English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For November 08/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.november08.26.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
My sheep hear my voice. I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish
John 10/22-42: "At that time the festival of the Dedication took place in Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the portico of Solomon. So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, ‘How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.’ Jesus answered, ‘I have told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name testify to me; but you do not believe, because you do not belong to my sheep. My sheep hear my voice. I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one will snatch them out of my hand. What my Father has given me is greater than all else, and no one can snatch it out of the Father’s hand.The Father and I are one.’ The Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus replied, ‘I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these are you going to stone me?’ The Jews answered, ‘It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you, but for blasphemy, because you, though only a human being, are making yourself God.’Jesus answered, ‘Is it not written in your law, "I said, you are gods"?If those to whom the word of God came were called "gods" and the scripture cannot be annulled. can you say that the one whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world is blaspheming because I said, "I am God’s Son"? If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me. But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.’ Then they tried to arrest him again, but he escaped from their hands. He went away again across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing earlier, and he remained there. Many came to him, and they were saying, ‘John performed no sign, but everything that John said about this man was true.’And many believed in him there."

Titles For The English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on November 07-08/2026
Ballot Jihad: How Political Islam Uses Elections in Europe and America as a Weapon to Infiltrate the West and Achieve Empowerment and Islamization/Elias Bejjani/November 04/2026
Nadim Koteish commenting on the US elections and their results: “The Iranian handed out baklava… but too early”/05 November/ 2026/Quoted from Nadim Koteish’s page on X
Lebanon Officially Notified of Decision to Expel Its Consul in Michigan; What Is the Story Behind His Stance on the "Marines Barracks Bombing" and His Photo with Abdul El-Sayed?
Lebanese Foreign Ministry Sources to Asharq Al-Awsat: US Declares Consul Charara Persona Non Grata
Trump Meets with U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon
Major Explosion in Al-Qantara; Demolitions in Bani Hayyan; Sweeping Operations in Al-Khiyam and Zawtar al-Sharqiya
Israel's army detains 65-year-old retired engineer at south Lebanon checkpoint — the details
Papal Nuncio Visits Deir Mimas and Qlaiaa Amidst Warm Public Welcome: Peace and Security Are the Priority
Philip Salem: Lebanon Needs "Active Neutrality" to Remain Globally Influential and a Peacemaker
Raji, at a large gathering with the diaspora in Ottawa: Lebanon does not belong to any party, sect, or leader, and it will not be used as a bargaining chip for anyone else’s cause.
Hezbollah Bristles at ‘Friends of Lebanon’ Statement
From Tehran to Beirut: Who Controls Hezbollah's Decision to Go to War?
Lebanon in Every Shade: More Than 60 Paintings Capture the Land of the Cedars
Lebanon’s Imperiled Transition: The Need for an Urgent Reset
Hezbollah Exploiting Public Infrastructure for Military Communications Network
Because international pressure intensified and did not weaken.. Hezbollah towards confrontation with harsh tools!
Between the Military Court and the Judicial Council... Where is the Dahr al-Baidar explosives headed?

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 07-08/2026
Herzog Tasks Eisenkot with Forming New Israeli Government
Eisenkot's party invites members of Netanyahu's Likud to join a unity govt
US Treasury Sanctions Canadian Money Services Firms Over Iran-Related Transactions
US in new targeted strikes on Iran as Tehran leaders weigh mediator's proposals
US Military Carries Out New Targeted Strikes on Iran
Washington Offers $20 Million Reward for Information on Iran's Nuclear Program
Army Spokesman: Iranian Forces 'Stronger' Than at Beginning of War
Trump Names Miller Chief of Staff after Midterms Rout
Iranian Discontent Heightens Cross-Border Threat to Syria, Experts Say
Coalition: Houthi Cruise Missile Launched Toward Riyadh Region Destroyed
Yemeni Government Rallies European Support to Confront Houthis, Protect Shipping
Talks Underway to Avert Split into Rival Administrations in Iraqi Kurdistan
Hamas Awaits Positive Response from Board of Peace to Salvage Gaza Agreement
Jordan Steps up Security with Overnight Raids as Terrorism Threat Resurfaces
Syrian Diplomatic Source Denies Sending Troops to Yemen

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on November 07-08/2026
Question: How can I learn to trust in God?/GotQuestions.org?/November 07/2026
On the Rights of the Arab Minority in Israel/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2026
How Will US Election Results Affect the Future of the Region?/Dr. Abdulaziz Hamad Al-Aweisheg/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2026
A Reading of the US Midterm Election Results/Mohammed al-Rumaihi/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2026
The West in Crisis/Samir Atallah/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2026
They Cannot Tolerate America's Existence: It Proves Them Wrong/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Gatestone Institute/November 07/2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on November 07/2026

Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on November 07-08/2026 (Some of the News reports below are translated from Arabic by AI)
Ballot Jihad: How Political Islam Uses Elections in Europe and America as a Weapon to Infiltrate the West and Achieve Empowerment and Islamization
Elias Bejjani/November 04/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/158819/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gZ7S6KAn0o
Introduction: America Votes, and Political Islam Seeks an Opportunity for Empowerment
The US elections held yesterday, Tuesday November 03, 2026, were not just a normal election or a traditional democratic transfer of power. The results, which led to the Democratic Party taking control of both houses of Congress after Republicans lost many seats, raise a very dangerous question about the future of the West, and about the ability of Western democracies to protect themselves from ideological movements that use the freedoms available to reach power and expand influence.
