English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News &
Editorials
For November 03/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.November03.26.htm
News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006
Click On The Below Link To Join Elias Bejjaninews whatsapp group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/FPF0N7lE5S484LNaSm0MjW
اضغط على الرابط في أعلى للإنضمام لكروب Eliasbejjaninews whatsapp group
Elias Bejjani/Click on the below link to subscribe to my youtube channel
الياس بجاني/اضغط على الرابط في أسفل للإشتراك في موقعي ع اليوتيوب
https://www.youtube.com/@eliasbejjani8036
Bible Quotations For today
They were yours, and you gave them to me,
and they have kept your word
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint John
17/01-08/:”After Jesus had spoken these words, he looked up to heaven and said,
‘Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son so that the Son may glorify you,
since you have given him authority over all people, to give eternal life to all
whom you have given him. And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the
only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. I glorified you on earth by
finishing the work that you gave me to do. So now, Father, glorify me in your
own presence with the glory that I had in your presence before the world
existed. ‘I have made your name known to those whom you gave me from the world.
They were yours, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word. Now they
know that everything you have given me is from you; for the words that you gave
to me I have given to them, and they have received them and know in truth that I
came from you; and they have believed that you sent me.”
Titles For The English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related
News & Editorials published on November 02-03/2026
Whoever God has blessed let him extend his hand with humility and love to
the needy/Elias Bejjan/November 02/2026
The Faith and Patriotism of Father Najeeb Al-Ameel versus the Trojanism and
Diabolism of the Regime, the Rulers, the Judiciary, and the Politicians under
the Barbaric Occupation of Hezbollah/Elias Bejjani/31 October 2026
Halloween in Canada: Concepts, Religious Background, and the Role of Native
Canadian Traditions/Elias Bejjani/October 31/2025
Druze and Christian Presence in State Institutions/Dr. Zeina Mansour / X
(formerly Twitter) / November 2, 2026
Summons of Priest from Lebanese Town of Rmeich Sparks Outrage Among Christians/Roumi
El-Habr/ACI MENA / November 2, 2026
What is the latest on the investigation into the Dahr al-Baidar explosives
shipment?
Sweeping operations, shelling, demolition, and the burning of homes in the south
Neither Israeli plans nor Beirut’s efforts will deter the party when summoned by
the *Wali al-Faqih* (Guardian Jurist)/Lara Yazbek / Al-Markaziyah/November 2,
2026
Hezbollah’s Weapons and the Taif Agreement: From Where Does Naim Qassem Derive
the Legitimacy of the "Resistance"?/Najwa Abi Haidar / Al-Markazia / November 2,
2026
Salam Discusses De-escalation Efforts and Support for Lebanon’s Stability with
His Qatari Counterpart
Raji, Haykal, and Lawandos Together: The Integration of Diplomacy and Strength
Fortifies the Nation
Electricité du Liban”: Recharge was limited to entities that paid part of their
dues and pledged in writing to pay the rest.
Israel plans to 'occupy Tyre, Sidon and Nabatieh' if Hezbollah joins potential
Iran war
Report: Dahieh to be erased if Hezbollah attacks, Trump backs Israeli response
Hezbollah begins distributing aid to those displaced by war
Israel proposes NGO for verification, rejects nations proposed by Lebanon
South Lebanon: Latest developments
Hezbollah minister among Lebanese delegation in Syria
Lebanese, Syrian Talks in Damascus Tackle Border Security, Refugees
Lebanon’s EDL Begins Cutting Power to Ministries, Municipalities and Public
Institutions over Unpaid Dues
Israeli Reports Heighten Lebanese Fears of Another War
Solidarity Stand with Father Najib Al-Amil at Mar Charbel Church / Mississauga –
Canada/Colonel Charbel Barakat/November 02, 2026
Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News
published on November 02-03/2026
Democrats, Trump Hold Final Rallies Before Midterm Elections
Trump says 'at some point' US will have to give Iran 'the hammer'
Trump, Vance signal progress in talks with Iran to avert renewed war
Iran's top diplomat hopes for 'rationality' on US side
Iran Says Considering Two-day Plan to Reopen Hormuz
Where things stand on Iran after a tense weekend
Pezeshkian: Supreme Leader Grants Authority to Negotiate with Washington
Iranians Have Left Doha Talks, Draft Proposal for US Deal Being Circulated,
Official Says
Iran Says in ‘Intensive’ Negotiations with US to Avert War
Israel Opposition Bloc to Meet Tuesday for First Time to Push PM Pick
Jordan's King Says 'No Security or Stability' in Region Without Palestinian
Homeland
Israel Army Withdraws After Hebron Operation, Says Military Official
Arab League Secretary-General: Palestinian Cause True Test of International
Order’s Credibility
United Arab Emirates says military solutions offer no quick off-ramps to crisis
with Iran
Saudi strikes on port, oil facility in Yemen wound seven
Yemen Urges Int’l Pressure to Dry Sources of Houthi Funding, Weapons
Fighting Against Houthis Resumes on Bab Al-Mandab Front
Israeli Strikes Kill Three People in Gaza, Medics Say
Syrian Intelligence Thwarts Terrorist Plot Targeting Homs Refiner
Al-Zaidi’s Regional Visits Aim to Reshape Iraq’s Foreign Relations
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on November 02-03/2026
Guerres inévitables ou diplomatie de fin de conflit/Dr. Charles Chartouni/ICI
Beytouth/November 02/2026
Inevitable Wars or End-of-Conflict Diplomacy/Dr. Charles Chartouni /Ici Beyrouth
/November 02, 2026
Congress should block Trump’s dangerous Saudi nuclear deal/Andrea Stricker/Washington
Examiner/November 02/2026
The UN secretary-general race is steeped in intrigue. Should we care? Like it or
not, the United States and the State of Israel have to deal with the world
body./Ben Cohen/Jewish News Syndicate/November 02/2026
Qatar Glorifies Terrorism: Al-Jazeera's Propaganda Machine Celebrates Hamas/Khaled
Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/November 02/2026
Our Lands… Between Two Projects/Mishary Dhayidi/Asharq Al-Awsat
newspaper/November 02/2026
The Region After the Elections… Which War and Which Settlement?/Sam Menassa/Asharq
Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
An Out-of-the-Box President/Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November
02/2026
The Problem of Doctrinal Militias/Khalid Al-Bari/Asharq Al-Awsat
newspaper/November 02/2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on November 02/2026
Latest English LCCC
Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on November
02-03/2026 (Some of the News reports below are
translated from Arabic by AI)
Whoever God has blessed let him extend his hand with humility and love to
the needy.
Elias Bejjan/November 02/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/158763/
In this life where fortunes shift like the wind, some people succeed while
others stumble. It is not necessarily because the successful one is smarter, nor
because the one who stumbles is less capable, but because God distributes
talents, opportunities, and circumstances as He wills. He gives freely, and He
gives with a wisdom we do not always understand. Some people find doors opening
before them; others find them closing again and again; and still others are born
carrying in their body or soul a wound they cannot heal alone.
Here arises the moral, human, and faith-based duty: that the one whom fortune
has favored should extend a hand to the one whom it has not. This is not a favor
— it is a debt. The success we enjoy is not purely our own possession; it is a
trust from God, a free gift, and a responsibility. As the Lord Jesus said to His
disciples: “Freely you have received; freely give” (Matthew 10:8). These words
alone are enough to condemn every form of arrogance and every closing of the
heart.
Often the real test takes place within the same family. One member succeeds
financially or socially, another falters, and a third falls prey to an illness
that prevents him from relying on himself. Whether it is addiction or any other
physical, psychological, or mental disease, the sick person is a human being in
need, and the healthy are called to stand beside him, not to abandon him.
Illness is not a shame that deserves neglect, nor a weakness that justifies
forgetting. Whoever possesses health, money, and ability must become a support
for the one from whom illness has stripped independence and the dignity of
self-reliance. Abandoning the sick in their weakness is a betrayal of blood and
of conscience; standing by them is a human and faith duty that does not fall
away with the type or severity of the disease. Expectations of them must be
realistic, and they must be treated with mercy, patience, and respect — not with
judgment or superiority. As the Apostle Paul wrote: “Bear one another’s burdens,
and so fulfill the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2).
Likewise, when one member of the family becomes wealthy while the others remain
in need, wealth is no justification for arrogance, distance, or forgetfulness.
Rather, it is a call to humility and love. Scripture repeatedly urges us in this
direction: “But if anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need,
yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him?” (1 John
3:17). And again: “So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone,
and especially to those who are of the household of faith” (Galatians 6:10). A
person did not create himself, nor did he grant himself his intelligence or his
opportunities — so how can he look down on the one who was not given what he was
given?
Pride and arrogance do not come from God, but from the devil. Wealth that strips
a person of his humanity, humility, and compassion for others is empty wealth,
no matter how large the account. True wealth is the kind that keeps the hand
extended and the heart merciful. As the Lord Jesus warned: “Take care, and be on
your guard against all covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the
abundance of his possessions” (Luke 12:15). And He also said: “Do not lay up for
yourselves treasures on earth… but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven”
(Matthew 6:19-20).
One of the most dangerous things that can happen is when sons or daughters
succeed and then forget their parents. Parents are the root; they are the ones
who gave and continue to give. Honoring and caring for them in old age and
weakness is a duty that does not disappear with success or wealth. Whoever
abandons his father and mother after becoming rich abandons part of his own
humanity. Scripture reminds us: “Honor your father and mother (this is the first
commandment with a promise)” (Ephesians 6:2).
In the end, remember, you who have succeeded: the day the Lord takes back the
deposit of life, you will take nothing of the earth’s riches with you. You will
leave everything behind just as you left it the day you arrived. As Job the
righteous man said with profound honesty: “Naked I came from my mother’s womb,
and naked shall I return. The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be
the name of the Lord” (Job 1:21). No money, no position, no status will
accompany you — only the love you gave, the hand you extended, and the humility
you preserved.
So extend your hand today, while you are still able, before the day comes when
you can no longer do so. Helping is not a favor; it is a right of human
brotherhood, a duty of faith, and proof that the grace you received has not
corrupted your heart. As the Lord Jesus said on the day of judgment: “Truly, I
say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it
to me” (Matthew 25:40).
*The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
The Faith and Patriotism of Father
Najeeb Al-Ameel versus the Trojanism and Diabolism of the Regime, the Rulers,
the Judiciary, and the Politicians under the Barbaric Occupation of Hezbollah
Elias Bejjani/31 October 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/10/158726/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7UYdHm16FM
Oh the shame, oh the horror, oh the disgrace!
What Father Najeeb Al-Ameel, the priest of the steadfast town of Rmeish, has
been subjected to at the hands of an unjust, ungrateful female judge—stripped of
all human feeling, detached from reality and conscience, a compliant tool in the
hands of the barbaric Iranian occupier, who knows nothing of the judiciary but
its name—is a vile insult to everything that is human, to humanity itself, to
reason, values, principles, and conscience.
It is a judicial and humanitarian crime complete in all its elements: a priest
who stood with his people in the most difficult circumstances, who strengthened
them on their land and refused their displacement, is summoned and accused of
issuing a threat merely because he asked, with bitter sarcasm, about the
impossibility of resorting to any force other than the Lebanese state under
occupation. Instead of being honored for preserving the land, honor, and
dignity, he is treated as a suspect.
In this context it a must to read the words of the Lord Jesus in the Gospel of
Matthew (Chapter 23): “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you
shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor
do you allow those who are entering to go in… Woe to you, blind guides… For you
pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters
of the law: justice and mercy and faith.
It also veryhelpfull to read in the Gospel of Saint Luke (11:42-46) the Lord’s
rebuke of the Pharisees and lawyers who load people with burdens hard to bear,
while they themselves will not touch them with one of their fingers, yet neglect
justice and the love of God.
This female judge—an instrument in the hands of the terrorist and jihadist
Hezbollah—and those behind her, above her, and with her from the political
rabble, the so falesly called political parties, the companies, and the
agencies, are a filthy, degenerate, and diabolical contemporary version of those
same scribes, Pharisees, and Trojans across the ages, for they turn a blind eye
to occupation, destruction, displacement, and killing.
Therefore, in a loud voice that will not be silenced, I say with a clear
conscience and deep conviction: May the curse of heaven fall upon the Lebanese
regime, the rulers, and the judiciary of Lebanon, upon all the political parties
apparatuses, companies, and agencies, and upon the political rabble of its
scribes, Pharisees, and Trojans.
O God, uncover what is hidden, replace the oppressors, and grant victory to the
truth and its people.
*The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
Author’s Email: Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website: https://eliasbejjaninews.com
Halloween in Canada: Concepts, Religious Background, and
the Role of Native Canadian Traditions
Elias Bejjani/October 31/2025
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/10/148754/
Definition and General Concept
Halloween, celebrated every year on October 31, is one of the most popular and
colorful events in Canada. Known for costumes, pumpkin decorations, haunted
houses, and children roaming neighborhoods shouting “Trick or Treat!”, it is a
blend of ancient pagan rituals, Christian traditions, and modern secular
customs. Although today Halloween is mainly associated with fun, candy, and
costumes, its origins are deeply rooted in ancient religious beliefs and
cultural practices that date back thousands of years.
Historical and Religious Background
The origins of Halloween go back to the ancient Celtic festival of Samhain
(pronounced Sow-in), celebrated in what is now Ireland, Scotland, and parts of
France. The Celts believed that on the night of October 31, the boundary between
the world of the living and the dead became blurred. They lit bonfires and wore
costumes to ward off wandering spirits. When Christianity spread through Europe,
the Church sought to replace or Christianize these pagan celebrations. In the
8th century, Pope Gregory III designated November 1 as All Saints’ Day (All
Hallows’ Day) — a day to honor saints and martyrs. The evening before it,
October 31, became known as All Hallows’ Eve, which later evolved linguistically
into “Halloween.”Thus, Halloween as we know it today is a mix of pagan and
Christian influences — a fusion of the Celtic belief in spirits and the
Christian remembrance of the dead.
The Role of Native Canadian Indians
Before European settlers arrived, Indigenous peoples across North America had
their own autumn festivals to mark the end of harvest and to honor the spirits
of ancestors. While these Indigenous traditions were not directly related to the
Celtic Samhain, they shared a spiritual connection with nature, life, and death.
When European immigrants — especially from Ireland and Scotland — brought
Halloween to Canada in the 1800s, the celebration gradually mixed with Native
Canadian storytelling, seasonal harvest ceremonies, and community gatherings.
Over time, Halloween in Canada became a cultural event reflecting both European
folklore and Indigenous respect for the spirit world and nature’s cycles.
The Origin and Meaning of the Pumpkin Tradition
The pumpkin has become the most recognizable symbol of Halloween. The tradition
of carving faces into pumpkins, known as “jack-o’-lanterns,” began with an old
Irish legend about a man named Stingy Jack, who tricked the devil and was
condemned to wander the earth carrying a lantern made from a carved-out turnip.
When Irish immigrants came to North America, they discovered that pumpkins were
larger and easier to carve than turnips, and thus they replaced the original
vegetable. Lighting a candle inside the carved pumpkin came to symbolize
guidance for lost spirits and protection from evil ones, turning the pumpkin
into both a symbol of creativity and a charm against darkness.
Halloween and Christianity: Connections and Controversies
While Halloween’s roots touch Christian traditions such as All Saints’ Day
(November 1) and All Souls’ Day (November 2), its modern expression has become
largely secular and commercial. Many Christians — especially Catholics and
Anglicans — observe All Saints’ Day as a holy day of obligation, remembering the
faithful who have passed away. For them, the evening before (Halloween) can be
seen as a time of reflection rather than superstition.
However, certain Christian denominations, particularly Evangelical and
conservative Protestant groups, view Halloween negatively. They argue that its
focus on ghosts, witches, and demons glorifies evil or the devil, rather than
goodness and holiness.This belief has led some families and churches to avoid
Halloween celebrations or to organize “Harvest Festivals” or “Holy Nights” as
wholesome alternatives. The Catholic Church, on the other hand, does not
officially condemn Halloween, but it encourages believers to avoid practices
that promote superstition, occultism, or satanic imagery. Many Catholic
educators emphasize that Halloween’s original intent was to honor the saints and
pray for the dead, not to celebrate evil.
Is Halloween a Celebration of the Devil?
Despite widespread claims, Halloween is not a “devil’s day.”
Historically, it was a time to confront fear and darkness with courage and
faith, not to worship evil. The imagery of ghosts, skeletons, and demons
represented the human confrontation with death and the unknown — central themes
in both pagan and Christian worldviews. In modern culture, Halloween’s
connection to the supernatural is largely symbolic and playful. Most people who
celebrate it today do so for entertainment, creativity, and community fun,
rather than for any religious or anti-religious reason.
Modern Celebrations in Canada
In Canada, Halloween has become a nationally recognized cultural celebration.
Communities, schools, and families decorate homes with pumpkins, lights, and
spooky figures. Children dress up as superheroes, ghosts, or fairy-tale
characters and go from door to door saying “Trick or Treat!” — a phrase dating
back to medieval times when poor people begged for “soul cakes” in return for
prayers for the dead. Canadian cities like Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, and
Halifax host Halloween parades, haunted house events, and pumpkin festivals.
Safety campaigns are also widespread, emphasizing reflective clothing, adult
supervision, and careful candy checks. For children, Halloween is primarily
about joy, imagination, and sharing. For adults, it can also be a chance to
reflect on the mystery of life, death, and the spiritual world — echoing its
ancient roots.
Conclusion
Halloween in Canada today stands as a fusion of ancient Celtic rituals,
Christian remembrance, and modern social fun. While some view it as a harmless
cultural festival, others see it as a reminder to avoid glorifying darkness. The
truth lies somewhere in between: Halloween’s true meaning depends on how it is
celebrated. If approached with understanding, creativity, and moral awareness,
Halloween can be a positive occasion — a night that connects the living with
their past, strengthens community bonds, and celebrates the victory of light
over darkness.
*The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
Author’s Email:
Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website:
https://eliasbejjaninews.com
Druze and Christian Presence in State Institutions
Dr. Zeina Mansour / X (formerly Twitter) / November 2, 2026
The current presence of the Druze and Christian communities within state
institutions is as follows:
Approximately 3% are Druze.
Approximately 14% are Christian.
