English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For  May 30/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.may30.26.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
Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled, and do not let them be afraid. You heard me say to you, "I am going away, and I am coming to you
John 14/27-31: "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled, and do not let them be afraid. You heard me say to you, "I am going away, and I am coming to you." If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father, because the Father is greater than I. And now I have told you this before it occurs, so that when it does occur, you may believe. I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no power over me;but I do as the Father has commanded me, so that the world may know that I love the Father. Rise, let us be on our way."

Titles For Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 29-30 May/2026
The Absurdity of the Salam Government’s Crocodile Tears Over Beaufort Castle and Tyre’s Ruins—While Hezbollah Turned Them Into Military Barracks and Warehouses/Elias Bejjani/May 29/2026
There is no hope and no promise from the rulers of Lebanon and its subservient political parties salvation, if it is destined to come, will be through the State of Israel and its army./Elias Bejjani/May 27/2026
Link to a special MTV Lebanon talk show commemorating May 25th, titled “Those Who Crossed the Gate
A link to a video interview in English with Arabic subtitles from the "This is Beirut" website with Israeli Ambassador to Washington Yehiel Leiter:
Etienne Saqr - Abu Arz/ An Open Letter to President Donald Trump regarding America-Iran Negotiations/Etienne Saqr - Abu Arz May 29, 2026
Pentagon hosts first round of new Lebanon-Israel military talks
Lebanese and Israeli officers meet, Aoun tells Rubio truce crucial to talks progress
Rubio hails Aoun’s ‘courage and vision’ in pursuing Israel negotiations
Lebanon’s Aoun tells Rubio ceasefire with Israel crucial to move on to ‘any other step’
Rubio reaffirms US support for Lebanon’s stability, sovereignty, and independence
Netanyahu says Israeli forces have crossed south Lebanon's Litani River
Israel's military urges expanded Lebanon operations ahead of potential Trump-Iran deal
Hezbollah rejects direct talks anew, Israel says wants disarmament, peace deal
Berri rejects Qassem's remarks on toppling government
Hezbollah claims several attacks targeting northern Israel
Lebanon warns Israeli strikes put heritage sites in 'serious danger'
Lebanon decries Israeli attacks damaging heritage sites
Health Ministry says Choueifat strike killed woman, two children
UNIFIL holds official ceremony in Naqoura marking International Day of UN Peacekeepers
What options as UN force’s Lebanon exit looms?/A worst-case scenario for Lebanon would be a UNIFIL pullout without any alternative.
Washington talks focus on extending state authority and restricting Hezbollah arms: Source tells
Trump administration grants rare TPS reprieve, extending protections for 11,000 Lebanese
No US-Iran deal can save Lebanon without local initiative/Makram Rabah/Al Arabiya English/29 May ,2026

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 29-30 May/2026
Trump says Iranians ‘very good’ negotiators but US has ‘all the cards’
Trump holds White House meeting to make ‘final determination’ on US-Iran deal
Trump says Iran talks depend on 'good deal' as military tensions continue
Trump says now making 'final determination' on Iran deal, hints will approve it
Vance says US, Iran made 'a lot of progress' towards deal
Iran sources tell IRGC-linked agency Trump comments on deal ‘mixture of truth, lies’
Iran preparing ‘grand’ funeral for slain Khamenei: State TV
Kazakhstan offers to take Iran’s uranium stockpile, IAEA chief says
US judge temporarily blocks Trump’s $1.8 billion ‘weaponization’ fund
Turkey warns against ‘uncontrolled escalation’ after ship drone attack
Hamas calls Netanyahu’s plan to expand control in Gaza a dangerous escalation
Russian official warns Europe to brace for more drone incidents after Romania episode
Uganda records two new Ebola cases: Health ministry

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 29-30 May/2026
Question: What is the day of Pentecost?/GotQuestions.org/May 29/2026
Why Christian persecution is Trump’s new foreign policy roadmap/Mariam Wahba and Samuel Ben-Ur/Christian Post/May 29/2026
Can Syria Be Friends with Both Europe and Russia?/Ahmad Sharawi/National Interest/May 29/2026
Iran: Truce Doesn’t End Wars/Amir Taheri/Asharq Al-Awsat/May 29/2026
Iran Draws Strength From Chinese-Russian Military and Technological Support/Huda al-Husseini/Asharq Al-Awsa/May 29/2026
The Muslim Brotherhood's War to Destroy the United States from Within: Part I/Jihad in Texas/Robert Williams/Gatestone Institute/May 29, 2026
The cross and the crescent are currently the signs of Christianity and Islam,/Hussain Abdul-Hussain/Face bok/May 29/2026
Syria-Jordan-Lebanon energy deal could fuel huge benefits across the wider region/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/May 29, 2026
Subsea cables in Hormuz are being weaponized against the global economy/Zaid M. Belbagi/Arab News/May 29/2026
NATO and the GCC states ahead of Turkiye summit/Dr. Sinem CengizArab News/May 29/2026

Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on 29-30 May/2026
The Absurdity of the Salam Government’s Crocodile Tears Over Beaufort Castle and Tyre’s Ruins—While Hezbollah Turned Them Into Military Barracks and Warehouses
Elias Bejjani/May 29/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/05/154894/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlKn43r3g3M&t=718s
Beaufort Castle
Beaufort Castle, or Qalaat Shaqif Arnoun (known in French as Château de Beaufort), is a historic fortress located in Lebanon, about one kilometer from the village of Arnoun. Originally built by the Romans, its structures were later expanded by the Crusaders and restored by Emir Fakhreddine II. The castle is built on a high, sheer cliff overlooking the Litani River, the Marjayoun plain, and the Nabatieh region. Its unique design bends along with the mountain, and its walls—built from local rock—make it look hidden among the cliffs, even though its grand silhouette can be seen from miles away. In historical references, it is known as Beaufort, meaning "the beautiful fortress."
The Trojan and Submissive Comedy in Occupied Lebanon
The ridiculous "Trojan" and submissive theater continues in occupied Lebanon, accompanied by a chorus of silent weeping and public mourning. Prime Minister Nawaf Salam’s government—which is completely castrated of any national pride—alongside a bunch of accidental and submissive ministers, are stepping up today to shed crocodile tears over the ancient city of Tyre and weep for the fate of the historic Beaufort Castle following Israeli military strikes.
The tragicomic irony is that this so-called "state," falsely named the Lebanese Republic, is actually just an occupied province belonging to the "State of Hezbollah"—with all the terror and hostage-taking that implies. This regime begs the international community and the world's conscience to protect historical stones. Yet, it has openly conspired and collaborated to hand over the people, the land, and history to an Iranian terrorist militia that has turned Tyre, its surroundings, and the towers of Beaufort Castle into military barracks and rocket warehouses!
Minister Raji and Idle Diplomatic Contacts: Much Ado About Nothing
In a highly dramatic scene, Foreign Minister Youssef Raji releases a statement dripping with "deep pain and profound anxiety," talking about Tyre’s ancient neighborhoods, its churches, and its mosques that survived for thousands of years. The minister boasts about his "intensive diplomatic contacts" to save this human heritage. In the exact same context came a notable statement by the Arabist and Nasserist Minister of Culture, Ghassan Salameh.
What heritage are Raji and Salameh even talking about? Their sweet diplomatic words are completely worthless and lack any credibility. With full intent, premeditation, and blatant submission, they choose to ignore the naked truth: the Iranian-backed, jihadist Hezbollah is the one that turned these ancient neighborhoods and historic sites into military outposts and security zones right under the cover of Nawaf Salam’s helpless government. Their diplomatic calls are nothing but an exercise in stupidity, serving as a cover-up for a clear Iranian occupation that is holding Tyre and its people hostage, while turning Beaufort Castle into an Iranian military barracks.
The Arnon Municipality and "Enhanced Protection" for a Rocket Arsenal!
Equally detached from reality is the statement issued by the Arnon Municipality. The municipality condemns the shelling of Beaufort Castle by hiding behind the 2024 Hague Convention protocol, which granted the castle "enhanced protection." The municipality and the "Green Southerners" association call the strikes a "systematic cultural genocide" and a war crime.
How short-sighted can these local officials be! International laws and heritage treaties automatically lose their validity the moment a terrorist militia transforms a historic site into a strategic military outpost to launch rockets, dig tunnels, and store weapons. Beaufort Castle, with its strategic location overlooking the Litani River and the Galilee, stopped being a tourist landmark the moment Hezbollah decided to resurrect its military "glory" there. Your talk about the "resilience of its people" over centuries is just a cheap excuse to justify the presence of Iranian weapon depots. Your statement is completely meaningless and worthless because you chose to ignore how the castle was booby-trapped with the spirit of the Mullahs. You stripped it of its cultural identity and dressed it in a yellow military uniform.
The Baalbek Theater Repeated in the South
This official hypocrisy reminds us of the exact same ridiculous plays staged by Hezbollah, its submissive state, and its media puppets during the COVID-19 era when they exposed the Baalbek ruins to the danger of destruction. Back then, they openly bragged about their military control while the state remained completely silent. Today, the exact same scenario is repeated in the South: the militia plants weapons among the ruins, and the government cries over international law!
Nawaf Salam: Political Coma and Intentional Blindness
As for Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, he treats us on the "X" platform to worn-out clichés like "nothing justifies these attacks" and demands for a full Israeli withdrawal and the return of state authority.
Mr. Prime Minister, where is this state authority you are talking about? What sovereignty are you weeping for when you know damn well that every single inch of Lebanon—not just Tyre or Beaufort Castle—is a military barracks and a weapons depot hijacked by the Iranian Supreme Leader (Wali al-Faqih)? How can you act surprised by these strikes while you cowardly turn a blind eye to the real occupation sitting inside your government offices and controlling your military and security institutions?
Conclusion: Shut Up and Accept the Truth
The puppets of this government, the cheerleaders of Hezbollah, and all the complicit ministers and officials in Lebanon should just shut up, swallow their tongues, and go away. Stop your cheap media campaigns that claim to protect history and heritage.
This is a state falsely called a "Republic," but in reality, it is an Iranian province ruled by a terrorist faction that holds the sole decision over war and peace. It controls the necks and the tongues of everyone in power. The world will not believe you, and treaties will not protect you, as long as Lebanon’s history and present are used as wooden shields to protect Hezbollah's arsenal. Your screaming has no credibility, and your tears are nothing but waste water running down the face of a state that has no sovereignty and no dignity

There is no hope and no promise from the rulers of Lebanon and its subservient political parties salvation, if it is destined to come, will be through the State of Israel and its army.
Elias Bejjani/May 27/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/05/154855/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE4KSTqfiVM
What the "Land of the Cedars," the land of holiness and saints, is currently suffering from is not only the Iranian occupation with its debauchery, obscenity, terror, jihadism, hallucinations, delusions, and the culture of death it promotes; rather, the bitter truth that must not be ignored lies also in this: all the rulers of Lebanon and the so called falsely political parties are nothing but diabolical tools operated by the "Party of Satan" via remote control. No president has any authority of his own, and no official exercises his responsibilities. They are merely Trojan horses, stripped of both will and decision-making power, and no hope or promise can be expected from them.
It clearly remains that salvation and liberation as is clear even to the blind—will not come, if it is ordained to come, except by way of the State of Israel and its army. Therefore, to uphold facts and reality, it is the duty of every sovereign Lebanese who realizes that the cancerous "Hezbollah" occupies Lebanon and is destroying it, to thank Israel; because it is executing militarily what the Lebanese lack the capacity to do themselves.
In summary, the actual reality shows us clearly that the evil Iranian terrorist Hezbollah continues to occupy Lebanon; the state is its state, the decision-making is its own, and all institutions are under its command, as it drives rulers and politicians with a whip. It is a bitter and shocking truth, yet it is the very reality that Lebanon lives and the Lebanese endure.

Link to a special MTV Lebanon talk show commemorating May 25th, titled “Those Who Crossed the Gate – The Hidden Narrative” (commemorating Israel’s 2000 withdrawal from southern Lebanon and the forced displacement of southerners to Israel due to threats from Hassan Nasrallah and his terrorist group). Presented by journalist Fadi Shahwan, MTV
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/05/154835/
Lebanon, May 25, 2026.

A link to a video interview in English with Arabic subtitles from the "This is Beirut" website with Israeli Ambassador to Washington Yehiel Leiter: Iran uses Hezbollah to destabilize the region; we have no designs on Lebanon; we are not enemies of the Shiites; Hezbollah must be dismantled to achieve peace, and we will not return to a situation where rockets are fired across the border.
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/05/154913/
Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter: Hezbollah Must be Dismantled for Israel-Lebanon Peace
This is Beirut/May 29/2026
Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter, in an exclusive interview with This is Beirut, said Israel is pursuing a two-track approach that includes strengthening the Lebanese Armed Forces with U.S. support so they can gradually take on Hezbollah and restore full state authority. He said Israel has no interest in remaining in Lebanon and would withdraw once Hezbollah is dismantled, framing its presence as solely tied to security threats from the group.
Leiter added that longer-term prospects for normalization and cooperation depend on removing Hezbollah’s military presence and ensuring it can no longer operate along Israel’s border.

Etienne Saqr - Abu Arz/ An Open Letter to President Donald Trump regarding America-Iran Negotiations
Etienne Saqr - Abu Arz May 29, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/05/154923/
Greetings of affection and respect,
Five reasons drive us to question the feasibility of these negotiations:
According to democratic norms, it is unacceptable to negotiate with terrorism, because it is akin to a cancerous tumor that cannot be treated with ointments alone.
America’s negotiations with a terrorist regime weaken its prestige and grant this regime a free legitimacy it does not deserve.
Any agreement with a terrorist regime is a bad agreement no matter how "good" it may seem, because a vessel only pours out what it contains.
The claim that the Iranian regime's behavior can be changed instead of toppling it is like trying to domesticate scorpions.
Iran's stalling and evasion in concluding any agreement confirm its bad faith, and warn of the possibility of overturning it whenever the right conditions are available.
Conclusion: We believe that the ongoing negotiations between America and Iran are futile and will not produce a fruitful agreement, even if it appears "good" on the surface.
At your service, Lebanon

Pentagon hosts first round of new Lebanon-Israel military talks
Al Arabiya English/29 May ,2026
readThe Pentagon hosted the first round of a new military dialogue between Lebanon and Israel on Friday, despite continued Israeli strikes on what it says are Hezbollah targets across Lebanon. The Lebanese Armed Forces’ director of operations and the head of the Israeli military’s strategic division led their respective delegations. Friday’s meeting was part of a US-brokered track of direct negotiations between the two neighboring countries. The Trump administration launched the talks earlier this year, with Lebanese and Israeli envoys to Washington holding meetings at the State Department and the White House. During the most recent round, both sides elevated their political representation and agreed to establish a separate military channel led by the Pentagon. Friday marked the first meeting under that framework. A fourth round of political talks is expected to take place in Washington in the coming days as negotiations continue on a parallel track. Meanwhile, clashes between Israel and Hezbollah continued along the Lebanese-Israeli border, with Israel expanding the areas it occupies inside Lebanon.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Friday that Israeli forces had crossed Lebanon’s Litani River and were operating in Beirut and the Bekaa Valley as part of ongoing actions against Hezbollah. As the delegations met, Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun held a phone call with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and voiced the importance of a ceasefire with Israel. According to a statement from Aoun’s office, the president said a ceasefire is crucial to pave way toward “any other steps.”