What deserves attention is not only the victory of Democrats and the defeat of Republicans, but the nature of the electoral alliances formed inside American society, and how different political forces used population, religious, and cultural blocs, including organized Muslim voting blocs, to reach decision-making centers. Americans and Westerners in general must understand that political Islam, both Sunni and Shia, especially Muslim Brotherhood currents, does not look at elections the way liberal democracies do. All these movements treat elections as a means to reach power, build institutions and influence, and achieve their ideological, political, and religious projects.
Ballot Jihad.
After armed jihad, coups, assassinations, and terrorism, the ballot box has become in the calculations of all jihadist Islamic movements a very important political and organizational weapon. The goal is not just to win a parliamentary or local seat, but to use the win to build power and influence that opponents will find hard to confront later.
US Election Results and Their Political Message
Yesterday's results showed a big shift in the American balance of power, as Democrats (left, gay groups, political Islam) regained the majority in the House and Senate, and won in states considered Republican strongholds. One notable event was the win of Dr. Abdul Salam Al-Sayed for a Senate seat in Michigan, known for his ideological affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood groups and his family, becoming the first Muslim elected to this chamber in US history. This event has political, demographic, and electoral importance, but by itself it does not mean political Islam has taken over American institutions, nor does it prove that all Muslim voters vote according to one organizational directive.
The problem we discuss is much deeper.
Organized voting blocs, whatever their identity, can become influential in close races, and turn into a bargaining force that imposes conditions on major parties. When ideological organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood invest in this fact, it becomes necessary to monitor their programs, connections, and political goals. American democracy allows a Muslim citizen and a non-Muslim citizen to vote, run for office, and reach the highest positions, and this is a constitutional right that must not be touched. But it does not give any Islamic or non-Islamic organization the right to use these freedoms to cancel the freedoms of others or to impose an ideological rule on them.
Ballot Jihad... The New Weapon of Political Islam
We must be clear about the plans, tricks, and taqiyya of political Islam, which does not always need a rifle, a suicide bombing, or an armed militia to achieve its goals. It can use elections, party alliances, associations, educational institutions, media, municipalities, and unions as multiple fronts for one political battle, and this is the essence of what we call ballot jihad. In democratic societies, political Islamic movements have wide space for freedom, organization, and expression, and can benefit from laws that protect religious and political pluralism. But the danger begins when these freedoms turn into tools to build a jihadist and religious authoritarian project that does not really believe in the right of others to exercise the same freedoms.
The electoral empowerment strategy of these jihadist and terrorist Islamic organizations is based on:
Mobilizing voters on the basis of religious, ideological, and organizational loyalty.
Using demographic weight in close electoral districts.
Pressuring major parties to get political concessions.
Building temporary electoral alliances with forces that differ ideologically.
Organizational control or wide influence over civil society institutions.
Placing their cadres in municipal councils, legislative institutions, and centers of influence.
Turning electoral gains into long-term political, legislative, and media influence.
Thus the ballot box becomes, in the calculations of these movements, a front of political jihad... It is a battle not necessarily fought with weapons and all kinds of terrorist operations, but with votes, organization, money, alliances, and exploiting legal and political loopholes. The question the West must ask is: Do these organizations accept democracy as a permanent principle, or do they accept it only when it is a path to power?