Together, they account for less than 20%—a decline that is unprecedented. The
question, however, is whether this decline is spontaneous or systematic.
In terms of figures, more than 80% of the positions—out of a total of 400,000
public sector jobs and 300,000 retirees—are currently held by Muslims (Sunni and
Shia).
This represents a total of 700,000 individuals, comprising both retirees and
those currently employed.
There are 400,000 employees in the public administration today.
Only 80,000 of these positions are held by Druze and Christians combined (20%).
These indicators are not addressed by either the Druze-affiliated members of
parliament or their Maronite and Christian counterparts. Doing so might
undermine their electoral base, jeopardize alliances with leftist or Islamist
factions, disrupt various supported agendas, or—perhaps most concerning to
them—offend their "sponsors." Abu Arz: A Farce
X (formerly Twitter) / November 2, 2026
Instead of focusing on addressing existential crises—such as dismantling the
military, security, and political apparatus of Hezbollah, or combating the
corruption that permeates every facet of political life in the country—
the state has busied itself with trivialities, pursuing cases of unauthorized
construction in the southern border villages—areas that are all but cut off from
the rest of the world—and summoning residents to Sidon to appear before the
judiciary.
Meanwhile, it fails to pursue those responsible for the destruction of the
South, the razing of its villages, and the displacement of its people.
In short, the state’s policy has become transparent: it distracts itself with
the superficial aspects of crises to avoid addressing their root
causes—essentially buying time in the hope that the Trump-Netanyahu duo might
fall.
At Your Service, Lebanon
Summons of Priest from Lebanese Town of Rmeich Sparks
Outrage Among Christians
Roumi El-Habr/ACI MENA / November 2, 2026
In a country where southern Christian villages and their inhabitants have paid
the price for wars they did not choose, Father Najib Al-Amil—the priest of the
southern border town of Rmeich—has been summoned for questioning regarding a
dispute over the construction of a room in the town. Father Al-Amil, who has
remained steadfast in his besieged town following the recent conflict, is now
being required to appear in Sidon. Yet, traveling to or from Rmeich currently
necessitates navigating long, perilous routes as part of convoys that require
prior coordination and security escorts. According to information reported by
the newspaper *Nidaa Al-Watan*, the summons stems from the construction of a
room by a local resident—a structure that the Rmeich police station had ordered
to be demolished. Seeking to prevent a confrontation between the resident and
the police, and hoping to de-escalate the situation, Father Al-Amil suggested
postponing the matter until conditions were more suitable, in order to avoid any
friction. However, the judge in Sidon who contacted Father Al-Amil interpreted
his remarks as a threat—specifically, a threat to involve "the Israelis." The
summons has triggered alarm and anger within the Christian community,
particularly because it targets villages struggling to survive—communities
currently awaiting convoys to deliver essential medicine and food—and a priest
who has stood firmly by their side. This case deepens a recurring grievance
within Christian circles regarding a state that applies strict measures toward
one group while remaining lenient toward another: how does a single room in a
town—already suffering under Israeli occupation and isolation—become a major
issue, while extensive, unauthorized construction elsewhere goes unaddressed?
Since 2024, Father Najib has consistently called for security forces to remain
in Rmeish, insisting that its residents must not be left to fend for themselves.
Today, he has expressed his readiness to appear before the authorities, provided
that safe passage can be guaranteed. On Saturday, local residents gathered in
the church square in a show of solidarity with him. Perhaps the words of Father
Dani Dergham on "X" (formerly Twitter) best capture a sense of abandonment—a
sentiment echoing among Christians across Lebanon: "Father Najib Al-Amil and the
people of the border region: the state that has abandoned you—abandon it in
return!" This is a cry that the Lebanese state should pause to consider
carefully: when those who have steadfastly supported its institutions and
demanded its presence reach the point of calling for its abandonment, one must
ask: what has the state done to lose their trust, and what will it do to regain
it? Tags: Lebanon news, Church news in Lebanon, news about Christians in
Lebanon, southern Lebanese border, persecuted Christians, Southern Lebanon,
Father Najib Al-Amil. Roumi El-Habr is a Lebanese
journalist and researcher. She holds a degree in journalism and a postgraduate
degree in international security, with a specialization in the affairs of
minorities in the Middle East.
What is the latest on the investigation into the Dahr
al-Baidar explosives shipment?
Al-Markaziya / November 2, 2026
The Government Commissioner to the Military Court, Judge Claude Ghanem, has
referred the investigation file regarding the explosives shipment to the First
Military Investigative Judge, Ghada Abu Alwan, after bringing charges against 13
suspects in the case. Judge Ghanem also filed charges against a ninth individual
involved in the "Dahr al-Baidar explosives" case, following the full
identification of the suspect. According to information obtained by MTV, the
suspect—identified as "Abd al-Muttalib Nassar"—was the driver of the vehicle
that accompanied Amhaz and Al-Kurdi while they were transporting the explosives.
Sweeping operations, shelling, demolition, and the burning of homes in the south
Al-Markaziya / November 2, 2026
The Israeli army carried out a large-scale explosion in Bani Hayyan, in the
Marjeyoun District. Reports indicate that automatic weapons fire was directed
toward the town of Hadatha and the city of Khiam, and that homes were set on
fire between the towns of Kfar Tibnit and Arnoun. Israeli aircraft flew at low
altitude over the city of Tyre and surrounding villages, conducting mock raids.
The National News Agency (NNA) reported that Israeli military vehicles were seen
moving within the town of Al-Mansouri, coinciding with artillery shelling on the
area. Israeli artillery also shelled the town of Hadatha in the Bint Jbeil
District. Additionally, an Israeli airstrike targeted the town of Ayta al-Jabal,
in the Bint Jbeil District, this afternoon. There were also reports of an
explosion in the town of Al-Tiri. The Israeli army conducted a sweep operation
using machine-gun fire, moving from Al-Khiam toward the Ibl spring. Israeli
artillery fired five shells into the Marjeyoun plain, while further artillery
fire targeted the outskirts of the town of Kunin in the Bint Jbeil District. The
Israeli army carried out a powerful controlled explosion in the town of Beit
Yahoun, and Israeli bulldozers demolished homes in the town of Zawtar al-Sharqiya.
An Israeli tank took up a position in the Al-Shariqa area of Al-Khiam and
opened fire toward agricultural lands in Ibl al-Saqi.
During the morning, Israeli artillery shelled the towns of Al-Mansouri and
Majdal Zoun. Israeli forces also opened fire with machine guns toward the Wadi
al-Hujair and Wadi al-Salouqi valleys. Additionally, Israeli forces carried out
an explosion in Bani Hayyan, located in the Marjeyoun District, and Israeli
warplanes conducted an airstrike on the town of Al-Qusayr, also in the Marjeyoun
District. Furthermore, intense artillery shelling targeted the area surrounding
the Ibl al-Saqi spring, with more than 10 shells landing there.
Neither Israeli plans nor Beirut’s efforts will deter the
party when summoned by the *Wali al-Faqih* (Guardian Jurist)
Lara Yazbek / Al-Markaziyah / November 2, 2026
Al-Markaziyah — During a meeting with senior commanders of Iran’s armed forces
last weekend—held in anticipation of any potential new confrontation between
Iran on one side, and the United States and Israel on the other—Iranian Supreme
Leader Mojtaba Khamenei issued strategic directives for the coming phase. He
emphasized that the unity of the "Axis of Resistance" is a strategic imperative
for the battle. According to sovereignist political sources speaking to *Al-Markaziyah*,
this implies that Tehran intends to involve all its regional proxies—stretching
from Lebanon and Iraq to Yemen—in any future war. This, in effect, is the
practical application of the concepts of "unity of fronts" and "unity of the
axis" as articulated by Khamenei. In response to this
explicit, bellicose rhetoric from Iran, Israel has escalated its warnings to
Lebanon, aiming to deter Hezbollah and compel the group to think twice—or
rather, a hundred times—before reopening the southern front. In this context,
the Israeli newspaper *Maariv* reported on Sunday that the Israeli military is
preparing to occupy three major cities in southern Lebanon—Tyre, Sidon, and
Nabatieh—and to impose a blockade on the ports of Beirut and Tripoli, should
Hezbollah participate in any future military confrontation. According to
sources—though the specific details may or may not be accurate—it is certain
that serious warnings have reached official Lebanese channels over the past few
weeks. These warnings, conveyed through various Western, Arab, Gulf, and UN
diplomatic channels, state that Israel will strike with overwhelming force
should "the Party" (Hezbollah) intervene—to the extent that it will make no
distinction between the Party and the Lebanese state. While the country’s three
top leaders—the President, the Speaker of Parliament, and the Prime Minister—are
currently striving to persuade the Party to act rationally and refrain from
intervening should war erupt again, these efforts are, in reality, merely "pro
forma" and ultimately futile. The Lebanese voice carries no weight with a group
that heeds only the directives of the *Wali al-Faqih* (the Supreme Leader in
Iran). More alarmingly, the Party is unlikely to heed even the Israeli warnings
or the dire scenarios currently being brandished by Tel Aviv—scenarios that have
historically proven to be more than mere threats—once Tehran gives the order to
"engage." Given that the Lebanese state has failed to consolidate arms under its
own exclusive control over the past months, all indicators are deeply
unsettling, suggesting that if war breaks out again in the region, Lebanon faces
the prospect of a third, catastrophic "support front."
Hezbollah’s Weapons and the Taif Agreement: From Where Does Naim Qassem Derive
the Legitimacy of the "Resistance"?
Najwa Abi Haidar / Al-Markazia / November 2, 2026
Al-Markazia – The latest statement by Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim
Qassem—released via media outlets rather than delivered by him in person or on
screen (reminiscent of the style of Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei)—has
reignited the debate over the legitimacy of the party’s arsenal and its
constitutional basis. Qassem asserted that "there is no room for discussion
regarding the disarmament of the 'Resistance' as long as the Israeli occupation
persists," arguing that the "Resistance" continues based on the "legitimacy of
the right to resist" and provisions supposedly guaranteed by the Taif-based
constitution. According to "sovereigntist" political circles speaking to Al-Markazia,
Hezbollah—now led by Qassem—interprets the Lebanese Constitution only in ways
that suit its own interests, while disregarding anything that conflicts with its
allegiance to Iran. These circles reject Qassem’s unrealistic approach, noting
that it relies on a selective reading of the Taif Agreement. The agreement
explicitly called for the "dissolution of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias
and the handover of their weapons to the Lebanese state within six months."
Furthermore, the agreement emphasized restoring state authority up to
internationally recognized borders, implementing UN Resolution 425, upholding
the 1949 Armistice Agreement, liberating Lebanese territory, extending state
sovereignty over it, deploying the army along the borders, and strengthening the
presence of international peacekeeping forces in the south. These political
circles pose the question: Where, exactly, is the "Resistance" mentioned in the
text of the Taif Agreement or in the Constitution? The discussion addressed the
means necessary to liberate occupied territories, without granting any armed
organization permanent legitimacy outside the framework of state institutions;
rather, the expectation was for militia weapons to be handed over to the state,
as was the case with other organizations. Observers point to the issue of the
Shebaa Farms, which for years served as a pretext for the continued existence of
Hezbollah’s arsenal. At Iran’s behest, Damascus—despite having previously
acknowledged the Lebanese identity of the Shebaa Farms—maintained the
justification for keeping these weapons by framing it as a mission to "liberate"
the area, only to later shift its stance and claim the territory as Syrian.
During a 2008 Lebanese-Syrian summit, Presidents Michel Suleiman and Bashar
al-Assad emphasized the necessity for an Israeli withdrawal from the Lebanese
Shebaa Farms, the Kfarchouba Hills, and the northern part of Ghajar, in
accordance with relevant United Nations resolutions. Furthermore, the Syrian
side informed Lebanon that it was unwilling to demarcate the borders until the
Shebaa Farms were liberated. Proponents of state sovereignty argue that the
Shebaa issue was exploited to entrench the continued existence of these arms;
they contend that Hezbollah narrowed the concept of "resistance" to encompass
only its own activities, tethering its strategic decisions to the Iranian axis
rather than maintaining it as a unifying national cause under the authority of
the state. They conclude that international resolutions and constitutional
frameworks—including the government’s decision (under the premiership of Nawaf
Salam) to consolidate all arms under state control—affirm the primacy of
sovereignty and the state’s exclusive authority over decisions regarding war and
peace. They also cite the position of General Joseph Aoun, who has called for an
end to the Israeli occupation while stressing that this remains the
responsibility of the Lebanese state. Consequently, these observers ask: Upon
which constitutional provision or agreement did Qassem base his assertion that
the "resistance" and its weaponry are beyond debate? And is there a unique
interpretation of the Taif Agreement that applies exclusively to Hezbollah?
Salam Discusses De-escalation Efforts and Support for Lebanon’s Stability with
His Qatari Counterpart
Al-Markaziya / November 2, 2026
The Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced, via its account on the
platform "X," that a phone call took place between the Prime Minister and
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Qatar, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim
Al Thani, and Prime Minister Najib Salam. The discussion covered bilateral
relations and the latest regional developments. The Ministry stated that the
call addressed cooperative relations between the two nations and ways to
strengthen them, alongside regional developments—specifically ongoing diplomatic
efforts and joint coordination aimed at de-escalating tensions and enhancing
security and stability in the region. During the call, the Qatari Prime Minister
and Foreign Minister affirmed his country’s support for all diplomatic efforts
and initiatives aimed at reaching a solution that ensures freedom of maritime
navigation and paves the way for a comprehensive agreement to achieve
sustainable peace in the region. Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani also
reiterated Qatar’s steadfast position in support of Lebanon’s stability and
territorial integrity, emphasizing that Doha continues to stand by the side of
the brotherly Lebanese people.
Raji, Haykal, and Lawandos Together: The Integration of
Diplomacy and Strength Fortifies the Nation
Al-Markaziya / November 2, 2026
Foreign Minister Youssef Raji posted a photo on the platform "X," accompanied by
the following: "At the same table with Army Commander General Rudolph Haykal and
Director General of State Security Major General Edgar Lawandos, on the
sidelines of our participation in the Manama Dialogue. I reaffirmed my
confidence in the Army and the security forces to assist the government in
restoring sovereignty, liberating territory, and consolidating arms [under state
control]. It is the integration of diplomacy and strength that fortifies the
nation." Al-Hajj Hassan to the Authorities: It Is Shameful for You to Turn
Against the Resistance
Al-Markaziya / November 2, 2026
The Public Relations department of Hezbollah in the Bekaa region organized a
political gathering in the town of Sarain, featuring the head of the "Baalbek-Hermel
Bloc," MP Dr. Hussein Al-Hajj Hassan. The event was attended by the town’s
mayor, Atrif Shuman; the head of Public Relations for the Bekaa region, Dr.
Ahmed Raya; and various political, religious, cultural, educational, and social
figures. Al-Hajj Hassan stated that "American projects in the region are paving
the way for the hostile entity to establish control and hegemony—something the
Resistance will not permit." He further argued that "American interference in
Lebanon’s internal affairs is intended to exacerbate crises across all sectors,
including the judiciary, politics, and the economy." He concluded by addressing
the authorities—who, he noted, are subject to American dictates—saying: "It is
shameful for you to turn against the Resistance, accusing its youth of
threatening state security, while remaining silent in the face of the arrogance
of the Zionist enemy—an enemy that occupies Lebanese territory, commits
massacres, and destroys homes and property in southern Lebanon."
Electricité du Liban”: Recharge was limited to entities that paid part of their
dues and pledged in writing to pay the rest.
Markazia/November 2, 2026
The Board of Directors of the “Electricité du Liban” Corporation issued the
following statement: “In addition to the statement issued this morning, and in
implementation of the Board of Directors’ decision, the competent teams began
cutting off the power supply to public administrations and institutions and
municipalities that are defaulting in paying their dues or reviewing the
Corporation to settle their situation, in accordance with the revised
regulations delivered from the administration to the relevant directorates. As a
result, a large number of concerned parties contacted the Corporation to settle
their situation and made payments of the due dues.” Accordingly, while written
pledges were made to schedule the remaining amounts and pay them in monthly
installments, other parties did not initiate any payment, so the Corporation
clarifies that the re-feeding was limited to those that paid part of their dues
and pledged in writing to pay the remaining amounts in monthly installments. All
parties that contacted the Corporation also pledged to pay their upcoming
consumption bills monthly and regularly, in order to avoid the accumulation of
new dues. This file will remain The Council also stresses that these measures
are not directed against the state or any of its institutions, but rather fall
within the core of its duties in collecting the institution’s dues and
preserving public money. It also calls on the concerned departments and
institutions to take the initiative to fulfill their obligations, considering
that paying the electricity consumption allowance is one of the most intuitive
obligations that are supposed to be adhered to. Automatically.
The Board of Directors expresses its surprise at the uproar that
accompanied the implementation of a procedure that falls within its most basic
responsibilities and duties. He also thanks the departments and institutions
that responded, and all the media that accompanied this step, and confirms the
continuation of his efforts to ensure the continuity and financial
sustainability of the Electricité du Liban Corporation, and to work to increase
production and electrical supply hours. Therefore, clarification is required.
Israel plans to 'occupy Tyre, Sidon and Nabatieh' if
Hezbollah joins potential Iran war
Naharnet/November 02/2026
The Israeli army is planning to occupy the three main southern cities of Tyre,
Sidon, and Nabatieh, should Hezbollah intervene in an upcoming war with Iran,
Israeli media said.A report published Sunday in Maariv said the Israeli Navy
could play a pivotal role in strikes on Lebanon, given that the Air Force would
be occupied with operations against Iran. Strikes would target vast areas of
Beirut's southern suburbs, and a naval blockade would be imposed on the ports of
Beirut and Tripoli, the report said.
Report: Dahieh to be erased if Hezbollah attacks, Trump backs Israeli response
Naharnet/November 02/2026
Hezbollah’s entry into a war in support of Iran could open the door to a broad
Israeli military escalation, U.S. diplomatic sources told the Nidaa al-Watan
newspaper. “This scenario includes invading into north of the Awali River;
taking control of the cities of Nabatieh, Tyre and Sidon; imposing a blockade on
the Rafik Hariri International Airport as well as the ports of Beirut and
Tripoli; and broad destruction of Beirut's southern suburbs (Dahieh) -- which
the sources described as ‘wiping it off the map,’" the daily said. The U.S.
diplomatic sources also claimed that this scenario has the approval of U.S.
