddiqine, Haddatha, Zrarieh, Brayke', Kfarmelki, Qsaybeh, Jarjou', Kfarseer, Kafra, Arnoun-Shqif, al-Mansouri, Srifa and other villages and towns in south Lebanon, despite a ceasefire and direct Lebanese-Israeli talks scheduled for Thursday and Friday in Washington. In the east of the country, strikes hit Yohmor, Sohmor, Lebbaya, and Ein el-Tineh. The Israeli army had ordered the residents of Lebeya, Sohmor, Tefahta, Kfarmelki, Yohmor, Ein al-Tineh, Houmin al-Fawqa, and Mazraat Sinay to evacuate ahead of imminent strikes. Hezbollah, for its part, targeted Israeli bases, troops, and equipment in the southern border towns of Blat, al-Bayyada, Kfarkela, and Deir Seryan. Earlier on Thursday, a Hezbollah drone strike injured several Israeli civilians on Thursday in Ras al-Naqoura, near the border with Lebanon.

Israel army says striking Hezbollah in south Lebanon
Agence France Presse/May 24/2026
Israel's military said it launched strikes against Hezbollah targets across southern Lebanon on Thursday, hours before U.S.-brokered talks between Lebanon and Israel were set to begin in Washington. "The IDF has begun striking Hezbollah terror infrastructure sites in several areas in southern Lebanon," the military said after issuing evacuation warnings for a number of villages in south and east Lebanon. The Israeli army had ordered the residents of Lebeya, Sohmor, Tefahta, Kfarmelki, Yohmor, Ein al-Tineh, Houmin al-Fawqa, and Mazraat Sinay to evacuate ahead of imminent strikes. Lebanon's state-run National News Agency (NNA) reported Israeli airstrikes on the south and east, including in areas not covered by the warning, a day after the health ministry said intense raids killed 22 people, eight of them children. Lebanon and Israel are to hold new peace talks in Washington starting Thursday, as their latest ceasefire -- considered to still be in place despite hundreds of deaths in Israeli strikes -- nears its end. Israeli strikes have killed more than 400 people during the truce, according to an AFP tally of health ministry figures. Israeli attacks since March 2 have killed more than 2,800 people in Lebanon, including at least 200 children, according to Lebanese authorities, a toll Hezbollah says includes its fighters.

Over 10,000 homes destroyed or damaged in Lebanon since Israel truce
Agence France Presse/May 24/2026
More than 10,000 homes have been damaged or destroyed in Lebanon since a ceasefire in the war between Israel and Hezbollah, the head of the country's National Council for Scientific Research said. "Since the current ceasefire... we have witnessed 5,386 housing units that were completely destroyed, and 5,246 housing units damaged," CRNS chief Chadi Abdallah told a news conference broadcast by local media. Israel has kept up heavy airstrikes despite the April 17 ceasefire, and Israeli soldiers are operating inside an Israeli-declared "yellow line", which runs around 10 kilometres (six miles) north of the Israel-Lebanon border where troops have been carrying out broad demolition operations.

US Senate hearing on Middle East ends with thoughts on disarming Hezbollah
Associated Press/May 24/2026
The Senate Armed Services Committee hearing with the top U.S. military leader in the Middle East ended with a focus on the challenge of disarming Hezbollah. Mississippi Senator Roger Wicker, the committee’s Republican chair, noted how Hezbollah has continually fired rockets into Israel, while Israel had launched a ground offensive into southern Lebanon focused on Hezbollah, displacing a million people. Wicker asked Adm. Brad Cooper, who leads U.S. Central Command, if the offensive was necessary. “It is an option among options, of which there are few to deal with the Hezbollah problem,” Cooper said. Wicker later said, “It would be a tremendous achievement” for Israel, Lebanon and the United States “if Hezbollah could be eliminated.”

Geagea says Berri and Qassem free to hold opinions, but not to obstruct talks
Naharnet/May 24/2026
Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea accused Hezbollah on Thursday of "bringing back" the Israeli occupation of South Lebanon. He said that the group's leader, Sheikh Naim Qassem, can take whatever stance he likes but cannot "obstruct" the direct negotiations with Israel.
Geagea added that Speaker Nabih Berri is similarly free to take any stance he wants, provided he does not cause obstruction. "Berri heads neither the executive power in Lebanon nor the deputies. When the results of the negotiations are sent to Parliament, he can offer his opinion as the head of a parliamentary bloc," Geagea said. Geagea argued that the balance of power is currently not in Lebanon's favor, noting that the country is unable to impose its conditions because it was "dragged into a war beyond its capacity by Hezbollah."

Berri: Lebanon needs Saudi-Iranian understanding 'under US umbrella'
Naharnet/May 24/2026
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has linked the success of the direct talks with Israel — which begin this Thursday in Washington — to the implementation of a "genuine" ceasefire. "If a genuine ceasefire is not achieved, it means all is lost," Berri told ad-Diyar in remarks published Thursday. Berri stated that Lebanon will not accept anything less than the withdrawal of the Israeli army from south Lebanon, followed by reconstruction, the deployment of the Lebanese Army, and the return of displaced residents to their homes. He added that the country requires a regional and international umbrella, "specifically a Saudi-Iranian understanding or agreement regarding Lebanon, under an American umbrella."Lebanese and Israeli representatives last met on April 23 at the White House, where U.S. President Donald Trump announced a three-week ceasefire extension and voiced optimism for a groundbreaking agreement between the countries, which have technically been at war for decades. Trump at the time made the bold prediction that during the three-week extension he would welcome Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun to Washington for a historic first summit between the countries.The summit did not happen, with Aoun saying a security deal and an end to Israeli attacks were needed before such a landmark meeting. Berri said that for Aoun, a meeting with Netanyahu is "out of the question."

Hezbollah MP says direct talks 'free concessions' to Israel
Agence France Presse/May 24/2026
Hezbollah lawmaker Ali Ammar reiterated Thursday his group's rejection of the direct talks, as Lebanon and Israel are to hold new peace talks in Washington starting Thursday. Ammar said direct talks amount to "free concessions" to Israel. Earlier this week, Hezbollah leader Sheikh Naim Qassem called for indirect negotiations. He said his group would cooperate with the state to end the war and the occupation, through indirect negotiations, but added that Hezbollah's weapons remain a domestic matter and should not be part of negotiations with Israel.
"Nobody outside Lebanon has anything to do with the weapons, the resistance... this is an internal Lebanese matter and not part of negotiations with the enemy," Qassem said.
Disarmament push -
Lebanon has repeatedly called for Israel to withdraw its troops from the south, and insists on extending state sovereignty over all its territory as part of a commitment last year to disarm Hezbollah. Washington has endorsed Beirut's commitment to do so, while pressing it to take more action against Hezbollah. Lebanese and Israeli representatives last met on April 23 at the White House, where U.S. President Donald Trump announced a three-week ceasefire extension and voiced optimism for a groundbreaking agreement between the countries, which have technically been at war for decades. Trump at the time made the bold prediction that during the three-week extension he would welcome Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun to Washington for a historic first summit between the countries. The summit did not happen, with Aoun saying a security deal and an end to Israeli attacks were needed before such a landmark meeting. A ceasefire, which began on April 17, lasts through Sunday. Still, Israeli strikes have killed more than 400 people during the truce. Thursday's meeting will be the third round of talks between the two countries, which have no diplomatic relations. Unlike the previous two rounds, neither Secretary of State Marco Rubio nor Trump will participate as both are on a state visit to China. The U.S. mediators for the two-day meeting at the State Department will include the ambassadors to Israel and Lebanon -- respectively Mike Huckabee, an evangelical pastor and staunch supporter of Israel's regional ambitions, and Michel Issa, a Lebanese-born businessman and golf partner of Trump -- as well as Mike Needham, a close aide to Rubio. Lebanon will be represented by special envoy Simon Karam, a veteran lawyer and diplomat who has fiercely defended Lebanon's sovereignty, as well as its ambassador in Washington. Israel's team will include its ambassador in Washington, Yechiel Leiter, a Netanyahu ally who is close with the Israeli settler movement in the occupied West Bank.