Lebanese and Israeli officers meet, Aoun tells Rubio truce crucial to talks progress
AP/May 29, 2026
WASHINGTON: Israeli troops entered a southern Lebanese village early Friday, pushing deeper into the country as Lebanese and Israeli military officials began direct talks at the Pentagon over the deadly conflict. The entrance of Israel’s troops into the village of Dibbine, near the town of Marjayoun, came as Israeli airstrikes killed at least six people. Five were killed in an airstrike on the villages of Deir Qanoun al Nahr and Abbasiyeh, while a municipal policeman was killed in the village of Ebba, state media reported. In Washington, a six-member Lebanese military delegation was meeting on Friday with Israeli military officials in the first direct military talks between the two countries in decades. A nominal ceasefire went into effect on April 17. A senior Lebanese military official told The Associated Press Friday that the Lebanese delegation, led by the army's head of operations Brig. Gen. George Rizkallah, would be to make it comprehensive. The official added the Lebanese delegation will request the reactivation of the committee monitoring the enforcement of an earlier US-brokered ceasefire that halted the war between Israel and Hezbollah in late 2024.Another Lebanese official, who is briefed throughout the day about the ongoing talks at the Pentagon, also said the delegation would seek the comprehensive implementation of the ceasefire and a stop to ongoing hostilities.
He said implementation would be followed by talks at a later date on matters such as deploying the Lebanese army along the border and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon. Both officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media about the ongoing talks in Washington. President Joseph Aoun's office said he received a call Friday from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and they discussed the situation in Lebanon and the latest developments in the Middle East. Aoun's office said the president told Rubio that efforts should concentrate on implementing the ceasefire as it is “the essential entry point for transitioning to any other issues.”In April, Lebanon and Israel held the first direct talks in Washington in more than three decades. The Israeli military issued several evacuation warnings for southern Lebanon on Friday, forcing hundreds of families to flee to safer areas further north. Israeli troops fought Hezbollah fighters inside the villages of Yohmor and Zawtar al-Sahrqieh near the city of Nabatieh after they crossed the strategic Litani River, which the Israeli military has used as a de facto boundary. Large areas to the south are under Israeli military control, despite the April ceasefire. Hezbollah, whose members have been fighting Israeli troops for days in the area, said in statements that its members struck Israeli troops inside Yohmor.
The two villages are close to the Crusader-built Beaufort castle that is about 15 kilometers (9 miles) from the Israeli border and overlooks wide parts of southern Lebanon. It was not clear if Israeli troops are trying to capture the castle, which lies north of the Litani. Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the northern front Friday where he spoke to members of the military. “I must tell you that there are very impressive results here. Our forces have crossed the Litani; they have advanced to controlling positions,” he said. “We are operating in Beirut, in the Bekaa, across the entire width of the front, and we are dealing Hezbollah a crushing blow,” Netanyahu said referring to Lebanon's eastern Bekaa Valley and Beirut's southern suburbs where Israel's air force struck on Thursday. The violence in southern Lebanon came as US and Iranian negotiators reached a tentative agreement Thursday to extend the ceasefire in the 3-month-old war by 60 days and start a new round of talks on Iran’s nuclear program, according to a US official familiar with the matter. Iran did not immediately confirm any deal. Vice President JD Vance on Thursday evening confirmed there was a tentative agreement, but said it was unclear if President Donald Trump would approve it. Hezbollah legislator Hassan Fadlallah said Friday that any deal between Iran and the US would stop Israel’s offensive in Lebanon. Officials in Iran, Hezbollah’s main backer, have said that they insist that a deal with Washington would stop the latest Israel-Hezbollah war that started on March 2, when Hezbollah fired rockets into northern Israel two days after Israel and Iran attacked in Iran.
The latest Israel-Hezbollah war has left 3,200 people dead in Lebanon and over 1 million people displaced.

Rubio hails Aoun’s ‘courage and vision’ in pursuing Israel negotiations
LBCI/May 29/2026
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and praised his efforts to pursue direct negotiations with Israel, according to a statement issued by the U.S. State Department. Rubio commended Aoun’s “courage and vision” in advancing the talks, despite what he described as attempts by Hezbollah to undermine the negotiations at the expense of the Lebanese people. The secretary reiterated that Hezbollah bears full responsibility for the ongoing fighting and stressed the need for the group to immediately halt its attacks and provocations to allow for de-escalation. Rubio also reaffirmed U.S. support for the Lebanese government, saying Washington fully backs Beirut’s efforts to seize what he described as a “historic opportunity” to achieve peace, reconstruction, and a better future for the Lebanese people.

Lebanon’s Aoun tells Rubio ceasefire with Israel crucial to move on to ‘any other step’
Al Arabiya English/29 May ,2026
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun told Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday that a ceasefire with Israel was crucial, as Israeli and Lebanese military delegations meet at the Pentagon. The president emphasized that a ceasefire is necessary to pave way toward “any other step,” a statement from the presidency said. Rubio reiterated the US administration’s support to Lebanon’s stability, independence and sovereignty on all its territories as well as to its inalienable right to self-determination. During the phone call, Aoun and Rubio also discussed recent developments in Lebanon and the region. The State Department said commended Aoun’s “courage and vision” in pursuing direct negotiations with Israel, “even as Hezbollah continues its attempts to derail those talks at the expense of the Lebanese people.”Rubio reiterated that Hezbollah was entirely responsible for the ongoing fighting and emphasized the need for Hezbollah to immediately halt attacks on Israel to enable deescalation. “The Secretary reaffirmed that the United States fully supports the Government of Lebanon as it works to seize a historic opportunity to deliver peace, reconstruction, and a better future for its people,” the State Department said.
Pentagon talks between Lebanon, Israel
The Pentagon hosted the first round of a new military dialogue between Lebanon and Israel on Friday, despite continued Israeli strikes on what it says are Hezbollah targets across Lebanon. Friday’s meeting was part of a US-brokered track of direct negotiations between the two neighboring countries. The Trump administration launched the talks earlier this year, with Lebanese and Israeli envoys to Washington holding meetings at the State Department and the White House.

Rubio reaffirms US support for Lebanon’s stability, sovereignty, and independence
LBCI/May 29/2026
Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun held a phone call with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, during which they discussed the general situation in Lebanon and the wider region, as well as recent developments. During the call, Aoun stressed the need to exert all possible efforts to reach a ceasefire, saying it represents the essential entry point for any further steps and a necessary pathway to create conditions for addressing pending issues and files. For his part, Rubio reaffirmed the U.S. administration’s commitment to continuing efforts to solidify the outcomes of previous Washington meetings. He also reiterated support for Lebanon’s stability, independence, and sovereignty over its entire territory, as well as its full and natural right to determine its own future.

Netanyahu says Israeli forces have crossed south Lebanon's Litani River
LBCI/May 29/2026
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Friday that Israeli forces had crossed Lebanon's Litani River, which runs around 30 kilometers north of the countries' shared border. "Our forces have crossed the Litani; they have moved up to the commanding terrain. We are operating in Beirut, in the Bekaa, across the entire front and are hitting Hezbollah head on," he said during a visit to troops near the border, according to a video released by his office. AFP

Israel's military urges expanded Lebanon operations ahead of potential Trump-Iran deal
LBCI/May 29/2026
Before U.S. President Donald Trump signs an agreement with Iran and calls on Israel to halt its war in Lebanon under such a deal, the Israeli military has reportedly recommended that the political leadership immediately approve an intensification of airstrikes and ground incursions in Lebanon beyond the Yellow Line, while taking control of new areas it does not plan to withdraw from before achieving Hezbollah's disarmament. At the height of these developments, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, accompanied by Defense Minister Israel Katz, Israeli army Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir, and senior military commanders, visited the border area with Lebanon. From there, he said Israeli forces were moving toward elevated positions that would give Israel tactical control inside Lebanon. An Israeli military official said the green light granted by Washington for Israel to carry out specific operations against Hezbollah effectively gives Israel the authority to decide the timing, location, and scale of any strike. The official also said that any potential U.S.-Iran agreement would not include a halt to Israeli operations but could lead to a return to the ceasefire lines agreed upon with Lebanon in November 2024. The remarks came as the Israeli military intensified its attacks against Hezbollah and prepared for possible retaliation scenarios, ranging from rocket fire to the launch of large numbers of drones toward northern Israel. Amid the security escalation, the municipality of Kiryat Shmona took what was described as an unprecedented step in Israel by filing a petition with the Supreme Court demanding that the Israeli government ensure its protection and security against what it called the “Lebanese enemy.”The municipality said that the continuation of negotiations between Tel Aviv and Beirut was further delaying the achievement of security guarantees for northern communities.

Hezbollah rejects direct talks anew, Israel says wants disarmament, peace deal
Associated Press/May 29/2026
Hezbollah has again rejected direct talks between Lebanon and Israel on the eve of military negotiations between the two sides. The Iran-backed group believes that Beirut doesn't have the leverage to stop the war and have Israel withdraw its troops. "The ruling authority persists in pursuing a downward trajectory, compromising both sovereignty and rights under the pretext that it is compelled to continue direct negotiations with the enemy," Hezbollah's parliamentary bloc said in a statement Thursday. The group instead endorsed its key ally Iran, which has made ending the war in Lebanon a condition for its own talks with Washington brokered by Pakistan. "Yet, instead of seizing this opportunity, the Lebanese authorities are attempting to undermine it — actively working to obstruct it, even at the cost of their own people's blood," the statement said. Israeli government spokesman David Mencer meanwhile said that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu instructed the military "to deepen our operation in Lebanon" to protect the communities of Israel's north. Mencer said that Israel would continue U.S.-mediated negotiations with Lebanon in Washington, saying that the talks aim to disarm Hezbollah and reach "a peace agreement that will strengthen security and stability in our region and promote prosperity and peace."

Berri rejects Qassem's remarks on toppling government
Naharnet/May 29/2026
Speaker Nabih Berri said that what concerns him at the present time and what he is intervening in is "preventing any recklessness or internal problems."In an interview with the Asas Media news portal, Berri rejected Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem's threat to bring down the government, saying: "I do not agree with him, and it is unnecessary to say this. It did not reassure me, and we quickly resolved the matter." He also revealed that the leaderships of the Amal Movement and Hezbollah held two meetings in the following two days to "correct this stance.""In the Amal Movement, we do not say such things, it is not our language, and I am certainly not with him," Berri added. Qassem had recently warned that it would be "the right of the people to take to the streets and overthrow the government" should it shut down Hezbollah's Al-Qard Al-Hassan financial institution due to U.S. and Israeli pressure.

Hezbollah claims several attacks targeting northern Israel
LBCI/May 29/2026
Hezbollah said Friday it had launched a series of attacks against military targets in northern Israel near the Lebanese border, as delegations from two countries held security talks in Washington. The armed group said in a series of statements that it targeted gatherings of soldiers near a town in Israel's north using drones, as well as another group in a military camp in Galilee and a barracks.AFP

Lebanon warns Israeli strikes put heritage sites in 'serious danger'
Agence France Presse/May 29/2026
Lebanon's culture minister told AFP on Friday that Israeli strikes on the country's south are putting heritage sites, including in the ancient city of Tyre, in "serious danger".
"Bombings fell very close to the ruins of Tyre," a UNESCO World Heritage site, Ghassan Salame said, adding that the medieval Beaufort castle overlooking Nabatieh was "directly hit".

Lebanon decries Israeli attacks damaging heritage sites
Agence France Presse/May 29/2026
Lebanese authorities have decried Israeli attacks near UNESCO-protected historic sites and landmarks in the country's south. Culture Minister Ghassan Salame "made numerous contacts with his counterparts worldwide and relevant international organizations to draw their attention to the huge damage to archaeological sites and heritage districts" in south Lebanon, the state-run National News Agency said. He highlighted the ancient city of Tyre and Beaufort castle in the Nabatieh district, emphasizing that "a large number of these sites enjoy enhanced protection from UNESCO, making it necessary to protect them from any Israeli air or artillery attack".Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said on X that "nothing can justify the ongoing attacks on the Tyre and Nabatieh regions and the destruction of their historical landmarks".
Israel has issued repeated evacuation warnings to swathes of the southern coastal city of Tyre in recent days and carried out heavy strikes. Early Thursday, Israel's military warned it would target a building in Tyre which it showed on an accompanying map as located very close to the city's archaeological area. Around two hours after the warning, AFP footage showed a fireball followed by smoke as a strike hit the district. The south Lebanon municipality of Arnoun, where the historic Beaufort castle is located, said in a statement on Facebook that it "condemns in the strongest terms the attack that targeted" the site, blaming Israeli bombardment and urging authorities to protect it "from further damage". On Wednesday, an AFP correspondent saw smoke rising near Beaufort castle after what appeared to be artillery fire. Israeli forces used the castle, also known as Qalaat al-Chakif, as a base during their previous two-decade occupation of southern Lebanon which ended in 2000. In November 2024, during a previous war between Israel and Hezbollah, UNESCO granted 34 heritage sites in Lebanon including Tyre and Beaufort Castle "provisional enhanced protection". "Non-compliance with these clauses would constitute 'serious violations' of the 1954 Hague Convention and... potential grounds for prosecution," it said at the time. This April, UNESCO added another 39 Lebanese sites to the list.

Health Ministry says Choueifat strike killed woman, two children
Agence France Presse/May 29/2026
Lebanon's health ministry said an Israeli strike south of Beirut on Thursday killed a woman and two children, after Israel's army said it "precisely struck" the capital without identifying the target. "The Israeli enemy strike on the town of Choueifat led to a final toll of three martyrs including a woman and her baby daughter, and a child of Syrian nationality, in addition to wounding 15 people including three children and five women," the health ministry said in a statement.'