President Donald Trump, and that his administration has warned the Lebanese
state about the consequences of Hezbollah's possible involvement in any new war.
Hezbollah begins distributing aid to those displaced by war
Agence France Presse/November 02/2026
Hezbollah on Monday announced it had begun distributing financial aid to
Lebanese displaced by the group's latest war with Israel, despite efforts to dry
up its funding sources. The aid is being provided despite U.S. economic
sanctions on Hezbollah backer Iran, and Lebanese authorities tightening controls
over the group's channels for obtaining money and weapons, as part of their
declared campaign to disarm the group. Hezbollah announced in a statement that
it had begun paying a first tranche of aid to displaced people in the Nabatieh
region of southern Lebanon. It is an act of "loyalty to the owners of the
destroyed homes," the group said. On October 13, Hezbollah had announced that it
would provide housing-related financial assistance capped at $14,000 per year
for the displaced. The aid is earmarked for people whose homes have been
completely destroyed or rendered uninhabitable, and for residents of
Israeli-occupied areas in the south, provided that the displaced have no other
place to live. Hezbollah had said it would distribute the aid in four
installments over one year, without specifying the source of the funding or the
number of beneficiaries.
The aid announcement was the first from Hezbollah since it drew Lebanon into a
new war with Israel on March 2 in support of Iran, which the U.S. and Israel
attacked on February 28. In December 2024, after an earlier war against Israel
in support of Hamas in Gaza, it announced similar assistance worth $77 million
to the displaced, describing it as a "a gift from the Iranian people and
Hezbollah."The wars waged by Hezbollah against Israel since 2023 have damaged or
destroyed more than 290,000 homes, according to provisional figures from the
authorities, particularly in the south of the country and in the southern
suburbs of Beirut. Violence has decreased in the south since June, following a
memorandum of understanding between Washington and Tehran and a framework
agreement between Lebanon and Israel, which includes the disarmament of
Hezbollah.
Israel proposes NGO for verification, rejects nations proposed by Lebanon
Naharnet/November 02/2026
The negotiations between Lebanon and Israel have run into Israeli conditions and
Lebanese reservations, media reports said.“Things remain at a standstill pending
the crystallization of the Israeli political landscape after the elections,” the
Nidaa al-Watan newspaper reported on Monday.
As for the latest Tampa talks, Lebanon rejected an Israeli proposal, which
suggested that the mission of monitoring the truce and the pilot zones be
assigned to a non-governmental organization (NGO) instead of forces belonging to
European or African countries, the daily said. “The Israeli delegation rejected
the countries proposed by the Lebanese side … while Beirut considered that
assigning the monitoring role to an NGO … constitutes an infringement on
Lebanese sovereignty and an unprecedented precedent,” Nidaa al-Watan added.
South Lebanon: Latest developments
Naharnet/November 02/2026
Israeli forces launched a series of strikes across southern Lebanon on Monday,
targeting the outskirts of Kounine, al-Mansouri, Majdalzoun, and Ibl al-Saqi
with artillery fire, alongside airstrikes on al-Qsaïr and Kfar Tebnit. In
addition, Israeli forces opened fire with heavy machine guns toward Ibl al-Saqi,
Wadi al-Hujair, and Wadi al-Slouqi, carried out detonations in Beit Yahoun and
Bani Hayyan, and bulldozed homes and infrastructure in Zawtar al-Sharqiyeh.
Hezbollah minister among Lebanese delegation in Syria
Naharnet/November 02/2026
Labor Minister Mohammad Haidar, who was named by Hezbollah, said Monday that his
visit to Syria among a Lebanese ministerial delegation is “ministerial work that
has nothing to do with any partisan background."The statement was made from the
Jdeidet Yabous crossing, following the arrival of the delegation in Syria led by
Deputy Prime Minister Tarek Mitri. Minister of Social Affairs Hanine El Sayed
told Al-Jadeed television that the ministers "will discuss the issue of (Syrian)
refugees with the Syrian side” during the visit. Mitri for his part said he
expects “positive results” from the visit.
The delegation later met with Syrian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates
Asaad Hassan al-Shaibani at the Tishreen Palace in Damascus. Bilateral sessions
began between the Lebanese and Syrian ministers later began to address joint
files, each from their respective position and specialty.
Minister of Education Rima Karami is also part of the Lebanese delegation.
Lebanese, Syrian Talks in Damascus Tackle Border Security,
Refugees
Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad Al-Shaibani received on Monday a high-level
Lebanese delegation led by Deputy Prime Minister Tarek Mitri in the Syrian
capital, Damascus, for talks on outstanding issues between the neighboring
countries. Informed sources in Damascus told Asharq Al-Awsat that the Syrian
side focused heavily on border control and joint security cooperation and
coordination, while the Lebanese side focused primarily on the file of Syrian
refugees in Lebanon. A Syrian Foreign Ministry statement said: "The meeting
discussed ways to strengthen bilateral relations between the two brotherly
nations and develop joint coordination across various fields, primarily security
cooperation and border control. This is in addition to expanding the horizons of
partnership in the sectors of education, higher education, social affairs, and
labor, as well as following up on the work of joint technical committees to
serve mutual interests."The Lebanese delegation's visit to Damascus comes within
the context of strengthening bilateral relations, serving as a continuation of
previous talks and a follow-up on the work of the joint committees established
between the two sides to address shared files. This follows an agreement reached
by both countries last July to establish a joint higher committee to serve as an
institutional framework for coordinating the work of the relevant ministries,
developing economic, investment, and trade cooperation, and reinforcing security
understandings. According to informed sources in Damascus, the management of the
Syrian–Lebanese border, traffic at border crossings, and security coordination
to combat smuggling and infiltration topped the agenda of the talks. The file of
Syrian refugees and the status of residents in Lebanon, particularly those who
entered covertly, was brought forward. The discussions sought to address the
refugee issue from multiple dimensions, including social, security, and legal
aspects. The situation of Syrian students in Lebanese schools was also raised.
Lebanon’s EDL Begins Cutting Power to Ministries,
Municipalities and Public Institutions over Unpaid Dues
Beirut: Soubhi Amhaz/Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Lebanon’s public power utility, "Electricite du Liban" (EDL), began on Monday
implementing measures to disconnect electricity supply to public
administrations, public institutions, and municipalities that have failed to
settle their financial dues. This unprecedented move, in terms of its sweeping
scope, targets ministries, official bodies, water authorities, and
municipalities. It comes amid a severe financial crisis confronting the state
utility due to the accumulation of public sector debts. An initial list obtained
by Asharq Al-Awsat revealed the names of institutions and administrations
covered by the measures. They include the Council for Development and
Reconstruction, Ministry of Public Works and Transport, Directorate General of
Urban Planning, Directorate General of Education at the Ministry of Education
and Higher Education, the Land Registry Directorates, and the Directorate
General of Customs, in addition to subscriptions belonging to the Ministry of
Telecommunications across various regions. An informed source confirmed to
Asharq Al-Awsat that "the decision to cut electricity to public institutions and
administrations that fail to settle their dues does not aim to punish them or
disrupt their work, but rather to enforce respect for the law and establish
permanent financial regularity in paying electricity bills, thereby ensuring
that EDL secures its rights and the continuity of its operations."The source
explained that "the primary objective is not the power disconnection itself, but
rather to push public institutions to assume their financial responsibilities
and settle their accumulated obligations on a regular basis, instead of
continuing to pile up debts and resorting to temporary fixes whenever the crisis
intensifies."Rafik Hariri International Airport in Beirut successfully avoided a
power disconnection after the Civil Aviation Authority reached an understanding
with EDL. The agreement stipulates the payment of a portion of the accumulated
dues and the rescheduling of the remaining amounts, alongside a commitment to
settle incoming bills on a regular basis.
The accumulated dues owed by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation reached
around $22.8 million, according to figures circulated regarding public sector
debts. These measures come in light of EDL’s need to collect regular revenues to
finance fuel purchases and operate power plants. Its dues from public
administrations and institutions reached around a quarter of a billion dollars.
The problem of arrears dates back to years of irregular electricity bill
payments and has worsened with the tariff increase and the lack of sufficient
credit availability among some administrations. This presents a dual challenge
related to settling past debts and ensuring the payment of new consumption.
Israeli Reports Heighten Lebanese Fears of Another War
Beirut: Caroline Akoum/November 02/2026
Israeli reports of military preparations for a possible offensive in South
Lebanon have heightened fears among Lebanese officials and residents of another
war, amid continuing Israeli attacks, mounting domestic political tensions and
uncertainty over Hezbollah’s response to any renewed regional confrontation.
Lebanon faces the prospect of a third war, with concerns that Hezbollah could
once again draw the country into a conflict in support of Iran, as it has done
in the past. Israel’s Maariv newspaper reported that the Israeli military was
preparing for the possible occupation of three major cities in South Lebanon -
Tyre, Sidon and Nabatieh - if war with Iran resumes and Hezbollah joins the
fighting. Israeli assessments believe that Tehran could activate several fronts
simultaneously, including Lebanon, it said. Tel Aviv was taking the possibility
of Hezbollah’s involvement seriously, despite assessing the group’s military
capabilities as weakened, and was preparing to deploy “extremely heavy
firepower,” it added. The scenarios outlined by Maariv include intensified
strikes across large parts of Beirut’s southern suburbs, a naval blockade of the
ports of Beirut and Tripoli, and attacks on coastal cities followed by possible
ground advances.
Lebanese concerns
Lebanese ministerial sources expressed alarm over the reports, warning that
another Israeli offensive could not be ruled out. “There is no doubt that the
situation is worrying. We cannot exclude the possibility of Israel launching
another war against Lebanon, particularly if Hezbollah fails to honor its
promise, as it has done before, and once again enters the conflict,” the sources
told Asharq Al-Awsat. “Israeli threats are nothing new. Officials in Tel Aviv
have repeated them many times, placing us before a genuine danger.
Unfortunately, we may reach the point where the plans being discussed in the
media are carried out,” they added. Riad Kahwaji, a researcher specializing in
security and defense affairs, said the Maariv report should be taken seriously.
“The threat clearly concerns the entire South, without distinguishing between
areas north and south of the Litani River. It extends to the occupation of all
of South Lebanon and, inevitably, parts of the western Bekaa if Hezbollah
decides to join the fight,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat. Kahwaji noted that Israel
was already preparing for such an operation because it expects Hezbollah to
intervene. “Israel fully understands that Hezbollah will enter the confrontation
and is preparing for an operation of this kind,” he said. “Hezbollah has not
disappointed the Israelis so far, particularly Benjamin Netanyahu and his
government. Each time, it acts as the other side expects, allowing Israel to
expand the territory under its occupation,” he remarked. He warned that any
subsequent Israeli withdrawal would take place on Israel’s terms, leaving
Lebanon to accept the conditions imposed. Kahwaji urged the Lebanese government
to accelerate efforts to bring all weapons under state control and called on
Shiite community leaders to take a decisive position on Hezbollah and its
arsenal.
“This threat must serve as an incentive for the Lebanese government to speed up
its work and become more active on the issue of bringing weapons under state
control,” he noted. “We cannot ignore this threat and wait for disaster to
strike again.”Looking ahead, Kahwaji predicted that another war appeared
inevitable after the US elections, citing remarks Saturday by Iranian supreme
leader Mojtaba Khamenei reaffirming the unity of regional fronts. His statement
contradicted reports that Hezbollah would stay out of any future confrontation,
added Kahwaji.
Al-Rahi calls for Lebanon to stay out of regional conflicts
Amid growing fears of a third war, Lebanese figures have renewed calls to keep
the country out of regional confrontations. Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi
stressed during Sunday Mass that preventing Lebanon from being dragged into
another war had become a major national responsibility.
He warned that the Lebanese people could not withstand another conflict and
insisted that decisions on war and peace must rest with the state rather than
multiple competing authorities. Al-Rahi also reiterated the need to place
weapons exclusively under the control of the state and its legitimate
institutions.The warnings come as Israeli attacks continue across South Lebanon,
maintaining military pressure despite concerns over a wider escalation. Social
Affairs Minister Haneen Sayed visited the town of Froun in the Bint Jbeil
district to inaugurate a center and hand over several prefabricated housing
units intended to shelter displaced families. While delivering remarks at the
inauguration ceremony, Israeli warplanes struck the town of Qoussair with two
missiles. Sayed interrupted her speech upon hearing the explosion and recorded
the strike on her phone before resuming her address. She stressed the importance
of supporting displaced people, strengthening humanitarian and social
assistance, and providing shelters and essential supplies to affected families.
Israeli artillery also shelled the outskirts of Aita al-Jabal, the
Baraashit-Kounine area and Bani Hayyan.
Solidarity Stand with Father Najib Al-Amil at Mar
Charbel Church / Mississauga – Canada
Colonel Charbel Barakat/November 02, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/158778/
In a solidarity stand with the people in the border villages, who for years have
suffered the effects of others' wars on Lebanese soil, the absence of the state,
and attempts to drag the country into an armed confrontation that does not serve
the southerners, the Lebanese community in Mississauga – Canada gathered
spontaneously in front of Mar Charbel Church after Sunday Mass on November 01,
2026.
A direct contact was made via social media with Father Najib Al-Amil in the
steadfast border town of Rmeish, as an expression of the diaspora's support for
the people in the border villages, and support for the priest who stood with the
people there on Lebanon's border, helping carry their concerns and preventing
them from fearing for their fate or fleeing and leaving their homes during the
war that struck the area. He has shown awareness, foresight, and dedication for
the sake of the parish. He is an example set by the late parish priest of Qlaia,
Father Pierre Al-Rai, who sacrificed his life to help his parishioners and
accompany ambulance teams to transport the wounded among them during the events,
and was martyred on the land of the town he shepherded, as a living example of
steadfastness.
After listening to the Canadian and Lebanese national anthems, Father Najib was
introduced. He thanked those present for their support and their noble stand
expressing solidarity with the steadfast people, despite all difficulties and
obstacles, in southern Lebanon, especially in the absence of the state, its
apparatus and its forces — indeed in the absence of any manifestation of it and
its ability to reassure citizens that there is someone who cares for their
existence and their future. Hence the role of Father Najib, who showed foresight
and stood at the forefront of the parish carrying the banner of steadfastness
and attachment to the land and protecting it from any aggressor, whether foreign
or close. He led that process with full support from His Holiness the Pope, who
sent the Papal Nuncio himself, and over months and in humanitarian convoys that
carried some of the needs of the steadfast people, but carried much more than
that; because they carried with them the spirit of hope and the decision to stay
despite all circumstances. The role of Father Najib Al-Amil and the rest of the
priests who led that wonderful steadfastness, and who led the parish defending
it and clinging to the symbolic remnants of the Lebanese state, was essential.
But this state, with some of those who represent it, did not understand the
meanings of staying and clinging to the land, just as it did when the Israelis
withdrew in 2000, where it failed and did not hasten to fill the vacuum, but
handed over the land and what is on it to the agents of the mullahs' regime in
Tehran, who did nothing but drag wars time after time and displace the
population and destroy villages.
Today, after staying has become a fait accompli and steadfastness is imposed on
everyone, and where countries through talks are trying to find common ground
between Lebanon and Israel to preserve the Lebanese identity of the land because
of those who remained steadfast, some short-sighted employees in the loitering
administration take the initiative to use their positions and threaten those
whom the state should thank, and who deserve medals of appreciation to be pinned
on their chests. They summon Father Najib for investigation about his attempt to
explain matters to those who know nothing about the conditions of the people in
those villages.
We do not demand violating the laws nor do we claim the right to bypass them, as
those who took control of the state and killed its people and displaced them
from their homes did and still do, and still work to cause further demolition of
the homeland in the rest of the regions so that all of them equally bear the
damage, but we try to make those who claim to enforce the laws understand that
summoning Father Najib to appear before the judge in Sidon is an assault on the
steadfast who still raise the flag of Lebanon despite the foreign armies that
control the land. The survival of Father Najib and his likes is the symbol of
Lebanon's survival and its rights to the land, and not the claim to defend them
by correspondence.
The dignity of Father Najib represents national dignity, and respecting him
represents the prestige of the state. Neither victimizing people like him nor
targeting the steadfast people on the border, who drew it by clinging to it, is
what keeps this state its right, but rather respecting them and helping them
overcome difficult circumstances is what serves the homeland and gives its
children the motivation to continue.
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News
published on November 02-03/2026
(Some of the News reports below are
translated from Arabic by AI)
Democrats, Trump Hold Final Rallies Before Midterm Elections
Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Democrats teed up final get-out-the-vote rallies Monday on the eve of midterm
elections where they expect to win at least partial control of Congress and
impose political constraints on President Donald Trump for the first time in two
years. Rallies -- including by star Democratic Senate candidates James Talarico
in Texas and Adam Hamilton in Kansas -- were capping a campaign of breathtaking
tension and bitterness. For his closing argument, Trump chose a speech in
Washington at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool -- a landmark that has become
synonymous with the 80-year-old president's obsessive, controversial drive to
redevelop the US capital. "We're going to win," he said on Sunday. Polls,
however, show that Democrats are near certain to take the majority from
Republicans in the House of Representatives and have a real shot at winning the
currently Republican Senate. Even winning just the House would mean Democrats
have voting power over the federal budget and would lead powerful committees
able to investigate alleged corruption under Trump, the Epstein files and other
explosive issues. The loss of total Republican dominance would push Trump into
unfamiliar and uncomfortable territory: a lame-duck period beset with high
inflation at home, the sputtering war against Iran and hostile Democratic
investigations into his activities in Washington. But a decade into the Trump
era, Democrats remain wary about predictions of victory. "Nauseously
optimistic," Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock told CNN to describe the mood.
Scorched earth
Republicans led by Trump have fought a political scorched-earth campaign,
painting Democrats as communists and openly branding Abdul El-Sayed, a Muslim
candidate for senator in Michigan, as a terrorist. Addressing a crowd in Iowa on
Sunday, Trump said Democrats are "extreme and dangerous radicals" who will
"steal your wealth" and let in migrants to "ransack, rape and plunder."But polls
show Americans heavily souring on Trump's wrecking-ball act. An NBC News poll
released on Sunday showed 60 percent disapprove of his performance, particularly
over high prices exacerbated by his now eight-month war against Iran.
