English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News
& Editorials
For May 19/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the
lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.may19.26.htm
News Bulletin Achieves Since
2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Click On
The Below Link To Join Elias Bejjaninews whatsapp group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/FPF0N7lE5S484LNaSm0MjW
اضغط
على الرابط في
أعلى للإنضمام
لكروب
Eliasbejjaninews whatsapp group
Elias Bejjani/Click on
the below link to subscribe to my youtube channel
الياس
بجاني/اضغط
على الرابط في
أسفل للإشتراك في
موقعي ع اليوتيوب
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAOOSioLh1GE3C1hp63Camw
Bible Quotations For today
Whoever serves me
must follow me, and where I am, there will my servant be also
Saint John 12/26-30:”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.’The crowd standing there heard it and
said that it was thunder. Others said, ‘An angel has spoken to him.’Jesus
answered, ‘This voice has come for your sake, not for mine.”
Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related
News & Editorials published on 18-19 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
Video link to journalist Ali Hamadeh’s commentary exposing the Lebanese
government’s negligence regarding the crime of the expansion and failure to
remove the Hezbollah-established BIEL camp on Beirut’s seafront
Brief observations on the the Lebanese Pen Club project in New York: Historical
distortions and cultural fraud/Dr. Charles Chartouni/May 1/2026
For a century, the West including the Western Church, has been played./Roger
Edde/Face Book/May 19/2026
Every Lebanese who stood against the 17 May 1983 accord has contributed
to:/Roger Bejjani/Face Book/May 19/2026
The General Amnesty Draft Law Passed in Committees... After Amendments
Pope Leo: I Pray Daily for Lebanon… It Is a Country Very Dear to My Heart
Israeli Warnings and Widespread Raids in South Lebanon… and the “Party” Links
the Ceasefire to Israel’s Commitment
Israel, Hezbollah fighting persists as Aoun vows to do ‘the impossible’ to end
war
Israel Pushes Toward Political and Security Coordination with Lebanon… and Aoun:
No Option but to Stop the War
The Israeli Army Announces the Assassination of the Islamic Jihad Commander in
the Bekaa
Father Michel Abboud Elected Regional Superior of the Carmelite Fathers Order in
Lebanon
Israel Has Seized Around 1,000 Square Kilometers of Land, Half of It in South
Lebanon!
Government Measures to Regulate Displaced Persons' Tents in Downtown Beirut
Will the IDF summon Hezbollah for a round of destruction in Nabatieh?/Colonel
Charbel Barakat/May 19/2026
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous
Reports And News published
on 18-19 May/2026
Five dead in shooting at San Diego mosque, police cites ‘generalised hate
rhetoric’
Trump announces pause in attack on Iran, Tehran sees ‘softening’ of US stance
UAE restores power to Barakah nuclear plant, Iran seen crossing a redline
Risk of renewed US-Iran fighting persists amid wide gaps, no concessions
Iran Responds to the US Proposal and Adheres to Communicating via the Pakistani
Mediator Despite the Stalled Negotiations
Consisting of 14 Clauses.. Iran Submits a New Proposal to Washington to End the
War
Israel and Washington Hint at Escalation Against Iran… and Plans to Strike
Energy and Infrastructure Facilities
The Iranian President Admits: We Cannot Say That the Enemy Is Being Defeated and
We Are Prospering
Pakistan Deploys Fighter Jets and Thousands of Troops to Saudi Arabia During the
Iran War
Confidential Documents: Kuwaiti Drones Flew in Iraqi Airspace Shortly Before the
Iran War
The European Union Removes the Syrian Ministries of Interior and Defense From
Sanctions Lists
Titles For The Latest
English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on 18-19 May/2026
Gaza’s orange line and the architecture of
permanent displacement'/Dr Imran Khalid/The Arab Weekly/May 19/2026
Heading toward disaster in the Middle East/James J. Zogby/The Arab Weekly/May
19/2026
Mohamed Aoun and Libya’s struggle over oil and legitimacy/Salah El Houni/The
Arab Weekly/May 19/2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets for May 18/2026
Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials
published
on 18-19 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.
Video link to journalist Ali Hamadeh’s commentary exposing
the Lebanese government’s negligence regarding the crime of the expansion and
failure to remove the Hezbollah-established BIEL camp on Beirut’s seafront
May 18, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/05/154529/
Elias Bejjani:
“This is indeed a full-fledged crime. This Hezbollah camp must be removed
immediately. We ask: where are the Beirut MPs, and why have they remained silent
until now?”
Introduction to the Commentary
The Lebanese government is failing to act: the camp on Beirut’s seafront is
expanding
According to the newspaper An-Nahar, the Governor of Beirut is expanding the
“BIEL” camp on the waterfront by reinforcing it with additional tents. The
state, through its various institutions, has failed to relocate the displaced
residents to proper shelter centers. Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has also failed
to address the issue of the displaced people in the “BIEL” camp and to secure a
suitable alternative with acceptable standards and services. Lebanon’s
experience with camps is an old one, often accompanied by demographic and
geographic transformations, as happened in the Ouzai area and along the coast of
the Baabda district (San Simon, San Michel, etc.). Observers warn that Hezbollah
could rapidly establish a security foothold on Beirut’s seafront facing the Port
of Beirut and downtown Beirut, where the Parliament, the Grand Serail, and the
northern gateway to the capital are located.
An-Nahar
“The ‘BIEL’ camp issue is growing and could soon become a real crisis. This camp
lacks the minimum standards for decent living, while shelter centers are
available and ready to host the displaced residents of the ‘BIEL’ camp.
Therefore, there is no justification for delay.
It is the duty of Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, a son of Beirut, not to be lenient
in resolving this issue, especially since the camp could expand at any moment
and Hezbollah could introduce weapons and armed elements into it. To Nawaf Salam
we say: do not leave this file to Minister Haneen El-Sayed — this matter is your
responsibility as a son of Beirut.”
The ceasefire that came into effect at midnight Sunday–Monday will remain only
partial as long as the issue of restricting weapons remains frozen and
unresolved without any real action on the ground. Therefore, expect periods of
escalating and fluctuating security tensions, not to mention the repercussions
should war with Iran resume.
Brief observations on the the Lebanese Pen Club project in New York: Historical
distortions and cultural fraud
Dr. Charles Chartouni/May 1/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/05/154538/
Brief observations on the the Lebanese Pen Club project in New York: Historical
distortions and cultural fraud:
A- The city of New York inaugurated a square dedicated to the Lebanese writers
who lived in New York at the onset of the Twentieth century. The city of New
York misappropriated their identity and traced them to a so called " Greater
Syria", an ideological geopolitical entity".
Lebanon was in a transitional stage between the end of the Mutassarifiya regime
(1861-1914) and the rise of the nation-state system featured by the formation of
the State of the "Greater Lebanon " (Grand Liban) in 1920. Their attribution to
the " Greater Syria" is a blatant usurpation which betrays the ideological
agenda behind it. The city of New York represented by its mayor Zohran Mamdani
and governing board bear full responsibility for the obliteration of historical
facts and identity fraud.
They cannot shelter behind the truncated Lebanese labeling while deliberately
connecting it to a fictitious political entity. We appeal on the revocation of
the intentional fraud, on the urge to restore the historical coordinates and
remodel the inappropriate choreography and the architectural setting to reflect
the mandated corrections. The Moroccan designer and landscaper is manifestly
unacquainted with the historical facts and intellectual idiosyncrasies related
to the purported monument.
B- I am not interested in the ideological labeling proper to that era. Lebanon,
at the time, was under the Mutassarifiya (1861–1914) and was not part of a
purported "Greater Syria," as carved in the stone of this monument. The names
are well listed, and they all belong to Mount Lebanon and are mainly Christians
aside from one unknown Druze writer. The Mount Lebanon of nowadays overlaps, by
and large, with the territories of the medieval Emirate (1516-1842).
Telescoping the historical facts to accommodate the ideological ruminations of
"Greater Syria" is not a historical fact but an ideological artifact. Lebanese
were not consulted, and Islamist governance in New York is behind the
undertaking as part of its ideological project, as duly mentioned in the
presentation. Your reference to the Turcos belongs to the Latin American
hemisphere and traces back to the Ottoman Empire taxonomy.
As for these writers, they differed in their ideological outlooks and were quite
perplexed about their identity markers since the formation of Lebanese
territorial statehood was a recent phenomenon succeeding the demise of the
Ottoman Sultanate (the last Islamic khilafah). Labeling them as part of "Greater
Syria" is inaccurate because no such geopolitical entity exists; this term only
reflects the perspectives of the emerging Arab and Syrian nationalist ideologies
of that era. The mainly Christian Lebanese nationalism advocates of "Greater
Lebanon" deliberately contradicted them. This ideological controversy has never
stopped, albeit it has embraced different versions and ideological stakes.
Otherwise, what are the cultural credentials of the project's authors, and where
does the cultural consensus locate? None of these questions are answered. I am
not relying on the ideological lenses of self-validating American cultural
entrepreneurs to decide about the relevance of this undertaking. Otherwise, the
co-optation of a Moroccan designer who knows nothing about our cultural history
is another departure from the epistemological standards that are mandated in
such cultural undertakings
For a century, the West including the Western Church,
has been played.
Roger Edde/Face Book/May 19/2026
They swallowed the fairy tale of “coexistence” in Greater Lebanon hook, line,
and cross.
A church standing next to a mosque.
A priest and an imam praying together.
Ave Maria blended with the call to prayer. Beautiful photo ops. Powerful
Instagram moments. Perfect for Western guilt, for virtue-signaling conferences,
for papal visits, and for fundraising campaigns.