UNIFIL holds official ceremony in Naqoura marking International Day of UN Peacekeepers
LBCI/May 29/2026
UNIFIL held an official ceremony at its headquarters in Naqoura on the occasion of the International Day of United Nations Peacekeepers. According to a statement, this year’s celebration comes amid a significant deterioration in the security situation, with escalating hostilities, repeated violations along the Blue Line, and a worrying risk of further escalation. In a speech marking the occasion, Head of Mission and Force Commander Major General Diodato Abagnara said that even under these complex conditions, peacekeepers continue to carry out their duties efficiently and with dedication, using liaison and coordination mechanisms to help ease tensions, coordinate humanitarian assistance where possible, and create conditions for stability. He stressed that the political and diplomatic track remains the only viable solution to the conflict, reaffirming that UNIFIL remains committed to supporting parties in restoring a cessation of hostilities and creating conditions for a lasting ceasefire. The ceremony also included a tribute to peacekeepers who lost their lives. In recent months, six UNIFIL peacekeepers were killed while performing their duties. Their sacrifice serves as a reminder of the risks faced by peacekeepers and the importance of their mission. Major General Abagnara said: “Today, we honour the memory of more than 4,500 peacekeepers who have lost their lives in service worldwide since 1948, including 345 in UNIFIL, and we pay tribute to our six colleagues who were recently lost in tragic circumstances. Their sacrifice strengthens our determination to complete this mission and pursue peace with renewed resolve. We will never forget their commitment and courage. Despite difficult circumstances, UNIFIL has once again reaffirmed its strong commitment to its mandate toward the people of southern Lebanon.”He concluded by saying: “As we mark the 78th anniversary of United Nations peacekeeping operations, we renew our determination to uphold peace, even in the darkest circumstances. We owe it to those who have lost their loved ones and livelihoods – and to communities on both sides of the Blue Line – to persist in our efforts toward stability and a peaceful future.”The statement noted that May 29 is observed annually as the International Day of United Nations Peacekeepers in recognition of the professionalism, dedication, and courage of military and civilian peacekeepers worldwide, and in memory of those who sacrificed their lives for peace. The date also marks the establishment of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) in 1948, whose international observers in Lebanon continue working alongside UNIFIL for peace and stability in southern Lebanon.

What options as UN force’s Lebanon exit looms?/A worst-case scenario for Lebanon would be a UNIFIL pullout without any alternative.
AFP/29 May ,2026
Lebanon is seeking an international force to replace a decades-long United Nations peacekeeping mission whose mandate ends this year following US and Israeli pressure, even as the latest Israel-Hezbollah war continues. Concerns over the possible exit of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) with no alternative come with Israeli troops occupying south Lebanon’s border areas, and as Israel and Lebanon hold direct negotiations seeking to end decades of hostilities. The force has been a buffer between Lebanon and Israel since 1978, but its presence has not been enough to prevent repeated outbreaks of conflict. With the UN secretary-general set to submit a report to the Security Council by June 1, AFP looks at some potential scenarios.
What does Lebanon want?
UNIFIL currently counts some 7,500 peacekeepers from nearly 50 countries. They are deployed in south Lebanon near the Blue Line, the 120-kilometre (75-mile) de facto border between Lebanon and Israel, where they are now in the middle of the Israel-Hezbollah war.
A Lebanese official requesting anonymity told AFP that after UNIFIL’s mandate ends on December 31, Lebanon’s preference is to still have “an international presence under the umbrella of the UN.” A second Lebanese official said it was “crucial” to have some kind of UN force resembling UNIFIL, “maybe with some downsizing or mission changes.”
“How can we talk about Resolution 1701 without UNIFIL?” they added, also requesting anonymity. UN Security Council Resolution 1701 ended a 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah, and bolstered UNIFIL’s role, tasking peacekeepers with monitoring the ceasefire between the two sides. The resolution also formed the basis of a 2024 truce that halted a previous round of fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, under which the Lebanese government has been seeking to disarm the Iran-backed group.
UN options?
Several sources said discussions were ongoing ahead of the UN report, but that options could include a downsized UN mission. Another might see the mission of the UN Truce Supervision Organization extended. UNTSO is a regional peacekeeping operation set up in 1948 that also has a small, unarmed contingent in Lebanon. Authorities are waiting to see the UN report before making an official request for international assistance, both Lebanese officials said.
But Israel and the United States, which last year pushed to end the UNIFIL mandate at the Security Council, could try to block any new UN proposal. The second Lebanese official said that even if Washington opposed a new UN formula, “we hope that at least they will not veto it.” Some Security Council members including China are however in favor of keeping a UN force on the ground. Cash could be another obstacle, with UN-led peacekeeping operations weakened by a funding crisis that has already seen UNIFIL cut its numbers in recent months.
Non-UN options?
If no new UN arrangement is reached, several sources said alternative proposals could include a European Union force or bilateral military arrangements between Lebanon and individual countries. They said Italy, France and Spain, which all have major troop contingents in UNIFIL, have expressed willingness to keep forces in Lebanon. In February, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun asked Germany -- which heads UNIFIL’s maritime taskforce -- to play a “key role” after UNIFIL’s departure. But myriad bilateral military accords could be unwieldy. “What makes increasing sense to everyone is going back to a UN framework,” a Western diplomatic source told AFP on condition of anonymity.
Vacuum?
A worst-case scenario for Lebanon would be a UNIFIL pullout without any alternative. The diplomatic source said such a vacuum would be “a very dangerous situation for Israel and Lebanon.”“There wouldn’t be any international witness to make sure that whatever is eventually agreed upon (in Israel-Lebanon negotiations) is well-implemented on the ground,” they said. A UN source noted that there would also be “a lot more competition for the narrative” with no international presence. “UNIFIL monitors and reports impartially -- there isn’t currently another actor or organization on the ground that can do that,” the source said on condition of anonymity.

Washington talks focus on extending state authority and restricting Hezbollah arms: Source tells
LBCI/May 29/2026
A source following the negotiations in Washington told LBCI that discussions on the military track are focused on a state plan to extend government authority and place Hezbollah's weapons under state control. The source said negotiators are also discussing a pilot mechanism for implementing the plan in areas from which Israeli forces would gradually withdraw.

Trump administration grants rare TPS reprieve, extending protections for 11,000 Lebanese
AP/May 29, 2026
MIAMI: The Trump administration has extended protections shielding about 11,000 Lebanese from deportation, allowing them to stay and work in the United States for another six months.
The decision, announced Thursday by the Department of Homeland Security, marked a rare reprieve for people protected by temporary measures which have been harshly criticized by Republicans. The extension comes amid ongoing fighting in southern Lebanon between Israeli troops and Hezbollah fighters. The decision was automatic, meaning that the administration missed the deadline by which they were supposed to decide on whether to extend the measure called Temporary Protected Status for Lebanese people living in the US who are covered by the program. By statute, the status automatically extends for six months if the department misses the deadline. It was an unusual outcome for an administration that has canceled the protections that had covered people from 13 countries, including Venezuela, Haiti, Nicaragua and Syria from deportation. TPS was created by Congress in 1990 to prevent deportations to countries suffering from natural disasters or civil strife, giving people authorization to work in increments of up to 18 months. More than 1 million immigrants from 17 countries were protected by TPS at the beginning of the Trump administration, after the Biden administration greatly expanded its use.
The program has been at the center of a controversy.
Republicans and critics of TPS argue that the program and its protections deviate from their original temporary intent, taking on a quasi-permanent character when extended. Its defenders assert that it is a fundamental humanitarian program that prevents vulnerable individuals from being forced to return to dangerous conditions. The DHS notice said that former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and current Secretary Markwayne Mullin, who has led the department for the past two months, “were unable to make an informed determination on Lebanon’s TPS designation.”The extension allows existing beneficiaries to keep their protections through Nov. 27, 2026, “if they still meet the eligibility requirements for TPS,” according to the notice. The work permits that were already issued for Lebanese TPS holders will be valid until the same day. This is the second time the Trump administration has automatically extended a TPS designation. The first happened nearly a year ago with South Sudan, but the protections were terminated in November 2025, after the six-month extension period. There are dozens of lawsuits challenging the termination of TPS at federal courts in different states. The Supreme Court is set to make a decision on TPS that protected Haitians and Syrians during the summer, and the result is expected to have an impact on all the other cases.
Advocates welcomed the extension.
“Extending Temporary Protected Status means Lebanese nationals in the United States will not be forced back into dangerous conditions but allowed to stay and continue supporting their families and contributing to their local communities,” said Kelly Razzouk, vice president of policy and advocacy at the International Rescue Committee. José Palma, national coordinator of the National TPS Alliance— an advocacy group that has fought in federal courts against the cancelation of TPS for several countries— welcomed the extension of protections for the Lebanese. “But we need to find a permanent solution for all TPS beneficiaries,” he warned.

No US-Iran deal can save Lebanon without local initiative
Makram Rabah/Al Arabiya English/29 May ,2026
Next week, Lebanese and Israeli officials are expected to meet in Washington for separate talks aimed at preventing a wider war and setting the parameters for a possible political arrangement. The talks come as Israel intensifies its military operations across southern Lebanon, expanding strikes, deepening destruction, and pushing further displacement across the country.
For Lebanon, the Israeli escalation is undeniably catastrophic. Entire border villages have been reduced to rubble. More than a million Lebanese remain displaced. Civilian infrastructure is collapsing under repeated bombardment, while fears continue to grow that the conflict may evolve into a longer and more devastating regional confrontation.But equally alarming is something else: The complete absence of a Lebanese state strategy.
At a moment that requires national clarity, political initiative, and institutional leadership, the Lebanese state remains largely passive, reacting to events rather than shaping them. There is no serious public roadmap for reconstruction, no timeline for the return of displaced populations, no national security doctrine capable of addressing the postwar reality, and no meaningful political discussion about how Lebanon intends to prevent this cycle from repeating itself yet again. Instead, Lebanon appears to be waiting for external negotiations – whether in Washington, Tehran, or Islamabad – to determine its future. Worse, it seems to be betting on the rationality and goodwill of Hezbollah and the IRGC to eventually disarm. This is not a strategy. It is an admission of paralysis. The Lebanese people cannot continue betting their survival on regional diplomacy while their country collapses in real time.
Israel has been clear that whatever happens at the negotiating table will not alter its stated objective: Implementing Resolution 1701 and restoring security to its northern border. In practice, this means maintaining military pressure until Hezbollah is pushed back and the Lebanese state is forced to assume responsibility for its own territory. For Israel, the option is not only military. It is also political. It is using destruction, displacement, and diplomatic pressure to force a new reality on Lebanon.
Hezbollah, meanwhile, continues to gamble with the country. It is not refusing negotiations outright, but it wants Iran to negotiate on behalf of Lebanon. It continues to operate as an armed extension of the IRGC, using Lebanese civilian infrastructure, border villages, and displaced communities as tools in a regional confrontation over which the Lebanese people have no say. This is the core of the crisis. Iranian occupation has invited Israeli occupation. Lebanon is trapped between two external powers, while its official institutions remain too weak, divided, or compromised to reclaim national decision-making.
Even if a ceasefire is reached, the crisis will not end. The villages of southern Lebanon have not merely been damaged; many have been razed. Homes, roads, farms, schools, and public infrastructure have been erased. Many of the displaced will not simply return when the guns fall silent, because there may be nothing left to return to.
A US-Iran deal, should one emerge, will not save Lebanon. It may restrain Israel for a moment or alter the diplomatic calendar, but it will not erase the ruins now stretching across the south. Those destroyed villages will remain as evidence of a deeper national failure: what happens when a country allows others to decide its wars, negotiate its fate, and dictate its future.
And no serious investor, donor, or international institution will finance the reconstruction of Lebanon if the same military structure that caused the devastation remains intact. Humanitarian aid may arrive. Emergency relief may be distributed. But long-term reconstruction will remain limited, conditional, and temporary unless Lebanon restores the monopoly of arms to the state.
This is not simply an Israeli demand. Nor is it merely an American or Gulf condition for assistance. Increasingly, it is becoming a Lebanese demand as well.
There is a growing recognition across large segments of Lebanese society that Hezbollah’s military role has become incompatible with the survival of the Lebanese state. Even among communities once willing to tolerate the “resistance” framework, many now understand that Lebanon cannot repeatedly sacrifice its villages, economy, and civilian population for regional wars decided elsewhere.
Hezbollah is certainly weakened. It has lost commanders, positions, and much of the aura it cultivated after 2006. But weakened does not mean finished. As long as it retains its arms, it retains enough power to control Lebanon’s political system, intimidate its opponents, and decide when the country goes to war. Through sectarian politics, and through its alliance with the Amal Movement and the speaker of parliament, Hezbollah continues to claim that it alone represents and protects Lebanon’s Shia.
In reality, it has isolated them, endangered them, and turned their towns into battlefields.
The Lebanese state cannot allow this to continue. The constitution is clear: the monopoly over arms belongs to the state. The duty of the Lebanese president, government, and army is not to manage Hezbollah’s weapons, justify them, or wait for Iran to bargain over them. Their duty is to protect the republic and all Lebanese citizens, starting with the Shiites of the south.
The illusion today is that reconstruction can precede sovereignty. That money will arrive first, and the difficult political decisions can be postponed. But the opposite is true. Without a clear process for consolidating all arms under state authority, every reconstruction project will remain hostage to the next escalation. The Lebanese state must therefore move beyond paralysis. It must present a national strategy that includes security reform, reconstruction mechanisms, economic recovery, and a realistic timeline for restoring state authority across all Lebanese territory.Netanyahu may prefer a depopulated buffer zone in southern Lebanon. Israel may seek to reshape the border through force. But Lebanon’s response cannot be rhetorical defiance disconnected from reality. If Lebanon wants its displaced citizens to return home permanently, it must confront the conditions that repeatedly produce war. That begins with disarming Hezbollah and restoring sovereignty to the state.
Not because foreign powers demand it. Not because Israel wants it. But because without it, there may soon be very little left of Lebanon to rebuild at all.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on 29-30 May/2026
Trump says Iranians ‘very good’ negotiators but US has ‘all the cards’
Al Arabiya English/29 May ,2026
US President Donald Trump said that while the Iranians are “very good” negotiators, their decimated military gives Washington leverage to secure their preferred conditions. “They’re crafty, but in the end, we have all the cards because we’ve defeated them militarily,” he said on ‘My View with Lara Trump’ in an interview that airs on Fox News on Saturday. “They have no Navy. Every ship - they have 159 ships, every one of them are at the bottom of the sea - every single one. We take pictures of them. We have people going down taking pictures of hundreds of ships. Their Navy is totally gone, 100 percent. Their Air Force is totally gone, 100 percent.”He also warned that a deal that isn’t going to be good for the US is a line that Tehran must not cross as it could trigger the US to restart its offensive military campaign.
“Well, a deal that wasn't going to be good for us is the line, ultimately,” Trump said. “I'm playing it out, and we’re going to see.”The US and Iran reached an agreement on Thursday to extend their ceasefire and lift restrictions on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, sources told Reuters, though US President Donald Trump has yet to approve it and Iranian state media said it had not been finalized. According to four sources familiar with the matter, the agreement would extend the truce for another 60 days and allow traffic to flow through the strategic waterway while negotiators tackle difficult issues such as Iran’s nuclear program. If approved by leadership in Washington and Tehran, it would amount to the biggest step toward peace since the conflict began on February 28. News of the possible agreement came after a round of tit-for-tat attacks between the two countries, the latest such incident since the ceasefire took effect in early April. with Reuters

Trump holds White House meeting to make ‘final determination’ on US-Iran deal
Published: 29 May ,2026
US President Donald Trump said Friday that he was going to make a “final” decision on a deal with Iran after a White House meeting. “I will be meeting now, in the Situation Room, to make a final determination,” Trump said on his Truth Social platform, adding that Iran must agree never to have a nuclear weapon and to open the Strait of Hormuz. “No money will be exchanged, until further notice,” he added. Trump outlined what a potential deal could look like, including: Iranian pledge to never have a nuclear weapon or bomb Immediate reopening of Strait of Hormuz, removing any mines Lifting US blockade on IranUS destruction of Iran’s highly enriched uranium But later Friday, White House officials said the meeting had ended without a clear signal on whether the US president had made a decision.