While the House seems highly likely to turn Democratic, the battle for the
Senate is up in the air. Only a third of the Senate's 100 seats are being
contested in these midterms, and few of the races were seen as favorable to
Democrats. However, with surprisingly strong challenges in deeply Republican
states, pollsters now say the odds of a Democratic flip are at minimum even. The
final New York Times/Siena poll released Sunday evening showed Democratic
candidates leading in all seven seats viewed as most competitive, though five
remained within the margin of error.
A Democratic Senate would be able to shut down Trump's lifetime appointments to
courts -- especially the Supreme Court. While Tuesday is election day, early
voting has already seen a record 54 million people cast ballots around the
country. The midterms have seen about $11 billion spent on advertising, with
large chunks coming from individual mega-donors. Elon Musk, a close Trump ally
who led the so-called DOGE effort in dismantling entire government departments,
has given a staggering nearly half-billion dollars to help get Republicans
elected.
Trump says 'at some point' US will have to give Iran 'the
hammer'
Agence France Presse/November 02/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump on Sunday reiterated his threat to resume strikes
against Iran, telling a campaign rally that he may have to give Tehran "the
hammer" at some unspecified time. "And the only reason why I'm not finished with
Iran is I want to be nice. I want to try and save all those lives if I can...But
at some point we're going to have to give them the hammer," the 80-year-old
president told supporters during a rally in Iowa ahead of the November 3 midterm
elections.
Trump, Vance signal progress in talks with Iran to avert
renewed war
Agence France Presse/November 02/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday signaled progress in talks with Iran to
avoid a return to war, as Tehran said "intensive" exchanges were underway while
offering to reopen the Strait of Hormuz under strict conditions. A deal with
Tehran "could happen," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, a day before
crucial U.S. midterm elections. He added that "Iran wants a settlement, as soon
as possible." Vice President JD Vance separately said that both he and Trump
were optimistic about securing an agreement. "We've certainly made some
progress. We'll see if we can make some more," Vance told reporters on Monday.
Oil prices, sent rocketing by Iran's blockade of the Strait of Hormuz energy
corridor, plunged by more than seven percent on Monday on optimism over a
possible end to the eight-month-old conflict. Trump also pointed to tumbling oil
prices on his social media post. The renewed diplomatic signals come ahead of
Tuesday's midterms, in which Trump's Republican Party is pushing to retain
control of Congress despite voter dissatisfaction over the war and higher fuel
prices. Democrats expect to win at least partial control of Congress and impose
political constraints on Trump for the first time in two years. Iran's Foreign
Minister Abbas Araghchi said Monday that indirect talks with Washington were
taking place via mediators. "Given the sensitivity and gravity of the current
situation, consultations and deliberations are very intensive," Araghchi said in
a video interview with the official IRNA news agency. "Qatar and Pakistan are
playing a very active mediating role in these negotiations."China also urged a
return to negotiations, while Iran's security chief discussed the conflict with
Russian President Vladimir Putin. Earlier, the Axios news outlet reported that
Vance had sent a letter to Iranian national security chief Mohsen Rezaei about
possible new talks, marking the highest-level move in months.Iran's First Vice
President Mohammad Reza Aref said the messages received from the U.S. were "an
acknowledgement of our victory." But Trump had previously kept up his threats
against Iran, telling a campaign rally that at "some point we're going to have
to give them the hammer."
'Good-faith approach' -
A senior Iranian official said Tehran was ready to open Strait of Hormuz, an
export conduit for the energy-rich Gulf, within two days -- as long as
Washington agrees to its list of demands. In September, Iran proposed a
seven-day plan to reopen the strait if the US agreed to demands including ending
the war on all fronts, unfreezing Iranian assets, lifting oil sanctions and
ending its counter-blockade of Iranian ports. "The possibility of implementing
this plan in two days is another indication of Iran's good-faith approach,"
foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei told reporters at a briefing. Chinese
President Xi Jinping also discussed the war with Oman's Sultan Haitham bin Tariq
in Beijing on Monday -- the first visit to China by the Gulf nation's head of
state since diplomatic ties were established."The two sides called for resolving
disputes through political and diplomatic means, urging the United States and
Iran to pursue a peaceful path, achieve a ceasefire (and) prevent war entirely,"
an Omani statement said.
'No compromises' -
China held meetings with Iranian and Saudi officials in Beijing on Monday as
well. Beijing supports Tehran in "safeguarding its own sovereignty and
security," Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Ali Bagheri, deputy secretary of Iran's
Supreme National Security Council, according to a Chinese statement. Bagheri
told Wang that "Tehran's stance on defending its national security, sovereignty,
and territorial integrity remains unchanged, and that Iran will make no
compromises in this regard," state TV reported. In an interview with Al Jazeera
released Sunday, Araghchi said Washington must accept a new route agreed between
Iran and Oman for transiting the strait. He said the U.S. must also remove
sanctions imposed recently and reduce American troop numbers in the region. On
Saturday, Trump said he still had to "take care" of one or two targets including
Pickaxe mountain in central Iran, a suspected nuclear site which Tehran denies
is such a facility. Baqaei warned that any act of aggression against Iran "will
be met with a powerful, immediate and comprehensive response."
Iran's top diplomat hopes for 'rationality' on US side
Associated Press/November 02/2026
Iran’s top diplomat said consultations with mediators are ongoing as diplomatic
efforts try to avoid a return to all-out war, and the final outcome depends on
answers provided by the United States to the “Iranian questions.”In an interview
shared on his Telegram channel, Abbas Araghchi said Iran hoped the U.S. would
choose “diplomacy over other paths.” He said Iran was ready for both defense and
diplomacy, depending on Washington’s “rationality."Araghchi on Saturday said
Iranian negotiators are in Qatar for talks on a proposal that could reopen the
Strait of Hormuz within two days if the U.S. meets several conditions. He said
no direct talks are being held with the U.S.
Iran Says Considering Two-day Plan to Reopen Hormuz
Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Iran's foreign ministry on Monday said it was considering a two-day plan to
reopen the Strait of Hormuz if the US agrees to its conditions, having
previously proposed a one-week timeline, AFP said. "The possibility of
implementing this plan in two days is another indication of Iran's good-faith
approach. We have stated that, if Iran's demands are met, it would be possible
to restore security to the Strait of Hormuz and resume the negotiating process
within a short period," said foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei, adding
that the "exchange of messages is still ongoing" via mediators.
Where things stand on Iran after a tense weekend
Associated Press/November 02/2026
The Middle East is braced for a possible return to all-out war. There are
concerns that the United States, along with Israel, could strike Iran shortly
after Tuesday's midterm elections in the U.S. Two Iranian officials said their
delegation had left Qatar after days of discussions but that messages with the
U.S. continued to be exchanged through the mediator. The officials spoke on
condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the talks. The diplomatic
efforts seek to avert new attacks. Tehran has expanded its threats but said it
is waiting for the latest U.S. response to a proposal that would fully open the
Strait of Hormuz to shipping within two days if Washington meets several
conditions.
Here's where things stand Monday. Trump had a 'very good' call with Netanyahu
U.S. President Donald Trump on Sunday evening told reporters he and Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had a "very good" call on Saturday. He said
they discussed Iran but gave no details. Even before Netanyahu and his bloc of
allies lost their majority in parliament in last week's election, there were
growing fears that Netanyahu was pushing for new strikes against Iran in an
effort to stay in power in an emergency government during renewed war. Since
last Tuesday's election, the prime minister has publicly commented only on the
vote. There was no word from Netanyahu and his office on the latest call with
Trump, who has continued to alternate between public comments about pursuing
talks with Iran and threats to strike it hard. "The standoff in the Gulf between
the U.S. and Iran is really between Qatar and Israel," Andreas Krieg, a
professor at King's College London, said on X. "Qatar is tirelessly working on a
diplomatic offramp with the region's backing while Israel is looking for
military ways to throw the region under the bus."
Iran greatly expands threats while sticking with diplomacy
The Islamic Republic has stepped up its public messaging during the uncertainty,
saying it is ready for both diplomacy and renewed fighting. The new supreme
leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, met with Iran's military chiefs and said the
response to "any kind and level of threat" from the U.S. or Israel should be
immediate and without "geographic limits," and urged an expansion of the list of
potential targets. Khamenei still has not been seen publicly since the opening
strikes by Israel and the U.S. on Feb. 28 killed his father, the previous
supreme leader. Iran's security chief, Mohsen Rezaei, warned on X that any
attack would bring "devastating blows on the aggressor using new weapons."In an
interview with state television, Rezaei said "the tone has completely changed"
from the U.S. and called it a "very good sign." He gave no details about the
letter he received from U.S. Vice President JD Vance, which Iran acknowledged
last week, and said he had not responded. Rezaei also said there had been no
decision to change Iran's nuclear doctrine, but he noted that some Iranians had
questioned whether that should it should change if Iran were attacked again.
Tehran has insisted its nuclear program is peaceful. Washington seeks to prevent
Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and wants to address the issue in any new
talks. Iran wants to discuss the nuclear issue later. Iranian Foreign Minister
Abbas Araghchi, on a one-day visit to neighboring Turkmenistan on Monday, has
said the final outcome depends on answers provided by the United States to the
"Iranian questions."
Middle East states are caught in the middle
More attacks on commercial ships were reported on the Strait of Hormuz during
October, in the busiest month for reported assaults since March, during the
war's opening weeks. The mood was grim at the Manama Dialogue, an annual
security summit in Bahrain organized by the International Institute for
Strategic Studies. "We don't really want to see another round of confrontation
in the region," United Arab Emirates presidential adviser Anwar Gargash told
attendees. Gargash acknowledged that "the rules of logic" show that the U.S. and
Iranian stances are far apart, and "if these positions are not bridged, then we
have to worry about the worst."Gulf nations have spent billions of dollars to
boost their defense capabilities since the war began. The UAE has faced the
largest number of attacks from Iran, with more than 3,000 drones and ballistic
missiles targeting airports and military and oil facilities, according to IISS.
Most were intercepted. Egypt's Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty told the
gathering in Bahrain that "the second round (of escalation) will be more
dangerous, more destructive, and it will lead to nowhere."Meanwhile, China will
send a special envoy to Iran, Oman and Saudi Arabia in early to mid-November,
Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters Monday. "The Middle East
Gulf region should not become an arena for great-power rivalry and geopolitical
conflict," China's President Xi Jinping said in his meeting with Oman's sultan,
according to a readout from China's Foreign Ministry. The two countries called
for a return to dialogue.
Pezeshkian: Supreme Leader Grants Authority to Negotiate
with Washington
Al-Markaziyah / November 2, 2026
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian confirmed on Monday that Supreme Leader
Mojtaba Khamenei has granted the government certain authorities to negotiate
with the United States, while emphasizing that Iran’s enemies will not be able
to subjugate the country through war. The official Iranian news agency, IRNA,
quoted Pezeshkian as saying: "We seek to resolve the issue through dialogue. In
this regard, the Supreme Leader has granted the government certain
authorities"—though he did not specify the nature or scope of these powers. His
remarks come as mediation efforts continue, aimed at ending the war and
preventing a new round of escalation, amid disagreements over the terms for
resuming negotiations and reopening the Strait of Hormuz. On the diplomatic
front, Reuters reported that messages continue to be exchanged between Tehran
and Washington via intermediaries, following talks—in which Qatar
participated—that failed to achieve a breakthrough. An Iranian proposal, put
forward in September, remains the basis for discussions; it includes lifting the
U.S. blockade on Iranian ports and easing restrictions on oil, in exchange for
the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, followed by subsequent talks. According
to IRNA, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi confirmed on Sunday that
consultations with Qatari mediators regarding a plan to reopen the Strait within
two days had not yet reached a final conclusion. On Monday, Iranian Foreign
Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei announced that the plan could potentially
be implemented within two days—rather than the previously proposed one-week
timeframe—provided that Washington meets Tehran’s demands. These demands include
ending the war in the Middle East on all fronts, unfreezing Iranian assets,
lifting sanctions on the oil sector, and terminating the U.S. naval blockade.
According to Reuters, Tehran asserts that moving toward nuclear negotiations
requires, as a prerequisite, verification that its demands have been met; it
also rejects the transfer of its highly enriched uranium stockpile abroad. In
parallel with these diplomatic communications, Baghaei warned that any military
attack on Iran would be met with a "strong, immediate, and comprehensive"
response, amid threats from the United States and Israel to launch new strikes.
Iranians Have Left Doha Talks, Draft Proposal for US Deal
Being Circulated, Official Says
Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Iranian negotiators have left talks with Qatari mediators aimed at ending the
war with the United States, and a draft proposal is being circulated with a
follow-up meeting possible, an official briefed on the talks said on Monday. The
negotiators departed on Sunday, though not because of difficulties in the
negotiations, the official said, without providing further details on the draft
proposal. Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson said the basis of the talks is a
seven-step plan Iran drew up in September to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and
end the US naval blockade on Iran, with Tehran now suggesting that proposal
could be implemented on a faster timeline under a deal. The spokesperson,
Esmaeil Baghaei, said deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi had been in Doha
to facilitate the exchange of messages with Washington via Qatari
intermediaries. "Our demands have been articulated very clearly and
transparently. These demands are reasonable and logical: no final agreement
can be initiated, nor can the Strait of Hormuz be reopened or secured, unless
the US naval blockade is brought to an end, Iran's demands are respected, and
Iran’s legitimate requirements are addressed,” Baghaei said. On Saturday, Qatari
broadcaster Al Jazeera quoted Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi as saying
that under a deal the Strait of Hormuz could be opened within a two-day
timeline rather than within the seven days originally envisaged. Iran's
initial proposal was rejected by US President Donald Trump. The latest round of
diplomacy comes amid concerns that the conflict could escalate again after
Tuesday's midterm elections in the United States. Asked about Tehran's view on
the midterms, Baghaei said Tehran did not expect elections to "give birth to a
new US." Trump has said the United States would not launch new attacks on Iran
before the vote and that talks with Tehran have been productive, though he has
not ruled out further military action.
Iran Says in ‘Intensive’ Negotiations with US to Avert War
Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Iran on Monday said "intensive" exchanges were underway with Washington and
offered to reopen the Strait of Hormuz under strict conditions, as efforts
escalated to avert a return to war. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said
indirect talks were taking place via mediators. China also urged a return to
negotiations, while Iran's security chief discussed the conflict with Russian
President Vladimir Putin. Oil prices, sent rocketing by Iran's blockade of the
Strait of Hormuz energy corridor, dropped more than six percent on Monday on
optimism over the eight-month-old conflict.
"Given the sensitivity and gravity of the current situation, consultations and
deliberations are very intensive," Araghchi said in a video interview with the
official IRNA news agency.
"Qatar and Pakistan are playing a very active mediating role in these
negotiations."
The Axios news outlet reported that US Vice President JD Vance had sent a letter
to Iranian national security chief Mohsen Rezaei about possible new talks,
marking the highest-level move in months. The redoubled diplomatic push comes
ahead of Tuesday's US midterm elections, where dissatisfaction over the war and
higher fuel prices are weighing on US President Donald Trump's Republicans.
Democrats expect to win at least partial control of Congress and impose
political constraints on Trump for the first time in two years. Iran's First
Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref said the messages received from the US were
"an acknowledgement of our victory".But Trump kept up his threats against Iran,
telling a campaign rally that at "some point we're going to have to give them
the hammer".
'Good-faith approach'
A senior Iranian official said Tehran was ready to open Hormuz, the export
highway for the energy-rich Gulf, within two days -- as long as Washington
agrees to its list of demands.In September, Iran proposed a seven-day plan to
reopen the strait if the US agreed to demands including ending the war on all
fronts, unfreezing Iranian assets, lifting oil sanctions and ending its
counter-blockade of Iranian ports. "The possibility of implementing this plan in
two days is another indication of Iran's good-faith approach," foreign ministry
spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei told reporters at a briefing. "We have stated that, if
Iran's demands are met, it would be possible to restore security to the Strait
of Hormuz and resume the negotiating process within a short period." Baqaei said
"everything depends" on the US side accepting the Iranian demands. "Only then
can we discuss the subsequent stages," he added. Chinese President Xi Jinping
discussed the war with Oman's Sultan Haitham bin Tariq in Beijing on Monday --
the first visit to China by the Gulf nation's head of state since diplomatic
ties were established. "The two sides called for resolving disputes through
political and diplomatic means, urging the United States and Iran to pursue a
peaceful path, achieve a ceasefire (and) prevent war entirely," an Omani
statement said. Beijing supports Tehran in "safeguarding its own sovereignty and
security", Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Ali Bagheri, deputy secretary of Iran's
Supreme National Security Council, according to a Chinese statement. Bagheri
told Wang that "Tehran's stance on defending its national security, sovereignty,
and territorial integrity remains unchanged, and that Iran will make no
compromises in this regard", according to state TV. Russian President Putin also
spoke with Iran's security chief Mohsen Rezaei about the war by telephone,
Iranian state media said.
'Powerful response' -
In an interview with Al Jazeera released on Sunday, Araghchi said Washington
must accept a new route agreed between Iran and Oman for transiting the strait.
He said the US must also remove sanctions imposed in recent months and reduce
American troop numbers in the region.
Washington has since August rolled out a fresh raft of sanctions, part of what
it called "economic asphyxiation" of Iran. American and Israeli threats to Iran
rose in the run-up to the midterms and last week's elections in Israel, where
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed to secure a majority.
On Saturday, Trump said he still had to "take care" of one or two targets
including Pickaxe Mountain in central Iran, a suspected nuclear site which
Tehran denies is such a facility. "Any act of aggression against Iran, any
military attack against Iran, by whatever means, will be met with a powerful,
immediate and comprehensive response from us," Baqaei said.
Israel Opposition Bloc to Meet Tuesday for First Time to Push PM Pick
Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Party heads in the diverse Israeli opposition camp, led by Gadi Eisenkot, will
meet on Tuesday after they all said they were endorsing the former military
chief to become the next prime minister.