The Muslim Brotherhood and the Empowerment Project
It is impossible to understand a basic aspect of contemporary political Islam, both Sunni and Shia, without studying the concepts, doctrines, plans, and projects of the Muslim Brotherhood, founded by Hassan al-Banna in Egypt in 1928. The Brotherhood is not just a charity or traditional religious movement, but an ideological movement with a transnational political and organizational project, based on making Islam the reference for governance, society, and the state. Over decades, the group's methods and branches evolved, some entered elections and parliaments, formed political alliances, and some reached power. But electoral participation does not automatically mean abandoning the jihadist ideological project or accepting all foundations of a civil state and liberal democracy. The concept of empowerment (tamkeen) in the literature of all jihadist Islamic currents refers to moving from the stage of building the organization and social base to the stage of expanding influence and reaching centers of power. Here lies the importance of monitoring what these movements announce in their electoral programs, what they say in their internal literature, and what they do when they hold power. Therefore the West should not be satisfied with hearing democratic slogans, but should ask about the real position on freedom of belief, women's rights, rights of Christians and Jews, freedom of expression, independence of judiciary, and peaceful transfer of power.
Taqiyya, Gradualism, Abrogation... The Problem of Temporary Discourse
One of the issues to stop at when studying the political religious discourse of Muslim Brotherhood groups in all their organizations and branches is the issue of gradualism in action, the gap between public discourse and political practice, and how religious texts are used to serve ideological goals. These movements present themselves in Western societies as moderate, defending freedoms, pluralism, and minority rights, while in their other literature or positions they adopt different views about state, society, and source of legislation. We should not consider every moderate discourse as deception, or attribute taqiyya to every Muslim, but we have the right, indeed the duty, to ask about the extent to which public discourse matches the actual political program. Here the importance of studying the concepts of taqiyya, gradualism, and empowerment in their jurisprudential and organizational contexts appears, and not allowing them to be used to justify hiding political goals or evading accountability. As for dividing Quranic verses into peaceful verses in the phase of weakness and fighting verses in the phase of strength, it is a complex interpretive and jurisprudential subject, and it should not be reduced to one equation that applies to all Muslims. But what the West must understand is that religious and electoral slogans are not enough to judge any movement. The criterion is its real program and its behavior when it has power.
The Opportunistic Alliance Between the Left, Political Islam, and Gays
One of the paradoxes worthy of criticism and study in Western politics is the emergence of electoral and interest-based alliances between currents of the radical left and groups of political Islam and gay groups. This alliance is not based on unity of doctrine or values, but on intersection of immediate electoral and political interests. The left needs Muslim voters' votes in some districts, political Islam needs doors to institutions where the left has influence, and alliances that help it expand its political presence... and gays need forces that support their demands... Here a stark paradox appears. Political Islamic groups adopt very conservative positions, reject homosexuality, and oppose basic aspects of individual freedoms defended by leftist groups. Yet, we find electoral and political intersections between the three parties when their interests meet against a common opponent. The left raises slogans of diversity and pluralism, while Islamic movements allied with it adopt religious and political views that do not accept pluralism in the liberal sense... The same opportunistic equation applies to the alliance of gays with those who stay silent or support their life and rights demands.. What kind of alliance is this? And what intellectual harmony is there between projects, aspirations, concepts, values, and lifestyles that are contradictory? It is an alliance of interests and votes, not an alliance of principles. And the danger is that some Western parties may discover too late that the votes they invested in do not necessarily adopt the social and cultural project they defend.
Example of Hamas and Gaza... What Does Political Islam Do After Winning?
The experience of Palestinian Hamas provides a model that must not be ignored when discussing political Islam's relationship with elections. In January 2006, jihadist and terrorist Hamas won the majority of seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council, in elections in which Fatah and other political forces participated. But in June 2007, after bloody armed confrontations with Fatah, Hamas took control of Gaza by force, expelled the Palestinian Authority from it, and established a unilateral rule under which no new general elections were held. These facts are not just historical details, but raise a fundamental question about the difference between electoral victory and respect for democracy. Elections give the winner the right to govern within the constitution and law, and do not give him the right to abolish opposition or use weapons against opponents or monopolize power indefinitely. Here the difference appears between democracy as a fixed political value, and democracy as a tactical means to reach power.
Hitler and the Historical Lesson That Must Not Be Forgotten
European history itself provides a stark example of the danger of totalitarian movements reaching power through political and constitutional paths. Adolf Hitler reached the position of Chancellor on January 30, 1933 by presidential appointment, after the Nazi party became a large electoral force and benefited from alliances and political maneuvers.