Trump says Iran talks depend on 'good deal' as military tensions continue
Naharnet/May 29/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump said any agreement with Iran would depend on securing a “good deal” for the United States as negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program intensify alongside continued military tensions in the Gulf. “A deal that wasn’t going to be good for us is the line,” Trump told Fox News in an interview set to air this weekend. “I negotiate. They negotiate. They’re very good negotiators.” The comments come as U.S. and Iranian negotiators reportedly reached a tentative 60-day memorandum of understanding extending the current ceasefire and launching broader nuclear talks, though the agreement still requires Trump’s final approval.

Trump says now making 'final determination' on Iran deal, hints will approve it
Agence France Presse/May 29/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday said he was now making a "final" decision on whether or not to strike a peace deal with Iran. "I will be meeting now, in the Situation Room, to make a final determination," Trump said in a lengthy social media post, stressing that Iran must agree never to have nuclear weapons and to open the Hormuz shipping lanes.

Vance says US, Iran made 'a lot of progress' towards deal
Agence France Presse/May 29/2026
The United States and Iran have made good progress towards a ceasefire extension deal but President Donald Trump is not yet ready to approve it, U.S. Vice President JD Vance said Thursday. "We're going back and forth on a couple of language points. We've made a lot of progress here," Vance told reporters, hours after U.S. sources said Washington and Tehran had agreed a deal. "Hopefully, we'll continue to make progress and the president will be in a position where he can endorse the agreement, but obviously that's still TBD (to be determined)," he added.

Iran sources tell IRGC-linked agency Trump comments on deal ‘mixture of truth, lies’
AFP/29 May ,2026
Iran’s IRGC-linked Fars news agency cited informed sources on Friday as saying the latest comments by US President Donald Trump about a potential deal to end the Middle East war were a “mixture of truth and lies.”“Trump claimed that Iran was obligated to open the Strait of Hormuz without tolls, even though no such clause appears in the next of the agreement,” the agency said.On Trump’s assertion that Washington and Tehran would coordinate on destroying Iran’s enriched uranium, it added: “Well-informed sources emphasized that not only does this not appear in the memorandum of understanding, but this claim is fundamentally baseless.”Fars also claimed that the preliminary deal includes the immediate release of $12 billion in frozen Iranian assets, alongside a complete ceasefire in Lebanon “in line with the views of Hezbollah.”

Iran preparing ‘grand’ funeral for slain Khamenei: State TV
AFP/29 May ,2026
Iranian authorities are laying the groundwork for a “grand” funeral for slain supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, official media reported Friday, following a lengthy postponement due to the war with the United States and Israel. Though the timing was still uncertain, “a special headquarters has been formed to prepare for the funeral ceremony, and various agencies are currently planning and making arrangements,” state TV reported, citing Mohsen Mahmoudi, head of the Tehran Coordination Council for Islamic Propaganda.
Khamenei, who led the Islamic republic for more than three decades, was killed in the first wave of US-Israeli strikes that launched the war on February 28. His son and successor Mojtaba Khamenei was also wounded in the attacks and has not been seen in public since assuming office. An event paying tribute to the elder Khamenei was organized in April, but a state funeral that was initially announced could not be held because of the war. State TV, citing Mahmoudi, said “different organizations are working to provide the necessary conditions so that, once officially announced, a ‘grand’ ceremony can be held,” adding “widespread attendance” was expected. Though a ceasefire has largely held since coming into effect in April, a deal to definitively end the conflict has proven elusive.

Kazakhstan offers to take Iran’s uranium stockpile, IAEA chief says
AFP/29 May ,2026
Kazakhstan has offered to take Iran’s uranium stockpile if the United States and Iran reach an accord on Tehran’s contested nuclear program, UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi told the Financial Times on Friday.The head of the Inte rnational Atomic Energy Agency met with Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in Astana this week. The Financial Times said the Kazakh leader had expressed his country’s “openness” to store the stockpile enriched to near weapons grade level. The estimated 440 kilograms of uranium processed to 60 percent purity is at the center of talks between the United States and Iran on extending the ceasefire in the war unleashed by US-Israel attacks. US President Donald Trump has insisted that Iran must accept that it will not have a nuclear weapon and that the uranium is destroyed. Iran has insisted on its right to maintain a nuclear program.

US judge temporarily blocks Trump’s $1.8 billion ‘weaponization’ fund
Reuters/29 May ,2026
A US judge on Friday temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s administration from setting up a nearly $1.8 billion fund to compensate victims of what Trump has called government “weaponization.”The order by US District Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia blocks the Trump administration from “taking any further action” to set up or operate the fund while the judge hears additional legal arguments.The Justice Department announced the creation of an “Anti-Weaponization Fund” last week as part of an agreement to settle Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax records. It set up a $1.776 billion fund overseen by a five-member commission to dole out payments to those who they show they were victims of “lawfare” and “weaponization,” terms Trump and his allies have used to describe investigations and criminal cases against them. Friday’s ruling came in a lawsuit filed by a group who claimed to be targeted “by the Trump-Vance administration as ideological or political opponents” and alleged they would be ineligible for payouts from the fund. The fund spurred a backlash, even from some lawmakers in Trump’s Republican Party, who expressed anger that some people who attacked the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, would receive taxpayer-funded payouts.

Turkey warns against ‘uncontrolled escalation’ after ship drone attack
AFP, Istanbul/29 May ,2026
Turkey on Friday warned against “uncontrolled escalation” in the Black Sea region after a drone attack on Thursday night hit a Turkish cargo ship. “We reiterate our warning to all parties concerned: any action that could lead to an uncontrolled escalation of the conflict must be avoided,” the Turkish foreign ministry wrote in a statement, without naming a suspect. The Ukrainian navy claimed earlier on Friday that a Russian drone had attacked the vessel, causing a fire. According to the Turkish authorities, the bulk carrier had left from the Odesa region bound for Turkey. Three Turkish cargo ships were targeted Thursday by a drone attack in the Black Sea, off Turkey’s northern coast, without causing any casualties, local media reported. “We have conveyed to the parties concerned... our concerns regarding the risks and threats posed to our region by the recent escalation of the conflict in the Black Sea, as well as our warnings about the potential negative repercussions for our country,” the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in its statement.

Hamas calls Netanyahu’s plan to expand control in Gaza a dangerous escalation
Reuters/May 29, 2026
GAZA/CAIRO: Hamas said on Friday that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s declaration that his country would expand its area of control in Gaza was a dangerous escalation, as residents of ​the Palestinian territory also voiced alarm at the plan.
Under a ceasefire deal in October Israel’s military was to remain in control of 53 percent of Gaza, but Netanyahu said on Friday that it would expand that area to an initial 70 percent, without laying out details or a timeline. The Palestinian militant group, which triggered two years of devastating warfare in Gaza with its October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, described his comments as a plan for ethnic cleansing and forced displacement of Palestinians.
MAJOR DISPUTES POSTPONED
“Any attempt to impose a new reality of occupation in Gaza is null and illegitimate,” said Ismail Al-Thawabta, head of the Hamas-run Gaza government media office, adding that Netanyahu’s statement “represents a dangerous escalation.” More than eight months into the ceasefire, and with global attention fixed on the war in Iran, Gaza’s underlying conflict remains stubbornly ‌unresolved with continued ‌Israeli attacks, little aid reaching civilians and the risk of major new violence. Israel has already expanded ​its ‌area ⁠of control ​in ⁠Gaza from the 53 percent lying behind a “yellow line” mapped into the ceasefire deal up to around 64 percent, with an area it has designated as restricted in maps shared with aid groups. Any further reduction in space available to the more than 2 million Gaza residents who are mostly crammed into tents in the tiny Palestinian territory risks worsening already dire conditions there. “Where do we go? To the sea? There is no space,” said Mohammed Al-Shagra, 72, in Khan Younis. Last year’s deal brokered by US President Donald Trump established a Board of Peace to oversee a phased ceasefire, and was ratified by the United Nations Security Council. However, many of the toughest areas of dispute including the disarmament of Hamas, a full Israeli ⁠withdrawal and the make-up of a Gaza government were postponed to later in the process. ‌The Board of Peace negotiators have been talking to both sides on the disarmament issue. Israel ‌and Hamas have repeatedly accused each other of violating the truce. Israeli strikes in ​Gaza have killed more than 900 Palestinians since the start of ‌the truce while Palestinian militant attacks have killed four Israeli soldiers.
Israel’s military and the prime minister’s office did not immediately respond ‌to a Reuters request for additional information and comment on Netanyahu’s statement. A spokesperson for the Board of Peace said it would not have a comment on Netanyahu’s statement. The foreign ministries of permanent UN Security Council members Britain and France did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A German foreign ministry spokesperson said Germany was concerned about Israeli plans to take more of Gaza and opposed a permanent division of the Palestinian territory.
RISK OF FURTHER VIOLENCE
Facing ‌elections this year and under pressure for Israel’s failure to secure its strategic goals in wars in Iran and Lebanon, Netanyahu may be seeking to bolster his standing with voters. “He’s determined ⁠to look tough in front of ⁠the electorate and he’s blamed by his opponents for having fought this seven-front war, but having won none of the wars,” said Max Rodenbeck, Israel-Palestine Project Director at International Crisis Group. “Unless there’s some sort of pushback from the Trump administration it really does risk a return to something very bloody,” he added, pointing to other ways in which Israel has been ramping up pressure on Hamas including continued aid restrictions on Gaza and strikes targeting Hamas figures. For people inside Gaza, where nearly all the population had to flee their homes during the war and with most still living in temporary tents or shelters, the prospect of increased Israeli military pressure is alarming. “We see no ceasefire or anything and they keep advancing beyond the yellow line. For how long will the world stay silent?” said Mohammed Al-Jundi, a displaced man in Gaza City. In Israel, a return to tougher military pressure is seen by security hawks as the only way to force Hamas to disarm and achieve a longer-term agreement. “It looks as if we are taking a step toward another collision. But I believe ​this time it will be much shorter and maybe would ​open the path toward a new future,” said Kobi Michael, a researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies and a former official in the country’s strategic affairs ministry.

Russian official warns Europe to brace for more drone incidents after Romania episode
Reuters/ 29 May ,2026
Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chair of Russia’s powerful Security Council, warned European leaders on Friday that drones would continue to stray into their countries and prevent their populations from sleeping peacefully. Medvedev spoke out after NATO accused Moscow of reckless behavior and pledged to “defend every inch of Allied territory” after Romania said a Russian drone had crashed into an apartment block in the alliance member state during an attack on neighboring Ukraine. Medvedev said it still needed to be ascertained which country the drone belonged to but said that Europe’s “impotent” leaders should stop expressing outrage over the incident since they were directly participating in a war against Russia. “Let them get ready: this will continue to happen,” Medvedev said in a statement. “There is a war going on! And the citizens of EU states, as the population of the belligerent countries, will not be able to sleep peacefully.”He said such incidents were particularly likely to continue in places where drones were being made for Ukraine. “After all, European drones, spare parts for them, and other weapons, not to mention intelligence, are used in attacks on our country every day. As a result of their actions, residential buildings are being damaged, in which our civilians are dying,” said Medvedev. Russian President Vladimir Putin had been informed about the drone incident in Romania, the TASS state news agency reported earlier on Friday, and the Russian Foreign Ministry said Moscow would respond swiftly to Romania’s retaliatory decision to close down the Russian consulate in Constanta.

Uganda records two new Ebola cases: Health ministry
AFP/May 29/2026
Uganda confirmed two new Ebola cases on Friday, bringing the total to nine – including one fatality – since the outbreak was declared on May 15 in the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo. The health ministry said the two new cases are both Congolese nationals.
One presented Ebola symptoms and was immediately isolated, while the other was a contact of a previously confirmed case. “All contacts of this new confirmed case have been identified and are under close follow up,” the ministry said in a statement. Uganda closed its border with the DRC this week in a bid to contain the spread of Ebola and ordered a 21-day quarantine for anyone arriving from that country. On Friday, the World Health Organization confirmed the first recovery since the start of the outbreak in the DRC, with one patient discharged from hospital after two negative tests. The WHO has recorded 17 confirmed and 223 suspected Ebola deaths in the DRC since May 15, out of 125 confirmed cases and over 900 suspected cases. The health agency issued an international health alert after the outbreak was declared.
No vaccine or treatment exists for the Bundibugyo strain of Ebola, which is responsible for the current outbreak. However, the Africa CDC said on Thursday that a vaccine is expected to be ready by the end of the year.

