English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For  May 18/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.may18.26.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
Very truly, I tell you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains just a single grain; but if it dies, it bears much fruit
Saint John 12/20-28/:"Among those who went up to worship at the festival were some Greeks. They came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida in Galilee, and said to him, ‘Sir, we wish to see Jesus.’Philip went and told Andrew; then Andrew and Philip went and told Jesus. Jesus answered them, ‘The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Very truly, I tell you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains just a single grain; but if it dies, it bears much fruit. Those who love their life lose it, and those who hate their life in this world will keep it for eternal life.Whoever serves me must follow me, and where I am, there will my servant be also. Whoever serves me, the Father will honour. ‘Now my soul is troubled. And what should I say "Father, save me from this hour"? No, it is for this reason that I have come to this hour. Father, glorify your name.’ Then a voice came from heaven, ‘I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again.’

Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 17-18 May/2026
The May 17, 1983, agreement between Lebanon and Israel was a fair opportunity for peace that Lebanon lost/With the Agreement/Elias Bejjani/May 17/2026
Lebanon Health Ministry says death toll from Israeli attacks since March 2 rises to 2,988
Doubts over ceasefire prospects: Netanyahu orders intensified operations in Lebanon
Israeli army issues evacuation warning for five Lebanese villages
Israeli Strikes Hit Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley and South Lebanon
Efforts continue for full ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel
Hezbollah says it struck military target in northern Israel
Israel says soldier killed in south Lebanon fighting
Lebanon Seeks Real Ceasefire from Early Monday
Israel Strikes Lebanon as Hezbollah Calls Talks 'Dead End'
Beirut Port conducts operational test of emergency sirens
Lebanon's ongoing financial challenges: BDL invests part of foreign reserves in US treasury bonds
Around 120,000 Syrian refugees return home from Lebanon
On How Lebanon’s Cause is Bigger than Negotiations/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/May 17/2026
Lebanese-Israeli Negotiations: Between Hope and Reality/Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/May 17/2026

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 17-18 May/2026
Trump, Netanyahu discuss Iran in phone call: Report
'Calm Before the Storm': Trump warns Iran in AI-generated picture
Trump Warns 'Won't be Anything Left' of Iran Unless it Agrees to Deal
Trump to meet US security advisers Tuesday: Axios
US Presents Five-point List that Iran Describes as 'No Tangible Concessions'
Pakistani minister arrives in Tehran to 'facilitate' US-Iran peace talks
Iran state TV says European countries in talks with Tehran for Hormuz transit
Iran Chief Negotiator Ghalibaf Appointed to Oversee Ties with China
UAE: Fire at Power Generator Near Barakah Power Plant After Drone Attack
UAE: Investigations underway to determine source of drone attack near nuclear plant
Saudi Arabia condemns drone strike near UAE nuclear plant
UN watchdog expresses ‘grave concern’ over drone strike near UAE nuclear plant
Saudi Foreign Minister Holds Talks with US Special Envoy for Syria
‘No tangible concessions’ in US response to Iran proposal: Iranian media
Saudi foreign minister meets US envoy in Riyadh to discuss support for Syria
Full Story of Al-Saadi’s Arrest; an Iraqi who Coordinated Attacks Across 3 Continents
Israel to establish defense offices in former UNRWA East Jerusalem compound
ICC denies it issued new warrants against Israeli officials, calls report inaccurate
Palestinian President's Son Elected to Top Fatah Leadership Body
Israeli Strikes Kill Five People in Gaza
Iraq’s Coordination Framework on Verge of Collapse after Zaidi’s Govt Approved by Parliament
WHO: Ebola Outbreak in Congo and Uganda Declared Public Health Emergency
China to buy at least $17 billion in US agricultural products annually: White House
US assesses drone threat from Cuba: Report

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 17-18 May/2026
Denouncing Israel?/Nils A. Haug/Gatestone Institute./May 17, 2026
German Mediation and Ending the Russian-Ukrainian War/Emile Ameen/Asharq Al Awsat/May 17/2026
The Nakba Anniversary/Samir Atallah/Asharq Al Awsat/May 17/2026
Trump-Xi summit: China gives neither green light nor red card on Iran/Raghida Dergham/Al Arabiya English/17 May ,2026
Frankly Speaking: New US-Iran nuclear agreement is the only way, says former Israeli PM Ehud Olmert/Arab News/May 17, 2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets for May 17/2026

Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 17-18 May/2026
The May 17, 1983, agreement between Lebanon and Israel was a fair opportunity for peace that Lebanon lost/With the Agreement
Elias Bejjani/May 17/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/05/118293/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHNz-oADuiw&t=1s
Today, we recall the May 17 Agreement, signed between the Lebanese Republic and the State of Israel on May 17, 1983, after months of difficult negotiations in Naqoura under American sponsorship. The Lebanese negotiating delegation, with remarkable national skill and professionalism, succeeded in asserting all elements of Lebanese sovereignty and rights, and in securing a full, peaceful, and unconditional Israeli withdrawal from all occupied Lebanese territories.
The agreement was approved by Parliament by a majority (65 votes) on June 14, 1983, and was cancelled on March 5, 1984, after President Amin Gemayel refused to sign it out of fear of Assad and as a result of his lack of vision for the future. His action was the greatest sin committed against Lebanon.
At the time, the agreement received widespread support from the Presidency, the Parliament, and the Cabinet, and was welcomed by the majority of the Lebanese people. It was also endorsed by most Arab countries and all nations of the free world, who saw it as a bold and realistic step on the path to peace. In truth, it represented a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to lift Lebanon out of the cycle of war, occupation, and proxy conflicts, and to put it on the track of peace and stability—just as Egypt had done in 1979, and Jordan would later do in 1994.
However, the Syrian Baathist regime, which had effectively occupied Lebanon since 1976, rushed to sabotage the agreement by force through its local proxies—mercenaries, fake “resistance” profiteers, extremist Islamists, and leftist chameleons who wore a thousand disguises but had no loyalty to Lebanon’s identity, history, or sovereignty. These groups served hostile regional agendas and were merely tools of Syrian influence. The Syrian regime and its agents resorted to assassinations, terrorism, and defamation campaigns to silence those who supported the agreement and to block its implementation.
The May 17 Agreement was a golden key to restoring sovereignty and ending the crime of “Lebanon the battlefield.” It could have brought an end to the destructive myths of “resistance” and “defiance,” which produced nothing but ruin, collapse, poverty, isolation, and chaos for Lebanon. Instead of embracing the opportunity, Lebanon surrendered to the will of the Syrian regime and its apparatuses, forfeiting a rare and invaluable chance for peace, development, and prosperity.
Ironically, President Amine Gemayel—under pressure from his father, Sheikh Pierre Gemayel, certain Kataeb leaders, and Arab states that feared early normalization with Israel—ultimately decided to suspend, and later cancel, the agreement. This was despite the fact that international powers did not pressure him to reverse course, as he himself confirmed in his memoirs. Sheikh Pierre Gemayel was known to repeat his famous phrase: “We don’t want to close 21 doors (Arab countries) just to open one (Israel),” reflecting the fear of Arab isolation—a fear that heavily influenced the cancellation decision.
But today, after Israel has dismantled Iran’s military arm in Lebanon—namely the terrorist group Hezbollah—eliminated its commanders, and forced it to sign a humiliating ceasefire… After the fall of the Assad regime… After the empty slogans of “resistance and defiance” were exposed as tools of destruction, takfir, and displacement… After Iran’s agents were expelled from several Arab countries… The time is ripe for Lebanon to reassess its strategic choices with a realistic and patriotic mindset.
Lebanon must sign a full peace agreement with the State of Israel—an agreement that ends the chronic state of war and grants the Lebanese people their rightful chance to live in peace and dignity, just as Egypt, Jordan, and most Arab nations have already done.
Enough hypocrisy. Enough trading in innocent blood. Enough gambling with Lebanon’s future in the name of a false and imaginary resistance that has brought nothing but devastation. Enough hollow slogans that have proven to be mere delusions, hallucinations, and fantasies.
The time has come for Lebanon to break free from the rule of the mini-state, from Iranian occupation, and to build a future that reflects the hopes and aspirations of its people.

Lebanon Health Ministry says death toll from Israeli attacks since March 2 rises to 2,988
LBCI/17 May 2026
Lebanon's Public Health Emergency Operations Center announced that the cumulative toll from the Israeli offensive on Lebanon since March 2 has risen to 2,988 people killed and 9,210 wounded.

Doubts over ceasefire prospects: Netanyahu orders intensified operations in Lebanon
LBCI/17 May 2026
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu discussed the situation in Lebanon during his government's weekly meeting, despite reports about the possibility of a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire taking effect at midnight between Sunday and Monday. Netanyahu reiterated that explosive drones used by Hezbollah pose a major challenge to Israel and instructed the Israeli military to intensify its operations on Lebanese territory. His remarks came as Israeli military and security officials expressed skepticism over the feasibility of a full ceasefire with Lebanon, arguing that the army has yet to achieve its objective of dismantling Hezbollah's military capabilities. Some military officials also said Hezbollah has regained the initiative in South Lebanon, complicating progress in ongoing negotiations. Meanwhile, with tensions continuing to rise along Israel’s northern front, the Israeli army raised its level of alert, particularly within the air force, amid preparations for a possible operation against Iran coordinated with the United States. As part of those preparations, Israeli Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir remained in close coordination with his American counterpart Brad Cooper. According to Israeli reports, the two officials held several conversations over the past 48 hours and agreed on mechanisms to ensure Israel would receive advance notice of any potential strike to prepare warnings for civilians in the event of an Iranian response.

Israeli army issues evacuation warning for five Lebanese villages
LBCI/17 May 2026
Israeli army spokesperson Avichay Adraee issued an urgent evacuation warning to residents in several towns and villages, including Sohmor in western Bekaa, Roumine, Al-Qusaibah, Kfar Houneh, and Bnaafoul. In the post, Adraee claimed that Hezbollah had violated the ceasefire agreement and said the Israeli army would act “forcefully” against the group, adding that the army ‘’did not intend to harm civilians.’’He called on residents to immediately evacuate their homes and move at least 1,000 meters away from the towns and villages into open areas “for their safety.” Adraee also warned that anyone located near Hezbollah members, facilities, or military equipment would be putting their life at risk.

Israeli Strikes Hit Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley and South Lebanon
This is Beirut/17 May 2026
Two Israeli strikes hit the town of Sohmor in the western Bekaa Valley, the state-run National News Agency (NNA) said, adding that additional raids struck multiple areas across southern Lebanon, including Majdal Selm, Braashit in Bint Jbeil district, Zibqin near Tyre, and villages between Kafra and Deir Aames. Strikes were also reported in Sadiqine and Jibaal al-Botm, while a raid near Hadasa in Bint Jbeil killed one person after a car was hit. Other strikes and drone activity were reported across the Tyre and Zahrani regions. The latest strikes came after envoys from Israel and Lebanon concluded the third round of U.S.-mediated talks in Washington, agreeing to extend the April 17 ceasefire by 45 days and to continue negotiations through two new tracks: political talks at the State Department on June 2–3 and a security track at the Pentagon on May 29. The State Department described the two-day meetings on May 14-15 as “highly productive,” saying they focused on advancing security and political understandings. It said the extension would allow time for further progress, adding that the goal is a framework for lasting peace, sovereignty, and border security. The Lebanese delegation said the talks were positive and reiterated priorities including restoring full state authority across all Lebanese territory and ensuring the safe return of displaced residents alongside reconstruction support. Israeli Ambassador to Washington Yechiel Leiter called the talks “frank and constructive,” expressing optimism about continued progress and the chances of a successful outcome. Hezbollah condemned the negotiations in a brief statement, rejecting any move toward a “comprehensive peace agreement” with Israel and warning against what it called a U.S.-driven “concessionary track.” The group also rejected linking its weapons to the talks, insisting they remain an internal Lebanese issue, and said military operations would continue as long as Israeli forces remain active. The ceasefire continues to face strain amid ongoing cross-border attacks and competing diplomatic and military tracks.

Efforts continue for full ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel
Naharnet/17 May 2026
Lebanon has received a proposal through its embassy in Washington concerning efforts to achieve a complete and comprehensive ceasefire within 24 to 48 hours, starting at midnight between Saturday and Sunday, diplomatic sources said. The diplomatic sources told MTV that contacts intensified on Saturday between Lebanon and the United States, and subsequently Israel, as well as between the Lebanese government and Hezbollah, specifically through Speaker Nabih Berri. Berri informed President Joseph Aoun on Saturday evening that the ceasefire idea was serious, reiterating his statement: "Bring a complete ceasefire, and I'll take care of the rest," while expressing considerable caution given Israel's behavior in Gaza and southern Lebanon and its lack of commitment, according to the sources. "This truce may not be declared, but rather implemented gradually, leading to a ceasefire," the sources added, noting that Hezbollah would be asked to grant Israel around two days to "reduce its strikes, potentially leading to a complete cessation.""It is not unlikely that Hezbollah will adopt a principle of reciprocity after this brief period. Those involved hope that these efforts, or this pilot period, will succeed in establishing a framework for the 45-day period," the sources said. "It is unclear whether this step resulted from Lebanese-Israeli discussions or from American-Saudi and perhaps Iranian pressure," the sources added.