'Promised to us': Israelis dreaming of settling in south Lebanon
Agence France Presse/May 24/2026
From her home in an Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank, Anna Sloutskin yearns to expand her country's borders and one day move to southern Lebanon. And she is not alone. With fighting between Israel and Hezbollah displacing more than a million Lebanese, a far-right fringe of Israel's settler movement is turning its gaze northwards. Uri Tzafon, or "Awake, North Wind", comprises dozens of families, according to Sloutskin, a 37-year-old research biologist who says the movement has seen growing traction since she co-founded it in 2024.
The group envisages Israel's northern border extending to at least the Litani river, which runs some 30 kilometers deep into Lebanese territory, and aims to establish a permanent Israeli civilian presence in the area. "The idea is that most of the population flees, we move the border, and we do not let that population return, and it remains a part of the State of Israel by declaration," said Sloutskin, who formed the movement in memory of her brother Israel Sokol, an Israeli soldier killed in Gaza in 2024. "He dreamed of settling in Lebanon," she told AFP from a hilltop lookout dedicated to Sokol near the settlement of Karnei Shomron in the northern West Bank. "He said he wanted to live in a place that is green in the summer and white in the winter."The Israeli government has given no public political support to the movement to settle southern Lebanon. In the occupied West Bank, the government has greenlit a major expansion of Israeli settlements and far-right ministers have openly called for the territory's annexation. Excluding east Jerusalem, more than 500,000 Israelis live in the occupied West Bank in settlements that are illegal under international law, among some three million Palestinians. Sloutskin insisted that Jewish settlement in southern Lebanon was key to Israel's security and ending the cycle of conflict with Iran-backed Hezbollah. "What the IDF is doing right now is the first stage," Sloutskin said, referring to the Israeli military. "The IDF goes in, conquers, and clears. And afterwards we must not withdraw, but settle."Following its invasion of parts of southern Lebanon, the Israeli military said forces may have to remain in the area without specifying for how long. A ceasefire has been in place since mid-April, and Israeli and Lebanese negotiators are holding a new round of talks in Washington.
'Nile to the Euphrates' -
On a WhatsApp channel with more than 600 members, Uri Tzafon posts invites to online meetings and maps showing supposedly ancient Jewish settlements in southern Lebanon. On Telegram, their number of followers sits at over 900. Contract farmworker, Ori Plasse, joined the group in its early days after being actively involved in settlements in both the West Bank and Gaza. The 51-year-old, who emigrated from Manhattan in the 1990s, told AFP that he and a group of others drove into Lebanon through an open border gate a year and a half ago.
The intention, he said, was to set up a tent, plant trees and "start something that would pick up momentum." He was soon escorted out by Israeli soldiers but described the experience as "amazing"."You feel like you're home, you feel it's your country," he said from his house in Moshav Sde Yaakov in northern Israel. In February, Uri Tzafon organized another tree-planting trip to the border, publishing photos of children smiling alongside Israeli flags and placards erected next to the wall. The Israeli military condemned the incident in which it said two civilians crossed the fence, constituting a criminal offence endangering civilians and troops. In his garden, Plasse enthusiastically opened an old shipping container holding supplies to build settlements -- including mattresses, sleeping bags and plastic sheets. Inside, he flicked through a book with maps showing Israel's borders spanning from parts of modern-day Egypt to Iraq. "Anybody who follows the Old Testament... should know that the land of Israel is promised to us from, basically most people say it's the Nile and to the Euphrates River," said Plasse.
'Under the table' support -
Ahead of elections due later this year, Plasse said Uri Tzafon would try to get support from politicians, but admitted their responses had so far been "vague". Sloutskin, however, insisted there was backing from some lawmakers and even ministers. "Some say it openly, some say it under the table, but there is definitely support," she said. Last month, Uri Tzafon published a photo of Sloutskin meeting with Environmental Protection Minister Idit Silman, captioned: "During the meeting with the minister, the issue of taking the territory was raised."
The dream of settling Lebanon sits on the ultra-nationalist margins of Israeli society, but both Sloutskin and Plasse were certain their views would become more mainstream with time. In his sparsely decorated home, Plasse proudly displayed a certificate of appreciation for Gaza settlement activists, signed by far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir and deputy speaker of the Israeli parliament Limor Son Har-Melech. "Ultimately, it has to be the people who want it," Sloutskin said. "The people must lead."

Hezbollah is not losing its Shiite base – rather it is entering a phase of radicalization and fortification
Tal Beeri/Alma-Isreal/May 14, 2026
Recently, we have been witnessing a mindset along with statements regarding Hezbollah’s condition and status in Lebanon. We found it appropriate to address the main points, from our perspective and as of the time of the writing:
There is no process of collapse in support for Hezbollah from within its base. The claim that Hezbollah is gradually losing its Shiite base in Lebanon and is even dealing with a severe split between itself and Amal, does not reflect the reality on the ground. There is no doubt that the continuous fighting from October 2023 until today has severely harmed the Shiite public – economically, socially, and civically – but this damage, as of now, has not manifested itself into the beginning of a process of public collapse within the Shiite support base for Hezbollah as some attempt to portray.
The Shiite base is fortified in its support for the organization while becoming more radical and confrontational. If there is some degree of erosion in the organization’s standing among certain parts of the Shiite public, mainly due to the destruction, displacement, and difficult economic situation, then this is a very limited erosion (to say the least), and not a broad phenomenon of abandoning support for Hezbollah. In fact, among the organization’s core support base, the opposite trend is evident – radicalization, ideological fortification, and a confrontational outing initiated against Hezbollah’s opponents, especially vis-à-vis Christian elements in Lebanon.
It should be remembered that the Shiite base is Hezbollah’s “captive audience” due to ideology, dependency, and fear.
There is nothing new under the sun. No change in approach. The claim regarding a wave of a Shiite campaign against Hezbollah on social media is inaccurate. Most of the criticism against Hezbollah on social media comes from elements that are not part of the Shiite support base of the organization, but rather mainly from Christians, Sunnis, and long-standing well-known opponents of Hezbollah. That is: the escalation in public criticism in Lebanon against Hezbollah comes from those who have always criticized Hezbollah in the harshest manner. There is nothing new under the sun. There is no change in approach.
The large social media campaign under the slogan “No to the Destruction of Lebanon – Lebanon First” is likewise not a new development resulting from the current war. Rather, it is a relatively longstanding campaign that began as early as 2024 and has been driven primarily by Christian circles and longstanding opponents of Hezbollah, not by the organization’s Shiite support base.
Rifts within the Shiite base? Indeed, there are isolated Shiite voices criticizing the organization, but they do not represent a broad trend within the Shiite street. These are usually confrontational Shiite journalists/influencers who are well known for their opposition to Hezbollah. These cannot be considered rifts within the base.
Sometimes examples from the field are cited as evidence of a weakening in Hezbollah’s standing within its Shiite base. However, a closer examination of some of these cases suggests otherwise. For example, one widely circulated video shows an elderly Shiite man from southern Lebanon describing his dire circumstances and saying that “at my age, it is better to die than to live like this.” While he laments his personal hardship, the destruction, and the suffering around him, he neither criticizes Hezbollah nor even mentions the organization. In other words, this reflects civilian despair and exhaustion, not necessarily a political or ideological rejection of Hezbollah.
Another example is a recording by Ali Al-Zahra, a Shiite figure close to the organization and a well-known social activist. Here too, the remarks were presented and interpreted only partially.
Al-Zahra does not criticize Hezbollah in the recording; rather, he criticizes Iran for allegedly having “abandoned” Hezbollah to fight alone in southern Lebanon. In essence, his criticism centers on why the “unity of the arenas” promoted by the Axis of Resistance did not materialize in practice.
In another recording, the remarks are seemingly directed at Hezbollah and the “resistance,” although the speaker does not explicitly mention them by name. He asks: what was all of this for? For Iran? For Gaza? We lost everything, we lost our young men… However, we strongly question the authenticity of this recording Because of its audio quality.
The issue of displaced civilians is also often portrayed in a misleading way. Since the majority of residents in southern Lebanon and the Dahieh are Shiites, it naturally follows that most of those displaced by the war would also be Shiites. This fact alone does not point to opposition to Hezbollah. On the contrary, during and after the war, numerous videos and social media posts circulated featuring displaced Shiites openly expressing their willingness to sacrifice their lives for the “resistance,” endure prolonged displacement, and upon returning to southern Lebanon they hoisted Hezbollah flags on their vehicles expressing a sense of “victory.”
Is there a split within the Shiite community? The statements that presented the “Supreme Islamic Shiite Council” in Lebanon (المجلس الإسلامي الشيعي الأعلى) as a litmus test for a split within the Shiite community also present an inaccurate picture. The “Supreme Islamic Shiite Council” is the official religious-political body of the Shiite community in Lebanon. Traditionally, control over the council’s institutions is divided between the Amal Movement and Hezbollah. Therefore, at times, an impression of struggles over influence and appointments between the two sides is created. However, this is not a real “split” within the Shiite community, but rather internal power struggles over representation, influence, and centers of control within the Shiite camp itself.
In addition, attention should be paid to the fact that Nabih Berri – the most senior and stable Shiite figure in the Lebanese political system and the central liaison of the “Shiite duo” with the Lebanese government and also with the United States – continues to conduct himself with the utmost caution regarding Hezbollah. It appears that, as usual, Berri is playing both sides and de facto acting to preserve Hezbollah’s interests.
Hezbollah’s economic situation. Here there is indeed a basis for assessing that the organization has been significantly harmed. The damage to the “Qard al-Hassan” bank, the “Al-Amana” gas stations, the weakening of smuggling routes and the Captagon market following the rise of Ahmad al-Sharaa in Syria and the intensifying struggle against smuggling, alongside the difficult economic situation in Iran itself and the consequences of the war – all these indeed complicate and challenge Hezbollah regarding its economic balance. This is reflected on the ground in regard to compensation payments to evacuees, victims, families of shahids, and salaries for the organization’s operatives themselves. However, as we noted, unfortunately, Hezbollah is not losing its Shiite base…

Washington Negotiations: “The Lebanese state negotiates by proxy for Hezbollah, and Hezbollah speaks on behalf of Tehran.”
Zéna Mansour​/X platform/May 14/2026
The third round of Lebanese-Israeli negotiations in Washington is not taking place between two states; rather, it unveils the broken structure of decision-making in Lebanon. The scene resembles a three-party theater: a state negotiating formally, a militia effectively holding the decision of war and peace, and a regional power pulling the strings from the outside. The question at hand is no longer “What are the terms of the settlement?” but “Who is the party actually qualified to negotiate?”
​A State Without an Independent Negotiating Ceiling
​Both the government and the President of the Republic appear to lack an independent negotiating ceiling. The Lebanese delegation entered negotiations with a low ceiling: a ceasefire, Israeli withdrawal, and then discussing security arrangements south of the Litani. This ceiling cannot be understood in isolation from Hezbollah’s position. The state operates under a fixed rule: no agreement is possible without the party’s consent. It demands what ensures the party remains a partner in shaping the post-war reality, while the state alone bears the burden of negotiating with the Americans and Israelis. The result is that the state negotiates in the room with the Israelis, while Hezbollah determines the content of the speech.
​Hezbollah Rejects Negotiation and Links the File to Iran
​Hezbollah rejects negotiations and the American internationalization of the file, yet accepts it through an Iranian lens, considering that the state holds no winning cards and that the battlefield is the final arbiter. However, the motive is deeper than that: negotiation strips the party of its legitimacy and transforms the file from an Iranian-Israeli conflict into a Lebanese-Israeli conflict. Therefore, it insists on linking the Washington track to the Iranian-American track in Islamabad. Thus, Lebanon is transformed from a primary party into a regional bargaining chip, and the state’s position becomes a “sovereign cover” for negotiations managed from Tehran.
​Israel and America: The Solution Begins with Disarmament
​Both Israel and America link the solution to disarmament, not just a ceasefire. They seek to impose a plan for disarmament, the dismantling of its infrastructure, and the arrangement of management south of the Litani with border security guarantees. This proposal places the state in a dilemma: acceptance means a confrontation with Hezbollah, and rejection gives Israel a justification to expand its operations.
​In American terms, Secretary of State Marco Rubio summarized the position by saying that peace in Lebanon is possible if the government possesses the “will and ability” to confront Hezbollah. With this stance, Washington moves from treating Lebanon as a victim to holding it responsible for controlling the weapons on its soil. The irony is that it asks the system for what it cannot achieve unless Hezbollah decides to voluntarily relinquish its weapons.
​The Impossibility of Separating Lebanon from the Region
​The crux of the matter lies in the impossibility of separating the Lebanese track from the regional one, which rules out any breakthrough in the foreseeable future given the intertwined files. Hezbollah will not accept a settlement before the Iranian nuclear issue is resolved. The state does not want to appear as if it is abandoning the party in front of its support base. Therefore, Israel will not accept a withdrawal without guarantees, and Washington does not want to fund reconstruction before the weapons are dismantled.