They are not coexistence.
They are theater to silence the uncomfortable questions.
Real coexistence is not a postcard.
It is when every community’s security is guaranteed, not left to the mercy of
supra national agendas and mercenary religious militias.
It is when political participation is fairly shared, not sabotaged by
demographic engineering and backroom deals.
It is when demographic shifts are not weaponized every decade as a threat:
“Don’t you dare…or we will outbreed you.”
It is when Christians are treated as founders of this state, not reduced to a
decorative minority whose only remaining role is to smile in interfaith photos
while their political weight is steadily erased.
It is when a Christian who simply longs for peace and the survival of his
community is not branded a traitor or a Zionist,
For one hundred years, Lebanon has sold the West a lie wrapped in incense and
minaret calls. And the West, eager to believe in fairy tales, bought it. The
Western Church, in particular, has been especially gullible, mistaking staged
spiritual summits for actual coexistence and confusing photo opportunities with
the Gospel’s demand for truth.
The mask is slipping.
The numbers don’t lie. The security situation doesn’t lie. The financial abuse
doesn’t lie. The systematic marginalization of founding communities doesn’t lie.
It is time for the Western world, and yes, the Western Church, to stop
applauding the performance and start demanding reality.
Lebanon does not need more interfaith theater.
It needs truth.
It needs justice.
It needs guaranteed security and equal citizenship for every community, starting
with the one that built the modern state and has been punished for it ever
since.
And this cannot be offered unless each community is granted the right to
autonomy.
The West’s stubborn refusal to face Lebanon’s reality is a century-long exercise
in self-deception that has cost real lives and destroyed generations.
The show is over.
Every Lebanese who stood against the 17 May 1983 accord
has contributed to:
Roger Bejjani/Face Book/May 19/2026
Every Lebanese who stood against the 17 May 1983 accord has contributed to:
1. Extend the Israeli occupation for at least 15 years.
2. The creation of the cancer that we are suffering from: HZB.
3. All the wars and miseries during the past 45 years.
The main champions of this achievement were at that time:
Berri and Jomblat who were working at that time for the Assad regime.
Today all Lebanese opposing a peace treaty with Israel and the dismantlement of
HZB in Lebanon, are contributing to maintaining the status of demise and misery
of Lebanon and Lebanese. The champions are still 45 years later, Berri and
Jomblat working for the interest of the Iranian regime.
It is beyond human understanding. See less
The General Amnesty Draft Law Passed in Committees... After
Amendments
Voice of Lebanon / May 19, 2026
The Joint Parliamentary Committees have approved the general amnesty draft law
after introducing the following amendments to it:
Death Penalty: Reduced to 28 prison years.
Life Imprisonment: Reduced to 18 prison years.
Detainees Not Yet Sentenced: Reduced to 14 prison years.
Sentences: Reduced by one-third.
The Exiled: Law 194 issued in 2011 was adopted, and its provisions were deemed
effective.
Drug-Related Offenses: Amnesty for drug abuse and unorganized drug trafficking,
while excluding organized trafficking and trade.
Personal Rights Link: Linking the implementation of the amnesty provisions to
personal rights (civil claims), meaning that no convicted person will benefit
from the amnesty unless the personal right is dropped.
Consolidation of Sentences: Approved by adopting the highest sentence, while
granting the judge the right to combine sentences up to a ceiling of one-quarter
of the harshest penalty. Furthermore, the Bureau of the Parliament will hold a
meeting later today.
Speaker of the Parliament Nabih Berri had previously called for a plenary
session to be held at 11:00 AM and PM on Thursday, May 21, to study the draft
laws and proposals listed on the agenda.
Pope Leo: I Pray Daily for Lebanon… It Is a Country Very
Dear to My Heart
Voice of Lebanon / May 19, 2026
In the Vatican, Pope Leo XIV received Aram I Keshishian, Catholicos of the
Armenian Apostolic Church. The Pope addressed his guest and the accompanying
delegation with a speech that he began with the words of Apostle Paul in his
Epistle to the Ephesians: "Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the
Lord Jesus Christ." He recalled that Saint Paul expresses the bond existing
between the two churches, especially since he was born in Tarsus, Cilicia—the
city where the Armenian Apostolic Church establishes its headquarters—and at the
end of his life, he received the crown of martyrdom in Rome. The Pope noted that
he entrusts to the intercession of the Apostle to the Gentiles the pilgrimage
visit made by his guests to the Eternal City, pointing out that he cannot but
recall the great saints who worked for Christian unity, especially Saint Nerses,
Catholicos of Cilicia, who can be considered a pioneer of the ecumenical
movement and who has been included in the Roman Catholic Church's Book of
Martyrs. If this indicates anything, it indicates the ecumenism of the martyrs
that unites the two churches.
Afterward, the Supreme Pontiff affirmed that the Catholicosate of the House of
Cilicia stands at the crossroads between different peoples and cultures, and has
been distinguished since ancient times by its ecumenical vocation, especially
regarding the Church of Rome. He pointed out that the special relationship
existing between the two churches, which was solid in the Middle Ages, witnessed
new developments in the twentieth century, particularly following the
proceedings of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council. In this context, he
explained that his guest's predecessor, Catholicos Khoren I, was the first head
of an Eastern Orthodox Church to visit Rome after the aforementioned council, in
May of the year 1967.
The Pope continued, saying that the current Catholicos, Aram I, is known for his
tireless ecumenical zeal on both local and international levels, noting that he
is one of the founders of the Middle East Council of Churches and is committed
within the framework of the World Council of Churches, in which he has held
several prominent positions. The Supreme Pontiff then expressed his deep
gratitude for the efforts made by his guest to strengthen relations with the
Catholic Church and for his closeness to the Church of Rome, which he visited
for the first time since his election on the occasion of the Week of Prayer for
Christian Unity in January of the year 1997, with visits repeated since that
date.
The Pope also thanked Catholicos Aram I for his personal commitment to
establishing the foundations of theological dialogue between the two churches
since 2003, within the framework of the Joint International Commission for
Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Oriental Orthodox
Churches. He explained that this dialogue enjoys the valuable contribution of
the delegations of the Armenian Apostolic Church, which has led to the issuance
of three important documents concerning the nature and mission of the Church, in
addition to communion in the Church of the early centuries and the sacraments.
In this context, the Pope expressed hope that this dialogue would continue with
renewed momentum despite current difficulties, because communion between the two
churches will not be restored unless unity in faith is first achieved.
The Pope's words were not devoid of talking about the country where Catholicos
Aram I was born, namely Lebanon, recalling that he had the opportunity to visit
it last December. He said that this country, which is very dear to his heart and
which showed the whole world the possibility of components from different
cultures and religions living together within one state, is still facing harsh
trials today. He stressed that at a time when the country's unity and
sovereignty are under threat, the two churches must seek to strengthen the bond
of brotherhood that unites Christians among themselves, and with their brothers
and sisters from other communities.
The Pope added that he prays daily for the intention of the people of Lebanon
and the churches of the Middle East, for which Aram I wished to dedicate a
conference during his stay in Rome. At the conclusion of his speech, the Supreme
Pontiff affirmed that at a time when we are preparing to celebrate Pentecost to
live the mystery of the miracle of the Holy Spirit's descent upon the nascent
Church, he is pleased to raise a joint prayer with the Catholicos of the
Armenian Apostolic Church, following the meeting, so that the Lord, the Giver of
Life, may grant us the gift of unity, bestow upon us lasting peace, and renew
the face of the earth.
Israeli Warnings and Widespread Raids in South Lebanon… and
the “Party” Links the Ceasefire to Israel’s Commitment
Janoubia / May 18, 2026
The field escalation continues in South Lebanon, with a series of Israeli
warnings and raids targeting a number of towns, coinciding with artillery
shelling and intensive overflights of warplanes and drones in the region's
airspace. The Israeli army issued warnings to the residents of a number of
villages and towns in the South, including Harouf, Burj Al-Shamali, and Debaal,
calling for evacuation. On the ground, an Israeli raid targeted the town of
Majdel Selm in the Marjayoun district, and another targeted the town of Tebnine
in the Bint Jbeil district, while artillery shelling hit the town of Kfar Tibnit
in the Nabatieh district. The raids also included the towns of Doueir, Harouf,
Deir Zahrani, Majdel Selm, Kfar Tibnit, and Zoutar, in addition to the city of
Nabatieh. On the other hand, a source close to "Hezbollah" told Al-Hadath that
the party's stance on the ceasefire is linked to Israel's commitment, confirming
the refusal to return to the pre-March 2 status, and stressing that the party
deals with what is happening within the context of regional developments and the
general Lebanese stance, with a difference in the method of managing the
negotiation file. The source added that communication is not carried out with
the President of the Republic, but rather through the Speaker of the Parliament.
Israel, Hezbollah fighting persists as Aoun vows to do
‘the impossible’ to end war
The Arab Weekly/May 19/2026
Israel carried out airstrikes in southern Lebanon on Monday, Lebanese security
sources and the state news agency said, while Hezbollah announced new attacks on
Israeli forces, continuing the war in Lebanon despite the extension of a
US-backed truce. Since the war began on March 2, more than 3,000 people have
been killed in Lebanon, the country’s health ministry reported in its latest
casualty toll on Monday. Reignited by the US-Israeli conflict with Iran,
hostilities between Iran-backed Hezbollah and Israel have rumbled on since US
President Donald Trump first announced a ceasefire on April 16, with fighting
mostly contained to southern Lebanon. A 45-day ceasefire extension, announced
after a third round of U.S.-hosted talks between Lebanon and Israel on Friday,
began at midnight, a Lebanese official said. The US-led mediation has emerged in
parallel to diplomacy aimed at ending the US-Iran conflict. Iran has said ending
Israel’s war in Lebanon is one of its demands for a deal over the wider
conflict. Hezbollah, which opened fire at Israel on March 2, objects to Beirut
taking part in the talks. Meanwhile, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said Monday
that he would do the “impossible” in order to stop the war with Israel, after
the ceasefire and direct talks between the countries failed to end the
fighting.“The framework that Lebanon has set for the negotiations consists of an
Israeli withdrawal, a ceasefire, the deployment of the army along the border,
the return of the displaced, and economic aid,” Aoun said in a statement Monday.