Hezbollah says it struck military target in northern Israel
Agence France Presse/17 May 2026
Hezbollah said Saturday it struck a military target in northern Israel, as the fragile ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel has not stopped fighting in the war that began on March 2.
In a statement, the Iran-backed militant group said its fighters targeted "the Ya'ara barracks... with a swarm of attack drones", after announcing multiple operations against Israeli forces in southern Lebanon, where they are occupying territory near the border between the two countries.

Israel says soldier killed in south Lebanon fighting
Agence France Presse/17 May 2026
Israel's military said Saturday that one of its soldiers died in combat in southern Lebanon, bringing its losses to 21 personnel since the war with Hezbollah began in early March. Captain Maoz Israel Recanati, 24, "fell during combat in southern Lebanon," the military said, without providing additional information. Since the war began, 20 Israeli soldiers and one civilian contractor have been killed.

Lebanon Seeks Real Ceasefire from Early Monday
Beirut: Thaer Abbas/Asharq Al Awsat/May 17/2026
Lebanon will test before dawn on Monday whether Israel will honor a ceasefire and halt attacks on civilians and civilian facilities, and whether Hezbollah will match that commitment, in a push to turn a fragile pause into real calm on the ground.The expected de-escalation would pave the way for the security track to begin smoothly at the end of this month and for the political track to resume early next month. But Hezbollah said direct negotiations with Israel would “strengthen Israeli gains at Lebanon’s expense,” warning the Lebanese authorities “not to go too far in deviant choices with the enemy” and blaming the talks for continued Israeli pressure and attacks. A Lebanese official source told Asharq Al-Awsat that contacts Lebanon has made after the first round of direct negotiations with Israel in Washington have focused on securing those principles before moving to the next steps in the security and political tracks. The source said Lebanon had stressed in talks with the US sponsor of the negotiations that the ceasefire must hold and that attacks on infrastructure and civilian facilities must stop. The source said the initial Israeli response showed readiness to comply if the other side, Hezbollah, did the same.
“We have informed the concerned parties inside Lebanon, the party, of these details,” the source said. “The Lebanese presidency was informed by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri that the party is ready to halt fire if Israel commits to doing so. Things are now being put to the test, especially since the Israeli side’s pledges cannot be trusted, as experience has shown so far,” the source added. The source said Berri had informed the presidency that Hezbollah was ready to issue a public pledge before the extended ceasefire deadline expires at midnight Sunday into Monday.
Hezbollah warned against “attempts to reproduce something more dangerous than the May 17 Agreement” by pushing for a “full and comprehensive peace agreement” between Lebanon and Israel. It said any such path would be a “deviation” from national principles and a breach of the Lebanese constitution, Lebanon’s history and the sacrifices of its people. The party issued its statement on the 43rd anniversary of the May 17, 1983 agreement, reaffirming its commitment to “resistance” and rejecting any peace agreement with Israel. Hezbollah said the Lebanese authorities were “dealing with the enemy as if it were a peaceful, recognized entity,” despite the continued “Israeli occupation and attacks.” It warned that such a course could threaten domestic stability and rejected “any foreign dictates or pressure, whether American or otherwise,” which it said aimed to impose political choices on Lebanon.
It said direct negotiations with Israel serve to “strengthen Israeli gains at Lebanon’s expense,” urged the Lebanese authorities “not to go too far in deviant choices with the enemy,” and blamed the negotiation track for continued Israeli pressure and attacks.
As Israeli escalation continued in the south, Lebanon’s internal political debate over Hezbollah’s weapons and its role in the next phase intensified. The US-sponsored negotiation track in Washington has again placed the issue of restricting arms to the Lebanese state at the top of the political and security agenda. MP Fouad Makhzoumi hardened his position on the weapons issue, saying “the era of weapons outside the state is over” and that any coming settlement must reinforce the authority of the Lebanese state and its sole right to decide on war and peace.
In a post on X, Makhzoumi said extending the ceasefire and launching the political and security tracks under US sponsorship offer a chance to rebuild the state and strengthen the Lebanese army as the only authority responsible for protecting the borders, the land and the people. He said all weapons outside Lebanese legitimacy must end. MP Ali Khreis, a member of the Development and Liberation bloc, condemned the Israeli raids on Tyre during a tour of the city, saying “the resistance cannot kneel or bow to pressure.” “What was said yesterday about extending the ceasefire is a false extension, as the Israeli enemy bombed residential buildings, neighborhoods and infrastructure and destroyed them completely. This shows the enemy’s premeditated intentions toward our people in Tyre and the south,” he said.
Other political positions, meanwhile, stressed the need to restore the Lebanese state’s authority and its sole power over decisions of war and peace. MP Ghayath Yazbeck, a member of the Lebanese Forces bloc, urged the Lebanese state to “seize the opportunity on the table to save the country from the repercussions of Hezbollah’s policies.”He said the proposed political and security tracks could lead to long-term understandings, provided Lebanon fulfills its pledges to place weapons exclusively under state control. Yazbeck said Lebanon’s decisions should be driven by “the interests of the Lebanese people, not Iran’s calculations or Hezbollah’s choices.” He said Hezbollah is demanding a ceasefire while rejecting the steps that could make it hold.

Israel Strikes Lebanon as Hezbollah Calls Talks 'Dead End'
Asharq Al Awsat/May 17/2026
Israel struck eastern and southern Lebanon on Sunday, state media reported, despite a fragile ceasefire as Hezbollah called US-brokered talks between the two countries a "dead end".Two Israeli strikes hit the town of Sohmor in eastern Lebanon's Bekaa valley, the state-run National News Agency (NNA) said, adding that others took place across southern Lebanon.The Israeli army later issued an evacuation warning to four villages near the southern coastal city of Sidon, dozens of kilometres from the border area, which were also subject to an evacuation warning on Saturday, AFP reported.
Israeli airstrikes hit three of the four villages following the warning, the NNA said. Despite the ceasefire, Israel continues to strike widely in southern Lebanon and issues frequent evacuation warnings to towns and villages across the south. Speaking at the start of a cabinet meeting on Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel was "holding territory, clearing territory, protecting Israel's communities, but also fighting an enemy that is trying to outsmart us"."We are facing the challenge of neutralizing FPV (First-Person view) drones," he said, as Hezbollah has increasingly made use of the drones to strike Israeli forces. The latest exchanges of fire came after envoys from Israel and Lebanon held a third round of negotiations in Washington and agreed to extend the ceasefire, talks that Iran-backed Hezbollah has repeatedly denounced. "The direct negotiations that the authorities in Lebanon have conducted with the Israeli enemy have... led them down a dead-end path that will result in nothing but one concession after another," Hezbollah lawmaker Hussein Hajj Hassan said on Sunday. "Neither they nor anyone else will be able to carry out what the enemy wants, especially when it comes to the issue of disarming the resistance," he said, adding that authorities were creating "very big predicaments" for the country. In a statement on Saturday, the group called the proposed establishment of a US-facilitated security track a fresh addition "to the series of free concessions" the Lebanese government "offers the enemy". On Saturday the group also said it had struck a military target in northern Israel, having earlier announced several operations against Israeli forces in southern Lebanon. Israel sent ground forces into southern Lebanon during the latest war and they continue to occupy territory near the border between the two countries.Israeli attacks since the start of the war have killed more than 2,900 people in Lebanon, including more than 400 since the truce began on April 17, according to Lebanese authorities

Beirut Port conducts operational test of emergency sirens
LBCI/17 May 2026
Emergency sirens were activated at the Port of Beirut at 5 p.m. on Sunday as part of an operational test, with the sound heard across surrounding areas. The move falls within the framework of technical testing and preparedness measures aimed at verifying the effectiveness and operational readiness of the warning system.

Lebanon's ongoing financial challenges: BDL invests part of foreign reserves in US treasury bonds
LBCI/17 May 2026
Banque du Liban (BDL) has decided to invest $5 billion from its foreign currency reserves in U.S. government treasury bonds, in a move expected to generate annual returns of around $175 million. The step reflects a common strategy used by central banks worldwide to avoid leaving cash reserves idle, particularly at a time when inflation and rising global prices continue to erode the real value of liquid assets. Instead of keeping the funds entirely in cash, BDL opted to place part of its reserves in highly secure and easily tradable investments such as U.S. sovereign debt instruments. Under the plan, BDL will receive annual interest payments estimated at roughly 3.5%, while maintaining the ability to recover the original amount once the bonds mature. Financial observers consider the move beneficial from an investment standpoint, especially as Lebanon's total foreign reserves are currently estimated at around $11.5 billion.
Still, analysts note that the returns generated by the investment remain modest compared with the scale of Lebanon's broader financial crisis. While the additional income may strengthen reserve management, it does not address the country's unresolved banking sector collapse or provide a clear solution for depositors still unable to recover their savings. For many Lebanese, the question remains unchanged: what will ultimately happen to people's deposits?

Around 120,000 Syrian refugees return home from Lebanon
Arab News/May 17, 2026
LONDON: Over 120,000 Syrian refugees in Lebanon returned to their hometowns in the Syrian Arab Republic during the first four months of 2026, according to official figures. The return came amid the fragile ceasefires between the US and Iran and between Hezbollah and Israel since early April. Currently, 490,424 Syrian refugees are registered with the UN Human Rights Council in Lebanon. The Lebanese government estimates that nearly 1.12 million people have fled the civil war in Syria, which lasted from 2011 to 2024. Mazen Alloush, head of public relations at Syria’s General Authority for Borders and Customs, said that around 1.26 million people have arrived from Lebanon since January, including the 120,000 Syrian refugees. In total, more than 3.4 million people crossed the Syrian border during the same period, according to the Syrian Arab News Agency. The Jousieh crossing is now a key transit point for Syrians returning from Lebanon, where many refugees are experiencing increasing economic pressure and stricter residency rules, the SANA added.

On How Lebanon’s Cause is Bigger than Negotiations
Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al Awsat/May 17/2026
There are some Lebanese voices, not necessarily coming from the same political camps, who warn Lebanese negotiators not to go as far as they can and stress their unequivocal preference for stopping at the bare minimum.
These arguments could be made on solid grounds. Nothing undermines them more, however, than their limited regard for the current balance of power between Lebanon and Israel, which occupies territory that is no longer limited and could increase. Realistically speaking, so long as the Lebanese state remains incapable of disarming “Hezbollah,” its weakness would only further weaken Lebanon’s negotiating position, pushing the Israelis to pile on new conditions and aggravate their blackmail. After all, no party can compel the Israelis to change course other than their close ally, the United States.
Realism, here, does not require a complete submission to reality. It entails engaging with the possibilities it offers, because the alternative is willful irresponsibility. Prime Minister Nawaf Salam’s trajectory offers a lesson: he went from being a judge who had been prosecuting Israel to a prime minister who, alongside the president, is overseeing negotiations with it. The symbolism here is a stark testament to the shift of reality and the weight of the task at hand.
We would be allowing ourselves to be taken by our illusions when we imagine that the Jewish state could possibly meet Lebanon’s demands like it were the defeated party! Accordingly, returning to the Armistice Agreement, for example, would be wholly unacceptable to the Israelis for reasons they consider justified. As more than one observer has pointed out, the armistice had been in place when the Palestinian resistance emerged and its military presence expanded. Later on, and while armistice was still in place, “Hezbollah” existed and became what it has now become.
As for putting our hopes behind an “internal dialogue” with the party regarding its disarmament, modest familiarity with the many previous attempts to do so is enough to conclude that they were efforts to plough the sea. If we want such a “dialogue” to accompany negotiations, we would be placing a ball of fire in our own net.
More importantly, these proposals revive a tradition we have long seen in our ideological parties: presenting a conception supposedly representing “the right thing to do” even when it goes against the composition and history of the society concerned.
A large segment of the Lebanese population, not a small handful of collaborators nor a marginal force in the country’s establishment and formation, wants not only to leave the state of war behind but also to put the culture of war behind.
This culture deprived this segment of the population of its right to freely decide a matter related to its life and death. Since the 1950s, and especially the 1960s, it has been dragged into a state of war against its will, whose opposition was branded treason on the grounds, raised either sincerely or opportunistically, that rejecting conflict with Israel was treachery. The moment “the cause” is mentioned, bearing arms becomes appealing to those who wish to do so for all manner of reasons, while those who hesitate are cast as a fifth column waiting for an opportunity to exploit. This notorious history of civil wars, Israeli invasions, Syrian tutelage, and Iranian domination stomped on the will of those who wished to live in their country as though it were truly their own.
While some among them have resorted, with varying degrees of frivolity, to gouache flattery of Israel, this behavior was a backlash that drew its force from the lethal blows they had previously endured. Accordingly, the current war has created the conditions for the eruption of disagreements over almost everything in this history of annexation and subjugation. The central axis of this disagreement is whether the path to an exit from this war must be a path of no return to war. Whatever facilitates this outcome is good; whatever impedes it is bad.
This radical rejection of war and desire to close all the roads leading to it, ought also to meet the aspirations and desires of Lebanon’s other communities as well, especially those most harmed by the war, provided they free themselves from “Hezbollah’s” capture of their minds. That is what makes the struggle against war a struggle in defense of reason, rationality, and liberation. As for the response that Israel will pursue its criminal agenda regardless of whether security is provided to it or not, and regardless of what we do or fail to do, it is contradicted by numerous facts showing that it is always possible to deprive Israeli crimes of their pretexts. Recently, in an investigative piece, our colleague the novelist Mohammad Abi Samra showed that the mixed villages of the Arqoub region avoided the miserable fate of other southern villages and towns. The same can be said of Christian villages that were spared because, like Arqoub, the party had been unable to dig tunnels beneath them or launch rockets from them. Accordingly, Lebanese diplomacy must consider the sensitivities of all the components of this fractured society. Above all, it must be stressed that treating the country’s unity as self-evident and imposing a single interpretation on this unity are no longer guaranteed. This is what no one who wants this country to remain united should ignore. While the costs and difficulties of partition are undoubtedly immense, the place we have reached with this war suggests that the costs and difficulties of maintaining unity are, at an accelerating pace, becoming even greater.