Lebanon must reclaim war, peace, and the state
Makram Rabah/Al Arabiya English/14 May ,2026
Despite all the predictable attacks against the Lebanese state for daring to engage in direct talks with Israel through American mediation, the second phase of this diplomatic track has started this week, and perhaps the most important thing to say at the outset is that Lebanon no longer has the luxury of pretending that slogans, denial, or ideological purity can protect its sovereignty, its people, or what remains of its institutions. For decades, Lebanese politics has been trapped between two equally destructive illusions. The first is that Israel can be confronted by speeches, emotional blackmail, and the permanent outsourcing of state decisions to armed factions. The second is that Hezbollah’s weapons are somehow a Lebanese source of strength rather than an Iranian instrument that has repeatedly invited destruction upon Lebanon, especially upon the very communities Hezbollah claims to defend. Both illusions have collapsed under the weight of fire, displacement, economic ruin, and the humiliation of a state that is expected to be responsible for a war it never truly decided to enter.
This is why the current Lebanese decision to enter a diplomatic process, even a difficult and politically costly one, should not be treated as weakness. On the contrary, it is the minimum expression of statehood. A state that is absent from the negotiating table is not a resistant state, nor is it a principled state; it is simply a state that has surrendered its fate to others. Lebanon cannot impose rationality on Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, and it certainly cannot impose humanity on the Israeli war machine, but it can at least refuse to leave the future of the south, the border, and the Lebanese people in the hands of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and its local franchise. The issue today is not whether Lebanon is rushing toward normalization, as Hezbollah and its chorus would like to claim. This is a deliberate distortion meant to intimidate the Lebanese presidency, paralyze the government, and drag the country back into the old vocabulary of treason. What is on the table today is not peace in the romantic or final sense of the word. Peace, if it ever comes, will require another stage, another debate, and another kind of national consensus.
What is on the table now is far more urgent and far more basic: stopping the war, restoring Lebanese territory, asserting the authority of the state, and beginning the process of removing the Iranian militia’s ability to decide war and peace on behalf of all Lebanese. The Lebanese state, of course, does not enter this process from a position of great strength. Its credibility has been damaged by years of hesitation, compromise, fear, and infiltration. Hezbollah has penetrated institutions, influenced officers, judges, and political decisions, and created a psychological barrier inside the republic whereby any attempt by the state to impose its authority is immediately described as civil war. This is perhaps the greatest lie Hezbollah has managed to impose on the Lebanese imagination. If the army protects constitutional institutions, defends citizens, and prevents an armed group from hijacking the country, this is not civil war. This is the restoration of state authority. It is not sectarian confrontation. It is law enforcement. It is counterterrorism when the weapon in question serves a foreign military project and turns Lebanese villages into sandbags for Iran.
The real challenge, therefore, is not merely how to negotiate with Israel, but how to rebuild Lebanese seriousness in the eyes of the world. Lebanon cannot demand international pressure on Israel while refusing to address the armed structure that gives Israel the permanent excuse to strike. Lebanon cannot ask Washington, Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, Cairo, Paris, or anyone else to save it while it continues to tolerate a militia that openly rejects the logic of the state. Diplomacy requires credibility, and credibility requires that Lebanon speak in one language: the language of sovereignty, not the language of excuses.
This does not mean that Israel should be trusted. It should not. Israel is using fire to impose facts on the ground, and its government has every reason to exploit Lebanese weakness. But the answer to Israeli aggression cannot be to keep Lebanon hostage to Hezbollah’s weapons. That weapon has not liberated the Lebanese state; it has brought occupation, assassination, isolation, and endless war. It has not protected the Shia of Lebanon; it has made them the first victims of Iran’s regional calculations. And it has not deterred Israel; it has given Israel the argument it needs to continue striking Lebanon while presenting itself as responding to an Iranian threat. President Joseph Aoun’s move, therefore, must be understood as an attempt to return Lebanon to the only battlefield where it can still gain something: Diplomacy backed by a clear national position. The attacks against him are expected, but they should not frighten the state into retreat. Hezbollah’s intimidation has worked for too long because too many Lebanese leaders chose survival over clarity. Today clarity is no longer optional. Lebanon must say openly that the weapon outside the state is not a resistance weapon, not a national asset, and not a sacred matter above discussion. It is the core of the Lebanese tragedy. Direct talks through US mediation are not a gift to Israel. They are a message that Lebanon intends to recover its decision-making, rebuild trust with the international community, and separate its future from the Iranian battlefield. Whether this process succeeds will depend on many factors, including American seriousness and Israeli restraint, but one thing is already clear: Refusing diplomacy will not protect Lebanon. It will only protect Hezbollah’s monopoly over war, and Lebanon has paid enough for that monopoly.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 14-15 May/2026
Trump, Xi praise US-China ties at Beijing state banquet after talks
Al Arabiya English/14 May ,2026
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping struck an optimistic tone at a state banquet in Beijing on Thursday, after holding what both leaders described as wide-ranging talks during Trump’s visit to China. Speaking at the banquet, Xi said he had an “in-depth exchange of views” with Trump earlier in the day and said both leaders believe China-US ties are “the most important bilateral ties in the world.”Xi also said China’s national rejuvenation and Trump’s “Make America Great Again” agenda can “go hand in hand,” framing the relationship between the world’s two largest economies as one that could benefit both sides. Trump also praised the discussions, describing them as “extremely positive and constructive.” He said the US-China relationship is “one of the most consequential in world history.”The banquet came after Trump and Xi held talks in Beijing during a high-profile summit focused on stabilizing relations between Washington and Beijing, with trade, technology, Taiwan and global security issues among the key topics on the agenda.With Reuters

Trump says Xi offered help to open Hormuz, vowed not to arm Iran
AFP/14 May ,2026
US President Donald Trump on Thursday said President Xi Jinping had offered China’s help to open the Strait of Hormuz and pledged not to send military equipment to aid Iran in its war against the US and Israel. “He said he’s not going to give military equipment… he said that strongly,” Trump told the “Hannity” show on Fox News, after the two leaders met in Beijing.“He’d like to see the Hormuz Strait open, and said ‘if I can be of any help whatsoever, I would like to help’,” Trump added.

Xi warns Trump on Taiwan, vows not to arm Iran
Agence France Presse/14 May ,2026
Chinese President Xi Jinping warned his U.S. counterpart Donald Trump that missteps on Taiwan could push their two countries into "conflict", a stark opening salvo as they met Thursday at a superpower summit in Beijing. Trump arrived in China with accolades for his host, calling Xi a "great leader" and "friend" and extending an invitation to visit the White House in September.Beyond the pomp as he welcomed Trump, Xi in less effusive tones said the two sides "should be partners and not rivals", and quickly highlighted the issue of Taiwan -- which Beijing claims as its territory. "The Taiwan question is the most important issue in China-U.S. relations," Xi said, according to remarks published by Chinese state media shortly after the start of the talks, which lasted two hours and 15 minutes. "If mishandled, the two nations could collide or even come into conflict, pushing the entire China-U.S. relationship into a highly perilous situation," Xi added. Trump's trip to Beijing is the first by a U.S. president in nearly a decade, with the grand reception belying a roster of unresolved trade and geopolitical tensions.
Xi greeted Trump with a red-carpet welcome at the opulent Great Hall of the People, with military band fanfare, a 21-gun salute and schoolchildren chanting "Welcome!"Seemingly enjoying the ceremony, the 79-year-old Trump said "the relationship between China and the USA is going to be better than ever before". Xi, who at 72 has led China for more than 13 years, instead referenced a political theory about the risks of war when a rising power rivals a ruling one, inspired by an ancient Greek historian. "Can China and the United States transcend the so-called 'Thucydides Trap' and forge a new paradigm for major-power relations?" Xi asked. At a state banquet in the evening, the Chinese leader insisted it was possible. "Achieving the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and making America great again can totally go hand in hand... and advance the wellbeing of the whole world," Xi said, in reference to Trump's MAGA movement.
'Blunt language'
But there are longstanding hurdles to overcome, with Taiwan looming large. The United States recognises only Beijing but under U.S. law is required to provide weapons to the self-ruled democracy for its defense. China has sworn to take the island and has not ruled out using force, ramping up military pressure in recent years. Following Xi's Thursday comments, Taipei called China the "sole risk" to regional peace, and insisted "the U.S. side has repeatedly reaffirmed its clear and firm support". Trump had said Monday he would speak to Xi about U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, a departure from Washington's previous insistence that it will not consult Beijing on the matter.The White House said Thursday's initial talks had been "good", though it did not mention Taiwan in the readout. Adam Ni, editor of newsletter China Neican, told AFP that while Xi's "blunt language" was not uncommon in party state media, it was unusual coming from the leader himself. China has been "signalling a desire for U.S. compromise on Taiwan", the National University of Singapore's Chong Ja Ian told AFP. Xi's demand could suggest "they see some opportunity to convince Trump", he said. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC the president would say more on Taiwan "in the coming days".
Iran overshadows -
Trump told Fox News that Xi had offered China's help to open the Hormuz Strait -- the key oil route largely blocked since the U.S.-Iran war erupted -- and that Xi had also pledged not to send military equipment to aid Iran. "He said he's not going to give military equipment... he said that strongly," Trump told the "Hannity" show. "He'd like to see the Hormuz Strait open, and said 'if I can be of any help whatsoever, I would like to help.'" Meanwhile Iran's Revolutionary Guards said naval forces had allowed multiple Chinese ships to pass through the strait since Wednesday night. China's foreign ministry said the Middle East had been discussed but did not give further details. The two leaders also discussed economic cooperation, with Trump hoping for business deals on agriculture and other sectors. He told Fox that China had agreed to purchase 200 Boeing jets, a deal that would equate to "a lot of jobs." U.S. media had described a possible China order of 600 jets, however. Boeing's CEO Kelly Ortberg was among the elite businessmen in the U.S. delegation, which also included Nvidia's Jensen Huang and Tesla's Elon Musk. At the state banquet Trump said the talks had been "extremely positive", describing the evening ahead as "another cherished opportunity to discuss among friends."