Eisenkot's Yashar party said that the leaders of the change bloc would meet "to
discuss coordinating the bloc's next steps" in Herzliya on Tuesday morning. It
will be the grouping's first meeting since last week's close-fought election
delivered no majority for either Eisenkot's bloc or that of Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu.
Jordan's King Says 'No Security or Stability' in Region
Without Palestinian Homeland
Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Jordan's King Abdullah II on Monday said there would be no security in the
Middle East region until the Palestinians' right to a homeland is fulfilled. "We
reiterate, time and again, that there can be no security or stability in our
region without upholding the Palestinian people's right to their homeland," he
said at the opening of Jordan's parliament. Jordan neighbors Israel and the
occupied West Bank. It has long advocated for a two-state solution, and signed a
peace treaty with Israel in 1994. "Despite international calls for an end to
Israel's violations, the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza continues, as do the
relentless attacks in the West Bank and Jerusalem, whilst Israel's expansionist
ambitions remain the greatest threat to the region's future and hopes," the king
said. The speech came days after Israel held a legislative election which saw
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's party win the most votes, but still fall
short of a majority. It also follows threats of a renewed conflict in the wider
region, with Iran vowing to hit back should the United States and Israel renew
strikes against the Iranian republic.
Israel Army Withdraws After Hebron Operation, Says Military
Official
Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
The Israeli army has pulled back following an operation in the occupied West
Bank city of Hebron, launched in the wake of an attack that killed two soldiers
in late October, a military official said Monday. The operation had emptied a
neighborhood in the West Bank's largest city where the two gunmen had lived. AFP
journalists witnessed residents returning to their homes on Monday after the
military left. "This morning, following the completion of all operational
activities, the soldiers withdrew from the area of operation in Hebron.
Counterterrorism activities throughout Judea and Samaria continue," the official
said, using the biblical name for the Palestinian territory. On October 23, days
ahead of close-fought Israeli elections, two Palestinian gunmen attacked an army
checkpoint near Hebron, killing two soldiers and prompting promises of a major
retaliatory operation from senior officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu. By the following morning, the military had cleared out the residents
of the assailants' neighborhood, displacing more than 3,000 people, according to
the municipality. The military official said that "soldiers conducted thorough
searches of multiple locations, detained and questioned suspects, and located
and confiscated four weapons, several vests, and additional military equipment".
They also demolished the two attackers' homes and "sealed an underground space
located next to" one of them. Muhannad al-Tamimi, whose house was occupied by
soldiers since the operation began, told AFP his family came back to a trashed
apartment with furniture and clothing strewn on the floors, mattresses
overturned and a child's bicycle broken.
Arab League Secretary-General: Palestinian Cause True Test of International
Order’s Credibility
Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Arab League Secretary-General Nabil Fahmy affirmed that the Palestinian cause is
a true test of the credibility of the international order, in light of
persistent double standards and Israeli violations of international law,
stressing the need to end the occupation and establish an independent
Palestinian state.He also underscored the importance of preserving the unity,
sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Arab states and supporting their
national institutions as a fundamental pillar of security and stability, SPA
reported. Fahmy made the remarks during an open dialogue at the third edition of
the Cairo Forum, where he reviewed the main challenges facing the Arab region,
explored ways to strengthen security and stability, and discussed the role of
joint Arab action in responding to regional and global shifts. He explained that
Arab security extends beyond military considerations to include political,
economic, social, and developmental dimensions. He highlighted the crises and
instability affecting Syria, Sudan, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Arab Gulf region,
noting that addressing them requires looking beyond their immediate
manifestations to tackle their root causes, foremost among them weak
institutions and the accumulation of political, economic, and social challenges.
Fahmy stressed the need to move from merely managing the repercussions of crises
to adopting proactive approaches that prevent their recurrence. He also
emphasized strengthening cooperation and integration among Arab states,
establishing balanced relations with neighboring countries based on respect for
sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs, and engaging with the
wider world on the basis of parity and shared interests.
United Arab Emirates says military solutions offer no quick
off-ramps to crisis with Iran
Associated Press/November 02/2026
The United Arab Emirates' presidential adviser said Sunday that his country
hopes a diplomatic breakthrough in Qatar-led mediations is possible to avert a
new round of confrontation between the U.S. and Iran. The Iran war, which began
on Feb. 28 with joint strikes by the U.S. and Israel followed by attacks by Iran
on the Gulf nations, has made it "a watershed year" for the region and the
world, UAE presidential adviser Anwar Gargash said at a security forum in
Bahrain. "We don't really want to see another round of confrontation in the
region," Gargash told the audience at the Manama Dialogue, an annual security
summit in Bahrain organized by the International Institute for Strategic
Studies, or IISS, that brings together regional and international state, defense
and foreign-affairs officials and experts. Iranian negotiators are in Qatar for
talks on a proposal that could reopen the Strait of Hormuz soon, according to
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. He said that no direct talks are being
held with the U.S. and that the final outcome depends on answers provided by the
United States to the "Iranian questions." In an interview shared on his Telegram
channel, Araghchi said Iran hoped that the U.S. would choose "diplomacy over
other paths." He said Iran was ready for both defense and diplomacy, depending
on Washington's "rationality."
Escalation fear casts shadow over forum
A possible escalation cast a long shadow over the three-day security forum in
Bahrain's capital, Manama. Gargash, the UAE adviser, said that the current
crisis requires "a lot of wisdom, with political tools being our main tools, and
the understanding that military solutions will only complicate the current very
complicated scene that we have and will not actually bring any quick off-ramps."Gargash,
however, acknowledged that "the rules of logic" show that the U.S. and Iranian
stances are far apart. "If these positions are not bridged, then we have to
worry about the worst," Gargash said.
He said it's not in the interest of the region or Iran to withstand another
round of war. It was a sentiment echoed by other Gulf and Arab officials at the
forum. Egypt's foreign minister Badr Abdelatty, a day earlier, told the
gathering: "The second round (of escalation) will be more dangerous, more
destructive, and it will lead to nowhere."But Gargash added that his country and
the region are braced for the possibility of escalation. Before a ceasefire was
reached in April, the UAE faced the largest number of airborne attacks from
Iran, with more than 3,000 drone and ballistic missile attacks targeting
airports, military and oil facilities, according to IISS. Most of those attacks
were intercepted.Since then, Gulf nations have spent billions of dollars to
boost their defense capabilities. Gargash said that the war has solidified U.S.-UAE
relations, making them "even more important" and at the heart of the UAE's
ability to defend itself.
Bahrain welcomes efforts to reduce tensions
At the conference, Bahraini Foreign Affairs Minister Abdullatif bin Rashid Al
Zayani said that his country also welcomes "every effort to reduce tensions,
prevent escalation and create opportunities for dialogue."Al Zayani said that
Iran has shown what he called a pattern of attacks or threat of attacks
threatening the region's and the world's stability and prosperity by targeting
sea, air and data facilities. He said Iran has continued to do so even after a
ceasefire was reached and as recently as last month, threatening underwater data
cables. He described the attacks by Iran-backed Houthi rebels on neighboring
Saudi Arabia as part of the pattern. "These attacks are part of one continued
pattern," he said. "The hands may change, the approach doesn't." Iran fired 500
drones and nearly 200 ballistic missiles toward Bahrain, home to the U.S. Navy's
5th Fleet, at the height of the war, according to IISS. The attacks hit the
naval base, residential buildings, the financial district and a water
desalination plant. This summer, Houthi rebels have escalated their attacks on
Saudi oil infrastructure and airports, saying they were a response to Saudi
airstrikes on Sanaa airport. The Houthis have hit critical oil pipelines and
disrupted air traffic in the kingdom.
Another issue that prevailed over the forum was the lack of a coordinated
defense response among the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council, which includes
Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Oman. At the height of the war
with Iran, the response from the Gulf countries that bore the brunt of Iranian
strikes was at the national level, each working with U.S. command and control
centers in the region. That, according to IISS, at times hindered their overall
defensive effort. Gargash offered a rare candid criticism. "I have to come and
say that we have not collectively risen to the challenge. Nationally, we have.
Each state independently has, or sometimes in terms of bilateral cooperation,"
Gargash said. "In one of our most critical crises, we collectively have not
risen to the challenge."
Saudi strikes on port, oil facility in Yemen wound seven
Agence France Presse/November 02/2026
Yemen's Houthis said Monday that Saudi strikes targeted a key Red Sea port and
oil facility in Hodeidah province, wounding seven people. The Iran-backed group
is fighting a Saudi-led coalition supporting Yemen's internationally recognised
government after a civil war reignited in one of the world's poorest countries.
Saudi-coalition strikes on Ras Issa port wounded four civilians, while three
more were hurt in an attack on an oil facility in Bajil district, Houthi health
ministry spokesman Anees Alasbahi said in a post on X. "These repeated attacks
on oil facilities and vital ports constitute a flagrant violation of
international humanitarian law and add to the series of war crimes in Yemen that
target civilians and critical infrastructure," he said. The Houthis' Al-Masirah
TV channel said earlier that Saudi Arabia had attacked a pier and commercial
ship on Ras Issa port. Hodeidah has the biggest seaport under Houthi control and
is a key entry point for food and aid to areas they hold. The Ras Issa port,
north of the city, also serves to import and store oil. Houthi media also
reported strikes on Sunday targeting the faculty of medicine at Hodeidah
University, in the same province, while two residents told AFP they heard an
explosion in the area. The Saudi-led coalition said it had conducted "a
precision operation to neutralise vital resources" used by the Houthis. A
fragile 2022 truce in Yemen's civil war fell apart in July after the Houthis
allowed an Iranian plane to land in the capital Sanaa in defiance of Saudi
control over Yemeni airspace, setting off a spate of attacks. The United Nations
says more than 1,600 people have been killed and more than 300,000 displaced
since fighting in Yemen reignited.
Yemen Urges Int’l Pressure to Dry Sources of Houthi
Funding, Weapons
Aden/Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
The Yemeni government is seeking to elevate its coordination with the United
Kingdom beyond political and diplomatic support, pushing for more impactful
measures to confront the terrorist Houthi militia. These proposed actions
include designating the group as a terrorist organization, choking off its
financial and armament supply lines, and tightening restrictions on the dual-use
technologies and components used to develop its military capabilities. This
diplomatic push coincides with anticipated international efforts to mobilize
economic and humanitarian assistance for Yemen. These issues were at the
forefront of a meeting between Chairman of the Presidential Leadership Council
Dr. Rashad Al-Alim and British Minister of State for the Middle East Stephen
Doughty. The two officials reviewed the latest developments in Yemen and
examined the threats posed by the Houthis to regional security and international
shipping lanes, alongside the ongoing preparations to convene an international
support conference for Yemen at the end of this month. Al-Alimi underscored that
the safeguarding of international maritime navigation cannot be achieved without
neutralizing the core sources of the Houthi threat. He called for bolstering the
capacities of the Yemeni state to defend its sovereign territory and territorial
waters, stressing that political and legal declarations must be paired with
concrete, practical measures targeting the financing, weaponization, and
smuggling networks that sustain the group’s military apparatus. He urged the UK
to play a more effective role in mobilizing international support to designate
the Houthis as a terrorist organization and ban the group in line with British
law. Continuing to address its threats without deterrent measures leaves the
group's sources of strength outside the scope of targeting, he added. Al-Alimi
briefed the British minister on the scale of the Houthi escalation, pointing to
the targeting of the civilian airports in Aden and Riyan, as well as the
relentless attacks on the city of Taiz.
He highlighted the attacks endured by Taiz's residential neighborhoods, civilian
facilities, markets, schools, and homes, in addition to the assaults on civilian
targets in Saudi Arabia and the ongoing threats posed to waterways and
international shipping lanes. He linked regional security directly to the
restoration of Yemeni state institutions' ability to extend their authority,
maintaining that supporting the government in this direction represents the sole
sustainable guarantee for protecting maritime corridors and regional stability.
Al-Alimi praised the British positions supporting Yemen, particularly London's
role as the penholder on the Yemeni file in the UN Security Council. He also
lauded the Saudi support provided through the King Salman Humanitarian Aid and
Relief Center and the Saudi Development and Reconstruction Program for Yemen,
including the response to humanitarian needs in Taiz and other governorates.
Fighting Against Houthis Resumes on Bab Al-Mandab Front
Aden: Asharq Al Awsat/November 02/2026
Fighting against the Houthis resumed on the Bab Al-Mandab front on Monday,
coinciding with fierce clashes in Lahj Governorate and advances by the Southern
Giants Brigades in Al-Mudarabah and Ras Al-Arah district. Meanwhile, government
forces deployed military reinforcements to Al-Maqatirah district in northern
Lahj to regain the initiative and recapture areas seized by the Houthis in
recent days, while maintaining their positions on the front lines surrounding
Taiz. Clashes resumed on the Bab Al-Mandab front early Monday morning, with the
Southern Giants Brigades taking part in military operations that resulted in the
recapture of several positions and advances in contested areas, according to
field sources. The fighting also left Houthi fighters dead and wounded. The
renewed battles coincided with continued clashes in Al-Mudarabah and Ras Al-Arah
district in western Lahj, where the Giants Brigades regained control of
strategic positions, including Jabal Safan and Qarn Al-Shamayah, while fighting
continued in the Al-Majza and Zurayqat Al-Sham areas on the district's
outskirts. In a related development, the Southern Giants Brigades denied reports
that their forces had withdrawn from Dhubab, Kahbub and their positions along
the western coast. Aseel Al-Saqaldi, director of the forces' media center, said
their units remained deployed at their positions and would not withdraw under
pressure from what he described as rumors and false claims. Al-Saqaldi added
that the forces' presence in Dhubab marked the beginning of a theater of
operations that he said would extend as far as Saada, reaffirming their
commitment to continuing the fight against the Houthis and pressing ahead with
military operations.
Regaining the Initiative
In Al-Maqatirah district in northern Lahj Governorate, government forces
deployed substantial reinforcements from the Southern Giants Brigades and
Nation's Shield Forces. The reinforcements took over the headquarters of the Tur
Al-Bahah Military Axis Command and immediately joined the front lines against
the Houthis, in a move aimed at recapturing areas seized by the group in recent
days. Field sources said government forces and the Popular Resistance had
thwarted Houthi attempts to advance and seize additional territory, forcing the
attackers to retreat after inflicting casualties and equipment losses. The
arrival of reinforcements is part of broader military efforts to regain the
initiative in the district and prevent the Houthis from expanding their control
over positions and high ground that have witnessed clashes in recent weeks.
Taiz: Government Forces Hold Their Ground
In Taiz Governorate, government forces and the Popular Resistance continued to
repel Houthi attacks on the fronts surrounding the city, with fighting
persisting along the southeastern axis. Operations focused on thwarting Houthi
movements and targeting the group's reinforcements and military positions. The
Taiz Military Axis Command reported that government forces, supported by
military aircraft, carried out strikes against Houthi positions and
concentrations in the Bardad area of Wadi Anqab on Jabal Sabr, destroying a
military vehicle. Other strikes targeted positions in Hisn Al-Mukhaaf and areas
of Al-Misrakh district in the southern part of the governorate. The command
added that air defenses shot down two Houthi drones on the Sabr front as
fighting continued across several sectors, with government forces maintaining
their positions and preventing the group from making further breakthroughs.
Separately, local sources reported that Houthi fighters raided and forcibly
seized the homes of government, political and community figures in Al-Shamayatayn
district, south of Taiz. According to the sources, the properties included the
home of Water and Environment Minister Tawfiq Al-Sharjabi in the village of
Sharjab, the home of former Baath Party leader Qasim Sallam, and the home of
Brigadier General Abdulwahab Al-Sharjabi. The incidents come amid an expanding
Houthi presence in several districts of the governorate, raising concerns about
further seizures of private property and the targeting of government officials,
politicians and community figures.
Air Support and Military Operations
On the broader military front, the Yemeni army announced that it had carried out
1,272 targeting operations during the 24 hours preceding Sunday evening as part
of Operation Fajr Yemen.
The operations targeted Houthi concentrations, reinforcements, fortifications,
firing positions, vehicles and supply assets. Colonel Majed Al-Nuzayli,
spokesperson for the Yemeni Armed Forces, said the operations had weakened the
group's capabilities, supported government advances and helped recapture
positions in Al-Jawf Governorate. He noted that operations were continuing on
the northern fronts and in Marib and Al-Bayda, as well as on the southern and
southwestern fronts. Al-Nuzayli added that the operations had resulted in the
neutralization of approximately 500 Houthi field commanders and fighters, along
with the destruction or disabling of 169 vehicles, pieces of equipment and heavy
weapons. He reaffirmed that military operations would continue, with the
necessary precautions taken to protect civilians and civilian objects.
Israeli Strikes Kill Three People in Gaza, Medics Say
Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Israeli strikes killed at least three Palestinians and wounded several others
in the Gaza Strip on Monday, the territory's health officials said. Medics said
two people were killed and six others wounded in two separate airstrikes in Khan
Younis, south of the enclave, while a third person was killed in an Israeli
airstrike in the town of Al-Mussadar. The Israeli military didn't immediately
comment on any of the attacks. Israel, which says the Hamas group has been
rearming and launching attacks in violation of a year-old ceasefire, has stepped
up strikes on the group in recent weeks.
Hamas has denied trying to carry out attacks or rebuild its arsenal and accuses
Israel of undermining the Gaza peace deal. Last year's US-brokered ceasefire
calls for eventual reconstruction of the territory. But little progress has
been made as negotiators have failed to agree on terms for Hamas to disarm or
Israel to withdraw its troops, who control about two-thirds of the territory
where they have ordered residents out. Nearly all of the more than 2 million
residents live in the remaining third of the enclave among war ruins, mostly
in makeshift tents and damaged buildings, still under effective control of
Hamas. At least 1,580 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli attacks in Gaza
since the ceasefire, according to the territory's health officials, while Israel
says four soldiers have been killed. Palestinian authorities say more than
74,000 people have been killed in Israel's assault on Gaza, launched after
Hamas-led fighters killed about 1,200 people in southern Israel on October 7,
2023.