The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on 29-30 May/2026
Question: What is the day of Pentecost?
GotQuestions.org/May 29/2026
Answer: Pentecost is significant in both the Old and New Testaments. “Pentecost” is actually the Greek name for a festival known in the Old Testament as the Feast of Weeks (Leviticus 23:15; Deuteronomy 16:9). The Greek word means “fifty” and refers to the fifty days that have elapsed since the wave offering of Passover. The Feast of Weeks celebrated the end of the grain harvest. Most interesting, however, is its use in Joel and Acts. Looking back to Joel’s prophecy (Joel 2:28–32) and forward to the promise of the Holy Spirit in Christ’s last words on earth before His ascension into heaven (Acts 1:8), Pentecost signals the beginning of the church age.The only biblical reference to the actual events of Pentecost is Acts 2:1–3. Pentecost is reminiscent of the Last Supper; in both instances the disciples are together in a house for what proves to be an important event. At the Last Supper the disciples witness the end of the Messiah’s earthly ministry as He asks them to remember Him after His death until He returns. At Pentecost, the disciples witness the birth of the New Testament church in the coming of the Holy Spirit to indwell all believers. Thus the scene of the disciples in a room at Pentecost links the commencement of the Holy Spirit’s work in the church with the conclusion of Christ’s earthly ministry in the upper room before the crucifixion. The description of fire and wind mentioned in the Pentecost account resounds throughout the Old and the New Testament. The sound of the wind at Pentecost was “rushing” and “mighty.” Scriptural references to the power of wind (always understood to be under God’s control) abound. Exodus 10:13; Psalm 18:42 and Isaiah 11:15 in the Old Testament and Matthew 14:23–32 in the New Testament are only a few examples. More significant than wind as power is wind as life in the Old Testament (Job 12:10) and as spirit in the New (John 3:8). Just as the first Adam received the breath of physical life (Genesis 2:7), so the last Adam, Jesus, brings the breath of spiritual life. The idea of spiritual life as generated by the Holy Spirit is certainly implicit in the sound of the wind at Pentecost.
Fire is often associated in the Old Testament with the presence of God (Exodus 3:2; 13:21–22; 24:17; Isaiah 10:17) and with His holiness (Psalm 97:3; Malachi 3:2). Likewise, in the New Testament, fire is associated with the presence of God (Hebrews 12:29) and the purification He can bring about in human life (Revelation 3:18). God’s presence and holiness are implied in the Pentecostal tongues of fire. Indeed, fire is identified with Christ Himself (Revelation 1:14; 19:12); this association naturally underlies the Pentecost gift of the Holy Spirit, who would teach the disciples the things of Christ (John 16:14).
Another aspect of the Day of Pentecost is the miraculous speaking in foreign tongues which enabled people from various language groups to understand the message of the apostles. In addition is the bold and incisive preaching of Peter to a Jewish audience. The effect of the sermon was powerful, as listeners were “cut to the heart” (Acts 2:37) and instructed by Peter to “repent, and be baptized” (Acts 2:38). The narrative concludes with three thousand souls being added to the fellowship, the breaking of bread and prayers, apostolic signs and wonders, and a community in which everyone’s needs were met. In many church today, Pentecost is remembered with a special Pentecost Sunday service.

Why Christian persecution is Trump’s new foreign policy roadmap
Mariam Wahba and Samuel Ben-Ur/Christian Post/May 29/2026
https://www.christianpost.com/voices/why-christian-persecution-is-trumps-new-foreign-policy-roadmap.html
During his first term, President Donald Trump made fighting Christian persecution around the world a foreign policy priority. In his second term, it has become something more than that.
The complications stemming from this virtuous decision during the first Trump administration were real. Relationships with adversaries and allies involved in Christian persecution were strained, and strategies became muddied.
Do you sanction Egypt, a critical partner in a volatile region, over its treatment of Coptic Christians? Do you let jihadist networks consolidate in Nigeria while you debate religious freedom benchmarks with Abuja? Do you refuse to engage China over its “Sinicization” of Christianity and targeting of pastors? A principle that cannot survive in world of realpolitik is a liability.
Whether by design or coincidence, Trump’s second term reflects a more calibrated approach to dealing with this scourge.
The question now is whether Washington can do something harder than either ignoring the issue or championing it: employ it as both a policy indicator and guide.
This is already being tested. In late 2025, after several attacks on Christians in Nigeria’s Middle Belt, Trump designated the West African nation a Country of Particular Concern under the International Religious Freedom Act. The administration went as far as ordering strikes on Islamic State targets on Christmas Day. More recently, the White House counterterrorism strategy listed defending Christians as one of its two main priorities in Africa. Washington also eliminated the Islamic State’s number two in Nigeria, whom Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said, “was killing Christians.” Meanwhile, on his visit to Beijing earlier this month, Trump brought up the case of imprisoned Pastor Ezra Jin.
Washington is no longer seemingly trying to fix Christian persecution wholesale. It is asking where persecution is happening, who is behind it, and whether those actors threaten American interests. These are the correct questions, and the answer is almost always the same.
The persecution of Christians abroad is often a concentrated expression of the very forces American foreign policy opposes: jihadism, authoritarianism, lawlessness, and anti-democratic repression. It’s no coincidence that the policies necessary to stymie Christian persecution often overlap with steps Washington would like to take regarding these same countries and nonstate actors.
The pattern holds across vastly different contexts.
Washington maintains a significant aid relationship with an Egyptian government that has chronically failed to protect Coptic Christians, an estimated 15 to 20 million people, from targeted violence and systematic legal discrimination. The pattern reflects the same tolerance for extralegal violence and sectarian hierarchy that makes Egypt an unstable and ultimately unreliable partner. Washington need not rupture the relationship, but measurable progress on Coptic protections, including fast-tracking stalled church construction permits, prosecution of sectarian violence, and working toward legal equality, should be a condition of the aid relationship. Currently, it is a mere footnote in the Washington-Cairo relationship.
But in Nigeria, the problems Christians face extend beyond organized Islamic terrorist groups like Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province to the Fulani, a largely Muslim West African ethnic group. Across the Middle Belt, Fulani militant attacks — which are often described as “farmer-herder violence” or “ethnic conflict” — have ravaged Christian communities. While there is some truth to the farmer-herder dynamics, that language can obscure the religiously charged violence carried out with near-total impunity.
The 2023 Christmas massacres in the north central Plateau State, where Fulani terrorists murdered more than 200 Christians, while reportedly shouting “Allah Akbar, we will destroy all Christians,” should have forced a reckoning with anti-Christian violence. But massacres of Christians on holy days in their places of worship continue. A government that cannot protect Christian villages from repeated attacks is failing at the basic tasks of governance. For Washington, which sees Nigeria as a partner in stemming terrorism in West Africa, this is also a strategic problem. The steps Nigeria must take to stabilize its north and Middle Belt are the same steps required to protect its Christian communities. Better intelligence cooperation, targeted counterterrorism pressure, security-sector reform, and aid conditioned on measurable results. Washington can pursue all of these goals together, increasing assistance in proportion to Nigeria’s proven willingness to protect vulnerable communities. In China, the Communist Party’s suppression of Christianity is not incidental to its foreign policy posture. It is an expression of the same logic driving it. Beijing demolishes crosses, detains pastors, rewrites religious materials, and places churches under supervision. Beijing fears Christianity so much that it has built a mass surveillance apparatus around containing it. Churchgoers have their identities catalogued by facial recognition cameras placed in churches around China. These same cameras were originally tested on Uyghurs in Xinjiang who are facing genocide, according to the United States and others. A regime that cannot tolerate independent churches is unlikely to tolerate independent institutions, civil society, or democratic pluralism anywhere it gains influence. And, key to American policymakers, Beijing’s fear of Christianity is not irrational. A faith premised on loyalty to a higher authority than the state is a structural challenge to totalitarian control.
With adversaries, the tools available are different. Washington should further sanction China’s United Front Work Department (UFWD), an organ of the CCP that leads enforcement of Chinese religious laws, under the Global Magnitsky Act. Doing so fits into Washington’s broader strategic vision for confronting Beijing. The U.S. has already sanctioned members of the UFWD for human rights abuses in Xinjiang and espionage in Hong Kong. Designating officials responsible for Christian persecution would add to Washington’s toolkit in combatting the department Chinese leader Xi Jinping calls his “magic weapon,” and signal that Washington is reading the right foreign policy roadmap. None of this requires Christian solidarity as a foreign policy posture. It requires a foreign policy attentive enough to read what Christian persecution is pointing to.
That is the standard against which Trump’s second term should be measured. Not whether he champions Christians loudly enough, but whether his administration followed the roadmap where it led, asked the right questions of the right governments, and let the answers shape policy.
This approach claims that Christian persecution often reveals where America’s enemies’ priorities lie, where its partners are weakest, and where its policy is least effective.
Whether in Egypt, Nigeria, or China, the persecution of Christians is rarely the whole story. Trump’s first term treated it as a cause that demanded resolution. His second term is treating it as a roadmap that underpins America’s strategic goals. Washington ought not to look at Christian persecution as an isolated problem that needs an isolated remedy. It needs to ask, consistently and seriously, what the presence of persecution tells us about the governments we fund, the partners we arm, and the threats we are not yet naming.
**Mariam Wahba is a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). Sam Ben-Ur is a research analyst focusing on Christian persecution at FDD. Follow Mariam on X @themariamwahba and Sam @realSamuelBenUr.
https://www.christianpost.com/voices/why-christian-persecution-is-trumps-new-foreign-policy-roadmap.html
Read in Christian Post

Can Syria Be Friends with Both Europe and Russia?
Ahmad Sharawi/National Interest/May 29/2026
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/middle-east-watch/can-syria-be-friends-with-both-europe-and-russia
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa has sought to open up relations with Europe while retaining the country’s longstanding ties with Moscow. As European officials moved to normalize relations with Damascus and ease years of sanctions on Syria this week, Russian cargo ships continued docking at Syrian ports carrying the oil and military support that still help keep the Syrian state afloat. The contradiction has become the defining feature of Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s foreign policy. Sharaa avoids a decisive alignment with any geopolitical camp while convincing rival regional and global powers that they still have something to gain from Damascus. The balancing act is most visible in Syria’s simultaneous engagement with Europe, Ukraine, and Russia, but the strategy extends far beyond those relationships. Across the region, Sharaa has sought to position Syria as a state open to all sides without fully aligning with any. In the Persian Gulf, Damascus has cultivated ties with both Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates despite their increased competitiveness.
For Sharaa, this foreign policy approach is a necessity born from Syria’s devastation. After 14 years of war that produced diplomatic isolation and economic collapse, Damascus no longer has the luxury of anchoring itself exclusively within a single geopolitical camp. Sharaa has repeatedly emphasized that he seeks to “rebuild relations with all regional and international states,” a reflection not only of Syria’s desperate need for reconstruction and international legitimacy, but also of a deeper lesson drawn from the former Bashar al-Assad regime itself.
For decades, Syria tied its future to rigid political axes. Under both Hafez and Bashar al-Assad, Damascus defined itself in alignment with the so-called “rejectionist” camp, the coalition of Arab states and militant groups opposed to peace with Israel and Western influence in the region. Syria also had to endure near-total dependence on Russia and Iran during the civil war. Sharaa is attempting to project the opposite image. In just a few months, he has visited more Western and regional capitals than Bashar al-Assad did during his 24-year rule. Sharaa is attempting to transform Syria from an ideological frontline state into a transactional state whose survival depends on maintaining relationships with mutually hostile powers simultaneously. Yet the contradiction at the center of Sharaa’s foreign policy remains unresolved. As European governments reopened embassies in Damascus and welcomed Syria back into diplomatic circles, Sharaa simultaneously deepened his engagement with another power many Europeans hoped to marginalize in Syria: Russia. Europe’s opening to Damascus carried a geopolitical expectation. As German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock put it before traveling to Damascus in January 2025, “It is time for Russia to leave its military bases in Syria.” Members of the European Parliament went further, urging Syria to “break free” from their long-standing alliances with Moscow.
Yet Sharaa has moved in the opposite direction, signaling to the Russians that they “play a major role in Syria, in stabilizing the situation.” Sharaa has allowed Moscow to preserve its military foothold in Syria through the Hmeimim Air Base and Tartus naval facility, both central to Russia’s power projection in the Mediterranean, and has also continued to purchase oil as well as stolen Ukrainian grain from Russia.
The contradiction became even sharper in April, when Sharaa welcomed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to Damascus for talks on security cooperation and reconstruction. During the visit, Zelensky announced that the two countries had agreed “to work together to provide more security and opportunities for development for our societies.” In addition, Ukrainian officials said Syria expressed “great interest” in exchanging military experience with Ukrainian specialists. Sharaa has positioned himself as a leader willing to shake hands with both the Kremlin and one of the Kremlin’s fiercest enemies.
The United States had hoped that removing sanctions on Syria would bring it closer to the Western camp. While some voices argued that sanctions relief should require the elimination of Russian influence, the Trump administration adopted a different approach. In March 2025, US officials handed Damascus a list of conditions for sanctions relief, but Russia’s military presence was notably absent from it. Moscow’s foothold in Syria was never treated as a decisive test for Damascus’ reintegration into the international fold.
Europe offers what Syria needs the most: international legitimacy and the financing required to rebuild a devastated country. His outreach to Ukraine is partly tied to that calculation, presenting Damascus as a government willing to engage with one of Europe’s closest wartime partners against Russia. But the relationship between Kyiv and Syria’s new leadership did not emerge overnight. During the final years of the civil war, Ukrainian operatives provided Sharaa’s Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham coalition with drone expertise and tactical knowledge as both sides confronted a common adversary in Moscow.
Yet Sharaa has shown little hesitation in balancing those ties by renewing a partnership with Russia itself. Sharaa appears to understand that Moscow’s interest in Syria is ultimately transactional, driven by Russia’s determination to preserve its military footprint in the Mediterranean. Sharaa has sought to leverage that reality to extract what Damascus needs. Russia continues to supply Syria with oil and gas that help sustain the country’s ambition to extend electricity hours. Under Assad, much of Syria lived on just two to four hours of state-provided electricity. By 2026, areas had received up to eight hours daily, a modest improvement but one Sharaa could point to as evidence that his energy deals were beginning to stabilize the country.
Additionally, reports have increasingly pointed to renewed Russian military support and training for Syrian troops. That cooperation is especially important because much of Syria’s military infrastructure and equipment remains Russian-made, making it difficult to replace Moscow even as Damascus opens to the West. Moscow likely understands that a partially aligned Syria is still preferable to losing Syria entirely. Russia also recognizes that Syria’s new leadership is unlikely to sever ties with Moscow so long as Russian military, energy, and logistical support remain essential to the Syrian state’s survival.
The Trump administration’s ambiguous posture towards Russia has indirectly reinforced Damascus’ opening to Moscow. Washington has demonstrated a willingness to tolerate forms of Russian-linked economic activity when tied to energy and stabilization concerns, particularly during the Iran War, when sanctioned Russian vessels received a general license to continue selling oil. That same logic had appeared earlier in Syria policy, as the administration prioritized Syria’s international normalization while leaving unresolved how much Russian influence inside the country it was willing to tolerate.
So how does Sharaa avoid alienating the Europeans and Ukrainians as he deepens ties with Moscow? In many ways, Sharaa understands that Europe’s overriding concern is preventing another collapse of the Syrian state. After more than a decade of refugee flows from Syria to Europe, migration has become one of the continent’s deepest anxieties. Thus, European officials have framed Syria’s stabilization as a strategic necessity, with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz declaring that Syrians in Germany “no longer [have] any grounds to asylum.” Damascus has also leveraged that reality. According to Mertz, Sharaa himself seeks the return of 80 percent of Syrians in Germany.
In effect, Syria has positioned normalization as part of Europe’s broader effort to contain instability and migration on its southern flank. That calculation helps explain why many of these European governments have largely tolerated Sharaa’s broad engagements with rivals and competitors, including Moscow.
Ukraine, too, appears willing to tolerate a degree of Sharaa’s openness toward Moscow because Kyiv’s expectations are ultimately pragmatic. Under Assad, Syria functioned as an extension of Russia’s regional camp, recognizing the separatist republics in eastern Ukraine and severing diplomatic relations with Kyiv. During the war in Ukraine, US officials confirmed that Moscow actively recruited Syrians to fight on the battlefield. At the same time, the Russian-backed paramilitary Wagner Group leveraged its networks inside Syria to recruit mercenaries and regime-linked fighters for Russian operations.
Sharaa has already shifted that equation dramatically. By reopening diplomatic channels with Kyiv and welcoming President Volodymyr Zelensky to Damascus, Syria has begun moving away from the rigid pro-Russian position it occupied under Assad. For Kyiv, that alone represents a significant victory. Syria no longer needs to become openly anti-Russian to serve Ukrainian interests; it simply needs to cease functioning as an exclusive Russian client state.
In some ways, Ukraine may even benefit from Russia’s continued need to preserve its military footprint in Syria. To maintain its military foothold, Moscow is dedicating military, logistical, and financial resources away from the war in Ukraine. At the same time, the fall of Assad and the emergence of a more pragmatic Syrian leadership have weakened one of Russia’s most reliable regional platforms for recruitment and influence in the Arab world. For Kyiv, Sharaa’s Syria may be imperfect, but it is far preferable to the Syria that Russia once controlled almost uncontested.
Yet the deeper Damascus moves towards Moscow militarily and economically, the harder Sharaa’s balancing act may become to sustain. Europe’s tolerance could quickly erode if Damascus expands defense cooperation with Russia. A renewed Syrian-Russian arms relationship could trigger Western backlash and expose Syria to a new wave of sanctions.
That contradiction could eventually produce backlash in Washington. Despite the Trump administration’s acceptance of Russia’s foothold, some US lawmakers have remained skeptical of the administration’s rapid opening to Damascus, in the absence of meaningful geopolitical concessions from Sharaa. The more Syria continues to rely on Russia in key military, economic, and energy sectors, the more difficult it may become for the White House to defend a sanctions relief policy that it justified, at least in part, as a pathway toward bringing Syria closer to Western interests.
The risks are not only external. For many Syrians, Russia is a country whose warplanes helped turn entire cities into rubble during the civil war. Sharaa may portray his relationship with Moscow as a necessity, but as one Syrian remarked, “The Russians killed half the Syrian people, supported Assad’s regime until they destroyed our homes and killed us, so on what basis should we reconcile with these criminal Russians?”For now, Sharaa has succeeded in convincing rival powers that their interests in Syria are best served by keeping Damascus open to everyone. The real test will come when one of those powers decides that Syria can no longer balance between camps and finally demands that Sharaa choose a side.
**About the Author: Ahmad Sharawi
Ahmad Sharawi is a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, focusing on Middle East affairs and the Levant. Previously, Sharawi worked at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, where he focused mainly on Hezbollah. He created a map visualizing the border clashes on the Israeli-Lebanese frontier and authored articles on Jordan and Morocco. Ahmad previously worked at the International Finance Corporation and S&P Global. He holds a BA in international relations from King’s College London and an MA from Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service.