“My duty, based on my position and my responsibility, is to do the impossible,
and to choose what is least costly, in order to stop the war against Lebanon and
its people,” he added. Overnight, an Israeli strike near the eastern Lebanese
city of Baalbeck killed a commander of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad militant
group, a Hezbollah ally, along with his daughter, security sources in Lebanon
said. The Israeli military said it had killed the commander, Wael Mahmoud Abd
al-Halim, in a strike, after taking steps to “mitigate the risk of harm to
civilians”. It made no mention of Halim’s daughter. Hezbollah said it launched
an explosive drone at an Iron Dome air defence position in the Galilee area of
northern Israel, and carried out other attacks on Israeli forces in Lebanon.
Israel’s military said some “launches” aimed at Israeli soldiers in southern
Lebanon, as well as an explosive drone, had crossed into Israeli territory.
Lebanon’s National News Agency reported Israeli airstrikes on more than half a
dozen locations in south Lebanon. The Israeli military said earlier on Monday it
had struck more than 30 Hezbollah sites in southern Lebanon in the previous 24
hours, and warned residents of three villages in the south to leave their homes,
saying it intended to act against Hezbollah. Israeli soldiers have invaded and
occupied a swathe of south Lebanon, operating inside an Israeli-declared “yellow
line” that runs around 10 kilometers north of the border. They have carried out
large-scale demolitions in the area. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu
said on Sunday his country was “facing the challenge of neutralising FPV
(first-person view) drones,” as Hezbollah has increasingly made use of the tech
to strike Israeli forces.
Reuters reported on May 4 that several thousand Hezbollah fighters had been
killed in the war, citing casualty estimates from within the group. The
Hezbollah media office said at the time the figure of several thousand fighters
killed was false.
Israeli authorities say 18 soldiers have been killed by Hezbollah attacks or
while operating in south Lebanon since March 2, in addition to a contractor
working for an engineering company on behalf of Israel’s defence ministry.
Hezbollah attacks have killed two civilians in northern Israel.
Israel Pushes Toward Political and Security Coordination
with Lebanon… and Aoun: No Option but to Stop the War
Janoubia / May 18, 2026
In a highly complex Lebanese moment, where military pressures intersect with
political and security negotiations, the President of the Republic, General
Joseph Aoun, drew a clear framework for the Lebanese stance on the ongoing
negotiations with Israel, defining its ceiling as an Israeli withdrawal from the
occupied territories, a ceasefire, the deployment of the Lebanese Army on the
borders, the return of the displaced, in addition to providing economic and
financial assistance to Lebanon, denying everything being circulated about
understandings that go beyond this framework. Aoun's words were not merely a
political stance, but a clear attempt to dispel internal fears of Lebanon
sliding into a negotiating track that exceeds stabilizing the calm toward
sensitive security arrangements affecting the Lebanese interior and its
political and security structure. The Lebanese President realizes that any talk
of direct military coordination with Israel, or about a Lebanese role in
dismantling Hezbollah’s structure by force, is capable of igniting the Lebanese
interior and opening the doors to an internal confrontation no less dangerous
than the ongoing war.
In contrast, Israel appears to be exploiting the current war to impose new
strategic realities in South Lebanon. The leaked Israeli information regarding
the withdrawal conditions clearly reveals that Tel Aviv is not only looking to
halt Hezbollah's threat, but to completely reshape the security equation south
of the Litani.
The five Israeli conditions, which range from establishing a buffer zone,
imposing strict international-American supervision, preventing the return of
residents of border villages, and maintaining occupied military points, all the
way to complete control over the weapon entry routes into Lebanon, reflect an
Israeli attempt to impose a security model similar to what happened after
previous international agreements, but with harsher conditions. What is new in
these proposals is the talk of establishing a military and security coordination
mechanism under American supervision, which observing circles consider a prelude
to putting the Lebanese Army in a confrontation with Hezbollah under the title
of implementing the new security obligations.
According to the circulated data, Washington is pushing toward transforming the
current negotiations into a platform for producing long-term security
arrangements, including joint intelligence and military monitoring mechanisms,
and perhaps special units within the Lebanese Army tasked with dealing with
Hezbollah’s weapons file. However, official Lebanon, as information indicates,
is trying to avoid this scenario, fully aware of the scale of the risks that
could result from involving the military institution in an internal
confrontation with the party. The military institution is still considered the
last pillar of national cohesion, and any attempt to plunge it into an internal
clash could lead to its fragmentation or plunge the country into open security
chaos. From here, one can understand President Aoun's insistence on confirming
that the goal of the negotiations is to stop the war and minimize losses, while
entering into arrangements that exceed Lebanon's capacity to bear their security
repercussions, unless a decisive change occurs in the international and regional
balances.
On the ground, the extension of the ceasefire agreement did not succeed in
cooling the southern front, as Israeli raids continued at a violent pace on the
villages of the South and the Bekaa, targeting homes, residential complexes, and
multiple sites, while Hezbollah continued to launch rockets and drones toward
Israeli positions. The mutual escalation reflects that the battle is no longer
merely field reactions, but part of a mutual negotiating pressure process.
Israel is trying through fire to impose its political and security conditions,
while Hezbollah seeks to establish the equation that it still possesses the
capability to respond and confront despite the harsh blows.
However, the greatest cost remains on Lebanese civilians, who live between
destruction, displacement, and economic collapse, while fears grow that the
ongoing negotiations will turn into an entry point for redrawing Lebanese
internal balances under the pressure of war and ruin. What is happening today
goes beyond the boundaries of traditional negotiation over a ceasefire. Lebanon
stands before a pivotal moment related to the future of its role and its
security and political situation, while Israel and the United States are trying
to exploit the war to produce a new reality in the South, and perhaps in all of
Lebanon. As for the biggest challenge facing the Lebanese state, it remains its
ability to stop the war on one hand, and to prevent the interior from exploding
on the other hand, in light of highly fragile balances and regional and
international pressures that exceed the capacity of an exhausted Lebanon to
endure.
The Israeli Army Announces the Assassination of the Islamic
Jihad Commander in the Bekaa
Janoubia / May 18, 2026
The spokesperson for the Israeli army, Avichay Adraee, announced that during its
attack last night in the Baalbek region, the Israeli army assassinated Wael
Mahmoud Abdel Halim, who served as the commander of the Islamic Jihad
organization in the Bekaa region in Lebanon. Adraee added that Abdel Halim led
the joining of Islamic Jihad elements to fight alongside Hezbollah elements in
Lebanon, and recently worked on promoting plots against Israeli forces. The
Israeli army had targeted a Palestinian family on the outskirts of the city of
Baalbek, near the southern entrance. The attack was carried out using a guided
missile targeting the apartment where the Palestinian family lives. The attack
resulted in the assassination of a leader in the Islamic Jihad movement named
Wael Abdel Halim and the martyrdom of his daughter, Rama (17 years old). Rescue
and ambulance teams were working at the scene to lift the rubble and search for
survivors.
Father Michel Abboud Elected Regional Superior of the
Carmelite Fathers Order in Lebanon
Voice of Lebanon / May 19, 2026
Voice of Lebanon has learned that Father Michel Abboud was elected Regional
Superior of the Carmelite Fathers Order in Lebanon during the regional chapter
held at the Saint Elias Monastery in Al-Mwayasra.
Israel Has Seized Around 1,000 Square Kilometers of Land,
Half of It in South Lebanon!
Voice of Lebanon / May 19, 2026
The "Financial Times" revealed that Israel has seized around 1,000 square
kilometers of land, half of it in South Lebanon and the rest in Gaza and Syria
since the "October 7" attack.
Government Measures to Regulate Displaced Persons' Tents in
Downtown Beirut
MTV / May 18, 2026
Government sources confirmed to "MTV" today, Monday, that the government's
decision regarding the displaced persons on the Beirut waterfront is clear and
explicit, noting that anyone wishing to receive basic services must head to the
centers designated for that purpose, foremost of which is the Sports City (Cité
Sportive). The sources added that in recent days, the construction of tents for
the displaced made of iron and wood was observed on the waterfront, and they
have been removed, which prompted the government to take action to control and
regulate the situation.
Will the IDF summon Hezbollah for a round of destruction
in Nabatieh?
Colonel Charbel Barakat/May 19/2026
The day the Israelis began advancing toward the city of Khiam, Hezbollah
launched its slogans, vowing to turn the city into a graveyard for the “enemy.”
Its media outlets began detailing strikes and acts of heroism inflicted upon the
“invaders,” even publishing casualty figures and the number of destroyed tanks.
However, its pronouncements gradually faded as the “enemy’s” “precise” operation
in Khiam continued, allowing some fighters to escape the city via an open
corridor toward Balat and Debine. This corridor remains open, perhaps to trap
any enthusiastic fighters should they prepare to return and fulfill their dream
of martyrdom and ascension to heaven with the help of Israeli forces.