Syrian Intelligence Thwarts Terrorist Plot Targeting Homs Refiner
Damascus/Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
A source in Syria’s intelligence revealed to SANA on Sunday that a terrorist
plot targeting the Homs refinery in central Syria has been thwarted. The Homs
refinery, along with the Baniyas refinery, plays a crucial role in securing
petroleum derivatives for the domestic market. Last October, atmospheric
distillation unit "10" was rehabilitated and maintained, with a design capacity
of one million tons of crude oil annually. This boosts the refinery's capacity
to produce petroleum derivatives and supports the availability of diesel, fuel
oil, and kerosene in the local market. Authorities did not reveal who was behind
the plot. The current refinery comprises four production units based on
atmospheric distillation, alongside a naphtha upgrading project to produce
high-octane gasoline that meets domestic market needs. Some units are currently
operational, while maintenance and commissioning work are being finalized on two
other units in preparation for launch. This will bring the refinery's
operational capacity to approximately 60,000 to 70,000 barrels per day of
petroleum derivatives. Established in 1959, the Homs Refinery General Company is
one of the oldest oil facilities in Syria, though its efficiency has declined
over time. Yousef Qablawi, CEO of the Syrian Petroleum Company, said last year
that the company is currently working on constructing a new refinery 51
kilometers away from the city of Homs.
Al-Zaidi’s Regional Visits Aim to Reshape Iraq’s Foreign Relations
Baghdad: Hamza Mustafa/Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi is preparing to visit Kuwait and Bahrain this
week as part of a diplomatic drive to reshape relations with neighboring
countries, following trips to Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Türkiye and Iran,
according to a government source. Political assessments in Baghdad suggest his
visits to Saudi Arabia and Jordan were aimed at building trust with both
countries’ leaders following a series of attacks by armed factions operating in
Iraq. Al-Zaidi offered assurances that such attacks would not happen again, as
efforts to bring weapons under state control continue despite opposition from
some factions and attempts to delay implementation. The process is expected to
be completed by June 2027. In Türkiye, talks focused on the transit of Iraqi oil
through the port of Ceyhan, the Development Road project and longstanding water
disputes.
Old disputes and new prospects
As political circles await the upcoming Gulf visits, reports indicate that
longstanding disputes between Baghdad and Kuwait will dominate one set of talks,
while minority issues will feature on the Bahrain agenda. An informed source
told reporters that discussions would address maritime border demarcation, the
Mubarak al-Kabeer Port project and its impact on Iraq’s Grand Faw Port,
alongside security concerns and regional stability. The source added that the
Bahrain visit would focus on de-escalation to maintain security in the region,
noting that Al-Zaidi had previously discussed the agenda for both trips with
leaders of Iraq’s Coordination Framework alliance. The prime minister’s recent
diplomatic engagements included a July 28, 2026, visit to Türkiye, where he met
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, followed by talks with Prince Mohammed bin
Salman, Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister, on October 14 and Jordan’s King
Abdullah II on October 26. On October 28, he traveled to Damascus for talks with
Syrian President Ahmad Al-Sharaa on bilateral relations and ways to strengthen
political, economic and security cooperation. The Syria trip was particularly
significant, marking the first by an Iraqi prime minister since the overthrow of
Bashar Al-Assad’s regime in 2024 and the establishment of a new administration
under Al-Sharaa, developments followed by political and sectarian complications.
According to observers, the meeting helped ease mutual concerns and address
shared challenges, particularly border security amid the presence of ISIS cells
on both sides of the frontier. The two leaders also discussed the possibility of
restarting the Iraqi oil pipeline through Syria’s port of Baniyas. Al-Zaidi’s
visit to Iran, meanwhile, appeared to extend beyond bilateral relations, fueling
speculation in Iraqi political circles that he may have conveyed firm US
messages to Tehran, particularly as the trip followed his visit to Washington in
July.
Regional alignments and political settlements
Former Iraqi lawmaker and Azm Alliance leader Haidar Al-Mulla told Asharq Al-Awsat
that Iraq remained more affected by regional conflicts than capable of
influencing their outcome. “The region is experiencing a state of conflict, and
Iraq has no influence over this international equation. It is not part of the
equation of political settlements but is affected by what is happening,” he
said. He described the prime minister’s diplomatic outreach as a positive step
toward keeping Iraq out of competing regional blocs.“The prime minister’s
shuttle visits are positive steps that put the state on the right path,” he
noted. “Iraq intends to open channels of dialogue with its Arab and non-Arab
neighbors. This is a positive step that distances us from the alignments
currently taking shape in the region.”Essam Al-Faili, a political science
professor at Al-Mustansiriya University, told Asharq Al-Awsat that Al-Zaidi was
seeking balanced relations with countries across the region, drawing on Iraq’s
geopolitical importance and economic potential to expand its international
engagement. “Al-Zaidi wants to establish strategic relations with Arab countries
primarily through shared economic interests,” he said. “He recognizes Iraq’s
importance to the Gulf states, which could eventually contribute to its
reintegration into the Gulf system.”Al-Faili argued that Iraq should contribute
to regional stability in the postwar period, particularly as competing alliances
and political blocs have become more pronounced. He said the prime minister was
determined to distance Baghdad from such alignments and had succeeded in curbing
the influence of Iran’s regional proxies. “This ultimately sends a message to
the Gulf states that Iraqi decision-making will carry weight, helping strengthen
relations with all Arab countries,” he remarked.
The Latest English LCCC analysis &
editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on November 02-03/2026
Guerres inévitables ou diplomatie de
fin de conflit
Dr. Charles Chartouni/ICI Beytouth/November 02/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/158775/
Quel que soit l’épilogue des élections en Amérique et en Israël, les enjeux
géostratégiques demeurent et les protagonistes sont sommés d’y répondre. Les
alternatives diplomatique ou de guerre sont à prendre ou à laisser et le
rétrécissement du champ de manœuvre s’impose de manière contraignante.
L’intermède électoral vient à sa fin alors que les questions de sécurité
stratégique sont plus que jamais en attente de réponse et les esquives se voient
reléguées. Les Israéliens doivent mettre en forme une coalition suffisamment
cohérente afin de sanctuariser leurs acquis politico-stratégiques, contenir ou
défaire la menace iranienne et sceller la nouvelle configuration géostratégique
qu’ils ont imposée au sein d’un ordre régional en éclats.
Les États-Unis opèrent sur la base d’un continuum géostratégique où la politique
étrangère et les modulations de la scène politique interne se font écho. Les
résultats électoraux ne seraient pas de nature à questionner les grands enjeux
stratégiques et leurs incidences sur l’échiquier politique domestique. Le
conflit multidimensionnel avec l’Iran est incontournable tant pour Israël que
pour les États-Unis qui doivent conjointement donner réponse aux défis qu’il
pose. Le pari iranien sur des retournements spectaculaires dans les positions
des deux némésis relève du fantasme plutôt que d’une évaluation objective de la
donne géostratégique.
Les divergences politiques en Israël sont loin de déteindre sur les questions de
sécurité nationale et des menaces existentielles qui leur sont rattachées. Alors
qu’aux États-Unis la vie politique intérieure se voit rattachée de manière
subreptice à la nouvelle cartographie des conflits mondiaux et à leurs
répercussions sur la géopolitique d’une Amérique mutante. La relation éminemment
sécuritaire et stratégique entre les États-Unis et Israël est plus que jamais
nécessaire en vue de réussir la restructuration géopolitique d’un Moyen-Orient
désorienté et en quête de nouveaux équilibres.
Il ne s’agit plus de reclasser des priorités plutôt que de définir les
coordonnées d’une architecture sécuritaire où les interdépendances et les
mutations définissent les dynamiques en cours. La coalition islamo-gauchiste qui
prévaut au sein d’un parti démocratique éclaté peut difficilement remettre en
question les grandes orientations stratégiques qu’ils entendent instrumentaliser
dans leur plan de conquête du pouvoir.
La réunion qui a regroupé à Téhéran les partenaires du pacte de la Mecque et les
apartés entre l’Iran et la Russie sont des stratagèmes de contournement que
l’Iran manipule de manière continue en vue de déjouer son isolement et de
protéger sa latitude manœuvrière dans un champ stratégique verrouillé. Le
président iranien M. Pezeshkian y voit une porte de sortie salutaire afin
d’asseoir un régime sécuritaire régional soustrait à l’arbitrage américain,
avant de se faire rattraper par les règles de jeu de la nouvelle guerre froide.
Somme toute, l’affrontement se maintient et les paramètres et les protagonistes
sont reconduits. La tente mecquoise est lardée de contradictions et pourrait
servir dans le meilleur des cas d’entremetteur erratique ou d'amortisseur de
chocs.
Les différends stratégiques et idéologiques de l'alliance sunnite sont
solidement ancrés dans les structures étatiques des protagonistes et entravent
la création de consensus stratégiques durables. L’aparté russo-iranien, lui,
n’est qu’un expédient occasionnel tenté par deux dictatures meurtrières aux
abois. Le régime iranien est un monstre aux hybridations multiples qu’il
faudrait démanteler de manière progressive.
Il faudrait mettre fin le cas échéant aux élucubrations d’une diplomatie
manœuvrière dont le but est de gagner du temps, de différer des échéances et de
restituer le statu quo ante tant sur le plan régional que domestique. La
manœuvre diplomatique iranienne vise à restaurer sa latitude après la
destruction de la stratégie des plateformes opérationnelles intégrées au niveau
régional, le retour en force de ses mandataires régionaux, le contrôle des
détroits du Bab al-Mandeb et d’Hormuz, la militarisation du nucléaire et la
poursuite de la politique de répression au sein de l’Iran.
La diplomatie iranienne s’inscrit dans une démarche de diversion alors que les
visées impériales sous-jacentes poursuivent leur cours et structurent l’ensemble
du processus politique. Il serait vain d’imaginer un autre scénario où la
diplomatie sert de relais à une volonté de normalisation et de démocratisation.
Le pouvoir iranien mise sur les méandres de l’alternance démocratique et sur la
poursuite de la politique de sabotage sur l’ensemble du canevas stratégique
moyen-oriental, et tout le reste n’est que théâtre d’ombres. La navigation
s'effectue dans des eaux troubles où la nature des enjeux géopolitiques reste
incertaine et difficile à scruter. La prudence s'impose.
Inevitable Wars or End-of-Conflict Diplomacy
Dr. Charles Chartouni /Ici Beyrouth /November 02, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/158775/
(Translated from French by AI)
Whatever the outcome of the elections in America and Israel, the geostrategic
stakes remain, and the protagonists are summoned to respond to them. The
alternatives of diplomacy or war are take-it-or-leave-it options, and the
narrowing of the room for maneuver is imposing itself in a constraining manner.
The electoral interlude is coming to an end while strategic security questions
are more than ever awaiting answers, and evasions are being relegated. The
Israelis must form a sufficiently coherent coalition in order to secure their
politico-strategic gains, contain or defeat the Iranian threat, and seal the new
geostrategic configuration they have imposed within a shattered regional order.
The United States operates on the basis of a geostrategic continuum in which
foreign policy and the modulations of the domestic political scene echo one
another. Electoral results would not be of a nature to call into question the
major strategic stakes and their repercussions on the domestic political
chessboard. The multidimensional conflict with Iran is inescapable for both
Israel and the United States, which must jointly respond to the challenges it
poses. The Iranian wager on spectacular reversals in the positions of its two
nemeses belongs to the realm of fantasy rather than to an objective assessment
of the geostrategic situation.
Political divergences in Israel are far from spilling over onto questions of
national security and the existential threats attached to them. Whereas in the
United States, domestic political life is surreptitiously tied to the new
mapping of global conflicts and to their repercussions on the geopolitics of a
mutating America. The eminently security-related and strategic relationship
between the United States and Israel is more necessary than ever in order to
succeed in the geopolitical restructuring of a disoriented Middle East in search
of new balances.
It is no longer a matter of reordering priorities, but rather of defining the
coordinates of a security architecture in which interdependencies and mutations
define the dynamics underway. The Islamo-leftist coalition that prevails within
a fractured Democratic Party can hardly call into question the major strategic
orientations that they intend to instrumentalize in their plan to conquer power.
The meeting that brought together in Tehran the partners of the Mecca Pact and
the private discussions between Iran and Russia are circumvention stratagems
that Iran continuously manipulates in order to thwart its isolation and protect
its room for maneuver in a locked strategic field. Iranian President Mr.
Pezeshkian sees in this a salutary way out in order to establish a regional
security regime removed from American arbitration, before being caught up by the
rules of the game of the new Cold War. All in all, the confrontation continues,
and the parameters and protagonists are being carried forward. The Meccan tent
is riddled with contradictions and could serve, at best, as an erratic
intermediary or a shock absorber.
The strategic and ideological differences of the Sunni alliance are solidly
anchored in the state structures of the protagonists and hinder the creation of
lasting strategic consensus. The Russo-Iranian private discussion, for its part,
is merely an occasional expedient attempted by two murderous dictatorships that
are at bay. The Iranian regime is a monster of multiple hybridizations that must
be dismantled progressively.
It is necessary, as the case may be, to put an end to the wild imaginings of a
maneuvering diplomacy whose aim is to gain time, to defer deadlines, and to
restore the status quo ante both regionally and domestically. The Iranian
diplomatic maneuver aims to restore its latitude after the destruction of the
strategy of integrated operational platforms at the regional level, the return
in force of its regional proxies, control of the Bab al-Mandeb and Hormuz
straits, the militarization of the nuclear program, and the continuation of the
policy of repression inside Iran.
Iranian diplomacy is inscribed in a diversionary approach while the underlying
imperial aims pursue their course and structure the entire political process. It
would be vain to imagine another scenario in which diplomacy serves as a relay
for a will toward normalization and democratization. The Iranian power is
betting on the meanders of democratic alternation and on the pursuit of the
policy of sabotage across the entire Middle Eastern strategic canvas, and
everything else is merely a shadow play. Navigation is taking place in troubled
waters where the nature of the geopolitical stakes remains uncertain and
difficult to scrutinize. Prudence is required.
Congress should block Trump’s dangerous Saudi nuclear
deal
Andrea Stricker/Washington Examiner/November 02/2026
Behind the scenes of U.S. midterm races, another campaign is quietly taking
shape. Congress is poised to vote on the Trump administration’s proposed nuclear
cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia, with both chambers expected to act
during the week of Nov. 30. Democratic senators have introduced a joint
resolution of disapproval to block the agreement during its required 90-day
review period, and a companion House resolution, introduced on Sept. 14, is
advancing as well.
The agreement would open the door to exporting U.S. uranium enrichment
technology for the first time since the Manhattan Project. That marks a
dangerous break with eight decades of bipartisan American nonproliferation
policy — and with numerous statutes Congress itself has written. Lawmakers
should oppose the agreement in its current form.
The bilateral deal, a “123 agreement” under Section 123 of the 1954 Atomic
Energy Act, would allow U.S. companies to build the kingdom’s first reactors. It
would also authorize a joint study of up to two years on constructing U.S.
uranium enrichment and conversion plants on Saudi soil — moving Riyadh closer to
the material needed for nuclear weapons. Enrichment and plutonium reprocessing
are the two primary pathways to nuclear weapons fuel, and most states that
possess them keep them under tight control. Commercial opportunity is not a
reason to abandon the long-standing American-led norm against their spread.
Since the first controlled chain reaction in 1942, Washington has generally kept
sensitive nuclear know-how closely held. The main exception was wartime and
postwar cooperation with the United Kingdom on gaseous-diffusion enrichment. The
United States has otherwise never agreed in a bilateral nuclear cooperation pact
to transfer sensitive fuel-making capabilities wholesale to a nonnuclear-weapon
state.
This restraint developed over decades. It grew out of the 1953 Atoms for Peace
initiative, the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and the Nuclear Suppliers
Group created after India’s 1974 nuclear test. The U.S. consented to limited
reprocessing by Japan, Euratom, and India but has drawn a harder line on
enrichment transfers.
In the 1970s, Washington pushed France and West Germany to limit sensitive
exports. Congress then passed the 1978 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act. In the
1990s, amid proliferation efforts by Iran, Iraq, and North Korea, the U.S.
pressed China and Russia to curb problematic transfers and helped develop the
1997 Model Additional Protocol to strengthen International Atomic Energy Agency
inspections.
These efforts helped keep the number of states mastering nuclear fuel-making
technologies small. Today, just 14 to 15 countries worldwide enrich uranium and
about 10 reprocess plutonium. Beyond the five NPT-recognized nuclear-weapon
states (the U.S., France, the U.K., China, and Russia), and the four others that
developed nuclear weapons (India, Israel, Pakistan, and North Korea), only
Argentina, Brazil, Germany, Japan, and the Netherlands enrich or reprocess.
Following recent U.S. and Israeli military strikes, Iran no longer enriches for
its nuclear-weapons program.
Over more than 80 years of the atomic age, this record could have been far
worse, thanks largely to supply-side controls and U.S. persistence. The Saudi
deal risks undoing those achievements.
U.S. enrichment and conversion plants on Saudi soil would be vulnerable to
seizure, espionage, and technology leakage. While media reports described “black
box” arrangements to limit Saudi access, no such language appears in the
transmitted text; the details are to be negotiated later. Lawmakers, therefore,
cannot review what Riyadh would actually see or learn. The administration could
possibly approve enrichment exports with limited further congressional review,
depending on its reading of the Atomic Energy Act.
That is especially concerning given U.S. intelligence assessments that the
kingdom has not ruled out nuclear weapons and past statements by the Saudi crown
prince that he would seek them if Iran does. Possible official Saudi links to
spying on U.S. artificial intelligence capabilities also raise alarm.
All of this would occur without Riyadh adopting the Additional Protocol — the
IAEA’s strongest inspection tool, which permits access to sites engaged in
covert nuclear-weapons work and is the overarching global standard, including
for Washington. Of the partners with whom America has nuclear cooperation
agreements, 51 have the Protocol in force; only two do not. The administration
has instead accepted standard IAEA safeguards for Riyadh, supplemented by U.S.
bilateral measures and shorter access times at certain “covered sites.” Those
steps are unlikely to catch illicit work elsewhere.
The precedent for Russia and China may be the most consequential risk. Since the
1990s, Moscow and Beijing have largely restrained fuel-making transfers,
recognizing the commercial value of the existing monopoly and seeking to avoid
major U.S. nonproliferation sanctions. An American exception for Saudi Arabia
could encourage them to offer similar capabilities in reactor deals with states
unfriendly to Washington. Other countries in the unstable Middle East and beyond
would seek similar capacities. Because fuel production is the hardest technical
hurdle, multiple new states could end up on the threshold of nuclear-weapons
capability.