US officials flag prospect of Chinese energy purchases after Trump-Xi meeting
Reuters/14 May ,2026
US officials raised the prospect of China buying more American energy after Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping held talks in Beijing on Thursday. The White House said Xi expressed interest in buying more US oil to reduce China’s dependence on the Strait of Hormuz in a readout of the two-hour-plus summit published after its conclusion on Thursday. Shortly afterwards, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC they had discussed Beijing buying more energy, and that production from Alaska would be a “natural” for China.
There was no mention of energy purchases in any of the Chinese summaries of the meeting published by state media. China’s foreign ministry did not respond to a request for comment. Thursday was the first day of a two-day summit which Chinese state media said would set a new course for relations between the countries. Chinese purchases of US energy and agricultural products have been flagged as possible parts of a deal, although no concrete details have been unveiled yet. China has not imported any US oil since May 2025 because of 20 percent tariffs imposed during the trade war and the removal of those duties would likely be a prerequisite to any large-scale resumption of purchases. Even at its peak, the US has never been a major source of crude for the world’s largest oil importer. Imports of US oil peaked at about 395,000 barrels per day (bpd) in 2020, accounting for just under 4 percent of China’s total imports. In 2024, before Trump returned to office, that had fallen to 193,000 bpd, worth $6 billion. The chairman of state-owned oil major CNPC, which has long-term contracts with US liquefied natural gas producers, was expected at a banquet in Beijing on Thursday for the US delegation. Reuters previously reported that the US and China are expected to move toward a trade mechanism for non-sensitive goods this week, with each side possibly identifying some $30 billion worth of goods on which they could reduce tariffs.

New attacks reported on ships near Hormuz as Trump discusses Iran with Xi
Al Arabiya English/14 May ,2026
US President Donald Trump discussed the Iran war with China’s President Xi Jinping in Beijing on Thursday, while new attacks on vessels near the Strait of Hormuz brought a reminder of the costs of a prolonged stalemate, with peace talks stalled. After Trump and Xi met, a White House official said the leaders had agreed that the strait should be open, and that Iran should never obtain nuclear weapons. China is close to Iran and the main buyer of its oil. In an interview with CNBC in Beijing, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he believed China would “do what they can” to help open the strait, which he said was “very much in their interest.”But diplomacy to end the war has been on hold since last week when Iran and the United States each rejected the other’s latest proposals, sticking to initial demands that each considers to be “red lines.”Iran has largely shut the Strait of Hormuz to ships apart from its own since the United States and Israel launched their bombing campaign two-and-a-half months ago, causing the biggest ever disruption to global energy supplies. The US paused the bombing last month but added a blockade of Iran’s ports. In the latest incident on the trade route, an Indian cargo vessel carrying livestock from Africa to the United Arab Emirates was sunk on Thursday in waters off the coast of Oman. India condemned the attack and said all 14 crew members had been rescued by the Omani coastguard. Vanguard, a British maritime security advisory firm, said the vessel had been hit by a missile or drone which caused an explosion. Separately, British maritime security agency UKMTO reported on Thursday that “unauthorized personnel” had boarded a ship anchored off the coast of the United Arab Emirates port of Fujairah, and were steering it towards Iran. Iran has lately been letting the occasional ship pass through the strait under special agreements. It let a Japanese tanker through on Wednesday. Its Fars news agency reported on Thursday an agreement to let some Chinese ships pass.Iran’s Judiciary Spokesperson Asghar Jahangir said on Thursday the seizure of “US tankers” violating Iranian regulations was being carried out under domestic and international law.
Little progress in talks
After intensively bombing Iran for six weeks, the United States and Israel paused their campaign more than a month ago to allow for what Trump said were promising peace talks. But after a single round of talks in Pakistan last month, there has been little progress and no further face-to-face meetings. Trump had said his aims in starting the war were to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, end its capability to attack its neighbors and make it easier for Iranians to overthrow their government. But none of those objectives has been achieved so far, with Iran still in possession of more than 400 kg (900 pounds) of near-weapons-grade highly enriched uranium, and missiles and drones with demonstrated ability to hit neighbors. Iran’s rulers, who had to use force to put down anti-government protests at the start of the year, have faced no organized opposition since the war began. And their new-found ability to close off the strait has given them additional leverage in negotiations. Washington wants Tehran to hand over the uranium and forgo further enrichment. Iran is seeking the lifting of sanctions, reparations for war damage and acknowledgment of its control over the strait. Trump’s trip to China, initially scheduled for the end of March, was postponed because of the war at a time when Trump was predicting a quick end to it. In the end, he traveled with the standoff still unresolved, allowing it to loom over the first visit by a US president in nearly a decade. The United States hopes to convince China “to play a more active role in getting Iran to walk away from what they’re doing now and trying to do now in the [Arabian] Gulf,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Fox News in an interview on board Air Force One en route to China. “We’ve made clear to them that any support for Iran would obviously be detrimental for our relationship.”With Reuters

Iran calls UAE 'active partner' in US-Israel war on Iran
Agence France Presse/14 May ,2026
Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Thursday accused the United Arab Emirates of playing what he called an active role in the US-Israeli war against Iran. "The UAE is an active partner in this aggression, and there is no doubt about it," Araghchi said while attending the BRICS summit in India. "It also became clear that they participated in these attacks and may have even acted directly against us." Araghchi also referred to what Israel described as a "secret" meeting between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in the UAE -- a visit that Abu Dhabi has denied took place.

Top admiral says US achieved all military goals against Iran, used Ukraine advice
Al Arabiya English/14 May ,2026
The US military achieved all of its objectives in Iran in less than 40 days, including significantly degrading Tehran’s ability to project power across the Middle East, the top US commander for the region said Thursday. “Today, Iran can no longer attack with [its previous] mass and scale,” US Central Command (CENTCOM) chief Adm. Brad Cooper said. “Further, with 90 percent of its defense industrial base destroyed, Iran won’t be able to reconstitute for years,” he added. In addition to severely degrading Iran’s military power and capabilities, Cooper said the country’s main regional proxies in Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis had been cut off from Tehran’s weapons supply and support. Speaking to lawmakers during a Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) hearing, Cooper lauded support from Washington’s Arab and Middle Eastern allies. He highlighted the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel for their help and their capabilities to defend their own nations. “But there were a couple” of regional countries that were “less than stellar,” he said, without elaborating. As the war went on and Iran deployed swarms of cheap but effective drones, Washington turned to Ukraine for help. The US military adopted a “large number of tactics, techniques, and procedures” shared by Ukraine to help defend against such Iranian attacks, the CENTCOM commander said. When asked about the war itself and threats emanating from Iran, Cooper said the US began to see an increase in Iran’s capability and intent to produce more ballistic missiles last November and December. This presented a “very significant risk both to partners and ourselves,” he said. Cooper also took the opportunity to remind lawmakers and the public of Iran’s track record against the US. “Iran’s hostile, lethal track record against the US is well documented. But I don’t know that it is well understood. In 30 months prior to Epic Fury, Iranian-supported terror groups attacked US troops and diplomats more than 350 times,” he said. He was asked about recent reports that Iran currently has between 70 and 75 percent of its missiles and launchers available. Without getting into specifics, Cooper said these numbers were not accurate.