After reaching power, he used state institutions and exceptional laws to dismantle democracy, ban opposition parties, and establish a dictatorial regime. Here the historical lesson is clear: Reaching power through elections or constitutional procedures alone does not prove that the movement is committed to democracy. Peoples have the right to know in advance whether whoever reaches power will preserve the rights of his opponents, or will use his authority to eliminate their political existence.
Role of Qatar, Turkey, and Iran... Money, Organization, and Weapons
Sunni and Shia political Islam based on the ideological concepts of terrorist Muslim Brotherhood groups cannot be studied apart from the regional and international influence network that supports it and invests in its expansion, and here three countries with different roles stand out:
Qatar: Has wide financial, media, and diplomatic tools, and has a history of relations with movements and figures linked to political Islam, in addition to influential international media influence.
Turkey: Under Recep Tayyip Erdogan, it became a political ally of a number of Islamic currents, and uses its political, media, and economic tools to enhance its regional influence.
Iran: Leads a Shiite political and military Islamic project under the authority of Wilayat al-Faqih, and uses its affiliated armed organizations in the region to expand its influence at the expense of state sovereignty.
Sunni and Shia political Islam are not one organization, but they intersect in many cases in putting ideological and organizational reference above the concept of an independent nation-state. The Sunni side includes multiple currents and organizations, including the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, al-Qaeda, and Boko Haram, with big differences in structure, goals, and means among them.
As for the Shia side, arms of the Iranian regime stand out, foremost Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and armed Iraqi factions linked to Tehran. These organizations are not all identical in their goals or methods, but their existence forces Western countries to deal with external financing, cross-border organizations, and political and military interventions seriously and transparently.
The Eastern Message to the West
We in the Middle East do not read these issues from books alone. We have lived long experiences with religious and political regimes, with armed organizations, and with countries where pluralism collapsed before the authority of doctrine and weapons. In Lebanon, we know well what it means for an armed organization to have the decision of war and peace outside state institutions, and for loyalty to an external reference to come before loyalty to the constitution and homeland, and we also know how religious slogans, resistance, and jihad can turn into tools to justify monopolizing power and decision. Therefore the warning we direct to the West is not a warning against Muslims, but against political Islam that wants to turn religion into political authority above constitution and law. A Muslim who lives in America or Canada or Europe, respects the constitution, believes in equality, and accepts the right of others to exercise their freedoms, is a citizen with full rights and duties. As for the organization that wants to exploit democracy to establish a system that does not recognize the rights of those who are not its followers, it is an opponent of democratic principles, regardless of the religion it uses as a cover for its project.
Conclusion: From Jihad by Sword to Jihad by Ballot
The recent American elections should be an occasion for a deeper reading of the future of Western democracy, and to notice that political conflict in modern societies does not always happen with weapons, but may happen through ballot boxes, party alliances, institutions, money, and media. Ballot jihad is the political expression of using elections as a means for empowerment, when the goal of democratic participation becomes reaching power, not respecting its rules, values, and principles, and political Islam, both Sunni and Shia, deserves serious critical study that does not flatter or compromise, and does not confuse it with Islam as a religion or Muslims as citizens. Hence the West must not deal naively with organizations that raise slogans of democracy in opposition, then reject pluralism when they reach power. Also the left must not ignore ideological and political contradictions with its electoral allies just to get extra votes... In the same context, gays should not ally with those who criminalize, prohibit, and betray their social lifestyle... And most importantly, Western institutions must not overlook any external financing or organizational connection or attempt to impose religious authority on civil society. The ballot box is not a weapon against democracy, but it can be turned into a political weapon against it when used by movements that do not accept peaceful transfer of power nor equality among citizens. Jihad by sword destroyed countries and societies, and ballot jihad may turn into another path to empowerment if accountability, transparency, and protection of institutions are absent. Beware that the ballot box turns into a Trojan horse through which enemies of pluralism and groups of terrorism and barbarism enter democratic institutions!
Democracy does not protect itself just by opening ballot boxes, but by protecting the constitution, law, freedoms, and the right of every citizen to live free, whatever his religion, origin, or belief. The West is not required to abandon its democracy, but is required to understand that everyone has the right to participate in elections, and no party has the right to use this participation to abolish democracy itself.