Then, the operation to encircle Bint Jbeil began. Hezbollah considered it the de
facto “capital” of the resistance, destined to become the “grveyard of the
Israelis.” There, the party reportedly amassed hundreds of fighters from its
Radwan forces, fully equipped with weapons, gear, fortified trenches, tunnels,
and supply depots. The tragic irony is that some residents, unaware of the plot
against the city, tacitly supported the systematic destruction that followed
every act of “resistance.” The Israelis then slowly encircled the city, moving
from the direction of Aitaroun toward Ainata, and later from the south between
Yaroun and Ain Ebel, leaving a corridor for reinforcements and escape toward
Qounine.
The bombardment, encroachment, and demolition continued for weeks—long enough to
eliminate those who resisted or remained trapped. Every movement within the city
was followed by destruction: first bombardment, then demolition, and finally
bulldozing. This type of operation continues, as the Israelis wait for any
suspicious movement to intensify the destruction. This matches what we witnessed
in the previous “cleansing” operations in Gaza; what appears here is a replica,
with the only difference being the towering buildings of Gaza versus the private
homes and beautiful villas that once adorned Bint Jbeil and its markets.
Today, amidst the negotiations that the party demands and pressures to hold—but
then rejects in the media because Iranian orders have not yet been issued—the
burden falls on President Berri. He must balance the demands of the affected
residents with the orders of the influential members of the armed group. These
members hold the reins of power without full authority (because the decision
remains in Tehran), yet they continue to burden the “stricken” sect with the
consequences of their random decisions and the childish concepts that control
the people and their fate. They gamble with all the wealth and real estate the
people have accumulated and inherited, which often overflow with memories.
In this atmosphere, the “enemy” is advancing toward a new target, which may be
the city of Nabatieh. He has prepared the ground around it and started the
encirclement operation by crossing the river at Zawater and increasing the
shelling of Nabi Taher, Arnoun, Yahmar al-Shaqif, and its surroundings from the
east, and Haboush from the north. He will advance gradually over time to carry
out the operation with complete steadiness. During this preparation,he has
apparently begun to draw out what remains of the Radwan forces and other
fighting units. These units, supported by “new” types of drones, are being used
to inflict losses on this “enemy” in lives and equipment, aiming to make him
lose his mind so that he begs for a ceasefire and an agreement to withdraw
without conditions.
The area between the Litani and Zahrani rivers, from Nabi Taher to Adloun and
Ghaziyeh, is the heart of the Shiite presence in the south. It is in this area
that the party’s struggle developed and its practical concepts spread, starting
from Jebchit and its surroundings to Ansar, and moving down toward the coast.
This occurred after it took control of the Amal Movement with Syrian support and
handed over the Lebanese file to Iranian leaders. These leaders effectively
bought the entire sect, emptying it of its history and dreams to turn it into a
hatchery of ideologically driven fighters who serve the system of the Supreme
Leader and seek to ensure his control over the entire region.
The enemy is floundering in the south, and Hezbollah is losing its resilience
daily, along with the support of the Lebanese people who are gradually freeing
themselves from its grip. Is it conceivable that the people of Nabatieh would
declare it an open city—free of armed men, tunnels, and weapons depots—thereby
eliminating any fighting within its buildings and residential areas? But how can
they do so when some still dream of resistance victories and the defeat of the
enemy? They act as if southern Lebanon were the size of Russia compared to
Napoleon’s armies, relying on the scorched-earth policy adopted by the Tsar, or
as if the battle of Nabatieh would be like the Battle of Stalingrad for Hitler’s
army in World War II.
The aspirations of the class that claims to understand and formulate theories
about warfare and combat remain far removed from reality, despite the abundance
of brilliant officers from the school of “Marshal” Hoteit, not to mention the
military analysts who promote these dazzling victories. Meanwhile, the Israelis,
along with the United States, are striving to expedite the resolution of the
Iranian situation and the dismantling of its nuclear program as a prelude to its
surrender, thereby cutting off salaries and orders to Hezbollah fighters. Who
will prevail in this series of losses and victories? Will there be any room for
opinion or maneuvering once the situation is settled and defeats and disasters
mount?
The coming days will undoubtedly reveal a new facet of this war, which began
with Hamas’s attack in Gaza. The so-called “resistance” faction—deluded by its
own arrogance and its swift plan to dismantle the “spider’s web” in seven
minutes, return the Jews to their countries of origin, and pray in the Al-Aqsa
Mosque—will now reveal the true fate of the resistance front across all its
branches, from Gaza to Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon, culminating in Iran, the head
of the octopus.
Iran believed that playing with the big players was a matter that could be
avoided and left to its tentacles. However, the decision has been made to
completely eliminate it, its tentacles, and its centers of power and control
over the Iranian people. Neither it nor its tentacles will remain; the head, the
tentacles, and even the feet will fall, and it will never rise again.
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published
on 18-19 May/2026
Five dead in shooting at San Diego mosque, police cites ‘generalised hate
rhetoric’
The Arab Weekly/May 19/2026
Two teenage gunmen opened fire on Monday at the Islamic Centre of San Diego,
California, killing a security guard and two other men outside the mosque before
the suspects were found dead, apparently from self-inflicted gunshot wounds,
police said. San Diego Police Chief Scott Wahl said local law enforcement and
the FBI were investigating the attack on the largest mosque in San Diego County
as a hate crime. However, no precise motive or precipitating incident for the
gun violence has been publicly suggested by authorities. At an evening news
conference, Wahl disclosed that the mother of one of the two suspects had called
police about two hours before the shooting to report that her son, whom she
described as suicidal, had run away from home taking three guns she owned and
her vehicle. Prior to the shooting police were not made aware of any “specific
threat” to the mosque or any religious centre, school, shopping area, or any
other place, Wahl said. Police instead were confronting a case of “generalised
hate rhetoric and hate speech,” which together with reports of a runaway
teenager with multiple weapons wearing camouflage “triggered a much bigger
threat assessment.”The attack came the week before the major Muslim holiday of
Eid al-Adha or Feast of the Sacrifice and the annual Hajj pilgrimage of Islamic
faithful to the holy site of Mecca in Saudi Arabia. “We have never experienced a
tragedy like this before,” Taha Hassane, the imam and director of the Islamic
Centre, told reporters. “It is extremely outrageous to target a place of
worship.”Scores of law enforcement officers called to the scene encountered the
bodies of the three men affiliated with the mosque shot dead. Officials credited
the slain security guard as likely having helped prevent further bloodshed. A
short time later, police discovered the bodies of two teenage males, aged 17 and
18, in a vehicle in the middle of a street, dead from apparently self-inflicted
gunshot wounds. Police originally put the age of the older youth at 19. The
Islamic Centre is the largest mosque in San Diego County and houses the Bright
Horizon Academy, a school providing Islamic education. Although random gun
violence has become a common occurrence in public places across the United
States, Muslim and Jewish communities have grown particularly apprehensive since
US and Israeli forces launched airstrikes on Iran on February 28, and Iran
responded with its own air attacks on Israel and several Gulf states, sparking
an intensifying war across the region. In March, a 41-year-old Lebanese-born US
citizen killed himself after crashing his truck into the largest Jewish temple
in Michigan, opening fire on security guards and causing an explosion with
fireworks. The synagogue near Detroit, like the San Diego mosque, housed a day
school.
Trump announces pause in attack on Iran, Tehran sees
‘softening’ of US stance
The Arab Weekly/May 19/2026
US President Donald Trump said on Monday he had paused a planned attack against
Iran after Tehran sent a peace proposal to Washington, and that there was now a
“very good chance” of reaching a deal limiting Iran’s nuclear programme.
After Iran sent the US a new peace proposal, The Gulf allies believe “a Deal
will be made” that includes “NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS FOR IRAN!” said Trump.The US
president said he had informed the US military “that we will NOT be doing the
scheduled attack of Iran tomorrow.”
But he added he had “further instructed them to be prepared to go forward with a
full, large scale assault of Iran, on a moment’s notice, in the event that an
acceptable Deal is not reached.”Trump had given Iran a series of increasingly
ominous warnings in the days since his return from a trip to China to meet
President Xi Jinping. Late Sunday he said the “clock is ticking” and threatened
that “there won’t be anything left” of Iran if no peace deal is reached. The
United States and Israel have been locked in a war with Iran since US and
Israeli forces launched strikes in late February.Trump has struggled to break an
impasse in negotiations and end the conflict, which has shaken the Middle East
and sent energy prices climbing.
The two sides have held only a single round of talks in Pakistan despite a
fragile ceasefire in April.
On Sunday, Iran’s 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.
Fars said that the Iranian proposal had emphasised that Tehran would continue to
manage the strategic Strait of Hormuz, a vital energy conduit which Iran has
largely kept closed since the start of the war.
On Monday, the Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), a new body Iran has set up
to enforce control of the Hormuz strait, said it would provide “real-time
updates” on X of operations and developments in the waterway.
Under pressure to reach an accord that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, Trump
has previously expressed hope that a deal was close on ending the war, but
threatened heavy strikes on Iran if Tehran does not reach a deal.
Speaking to reporters, he said the United States would be satisfied if it could
reach an agreement with Iran that prevents Tehran from obtaining a nuclear
weapon.
“There seems to be a very good chance that they can work something out. If we
can do that without bombing the hell out of them, I would be very happy,” Trump
told reporters gathered for an unrelated announcement. Trump’s post on calling
off an attack came after Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei
confirmed that Tehran’s views had been “conveyed to the American side through
Pakistan”, but gave no details. A Pakistani source confirmed that Islamabad,
which has conveyed messages between the sides in the war in the Middle East
since hosting the only round of peace talks last month, had shared the latest
proposal with Washington. But the source suggested progress had been difficult.