UAE denies Netanyahu secretly visited country during Iran war
Associated Press/14 May ,2026
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quietly visited the United Arab Emirates during the Israeli-U.S. war with Iran, his office said Wednesday. The UAE later denied any secret visit had occurred. Netanyahu met with UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in a gathering that "resulted in a historic breakthrough in relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates," according to the Israeli statement. The Gulf nation normalized relations with Israel in 2020. The UAE's official WAM news agency later posted an article denying "reports circulating" about a Netanyahu visit. According to WAM, the country's relations with Israel "are public and conducted within the framework of the well-known and officially declared Abraham Accords, and are not based on non-transparent or unofficial arrangements." The Emirati report also denied any Israeli military delegation was received in the UAE. Israel's announcement came a day after U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee revealed that Israel had sent Iron Dome air-defense weapons and personnel to operate them to the UAE. The UAE has faced Iranian missile and drone fire even after the ceasefire was reached last month. It has been trying to signal to nervous investors that it remains open for business and safe. Last week, WAM reported that Netanyahu was among the leaders who called the Emirati president to condemn Iranian attacks and express their solidarity with the Gulf federation. It was rare public acknowledgment of direct talks between the countries that normalized relations in the 2020 Abraham Accords and have strengthened their ties during the Iran war. Iran has criticized that agreement and has repeatedly suggested over the years that Israel maintained a military and intelligence presence in the Emirates.Israeli leaders have made occasional visits to the UAE in recent years after normalizing relations.
Iran demands Kuwait release detainees
Iran's foreign minister accused Kuwait of attempting to "sow discord" by detaining four Iranians that the Gulf Arab country accuses of being Revolutionary Guard operatives. In a post Wednesday on X, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi demanded the Iranians' immediate release and said Iran reserved the right to respond. "This illegal act took place near an island used by the U.S. to attack Iran," Araghchi wrote. A day earlier, Kuwait said four men were detained and two escaped while trying to infiltrate Bubiyan Island in the northwest corner of the Persian Gulf on May 1. Bubiyan Island is home to Mubarak Al Kabeer Port, which is under construction as part of a Chinese plan to build infrastructure across the world. It also came under Iranian attack during the war.
Iranian human rights lawyer released
Prominent Iranian human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh has been released from prison more than a month after being detained, a rights group and her daughter said Wednesday. Sotoudeh, who is known for defending activists, opposition politicians and women prosecuted for removing their headscarves, was detained by Iranian intelligence agents at her house in Tehran in April. Her release comes as U.S. President Donald Trump arrived in China for a long-anticipated visit that is expected to touch on the war in Iran. The U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency, which closely tracks developments in Iran, said that Sotoudeh was released on bail from Tehran's Evin Prison. Her daughter, Mehraveh Khandan, posted on social media that Sotoudeh was released on temporary custody. Iran's semiofficial ISNA news agency also reported Sotoudeh release. Sotoudeh has been imprisoned multiple times. Her activist husband, Reza Khandan, has been imprisoned in the same prison as his wife.
Nobel Peace laureate needs long-term care
Doctors who examined Nobel Peace laureate and activist Narges Mohammadi more than a week after she collapsed at a prison in Iran said she needs months of treatment, according to her foundation. Mohammadi, 53, was urgently transferred from prison to a hospital in northwestern Iran on May 1 after she fell unconscious. She was released on bail nearly 10 days later and transferred to a hospital in Tehran where her specialists examined her. The doctors said her vascular disease has worsened since she was last checked in 2024 and recommended eight months of treatment. She was awarded the Nobel in 2023 while in prison and has been jailed repeatedly throughout her career. Her latest imprisonment began in December when she was arrested in the northeastern Iranian city of Mashhad.

Vessel off UAE coast 'taken', now bound for Iran waters
Associated Press/14 May ,2026
A ship anchored off the east coast of the United Arab Emirates has been seized and is heading toward Iranian territorial waters, the British military said Thursday. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center said it received reports that the vessel was taken by unauthorized personnel while anchored 38 nautical miles (70 kilometers, 44 miles) northeast of the UAE port of Fujairah, near the Strait of Hormuz. The seizure comes as U.S. President Donald Trump is meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping on a much-anticipated visit to Beijing. The leaders' talks are expected to focus on the war with Iran, which has seriously disrupted trade in oil, gas and other products and rattled the global economy. It happened hours after Israel said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had quietly visited the United Arab Emirates during the Israeli-U.S. war with Iran, though the UAE swiftly denied that any secret visit had occurred. The Gulf nation normalized relations with Israel in 2020. Iran has criticized that agreement and has repeatedly suggested over the years that Israel maintained a military and intelligence presence in the Emirates. Israeli leaders have made occasional visits to the UAE in recent years after normalizing relations. UKMTO did not name the ship and said it is investigating. There were no immediate claims of responsibility for the seizure. Fujairah is an important oil export terminal and the UAE's main port outside of the Persian Gulf. It has been repeatedly attacked during the war with Iran. Iran has seized a number of ships since the war began. Its navy last week seized an oil tanker identified as the Ocean Koi, saying it was attempting to disrupt oil exports and Iranian interests, according to the official IRNA news agency. It said the tanker was seized in the Gulf of Oman and was carrying Iranian oil when it was boarded and taken to Iran's southern coast. The U.S. sanctioned the Ocean Koi in February, saying it has been part of a "shadow fleet" that has been transporting Iranian oil.

Iraq PM vows to ensure state monopoly on arms
Agencies/14 May ,2026
Iraq’s new Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, whose government was approved on Thursday, vowed to ensure that the state would have a monopoly over weapons, the INA state news agency said. Al-Zaidi’s government program, which he presented to parliament, includes “reforming the security apparatus by restricting weapons to state control and strengthening the capabilities of the security forces,” INA quoted the parliament media office as saying. Al-Zaidi was sworn in on Thursday with only a partial cabinet after lawmakers failed to reach a consensus on key postings, including interior and defense. Basim Mohammed was appointed as the country’s new oil minister while Fuad Hussein was kept on as the foreign minister in the new government, lawmakers told Reuters. Parliament approved 14 ministers in the new government but failed to reach consensus on several remaining posts, including the interior and defense portfolios. The session witnessed heated exchanges among lawmakers after some objected to the approval of the nominee for interior minister, lawmakers said. “Parliament approved 14 ministries, while nine ministries remain pending. Three of them failed to win parliament’s confidence today,” MP Muqdad al-Khafaji told Reuters. On May 1, US President Donald Trump voiced strong support for al-Zaidi in a call, after the Iraqi alliance of Shia political blocs, the Coordination Framework, in April named al-Zaidi as its nominee for the prime minister, giving him 30 days to form a government. Al-Zaidi, in his 40s, is an Iraqi multimillionaire with interests spanning several sectors, including banking and the supply of Iraq’s vast government food basket program that serves millions of people.

Iraq's new PM vows to ensure state monopoly on arms
Agence France Presse/14 May ,2026
Iraq's new Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, whose government was approved on Thursday, vowed to ensure that the state would have a monopoly over weapons, the INA state news agency said. Zaidi's government program, which he presented to parliament, includes "reforming the security apparatus by restricting weapons to state control and strengthening the capabilities of the security forces", INA quoted the parliament media office as saying. The U.S., a key powerbroker in Iraqi politics, has recently piled pressure on Baghdad to disarm Iran-backed groups, which it designates as terrorist organizations.

UK health secretary resigns and is expected to challenge Starmer's leadership
Associated Press/14 May ,2026
Efforts to unseat British Prime Minister Keir Starmer broke out into open rebellion Thursday, with one potential rival resigning from the Cabinet and another clearing the way for her to enter any future leadership contest. Health Secretary Wes Streeting became the first senior minister to quit Starmer 's Cabinet on Thursday in what is expected to be a precursor to challenging his leadership. Starmer is facing growing pressure to step down after his Labour Party's disastrous results last week in local and regional elections. "You have shown courage and statesmanship on the world stage — not least in keeping Britain out of the war in Iran," Streeting wrote in a letter. "But where we need vision, we have a vacuum. Where we need direction, we have drift.""It is now clear that you will not lead the Labour Party into the next general election," he added.
Streeting, whose political ambitions have long been know, is considered one of a handful of people who could try to unseat Starmer. Another likely challenger, former Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, said Thursday that she had reached an agreement with tax authorities to clear up questions about her taxes that forced her to leave the Cabinet last September. Rayner told the Guardian newspaper that Starmer should "reflect on" his position, adding that she was ready to "play my part" in any leadership election if Streeting were to trigger a contest.
Race to unseat Starmer heats up
Pressure for Starmer to step aside has intensified since Labour suffered disastrous losses in local and regional elections last week, underscoring voter frustration with a government that has failed to deliver on pledges to boost economic growth and improve living standards for working people.A stagnant economy and stubbornly high consumer price inflation have made it difficult for Starmer's government to deliver on its promises after winning a landslide election victory less than two years ago. Starmer has vowed to remain in office, warning lawmakers that any leadership contest would plunge the government into "chaos" at a time it should be focused on issues like the cost of living crisis and war in the Middle East. His effort to fight off a leadership challenge was bolstered Thursday morning by a rare bit of positive economic news. Gross domestic product, a broad measure of economic activity, grew 0.6% in the first three months of the year, compared with 0.2% in the previous quarter, the Office for National Statistics said. Treasury chief Rachel Reeves said the figures showed that her policies were working and that renewed economic growth would allow the government to put more money into public services and programs to support those hit by the high cost of living. "But that is only possible because of the economic stability that we have brought back to our economy," she told the BBC. "And we shouldn't put that at risk by plunging the country in chaos at a time when there is conflict in the world."There was also positive news from the National Health Service. Waiting lines for NHS appointments — one of Streeting's signature priorities – had fallen for the fifth straight month, boosting any potential candidacy. Streeting comes from the moderate wing of the left-leaning Labour Party, as does Starmer. Rayner is a favorite of many more left-wing voters, calling on the party to do more to boost the minimum wage and raise taxes on the rich.
Under Labour Party rules, any potential challenger to the prime minister would have to have the backing of 81 of the party's 403 members in the House of Commons. More than that number have publicly called on Starmer to quit in recent days.
But other potential candidates may enter any race for the leadership. Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham is widely seen as a potential candidate, though he would have to find a way back into Parliament before he could run. Allies have suggested a sitting member of the House of Commons could resign to make way for Burnham to run in a special election. Burnham canceled his regular Thursday appearance on a local BBC radio program this week to "prioritize discussions arising from last week's elections."
Efforts to depose a Labour leader are relatively rare
While the opposition Conservative Party has a history of deposing prime ministers while in office, Labour does not, said Jonathan Tonge, a professor of politics at the University of Liverpool. "Labour's political history has been about losing quite a lot of general elections, but they don't do ruthless on their leader,'' he said. "They don't tend to depose their leader. The Conservatives, they readily do ruthless.''While there is a chance that the current efforts to unseat Starmer will fizzle out, that would probably just delay the crisis for a few months given the level of fragmentation in British politics, Tonge added. If "a civil war opens up within a Labour Party that's supposed to be governing us at present, it's an extraordinary state of affairs given it's less than two years since Keir Starmer won one of Labor's greatest election victories ever," Tonge said. "He's got a huge parliamentary majority, he's got more than 400 MPs, and yet his prime ministership may be on the brink of disintegration," he added.