Iran: Truce Doesn’t End Wars
Amir Taheri/Asharq Al-Awsat/May 29/2026
With Iran and the US still moving towards some form of truce it may be too early to provide a final assessment of the conflict. A truce, or armistice in military terms, is something more than a lee ceasefire but something less than a peace accord. It doesn’t end a war; only moth-balls it sine die. The USSR and Japan signed an armistice in 1956 more than a decade after Russians attacked and annexed the Kuril archipelago. Technically, therefore, the two nations are still in a state of war. There are numerous other cases of truce accords that halt a war without ending it in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, and Asia.
Back to the case that interests us today a truce will not end a war that Iran launched against the US in November 1979 when pro-Khomeini militants attacked and occupied the American Embassy in Tehran which under international law was regarded as sovereign US territory.
Iran started its war against Israel in 1982 through proxies, at first with help from Syria intelligence based in Lebanon. For years Israel practiced restraint in the hope that Iran, because of real or imagined anti-Arab and anti-Sunni sentiments, might emerge as an ally of the Jewish state. During the Iran-Iraq war Israel helped smuggle arms to Iran, provided intelligence material and used its international influence to portray Iraq as the aggressor.
Gradually, however, especially with Hezbollah emerging as a nuisance not to say threat that Israeli leaders began to question their illusions about our “Persian ally”.
But even as late as the 1990s many Israeli leaders were opposed to adopting an openly hostile posture towards Iran. It was only under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Israel decided to go on the offensive against the Khomeinist rulers of Tehran. What started as a cold war rose a few degrees in temperature when Israelis started their assassination spree against Iranian nuclear scientists while helping arm secessionist mercenaries based in Iraqi Kurdistan. Last June’s 12-day war in which Israel had managed to drag the US in solidified the state of war between the two nations, a position confirmed by the latest phase of the conflict that began almost 100 days ago.
Though Israel was included in the various ceasefires that President Donald Trump has declared, and broken, almost always without securing Israel’s consent, it is clear that Israel will not be a party to the truce mediated by half a dozen countries notably Pakistan.
This means that even if a truce is concluded between Tehran and Washington it won’t necessarily commit Israel to observing it. At the same time Iran as it is already threatening intends to continue its war against Israel through the Lebanese Hezbollah. Last Tuesday Tehran said $5 billon of any Iranian frozen assets that will be released under the truce will go to Hezbollah in Lebanon to “continue the resistance.”To make matters more complicated Iran is technically at war against several regional countries from Oman to Jordan and passing by the GCC members that it has attacked with the flimsy excuse that they shelter American military assets. In reality, however, most of the targets hit by Tehran were civilian structures that had nothing to do with US or Israeli forces. After the first phase of the war almost all US bases in the region were evacuated and temporarily de-commissioned.
The bulk of US attacks came either from Diego Garcia or from mainland US with stopovers in Britain and Germany. The aircraft carriers that Trump had assembled 1000 kilometers from Iranian shores were mostly used as stage props with the Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv serving as the key aircraft carrier. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz was also an act of war, this time not against the US and Israel neither of which depend on oil from the region but against the entire international community that has paid a heavy economic price. Under international law Iran has the right to deny the right if innocent passage to belligerent powers, that is to say the US and Israel in this case. But it has no right to deny passage to ships flaying the flags of the other 190 members of the United Nations.
At the same time since the southern coast of the Hormuz Strait is sovereign territory of Oman its unilateral blocking is a direct act of war against the sultanate.
Since the Khomeinists seized power Iran has moved from one war to another.
The first war was between the new regime and the personnel of the fallen one. More than 25,000 military, diplomatic, political, bureaucratic, academic, scientific, art and culture, media business and social personalities were executed, and over 50,000, including 6000 university professors and teachers, were purged. Over a million others fled into exile; their number grew to almost nine million by 2026.
The new regime’s next war was launched against so-called “minorities” with massacres of Kurdish dissidents in Naqadeh and Turkoman tribesmen in Gonbad Kavous.
The next war was launched against Khomeini’s initial allies in the 1979 revolution and led to the execution of thousands of Communists, People’s Mujahedin, pro-Mossadeq and “liberal” Islamic figures.
Then there was the 8-year war against Iraq which, technically, has not ended because there has been no peace treaty. Tehran has violated Iraqi sovereignty by setting up bases there and raising paramilitary forces led by Iranian commanders.
The truce touted by President Trump will not end any of those wars, none of which are likely to end unless Iran breaks with Khomeinism and chooses another trajectory.
Prospects for such a momentous event seemed promising at the end of 2025 when a combination factor had pushed the regime onto the defensive. The war came to the rescue at a time that a wave of nationwide protests was gaining momentum with part of the regime’s base pondering the possibility of switching sides. Changing Iran by war was always the big enchilada that successive US residents avoided. Trump half-heartedly decided to try it and the result at least in the short term is the slowing of the process of change. The final word must come from the people of Iran. Without a regime that is at peace with its people Iran is unlikely to reach peace with anyone else.

Iran Draws Strength From Chinese-Russian Military and Technological Support
Huda al-Husseini/Asharq Al-Awsa/May 29/2026
Despite the continued fragile ceasefire between the United States and Iran, the conflict does not appear to have entered a phase of genuine calm. Amid mediation efforts led by Pakistan to prevent renewed confrontation, US intelligence assessments indicate that China and Russia continue to provide Iran with military and technological support, enabling Tehran to restore a large part of its capabilities and prepare for potential future conflict.
According to informed sources, Beijing is considering transferring man-portable air defense missiles to Iran through intermediary countries, making it difficult to trace their true origin. These missiles are small, easy to transport and conceal, and can be used against low-flying aircraft. Reports suggest that Tehran is seeking to compensate for losses suffered during recent confrontations by acquiring additional systems of this kind.US President Donald Trump had previously confirmed that an American F-15E aircraft was brought down over Iranian territory by a shoulder-fired heat-seeking missile, saying that the Iranians “got lucky.” So far, there is no conclusive evidence regarding the source of the missile used, particularly given that Iran locally manufactures missiles copied from older Chinese models. Experts believe that any new transfer of such missiles would mark a shift by China from supplying Iran with components and spare parts to providing complete weapons systems, a development many regard as a clear escalation in the level of military support.
Russia, meanwhile, plays a different but equally significant role. According to American reports, Moscow provided Tehran during the early days of the war with detailed information about the locations of US warships, aircraft, and radar systems in the region. It also supplied satellite imagery that enabled Iranian forces to assess the results of their strikes and identify new targets. Military assessments indicate that Iran’s recent strikes against US positions in the Middle East were more accurate than previous operations, which some analysts attribute to the intelligence and expertise Tehran obtained from Russia.
After years of using Iranian drones in Ukraine, Russia has reportedly begun transferring its experience in managing drone swarms and conducting synchronized attacks designed to overwhelm air defenses and clear the way for precision missiles.
Years before the war began, Russia helped Iran develop its reconnaissance and surveillance capabilities. In 2022, Moscow launched a satellite on Tehran’s behalf, giving Iran enhanced continuous surveillance capabilities over military sites. Russia also supplied advanced radar systems capable of detecting stealth aircraft and ballistic missiles from long distances, in addition to components from the S-400 air defense system.
On the Chinese side, support extends beyond direct military equipment to include technology and infrastructure. Beijing allowed Iran to use the Chinese BeiDou satellite navigation system, reducing Tehran’s dependence on the American GPS network. During the 2025 conflict, Iranian guidance systems linked to GPS were subjected to jamming, but Tehran later managed to adapt a large portion of its weapons systems to operate through BeiDou, reducing the effectiveness of those jamming operations.
The US Treasury Department has also imposed sanctions on Chinese companies accused of supplying Iran with electronic components and navigation equipment used in the development of drones and missiles. Other reports have pointed to shipments of materials used in the production of solid rocket propellant reaching Iran from China aboard vessels already subject to international sanctions.
Western sources say some Chinese companies provided satellite imagery and advanced analyses of US troop movements during the conflict, while Washington accuses other firms of supplying technical training and equipment to Iranian military industries.
The United States is not primarily concerned with what occurred during the fighting, but rather with what is taking place afterward. Every round of combat weakens part of Iran’s military capabilities, yet Tehran succeeds within months in rebuilding much of what it lost thanks to external support. American officials worry that the current ceasefire could become an opportunity for Iran to rearm and prepare for another confrontation.
Some experts believe sanctions no longer produce the results they once did, because Russia and China have become increasingly capable of circumventing them, while Iran has developed extensive networks to obtain the equipment and technologies it needs despite the restrictions imposed on it. Western intelligence circles note that cooperation among Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran no longer consists merely of arms deals and intelligence exchanges. It has evolved into an integrated network encompassing technology, financing, technical expertise, and alternative transportation routes. As Western oversight of supply chains has intensified, Iran has increasingly relied on “front companies” and “complex commercial networks” to obtain sensitive components used in military industries. Iran has also benefited from Russian and Chinese expertise in reducing the impact of sanctions on sectors linked to military production, allowing it to maintain the pace of development and rebuild its capabilities faster than many previous Western assessments had anticipated.
At the same time, neither Moscow nor Beijing appears interested in a prolonged and open-ended conflict in the Middle East, as both would suffer from rising energy prices and disruptions to global trade. Yet neither wants to see Iran weakened or collapse, because maintaining a strong regional partner helps constrain American influence and drain part of Washington’s military and political resources.
For this reason, many analysts believe that the shared objective of Russia and China is not to expand the conflict, but to ensure that Iran remains capable of defending itself and rebuilding its strength after every confrontation. From this perspective, the two countries do not view the ceasefire as the end of the crisis, but as a new phase in which Iran’s military capabilities are rebuilt in preparation for future confrontations.