The sides “keep changing their goalposts,” the Pakistani source said, adding:
“We don’t have much time.”
Iran remained defiant in statements issued on state media after Trump’s
announcement, warning the U. and its allies against making any further
“strategic mistakes or miscalculations” in attacking Iran, while contending the
Iranian armed forces were “more prepared and stronger than in the past.”Iran’s
top joint military command, Khatam al-Anbiya, said Iran’s armed forces are
“ready to pull the trigger” in the event of any renewed US attack, according to
Iran’s Tasnim news agency.
“Any renewed aggression and invasion … will be responded to quickly, decisively,
powerfully, and extensively,” the commander of Khatam al-Anbiya, Ali Abdollahi,
was quoted as saying. The Iranian peace proposal, as described by a senior
Iranian source, appeared similar in many respects to Iran’s previous offer,
which Trump rejected last week as “garbage”.It would focus first on securing an
end to the war, reopening the Strait of Hormuz – a major oil supply route that
Iran has effectively blockaded – and lifting maritime sanctions.
Reflecting Tehran’s impresson that Washington’s is softening its stance, the
senior Iranian source said on Monday that the United States had agreed to
release a quarter of Iran’s frozen funds -totalling tens of billions of dollars-
held in foreign banks. Iran wants all the assets released.
The Iranian source also said Washington had shown “more flexibility” in agreeing
to let Iran continue some peaceful nuclear activity under supervision of the
International Atomic Energy Agency.
The US has not confirmed that it has agreed to anything in the talks. Iran’s
Tasnim news agency separately quoted an unidentified source as saying the US had
agreed to waive oil sanctions on Iran while negotiations were under way.
Iranian officials did not immediately comment on Tasnim’s report, which a US
official, who declined to be named, said was false. A fragile ceasefire is in
place after six weeks of war that followed US-Israeli airstrikes on Iran,
although drones have been launched from Iraq towards Gulf countries, including
the United Arab Emirates Baraka nuclear reactor, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait,
apparently by Iran or its regional proxies.
UAE restores power to Barakah nuclear plant, Iran seen
crossing a redline
The Arab Weekly/May 19/2026
The International Atomic Energy Agency said on Monday it has been informed by
the United Arab Emirates that off-site power was restored to Unit 3 of the
Barakah nuclear power plant following the drone strike on Sunday. Sunday’s drone
strike caused a fire at an electrical generator outside the inner perimeter of
the Barakah nuclear power plant, with authorities confirming that safety levels
were unaffected and no radioactive material was released. The first attack
targeting an Arab nuclear site has however sent a symbolic warning to the United
States and its Gulf allies about the threat posed by Iran and its allied
militias in the region in their no-holds-barred pursuit of attacks against Arab
neighbours .
The UAE has yet to officially blame anyone for the attack, in which drones
crossed its western border, but in the aftermath a top Emirati official pointed
the finger at Iran or one of its regional proxies. The limited attack appeared
to leave room for de-escalation, while sending a message to Gulf nations that
the region remains vulnerable despite the ongoing US-Iran ceasefire and peace
talks, in which Iran is using economic bargaining tools.
“This is highly significant symbolically, even if the physical damage appears
limited,” according to Andreas Krieg, a security expert at King’s College
London, who described it as “both a major escalation and a warning shot”.
The Arab world’s only nuclear plant, located near the UAE’s western border with
Saudi Arabia, is the country’s largest source of electricity and produces around
a quarter of national power. Iran has attacked the UAE and other Gulf nations
since the US and Israel launched strikes on the country on February 28,
particularly targeting energy and economic infrastructure. But the nuclear site
had been off limits until Sunday.
“Nuclear infrastructure has generally been treated as a red line in the region”
but now Tehran is sending a message that “no strategic infrastructure in the
Gulf is completely immune,” said Karim Bitar, a lecturer at Sciences Po in
Paris.
The drone attack is a measure of Iran’s awareness of its own vulnerability to
future attacks by the US and its regional allies. Tehran is upping the ante in a
quest for deterrence before its own nuclear facilities and other vital
infrastructure are attacked, even if its moves carry huge risks of
miscalculation, say analysts. Tehran could also be using this type of attacks as
a bargaining tool to pressure the wider Gulf region and its US ally to end the
war on its terms, as diplomacy behind the scenes continues with no concrete
results yet.
US President Donald Trump is also threatening renewed attacks and has said that
“there won’t be anything left” of Iran unless it agrees to a deal.
It suggests that “if the US were to escalate and attack civilian infrastructure
or important critical infrastructure in Iran, Iran would do the same to the UAE
and across the Gulf,” said Dania Thafer, director of the Gulf International
Forum research institute
The drone attack is also likely to harden the stance of the UAE, which has grown
increasingly hawkish since the war began. “Strategically, this will harden Abu
Dhabi’s view that passive defence is not enough,” Krieg said. “But the UAE will
still be cautious. It wants to avoid being dragged into open escalation.”
The raid was the latest in a string of unclaimed attacks on the UAE since an
April 8 ceasefire took effect in the war.The site had been in Tehran’s
crosshairs, with Iranian media publishing a list of power plants as potential
targets that included Barakah.
UAE presidential adviser Anwar Gargash appeared to refer to Iran and its proxies
in the Middle East, saying the attack was carried out “by the principal
perpetrator or through one of its agents”.The UAE has blamed Iran and Iraq-based
groups which Tehran backs for attacks across the Gulf, but it has so far
refrained from officially accusing anyone for Sunday’s incident. “Even when all
suspicions point toward Iran or Iran-aligned groups, governments may avoid
immediate public attribution because they want to preserve room for
de-escalation and avoid being trapped into a military response,” Bitar said.
Risk of renewed US-Iran fighting persists amid wide gaps,
no concessions
The Arab Weekly/May 19/2026
Three months after the United States and Israel staged an attack on Iran, a US
blockade and Tehran’s grip on the Strait of Hormuz have created a deadlock, with
neither side bending, economic pain deepening and the risk of renewed war
rising. Amid Trump’s mixed signals, the growing concern among policymakers is
how long tensions can persist before the wide gaps between the two sides trigger
renewed conflict. Calls for a fresh strike are growing louder in the US and
Israel, with some officials arguing that increased pressure could weaken
Tehran’s leverage and force Iran back to the negotiating table. “There is one
major problem with this theory: We have already tested it, repeatedly, and Iran
did not capitulate,” said Danny Citrinowicz, a senior researcher on Iran at
Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies and former head of the Iran
branch in Israeli Defence Intelligence. “We’re in a war of attrition with the
prospect of a new US-Israeli attack growing by the day,” said one regional
official. Iranian officials told Reuters concessions on their missile programme,
nuclear capabilities or control of the Strait are not policy tools but
ideological pillars of the Islamic Republic’s survival — giving them up is not
compromise, it is surrender. That explains, Citrinowicz said, why even prolonged
military confrontation has failed to shift Tehran from its red lines, and why
further escalation is unlikely to succeed.
Rounds of indirect talks mediated by Pakistan have produced no breakthrough. The
gaps remain vast. The United States wants Iran to halt uranium enrichment for 20
years and ship out its stockpiles to the US. Iran wants an end to strikes,
security guarantees, war reparations and recognition of its sovereignty over
Hormuz — terms Washington has rejected. President Trump has warned Tehran that
the “clock is ticking,” saying they “better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be
anything left of them.” He threatened that if Tehran fails to reach a deal with
Washington, it will face “a very bad time.”
Ali Vaez of the International Crisis Group said neither side has shown
willingness to make “the painful concessions” needed for a deal. “Both believe
time is on their side and they have the upper hand, and that perception is
precisely what is making a deal impossible.”
The result is a war of endurance centred on one of the world’s most critical
waterways. Before the war, the Strait carried roughly 25% of global oil trade
and 20% of liquefied natural gas. Now, with the strait near-closed, the economic
fallout is growing, disrupting supplies. Former State Department Iran official
Alan Eyre, who took part in past US-Iran talks, said an agreement may be out of
reach. “These two sides will never reach a deal. Trump doesn’t want to just win,
he wants to humiliate Iran and be seen as having crushed Iran.”Tehran sees its
stockpile of enriched uranium and control of Hormuz as core strategic assets
essential to survival. “Iran is therefore determined to use these assets to
guarantee its interests,” a senior Iranian official said, adding capitulation
is not an option.
“We fight, we die, but we don’t accept humiliation. Surrender is fundamentally
incompatible with Iran’s identity.”A second Iranian official argued Tehran has
already won — not by defeating Washington militarily, but by refusing to submit.
Weeks of US and Israeli strikes failed to break Iran’s will, reinforcing its
view that its nuclear stockpile and control of Hormuz remain the core of its
deterrence. Surrendering them would dismantle that balance. “Trump wants to
declare victory but Iran won’t give it to him. Can the world economy withstand
the pressure? That’s the question Trump owes the world an answer to,” he added.
More strikes would not change Iran’s calculus, only accelerate escalation, he
said, adding that Iran will not abandon enrichment or bow to ultimatums without
compromise from Washington.