Lebanese-Israeli Negotiations: Between Hope and Reality
Eyad Abu Shakra/Asharq Al Awsat/May 17/2026
Once again, Itamar Ben-Gvir staged his extremism at the Al-Aqsa compound, surrounded by a crowd of his fascist supporters, repeating his claim of Israel’s “exclusive ownership” over the site. At the very same moment, while some sought to convince the Lebanese public that their leadership was engaged in “serious negotiations” with Israel aimed at defusing the crisis, Israel’s war machine continued its geopolitical assault, replicating in southern Lebanon the same lethal displacement strategy it has pursued in Gaza. As I fear, this strategy may soon extend to other parts of the Levant, beginning with Lebanon and the occupied West Bank, and potentially reaching the openly declared ambitions embedded in some extremist Israeli interpretations of the “Greater Israel” map stretching from the Euphrates to the Nile.
With the gap now narrowing between the positions of the US administration and those of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, particularly regarding Lebanon and the future of the eastern Mediterranean, it is difficult for any sober observer to take comfort in the reassurances offered by Lebanese officials about the current negotiating track and its eventual outcome.Several factors, I would argue, have made the idea of negotiations with Israel easier to accept, at least for now. First, the massive imbalance of power between Lebanon and Israel, and Israel’s virtually unlimited capacity to devastate Lebanon and tear the country apart.Second, the existence of Sunni Muslim political cover for direct negotiations with Israel, unlike the May 1983 agreement that followed the 1982 invasion, which lacked such backing despite a few exceptions among traditional political leaders. The conduct of the Syrian regime, followed by Hezbollah’s dominance and the circumstances surrounding Rafik Hariri’s assassination, played a decisive role in pushing large segments of Lebanon’s Sunni community, along with a significant number of Druze, to reject what they came to view as Iranian hegemony and to demand the restoration of the Lebanese state, its army and its security institutions. Third, the economic and financial collapse, which accelerated emigration, weakened institutions and productive sectors, and eroded the Lebanese people’s capacity to endure. Fourth, an international order, financially, technologically and geopolitically, that has thus far strengthened forces aligned with the West, foremost among them Israel, at the expense of their adversaries. Taken together, these factors have fueled optimism about the supposed benefits of direct negotiations with the most extremist government in Israel’s history under the sponsorship of one of the most right-wing US administrations. The ready-made response to critics has been: “What alternative do you propose?” That argument is not without merit. Yet, at the very least, the political history of Israel’s chief negotiator, Yechiel Leiter, Israel’s ambassador to Washington, offers little reason for optimism about any genuine commitment to peace or coexistence. Netanyahu’s envoy to Washington is, in many ways, the mirror image of his biblical-ideologue counterpart Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel. For those unfamiliar with him, Leiter is a US-born rabbi from Pennsylvania, a religious historian, a right-wing biblical commentator, and a settlement activist associated with the late extremist rabbi Meir Kahane, founder of the anti-peace Kach movement. He lived in the Kiryat Arba settlement near Hebron before moving to Alon Shvut in the southern West Bank.
Politically, he rose through several positions during Likud governments and at one stage served as an adviser to Ariel Sharon, the general who led Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon. He later became part of Netanyahu’s inner circle. This record is deeply revealing, especially when viewed through two fundamental realities: first, the special strategic relationship between Washington and Tel Aviv; and second, the close alignment between the Trump administration and its advisers, including Huckabee, on one side, and Netanyahu’s government and its network of American allies on the other. These realities suggest that neither the Israeli negotiator nor the American sponsor truly believes in a lasting peace outside the framework of Israel’s expansionist vision, one perpetually justified, as always, under the banner of “self-defense.”Of course, Israel will continue to argue that as long as non-state actors backed by foreign powers, particularly Iran, retain weapons, it cannot feel secure about the safety of its settlers, especially in border settlements. This argument resonates across much of the Western political establishment. Combined with Tehran’s regional conduct over recent decades and its consequences across the Middle East, that narrative greatly facilitated the conditions for the US-Israeli confrontation with Iran. And perhaps it has also given new momentum to plans aimed at fragmenting and partitioning the region itself!

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 17-18 May/2026
Trump, Netanyahu discuss Iran in phone call: Report
Al Arabiya English/17 May ,2026
US President Donald Trump spoke by phone with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and discussed Iran, Axios reported on Sunday, citing an Israeli official. Trump and Netanyahu discussed the possibility of renewed military action against Iran during the call, Israeli public broadcaster Kan reported. Earlier on Sunday, Netanyahu said he was scheduled to speak with Trump later in the day. He added that he expected to hear about Trump’s recent trip to China, while indicating the two leaders would also discuss Iran.

'Calm Before the Storm': Trump warns Iran in AI-generated picture
Naharnet/17 May ,2026
U.S. President Donald Trump has threatened Iran over its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, posting an AI-generated picture on his Truth Social platform with Iranian-flagged naval vessels warning, "It Was The Calm Before the Storm." Trump also warned in comments that Iran should make a deal with the U.S., saying, "if they don't, they're going to have a bad time. A very bad time."

Trump Warns 'Won't be Anything Left' of Iran Unless it Agrees to Deal
/Asharq Al awsat/17 May 2026
President Donald Trump on Sunday warned Iran "there won't be anything left of them," if Teheran does not quickly agree to a peace deal with the United States. "For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won't be anything left of them," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.
"TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!"
Trump is expected to hold a ‌Situation ‌Room ​meeting ‌on ⁠Tuesday ​with his top ⁠national security advisers to ⁠discuss ‌the options ‌for military ​action ‌regarding ‌Iran, Axios reported on ‌Sunday, citing two US officials. Iranian media that the US had failed to make any concrete concessions in its latest response to Iran's proposed agenda for negotiations to end the war.

Trump to meet US security advisers Tuesday: Axios
LBCI/17 May ,2026
United States President Donald Trump is expected to hold a Situation Room meeting on ⁠Tuesday with his top national security advisers to discuss the options for military action ⁠regarding Iran, Axios reported on Sunday, citing ⁠two U.S. officials.Reuters

US Presents Five-point List that Iran Describes as 'No Tangible Concessions'
Asharq Al Awsat/17 May 2026
Iranian media said Sunday that the United States had failed to make any concrete concessions in its latest response to Iran's proposed agenda for negotiations to end the war. The Fars news agency said Washington had presented a five-point list which included a demand for Iran to keep only one nuclear site in operation and transfer its stockpile of highly enriched uranium to the United States. The US also refused to release "even 25 percent" of Iran's frozen assets abroad or pay any reparations for the damage inflicted on Iran during the war which broke out on February 28, according to Fars. The report added that the US had conditioned the cessation of hostilities on all fronts on the start of negotiations. The Mehr news agency, meanwhile, said: "The United States, offering no tangible concessions, wants to obtain concessions that it failed to obtain during the war, which will lead to an impasse in the negotiations."In its proposal, Iran had called for an end of the war on all fronts including Israel's campaign in Lebanon, as well as a halt to the US naval blockade on Iranian ports in place since April 13.It also called for lifting all of the US sanctions and the release of Iranian assets frozen abroad under longstanding US sanctions, according to the Iranian foreign ministry in a press conference last week. Fars said the Iranian proposal had emphasized that Tehran would continue to manage the strategic Strait of Hormuz, a vital energy conduit which it has largely kept closed since the start of the war. On Sunday, Iranian armed forces spokesman Abolfazl Shekarchi warned US President Donald Trump against restarting attacks on Iran. "The desperate American president should know that if his threats are carried out and Islamic Iran is attacked again, his country's resources and military will be confronted with unprecedented, offensive, surprising and tumultuous scenarios," he said, according to state television. Similarly, deputy speaker of parliament Hamidreza Hajibabaei warned against attacking Iranian oil infrastructure. "If Iranian oil is harmed, Iran will take measures that will prevent the United States and the world from accessing oil from the region for an extended period," he said, according to the news agency ISNA.

Pakistani minister arrives in Tehran to 'facilitate' US-Iran peace talks
Agence France Presse/17 May ,2026
Pakistan's interior minister arrived in Tehran on Saturday "to facilitate" the peace talks between Iran and the United States that have stalled despite a fragile ceasefire, Iranian media reported. "Mohsin Naqvi arrived today in the Islamic Republic of Iran on an official two-day visit as part of Pakistan's ongoing efforts to facilitate talks and promote regional peace," the Tasnim news agency reported. Iranian Interior Minister Eskandar Momeni received Naqvi, whose visit to Tehran comes days after that of Pakistan's influential army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir.
Islamabad has been actively mediating in the peace talks between Iran and the U.S. and last month hosted a high stakes meeting between delegations from both sides. A ceasefire that began on April 8 has largely halted the fighting that erupted when U.S. and Israeli forces attacked Iran on February 28. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Friday that Tehran had received messages from Washington indicating that President Donald Trump's administration was willing to continue negotiations.Iran's chief negotiator and speaker of parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said on Tuesday that Washington should accept Tehran's proposal for peace or face "failure" after Trump rejected an Iranian counteroffer and warned the ceasefire was on "life support". "There is no alternative but to accept the rights of the Iranian people as laid out in the 14-point proposal. Any other approach will be completely inconclusive; nothing but one failure after another," Ghalibaf said, in a social media post.

Iran state TV says European countries in talks with Tehran for Hormuz transit
Agence France Presse/17 May ,2026
Iranian state television said on Saturday that European countries were in talks with Tehran over transit for ships through the Strait of Hormuz. "Following the passage of ships from East Asian countries, notably China, Japan and Pakistan, we received information today indicating that Europeans have also begun negotiations with the Revolutionary Guards navy" to get permission to pass, state television reported, without specifying which countries. Iran has largely blocked shipping through the vital strait since the outbreak of war with the United States and Israel on February 28. A fragile ceasefire has been in place since April 8. Its grip over the waterway has rattled global markets and given Tehran significant leverage, while the United States has imposed its own naval blockade on Iranian ports. In peacetime, the route accounts for roughly a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments, along with other key commodities. Iran has in recent days allowed passage for dozens of ships including from China "after an agreement on Iran's strait management protocols," the Guards, the ideological arm of Iran's military, said in a statement. Since the war broke out, Iran has repeatedly said that maritime traffic through the strait would "not return to its pre-war status" and last month said it has received the first revenue from tolls it imposed on the waterway. On Saturday, Ebrahim Azizi, head of the Iranian parliament's national security commission, said Iran "has prepared a professional mechanism to manage traffic" through the strait, adding that it will be "unveiled soon". "In this process, only commercial vessels and parties cooperating with Iran will benefit from it," he noted, adding that "the necessary fees will be collected for specialized services". "This route will remain closed to the operators of the so-called 'freedom project'," he said, referring to a temporary U.S. military operation to guide stranded commercial ships through the strait.

Iran Chief Negotiator Ghalibaf Appointed to Oversee Ties with China
Asharq Al Awsat/17 May 2026
Iran's Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who recently emerged as a chief negotiator in talks with the United States, has been appointed to oversee relations with China, Iranian media reported on Sunday. "Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has recently been appointed as a special representative of the Islamic republic of Iran for China affairs," Tasnim news agency reported, citing "informed sources,” with other media carrying similar reports. It was not immediately clear who appointed Ghalibaf to the role, but Tasnim said he would "coordinate various sectors of relations between Iran and China.” Pakistan's Interior Minister arrived in Tehran on Saturday "to facilitate" the peace talks between Iran and the US that have stalled despite a fragile ceasefire, Iranian media reported. Islamabad has been actively mediating in the peace talks and last month hosted a high stakes meeting between delegations from both sides. A ceasefire that began on April 8 has largely halted the fighting that erupted when US and Israeli forces attacked Iran on February 28. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Friday that Tehran had received messages from Washington indicating that President Donald Trump's administration was willing to continue negotiations.

UAE: Fire at Power Generator Near Barakah Power Plant After Drone Attack
Asharq Al Awsat/17 May 2026
The UAE announced that authorities had responded to a fire that broke out in an electrical generator outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant in the Al Dhafra region of Abu Dhabi following a drone strike, confirming that no injuries were reported and that there was no impact on radiological safety levels.Authorities said all necessary precautionary measures were taken immediately after the incident, adding that specialized emergency response teams succeeded in containing and extinguishing the fire while continuing to monitor developments and implement measures to ensure the safety of the site and surrounding areas. The Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation (FANR) said the fire had not affected the safety of the plant or the readiness of its core systems, adding that all units at the facility were operating normally and in line with the highest approved standards of safety and security. The UAE Ministry of Defense said Sunday that air defense systems had dealt with three drones that entered the country’s airspace from the western border area, noting that two of them were successfully intercepted while the third struck an electrical generator outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant in Al Dhafra. In a statement, the ministry said investigations were ongoing to determine the source of the attacks, adding that further details would be announced once inquiries were completed. The ministry stressed that the armed forces remained fully prepared to confront any potential threats and would respond firmly to anything that could undermine the country’s security and stability, ensuring the protection of national sovereignty and the UAE’s strategic interests.