The Muslim Brotherhood's War to Destroy the United States from Within: Part I/Jihad in Texas
Robert Williams/Gatestone Institute/May 29, 2026
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22542/muslim-brotherhood-texas
"The Ikhwan [Muslim Brothers] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." — From the Muslim Brotherhood's 1991 "Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America."
"What the Islamic movement is doing... is they are waging war, total war. Again, not primarily violent, but total war: Counter-intelligence, espionage, subversion, economic warfare... in order to overthrow the government and replace it with an Islamic state under Sharia. Not only is that what they teach their children. It's what Islamic law requires." — John Guandolo, National Security Consultant, former FBI agent, April 2026.
In Texas, the jihad to transform the US and Western civilization prompted the state's Governor Greg Abbott, last November, to designate the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as foreign terrorist organizations and transnational criminal organizations.
"The Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR have long made their goals clear: to forcibly impose Sharia law and establish Islam's 'mastership of the world.' The actions taken by the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR to support terrorism across the globe and subvert our laws through violence, intimidation, and harassment are unacceptable... These radical extremists are not welcome in our state and are now prohibited from acquiring any real property interest in Texas." — Texas Governor Greg Abbott, November 18, 2025.
The man behind the EPIC/Meadow project in Texas is Islamic scholar Yasir Qadhi, who is Chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America, which is named in the Brotherhood's "Explanatory Memorandum" as one of the organizations involved in the "civilizational jihad"/grand jihad strategy in North America.
"[O]n every major college campus in Texas, you've got the Muslim Brotherhood's Muslim Student Association.... You have Hamas doing business as Students for Justice in Palestine on college campuses... kind of under the umbrella of American Muslims for Palestine...You have... dozens of properties in Texas owned by the North American Islamic Trust [NAIT], which is not only a Muslim Brotherhood organization, but in the largest terrorism financing trial in American history, US vs Holyland Foundation trial, which was adjudicated in Dallas, Texas in 2008. NAIT was not only identified as a Muslim Brotherhood organization, but an organization that directly funds Hamas organizations and leaders. And it's operating all over Texas. You have the Islamic Society of North America, also identified in that trial as a Muslim Brotherhood organization directly funding Hamas, operating in Texas with subsidiaries... and the list goes on... numerous Islamic schools... and now you've got right here in Garland a massive Quranic academy... So it's just... everywhere. And Yaser Qhadi, who's running the Plano Islamic Center, is not only a senior Muslim Brotherhood jurist. He is the senior Muslim Brotherhood jurist. He's the chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America, which is the Muslim Brotherhood's legal entity that oversees the entire Islamic movement in North America...." — John Guandolo, April 2026.
Qadhi, of course, is not the only Brotherhood operative in Texas creating parallel Islamic societies. According to RAIR Foundation: "Longtime Muslim Brotherhood operative Main Al Qudah is building a $70–80 million, 30-acre fully autonomous Sharia-adherent Islamic enclave in rural Katy, Texas — a self-sustaining parallel society featuring a grand mosque, K-12 school, Islamic university, apartments, health clinic, sports fields, and its own strip mall, while openly using Texas taxpayer school voucher funds to raise the next generation of Muslims from cradle to grave with almost no contact with the non-Muslim world outside."
The Muslim Brotherhood is actually hard at work establishing an Islamic state based on sharia law in the United States. They have, in fact, been at it for decades.
In March, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard warned that "the spread of Islamist ideology, in some cases led by individuals and organizations associated with the Muslim Brotherhood" poses a threat as it seeks to establish "an Islamist caliphate which governs based on Sharia." Gabbard went on to say that "there are increasing examples of this in various European countries."
Not quite. The Muslim Brotherhood is actually hard at work establishing an Islamic state based on sharia law in the United States. They have, in fact, been at it for decades. The 1991 Muslim Brotherhood "Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America," provides a detailed blueprint of how to destroy the US and Canada. According to the memorandum:
"The Ikhwan [Muslim Brothers] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions... It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes."
Even more forthrightly, the Muslim Brotherhood blueprint is part of a 100-year plan to take over the world as a whole. A document titled "The Muslim Brotherhood Project: Towards A Worldwide Strategy for Islamic Policy" (known as "The Project") was discovered during a 2001 police raid by Swiss authorities on the home of the late Youssef Nada, who was a prominent Brotherhood operative in Switzerland.
The Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP) wrote in its recent report, "The Muslim Brotherhood's Strategic Entryism into the United States: A Systemic Analysis":
"Rather than relying on rapid mobilization or revolutionary confrontation, the Brotherhood envisions societal transformation as the cumulative result of incremental influence across education, media, law, civil society, and political structures.... The 100-year horizon embedded in 'The Project' underscores the Brotherhood's belief that durable transformation occurs not through disruption but through the patient, deliberate reconfiguration of society from within."
John Guandolo, a former FBI agent who educates lawmakers and the public about the Brotherhood's operations in the US, put it even more bluntly in a recent interview:
"What the Islamic movement is doing... is they are waging war, total war. Again, not primarily violent, but total war: Counter-intelligence, espionage, subversion, economic warfare... in order to overthrow the government and replace it with an Islamic state under Sharia. Not only is that what they teach their children. It's what Islamic law requires."
Texas is a particularly blistering example of the extent to which the Muslim Brotherhood has been successful in pushing civilizational jihad, according to John Guandolo.
"Texas is already in a 'pre‑kinetic' phase of jihad, with an expanding network of mosques, Islamic schools, and Muslim Brotherhood‑linked organizations... working to subvert American law and replace it with Sharia."
The founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna, stipulated:
"Make every effort for the establishment of educational, social, economic and scientific institutions and the establishment of mosques, schools, clinics, shelters, clubs..."
In Texas, the jihad to transform the US and Western civilization prompted the state's Governor Greg Abbott, last November, to designate the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as foreign terrorist organizations and transnational criminal organizations.
"The Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR have long made their goals clear: to forcibly impose Sharia law and establish Islam's 'mastership of the world,'" Abbott said.
"The actions taken by the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR to support terrorism across the globe and subvert our laws through violence, intimidation, and harassment are unacceptable... These radical extremists are not welcome in our state and are now prohibited from acquiring any real property interest in Texas."
Proponents of the Muslim Brotherhood in Texas are aggressively trying to acquire real estate to establish Islamic enclaves such as EPIC city, recently rebranded as "The Meadow". The Meadow is to be an exclusively Muslim residential enclave, encompassing more than 1,000 homes, a new mosque, Muslim schools, sports facilities and Muslim communal institutions. So far, Texas has been successful in putting a halt to the project, however numerous lawsuits are forging ahead to push the project through.
The Texas branch of CAIR follows the Brotherhood playbook of deflecting scrutiny by claiming opposition to the project constitutes an "Islamophobic witch hunt."
The man behind the EPIC/Meadow project in Texas is Islamic scholar Yasir Qadhi, who is Chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America, which is named in the Brotherhood's "Explanatory Memorandum" as one of the organizations involved in the "civilizational jihad"/grand jihad strategy in North America. In short, Qadhi is about as Muslim Brotherhood as it gets.
Qadhi, according to John Guandolo, prior to targeting Texas, was a Muslim Brotherhood operative in Tennessee:
"I knew him from being in the FBI because he's a senior Muslim Brotherhood leader, now one of the most prominent in North America, but was clearly an up and comer... back in 2004 or 2005.... Then he became the scholar, Islamic scholar at the Memphis Islamic Center in Tennessee. And... the Muslim Brotherhood made Tennessee their primary target because from their perspective they viewed Tennessee as the buckle of the Bible belt."
When Qadhi moved in 2019 to Texas, Guandolo noted,
"They started ramping up their activities here... you have just in Dallas alone over 350 halal restaurants. We have now as of last week 314 mosques across Texas... on every major college campus in Texas, you've got the Muslim Brotherhood's Muslim Student Association.... You've got Hamas doing business as CAIR in Texas... You have Hamas doing business as EMgage operating in Texas. You have Hamas doing business as Students for Justice in Palestine on college campuses... kind of under the umbrella of American Muslims for Palestine...You have... dozens of properties in Texas owned by the North American Islamic Trust [NAIT], which is not only a Muslim Brotherhood organization, but in the largest terrorism financing trial in American history, US vs Holyland Foundation trial, which was adjudicated in Dallas, Texas in 2008. NAIT was not only identified as a Muslim Brotherhood organization, but an organization that directly funds Hamas organizations and leaders. And it's operating all over Texas. You have the Islamic Society of North America, also identified in that trial as a Muslim Brotherhood organization directly funding Hamas, operating in Texas with subsidiaries...and the list goes on... numerous Islamic schools... and now you've got right here in Garland a massive Quranic academy... So it's just... everywhere. And Yaser Qhadi, who's running the Plano Islamic Center, is not only a senior Muslim Brotherhood jurist. He is the senior Muslim Brotherhood jurist. He's the chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America, which is the Muslim Brotherhood's legal entity that oversees the entire Islamic movement in North America to ensure that everything they're doing is compliant with Sharia."
Qadhi, of course, is not the only Brotherhood operative in Texas creating parallel Islamic societies. According to RAIR Foundation:
"Longtime Muslim Brotherhood operative Main Al Qudah is building a $70–80 million, 30-acre fully autonomous Sharia-adherent Islamic enclave in rural Katy, Texas — a self-sustaining parallel society featuring a grand mosque, K-12 school, Islamic university, apartments, health clinic, sports fields, and its own strip mall, while openly using Texas taxpayer school voucher funds to raise the next generation of Muslims from cradle to grave with almost no contact with the non-Muslim world outside."
Meanwhile, Islamic associations are now visiting American schools, seeking to indoctrinate American kids with sharia law – an effort at proselytizing known as dawa. At Wylie East High School in Texas, an Islamic group called "Why Islam, " without approval, set up a booth at the front of the school during school hours and began courting students. The "Why Islam" group is an official outreach project run by the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), widely regarded as a Muslim Brotherhood group.
"They were giving out hijabs to girls throughout the high school, and they were giving out Qurans, and they also had pamphlets about Sharia law," Marco Hunter-Lopez, president of the High School Republicans at Wylie East High School said in videos that raised the issue of the Muslim Brotherhood outreach at his school.
In February 2025, Wylie East Principal Tiffany Doolan reportedly posted an image on Instagram of herself wearing a hijab on campus as part of last year's World Hijab Day celebration organized by MSA students. "I LOVED this experience!" she wrote.
**Robert Williams is based in the United States.
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.

The cross and the crescent are currently the signs of Christianity and Islam,
Hussain Abdul-Hussain/Face bok/May 29/2026
The cross and the crescent are currently the signs of Christianity and Islam, respectively. In Christianity, the cross symbolizes the tool on which Jesus died. This explanation is retrospective. The cross symbol predates Jesus by a few thousand years. Christians in the first 300 years since his crucifixion never used the cross as a symbol. They used the fish. The justification is that they avoided using the cross for fear of Roman persecution and used the fish instead. But it does not make sense that the Christian symbol of the fish remained secret, not decoded by the Romans, for 300 years. The more plausible explanation is that Jesus represented birth and rebirth, whose symbol is the fish because the ancients (Iraqis mainly) believed that souls came from the underworld inside a fish that swam all the way to the river. When the woman ate the fish, the soul started growing inside of her. Christianity used the fish until Constantine the Great made the cross the official symbol of the faith after the sign of the cross shone in the sky and told him: With this thou shalt conquer. Starting with Constantine, in 324, the cross replaced the fish as the symbol of Christianity.
Unlike Christianity, which has a story for the cross (crucifixion of Jesus), Islam has no explanation for the crescent whatsoever. Muslims say the crescent symbolizes Islam’s lunar calendar, a retrospective explanation that does not make sense. Calendars have no importance in any religion.
The cross and the crescent predate both Christianity and Islam by a few millennia. Mesopotamians used the cross as the symbol of the sun, whose light conquers the four corners of earth, and therefore represented sun god Marduk or Shemesh. The crescent symbolized wisdom god Sin (whose mount, Sin-at or Sinai, Moses climbed to receive the commandments). Sin is drawn as a crescent (the letter Sin/Shin in Arabic and Hebrew is drawn like a crescent). Sin was the deity of wisdom who could foretell the future. The Semitic root for foretelling is n, b and a vowel. Therefore, Sin’s name was also Nabu.
The oldest myth (which we received from a Phoenician text written in Greek) teaches us that the first living being was a conical black stone. It gave birth to the sun. The sun then died. The crescent appeared. The sun was born again. For the sun’s second coming, the symbol thus became a cross, doubled, thus producing an octagon (eight-pointed, like the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem). This was the original order of the deities: The black stone was a woman that gave birth without conception to the sun, a strong male. When he died, he was replaced by the crescent, a wise male. When this one died, he was replaced by the octagon star, the rebirth.
But then civilizations started elevating power over wisdom as all deities were turned into males. This reshuffle caused a schism and the rise of two factions: the sun cross faction and the moon crescent faction.
Now to the illustration using Mesopotamian epigraphy. These are pictures I took on my last visit to the British Museum on Dec. 31, 2021 (I visit often, it’s my happy place).
The stela of Assyrian Emperor Asurbanipal (d. 859 BCE) shows the lineup of the five deities, counterclockwise: The horned cap (which looks like the turban of Shia and Sunni religious clerics) represented the major deity, Assur. Next is sun god Marduk, followed by the crescent of moon god Nabu, then thunder symbolizing power and rain god Adad, and last but not least, the octagon star of life after death, Ishtar.
In the stela of Assyrian Emperor Adad V (d. 811), you will see that the order remains the same, but that the emperor himself wears the cross prominently on his chest. This cross is closer to the Greek cross (all hands have similar length, when compared to the Latin cross, whose down leg is longer than the other three) and closest to the Nestorian cross (which is found on tombs in the Kharg Island, the oil export hub of Iran, currently under US naval blockade). The Crusaders in Acco endorsed this cross and gave it the name the Teutonic Cross, which evolved into the Maltese Cross and the Iron Cross that the Nazis made into a medal.
But not all Mesopotamian kings agreed to the elevation of the sun god and the cross. Nabu Nidus (whose epigraphy is the most damaged in the collection that I photographed) reshuffled the order, clockwise, starting with the crescent, followed by the sun, then the rebirth star. The name Nidus means “the coveted one” or the “awaited-for.” In the Semitic languages, the root for coveted is h-m-d. Hebrew today uses the word hamoud to mean cute, but this is repurposing. In Arabic, the name Muhammad is the translation of Nidus. Nabu Nidus is the identical name of Nabi Muhammad.
Nabu Nidus was the last Mesopotamian King (rule ended in 539 BCE). He conquered Nabataean territory in the Levant (Syria, Lebanon and Jordan) and the northern part of Hijaz where he made Tayma his capital. There is a possibility that the Nabataeans got their name for endorsing him and being his cult (currently, it’s assumed that their name they got from their technology of water extraction).
What did Nabu Nidus also do? By reshuffling the divine order and elevating the crescent, he caused a revolt in the pro-sun god temple against his rule. The clergy in Babylon conspired with sun-worshipping Cyrus the Great and invited him to take over their city. He obliged, after which the fate of Nabu Nidus was not determined. Some legends said he returned from Tayma right before the fall of the city and then lived in exile in a mountain. The mountain was either in south Iran or in north Hijaz. His supporters expected him to return to reestablish justice. In the centuries that followed, many claimants argued that they were the returning Nabu Nidus. What’s also interesting about this crescent king is that the language of his prayer looks very similar to later Muslim prayers. For example: God and the angels pray to Nabonidus. Also in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Nabonidus was presumably ill and heeled after he believed in the “god of the Jews” as the “one and only God.” Now whenever you see the cross and the crescent, you will understand that the competition between them predates Christians vs Muslims. Now you’ll know that the name Nabi Muhammad was a known religious concept at least one thousand years before the date assigned to the life of Prophet Muhammad, who – according to Muslim tradition – was also awaited-for.