Israeli minister criticizes Barcelona star Lamine Yamal for waving Palestinian flag
The Associated Press/14 May ,2026
Israel’s defense minister has criticized Barcelona’s teenage star Lamine Yamal for his waving of a Palestinian flag during celebrations of the Spanish league title win, saying the act “incites hate.”“Lamine Yamal chose to incite hate against Israel while our soldiers combat the terrorist organization Hamas, an organization that massacred, raped and burned Jewish children, women and the elderly on Oct. 7, (2023),” Israel Katz wrote on X on Thursday. The 18-year-old Yamal waved a large Palestinian flag from an open-top bus during a victory parade by Barcelona’s team through the city on Monday. The parade drew some 750,000 people to celebrate the league title clinched the previous day, local authorities said. Yamal, who is Muslim, posted pictures of him holding the flag on his Instagram account. Spain’s government and a large part of its population have been highly critical of Israel’s military operations that killed tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza in response to the 2023 Hamas attack. There has been a global backlash against Israel over the humanitarian toll of the war in Gaza, which has spread to sport and culture. Protests have been seen in soccer, cycling and basketball. Last year’s Spanish Vuelta was repeatedly disrupted by protesters angry with the participation of an Israeli-backed cycling team. Spain is also one of five countries boycotting this year’s Eurovision Song Contest to protest Israel’s inclusion. Yamal is set to star for Spain at next month’s World Cup to be played in North America.

Yemen’s warring parties agree to swap over 1,700 detainees
Al Arabiya English/14 May ,2026
Major General Turki Al-Maliki, the spokesman of the Arab coalition, said on Thursday that Yemen’s warring parties agreed to release 1,750 prisoners, including 27 prisoners and detainees from the coalition forces, among them seven Saudis. The agreement was reached following weeks of UN-sponsored meetings in Jordan’s capital of Amman.“This outcome is the result of 15 weeks of intensive negotiations under the auspices of the UN in Amman, Jordan,” UN special envoy Hans Grundberg said after the meeting. “This is a moment of profound relief for thousands of Yemenis who have endured long and painful waits (for) the return of their family members. The steadfast and courageous advocacy of the families of detainees has been instrumental in bringing us to this point,” Grundberg added. More than 1,000 prisoners were exchanged in 2020 and about 900 in 2023, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Yemen’s civil war, which triggered one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises, raged from 2014 until 2022, when a UN-brokered truce calmed the fighting. The ICRC, which will organize the release as a neutral intermediary, called it a “crucial step forward.” “Today’s agreement has brought families closer to the reunifications they have been so anxiously waiting for,” said Christine Cipolla, the ICRC’s head of delegation in Yemen. “We count on all parties to extend their full cooperation so that we can begin preparations to implement the agreement and ensure the process runs smoothly.”with AFP

The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 14-15 May/2026
Palestinian Leaders Still Reject Israel's Right to Exist
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/May 14, 2026
[T]he "right of return" for refugees will remain "a historical constant that cannot be forfeited by the passage of time." — PLO Executive Committee member Wasel Abu Yousef, wafa.ps, May 12, 2026.
When Palestinian leaders speak about the "right of return," they are not talking about resettling refugees in a future Palestinian state in the West Bank or Gaza Strip.... The goal is to flood Israel with millions of Palestinians and transform Jews into a minority in their own country.
This demand fundamentally contradicts the idea of a "two-state solution." Under a genuine "two-state solution," Palestinians would establish their own independent state alongside Israel. Yet Palestinian leaders are effectively saying that they want not only a Palestinian state....
How can a leadership that celebrates Israel's creation as a "catastrophe" be serious about peace? How can leaders who continue promoting the fantasy of the "right of return" claim to support coexistence? How can the international community expect real reform while Palestinian leaders continue indoctrinating their people with narratives of rejection and victimhood?
Or does the international community not expect any reform and secretly hope that the Palestinians might "take care of the Jewish problem" without them having to get their own hands dirty?
The Trump administration and Western donors should pay close attention to the messages emerging from Ramallah. The problem is not just Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The problem is far deeper and more widespread.
Even the supposedly "moderate" Palestinian Authority leaders continue to promote narratives that erase Israel's existence and deny Jewish historical rights.
So long as this narrative dominates the Palestinian political culture, peace will remain not possible.
When Palestinian leaders speak about the "right of return," they are not talking about resettling refugees in a future Palestinian state in the West Bank or Gaza Strip. The goal is to flood Israel with millions of Palestinians and transform Jews into a minority in their own country.
On May 11 and 12, the Palestinian Authority organized mass rallies across the West Bank to commemorate the "Nakba" ("catastrophe") -- the term Palestinians use to describe the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.
Hundreds of Palestinians marched through the streets of Ramallah, the de facto capital of the Palestinians, waving flags, carrying "keys of return," and chanting slogans such as "We live a new Nakba every day" and "We will never forget the right of return."
Senior Palestinian officials, including top figures from the ruling Fatah faction and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), participated in the event, once again reaffirming their commitment to the Palestinian refugee issue and the so-called "right of return."
PLO Executive Committee member Wasel Abu Yousef said that after 78 years, "the occupation [Israel] is trying to undermine the sacred right of return."
He added that the "right of return" for refugees will remain "a historical constant that cannot be forfeited by the passage of time."
At first glance, the "right of return" may sound humanitarian and symbolic. In reality, however, it represents one of the most extreme demands in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
When Palestinian leaders speak about the "right of return," they are not talking about resettling refugees in a future Palestinian state in the West Bank or Gaza Strip. They are demanding that millions of Palestinians classified as "refugees" – including descendants of the original refugees from 1948-49 – be allowed to settle inside Israel itself. The goal is to flood Israel with millions of Palestinians and transform Jews into a minority in their own country.
This demand fundamentally contradicts the idea of a "two-state solution." Under a genuine "two-state solution," Palestinians would establish their own independent state alongside Israel. Yet Palestinian leaders are effectively saying that they want not only a Palestinian state, but also the demographic destruction of Israel through mass migration.
No Israeli government – left, right, or center – could ever agree to national suicide.
This is why the "right of return" has remained one of the core obstacles to peace negotiations since the signing of the Oslo Accord between Israel and the PLO in 1993.
The continued glorification of the "Nakba" and the insistence on the "right of return" demonstrate that many Palestinians have not abandoned their long-term dream of replacing Israel rather than living peacefully beside it.
For many in the West, "Nakba Day" often is portrayed as a day of mourning and remembrance for Palestinian refugees who lost their homes during the 1948-49 Arab-Israeli war. What is frequently ignored, however, is the political message behind such commemorations and the dangerous implications they carry for any future peace between Palestinians and Israelis.
By defining Israel's establishment as a "catastrophe," the Palestinian leadership is effectively telling its people that the very existence of Israel is illegitimate. This is not the language of reconciliation, coexistence, or compromise. It is the language of rejectionism and extremism.
Imagine if, every year, one side of the conflict commemorated the creation of the other side's country as a disaster that must be reversed. Would anyone seriously believe that such rhetoric prepares people for peace and compromise?
The annual Nakba commemorations do not merely express grief over historical events. They reinforce the narrative that Jews are foreign colonialists with no legitimate historical or national connection to the land. This narrative erases thousands of years of Jewish history in Jerusalem, Hebron, Judea, Safed, Tiberias, and elsewhere in Israel.
The message Palestinians hear from their leaders is unambiguous: Israel was born in sin, has no right to exist, and one day should disappear. This schooling explains why peace efforts have repeatedly failed over the past decades.
One of the greatest obstacles to peace has always been the failure of Palestinian leaders to prepare their people for compromise with Israel. There is, bluntly, no will whatsoever to do that. While some Westerners continue to speak about a "two-state solution," Palestinian leaders continue to educate their people that all of Israel is "Occupied Palestine."
Palestinian school textbooks, official media, speeches, and public events do not prepare Palestinians for the idea that Jews are a legitimate people with national rights in the Middle East. Instead, Palestinians are taught to view Israel as a temporary, illegitimate entity. Maps used in geography and history textbooks usually omit the State of Israel entirely. The entire region between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea is labeled as "Palestine," erasing Israeli cities or renaming them as Palestinian localities.
What makes the latest Nakba events especially significant is their timing.
These rallies come at a moment when the Trump administration is demanding reforms from the Palestinian Authority, particularly in the areas of education, incitement, and governance.
For years, Western governments have pressured the Palestinian Authority to revise its school curricula, stop incitement against Israel, combat antisemitism, and prepare Palestinians for peaceful coexistence. Palestinian officials most often respond by promising reform and moderation.
The scenes from Ramallah and other Palestinian cities, however, tell a very different story.
How can a leadership that celebrates Israel's creation as a "catastrophe" be serious about peace? How can leaders who continue promoting the fantasy of the "right of return" claim to support coexistence? How can the international community expect real reform while Palestinian leaders continue indoctrinating their people with narratives of rejection and victimhood?
Or does the international community not expect any reform and secretly hope that the Palestinians might "take care of the Jewish problem" without them having to get their own hands dirty?
The Trump administration and Western donors should pay close attention to the messages emerging from Ramallah. The problem is not just Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The problem is far deeper and more widespread.
Even the supposedly "moderate" Palestinian Authority leaders continue to promote narratives that erase Israel's existence and deny Jewish historical rights.
A leadership that seeks peace would educate its people for compromise, mutual recognition, respect and coexistence. It would teach Palestinians that Jews are not foreign invaders, but a people with nearly 4,000 years of deep historical roots in the land. In addition, it would prepare Palestinians to build their own future rather than dream of reversing the outcome of the 1948 war. Instead, Palestinian leaders continue to commemorate Israel's birth as a tragedy and promise that the struggle against its existence is not over. So long as this narrative dominates the Palestinian political culture, peace will remain not possible.
**Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.
**Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter)
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.