Congress can stop this, but only if both parties act together. To halt the deal,
both chambers must pass the resolutions of disapproval with a two-thirds vote to
override a presidential veto. With midterm elections behind them, when the votes
are held, members may feel freer to oppose a dangerous deal. At a minimum, both
chambers should hold hearings on the risks of proliferation. Given the kingdom’s
refusal to normalize relations with Israel, as President Donald Trump has
demanded, the administration could also withdraw the current text and negotiate
stronger conditions before it takes effect.
A revised agreement need not sacrifice all commercial prospects. It could
require the Additional Protocol and offer the Saudis a stake in an enrichment
plant on U.S. soil to fuel American-built reactors in Saudi Arabia, along with
attractive financing and training, in exchange for firm nonproliferation
commitments and restraint from developing the full fuel cycle. Saudi refusal to
these conditions should jeopardize U.S. military assistance.
For decades, U.S. policy has imposed strict conditions on nuclear cooperation
and sought to limit or prohibit partners’ enrichment and reprocessing. Congress
has long supported those goals on a bipartisan basis. An exception now for Saudi
Arabia is not worth the risk to the nonproliferation regime.
Andrea Stricker is deputy director of the nonproliferation program and a
research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. FDD is a
Washington, D.C.-based, nonpartisan research institute focused on national
security and foreign policy.
The UN secretary-general race is steeped in intrigue.
Should we care? Like it or not, the United States and the State of Israel have
to deal with the world body.
Ben Cohen/Jewish News Syndicate/November 02/2026
For most of this year, a relentlessly crowded news cycle has kept the race to
succeed António Guterres as U.N. secretary-general out of the main headlines.
So, for those of you who haven’t been following this story, I can tell you that
it’s been rather entertaining. Not since 1996, when the United States at the
11th hour lifted its veto on a second term for the Egyptian incumbent Boutros
Boutros-Ghali, has the race arrived at such a white-knuckle denouement. As of
this writing, it’s still not clear who will replace Guterres when his term
expires on Dec. 31, although it may be getting a little clearer. In terms of the
selection process, the successful candidate needs to win a majority of the 15
member states on the U.N. Security Council, 10 of whom are elected to serve
temporary terms. They must also avoid one or more vetoes from the five permanent
members—the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China and Russia. Once
they have jumped over that hurdle, the Security Council’s nominee is referred to
the General Assembly for approval, which is usually a straightforward procedure.
At the beginning of this year, the assumption was that the post would go to a
diplomat from Latin America, in keeping with the informal practice of rotating
the U.N.’s top post among the world’s regions; and, ideally, a woman, as every
secretary-general so far has been male.
Accordingly, the two leading candidates at the start of 2026 were Michele
Bachelet, a former president of Chile, and Rafael Grossi, the Argentine diplomat
currently at the helm of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Happily,
Bachelet, who demonized Israel during her 2018-22 tenure as head of the U.N.
Human Rights Council, and who is disturbingly close to China, watched her bid
tank shortly after Chile’s newly elected conservative government said that it
would not support her.
For his part, Grossi, who’s still in the race, appears to be facing stiff
opposition from the Russians because of his concerns over the nonproliferation
implications stemming from Moscow’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine and its close
relations with Iran.
Until the middle of this month, Grossi’s two main rivals were also from Latin
America: Rebeca Grynspan(yes, she’s Jewish), the Costa Rican who currently heads
the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development; and Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett,
currently Guyana’s ambassador to the United Nations. Grynspan is perhaps the
world body’s in-house candidate in that she is widely respected among the
organization’s professional staff and is regarded as being in much the same mold
as Guterres. But that begs the question of whether she can implement the radical
financial and structural reform of the United Nations, which the United States
is demanding. She is also close to China and not known for being particularly
sympathetic to Israel.
For all the doubts about Grynspan, Rodrigues-Birkett would be a far worse
choice. She has voiced sympathy for Cuba’s communist tyranny and is a vocal
supporter of the Chinese regime’s contention that only the People’s Republic can
legitimately represent China in international forums, thereby marginalizing
democratic Taiwan. She has also defamed Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza
post-Oct. 7 as a “veritable genocide.”
In the last three straw polls conducted in the Security Council, neither
Grynspan nor Grossi nor Rodrigues-Birkett has managed to secure a commanding
lead. In the last straw poll, which Grynspan won by a whisker and which was
color-coded to give a sense of where the permanent five members of the Security
Council sit, all of them attracted two vetoes each. This fueled speculation that
the contest would not be resolved by the end of the year, meaning that Guterres
might have to stay on as acting secretary-general until the deadlock is broken.
Then a bombshell landed.
On Oct. 21, Lana Nusseibeh—a talented younger diplomat from the United Arab
Emirates with a long record of involvement in U.N. affairs, including 11 years
as the UAE’s envoy to the world body—announced that she was entering the race.
Of Palestinian descent and hailing from one of Jerusalem’s most prominent Arab
families, Nusseibeh has on occasion been harshly critical of Israel’s conduct in
Gaza. Yet she has also been an enthusiastic supporter of the Abraham Accords
between Israel and various Muslim-majority states, including the UAE, as well as
being a graduate of the highly regarded program in Israel Studies at London’s
School of Oriental and African Studies (where her academic supervisor described
her as “a brilliant student who wrote some wonderfully insightful and incisive
essays on Zionism and Israeli history”).
Expressions of support for Nusseibeh quickly landed from the Gulf Cooperation
Council, Egypt and Jordan, as well as a handful of countries in Europe,
including NATO member Greece. Several diplomatic luminaries have backed her,
among them Nikolai Mladenov, the head of the Board of Peace charged with
stabilizing the Gaza Strip; and Brett McGurk, who served as a leading national
security official under four separate presidents, including Donald Trump.
The United States has not made its position known, but there has been
speculation in recent days that rumored alternative candidates being floated by
Washington, such as former Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, are only in
the frame so that U.S. diplomats can more convincingly persuade their colleagues
that Nusseibeh is the right compromise candidate.
It would be mistaken to regard Nusseibeh as a shoo-in at this juncture. Turkey,
a rival to the UAE in terms of regional influence, is considering throwing its
own candidate into the fray, in the form of veteran diplomat Feridun Sinirlioğlu.
Twenty years ago, Sinirlioğlu was Ankara’s ambassador in Tel Aviv; these days,
he loyally echoes the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish tropes promoted by his boss,
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, while defending, with no sense of irony,
Turkey’s illegal occupation of the northern part of Cyprus.
We should expect the drama and intrigue to continue as we edge perilously closer
to Guterres’s departure date. But above and beyond that, the question of why
anyone should ultimately care about the outcome remains pertinent.
For American Jews and Israelis, this is a particularly important question.
The United Nations is the body that passed a resolution equating Zionism with
racism. It engages in structural discrimination against Israel in violation of
the “sovereign equality” principle enshrined in the U.N. Charter. It provides a
home for one of the most egregious and vicious antisemites on earth, Francesca
Albanese, the special rapporteur “on the situation of human rights in the
Palestinian territories occupied since 1967.” When its officials do speak out on
antisemitism, their words are so cloying and disingenuous that one wishes they
had just stayed quiet.
Yet despite all that, a shoulder-shrugging dismissal of all the candidates,
along with the world body itself, is not the wisest response. Like it or not,
Israel has to deal with it. Like it or not, Israel needs the support of the
United States in the corridors and meeting rooms of the United Nations. Like it
or not, the United Nations will retain its antisemitic fixation on Israel’s
alleged abuses, largely ignoring true rogue states like Iran and North Korea,
until it is stopped from doing so.
For those reasons and more, the organization needs a secretary-general who can
work productively with the United States, particularly in the coming five years,
when the situation in Gaza will continue to be a major component of her (or his)
agenda. It also needs a leader who will stamp out its chronic waste of resources
and crack down on propaganda organs like its “Committee on the Exercise of the
Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People.”
Might Lana Nusseibeh be such a candidate?
It would be foolish to make that prediction now, as promising as she may seem in
comparison to her rivals. Yet she is certainly more open-minded when it comes to
Israel than the rest of the hopefuls. Keep an eye, then, on where this race is
headed.
**Ben Cohen is a research fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of
Democracies (FDD), specializing in international organizations, Europe-Middle
East relations and global antisemitism/anti-Zionism.
Qatar Glorifies Terrorism: Al-Jazeera's Propaganda Machine Celebrates Hamas
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/November 02/2026
The Hamas officials featured in Al-Jazeera's footage are portrayed as military
leaders, strategists, and figures worthy of admiration.
The program included footage of meetings inside Gaza's underground tunnel
network, discussions about terror attacks, and documents that purportedly shed
light on the preparations for the October 7 massacre.
Among the most disturbing revelations was an operational order attributed to
Deif and dated October 5, 2023. According to the network's presentation, the
document specified that the invasion of Israel would begin at 6:30 a.m. on
October 7.
What exactly was Al-Jazeera trying to communicate to its Arabic-speaking
audience? The message is clear: These are your heroes – men who planned and
carried out the massacre of Jews on October 7 and whose declared objective is
the destruction of Israel.
This is not journalism exposing terrorism; it is a platform for glorifying it.
Al-Jazeera could have used the material to examine how Hamas transformed Gaza
into a military base, diverted resources into tunnels and weapons production,
and prepared an assault in which they murdered approximately 1,200 people in
Israel and abducted 251 others.
Instead, Al-Jazeera chose to turn the architects of the massacre into celebrated
military figures.... These were, however, the leaders of an Iran-backed Islamist
terrorist organization whose October 7 assault included the deliberate
mass-murder of civilians, rape, torture, and hostage-taking.
Qatar has hosted senior Hamas leaders for years [and] has also served as a
diplomatic base for purportedly "neutral" negotiations involving the terrorist
organization.
The US Congressional Research Service, which notes that Hamas is an offshoot of
the Muslim Brotherhood, has also documented Qatar's engagement with the
organization...
Al-Jazeera English presents itself as a major international news organization,
competing for credibility among Western viewers.
Al-Jazeera Arabic, meanwhile, operates in a political and cultural environment
in which the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas enjoy considerable support among
segments of the public.
American universities, policymakers, and media organizations should ask whether
foreign government funding creates conflicts of interest and delectable
opportunities for political influence.
Qatar cannot simultaneously present itself as a trusted Western partner and
avoid serious questions about its relationships with Hamas and the Muslim
Brotherhood.
Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, the current Emir of Qatar, and his family, who
provide a media platform for Hamas's leaders to glorify the October 7 massacre,
should not be allowed to hide behind the claim that they are merely reporting
the news.
How did Al-Jazeera obtain recordings of Hamas's most sensitive military
meetings, internal secret discussions, and operational documents? Who handed
them to the network? When did this transfer take place? Did Hamas provide the
material as part of a propaganda campaign? Did Al-Jazeera or Qatar have advance
knowledge of the October 7 massacre?
Qatar's state-owned Al-Jazeera television network has once again demonstrated
why its Arabic-language news coverage deserves particularly close scrutiny.
Al-Jazeera has broadcast previously unseen footage, recordings, and documents
showing senior Hamas military commanders preparing for the October 7, 2023
massacre in Israel.
Instead of using this material to expose the criminal nature of Hamas's
activities, Al-Jazeera has presented it as an exclusive glimpse into the lives
of the organization's senior commanders. The Hamas officials featured in
Al-Jazeera's footage are portrayed as military leaders, strategists, and figures
worthy of admiration.
The question is not merely why Al-Jazeera chose to broadcast its "exclusive"
material. It is also how the network obtained it, who provided it, and how long
it had possessed it before deciding to make it public.
On October 30, Al-Jazeera's investigative program, "What is Hidden is Greater,"
aired previously unseen recordings of Mohammed Deif, the former commander of
Hamas's military wing, and other senior Hamas officials. The program included
footage of meetings inside Gaza's underground tunnel network, discussions about
terror attacks, and documents that purportedly shed light on the preparations
for the October 7 massacre.
Among the most disturbing revelations was an operational order attributed to
Deif and dated October 5, 2023. According to the network's presentation, the
document specified that the invasion of Israel would begin at 6:30 a.m. on
October 7. Another document reportedly recorded a decision by Hamas's military
leadership in February 2023 to begin preparations for the attack.
The footage and documents provide another reminder that October 7 was not a
spontaneous outburst of anger or an improvised act of "resistance." It was a
carefully prepared military operation, planned months in advance by Hamas's
senior leadership.
Another recording shows Izz al-Din al-Haddad, a senior Hamas commander, reading
Deif's operational order. Haddad subsequently rose through the organization's
military hierarchy and was killed by Israel in Gaza City in May 2026.
Another recording shows Deif meeting with senior commanders, including Marwan
Issa, Mohammed Sinwar, Ahmed Ghandour, and other members of Hamas's military
leadership. A separate photograph shows Deif surrounded by senior commanders
inside a tunnel complex.
All the commanders identified in that photograph have since been killed by
Israel.
The Al-Jazeera broadcast also included a recording of a telephone conversation
between Deif and Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar after the May 2021 ceasefire with
Israel. Sinwar, the mastermind of the October 7 massacre, is seen becoming
emotional while congratulating Deif over what Hamas considered a "victory"
against Israel.
The presentation raises another important question: What exactly was Al-Jazeera
trying to communicate to its Arabic-speaking audience? The message is clear:
These are your heroes – men who planned and carried out the massacre of Jews on
October 7 and whose declared objective is the destruction of Israel.
This is not journalism exposing terrorism; it is a platform for glorifying it.
Al-Jazeera could have used the material to examine how Hamas transformed Gaza
into a military base, diverted resources into tunnels and weapons production,
and prepared an assault in which they murdered approximately 1,200 people in
Israel and abducted 251 others.
Instead, Al-Jazeera chose to turn the architects of the massacre into celebrated
military figures. The images of commanders gathering underground, discussing
operations and examining military plans create the impression of a conventional
army's general staff. These were, however, the leaders of an Iran-backed
Islamist terrorist organization whose October 7 assault included the deliberate
mass-murder of civilians, rape, torture, and hostage-taking.
Al-Jazeera is not an ordinary international broadcaster operating independently
of its political environment. The network is based in Doha and is funded by the
Qatari government. Although Al-Jazeera describes itself as an independent media
organization, the relationship between the network and its principal state
patron deserves scrutiny, particularly when its coverage concerns organizations
with which Qatar maintains political relationships.
Qatar has hosted senior Hamas leaders for years, including Khaled Mashaal,
Khalil al-Hayya, Ghazi Hamad, and Ismail Haniyeh. Doha has also served as a
diplomatic base for purportedly "neutral" negotiations involving the terrorist
organization.
The US Congressional Research Service, which notes that Hamas is an offshoot of
the Muslim Brotherhood, has also documented Qatar's engagement with the
organization and the presence of senior Hamas leaders in Doha.
Hamas itself identified the Muslim Brotherhood as its parent movement in its
1988 charter, describing itself as the Palestinian branch of the Brotherhood.
This relationship is especially relevant because Al-Jazeera has frequently
provided Hamas leaders with a prominent platform to communicate their positions
to Arab audiences. Its coverage of Hamas leaders and commanders, their
statements and their military activities should be examined in this broader
context.
There is also a significant difference in the way Al-Jazeera reaches its
audiences. Al-Jazeera English presents itself as a major international news
organization, competing for credibility among Western viewers.
Al-Jazeera Arabic, meanwhile, operates in a political and cultural environment
in which the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas enjoy considerable support among
segments of the public. Its coverage should be judged not just by the
information it broadcasts but also by the voices it chooses to amplify, the
language it uses and the distinction it makes – or fails to make – between
terrorism and legitimate political activity.
The most important unanswered questions concern the source of the newly released
material. How did Al-Jazeera obtain recordings of Hamas's most sensitive
military meetings, internal secret discussions, and operational documents? Who
handed them to the network? When did this transfer take place? Did Hamas provide
the material as part of a propaganda campaign? Did Al-Jazeera or Qatar have
advance knowledge of the October 7 massacre?
Several Arab governments have had serious confrontations with Al-Jazeera. Egypt
banned the network in 2013, while Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and
Bahrain blocked its website during the 2017 Gulf crisis. Jordan closed its Amman
bureau that year. These actions were part of wider political disputes involving
Qatar, which has been accused by the Arab countries of supporting the Muslim
Brotherhood and terrorism, promoting regional instability, and interfering in
various countries' domestic affairs.
Western governments should pay attention to the concerns that have repeatedly
been raised about the political role of Qatar and its Al-Jazeera network.
The United States, in particular, should examine the extent of Qatari funding
and influence in American institutions, universities, media, and public life.
American universities, policymakers, and media organizations should ask whether
foreign government funding creates conflicts of interest and delectable
opportunities for political influence.
Qatar cannot simultaneously present itself as a trusted Western partner and
avoid serious questions about its relationships with Hamas and the Muslim
Brotherhood.
Al-Jazeera's latest broadcast has brought these contradictions back into the
spotlight. The United States and other Western governments should demand
answers.
Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, the current Emir of Qatar, and his family, who
provide a media platform for Hamas's leaders to glorify the October 7 massacre,
should not be allowed to hide behind the claim that they are merely reporting
the news.
*Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.
*Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter)
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22964/qatar-terrorism-al-jazeera-propaganda
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.
Our Lands… Between Two Projects
Mishary Dhayidi/Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
In his latest message to his military commanders, sent through Telegram, the
absent Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, said that the response to the enemy's
threats would be without geographic limits, and that all assets would fall
within Iran's target bank.
That is not the important part, grave as it is, and great as its contempt for
the interests and security of Iran's neighbors may be. The most important part
of the hidden Supreme Leader's words was his call to form a new political and
security order in West Asia. Among the instruments of this new order, as he put
it, is the unity of the Axis of Resistance, which he called a strategic matter
in the battle. How do Khamenei and his men understand this new order in West
Asia? I mean men such as his chief of staff, Abdollahi, his Revolutionary Guard
commander, Vahidi, and his man on the Supreme National Security Council,
Rezaei.Who founds this order, and on what basis? Who draws up its policies? Who
determines its friends and its enemies? What are its moral and strategic
premises? What is its political and security doctrine? And what does West Asia
mean to the son who is now Supreme Leader? Does it include the Gulf states?