Conflicted reality
Yet behind the defiant posture, Iranian sources close to the establishment
describe a more conflicted reality: Tehran does not want a prolonged “no war, no
peace” scenario as inflation rises, unemployment worsens and strikes on key
industries bleed an already battered economy. Instead, they said, Iran is
seeking a preliminary deal to end the war — reopening Hormuz under Iranian
oversight in exchange for lifting the US blockade, before tackling harder issues
such as sanctions relief and nuclear restrictions. The US says ending the war
must be deferred to later talks. On the nuclear issue, Iranian sources say
Tehran could dilute its stockpile of 440 kg of highly enriched uranium or send
part of it abroad, preferably to Russia, arguing it could reclaim it if
Washington violates any agreement. Washington has refused. Iran is also pushing
for a shorter halt to enrichment than Washington’s 20-year demand and full
access to $30 billion in frozen assets, but Washington has only agreed to free a
quarter of those assets under a timetable, the sources added. Tehran is seeking
a new governance mechanism to cement its control over Hormuz, rejecting a return
to the pre-war status quo, while the US insists on unconditional reopening — no
tolls, no veto — a gap that may prove harder to bridge than the nuclear issue
itself.
Aaron David Miller, a former US official and Middle East negotiator, says
control of Hormuz will be the key measure of success or failure for Washington.
How this ends could define Trump’s foreign policy, he added, with the US leader
acutely sensitive to the risk of being seen as having lost. Reopening the
waterway without a political settlement, Miller added, would require “a
prolonged American occupation with ground forces of Iranian territory”.
There is no military solution to Hormuz other than the costly one that Trump may
be unwilling to undertake, argued Vaez, leaving negotiations as the only viable
path.
Despite operational gains of the US-Israeli campaign, the strikes have failed to
deliver a strategic knockout, Citrinowicz said. “We didn’t topple the regime —
we have a more radicalised one. We didn’t end Iran’s missile capacity. And they
still have the uranium,” added the Israeli expert. Citrinowicz said
overestimating pressure and underestimating Tehran’s resilience carries its own
danger. “It raises the risk that Washington once again enters a confrontation
expecting coercion to produce capitulation, and discovers, too late, that the
regime was prepared to absorb far more pain than anticipated,” he said.
Iran Responds to the US Proposal and Adheres to Communicating via
the Pakistani Mediator Despite the Stalled Negotiations
Janoubia / May 18, 2026
Iran announced today, Monday, that it has responded to a new US proposal aimed
at ending the war, emphasizing the continuation of communication with the United
States through Pakistani mediation, amid ongoing stagnation and deep
disagreements between the two sides. The spokesperson for the Iranian Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, Esmaeil Baghaei, said during a press conference that Tehran
conveyed its "concerns" to the American side, adding: "As we announced
yesterday, our concerns have been conveyed to the American party." Baghaei
confirmed that communication channels with Washington "are still ongoing through
the Pakistani mediator," without providing additional details regarding the
content of the Iranian response or the nature of the mutual proposals.
This development comes following reports quoting a Pakistani source stating that
Islamabad sent a modified Iranian proposal to the United States in an attempt to
revive the stalled negotiations and push them toward a potential settlement.
According to the source, the talks are still facing major difficulties as both
parties continue to amend their conditions, reflecting the depth of the
disagreements over the terms of the agreement. He also noted that the time
available for the negotiating track "is not long," indicating the political and
military pressures surrounding the file.
These developments take place amid a continuous regional escalation since the
outbreak of the war between Iran on one side, and the United States and Israel
on the other, amid fears of the confrontation expanding into broader theaters in
the Middle East. Tehran had emphasized in its proposals the lifting of US
sanctions, the release of frozen assets, and the recognition of its right to
enrich uranium, while Washington has so far refused to provide full guarantees
regarding these demands. In contrast, US President Donald Trump continues to
hint at military options, while both Pakistan and the Sultanate of Oman are
intensifying their efforts to prevent the collapse of the diplomatic track.
Consisting of 14 Clauses.. Iran Submits a New Proposal to
Washington to End the War
Janoubia / May 18, 2026
The Iranian "Tasnim" news agency quoted an informed source close to the
negotiation team today, Monday, stating that Tehran has delivered a new text
consisting of 14 clauses via the Pakistani mediator, in preparation for its
transfer to the American side. According to the source, the Pakistani mediator
will take charge of delivering the Iranian proposal to Washington within the
mechanism for exchanging messages and positions between the two parties. The
source explained that the United States had recently responded to the previous
version of the Iranian proposal, which was also composed of 14 clauses, pointing
out that Tehran made amendments to its position before sending the text again in
its new form through the same channels. He added that the latest Iranian update
focuses mainly on issues related to ending the escalation and stopping the war,
in addition to including "confidence-building" measures from the American side
within the framework of any potential agreement. The source confirmed that the
process of exchanging messages between the two sides is continuing via the
Pakistani mediator in an indirect framework, without entering into declared
direct negotiations so far.
Meanwhile, "Reuters" quoted an informed Pakistani source stating that the United
States and Iran continue to amend their conditions within an indirect track of
negotiation, pointing out that the time available to resolve the differences "is
shrinking rapidly." According to the source, the two parties are still
exchanging new proposals and conditions through mediation channels, within the
framework of efforts aimed at narrowing the gaps between their positions. The
source added that "Washington and Tehran are continuing to change their
positions and conditions," warning that "the remaining time to address the
differences is no longer significant." In a related context, Reuters also quoted
the same source stating that the Pakistani mediation sent a modified Iranian
proposal on Sunday aimed at ending the state of war, within the ongoing efforts
to bring the viewpoints of the two sides closer.
Israel and Washington Hint at Escalation Against Iran… and
Plans to Strike Energy and Infrastructure Facilities
Janoubia / May 18, 2026
Israeli sources revealed the outlines of joint plans between Washington and Tel
Aviv in the event that US President Donald Trump makes a decision to resume
military operations against Iran, amid estimates indicating high readiness at
the security and military levels for a potential escalation phase. According to
Hebrew sources quoted by the "Kan" channel, any American decision to return to
attacks on Iran will be met with joint operational coordination between the
Israeli and American militaries, with a specific focus on targeting strategic
facilities, foremost among them the infrastructure of the Iranian energy sector.
The sources indicated that the military command in Israel believes that striking
energy facilities could exert direct pressure on Tehran and push it toward
greater flexibility in negotiations, a proposition that intersects with previous
American orientations hinted at by President Trump and which found support from
the Israeli side.
In contrast, the Hebrew channel quoted military experts expressing reservations
about this scenario, considering that Iran will not make fundamental concessions
at the current stage despite the mounting pressures. In parallel, American
reports stated that the Pentagon has already prepared a list of potential
targets for strikes inside Iran in the event that a political decision is issued
by the US administration, including military sites and facilities linked to the
energy infrastructure. According to the same reports, Trump discussed the next
steps toward Tehran with senior officials of his administration in a closed-door
meeting following his return from China, in the presence of high-ranking
security officials, including the Vice President, the Director of the Central
Intelligence Agency, and the Special Envoy. The information indicates that the
US President expressed his annoyance at the repercussions of the tension in the
Strait of Hormuz and its impact on oil prices, at a time when he is expected to
hold new security meetings during the coming days to discuss the options on the
table. In parallel, reports speak of Iranian preparations to break any potential
naval blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, amid rising regional tension and the
intensification of military movements in the Gulf region, which enhances the
probability of entering a more sensitive phase of the indirect confrontation
between Washington, Tehran, and Tel Aviv.
The Iranian President Admits: We Cannot Say That the Enemy
Is Being Defeated and We Are Prospering
Al-Kalima Online / May 18, 2026
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian indicated that "the enemies are planning to
move forward by sowing discord among us."
Commenting on the talks with the United States, he added: "We must speak
rationally and receive rational responses, and it makes no sense to say that we
will not engage in dialogue." He also emphasized: "We are doing our utmost to
secure the livelihoods of citizens, but there are limits to our efforts,"
stressing that "we must lower the ceiling of our expectations and accept reality
so that we can confront it." He said: "We do not export oil; the road has been
closed. We do not have the capacity to export oil and secure dollars to import
gasoline, and if the current situation regarding energy continues, we will face
problems and everyone will be affected."
Pezeshkian added: "We cannot say that the enemy is being defeated and we are
prospering. We cannot claim that we do not suffer from problems; we must be
honest with the citizens. Prices will rise, and we are fighting a battle and we
must accept hardship." He pointed out that "we face problems in all sectors; we
cannot even collect taxes."
Pakistan Deploys Fighter Jets and Thousands of Troops to Saudi Arabia During the
Iran War
Janoubia / May 18, 2026
Pakistan has deployed 8,000 troops, a squadron of fighter jets, and an air
defense system to Saudi Arabia under a defense agreement, in a reinforcement of
military cooperation with Riyadh. This deployment, the full scope of which was
revealed by "Reuters" today for the first time, was confirmed by three security
officials and two government sources. The sources described these forces as a
large and combat-capable force aimed at supporting the Saudi military in the
event that the Kingdom is subjected to further attacks. There was no immediate
reaction from the Pakistani military, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, or the
media office of the Saudi government to requests for comment on this deployment.
According to the sources, the full terms of the defense agreement, which was
signed last year, remain confidential, but both sides confirmed that it
obligates Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to defend each other in the event of any
attack. Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif had previously hinted that this
agreement places the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia under the Pakistani nuclear
umbrella. According to the sources, Pakistan deployed a full squadron comprising
about 16 fighter jets, mostly of the "JF-17" model manufactured in cooperation
with China, and these jets were sent to Saudi Arabia early last April. Two
security officials also indicated that Pakistan has sent two drone squadrons as
well. All five sources confirmed that the deployment includes about 8,000
soldiers, with a pledge to send more troops if necessary, in addition to a
Chinese "HQ-9" air defense system.