War on Iran no longer a short-term operation
Khaled Abou Zahr/Arab News/May 14, 2026
The war between the US and Iran has entered an ambiguous phase. While strikes still take place during the ceasefire, both sides are exchanging demands for the negotiations. Among the points raised by Iran is the recognition of its sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz. And, while it denies that the US has any impact on the strait, it demands an end to the American naval restrictions on Iranian ports, plus guarantees for safe passage under Iranian control. As we discuss Iran, I feel compelled to paraphrase something Saddam Hussein stated during the Iran-Iraq war, which was also the last time the Strait of Hormuz faced real navigational obstructions. Saddam stated that, if you take out your gun, it is not to threaten but to shoot and kill. Iran today, after decades of threatening to block the strait, has finally done so. Yet, despite the hurt inflicted on the global economy, it missed its shot. This weapon, whose use has been threatened for years and years, is finally out — but it has clearly been overpowered by the US.
Despite this, we are now in a difficult position. It is undeniable that the Iranian regime’s actions are a threat to the stability and future of both the Middle East and the world. Even if it is not a gun, it is a splinter adding pressure. To start, no country — not even China — will accept the regime in Iran continuing to threaten or control this strait, through which about a quarter of global seaborne oil trade and a fifth of the world’s liquefied natural gas usually passes. China gets about half of its crude oil imports from the Middle East, so any disruption is a direct threat to its economy. No country — not even China — will accept the regime in Iran continuing to threaten or control this strait
The main diplomatic effort is a UN Security Council draft resolution under Chapter VII of the UN Charter that demands Iran immediately cease attacks on shipping, remove mines, stop imposing illegal restrictions and guarantee freedom of navigation. Experts have compared the long-term goal to a solution similar to the 2022-23 Black Sea grain deal, which, despite the war in Ukraine and tensions in the neighborhood, guaranteed the safe transit of food, fertilizer and essential goods. As for the multinational military proposition, there has been a series of ideas put forward with the goal of restoring safe passage through the strait. The latest is a strictly defensive multinational mission co-led by the UK and France. The goal is to ensure merchant vessel protection, escorts and mine clearance, with participation from more than 40 nations.
For its part, the US launched “Project Freedom,” a unilateral but expandable escort operation that was briefly activated before being paused for diplomacy. Additionally, Washington proposed the broader “Maritime Freedom Construct,” inviting international partners for coordinated diplomatic and military support. While the back and forth between military action — even if it is defensive — and diplomacy continues, there is always a possibility we could witness a swift and dangerous escalation. If this happens, will the US and other countries be forced to put boots on the ground?While the back and forth continues, there is always a possibility we could witness a swift and dangerous escalation
The Iranian regime knows the US can inflict more pain, but it also knows that America does not want to send soldiers to complete the mission. The US and Israel know that, while the Iranian regime can project an image of resistance through targeted actions, its military infrastructure has been devastated. So, what comes next? How long will this status quo hold? And who will yield first?The US and Iran have probably already started a long-term posture of confrontation, flirting with the red line of an all-out war and boots on the ground.
The Iranian regime’s goals were exemplified by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ failed attempt at an infiltration attack on Kuwait’s Bubiyan Island this month. A relatively small group of six armed IRGC members tried to land by boat but Kuwaiti forces repelled them, detaining four. One Kuwaiti officer was wounded. While Tehran claimed it was a navigation error during a routine patrol, few believe this. It is worth noting that the island hosts the China-backed Mubarak Al-Kabeer Port project. Such consistent and persistent destabilization actions, while officially denied, look to increase the hostage-taking and blackmail operations, while not being serious enough to merit a military escalation from the US.
The US and Israel themselves will probably work to weaken the regime even more or push for its downfall through infiltration by covertly supporting internal opposition networks and ethnic minorities, such as the Kurds, Balochis and Azeris. The work of intelligence agencies, coupled with further airstrikes and cyber operations, could be the way forward to avoid boots on the ground. The ability to assassinate regime figures, coupled with the sabotage of key infrastructure by limited special forces or proxy actions, can certainly disrupt the regime’s control.
This is hence no longer a quick operation but a long-term one that will continue to focus on information warfare, targeted assassinations and economic disruption. There is no doubt that the main goal will be to erode loyalty within the military and security forces. Looking at past covert programs, the US is capable of executing its goals with great precision and with the same deniability the Iranian regime uses. Ultimately, this could lead to the regime’s downfall. But patience and time will be of the essence.
**Khaled Abou Zahr is the founder of SpaceQuest Ventures, a space-focused investment platform. He is CEO of EurabiaMedia and editor of Al-Watan Al-Arabi.

The growing regionalization of the Sudan conflict
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/May 14, 2026
The conflict in Sudan has evolved beyond the borders of the country, transforming into a major regional security crisis with profound implications for the Horn of Africa, the Sahel and broader African geopolitical stability. The conflict also reveals how civil wars can rapidly destabilize surrounding regions through violence, forced displacement and humanitarian collapse.
Sudan is situated at the intersection of North Africa, East Africa, Central Africa and the Red Sea corridor. As a result, its civil war should be examined through the prism of the regional landscape as well as the domestic one. For example, recent developments involving Chad show the extent to which the conflict is spilling into neighboring states and obtaining a regional character. In February, Chad closed its border with Sudan following armed confrontations involving Sudanese militants near the border town of Tine, which resulted in the deaths of several Chadian soldiers and civilians. Such incidents are a significant escalation that clearly show that Sudan’s internal war is now directly affecting the territorial integrity and security apparatus of neighboring countries. The border closure also reflects growing fears within N’Djamena that continued instability in Sudan may ignite broader security crises inside Chad itself.
Recent developments involving Chad show the extent to which the conflict is obtaining a regional character
Historically, the Sudan-Chad borderlands have been highly volatile and the resurgence of cross-border violence therefore revives older regional conflict patterns, such as the Darfur crisis during the 2000s. Such developments suggest that the current war is entering a new phase, in which neighboring states are no longer merely humanitarian bystanders. Instead, they are becoming increasingly vulnerable to direct security repercussions arising from Sudan’s instability.
The regionalization of the Sudan conflict poses particularly severe risks since many neighboring states already suffer from fragile political institutions, economic hardship and weak border governance. Chad, for example, remains highly vulnerable due to its internal political fragility, ongoing security pressures and limited economic capacity. It reportedly still faces threats from militant organizations operating around the Lake Chad Basin, including Boko Haram and Daesh-affiliated groups.The influx of instability from Sudan could significantly overwhelm neighboring countries’ already-strained state institutions. Another danger lies in the possibility that prolonged Sudanese instability could contribute to the militarization of border regions. This could empower nonstate armed actors and intensify ethnic and tribal tensions.
The humanitarian dimension of the conflict, which is alarming and is one of its gravest aspects, should also not be forgotten. Sudan has experienced catastrophic levels of human suffering, with millions of people displaced internally and externally.
The scale of the forced displacement has created one of the world’s largest humanitarian emergencies, placing enormous pressure on neighboring countries. Chad alone has absorbed nearly 1 million Sudanese refugees, particularly in its eastern provinces, where local infrastructure and humanitarian resources were already severely limited. The arrival of such large refugee populations places extraordinary strain on food supplies, healthcare systems, water resources, sanitation networks and employment opportunities. In regions already characterized by poverty and underdevelopment, these pressures can lead to localized violence and political instability. In addition, the humanitarian catastrophe inside Sudan continues to worsen due to the systematic destruction of civilian infrastructure and the collapse of healthcare systems. Humanitarian organizations have repeatedly warned that millions of civilians remain beyond the reach of emergency assistance due to the ongoing fighting and insecurity. The influx of instability from Sudan could significantly overwhelm neighboring countries’ already-strained state institutions
Unfortunately, despite the unprecedented scale of the violence and humanitarian crisis, international attention on Sudan has diminished considerably in recent months, as global focus has shifted toward other geopolitical crises. There has also been a decline in diplomatic engagement and media coverage. This risks normalizing the conflict.
Furthermore, the geopolitical implications of the conflict have expanded significantly, as regional and external actors have become increasingly entangled in Sudan’s instability. This raises the possibility of proxy conflict patterns emerging across the region.
There has also been a growing militarization of border regions and reactivation of transnational armed networks operating across Sudan, Chad, Libya, the Central African Republic and South Sudan. The porous nature of these borders makes it easier to move fighters, weapons and contraband. If the conflict continues, it could threaten crucial transport corridors and commercial networks that link East Africa to North Africa and the Middle East. In this context, the Sudan conflict increasingly represents a major regional security challenge rather than just a localized civil war. As a result, renewed international engagement is extremely important. International actors, including the UN, the African Union, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, the EU and major global powers, should ratchet up their diplomatic efforts with the aim of at least containing the conflict and preventing further regional spillover.
One of the most urgent priorities should be the establishment of a ceasefire. In addition, the establishment and protection of humanitarian corridors must be an immediate international priority. In a nutshell, the Sudanese civil war is entering one of its most dangerous phases. The war now threatens not only Sudan’s territorial integrity but also the broader stability of the Horn of Africa and the Sahel. The recent spillover into Chad illustrates this issue. The international community must secure a ceasefire, expand humanitarian access and prevent further regional militarization.
**Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist. X: @Dr_Rafizadeh