Geographically, they are countries of West Asia, unless Iran's geographers hold
another view.
Speaking of the Gulf: at the same moment, in the closing session of the Manama
Dialogue 2026, Bahraini Foreign Minister Abdullatif Al Zayani said that Gulf
security should be shaped with the participation of the region's own countries,
through partnerships based on respect for sovereignty and non-interference in
internal affairs. He called for a regional security framework built on
interconnection and cooperation, open to every neighboring country ready to
respect sovereignty and freedom of navigation and to renounce the threat or use
of force.
Al Zayani said the door remains open to Iran as to others, but that it leads to
rules and not to exceptions, and to deeds and not to intentions. Is this
regional security framework, called for from the Bahraini platform, the same one
that preoccupies the younger Khamenei and his men? Or is it something entirely
different? We face here a clash of visions and a conflict of views, between two
minds, two hearts, and two tongues. One holds that the right security order is
the one that guarantees Iran's hegemony over the region. It normalizes Iran's
militia aggression against its neighbors, its violation of the sovereignty of
Arab states, and its piracy at sea. The other holds that regional security is
the one that guarantees the sovereignty of states and criminalizes and prevents
interference in their affairs, let alone aggression against them. It guarantees
safe passage through Hormuz, the Arabian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, Gulf of Aden, Bab
al-Mandeb, and Red Sea. Which of the two frameworks, which of the two projects,
and which of the two roads will Iran, its son-turned-Supreme Leader, and his men
take?
The Region After the Elections… Which War and Which
Settlement?
Sam Menassa/Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
It is hard to say with certainty what the recent Israeli elections will produce,
amid shifting balances of party power, political and social divisions, and the
fragile governing coalitions they may yield. The upcoming American midterm
elections are no less important, since they test the administration's capacity
to carry out its priorities and manage foreign crises, especially in the Middle
East. In Israel, the question goes beyond a choice between Benjamin Netanyahu
and Gadi Eisenkot to the future of political and social life, the composition of
the government and its parliamentary base, and how far it depends on the most
hardline forces. Changing the prime minister does not guarantee a radical shift
toward Palestine, Iran, and Lebanon, but it may change priorities, methods of
managing the conflict, and the limits of responsiveness to diplomacy, with the
role of the Arab members of the Knesset an important factor. The return of
Netanyahu and his team, on the other hand, raises the question of whether the
current approach continues and how far it can be adjusted.
In the United States, the elections are a referendum on Donald Trump's rule, and
will determine the balance of power in Congress. If the Republicans keep both
chambers, his margin widens; losing one or both makes it harder to pass and fund
his priorities. Despite his broad powers in foreign affairs, the results will
affect his calculations and the cost of his choices, without settling their
direction.
Will the shifts in Washington and Tel Aviv allow a move from military attrition
to sustainable settlements? Or will electoral calculations, ideological
rigidity, and conflicting regional and international interests prolong the wars
and widen them?
The region's course is likely to be shaped by both contests, depending on how
their results are used and on the cost of stalemate to its states and societies,
to Iran, to Israel, and to the United States. Two main paths lie before the
region: a settlement led by Washington with Tehran, or a military round to
adjust the terms of negotiation, with continued attrition remaining a
possibility if American hesitation between pressure and settlement persists.
The first path is an agreement with Iran, led by the nuclear file and the
reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and guaranteeing the security of navigation
and energy supplies, while the other regional files recede or are handled
through partial understandings that contain escalation without addressing its
sources. The danger is that a settlement entrenches the influence of the forces
tied to Iran in exchange for calm. Merely restraining the operations of the
Houthis, Hezbollah, and the pro-Tehran factions in Iraq, without addressing
their weapons and their relationship to the state, may ease the regional
confrontation, but it would strengthen their hand against the legitimate
authorities and their threat to others. That is not an inevitable outcome, but
it is likelier if Washington reduces success to restricting the nuclear program
and securing the sea lanes.
The second path is an American-Israeli confrontation with Iran, if negotiations
fail and the Israeli leadership, under Netanyahu or someone else, convinces
Trump of the usefulness of force. The wager would be on a swift operation that
weakens Tehran's capabilities and extracts broader concessions. But a short and
controlled war is not guaranteed, and exhausting Iran may push it to widen the
confrontation rather than show negotiating flexibility.
And if military pressure opens the door to diplomacy, the challenge is to reach
a settlement that goes beyond a temporary ceasefire, with effective Arab
participation, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states above all, ensuring that the
region's interests are not reduced to an American-Iranian understanding or to
Israel's demands. Stability requires addressing the sovereignty of states and
weapons outside their institutions, the security of navigation, the nuclear and
missile files, and opening a political horizon for the Palestinian question.
These two paths require Arab capitals to define their shared priorities in
defense of their sovereignty and their societies' interests, and to take part in
shaping the conditions of stability, through coordination that goes beyond
containing the confrontation to preparing for the understandings and balances
that will follow it. How are Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, and the Palestinians to
protect their interests, despite their differing circumstances and their lack of
control over the decision of war and settlement and its terms? The beginning is
to stop waiting. Preparing for war requires protecting civilians, securing
essentials, strengthening institutional response and Arab coordination,
reinforcing national capacities, and diversifying partnerships.
These states' capacities to influence events are not equal, and their crises are
not solved by a single formula. The Arab states' effort begins with supporting
their legitimate institutions and involving them in the arrangements for their
future, rather than merely informing them of decisions others have made.
Hedging against a settlement is as necessary as hedging against war. What is
needed is to define national interests and crystallize clear Arab positions
before the understandings settle, and to refuse to trade calm for entrenching
weapons outside the state, or for separating security in Palestine from national
rights.
This preparation matters all the more because the diplomatic success of the
great powers can add to the burdens of weaker states. A settlement is measured
by its guarantees, its implementation, and its prevention of renewed
confrontation. Without those who have a stake in it, negotiations may settle for
managing the conflict and distributing its costs rather than resolving it, so
that societies once again bear the price of arrangements they had no part in
drafting and have no means of reviewing or contesting.
The upshot is that the elections in Washington and Tel Aviv reveal a crisis that
goes beyond the contest of right and left to the nature of the system and the
cohesion of society, since internal division is more dangerous to their future
than external threats. As for the region, ending the war is a necessary
humanitarian and political gain, but turning it into a sustainable peace
requires addressing the roots of the conflicts, foremost among them the erosion
of state sovereignty. Achieving stability goes beyond silencing the guns and
dividing up influence to states recovering their legitimate authority,
strengthening their institutions, and guaranteeing their peoples' rights.
Otherwise the end of the war will remain a fragile truce that keeps the region
an arena of conflict and holds its peoples hostage to settlements concluded
without them.
An Out-of-the-Box President
Ghassan Charbel/Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
How harsh democracy can be; it pledges the destiny of the most powerful man in
the most powerful country in the world to the will of the voters. One voter
wants to punish the president for the rise in fuel prices, another for the
threat to healthcare, and a third for his intolerance toward immigrants. The
voter is preoccupied with their livelihoods, salary, and job opportunities far
more than with the slogan "Make America Great Again."
It is the habit of democracies to punish the powerful man, sidelining him or
curbing his ambitions and excesses. This is America; it is not Russia, where the
czar knows the election results in advance, nor is it China, which possesses its
own mechanism to perpetuate the reign of the emperor sitting on the throne of
Mao Zedong.
The court of the ballot box is brutally harsh, and its final verdicts are
difficult to overturn. It has surprised many and betrayed many. Donald Trump
previously attempted to question its integrity and failed. Whenever America
heads to the ballot box, the world goes with it, even if it is a midterm
election. The global village is entirely consumed by the power of the master of
the White House, his aura, and his decision-making capacity. Maps near and far
feel as though they are close to the American giant, which resides either on
their lands, in their opposing waters, or within their airspace. America is a
political, economic, and media locomotive whose fate leaves its marks on the
destinies of others. It is as if the entire world will participate in the
ballot, for a simple reason: it concerns the most sensational man on the planet.
This is a man who has broken records for upending norms, as if he is re-founding
his country and its relationship with the world. Many believed the billionaire
newcomer from the real estate industry could not clinch the Republican
nomination. When he did, they assumed the gates of the White House would never
open to a man without a political track record. When the tempestuous man stormed
the Oval Office, they wrongly imagined he would not last long. When the voters
unseated him, they breathed a sigh of relief and presumed he would retreat into
retirement to welcome his eighties on golf courses. He did not retire; instead,
his actions burned with a desire for vengeance, and he launched a comeback
matched by only one other man in his nation's history.
The master of reversals. Having utilized the screen back when it turned people
into stars, he fully grasped the magic and dominance of the media.
He bypassed traditional institutions to address Americans directly, defying the
bastions of legacy media to bombard both his country and the world with tweets.
It was as though he had appointed himself editor-in-chief of the global news
cycle. Upon waking, he would dictate headlines and soundbites to world capitals,
leaving them entirely consumed by his words. He willfully combated the
journalists who detested him and confronted their organizations, appearing to
take genuine delight in swimming against a sea of hostility.
The master of reversals. Never before has an American president reprimanded the
NATO alliance the way he did. No American president has mocked old Europe as
much as he has. It is no small matter for the master of the White House to stoop
to reminding the resident of the Elysee Palace of the slap he received from his
wife. No American president would have subjected a visitor named Zelenskyy to
such a degree of humiliation. Nor would anyone have dared demand that a man
defending his country's territory vanish from the stage simply because he
refused to accept the slimming down of the Ukrainian map. He has practically
conceded Putin's right to establish a "security zone" within Ukrainian territory
- a precedent that alarms many, yet delights a man named Benjamin Netanyahu.
He appears hesitant, then he appears baffling. A maker of crises and an
improviser of mediations.
A man from outside the box; he breaks rules, norms, and traditions. Nicolas
Maduro did not expect the general of the White House to send his soldiers to
bring him bound to stand trial before an American court, while bringing
Venezuelan oil into submission. Meanwhile, he still promises the Cubans that he
will enable them to dig up the tomb of Fidel Castro and end the rule of his
heirs.
Trump's arsenal is diverse, encompassing tweets, tariffs, economic sanctions,
and the ability to deploy fleets whenever he feels the need. Throughout all of
this, he never forgets that he is the promoter of "The Art of the Deal."
In the Middle East, Trump took steps that his predecessors never did.
During his first term, he recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital and moved the
American embassy there, while also recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the
Golan Heights. In that same term, Trump was the driving force behind the Abraham
Accords between a number of Arab countries and Israel.
It was also during this period that Trump ordered the assassination of the
commander of the Iranian Quds Force, General Qasem Soleimani, near Baghdad
airport - a move his predecessors never even contemplated. The Iranian
leadership failed to grasp the message: that someone who orders the killing of
Soleimani could go even further. It is clear that Netanyahu would not have dared
send his warplanes to occupy Tehran's airspace without the green light provided
by Trump as a sponsor and a partner. The race between negotiations and a
military strike has entered a delicate and critical juncture. Netanyahu, who
previously persuaded Trump to withdraw from the Obama-era nuclear deal with
Iran, continues his efforts to convince the US president of the need to
"complete the mission." Meanwhile, Trump is sending mixed signals, just as
Tehran is issuing contradictory signs of its own; Trump threatens swift
targeting of nuclear facilities, while Iranian officials speak of popular
pressure advocating for a change in the country's "nuclear doctrine."
Trump's days will not be easy if his opponents gain control of Congress. They
will attempt to put a spoke in his wheels through obstruction and
accountability, and they may even harbor dreams of impeaching the president.
However, a defeat for Trump's party - should it occur - will not deter him from
making tough decisions, even if it forces him to pay closer attention to the
traps that will be set for him and his administration.
The big question remains: Will he respond to a loss by completing the mission in
Iran, so that his legacy is tied to a victory in war rather than a defeat at the
ballot box?
The Problem of Doctrinal Militias
Khalid Al-Bari/Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper/November 02/2026
Dealing with militias is an extremely complex political and military challenge.
It rests on a set of intertwined policies, each with its own difficulties and
risks. The first of these is security and military confrontation, and the
dismantling of the command network at its various levels. The aim here is to
exploit militias' usual dependence on charismatic leadership and their thin
institutional character. But it is not that simple: on the one hand because of
the heavy security around their leaders, and on the other because of the
calculation of the response, the fear that the militia may splinter into small,
undisciplined gangs, or surprises such as the emergence of a second rank of
leaders fiercer than the first. Modern militias are not static; they too develop
an institutional character.
The second pillar of confronting a militia is financial strangulation. Its
difficulties lie in the ramification of funding sources and the multiplicity of
means of concealment. Militias do not always rely on formal channels that are
easy to identify and trace, but on individuals, charitable and social fronts,
and illegal activities such as money laundering and trade in basic goods. This
policy too is not without hazards, the most important being the fear that the
militia will move into the underground economy, trading in drugs and hiring out
criminal services, a path repeated by most of the militias we know. Financial
strangulation also falls on the militia's social base, giving it the chance to
present itself as defending its constituency against impoverishment.
The third pillar of policy is strengthening the central state. This, as we can
see, is a radical task, for had the central state been strong there would have
been no militia in the first place. Moreover, the task collides with another
essential pillar of the militia's existence: its social base. However strong, a
militia would not hold out long against a regular army with an air force, heavy
artillery, and political backing, were it not for this base, which allows it to
hide among civilians, usually welcomed, but sometimes by coercion. No effective
confrontation with a militia has escaped strong criticism over the number of
civilian casualties, which in turn feeds propaganda against the regular forces.
The four pillars are completed by punishing the principal patron, often a
regular state. This moves the problem to a larger dimension that may threaten
regional stability or, through intertwined interests, world peace. Carrying it
out requires a decisive margin of power in favor of the injured state. The
United States, as a superpower, did this with al-Qaeda and its patrons, and even
extended the punishment to other states that had no connection with the
organization, by way of baring its teeth.
Here two points must be noted. First, the impossibility of fully achieving the
policies of confrontation does not mean abandoning them. Second, strong media
are the companion lining of all these policies.
We must always remember that the aim of eliminating a militia is a compass on
the way to a point of political settlement, a negotiating point which, if
reached, would allow conditions to stabilize reasonably. Here the differences
among types of militias and their purposes come to the fore. The essential
problem with religious militias is the difficulty of putting a finger on a
realistic political point that offers a possibility of ending the conflict. For
them conflict is an end in itself; its prize does not belong to this world, and
where it does, its greatest justification is terror and the readiness to die,
not actual political weight. In other words, granting them their political
demand would turn into a bigger problem for everyone around them, and especially
for their own social base.
The party confronting a militia accumulates, over time, experience and a way of
life that enable it to contain the danger and live with it, and sometimes to
construct a set of political interests resting on the existence of that danger.
At that point the social base pays the price, deferred and in advance.
Selected Face Book & X tweets
on November 02/2026
Israel-Alma/@Israel_Alma_org
On October 27, 2026, it was reported that Amal representatives on the municipal
council of Hallousiyah (الحلوسية), in the Tyre district, had threatened to
resign following a dispute with Hezbollah representatives over the naming of the
village's main street.
Amal representatives proposed naming the street jointly after Musa al-Sadr,
founder of the Amal Movement, along with Hassan Nasrallah.
The Hezbollah representatives insisted on commemorating Nasrallah alone. Amal
representatives opposed putting the matter to a vote, called for a consensus,
and accused the council chairman of undermining their partnership and turning
the council into a partisan instrument. We note that before Hezbollah's
establishment, Nasrallah himself had been shaped by Musa al-Sadr's worldview and
admired him, leading him to join the Amal Movement in his youth.
This was not the first dispute in Hallousiyah. In January 2021, five council
members affiliated with Amal, including the deputy chairman, held a boycott of
the council meetings which lasted more than three months. According to these
members, one reason for the boycott was the placement of Hezbollah's Islamic
Health Organization emblem on an ambulance registered as council property. Amal
representatives demanded the emblem's removal, arguing that public property
should not be used to serve partisan interests.
The current dispute reflects the ongoing competition between Hezbollah and Amal
over influence, resources, and their presence in Shiite public life. Alongside
their political alliance, the two sides engage in local struggles over the
management of public institutions, service provision, and at times, military
activity near residential areas, shown in several recent incidents. At this
stage, these events alone do not indicate a significant rift between the two
organizations.
They do, however, demonstrate that their interests do not always align, raising
the question of what costs Amal’s support base is now willing to bear as a
result of Hezbollah’s conduct.
Eli Kowaz - איליי קואז
BREAKING: Avigdor Lieberman announces he will recommend Gadi Eisenkot as the
next prime minister and support Yair Lapid to become Speaker of the Knesset.
לידור סולטן | Lidor Sultan
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee to "Hayom" on a planned
attack against Iran: "There are only two people who probably knew the answer to
that - President Trump and the Prime Minister (Netanyahu). I'll wait until they
declare it before I declare it. Israel is the most resilient and prepared nation
(for war) in the world, and no matter what happens - I believe >>
George Deek
The vandalism of the Christian place of prayer in Nahariya is disgraceful. All
the more painful because it belongs to a community of Lebanese Christians who
stood alongside Israel and found a home here.
I spoke with Father Rudy Noura, head of the community, to express my solidarity
and offer whatever assistance may be needed. Those responsible must be
identified and brought to justice. There can be no tolerance for attacks on
places of worship, anywhere or against anyone. Any attack on a place of worship,
of any faith, is an attack on the freedom and dignity we must protect.
Vatican News
The Maronite Archeparchy of Haifa has condemned the attack on a Maronite prayer
hall in Nahariya, in northern Israel, by unidentified individuals on November 1,
the Feast of All Saints.
The Archeparchy of Haifa issued a statement asserting that "such acts can
neither be justified nor tolerated."It noted that, despite the attack, the
Christian community remains firmly opposed to responding to evil with evil, or
to vandalism with hatred. The Archeparchy called on the competent authorities
and security services to “act immediately and decisively to investigate this
attack,” noting that those responsible must be identified, apprehended and
brought to justice “so that they may be punished in accordance with the law.”
"We also demand," the Archeparchy insisted, "that the necessary measures be
taken to protect this place of worship and prevent any recurrence of such acts,”
noting that the members of the community have “no intention of being deterred
from exercising our inalienable right to prayer and worship.”