Finally, it is very important that the world, with all its countries and systems, understands the reality of the contradictions in the Muslim Brotherhood's discourse:
In the phase of weakness in the West and in any country in the world (Dar al-Harb / House of War), the Muslim Brotherhood raises the Meccan verses - the verses of patience and peacefulness:
"O you who have believed, persevere and endure and remain stationed" [Al-Imran: 200]
"And be patient, and your patience is not but through Allah" [An-Nahl: 127]
"Indeed, Allah is with the patient" [Al-Baqarah: 153]
"And if they incline to peace, then incline to it and rely upon Allah" [Al-Anfal: 61]
"There shall be no compulsion in religion, the right path has become clear from the wrong" [Al-Baqarah: 256]
"For you is your religion, and for me is my religion" [Al-Kafirun: 6]
With these verses they address the West: We are moderate, democratic, we believe in coexistence.
And at the time of empowerment and strength (Dar al-Islam/House of Islam) in any country, the Muslim Brotherhood applies the Medinan verses - the verses of the sword and empowerment which abrogate what came before them:
"And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush" [At-Tawbah: 5]
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah nor in the Last Day" [At-Tawbah: 29]
"And fight them until there is no fitnah and the religion, all of it, is for Allah" [Al-Anfal: 39]
"And He brought down those who supported them among the People of the Scripture from their fortresses
*The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
Author’s Email: Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website: https://eliasbejjaninews.com

Nadim Koteish commenting on the US elections and their results: “The Iranian handed out baklava… but too early”
05 November/ 2026/Quoted from Nadim Koteish’s page on X
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/158955/
Look, the Iranian has every right right now to be handing out baklava, it’s normal man. If you’re Khamenei, there are three reasons today that make you feel like you’re celebrating, even though it’s the elections in America.
First, you’ll consider that the whole issue of the decisive strike is over, and therefore Trump today doesn’t have the ability, or the cost of war and the decisive strike has become very high for him. I mean, the story is off the table now. He wants an honorable exit, he wants negotiations, and therefore the ball is in your court. Two, you’ll consider that the grand prize is that the regime survived. The survival of the regime is the victory. I mean, you can come out today from underground, from under the shelter, dust off your turban and say: We won, guys.
Number three, you’ll consider that because of the rift between America and Israel, that Israel today, its margins are weakened, it won’t be able to wage a war on its own, and that the theory of “weaker than a spider’s web” — this is its real meaning, here it is in front of you, guys.
The danger is if the Iranian regime really reads the results of the midterm elections in America as a victory for it, that means it will harden internally, it will increase its bullying in the region, and it will harden in negotiating with America in the upcoming negotiations. And therefore, while it’s cashing in this genius, great victory of his, he’ll be laying the foundation for the coming wars, and therefore handing out baklava has come way too early. Yeah.

Lebanon Officially Notified of Decision to Expel Its Consul in Michigan; What Is the Story Behind His Stance on the "Marines Barracks Bombing" and His Photo with Abdul El-Sayed?
Al-Markaziya / November 7, 2026
The Lebanese Embassy in Washington informed *An-Nahar* that it had received official notification from the U.S. Department of State regarding the decision to expel the Lebanese Consul in the state of Michigan. A source close to the Consul stated that he is set to return to Lebanon tomorrow. The source indicated to LBCI that the controversial tweet in question originated from an old account that had been compromised years ago. Regarding the photograph featuring him alongside Abdul El-Sayed, the source explained that their sitting next to each other was purely coincidental—occurring during the annual dinner of an Arab-American organization—and emphasized that there is no relationship whatsoever between the Consul and El-Sayed. Reports had circulated in recent hours suggesting that Washington had declared the Lebanese Consul General in Michigan (Detroit), Ibrahim Sharara, *persona non grata*. This follows the emergence of old posts attributed to him, in which he allegedly praised the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut. As of now, the U.S. State Department has not issued an official statement on the matter.According to a report published by the *Washington Free Beacon* on November 2, 2026, the issue is not limited to a single post; rather, it concerns a series of statements attributed to Sharara on social media, which have drawn criticism within American circles. In his report, journalist Chuck Ross republished statements attributed to Sharara and noted his attendance at an Arab-American community event in Michigan—an event also attended by Abdul El-Sayed—on the eve of the U.S. Senate elections.
Key details regarding Sharara’s posts:
1. A post on the anniversary of the bombing: The report notes that on November 23, 2021—the anniversary of the bombing—Sharara wrote that the "heroic resistance" had ended the "U.S. military occupation" of Lebanon with a single blow.