UAE: Investigations underway to determine source of drone attack near nuclear plant
Al Arabiya English/17 May ,2026
The UAE’s defense ministry said on Sunday that investigations were underway to determine the source of a drone attack that hit a generator outside the Barakah nuclear power plant in Abu Dhabi. The defense ministry said it dealt “successfully” with two drones, while a third one hit a generator near the plant. It said the drones were launched from the “western border,” without providing further details.The UAE’s foreign ministry condemned the drone attack, calling it a “dangerous escalation.”“The UAE emphasized that it will not tolerate any threat to its security and sovereignty under any circumstances,” a ministry statement said. UAE presidential advisor Anwar Gargash wrote on X later on Sunday that the “terrorist” targeting of the Barakah nuclear power plant – whether carried out directly by Iran or “through one of its proxies” – represented “a dark development that violates all international laws and norms, reflecting criminal disregard for the lives of civilians in the UAE and its surroundings.”“No one will twist the UAE’s arm, nor succeed in undermining its vision, success, and inspiring message to the peoples of the region centered on security, stability, development, and prosperity,” he added. Abu Dhabi authorities had earlier said that a fire broke out in an electrical generator outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah nuclear power plant in Abu Dhabi’s al-Dhafra Region following a drone strike. According to a statement from the Abu Dhabi Media Office, emergency authorities responded to the incident and confirmed that no injuries were reported. Meanwhile, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it had been informed by the UAE that radiation levels at the nuclear plant remained low. The agency said it was following the situation closely. IAEA chief Rafael Grossi expressed “grave concern” about the incident, the agency said, adding that military activity that threatens nuclear safety was unacceptable. UAE authorities added that all precautionary measures had been taken and that further updates would be provided as more information becomes available. The Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation (FANR) said the fire did not affect the safety of the power plant or the readiness of its essential systems.
FANR added that all units at the facility continue to operate normally.

Saudi Arabia condemns drone strike near UAE nuclear plant
Al Arabiya English/17 May ,2026
Saudi Arabia on Sunday strongly condemned the drone attack on the United Arab Emirates that caused a fire outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah nuclear power plant, as UAE authorities investigated the source of the strike.The UAE’s defense ministry said it had “successfully” intercepted two drones, while a third struck an electrical generator near the nuclear facility in Abu Dhabi’s al-Dhafra Region. The ministry said the drones entered from the “western border” but did not provide further details. Emergency authorities responded to the incident and confirmed that no injuries were reported, according to the Abu Dhabi Media Office. In a statement, Saudi Arabia’s foreign ministry said the Kingdom firmly rejects the “blatant attacks,” which it said “threaten the region’s security and stability.”The ministry also reaffirmed Saudi Arabia’s solidarity with the UAE and its support for “all measures it takes to safeguard its sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity.”Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan later received a phone call from UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed, during which the two sides reviewed safety measures following the attack, the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) reported. The UAE’s foreign ministry separately condemned the strike, describing it as a “dangerous escalation.”“The UAE emphasized that it will not tolerate any threat to its security and sovereignty under any circumstances,” the ministry statement said. Later on Sunday, UAE presidential advisor Anwar Gargash described the targeting of the Barakah plant as a “terrorist” act, saying that whether it was carried out directly by Iran or “through one of its proxies,” it represented “a dark development that violates all international laws and norms, reflecting criminal disregard for the lives of civilians in the UAE and its surroundings.”“No one will twist the UAE’s arm, nor succeed in undermining its vision, success, and inspiring message to the peoples of the region centered on security, stability, development, and prosperity,” he added.

UN watchdog expresses ‘grave concern’ over drone strike near UAE nuclear plant
Arab News/May 17, 2026
DUBAI: The UN watchdog has expressed ‘grave concern’ over a drone strike near the UAE’s nuclear plant in the outskirts of Abu Dhabi. Authorities in Abu Dhabi responded to a fire incident that broke out in an electrical generator outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant in the Al-Dhafra Region following a drone strike. The agency is following the situation closely and is in constant contact with the UAE authorities, is ready to provide assistance if needed, the International Atomic Energy Agency said.
No injuries were ‌reported, radiological safety levels ⁠were unaffected and ⁠the Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation confirmed the plant’s essential systems ​are ​operating normally, the ​Abu ‌Dhabi ‌Media Office said on Sunday. The authority “confirmed that the fire did not affect the safety of the power plant or the readiness of its essential systems, and that all units are operating as normal.”The Abu Dhabi statement also urged the public to obtain information from official sources only, and to avoid spreading rumors or unverified information.

Saudi Foreign Minister Holds Talks with US Special Envoy for Syria
Asharq Al Awsat/17 May 2026
Saudi Minister of Foreign Affairs Prince Faisal bin Farhan bin Abdullah met with US Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack in Riyadh on Sunday, SPA reported. They discussed the latest developments in Syria and ways to support stability there, and included an exchange of views on issues of common interest.

‘No tangible concessions’ in US response to Iran proposal: Iranian media
AFP/17 May ,2026
Iranian media said Sunday that the United States had failed to make any concrete concessions in its latest response to Iran’s proposed agenda for negotiations to end the war. The Fars news agency said Washington had presented a five-point list which included a demand for Iran to keep only one nuclear site in operation and transfer its stockpile of highly enriched uranium to the United States.The US also refused to release “even 25 percent” of Iran’s frozen assets abroad or pay any reparations for the damage inflicted on Iran during the war which broke out on February 28, according to Fars. The report added that the US had conditioned the cessation of hostilities on all fronts on the start of negotiations. The Mehr news agency, meanwhile, said: “The United States, offering no tangible concessions, wants to obtain concessions that it failed to obtain during the war, which will lead to an impasse in the negotiations.”In its proposal, Iran had called for an end of the war on all fronts including Israel’s campaign in Lebanon, as well as a halt to the US naval blockade on Iranian ports in place since April 13.It also called for lifting all of the US sanctions and the release of Iranian assets frozen abroad under longstanding US sanctions, according to the Iranian foreign ministry in a press conference last week. Fars said the Iranian proposal had emphasized that Tehran would continue to manage the strategic Strait of Hormuz, a vital energy conduit which it has largely kept closed since the start of the war. On Sunday, Iranian armed forces spokesman Abolfazl Shekarchi warned US President Donald Trump against restarting attacks on Iran. “The desperate American president should know that if his threats are carried out and Islamic Iran is attacked again, his country’s resources and military will be confronted with unprecedented, offensive, surprising and tumultuous scenarios,” he said, according to state television. Similarly, deputy speaker of parliament Hamidreza Hajibabaei warned against attacking Iranian oil infrastructure. “If Iranian oil is harmed, Iran will take measures that will prevent the United States and the world from accessing oil from the region for an extended period,” he said, according to the news agency ISNA.

Saudi foreign minister meets US envoy in Riyadh to discuss support for Syria
Al Arabiya English/17 May ,2026
Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan met US envoy to Syria Tom Barrack in Riyadh on Sunday, where the two sides discussed the latest developments in Syria and ways to support stability in the country, the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) reported. Relations between Saudi Arabia and Syria have flourished since the fall of the al-Assad regime in December 2024. In early 2025, Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa chose Saudi Arabia for his first foreign visit as Syria’s new leader. In May 2025, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman persuaded US President Donald Trump to lift American sanctions on Syria and facilitated a meeting between Trump and al-Sharaa in the Kingdom. The meeting between Prince Faisal and Barrack came a day after the US envoy met Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa in Damascus.Al-Sharaa and Barrack discussed the latest developments in Syria and the wider region, as well as “ways to enhance economic cooperation” between the US and Syria, according to the Syrian presidency.

Full Story of Al-Saadi’s Arrest; an Iraqi who Coordinated Attacks Across 3 Continents
Fadhel al-Nashmi/Asharq Al awsat/17 May 2026
The arrest by the US authorities of Kataib Hezbollah figure Mohammed Baqer al-Saadi has drawn renewed attention to the faction’s role in cross-border operations. Many viewed it as the start of tougher US measures against individuals and figures linked to the Quds Force, the regional arm of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, and what is known as the “Axis of Resistance.”Because of the highly secretive environment in which Kataib Hezbollah has operated since it was founded by Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis - the former deputy head of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces, who was killed in a US strike in 2020 - soon after the 2003 overthrow of late president Saddam Hussein, ambiguity and scarce information surround most of the group’s senior figures. That secrecy is reinforced by their reluctance to appear in public, despite the faction’s local influence as one of the groups closest and most closely linked to the Revolutionary Guards.
Link to the Quds Force
Information obtained by Asharq Al-Awsat from factional sources indicates that al-Saadi had close ties to the Quds Force intelligence body. It also suggests he had close ties to a member of that Iranian body who was killed during the 11-day war between the United States and Iran, although some sources said he “liked to claim such ties.”A review of his photo archive on X, where al-Saadi has been active since 2014, shows that he often appeared alongside Revolutionary Guards commanders. In one video clip, he appeared to exchange words and smiles with the late Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi. According to the factional sources, al-Saadi “stepped up his visits to Lebanon after the killing of Lebanese Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in late September 2024, and was also active in moving between Lebanon and Syria during Bashar al-Assad’s rule.”Sources said al-Saadi’s possession of a “service passport,” usually granted to senior military figures and official personnel, “gave him flexibility to move and travel to other countries.”From this perspective, the sources explained his latest trip to Türkiye, where he was reportedly caught and arrested. It was also rumored that he was preparing to travel to a European country. Al-Saadi appeared in more than one circulated photograph with former Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani and other figures linked to armed factions and the Revolutionary Guards. Some sources said he preferred to add “Soleimani” to his name.
According to most Western sources that reported al-Saadi’s arrest in Türkiye and transfer to the United States, he is accused of coordinating and planning at least 18 terrorist attacks in Europe targeting Americans and Jews, all in the name of ending the war in Iran. After his arrest, al-Saadi appeared in a video message to his mother on a mobile phone screen, urging her to “be patient” and saying they “will not be broken.” Western sources say he “directed and urged” others to attack US and Israeli interests in retaliation for the war Washington and Tel Aviv are waging against Tehran. Al-Saadi is also accused of coordinating two additional attacks in Canada, directing others, and attempting to coordinate terrorist attacks inside the United States, including against a synagogue in New York City, according to prosecutors.
The US lists Kataib Hezbollah as a foreign terrorist organization and says al-Saadi has been involved with the group since 2017. Some sources say his father is linked to the Badr Organization, led by Hadi al-Amiri. Last month, Washington offered a $10 million reward for information on Kataib Hezbollah leader Abu Hussein al-Hamidawi.
CNN had reported a link between Kataib Hezbollah and the group that claimed responsibility for a series of arson attacks targeting Jewish sites across Europe, including synagogues, schools and ambulances. Al-Saadi faces several charges, including conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization, conspiracy to provide material support for terrorist acts, and conspiracy to bomb a public place. He appeared in court on Friday in the Southern District of New York, where a judge ordered him detained without bail. He did not enter a plea during the hearing. The potential repercussions of al-Saadi’s arrest for Kataib Hezbollah remain unclear, as does the nature of the information US agencies may obtain from him and whether it could expose the armed group, which is now at the center of US scrutiny.
According to al-Saadi’s defense lawyer, Andrew Dalack, who spoke to Western media, he was arrested in Türkiye by Turkish authorities, most likely at Washington’s request, and handed over to US authorities without being given a chance to challenge the legality of his detention or his transfer to the United States.
Al-Saadi faces numerous allegations and accusations, including an attempt to arrange the bombing of a prominent synagogue in New York City, as well as targeting two other sites in the United States, Jewish centers in Los Angeles and Scottsdale, Arizona.
Other allegations indicate that al-Saadi agreed to pay $10,000 to carry out the attack, but insisted that it be filmed. Investigators say he insisted the attack be carried out on April 6, and when it did not happen, he sent a text message to the undercover agent the following morning asking why.
Al-Saadi’s record on X
Al-Saadi appears to have been active on X for years, where he often sharply criticized the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, which filed a “defamation” lawsuit against him in 2024. In July 2020, al-Saadi posted on his account a picture of the US Capitol destroyed, alongside images of slain commanders such as Soleimani, with the phrase: “Our revenge for the martyred commanders continues. No negotiations with the occupier.”
He also uses the platform to openly declare support for Iran and the “Axis of Resistance,” and to attack their opponents. In 2023, al-Saadi posted a screenshot from a maps application of Indian Creek Island in the US state of Florida, a small fortified residential island in Miami-Dade County known in the media as the billionaires’ bunker, where a number of businesspeople, celebrities and politicians live. Prominent residents include Jared Kushner and his wife Ivanka Trump.