Starmer uncertainty reflects UK’s political instability
Peter Harrison/Arab News/May 14, 2026
The UK will have seen nine prime ministers in the last 20 years if Keir Starmer resigns or is forced out of office before the end of 2026. This is in sharp contrast to the three who served in the two decades before that. Even extending the comparison back to 1970, Britain still only had six prime ministers in the 30 years leading up to the turn of the century. British prime ministers can remain in office for up to five years before a general election must be called. When Starmer won the election in July 2024, he told supporters: “We did it. Change begins now.” Yet many argue that he has struggled to deliver on that promise.
One could argue that the defining political trend of the past two decades has not been stability or renewal, but a conveyor belt of short-lived prime ministers. The result is a growing sense of frustration among voters and a weakening of public faith in Britain’s political system.
Starmer was always going to face an uphill struggle. His landslide victory in 2024 might have reflected support for Labour, but also the public’s exhaustion after 14 years of Conservative rule and a succession of Tory leaders who quickly fell out of favor. But few expected Starmer’s political standing to deteriorate quite so rapidly.
The defining political trend of the past two decades has been a conveyor belt of short-lived prime ministers
In their time, the Conservatives remained defiant until the end, keeping each of their 21st-century prime ministers in office for as long as possible without calling an election.
Labour, by contrast, had the opportunity to present itself as a more competent and stable alternative after spending much of the previous two decades in opposition. Instead, the government came under pressure almost immediately after taking office.
When Tony Blair came to power in 1997, he received what felt like a hero’s welcome. The Conservatives had been swept aside in a landslide after 18 years in office.
Before coming to power, Blair had repositioned Labour toward the political center through his rebranding of the party as “New Labour.” He went on to win three consecutive elections. As prime minister, he introduced major constitutional reforms, including devolution in Scotland and Wales, and the Human Rights Act. In his early years in office, Blair projected confidence and optimism. Downing Street became associated with a modern, outward-looking Britain, closely linked to business leaders, cultural figures and celebrities. His time in office was not straightforward. He introduced unpopular policies such as university tuition fees and was accused of overusing political “spin,” but somehow he managed to remain in power for more than 10 years.
Blair’s reputation suffered lasting damage when he backed US President George W. Bush and took Britain into the war in Iraq in search of weapons of mass destruction that were never found.
After just over a decade in office, Blair stepped down in 2007 as many had expected — but with significantly less mudslinging. Gordon Brown succeeded him and lasted for less than three years before the Conservatives returned to power in a coalition with the Liberal Democrats following the 2010 election.
In the years that followed, there was not simply a revolving door of leaders but a broader fragmentation of British politics.
The COVID-19 pandemic and what some say was its mismanagement, Brexit, economic stagnation, falling trust in institutions and declining loyalty to the main political parties have all contributed to a political environment in which long-term leadership appears increasingly difficult to sustain. At the time of writing, Starmer remains adamant he will stay in office and lead Labour into the next general election. However, the speculation surrounding his future reflects a wider sense of instability that has come to define modern British politics.
For decades, British politics has been dominated by Labour and the Conservatives, with the Liberal Democrats occupying a distant third place. Part of the reason for this was the first-past-the-post electoral system, which heavily favors the larger parties.
But last week’s local elections suggest voters are increasingly willing to back smaller parties, such as Reform UK and the Green Party. Indeed, if there were a general election today, the most likely outcome would either be an outright win for Reform or it holding the balance of power in a coalition.
The local elections suggest voters are increasingly willing to back smaller parties, such as Reform UK and the Green Party
Peter HarrisonOf course, there is no legal obligation for there to be a general election for another three years and a lot could change in that time. But the current standing of Reform and the Greens does point toward a more fragmented political future, in which smaller parties increasingly shape national debate or hold influence in a hung parliament — or even take power.
Why does any of this matter to a Middle Eastern audience? Because Britain’s domestic political instability is increasingly affecting its foreign policy positioning.
Starmer — rightly or wrongly — has aligned himself with several European leaders in resisting pressure for direct military alignment with US President Donald Trump over Iran. A future Labour leader could take a different position. Equally, a future government influenced or led by Reform could seek far closer alignment with Washington.
Despite the growing opposition, the Starmer-led government has seen some popular actions. The PM’s position on the Iran war has been welcomed by many of those concerned that the UK risks becoming involved in another prolonged Middle Eastern conflict that costs billions in public money and potentially thousands of lives.
His government has also overseen increases to the minimum wage, the introduction of employment rights reforms and a review of the pensions system. Despite this, he remains under pressure over the pace of economic growth and the wider sense that living standards have failed to improve quickly enough.
Under British law, a governing party is not required to call a general election when its leader changes. The principle is that voters elect MPs rather than a prime minister directly — it is a system that has long favored Labour and the Conservatives.
The irony now is that the same system could contribute to the decline of both parties, as voters increasingly look beyond the traditional political establishment.
Both Reform and the Greens have called for electoral reform. If this were ever to materialize, Britain’s traditional two-party model — and the centrist consensus that shapes most of the country’s politics — could begin to break down. Labour and the Conservatives may not disappear, but their era of unquestioned dominance is looking increasingly uncertain.
*Peter Harrison is a senior editor at Arab News in the Dubai office. He has covered the Middle East since 2009. X: @PhotoPJHarrison

Selected Face Book & X tweets for May 14/2026
Hussain Abdul-Hussain
"Secure your future in Europe" by investing 250k Euros in Greece, according to this ad in Beirut, Lebanon. The ad is even more ironic because a party of five Sunnis hung a banner underneath with the image of late Egyptian dictator Abdul-Nasser with the famous final statement of the 1967 Arab League Summit in Khartoum that said "no reconciliation, no negotiations, and no recognition" of Israel. Needless to say, if Lebanon's future will be more war with Israel, the Lebanese better secure their future in Europe or elsewhere.

Nadim Koteich
Saudi Arabia launched strikes against Iran.
But here’s a very interesting detail in the
@FT report Bernard Haykel, a professor of Near Eastern studies at Princeton University, who speaks to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, said it appeared “this was done in a very deliberate and co-ordinated way, with the Iranians being informed by the Saudis and with the aim of reaching a modus vivendi”.

Maya Khadra (PdV)
Lebanese Foreign Minister @YoussefRaggi« The Lebanese government has taken the decision to completely dissociate the Hezbollah file from the Iranian-American negotiations, and Lebanon refuses that any other party negotiate on its behalf. »

Hiba Nasr
Brad Cooper in Lebanon : Taking on the disarmament of Hezbollah is a tall order. They've been funded by Iran for decades with billions of dollars, and Hezbollah is inculcated into every fabric of the Lebanese society. I think right now, our continued commitment, with modest dollars to the Lebanese Armed Forces is helpful. They have, in particular, several units who can do more. We have to be, I believe our commitment could be to provide the funding necessary so that they can do more.

Benjamin Netanyahu - בנימין נתניהו
Today I instructed my legal advisers to consider the harshest legal action against The New York Times and Nicholas Kristof. They defamed the soldiers of Israel and perpetuated a blood libel about rape, trying to create a false symmetry between the genocidal terrorists of Hamas and Israel’s valiant soldiers. Under my leadership, Israel will not be silent.
We will fight these lies in the court of public opinion and in the court of law.
Truth will prevail.

Dr Walid Phares
The Peace sought between Israel an Lebanon will happen naturally the minute Hezbollah is disarmed. People to people encounters will create miracles the minute the border opens.

Roger Bejjani
The demands of Israel on the negotiations table are as follows:
1. Dismantling of HZB military’s apparatus.
2. Define the international border between both Israel and Lebanon.
3. Establish diplomatic and economic relations with Lebanon.
Those three points should be Lebanon’s demands. See less

Mario Nawfal
 Lebanese MP, billionaire, and top PM-candidate, Fouad Makhzoumi, is standing up to Hezbollah!
He says Hezbollah has threatened to kill him for what he's doing, but he's not stopping.
In an exclusive sit-down, he made the case for a historic reset: Lebanon negotiating with Israel, reclaiming Beirut block by block, and using Trump's presidency as the unique window to thread the complicated needle of striking peace and sovereignty.
"Since 1984, they attacked Lebanon. What did we get? Destruction after destruction."
He has a no-holds-barred message to the World: End the hostage taking of the Lebanese people
@fmakhzoumi
2:42 - Why Makhzoumi entered Lebanese politics after decades in business
6:54 - The deep state, the mafia, and the militia running Lebanon
11:25 - Iran hijacked Lebanon's resistance movement and turned it into a vehicle for corruption, smuggling, and drug trade
13:15 - Why Hezbollah kept its weapons when every other militia disarmed in 1992
19:41 - The 2006 war, the deal Hezbollah itself asked for, and the 20 years Lebanon wasted after it
27:33 - Why there is no distinction between military and political Hezbollah
33:22 - The U.S. is the only country that can force Israel to withdraw from South Lebanon
38:35 - Why Trump's offer to Lebanon is the only option on the table right now
42:42 - A 70-year-old law carries the death penalty for talking to an Israeli is still on the books in Lebanon
46:20 - Hezbollah's assassination threats and why he refuses to be silenced
52:37 - Gulf investment in Lebanon and why it has stalled
1:06:22 - The golden opportunity with Trump and why nothing will make him stop

Hussain Abdul-Hussain
Some Lebanese are sharing Cooper's statement that he said disarming Hezbollah is a tall order and that the militia is part of the Lebanese fabric to suggest that America doesn't believe disarming the Iranian proxy is possible. When you read the full quote, you'll understand that he said we should help Lebanon reform its army and give the reformed military more money to disarm Hezbollah.
CENCTOM Commander Cooper: I do appreciate that you've applauded the Lebanese Armed Forces for their efforts to disarm Hezbollah. While the current effort in conflict has demonstrated the extent to which Hezbollah is rearmed, a strong Lebanese Armed Forces remains the best pathway for Lebanon through which Hezbollah can be disarmed once and for all, and we know that needs to happen.
So what can the US do to support the Lebanese Armed Forces to ensure that they have the necessary capacity to disarm Hezbollah, while also holding them accountable?
Taking on the disarmament of Hezbollah is a tall order. They've been funded by Iran for decades with billions of dollars, and Hezbollah is inculcated into every fabric of the Lebanese society.
I think right now our continued commitment with modest dollars to the Lebanese Armed Forces is helpful. They have in particular several units who can do more. We have to be, I believe our commitment could be to provide the funding necessary so that they can do more.