Confidential Documents: Kuwaiti Drones Flew in Iraqi
Airspace Shortly Before the Iran War
Janoubia / May 18, 2026
A confidential document from the Iraqi Ministry of Defense revealed on Monday
that Kuwaiti drones violated Iraqi airspace and were repeatedly seen flying in
the Basra Governorate in the middle of last February. The "Al-Ahed" satellite
channel reported that the Iraqi Ministry of Defense issued a confidential
document dated last February 24, based on daily reports and logs from the Iraqi
Naval Forces Command, confirming that during the period between the 16th and
17th of the same month, Kuwaiti drones were spotted in the skies of the Um Qasr
area in the Basra Governorate, southern Iraq.
The document explained that these drones were coming from Kuwaiti territory and
ranged in number from 8 to 15 drones in the form of squadrons, with each
squadron comprising three drones, and the Air Defense Operations Center in Basra
Governorate was notified of the incident. Additionally, a fixed-wing drone,
believed to be coming from Kuwaiti territory, was seen in the Um Qasr
sub-district heading toward the free zone before disappearing from sight. The
document requested the approval of Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani,
the Commander-in-Chief of the Iraqi Armed Forces, for the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs to submit a protest note against the repeated violations from the
Kuwaiti side. It is worth mentioning that the American-Iranian-Israeli war broke
out on February 28, in which Iraqi armed factions participated in part by
targeting bases and headquarters of the US Armed Forces in the region.
The European Union Removes the Syrian Ministries of
Interior and Defense From Sanctions Lists
Janoubia / May 18, 2026
The Council of the European Union has decided to remove 7 Syrian entities from
the sanctions list, which included the Ministries of Defense and Interior, in a
step aimed at supporting the enhancement of the European Union's engagement with
Syria during the transitional phase. This decision came in conjunction with the
renewal of sanctions targeting individuals and entities linked to the former
regime of Bashar al-Assad until June 1, 2027, following the Council's annual
review of the sanctions regime. It is noteworthy that the European Union had
lifted all economic sanctions imposed on Syria in May 2025, with the aim of
supporting a peaceful and comprehensive transition for the country,
socio-economic recovery, and reconstruction operations.
However, the European Union simultaneously retained targeted restrictive
measures against individuals and entities associated with the former Assad
regime, in addition to existing sanctions based on security grounds. The
European Union believes that networks linked to the former Assad regime still
maintain significant influence and pose a real danger to undermining the
political transition process in Syria, and obstructing efforts aimed at
achieving national reconciliation and accountability. Individuals and entities
listed on the sanctions list are subject to an asset freeze, and EU citizens and
companies are prohibited from making any funds available to them. In addition,
the targeted individuals are banned from entering or transiting through the
territories of EU member states. The European Union had first imposed
restrictive measures in light of the situation in Syria in 2011. Following the
fall of the Assad regime, the Council eased a number of these measures on
February 24, 2025, to facilitate dealings with Syria, its people, and its
companies. On May 20, 2025, the Council confirmed its continuous commitment to
supporting the Syrian people and the peaceful and comprehensive transition by
announcing the political decision to lift all economic sanctions (except those
based on security grounds), representing a historic shift toward helping Syria
recover and transition in the post-Assad phase. In a subsequent development, the
Council reinstated the full application of the "EU-Syria Cooperation Agreement"
on May 11, 2026, which had been partially suspended since 2011.
on 18-19 May/2026
Gaza’s orange line and the
architecture of permanent displacement'
Dr Imran Khalid/The Arab Weekly/May
19/2026
The Gaza Strip is being transformed from a distinct political problem into a
permanent, unmanageable humanitarian ward.
The current international landscape is defined by a dangerous atmospheric noise.
As of mid-May 2026, the international community remains hyper-focused on the
high-stakes volatility of the Gulf region. Between the fallout of recent
maritime blockades and the spectre of a nuclear-threshold escalation, the grand
geostrategic picture has become a blinding light. Yet, it is precisely within
the shadows cast by this regional firestorm that the final dismantling of the
Gaza Strip is being executed. The instrument of this erasure is the Orange Line,
a shifting military perimeter that is effectively redrawing the Levant while the
international community remains paralyzed by the threat of a wider war.
To understand the Orange Line, one must apply a form of systemic triage. This is
not a mere temporary tactical perimeter. It is a three-tiered mechanism of
territorial erasure defined by physical displacement, the architectural
destruction of homes or domicide to prevent civilian return, and the
administrative swallowing of land that the October 2025 ceasefire was legally
supposed to protect.
This process has accelerated dramatically following the definitive stall of the
Cairo disarmament talks earlier this month, where deadlocks over
demilitarisation sequencing left a diplomatic vacuum. That vacuum is being
filled not with peacekeepers, but with concrete. Prime Minister Binyamin
Netanyahu’s recent public acknowledgement that Israel now controls roughly 60%
of Gaza’s total territory underwrites this new reality—a structural fait
accompli that no future peace treaty will be able to easily reverse.
The mechanical reality of this development is surgical. Since the implementation
of the fragile October 2025 ceasefire, the boundaries of Gaza have not been
static. Instead, they have been fluid, moving steadily westward under the guise
of security necessity. Recent satellite data and ground reports from
international aid agencies have confirmed a chilling trend. The Orange Line is
being hardened with permanent dirt berms, fortified outposts, and paved military
roads. This is no longer a temporary fence line; it is the outer wall of a
permanently downsized enclave.
Just as regional powers use the concept of strategic depth to justify external
interventions, Israel is using the security buffer narrative to carve out a
restricted zone that encompasses 11% of Gaza’s territory beyond the original
truce lines. When stacked on top of the pre-existing Yellow Line zones already
under IDF charge, nearly two-thirds of the Gaza Strip has been transformed into
a militarized no-go area.
For the global reader, the implications are immediate and profound. While the
world waits for a post-war reconstruction plan, the land intended for that
reconstruction is actively vanishing.
The Orange Line operates as a living border. Unlike the static concrete blocks
of the 20th century, this perimeter is updated via digitally distributed maps
sent directly to aid groups, quietly moving the boundaries of permissible human
habitability westward.
Furthermore, the timing of this expansion is a calculated play on human rights
fatigue. The world has grown accustomed to the imagery of ruin in Gaza. When
recent UN public health assessments note that tanks are advancing into the
Jabalia area within the newly designated Orange Line, it barely registers in a
global news cycle dominated by ballistic missile counts and regional naval
escorts. This is the essence of the Orange Line Trap: using a massive regional
escalation as a shield for local dispossession. While the world watches the sky
over Tehran, the ground is being pulled from beneath the feet of the Gazan
people.
The structural baseline has shifted from occupation to total fragmentation. By
cutting off the most fertile northern and eastern lands, the military perimeter
ensures that Gaza can never achieve even a baseline of agricultural
self-sufficiency.
Verified data from the Food and Agriculture Organization (post-ceasefire
assessment) reveals that currently, only 4% of Gaza’s cropland is both
accessible and undamaged. The Orange Line ensures that even during a technical
cessation of major aerial bombardments, a manufactured economic and metabolic
famine continues by design. This transforms the buffer zone from a security
necessity into a structural policy of rendering the territory geographically
unviable.
The strategic implications for the next six months are stark. We are moving
rapidly toward a scenario where Palestine exists only as a series of
disconnected, hyper-dense urban nodes, entirely stripped of their hinterlands,
agricultural resources, and political cohesion. The Orange Line creates a
permanent barrier to return for millions of displaced families.
Even more concerning is the digital normalisation of this theft. By distributing
updated security maps to humanitarian groups, the occupying power forces
international agencies to become reluctant participants in the new geography, as
they must respect the fluid coordinates of the Orange Line simply to avoid being
targeted.
This is the critical systemic insight that policy-makers are missing. The Gaza
Strip is being transformed from a distinct political problem into a permanent,
unmanageable humanitarian ward.
If the habitability of the remaining space is reduced any further, the
population density of these fragmented urban pockets will reach a breaking point
that no governance structure can sustain. The result will be a permanent state
of emergency that justifies perpetual military intervention.
The international community must urgently pivot its focus. The specter of a
regional war cannot be allowed to grant a moral blank check for the structural
erasure of Gaza. The Orange Line must be recognised for what it is: a violation
of the very international legal norms that Western powers claim to be defending
in the wider Middle East. If the international community accepts the security
buffer argument here, it validates a model of stealth annexation that will
inevitably be exported to other 21st-century conflict zones.
The Orange Line is the technical end to a political dream. Unless the immediate
crisis of Gaza’s shrinking geography is decoupled from the broader geopolitics
of the Iran conflict, the world will wake up from the current regional tension
to find that the map of Palestine has been permanently rewritten. The time to
intervene is not after the regional friction cools, but right now, while the ink
on these new digital maps is still wet.
**Dr Imran Khalid is a geostrategic analyst and columnist on international
affairs based in Karachi, Pakistan.
Heading toward disaster in the Middle East
James J. Zogby/The Arab Weekly/May 19/2026
Our work indicates that US policies are clearly headed for disaster—not only for
the US and its stated goals, but also, and more importantly, for the Arab
people.
Tuesday 19/05/2026
US policy in the Middle East has been so problematic because policymakers refuse
to consider its impact on theArab people. With Israel, it’s a different story.
Over-attentiveness to Israeli concerns and a lack of sensitivity to Arab
reaction to our actions has caused deep fractures between Arabs and the US and
within the Arab World.
Since 2000, we’ve conducted over 50 multi-nation opinion polls on a variety of
topics, exploring Arab attitudes toward other Arabs, the US, China, Russia,
Iran, and Israel, and toward conflicts in the region.