Israel to establish defense offices in former UNRWA East Jerusalem compound
Reuters/17 May ,2026
Israel’s cabinet on Sunday approved a plan to build a defense compound on the site of the recently demolished premises of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency in East Jerusalem. Israel in January demolished structures inside the UN Palestinian refugee agency’s East Jerusalem compound after seizing the site last year, in an act condemned by the agency as a violation of international law. In a joint statement, the defense ministry and Jerusalem Municipality said the new compound would include the establishment of a military museum, a recruitment office and a defense minister’s office.
Defense Minister Israel Katz called the decision one of “sovereignty, Zionism, and security.”UNRWA, which Israeli authorities accuse of bias, had not used the building since the start of last year after Israel ordered it to vacate all its premises and cease its operations.
A UNRWA spokesperson declined to comment on the Israeli plan. The agency operates in East Jerusalem, which the UN and most countries consider territory occupied by Israel as it was captured from Jordan in the 1967 Middle East war. Israel considers all Jerusalem to be its indivisible capital. UNRWA also operates in Gaza, the West Bank and elsewhere in the Middle East, providing schooling, healthcare, social services and shelter to millions of Palestinians. “There is nothing more symbolic or justified than establishing the new IDF recruitment office and defense establishment institutions precisely on the ruins of the former UNRWA compound – an organization whose employees took part in the massacres, murders, and atrocities committed by Hamas terrorists on October 7,” Katz said.
Israel has alleged that some UNRWA staff were members of the Palestinian militant group Hamas and took part in the attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, that killed about 1,200 Israelis and led to Israel’s war against Hamas, in which Gaza authorities say more than 71,000 Palestinians have been killed. UNRWA has fired several staff members but said Israel had not provided evidence for all the allegations against its staff and its former chief, Philippe Lazzarini, accused Israel of conducting “a large-scale disinformation campaign” against it.

ICC denies it issued new warrants against Israeli officials, calls report inaccurate
Reuters/17 May ,2026
The International Criminal Court (ICC) denied a report in Israeli media on Sunday that it had issued new arrest warrants for five Israeli political and military officials for alleged crimes against Palestinians. ICC spokesperson Oriane Maillet said in a note to journalists that the report, in Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, was not accurate, and the court “denies the issuance of new arrest warrants in the situation in the state of Palestine.”

Palestinian President's Son Elected to Top Fatah Leadership Body
Ramallah: Asharq Al Awsat/17 May 2026
The son of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas won a seat on Fatah's top decision-making body on Sunday, as initial results emerged from the Palestinian movement's first congress in years. Yasser Abbas, 64, a businessman who spends most of his time in Canada, secured a place on the central committee after being appointed around five years ago as his father's "special representative" - a role that marked his gradual emergence on the political scene. Jailed Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti topped the preliminary results, retaining his seat on the committee with the highest number of votes, according to figures seen by AFP. Jibril Rajoub was reelected as the secretary-general of the committee, retaining the seat he has held since 2017. Palestinian vice president Hussein Al-Sheikh, Fatah deputy leader Mahmoud Al-Aloul and ex-Palestinian intelligence chief Tawfiq Tirawi also held their seats on the body. Among the newcomers was Zakaria Zubeidi, 50, a former commander of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades -- Fatah's armed wing in the Jenin refugee camp -- who was freed from Israeli prison last year under a prisoner exchange deal with Hamas. Two women also won seats, including Ramallah governor Laila Ghannam. The three-day congress, held simultaneously across Ramallah, Gaza, Cairo and Beirut, drew 2,507 voters -- a turnout of 94.64 percent, organisers said. Fifty-nine candidates competed for 18 seats on the central committee, while 450 vied for 80 seats on the revolutionary council, the party's parliament. Counting for the council was still under way. The congress opened Thursday, with Abbas being reelected as head of the movement. In his opening address, he vowed to pursue reforms and hold long-delayed presidential and parliamentary elections.

Israeli Strikes Kill Five People in Gaza
Asharq Al Awsat/17 May 2026
Israeli strikes killed at least five Palestinians in the Gaza Strip on Sunday, health officials said, as ceasefire efforts meant to end fighting between Israel and Hamas falter. In the weeks since halting its joint bombing with the US in Iran, Israel has stepped up its attacks in Gaza, where Hamas has been tightening its grip, even as Israeli troops remain in control of more than half the territory. Medics said an Israeli strike killed one Palestinian near a police ⁠post and another ⁠at a tent encampment in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip. The Israeli military said it killed a militant who posed an immediate threat to forces in the area. Separately, Gaza medics said another Israeli airstrike killed at least three people at a community kitchen near Al-Aqsa Hospital in Deir Al-Balah, in the central Gaza area. The Israeli military did not immediately ⁠comment on that incident. On Saturday, the Israeli military said that Izz al-Din al-Haddad, the head of Hamas' armed wing in Gaza, was killed in what it described as a precise strike on Gaza City on Friday. Hamas confirmed Haddad's death but stopped short of threatening revenge. The Israeli military said it had also killed Bahaa Baroud, a Hamas Operations Headquarters commander, in an airstrike on Saturday, accusing him of planning multiple imminent attacks against troops and Israeli civilians in recent weeks.
According to Reuters, the military said Baroud posed an immediate threat and was targeted in a precise strike, adding ⁠that measures ⁠were taken beforehand to reduce civilian harm, including the use of precision munitions and aerial surveillance. Gaza health officials said Baroud, along with another person, was killed in the airstrike, which targeted their car in Gaza City. Israel and Hamas remain deadlocked in indirect talks to advance US President Donald Trump's post-war plan for Gaza that is meant to end more than two years of fighting with Hamas disarming as Israeli troops withdraw from Gaza.

Iraq’s Coordination Framework on Verge of Collapse after Zaidi’s Govt Approved by Parliament
Baghdad: Hamza Mustafa London: Asharq Al Awsat/ May 17/2026
Iraq’s ruling pro-Iran Coordination Framework appears to be on the verge of collapse after Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi's government was approved by parliament on Thursday. The PM submitted an incomplete lineup, but it still earned the vote of confidence. The parliament approved 14 ministers out of 23. Discussions on the remaining vacant portfolios, including notable ones such as interior and defense, have been postponed due to political disputes between Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish forces. Thursday’s vote exposed evident differences in the Framework, which includes major parties, such as former PM Nouri al-Maliki's State of Law coalition, with other influential Shiite blocs over sovereign portfolios, especially the interior and higher education ministries, said lawmakers and political sources. State of Law MP Ibtissam al-Hilali told the media that failure to include a candidate from her bloc in the lineup was an act of "deceit" against political agreements reached before the session. Meanwhile, the National Contract bloc and the Sumerian Movement announced on Friday that they were quitting former PM Mohammed Shia al-Sudani's Construction and Development bloc, accusing the political leadership inside the alliance of violating agreements and seeking to marginalize members. In a joint statement, they said the proceedings at parliament reflected "a violation of political agreements whereby individual interests were placed above national ones."They said they would form a new parliamentary bloc in a move that would reshape alliances in the legislature. Later on Friday, MP Ammar Youssef also announced he was leaving Sudani’s bloc but that he would remain in Faleh al-Fayyad's National Contract bloc. These developments are seen as a realignment of Shiite political forces that are coming under mounting internal and foreign pressure. Sudani, Zaidi’s predecessor, has slammed his allies in the Framework, saying: "No other government has come under such false accusations and misinformation." He accused "failed leaderships" of mounting these campaigns.
Zaidi, who is backed by the Framework, is Iraq's youngest prime minister at the age of 40. He was chosen to form the new government late last month. His program includes "reforming the security apparatus by restricting weapons to state control and strengthening the capabilities of the security forces", state news agency INA quoted the parliament media office as saying. He also vowed to ensure a state monopoly on weapons amid growing US pressure to dismantle Tehran-backed groups. His nomination followed months of political wrangling after the United States vetoed the previous frontrunner, former premier Maliki. Senior US diplomat Tom Barrack said his government was ready to work with Zaidi "to advance our shared goals of prosperity for the Iraqi people and the elimination of terrorism, which is always an impediment to the people's progress".
Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi congratulated Iraq's new government following the approval from parliament. "Strengthening the friendly and brotherly relations between Tehran and Baghdad has always been at the top of the priorities of our foreign policy," he wrote on X.
The US has recently piled pressure on Baghdad to disarm Iran-backed groups, which it designates as terrorist organizations. After the United States and Israel attacked Iran on February 28, those groups intervened in support of Tehran and hit US facilities in Iraq more than 600 times before a ceasefire was announced, according to a US official. Recently, several powerful Iraqi politicians have also called for a state monopoly on weapons, revealing divisions over the sensitive issue. While some armed groups showed readiness to cooperate, others remain adamant that the issue should not be discussed under US pressure. Hussein Mounes, the head of a parliamentary bloc close to the Kataib Hezbollah group, criticized the "clear and direct American interference in shaping the political scene".
The new premier faces other daunting tasks. His government will also need to repair Iraq's relations with Gulf countries, which have protested attacks by Tehran-backed groups on their territory during the war. His program has also set economic reforms as a main priority, with an emphasis on diversification and investment, in a country where almost the entire economy relies on oil. Iraq has lost significant income due to the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, given that oil exports make up about 90 percent of the country's budget revenues.

WHO: Ebola Outbreak in Congo and Uganda Declared Public Health Emergency
Asharq Al Awsat/17 May 2026
WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared the Ebola disease outbreak in Congo and Uganda a public health emergency of international concern on Sunday after more than 300 suspected cases and 88 deaths. In a post on X, the World Health Organization said the outbreak does not meet the criteria of a pandemic emergency like the COVID-19 pandemic, and advised against the closure of international borders. Ebola is highly contagious and can be contracted via bodily fluids such as vomit, blood or semen. The disease it causes is rare, but severe and often fatal. Health authorities have confirmed the current outbreak is caused by the Bundibugyo virus, a rare variant of the Ebola disease that has no approved therapeutics or vaccines. Although more than 20 Ebola outbreaks have taken place in Congo and Uganda, this is only the third time the Bundibugyo virus has been reported, The Associated Press reported. Congo accounts for all except two of the cases, both of which were reported in neighboring Uganda, the WHO said. Officials first reported the spread of the disease in Congo's eastern province of Ituri, close to Uganda and South Sudan, on Friday. On Saturday, the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported 336 suspected cases and 87 deaths. “There are significant uncertainties to the true number of infected persons and geographic spread associated with this event at the present time. In addition, there is limited understanding of the epidemiological links with known or suspected cases,” Tedros said. Uganda on Saturday confirmed one case it said was imported from Congo, and said the patient died at a hospital in Uganda’s capital, Kampala, and the WHO said that a second case has been reported in Kampala. The two cases had no apparent links to each other and both patients had traveled from Congo, it added. The Bundibugyo virus was first detected in Uganda’s Bundibugyo district during a 2007-2008 outbreak that infected 149 people and killed 37 people. The second time was in 2012 in an outbreak in Isiro, Congo, where 57 cases and 29 deaths were reported. WHO’s emergency declaration is meant to spur donor agencies and countries into action. However, the global response to previous declarations has been mixed.
In 2024 when the WHO declared mpox outbreaks in Congo and elsewhere in Africa a global emergency, experts at the time said it did little to get supplies like diagnostic tests, medicines and vaccines to affected countries quickly.

China to buy at least $17 billion in US agricultural products annually: White House
LBCI/17 May ,2026
China has committed to purchasing at least $17 billion of U.S. agricultural products in 2026, 2027 ⁠and 2028, the White House said in a fact sheet released on Sunday.
The commitment was made during ⁠meetings between U.S. Reuters

US assesses drone threat from Cuba: Report
Al Arabiya English/17 May ,2026
Cuba has acquired more than 300 military drones and recently began discussing plans to use them to attack the US base at Guantanamo Bay, US military vessels and possibly Key West, Florida, 90 miles north of Havana, Axios reported on Sunday, citing classified intelligence.
The intelligence — which could become a pretext for US military action — shows the degree to which the Trump administration sees Cuba as a threat because of developments in drone warfare and the presence of Iranian military advisers in Havana, a senior US official told the publication.
The report also citied US officials as saying that Cuba has been acquiring attack drones of “varying capabilities” from Russia and Iran since 2023, and has stashed them in strategic locations across the island. According to Axios, the senior US official said that within the past month, “Cuban officials have sought more drones and military equipment from Russia.”“The official cited intelligence intercepts that also indicated Cuban intelligence officials are ‘trying to learn about how Iran has resisted us,’” the report added. With Reuters