Syria-Jordan-Lebanon energy deal could fuel huge benefits across the wider region
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/May 29, 2026
One of the latest and most important recent developments in the evolving geopolitical landscape of the Levant is a tripartite agreement this month on energy between Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. This pact, which facilitates the utilization of Jordanian infrastructure for liquefied natural gas imports and the reactivation of the Arab Gas Pipeline, ought to be considered a significant step toward practical regional cooperation. There are several benefits to the deal. First of all, building on previous bilateral arrangements, it addresses immediate energy deficits in Syria while extending indirect benefits to Lebanon’s strained power sector. Considering that Syria is still at a critical juncture in its post-civil war reconstruction, it also offers a pragmatic foundation for broader collaboration extending far beyond energy alone. The gas-exchange framework also demonstrates the potential of practical cooperation in an area long beset by conflict and institutional challenges. These mutual dependencies will also incentivize more engagements among the three nations. One of the key areas in which they can expand cooperation is efforts to combat drug smuggling and other transnational criminal networks
For Syria, it adds essential electricity-generation capacity vital for reconstruction efforts and economic revival. It strengthens Jordan’s position as a regional logistical and energy hub. And it offers Lebanon partial relief from the chronic power shortages that have long undermined socioeconomic stability.
The collaboration will also establish trust and operational mechanisms that can gradually extend into more complex domains. In other words, these initial, pragmatic steps can pave the way for deeper cooperation. Another significant aspect of the deal is that it can be used by the three nations as a starting point to foster expanded partnerships in four areas: security, humanitarian affairs, economic connectivity, and resource management. This will not only advance their own individual interests but also the stability and prosperity of the wider Middle East.
One of the key areas in which they can expand cooperation is efforts to combat drug smuggling and other transnational criminal networks. These networks exploit porous borders and instability. It is also worth noting that the production and trafficking of illegal substances such as captagon from areas within Syria and Lebanon fuel violence, strain law-enforcement resources, and pose significant public-health challenges across the Levant.
The ministerial-level dialogue established under the gas agreement can also provide the foundations of a platform for joint intelligence sharing and coordinated border patrols. The three countries need to integrate their counternarcotics initiatives to better disrupt illicit flows of drugs. This will also reinforce state authority and reduce spillover effects in neighboring markets, including those in the Gulf. Another critical, and equally pressing, issue is related to the need for coordinated responses to the ongoing refugee crisis, particularly stemming from Syria. Jordan and Lebanon continue to host substantial refugee populations, which has created significant burdens on public services and social cohesion, and fiscal challenges remain acute.
The three nations can directly support improved conditions in refugee camps and host communities, as well as reintegration programs within postwar Syria. Such humanitarian and developmental programs can include livelihood initiatives and skills training. This can help transform a protracted challenge into an opportunity through shared investment in human capital. Trilateral mechanisms can also help to promote orderly, voluntary returns of refugees and sustainable resettlement, which is more likely to alleviate demographic pressures.
A third issue is linked to the strengthening of border security, which represents another critical avenue for collaboration among the three countries. The successful management of energy-related infrastructure near borders points to the feasibility of joint protocols for monitoring border security.
One way to adequately address the risks posed by nonstate actors is to enhance surveillance and modernize border-crossing facilities. This would also facilitate and allow the safe movement of goods and individuals across borders. In Syria’s post-conflict environment, such measures are essential because they increase legitimacy and further create conditions conducive to reconstruction.
In addition, the promotion of economic integration through increased trade and infrastructure connectivity is critical. This means the restoration and expansion of pipelines, roads and rail connections. This would position Syria as a vital regional corridor, leverage Jordan’s logistical strengths and access to ports, and utilize Lebanon’s maritime advantages. However, this will require joint-investment frameworks, as well as the participation of the private sector to reduce costs. The importance of such a move lies in the fact that it can stimulate job creation. It will also accelerate post-war economic recovery by integrating the three economies more closely with broader regional and global markets.Finally, the three countries can coordinate on the issue of water to address the interconnected challenges of drought and scarcity in the Levant. Specific projects could include shared management of aquifers, as well as energy-supported desalination projects. In other words, they can use the positive momentum from the gas accord to expand into renewable-energy projects. The ramifications of such multifaceted cooperation would extend far beyond the three participating states. First of all, a more stable Levant would reduce the risks from a number of threats, including terrorism, irregular migration and illicit trafficking. This Arab-led model of pragmatic integration could also attract international investment and financing.In a nutshell, the agreement between Syria, Jordan and Lebanon represents a positive and pragmatic move. It establishes a valuable platform for expanded collaboration in other critical areas, including efforts to combat drug smuggling, address the protracted refugee crisis, strengthen border security, enhance trade and infrastructure, and coordinate water and energy policies. Such multifaceted integration would not only benefit the three countries through improved security, humanitarian outcomes and prosperity, it would also contribute in a meaningful way to broader regional stability across the Middle East. It would reduce transnational threats and create a model for pragmatic, Arab-led cooperation.
**Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist. X: @Dr_Rafizadeh

Subsea cables in Hormuz are being weaponized against the global economy
Zaid M. Belbagi/Arab News/May 29/2026
The war with Iran has exposed an uncomfortable truth about the global economy: It still runs through a handful of narrow waterways, and the digital layer that sits beneath them is dangerously fragile.
Submarine communications cables carry about 99 percent of intercontinental data and an estimated $10 trillion in financial transactions each day, and a meaningful share of that traffic passes through the Strait of Hormuz. Long understood as an energy chokepoint, the strait is now being reframed also as a digital one. This vulnerability has not gone unnoticed in Tehran; on April 22, the Tasnim News Agency, a media outlet directly linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, published a detailed report mapping undersea internet cables and cloud infrastructure in the Arabian Gulf. The piece warned of a potential digital catastrophe should the conflict with the US escalate.
Titled “Three practical steps for generating revenue from Strait of Hormuz internet cables,” the article represented a veiled threat against the region’s digital backbone, floating the idea of extracting value from the transactions pulsing through the cables that cross the strait.
This is not conventional military signaling but asymmetric warfare, the practice of attempting to counter well-funded and technologically sophisticated adversaries with cheaper and lower-tech tools targeting critical vulnerabilities. To Iran, subsea cables represent an almost ideal target because they are difficult to defend and expensive to repair, and they underpin a vast share of global commerce. Damaging them, or even threatening to do so, imposes costs on adversaries without requiring open confrontation. The Strait of Hormuz connects the Arabian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, and a significant share of the world’s petroleum and natural gas exports pass through it. About seven major cable systems also pass through it, of which only two, Falcon and Gulf Bridge International, are within Iranian territorial waters. These routes account for less than 1 percent of global bandwidth but provide the primary connectivity for the Gulf states and are a significant artery for India. The recent IRGC announcement that foreign operators must obtain permits from Iran and pay “protection fees” to maintain cables in Iranian waters reframes the strait once again as a tool of pressure.
The vulnerabilities extend beyond Hormuz, however. The Suez Canal and the Bab El-Mandeb strait remain exposed to Houthi attacks, repeatedly forcing shipping to reroute around the Cape of Good Hope. The Strait of Malacca, Asia’s principal shipping artery, carries about a quarter of traded goods worldwide and faces its own pressures from piracy, gray zone naval activity, and sheer congestion. The pattern across each of them is the same: modern power flows through a small number of routes that were never designed to absorb the stresses now placed on them.To Iran, subsea cables represent an almost ideal target because they are difficult to defend and expensive to repair.The real play by Iran here is not to actually cut the cables but to hold the repair infrastructure hostage. On March 12, Alcatel Submarine Networks, the French state-owned company contracted to lay Meta's 2Africa Pearls cable, issued “force majeure” notices for operations in the Arabian Gulf, effectively suspending maintenance in waters adjacent to the conflict zone.
This means the 2Africa Pearls Gulf extension, which was scheduled to go live this year and connect to Oman, the UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Pakistan and India, is now on hold indefinitely. Networks are being forced to reroute through older systems that are less secure and more easily intercepted. Tehran’s moves to turn the Iranian seabed into a licensing jurisdiction relies on this dynamic: pay protection fees or accept that future faults will go unrepaired indefinitely. In 2024, damage to the Asia-Africa-Europe-1, Europe India Gateway, and Seacom cables disrupted approximately 25 percent of internet traffic between Asia and Europe and took months to repair. This was without any active military conflict preventing repair vessels from accessing the damage sites.
In trading environments where milliseconds can determine outcomes, even small spikes in latency can produce cascading order failures and real financial losses. Deloitte and the Brookings Institute estimate that connectivity disruptions can wipe out hundreds of millions of dollars in localized or regional gross domestic product within days.The market is also unusually concentrated. Hyperscalers such as Meta, Google and Microsoft now fund as much as half of all new cable projects, leaving global routing dependent on a small group of private-sector actors. Terrestrial alternatives, analysts warn, would not be able to fully absorb the required volume if major Gulf systems were taken offline. Tehran already operates one of the most centralized internet-control systems in the world, with sophisticated shutdown and filtering mechanisms coordinated through national border gateways. Within hours of the Feb. 28 strikes by the US and Israel, the capacity of Iran’s own internet system dropped to just 4 percent of normal, the largest nation-state internet blackout ever recorded.
This domestic apparatus reflects a deep institutional understanding of connectivity as a strategic tool for control. The extension of this logic offshore, through a new permit regime, raises the prospect that Tehran could apply its onshore legal framework to the seabed.
The consequences of this for data sovereignty would be significant. Operators working under Iranian jurisdiction could in theory be compelled to provide backdoor access to traffic, comply with state-directed censorship protocols or expose cryptographic keys to avoid asset seizures or localized blockades. Espionage and bulk data interception would become structurally easier. What Iran is doing is weaponizing connectivity with the aim of raising insurance premiums in the Gulf, increasing uncertainty among international firms, and forcing boardrooms to calculate the costs of prolonged regional instability. In the long term their goal is more ambitious: to convert geography into permanent leverage.For the Gulf states, a decade of digital sovereignty has been approached as a question of where data is stored, with localization laws and sovereign clouds treated as proof of autonomy. Iran has just demonstrated that territorial control counts for little when the digital traffic feeding it must cross a strait in which a hostile neighbor can intercept it.
The country threatening these cables is the one that has spent the longest time learning to live without them, and this asymmetry is what the region must now plan for.
***Zaid M. Belbagi is a political commentator and an adviser to private clients between London and the Gulf Cooperation Council. X: @Moulay_Zaid

NATO and the GCC states ahead of Turkiye summit
Dr. Sinem CengizArab News/May 29/2026
In 2004, when Turkiye hosted the NATO summit in Istanbul, the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative was launched to strengthen political and military ties between NATO and the Gulf Cooperation Council member states. The initiative aimed to foster security cooperation in the Middle East. As a key NATO member, Turkiye backed strategic dialogue between NATO and the GCC states. The ICI was launched in the aftermath of the 2003 US invasion of Iraq that changed the region’s security order and led to the improvement in Turkiye-GCC relations. Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain and the UAE formally joined the initiative, while Saudi Arabia and Oman have not officially joined, but have taken part in ICI’s activities over the years.
In 2012, the UAE became the first country in the region to open a permanent mission to NATO headquarters. Then a NATO-ICI Regional Center was established in Kuwait in 2017 — the first of its kind in the region. The center was created to act as a hub for security training and military education between NATO and its GCC partners. NATO also signed an agreement with Kuwait in 2016 — ratified a year later by Kuwait — to facilitate the movement of NATO personnel and forces through Kuwaiti territory.
In 2025, NATO officially opened its first liaison office in Jordan, reflecting the alliance’s growing strategic interest in the region and its desire to deepen engagement with regional states. The same year, the Turkish Embassy in Cairo hosted an event focused on NATO-Egypt relations that addressed the NATO Southern Neighborhood Action Plan adopted at the 2024 NATO summit in Washington. The initiative aimed to strengthen cooperation between Egypt and NATO while maintaining Cairo’s longstanding policy of engagement with the alliance without seeking formal membership.
Recent regional tensions have accelerated NATO’s engagement with Middle Eastern states. The Gaza war, in particular, has intensified concerns over regional instability, while the US-Israeli war with Iran and concerns over the Strait of Hormuz have further highlighted the importance of NATO-GCC cooperation. The GCC states, as well as Turkiye, increasingly face threats due to the regional tensions, and this pushes them toward more structured security coordination.
Why is Turkiye a significant actor in NATO-GCC cooperation? Turkiye has been a crucial NATO member since joining the alliance in 1952 and it continues to possess the second-largest military within the alliance by personnel after the US. Over the last decade, the development of Turkiye’s defense industry is attracting the interest of both the GCC and the European states – both facing immediate security threats. As a non-Arab regional middle power and a NATO member, when compared to Iran and Israel, Turkiye’s policies closely align with the interests of the Arab regional system.
Within this context, Ankara seeks to play an active role in NATO’s outreach efforts across the Middle East, the Eastern Mediterranean and the Gulf. In doing so, Ankara aims to strengthen its strategic position within NATO by serving as a bridge between the alliance and Middle Eastern countries, particularly the GCC states and Egypt. The recent improvement in Turkiye’s relations with these regional states also aligns closely with NATO’s broader objectives in the region. Therefore, the upcoming 2026 NATO summit to be hosted in Ankara carries significance beyond symbolism. It comes at a critical moment of geopolitical transformation and will mark only the second time Turkiye hosts a NATO leaders’ summit after more than two decades. Ahead of the summit, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan attended a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Sweden this week, where he shared Turkiye’s expectations for the summit and briefed allies on Ankara’s efforts to preserve NATO’s unity and strategic coherence. According to reports, ICI member states are expected to attend the upcoming summit at the foreign minister level.
NATO itself faces challenges in adapting to evolving global security dynamics. The alliance faces issues of internal cohesion, declining military capabilities among some European members and the gradual strategic shift of US attention from Europe toward the Indo-Pacific. Yet, the alliance continues to play a critical role, particularly regarding energy security and maritime trade routes. Recent regional tensions have accelerated NATO’s engagement with Middle Eastern states.
At the same time, the GCC and other regional states face threats not only from Iran, but also Israeli military actions and unpredictability of US policies in the region. The tensions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz during recent regional confrontations have further shown the need for NATO to strengthen cooperation with the GCC states.
However, there is a growing need to redefine the aimed regional security framework. NATO could become an important partner in a new regional security architecture in the region. However, for this to happen, the ICI must evolve beyond bilateral engagement with the individual GCC states and develop a more comprehensive strategic partnership with the GCC as a sub-regional bloc. Recently, GCC Secretary-General Jasem Al-Budaiwi said that last year marked a milestone in NATO-GCC cooperation, as the NATO-ICI Regional Center in Kuwait recorded its highest level of activity since its establishment.
As GCC states seek to strengthen their defense capabilities in response to regional challenges, the partnership between NATO and the GCC states could emerge as an effective mechanism within a future regional security order. Having said that, the Turkiye summit, in my opinion, could serve as a good opportunity for Saudi Arabia and Oman to formally join the ICI, as their participation has become increasingly important amid regional tensions.
With the potential inclusion of Saudi Arabia and Oman in the ICI, alongside Turkiye’s support for both GCC and NATO defense capabilities, a more comprehensive collective partnership could emerge — one that is capable of addressing regional security challenges, protecting shared interests and expanding areas of defense cooperation.
*Dr. Sinem Cengiz is a Turkish political analyst who specializes in Turkiye’s relations with the Middle East. X: @SinemCngz
 

Selected Face Book & X tweets on 29 May/2026