Our work indicates that US policies are clearly headed for disaster—not only for
the US and its stated goals, but also, and more importantly, for the Arab
people.
Some observations based on the trend linesfrom our surveys:
After 9/11, President Bush famously claimed, “They hate us because they hate our
values.” Our 2002 polling found the opposite: Arabs liked American people,
products, education and values, but strongly disliked US policies toward the
Arab world.
Bush’s Iraq war and neglect of Palestinians further lowered US ratings. They
rose with Obama’s promise of change but fell when he didn’t deliver. Attitudes
further plummeted with Trump’s pro-Israel, anti-Muslim policies.
By late 2023, our most recent multi-nation poll showed Biden’s support for
Israel’s war on Gaza generating even stronger negatives. Worse still, President
Trump’s US-Israel attacks on Iran and his assault on America’s most respected
elements—universities, press freedom, and immigration policy—likely make it
increasingly difficult for Arabs to like American values.
Arab attitudes toward Iran have followed a consistent pattern. When perceiving
that Iran under attack for resisting the US and the West, many Arabs supported
it. But when Iran directly meddled in Arab countries, opinion flipped. Iran’s
direct involvement in Syria’s civil war turned majorities in most Arab countries
against Iran.
It’s reasonable to assume that US/Israel attacks on Iran and Israel’s attacks on
Lebanon and Syria won Iran some sympathy in Arab public opinion. However,
instead of seeking Arab support, Iran deliberately attacked its Arab Gulf
neighbours—the very countries trying to restore relationships with Iran. Gulf
opinion has likely turned against Iran. How much intra-Arab friction has
resulted is uncertain.
• Support for Palestinians has long been a central Arab concern, with
peacemaking with Israel of little interest even in countries with signed peace
agreements with Israel. As Israeli repression of Palestinians intensified and
visionless Palestinian leadership fractured, Arab opinion shifted. In 2019, a
significant number said it might be desirable to make peace with Israel, even if
Israel didn’t accept the Arab Peace Initiative. Many said it might stem the
violence and give Arabs more leverage to convince Israel to grant Palestinian
rights.
Repeating this question in September 2023, we’d completed half of the
questionnaires by October 7, when Hamas attacked. We interrupted the survey and
returned a few weeks later to complete it. The changes were significant. Before
October 7th, responses were similar to 2019, but by the end of October, reacting
to Israel’s assault on Gaza, attitudes shifted dramatically against any deal
with Israel. Three years later, one can assume this hasn’t changed.
In 2024 and 2025, we polled in the Occupied Lands three times—with disturbing
results. Israeli policy had discredited the Palestinian Authority, weakening its
ability to govern. West Bank respondents had turned against the PA, now
preferring Hamas. In Gaza, Hamas was deeply disliked, with a strong plurality
preferring the PA. Few in the West Bank and Gaza supported the US, Israeli, or
international governance, but preferred Palestinian unity.
Meanwhile, Israel continues to lay waste to Gaza, runs roughshod over the West
Bank and East Jerusalem, and rejects any role for the PA in Gaza. As the
situation further unravels, the US ignores Palestinian wishes and Israeli
misdeeds.
In Lebanon, when Hezbollah was seen as resisting Israel, it found favour,
especially since Israel frequently bombed Lebanon and occupied Lebanese land for
decades until 2000. However, when in 2008 Hezbollah turned its weapons against
the state and in 2019 against the popular revolt, Lebanese opinion divided along
sectarian lines. Our polling before 2023 showed that most Lebanese wanted
Hezbollah disarmed or controlledby the Lebanese army. But Israel’s recent
assault on Lebanon, bombing throughout the country, forced expulsion of one
million Lebanese from the south, destruction of homes, farmlands, and entire
villages, and explicit intention to annex a large territory has likely restored
some support for Hezbollah and exacerbated internal sectarian tensions, while
turning more Lebanese against Israel and the US.
In this light, US efforts to pressure the Lebanese government to forcibly disarm
Hezbollah and make a peace agreement with Israel is dangerous for Lebanon’s
stability.
Mohamed Aoun and Libya’s struggle over oil and legitimacy
Salah El Houni/The Arab Weekly/May 19/2026
In a region where foreign investment in energy is increasingly vital, the
legitimacy of who signs contracts has never mattered much more.
In Libya, oil is not just an economic sector. It is the main core of the economy
itself. And the battle over who controls the ministry of oil has become a proxy
for a larger struggle: whether Libya is governed by institutions or by raw
political power.
At the centre of this confrontation is Mohamed Aoun, a veteran
engineer-turned-minister who has spent the past two years fighting to assert his
legitimacy against a prime minister determined to sideline him. Since 2024,
Libya’s courts have issued four consecutive rulings affirming Aoun as the lawful
minister, striking down the appointment of Khalifa Abdelsadiq, a deputy
installed by Prime Minister Abdulhamid Dbeibah.
The rulings came from appellate chambers and even from the Supreme Court,
leaving little room for ambiguity. Yet the prime minister has refused to
implement the rulings, a form of defiance which Aoun describes as “contempt for
judicial rulings.”
This is not a mere bureaucratic quarrel. Libya holds Africa’s largest proven oil
reserves, estimated at 48.4 billion barrels, ranking seventh among OPEC members.
In a country without income tax, a strong manufacturing base, and a productive
agriculture, oil revenues are the state’s lifeline. Whoever controls the
ministry controls the artery that sustains the nation.
The clash between the tw was triggered by Aoun’s refusal to sign exploration
contracts, particularly in the Ghadames basin, that he deemed unlawful. Reports
suggest the contracts violated legal procedures, and when Aoun resisted, the
oversight authority suspended him. Months later, the same authority reinstated
him after clearing him of any wrongdoing. By then, the prime minister had
already appointed Abdelsadiq, setting the executive on a collision course with
the judiciary.
The courts have been unequivocal. In ruling after ruling, they declared
Abdelsadiq’s appointment void. Yet the executive pressed on, ignoring the
judgments. For Aoun, the issue is not personal pride but a matter of legal
principle. “All decisions issued by the illegitimate minister since May 12, 2024
are absolutely null and void,” he insists.
The implications extend beyond Libya’s borders. International oil companies and
organisations such as OPEC face a real dilemma: contracts signed by a minister
whose authority has been annulled risk being challenged in court. Aoun has urged
foreign partners to deal only with legitimate ministers, warning that ignoring
judicial rulings entrenches the crisis and undermines Libya’s credibility as a
partner.
The saga points to a deeper problem. Libya’s judiciary can issue clear rulings
but lacks the mechanisms to enforce them. In a system scarred by years of
division, the executive branch can simply defy judgments. This erosion of
institutional authority corrodes incentives for competence and integrity,
rewarding those who bypass rules and punishing those who uphold them.
For Aoun, the fight has been personal as well as political. A technical engineer
by training, he found himself up against a powerful political machine: a prime
minister, oversight bodies, a deputy acting as minister, and media outlets
framing the dispute on their own terms. Yet he has remained defiant. “I am 100
percent certain of my position, I will not be afraid, and I am ready to appear
before any court in Libya,” he declared.
His persistence has made him an unlikely symbol. He is not merely defending a
post; he is testing whether Libya can still claim to be a state of law. Four
rulings in his favour, yet no guarantee of implementation.
If Dbeibah is eventually forced to comply, it will mark a modest but real
victory for the judiciary and for the idea that law can bind power. If not, it
will confirm what many Libyans already suspect: that the architecture of a
functioning state remains out of reach.
For now, Aoun continues to speak out, documenting every statement and warning
that failure to implement judicial rulings carries future liability. In a region
where foreign investment in energy is increasingly vital, the legitimacy of who
signs contracts has never mattered much more.
Libya’s oil battle is ultimately a mirror of the country’s deeper question since
2011: is Libya a state of institutions governed by law, or a space where power
interests intersect unchecked?
Selected Face
Book & X tweets for
May 18/2026
Dr Walid Phares
Hezbollah will be happy to surrender its weapons to a Lebanese Army made of
Hezbollah...
Can you believe how stupid are the strategists who wants to resolve the
Hezbollah problem by dissolving the militia inside the Army? This tweet is a
message to those who are pushing for such reckless option DON'T...
Hussain Abdul-Hussain
I try to give the antisemitic Global Intifada a chance by reading what they
write. But they just don't make sense, their ideas don't add up, and other than
hating Israel, you can't tell what they want. The excerpt below is from one of
their magazines. After I read it, I was left thinking: Did they want
Palestinians to work in Israel and were complaining that evil Israel is now
banning them? Or did they oppose Palestinians working in Israel because that
created Palestinian dependency on the occupation? Other than the annihilation of
Israel, they don't seem to know what they're saying.
The excerpt:
Today, these opportunities have all but vanished. After October 7, over 200,000
Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza — including 150,000 permit holders from
the West Bank, an estimated 50,000 working without permits, and 18,500 from Gaza
— were barred from entering Israel, ostensibly due to “security concerns.”
In effect, the war on Gaza has provided the Israeli state with the impetus to
significantly scale back its long-standing reliance on Palestinian labor,
marking a decisive shift in the decades-old balance between the ideological
imperative to exclude Palestinian workers and their essential role in Israeli
economic development.
“Before the war, the inclusion of Palestinian workers in the labor market was in
Israel’s economic interest,” Maayan Niezna, a legal expert who tracks Israel’s
use of migrant labor, told +972 Magazine. “But it was also part of the political
project of the occupation, creating dependency while ‘containing’ the risk of
resistance by providing a degree of economic stability.”