The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 17-18 May/2026
Denouncing Israel?
Nils A. Haug/Gatestone Institute./May 17, 2026
Although many of these Jewish progressives might claim to be Zionists, they seem to be attempting to put a "friendly face" to Zionism -- one that could be described as "soft Zionism" or "Zionism-lite." They appear to find the Jewish religion "offensive," and instead promote an airbrushed "politically correct" expression of social justice, more to their liking. Many also undertake to "remain committed to two safe and secure states – Israel and Palestine – as the most viable solution to the present situation."
As Netanyahu explained in 2025, "There was a Palestinian state. It was called Gaza. Look what we received. The biggest massacre since the Holocaust."
The problem these frightened people will encounter, unfortunately, is that conceding to the ambient political ethos of Jew-hate will not make them any safer. Did Germany's Nazi regime first inquire of Jews if they were Progressive/Reform, Conservative or Orthodox before sending them to death camps?
Today's ubiquitous antisemitism generally supports toward all Jews a barely-concealed death wish, perhaps borne of envy at their success, whatever their affiliation or position on the Jewish "identity spectrum."
Perhaps many progressives in New York City are hoping that Mamdani will help them to advance their social programs, while many Islamists may be hoping that the progressives will help them to advance their Islamist programs.
"We are not guests in our own story.... We have carried these words through expulsions and ghettos, through inquisitions and pogroms, through the cattle car and the crematorium, through the lecture hall and the algorithm. We will carry them still. And we will not whisper." — Moshe David, CEO of The Roar of Judah Foundation, JNS, April 21, 2026.
According to the Hebrew prophet Isaiah, Jews are destined to be a "covenant for the people" and a "light for the Gentiles ... (so) that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth."
In the words of John 4:22: "Salvation is from the Jews."
Today's ubiquitous antisemitism generally supports toward all Jews a barely-concealed death wish, perhaps borne of envy at their success, whatever their affiliation or position on the Jewish "identity spectrum." Pictured: People hold placards at the May 10, 2026, "Britain Stands With British Jews" rally in London, organized in response to several recent violent attacks on Jews in the UK. (Photo by Alishia Abodunde/Getty Images)
When certain prominent Jewish community leaders in the diaspora denounce Israel's coalition government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as an "existential threat" to the nation, which then, in their view, risks becoming "incompatible with Jewish values", it says more about those speakers than about Israel.
Some individuals -- even Jews, such as Rabbi Charley Baginsky and Rabbi Josh Levy -- who claim that criticism of Israel's government is a "Jewish obligation," which, from their perspective, does not amount to "an act of disloyalty." No one, of course, ever criticizes Israel; they must find that so disappointing.
The central issue would appear to be the definition of "Jewish values." One answer can be found in the UK-based Movement for Progressive Judaism's "Core Values and Beliefs" -- oddly, a view not that different from progressive Christian denominations such as the Church of England, among others.
This view embraces an understanding of gender that disregards the XX-XY chromosome distinction between genders; deprecates the Ten Commandments, and pledges made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob not only on the distinctive character of Jews as people chosen to carry forth the covenant but also on the biblical promise of land. It is a view that appears both theologically and morally compromised.
Although many of these Jewish progressives might claim to be Zionists, they seem to be attempting to put a "friendly face" to Zionism -- one that could be described as "soft Zionism" or "Zionism-lite." They appear to find the Jewish religion "offensive," and instead promote an airbrushed "politically correct" expression of social justice, more to their liking. Many also undertake to "remain committed to two safe and secure states – Israel and Palestine – as the most viable solution to the present situation."
As Netanyahu explained in 2025, "There was a Palestinian state. It was called Gaza. Look what we received. The biggest massacre since the Holocaust."
"Soft Zionism" among Jews is indeed a capitulation, directed by fear, to the increasing, pervasive odor of antisemitism, and quite distant from core principles of Jewish identity, which has been rooted in the "People of the Book" in their ancestral land for nearly 4,000 years.
The problem these frightened people will encounter, unfortunately, is that conceding to the ambient political ethos of Jew-hate will not make them any safer. Did Germany's Nazi regime first inquire of Jews if they were Progressive/Reform, Conservative or Orthodox before sending them to death camps?
Today's ubiquitous antisemitism generally supports toward all Jews a barely-concealed death wish, perhaps borne of envy at their success, whatever their affiliation or position on the Jewish "identity spectrum" (and here, here, here and here).
The "Progressive Judaism" movement is prevalent not only in the United Kingdom, but in almost all other Western nations. Jews, for the most part, are permitted to think and believe whatever they wish, no matter how outrageous. JNS reports that a recent survey in New York City -- the center of Jewish life in the region with more than one million Jewish residents – discloses that 42% of people who self-identify as Jewish approve of, or are "not sure" (which implies they do not strongly disapprove), of anti-Israel Mayor Zohran Mamdani. A significant number even voted for him.
Mamdani vowed to arrest Netanyahu should he visit New York and revoked policies permitting the city to purchase goods made in Israel. Moreover, according to JNS, "his spokeswoman said that synagogues violate international law when they host pro-Israel events."
Sadly, some of these voters seemed to have believed campaign promises to deliver free bus rides and government owned grocery stores. Perhaps many progressives in New York City are hoping that Mamdani will help them to advance their social programs, while many Islamists may be hoping that the progressives will help them to advance their Islamist programs.
The JNS report adds:
"Mamdani has said that he opposed Israel's existence as a Jewish state.
"Even many of those who voted for the mayor disagree with him, per the poll, which suggests that 60% of respondents support the idea of a two-state solution if it would end the Israel-Palestinian conflict, while 26% oppose the concept."
At a time when the very security of Israel is at risk, attacked by Iran and its proxies, it is almost beyond belief that a significant percentage of diaspora Jews would even consider a two-state solution to the Palestinian conundrum. A Palestinian state, as Netanyahu pointed out, would have the effect of setting the stage for another October 7, 2023, massacre, or worse. Perhaps those enlightened souls should spend some time in Israel experiencing the reality of daily life under bombardment from Islamist enemies who seek their blood.
Jewish communities in Western nations, since October 7, 2023, have been facing escalating threats, hatred, prejudice, and assaults. The UK Commissioner of Police, Sir Mark Rowley, recently conceded that "threats to the Jewish community had reached an unprecedented level." His admission stems from numerous occurrences of violent attacks of Jews such as the Manchester attack on a synagogue last year, in which two people were murdered on Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the year; the firebombing of two Jewish charity ambulances in April 2026 and, in the same month, a stabbing attack on Jewish men at Golder's Green, the heart of Jewish life in London. Jew-hate in the UK has spun out of control, with no solution in sight.
Aside from the UK, vicious assaults on Jews have become common throughout Western nations, the worst being December's devastating Bondi Beach terrorist attack in Australia. France has both Europe's largest Jewish community and the largest Muslim population in Europe. Unsurprisingly, some 80% of Jews there feel unsafe. "The majority of young people are thinking about how they can live in Israel before it is too late," explains a young Jewish doctor.
In the US, the American Jewish Committee's annual State of Antisemitism in America Report for 2025 revealed that "91% of American Jews say they feel less safe as a Jewish person in the United States due to violent attacks in the past year... 73% of American Jews, say they have experienced antisemitism online..."Moshe David, CEO of the nonprofit Roar of Judah Foundation, commented on the report:
"This is not background noise. This is climate. This is a people learning to move through the public square with a new tightness in the chest, a new alertness in the eyes, a new awareness that even the air of modern life has become hostile."
It is evident that Jews are no longer safe in the United States, the UK, France, Italy, or in any Western nation where Jew-hate has become normalized. As a result, many wish to emigrate. These constant assaults on peaceful Jewish citizens who now live in fear will doubtless escalate further. Political leaders seemingly lack the will or courage even to name -- let alone to confront -- the root cause of terror, the source of which overwhelmingly emanates from radicalized sectors of their Muslim communities. Almost all incidents of anti-Jewish violence in the West are perpetrated by Islamists.
Unfortunately for them, the sorry attempts by progressive diaspora Jews to become less conspicuous in the surrounding culture by adopting a diluted version of Zionism and Jewish identity will not work. In the words of Moshe David:
"What stands before us is the ancient demand that the Jew make himself smaller for the comfort of the world. Not leave, not always convert, not always vanish in the old brutal forms, but soften, edit, dilute and translate himself into something easier for the age to tolerate.
"Be Jewish, perhaps, but not too Jewish. Speak, perhaps, but not in the full thunder of your own inheritance. Remain, perhaps, but only after you have been trimmed into acceptability.... Lower your voice. Stand down your particularity. Explain your loyalty.
"That expectation is itself a moral obscenity."Jews have confronted challenges to their authenticity ever since the various exiles from their homeland began, and now have arisen again. One can adapt to the culture by surrendering one's strength, or live a proud and dignified life. Meanwhile, Israel is there as a sanctuary.
David continues:
"We are not guests in our own story.... We have carried these words through expulsions and ghettos, through inquisitions and pogroms, through the cattle car and the crematorium, through the lecture hall and the algorithm. We will carry them still. And we will not whisper."
According to the Hebrew prophet Isaiah, Jews are destined to be a "covenant for the people" and a "light for the Gentiles ... (so) that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth."
In the words of John 4:22: "Salvation is from the Jews."
*Nils A. Haug is an author and columnist. A Lawyer by profession, he is member of the International Bar Association, the National Association of Scholars, the Academy of Philosophy and Letters. Among degrees in Philosophy, English Literature, and Law, Dr. Haug holds a M.A.in Jewish Studies (cum laude) and a Ph.D. in Apologetical Theology. He is author of 'Politics, Law, and Disorder in the Garden of Eden – the Quest for Identity'; and 'Enemies of the Innocent – Life, Truth, and Meaning in a Dark Age.' His work has been published by First Things Journal, The American Mind, Quadrant, Minding the Campus, Gatestone Institute, National Association of Scholars, Jewish Journal, James Wilson Institute (Anchoring Truths), Jewish News Syndicate, Tribune Juive, Document Danmark, Zwiedzaj Polske, Schlaglicht Israel, and others.
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

German Mediation and Ending the Russian-Ukrainian War
Emile Ameen/Asharq Al Awsat/May 17/2026
Is Russian President Vladimir Putin seeking a way out of the Ukraine war through European mediation? During Russia’s Victory Day celebrations, he announced that former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroder was his preferred channel to Ukraine. Schroder and Putin share close ties that did not end with the end of the latter’s chancellorship, evolving into a personal friendship with time, and the German politician is among Putin's most prominent allies in the West.
The latest move from Moscow raises two questions. The first: has the burden and mounting costs of the war begun to weigh on Putin, particularly given its implications for his legacy? Will he leave the Russian phoenix truly risen from the ashes, as he did the first time after taking over a country left in wretched condition by his predecessor Boris Yeltsin, or will it be smoldering in the ashes indefinitely?
The second question concerns both nationality and personality: why should the mediator be German; why not someone from any other European country? And why Schroder in particular?
One could say that Schroder is the Western figure closest to the “siloviki,” Putin's powerful circle of strongmen overseeing Russia's major energy institutions. Schroder has held senior positions in Russian energy companies despite the broad criticism coming first from within Germany and later from across the European Union. Observers across Europe are asking whether Schroder be trusted to be an impartial mediator.
It is no secret that the widespread "Russophobia" across the Old Continent leads officials to see any proposal advanced by Putin with suspicion, especially in light of what millions of Europeans see as Russian preparations to invade other European countries after Ukraine, regardless of his stated intention to end the war. To many, such declarations seem like little more than a ploy.
Assessing Schroder's impartiality as a mediator is no simple matter. While he has described Russia's war on Ukraine as a violation of international law, he has also insisted that demonizing Russia and casting it as a permanent enemy is unacceptable and repeatedly called for Russian oil to be allowed to flow once into Germany. Another question arises from this conspiratorial reading of history: is Putin's call for German mediation a sincere effort to end years of fire and destruction, or a ploy aimed at aggravating divisions within NATO three weeks before its annual summit in Ankara?
Some see Putin's preference for German mediation as a form of political courtship that exploits the tension of German-American relations and as a way to put his finger on Germany's open wound- the anxiety stirred by the prospect of a withdrawal of American troops, who for eight decades have served as Europe's protective umbrella against Soviet ambitions. In this context, a faction of the Social Democratic Party, Schroder's party, sees Putin's push for his mediation as an insult to the United States and a transparent ploy designed to widen the gap between Washington and Berlin. From this perspective, the idea of Schroder mediating them talks is meant to create the impression of a desire for dialogue, hiding Putin’s real intentions: to sow discord in Europe because he has neither forgotten nor forgiven the fact that NATO was, in his eyes, responsible for the cardinal sin of the twentieth century: booby-trapping and ultimately dismantling the Soviet Union.
Is there, then, an alternative to Schroder among the Germans?
Before answering, it bears noting that some German strategists believe Russia has lost its Eurasian cohesion and inflicted enormous damage on itself by pursuing a path of manufacturing enemies in every direction, and that the time has for a change of direction.
Alternatives are now being discussed, foremost among them former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whom Der Spiegel described as a potentially effective mediator on account of her command of Russian, her deep knowledge of Putin, and her availability. Merkel is criticized, however, for her support of Nord Stream, her role in the Minsk agreements, and statements she made to a Hungarian outlet, Partizan, in which attributed part of the responsibility for the war in Ukraine to certain European Union countries. In Germany itself, some speak of mediation by President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, while German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul insists that "Germany is prepared to assume greater responsibility in the diplomatic process."
The conclusion: has German mediation become the solution, whoever ends up being the mediator?

The Nakba Anniversary
Samir Atallah/Asharq Al Awsat/May 17/2026
Nations usually commemorate moments of triumph and honor. That is why every country celebrates its Independence Day or National Day. Russians commemorate the heroism of Leningrad and Stalingrad and victory over Nazi Germany. Italians celebrate unification. Americans celebrate independence from Britain. The French mark the storming of the Bastille. And so on. Seventy-eight years after the loss of Palestine, we once again mark the anniversary of the Nakba and the Balfour Declaration. Our collective memory swings each year between catastrophe and defeat. The rest has been a relentless cycle of revolutions, coups and massacres. After Palestine was lost, loss itself became habit, almost tradition. What remained of Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza was lost as well. Egypt lost Sinai before recovering it. Syria lost the Golan. Lebanon lost Lebanon itself. Israel destroyed its villages, redrew its borders, and still we celebrate. As we mark the loss of Palestine, we find ourselves negotiating yet another temporary ceasefire in Lebanon. We look around and see Israel’s defense minister threatening Lebanon with Gaza’s fate, then immediately beginning to carry out the threat. Three southern cities are turned into devastated rubble.Seventy-eight years after Balfour, in 2026, we are haggling over the toll of 3,000 Lebanese killed in a single month and 8,000 wounded. And all this under the label of a ceasefire, not even a war.
Nothing changes in this endless spectacle of paralysis and noise. What I am writing today is the same thing I read, or heard, every day as a boy. Every year I told myself I would not be reading the same words again the following year, that we would finally win a battle, or at least avoid losing the next war. But nothing in our world seems willing to change. Wars remain wars among ourselves. The road to Jerusalem remains cut off. Everything becomes indistinguishable: death and life, victory and defeat, knowledge and ignorance, hunger and dignity, celebration and disgrace. The only difference between 1948 and everything that has happened since October 7 is the scale of the catastrophe. In the past, the number of victims was smaller and the tragedies less vast. Today we live in the age of mechanized digital killing, where catastrophe knows no limits. Nor does the hostility and hatred among ourselves. All of it unfolds under the same banner: Palestine, the road to Jerusalem, and the cities and villages of the South.

Trump-Xi summit: China gives neither green light nor red card on Iran
Raghida Dergham/Al Arabiya English/17 May ,2026
The recent summit between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping did not merely produce trade and economic understandings. It also signaled a strategic truce between the world’s two largest powers, one aimed at managing competition rather than detonating it, and at preventing a major confrontation that could threaten the global economy, maritime corridors, and energy markets. Iran was the unspoken presence throughout the summit, not only because of its nuclear file, but because the Strait of Hormuz has effectively become one of the most direct tests of the implicit understandings between Washington and Beijing.
President Xi did not go as far as offering President Trump an explicit commitment to exert decisive strategic pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran. China still rejects, in principle, sanctions, blockades, and the American militarization of maritime corridors. Beijing views the “Freedom Plus” project, which effectively expands the US naval blockade on Iranian ports, as part of the militarization of a region that should remain open to international trade rather than dominated by military displays and US-led security alliances.
What matters more than China’s declared positions, however, is what Beijing chose not to do. China did not directly challenge the United States in the Strait of Hormuz, nor did it enter into a strategic confrontation in defense of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard or Tehran’s use of the strait as leverage and pressure. Beijing criticized US policies, yes, but it did not move to break the naval blockade, nor did it engage in a power test with the Trump administration over freedom of navigation or over preventing Iran from controlling traffic through the strait.
This is where the importance of the summit lies. The new element is not a revolutionary shift in China’s position, but greater clarity in Chinese priorities. Xi Jinping understands that the Chinese economy itself depends on the stability of global trade and on the uninterrupted flow of oil and energy through maritime corridors, foremost among them the Strait of Hormuz. Beijing therefore cannot realistically stand behind any project that threatens international navigation or allows Iran to impose fees, restrictions, or conditions on international shipping and oil tankers.
China does not want the militarization of the Strait of Hormuz, but neither does it want the strait to become hostage to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. In that sense, China’s position objectively intersects with the core American objective, even if the two sides differ over methods and strategy.
The American-Chinese convergence over freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz is almost self-evident. The same applies to opposition to Iran acquiring nuclear weapons. This is not only an American position; it has long been a Chinese one as well, with the distinction that Beijing consistently insists on Iran’s right to maintain a peaceful nuclear program. What became clearer after the summit, however, is that China does not view Iran as a strategic ally worth entering into a major confrontation with the United States to defend.
That message is deeply unsettling for Tehran. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard built a central part of its strategic calculations on the assumption that the expanding US-China rivalry would eventually force Beijing into Iran’s camp against Washington. Now the picture appears different. The bilateral relationship between the American and Chinese presidents, with all the enormous economic, commercial, and strategic interests it represents, occupies a far higher priority for Beijing than the Iranian file itself.
Perhaps what worries Iran’s IRGC the most today is not the American naval blockade itself, but the discovery of the limits of betting on China. Tehran built part of its long-term strategy on the growing American-Chinese confrontation and on the possibility that Beijing would eventually become a strategic partner against Washington. Instead, Iran now faces a different reality. Xi Jinping’s priority is not protecting Iran’s regional project or entering into confrontation with the United States on behalf of the Revolutionary Guard, but protecting the Chinese economy, global stability, and freedom of navigation. That alone is reshaping Iranian calculations from the Strait of Hormuz to the nuclear issue.
President Trump emerged from the summit understanding that China will neither grant him an open mandate against Iran nor become a strategic military partner to the Islamic Republic against the United States. That alone is a significant development in American calculations. Trump now appears increasingly inclined toward expanding the strategy of naval and economic strangulation before returning to large-scale US-Israeli military operations against Iran.
Washington may therefore move further toward tightening the naval blockade on Iranian ports and expanding the “Freedom Plus” project as an option less costly than direct war and more capable of buying time while economically and financially exhausting Iran without dragging the region into a full-scale conflict that would threaten global markets.
This option also aligns with China’s current strategic mood. Beijing does not want a major military explosion in the Gulf. It does not want a broad American-Israeli war against Iran that could trigger regional collapse and chaos in oil and energy markets. At the same time, China does not appear prepared to practically challenge the United States if the stated objective is to protect freedom of navigation and prevent Iran from turning the Strait of Hormuz into a platform for confrontation with the global economy.
There is no formal agreement between Washington and Beijing over Iran, but there is a clear intersection of interests on several essential points: no Iranian nuclear weapon, no Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz, no large-scale military explosion threatening the global economy, and no direct military overthrow of the Iranian regime so long as its behavior and regional influence can be contained and reduced through other means.
None of this means the end of American-Chinese rivalry. Quite the opposite. Competition between the two powers is larger and deeper than the Iranian dossier or even the Middle East itself. Yet the summit suggests that both sides are attempting to manage that rivalry in ways that prevent a major global explosion, especially during this economically, financially, and militarily sensitive phase.
The Arab Gulf states are observing this shift with extreme caution. They see the relative easing between Washington and Beijing as a factor that could reduce the likelihood of major war and help preserve stability in energy markets and global trade. At the same time, they understand that major-power understandings can sometimes come at the expense of smaller allies or delicate regional balances. Europe, meanwhile, appears to be the direct economic beneficiary of a calmer American-Chinese atmosphere. Yet Europeans also fear finding themselves outside the circle of decision-making in a world increasingly shaped by raw power understandings and transactional interests between Washington and Beijing. In Tehran, the message is harsher. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard is gradually discovering that China has no intention of entering a strategic confrontation with the United States in defense of Iran’s regional project or its policies in the Strait of Hormuz. China’s priorities are stability, economics, and energy, not ideological adventures or proxy wars.
For that reason, the coming phase appears exceptionally sensitive for the Islamic Republic of Iran. Tehran faces an American administration that may increasingly see an expanded naval blockade as a temporary alternative to major war, while simultaneously confronting a Chinese partner unwilling either to abandon Iran entirely or to go too far in challenging the United States on its behalf. In other words, President Xi Jinping did not give President Donald Trump the green light for expanded American military operations against Iran, but neither did he raise the red card against the American strategy of tightening the naval blockade and expanding the “Freedom Plus” project to protect freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.

Frankly Speaking: New US-Iran nuclear agreement is the only way, says former Israeli PM Ehud Olmert
Arab News/May 17, 2026
RIYADH: Ehud Olmert, the former Israeli prime minister, sees a renewed nuclear agreement between the US and Iran as the only realistic way to defuse one of the Middle East’s most dangerous flashpoints. Diplomacy, not military force, he said, offers the best chance of curbing Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.
Appearing on the Arab News current affairs program “Frankly Speaking,” Olmert made the case for a deal at a moment of regional volatility, with a tenuous ceasefire holding in the war with Iran and diplomatic efforts largely stalled.
In his view, an agreement that limits uranium enrichment, bars any military dimension to Iran’s nuclear program and restores strict international inspections would amount to a strategic win for Israel, whether its current government welcomes it or not.
“I think that the only possible way (forward) is a new agreement on nuclear issues between America and Iran,” he said. “If there will be an agreement between Iran and America, whether Israel likes it or not, the government of Israel will have to (fall in line).”
Olmert pointed to the 2015 nuclear agreement reached under the former US president, Barack Obama, which capped Iran’s enrichment at 3.67 percent, significantly below the enrichment level needed to create a bomb.
Ehud Olmert, the former Israeli prime minister, told Frankly Speaking he sees a renewed nuclear agreement between the US and Iran as the only realistic way to defuse one of the Middle East’s most dangerous flashpoints. (AN Photo)
“America withdrew from this agreement,” Olmert told “Frankly Speaking” host Katie Jensen. “So, I think that Iran already agreed to an agreement limiting its activities in the nuclear program — limited entirely (to nonmilitary activity.) And I think that it’s open now for a similar agreement.” For Olmert, the central question is whether US President Donald Trump is willing to pursue such a path. He dismissed military action as an effective alternative. “But what are his options? I don’t see that a military operation can make a dramatic change,” he said.
Even if US and Israeli leaders define victory differently, Olmert argued that a credible agreement would still serve Israel’s core security interests.
“I’m not certain that what I think is the win is necessarily what the American president or the Israeli prime minister will define as such,” he said, adding that a deal that ends Iran’s enrichment activities, halts any nuclear weapons program and places its nuclear work under close supervision by the International Atomic Energy Agency would remove the immediate threat of an Iranian nuclear capability.
“I think that this will be definitely a victory for what Israel as a state wants as the main objective of our security concern for years.”
Iran’s regime may be open to talks on ending the war, but not yet to a broader nuclear accord. Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s foreign minister, said on Saturday that Tehran had received messages from the Trump administration indicating openness to new negotiations. But he said a “deadlock” remained over Iran’s enriched nuclear material.
While Olmert described the opening US-Israeli strike on Iran as “quite impressive,” he repeatedly questioned the strategy and endgame of the US military offensive, Operation Epic Fury, and Israel’s Operation Lion’s Roar.
A woman walks past an anti-Israel mural in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, May 17, 2026. (AP)
“The outcome of that strike was significant … the (liquidation) of the leadership of Iran, Ayatollah (Ali Khamenei) and some senior commanders in the army,” he said.
On Feb. 28, the US and Israel launched joint strikes in Iran, killing top leaders, including Supreme Leader Khamenei, and inflicting heavy damage on Iran’s military assets.
Iran retaliated with barrages of missiles and drones at Israel and Arab neighbors, notably the Gulf states. It also announced restrictions on marine navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical shipping lanes.
For Olmert, however, the initial success of the strikes did not answer the larger political question. “What’s the endgame?” he asked. “What’s the next step, where are we aiming it, what is the objective? And I think time has passed and I still ask the same question.
“Seems to me that the stalemate or the ceasefire … remains more the same,” he said. “There is no movement. There is no end to the military (conflict), but there is no movement toward a solution. So, we are stuck.”
Asked whether the US-Israeli offensive lacked a coherent strategy from the outset, Olmert said he could not recall “any clear definition of the political objective” beyond the military campaign itself. Early talk of regime change, he said, quickly faded once it became clear that no such outcome was imminent.
“At the beginning, they were talking about a regime change, but I think quite soon afterwards it became apparent that a regime change is not going to take place,” he said. “It seems to have been forgotten. “So, I don’t know if there was any specific objective other than, of course, what President Trump keeps saying all the time — that Iran should not have nuclear (weapons), and that consequently Iran perhaps should release the 450 kilograms of enriched uranium and give it to America or to a third party.” Despite a ceasefire since April 8, naval clashes have continued in the Strait of Hormuz. Trump has repeatedly said he would accept nothing short of a full surrender and a permanent end to Iran’s nuclear ambitions. But on Friday, he said a 20-year moratorium on Iran’s nuclear program could be enough to secure a deal.
Olmert’s support for the current strikes is a shift from his earlier position. In 2012, he opposed an Israeli attack on Iran, and he said the distinction now is US involvement.
“I didn’t support an Israeli strike in 2008 and since then. And, if asked on February 27, am I in support of a single Israeli military strike without the US, I probably would have said the same,” he said. “The difference is that this was not just an Israeli strike.
“Israel didn’t have a real option of destroying … the underground nuclear sites of Iran. And, therefore, I was against an Israeli operation had it not been successful in destroying the nuclear sites. “America does have the bombs and the weapons and the planes that can carry the bombs that could take the nuclear sites in Fordow … so, the question now is, can we destroy the nuclear sites?” Olmert said. “The only way to do it is to (turn) to America. And America doesn’t seem to be able to do it now. So, therefore it changes the situation.”
He was more cautious when asked about Benjamin Netanyahu’s role in pushing Trump toward war. Media reports, including in the New York Times, have suggested the Israeli prime minister played a major part in steering the US president toward military action. Olmert said he had no direct information to confirm that, although he had no doubt Netanyahu strongly favored a strike.
“I’m not familiar with any specific intelligence or information that I can provide you,” he said. “So, I don’t know.”“I’m sure that he may have talked to President Trump,” Olmert said. But whether Netanyahu alone shifted Trump’s position, “I don’t know. I would be careful to pass an opinion about it,” he said. “Certainly, Netanyahu was in favor, but had he been powerful enough to force Trump to move from where he was into giving orders to the American army to attack? That, I don’t know.”From Iran, the conversation turned to Gaza and the occupied West Bank, where Olmert again broke sharply with the current Israeli government.
In an August 2025 interview on “Frankly Speaking,” he had said Israel committed “war crimes” in Gaza. More recently, he has drawn attention over comments cited by the New York Times in an article about alleged sexual violence against Palestinian detainees — remarks he said were taken out of context. “I was asked whether I know about the sexual violence perpetrated by Israelis, and I said I have no information about it,” Olmert said. “I think that the placing of what I said in the context of allegations (of) which I was not even aware, was inappropriate, and I said it to the New York Times, to their correspondent.”
He said he told columnist Nicholas Kristof that he had no direct knowledge of such abuse. At the same time, Olmert said he would not dismiss the possibility that sexual violence had occurred in Israeli custody. “Is it possible that there was sexual violence perpetrated against Palestinians? I don’t really doubt,” he said. “But I don’t know.” “I, therefore,” he added, “couldn’t be associated with all the specific allegations that were made by the New York Times correspondent.”Israel recently threatened a libel suit after the newspaper published a May 11 article alleging a pattern of widespread Israeli sexual violence against Palestinian men, women and children by soldiers, settlers, interrogators and prison guards.
In a May 14 statement on X, Netanyahu called Kristof’s column “one of the most hideous and distorted lies ever published against the State of Israel in the modern press.”
The statement said Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Gideon Saar had instructed officials to begin a defamation lawsuit against the newspaper. The NYT responded by defending the column as “deeply reported” and said Israel’s threat was part of “a well-worn political playbook that aims to undermine independent reporting and stifle journalism that does not fit a specific narrative. Any such legal claim would be without merit.”
Rights groups have documented allegations of sexual abuse of Palestinian detainees for years. But Olmert insisted that, in his own interview with Kristof, he did not validate specific allegations he had not seen evidence for. He said: “I was asked by Mr. Kristof, and I said to him, and I keep saying it since then, time and again, I didn’t have any specific information about sex violence and that it was perpetrated in there by Israelis as part of the policy.”
“However,” he added, “had there been information presented to me, I may have not been surprised, but I didn’t validate any of the allegations made in The New York Times article.”
Asked how a reputable newspaper could get it so wrong, Olmert said he had no disrespect for the newspaper and was not familiar with the allegations, but he knew Israelis were committing crimes in the Palestinian territories. “I definitely have no disrespect for the New York Times. And I don’t know, and I think Mr. Kristof has the reputation of a very serious journalist,” he said. “As I said, I’m not familiar with the allegations. “I know that there are crimes perpetrated by Israelis in the territories,” he added, citing the burning of olive groves and property and shootings of Palestinians “who are not involved in terror.
“This is terrible, unacceptable, unbearable and unforgivable,” he said.
In February, after Israeli authorities announced new plans to expand control over more Palestinian territory, Olmert told Euronews that Israel bore responsibility for the escalating violence in the West Bank, where settlers have repeatedly attacked and displaced Palestinians.
“No one can blame anyone else but the Israelis that live in the West Bank and the government that supports them,” he said then, calling the violence “something that comes close to an attempt to make ethnic cleansing.” Asked whether he believes ethnic cleansing is taking place now, Olmert pointed to the Hilltop Youth, a loose label for radical settler youths associated with hardline religious-nationalist ideology and frequent attacks on Palestinians.
“They are perpetrating crimes which certainly can be defined within the framework of ethnic cleansing,” he said. “They are trying to force out the Palestinians from the territories, they are burning their properties, they are taking their homes and they are burning their olive groves.
“All this is a war crime, a crime against humanity, and this is something which is definitely aiming at ethnic cleansing,” he added. Olmert also accused Israeli authorities of failing to stop the violence. He said police too often “close their eyes,” while some military units also fail to intervene against what he called “Jewish terrorists.”
Olmert pointed out that in his first week in office Israel Katz, the Israeli defense minister, canceled the use of administrative detention against Jews — while keeping it for Palestinians.
This, he added, “has certainly contributed to the flexibility that the Jewish terrorists feel in perpetrating these atrocities in the West Bank, not having the fear of being detained by the Israeli law-abiding security agents.”
Since Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel, which triggered the large-scale Israeli assault on Gaza, the number of settler attacks have increased sharply. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 240 Palestinians, including 55 children, were killed in the West Bank in 2025 alone; 225 were killed by Israeli forces and nine by Israeli settlers.
Olmert struck a similarly diplomatic tone on Lebanon, arguing that Israel needs a political plan there as well, not only military pressure.
Since March 2, Lebanon has faced intensified Israeli attacks after the Iran-backed group Hezbollah launched rockets at Israel in retaliation for Khamenei’s killing. Olmert said the Lebanese government appears deeply unhappy with Hezbollah and broadly supportive of disarming the group. “I think the Lebanese government is definitely unhappy about Hezbollah,” he said. “They think Hezbollah is a real enemy and a threat to the purity and the wellbeing of Lebanon. And they are very much in favor of disarming Hezbollah.”
He pointed to Lebanese President Joseph Aoun’s statements that he is prepared to negotiate an agreement with Israel — “perhaps a ceasefire ... and possibly also peace” — and said he welcomed that approach. Olmert said he was not “particularly happy” about Israeli ground operations in southern Lebanon “for obvious reasons.” But he also said Hezbollah drone attacks on civilian areas in northern Israel are a serious threat that cannot be ignored.
“Part of it has to be an agreement with the government of Lebanon so that those of us together will act to disarm the Lebanese Hezbollah,” he said.
Appearing on the Arab News current affairs program “Frankly Speaking,” Olmert argued that a credible agreement would still serve Israel’s core security interests. (AN Photo)
On Friday, the US State Department said Israel and Lebanon had agreed to extend their shaky ceasefire for 45 days after two days of talks in Washington.
Yet even since a truce took hold in mid-April, Israel and Hezbollah have continued to trade fire. Lebanon’s Health Ministry has accused Israel of targeting civilians and paramedics, which Israel denies. With elections in Israel expected later this year, Olmert said he hopes Netanyahu’s bloc is voted out. “I certainly hope so,” he said. “In all of the polls which were conducted in Israel over the last three years, there never was one which gave the present coalition government the majority in the votes.
“I think that there is a likelihood that in the coming elections, there will be a stable majority against the present coalition government … I think that this is a bad government. It is a bad government for Israel. It is a bad government because I think that it doesn’t represent a real genuine national security interest for the state of Israel in a proper way.”
Olmert did not absolve Israel’s enemies of responsibility for the region’s turmoil. Hamas, he said, started the war in October 2023, and Hezbollah, the Houthis and Iran-backed militias all widened the conflict. Iran itself, he noted, launched major ballistic missile barrages at Israel in April and October 2024.But, he said, Israel’s leadership failed to meet the moment.
“All of them contributed to the instability and, unfortunately, the Israeli leadership didn’t rise to the heights which were expected and wasn’t responsible and wasn’t innovative and creative enough in offering political solutions rather than military actions,” he said.
As for the election itself, Olmert said he could not predict the result. For now, he said, “the expectation is that there will be a coalition made up of present opposition parties.”

Selected Face Book & X tweets for May 17/2026
Zéna Mansour ܙܺܝܢܵܐ ܡܲܢܨܘܪ
شركة سوروس اليسارية الاسلاموية المتخصصة بمسح الهويات والمجتمعات المفتوحة. لديهم فروع وأدوات وأذرع* في كل أنحاء العالم.. مطلوب بشكل دائم وكلاء معتمدين في لبنان لتوسيع دائرة الأعمال والإستثمارات نظرا لارتفاع الطلب وغزارة العرض. -التخصصات سياسة إقتصاد إعلام ثقافة تربية فنون قوانين مدنية. حجم أعمال المنظمة وميزانيتها السنوية للإستثمارات المفتوحة في الهويات الممسوحة والمجتمعات المفتوحة:
1.2 مليار $للمهتمين المقر الرئيسي للشركة نيويورك والقاعدة في كاليفورنيا ولوس أنجلوس وكافة الولايات الأميركية.
•نبذة من الموقع الرسمي للمنظمة:
-The primary headquarters of the Open Society Foundations is located at :
224 West 57th Street, New York, NY 10019, USA.
-For direct electronic communication, general inquiries and press correspondence can be directed to their media team via email: media@opensocietyfoundations.org.
-The Open Society Foundations' global headquarters is located at
224 W 57th St, New York City, NY 10019, United States.
-For specific inquiries, the foundations can be reached via the following emails:
-Media inquiries: media@opensocietyfoundations.org
-Ombudsperson (for official complaints): ombudsperson@opensocietyfoundations.org
-Grant scams and fraud reporting: contact@opensocietyfoundations.org
-For a full list of global offices or to use their online submission forms, visit the official website.

Hussain Abdul-Hussain
The UAE is the marvel of the Arab countries. It is where the majority of the Arabs — especially Palestinians — want to invest, live, work, and raise their families.
Don’t fall for the propaganda that the UAE is unpopular among the Arabs, even if many Palestinians who live in the UAE are ungrateful. In general, Palestinians have been ungrateful to all the countries they lived in. Ask the Kuwaitis, the Iraqis and the Lebanese, even the Transjordanians.

Hussain Abdul-Hussain
Today, 43 years ago, Lebanon’s Parliament voted for a peace treaty with Israel that would have seen an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, coupled with the Lebanese government disarming all militias and restoring its sovereignty. Had it stuck, Lebanon would have been the top country in the region, second only to Israel and the UAE. The treaty also stipulated that the army of Syrian dictator Hafez Assad must withdraw from Lebanon, the stipulation that spelled its doom.
On February 6, 1984, Assad’s allies Shia Nabih Berri, elected speaker repeatedly since 1992, and Druze Walid Jumblatt sent their militias to the streets of Beirut against the Lebanese Armed Forced (LAF). They called it the “February 6 Intifada.” The May 17 Peace Agreement between Lebanon and Israel was therefore abrogated.
The story above illustrates how foreign intervention and local (or Palestinian) rogue militias have – since 1969 – have been undermining both the State of Lebanon and peace with Israel.
Today, 43 years later, Lebanon and Israel are trying one more round of stemming militias in a way that allows Israel to again concede control over Lebanese territory without fearing that violence will be launched, for the umpteenth time since Israel was founded in May 1948, against Israeli territory.
One note about the May 17, 1983 Peace Treaty, while some argue that the vote taken under coercion from Israeli tanks, that is totally false. The May 17, 1983, was voluntarily attended by 72 lawmakers. Nineteen boycotted. Of those in attendance, 65 voted for peace with Israel, two votes against, three abstained, and one cast a vote “with reservation.” The speaker votes only to break a tie, in this case Shia Speaker Kamel al-Assaad did not have to.
The breakdown of the vote was also interesting. Naturally, Christians were (still are) the biggest supporters of Lebanon’s peace with Israel. But unlike today, the biggest opponents were not the Shia (Iran and Hezbollah) whose majority voted for the peace treaty. The opposition was Sunni (over the Palestine nonsense), and yet, eight Lebanese Sunni lawmakers freely voted for Lebanese peace with Israel. The Druze lawmaker naturally voted yes. Below are the names and sectarian breakdown of the lawmakers who voted for peace between Lebanon and Israel.
Christian (39):
Camille Chamoun (former president), Pierre Gemayel (founder of the Phalange Party), Semaan Douaihy, Abdo Oweidat, Edmond Rizk, Fouad Lahoud, René Moawad (later elected president and killed, his son serves today as lawmaker), Emile Rouhana Sakr, Michel Sassine, Khatchik Babikian, Malkon Aplighatian, Souren Khan Amirian, Ara Yerwanian, Andranik Manoukian, Pierre Helou, Shafik Badr, Albert Mokheiber, Pierre Dakkash, Fouad Ghosn, Rashid al-Khouri, Edouard Henein, Michel Maalouli, Joseph Skaff, Salim al-Maalouf, Nadim Naim, Salim Abdel Nour, Fouad Naffa, Auguste Bakhos (his think tanker nephew today opposes peace with Israel), Boutros Harb (his son Majd is the leader of ending the law of boycotting Israel), Gibran Touq, Habib Kairouz, Maurice Fadel, Elias Hrawi (later Assad guy and elected president), Elias al-Khazen, Louis Abu Sharaf, George Saadeh, Nasri al-Maalouf, Tarek Habshi, Mikhael al-Daher.
Sunni (8):
Saeb Salam (uncle of incumbent Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam), Jamil Kabbi, Suleiman al-Ali, Nazih al-Bizri, Zaki Mazboudi, Othman al-Dana, Munif al-Khatib, Nadim Salem.
Shia (17):
Rafic Shaheen, Mahmoud Ammar, Hamid Dakroub, Abdel Latif Beidoun, Ali al-Abdullah, Abdel Latif al-Zein, Muhammad Youssef Beidoun, Ali Khalil, Adel Osseiran, Bashir al-Awar, Hussein Mansour, Kazem al-Khalil, Talal al-Murabbi, Fouad al-Tahini, Subhi Yaghi, Anwar al-Sabah, Youssef Hammoud.
Druze (1): Majid Arslan
Voted against: Najah Wakim (Greek Orthodox, Assad’s guy) and Zaher Khatib (Sunni, also Assad’s guy).
Abstentions: Hussein al-Husseini (Shia – later became speaker), Rashid al-Solh (Sunni who got some PM terms), and Albert Mansour (Christian).
The vote with “reservation” came from Tripoli’s Sunni MP who was the man of Iraqi Baath and Saddam Hussein in Lebanon. (Pic not of the May 17 session but of parliament around that time) See less