2. Linking the Beirut bombing to the al-Tanf base: The site cites another post in which he wrote, "From the Marine barracks in Beirut to the al-Tanf base... we will reject the occupier and defeat them"—a reference to U.S. forces in Syria.
3. Other stances: The report mentions that in 2021, he praised the escape of six Palestinian prisoners from Israel’s Gilboa Prison. It also points to his cover photo on the platform "X" (formerly Twitter), which depicts an Israeli flag on fire.
These details were presented by the site as part of an overview of his positions; they are not necessarily all the reasons officially cited for the decision. 4. Attendance at political events in Michigan: The report notes that Sharara participated in a banquet hosted by the Arab American Political Action Committee in Dearborn, which was attended by Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed and other political figures. It also mentions his relationships and meetings with local officials and members of the Arab-American community.
What is the story behind the Marine barracks bombing? On October 23, 1983, a suicide truck bombing targeted the U.S. Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut, killing 241 American service members.

Lebanese Foreign Ministry Sources to Asharq Al-Awsat: US Declares Consul Charara Persona Non Grata
Beirut: Caroline Akoum/ Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
Sources at Lebanon's Foreign Ministry confirmed to Asharq Al-Awsat that the Lebanese Embassy in Washington had been officially notified by the US State Department of its decision to declare Ibrahim Charara, Lebanon's consul in Detroit, persona non grata and order him to leave the United States within 48 hours. Reports had indicated that the decision followed controversy sparked by American media coverage of old social media posts attributed to Charara, in which he described the 1983 bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut as an act of "heroic resistance." His participation in political events in Michigan, including an event supporting Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed, also attracted media attention in the United States.

Trump Meets with U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon
Al-Markaziya / November 7, 2026
U.S. President Donald Trump met in Florida with the U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon, Michel Issa. The discussion covered the latest developments in both the United States and Lebanon. Issa shared a photo of the meeting on his Instagram page.

Major Explosion in Al-Qantara; Demolitions in Bani Hayyan; Sweeping Operations in Al-Khiyam and Zawtar al-Sharqiya
Al-Markaziya / November 7, 2026
This evening, the Israeli army carried out a major explosion in the vicinity of the town of Al-Qantara, while simultaneously targeting the shoulder of Wadi Nafkha—on the outskirts of the town of Zabqin—with intermittent artillery fire. A sweeping operation involving machine-gun fire was also recorded toward the town of Zawtar al-Sharqiya, coinciding with the movement of enemy vehicles within the town. Additionally, an Israeli drone dropped explosive materials on the outskirts of Ayta al-Jabal, in the Bint Jbeil District, for the third consecutive time. Reports also indicated Israeli artillery shelling targeting the town of Hadatha. The Israeli army conducted an explosion in the town of Aynata, carried out a demolition operation in the town of Bani Hayyan, and executed an intensive sweeping operation in the town of Al-Khiyam, utilizing both heavy and light machine guns.
Artillery shelling targeted the inner neighborhoods of Zawtar al-Sharqiya, as well as the area situated between the towns of Mifdoun and Kfar Tebnit. Furthermore, artillery fire struck the town of Al-Mansouri and Wadi Zabqin. Four artillery shells, fired from Israeli positions, were recorded landing in the town of Beit Yahoun. An explosion targeted the town of Al-Qantara, while the Israeli army fired a shell directly at a house in Ayta al-Jabal, in southern Lebanon. Reports indicated the movement of Israeli tanks toward the Al-Hawza area, on the outskirts of Ayta—Beit Yahoun. Meanwhile, Hadatha was subjected to Israeli artillery shelling this morning. Earlier at dawn, the shelling had targeted the outskirts of Wadi al-Hujair, Zibqin, Haris (specifically the Al-Arayesh area), and Nabatieh al-Fawqa.

Israel's army detains 65-year-old retired engineer at south Lebanon checkpoint — the details
LBCI/November 07/2026
Shortly before noon on Friday, the Israeli army detained retired engineer Nakad Bechara, who remains in custody. The 65-year-old Bechara was traveling by car with a friend when they came across a temporary Israeli army checkpoint set up between Borj el-Mlouk and Deir Mimas.
The checkpoint has reportedly been operating in the area for about a month, following the latest confrontation between the Lebanese and Israeli armies at that location. Nakad Bechara, who wanted to return to his village and tend to his farmland, has yet to be told why he was detained. According to available information, Israeli soldiers stopped the two men, requested their identification documents, and searched their phones, including stored information and photos, using a device in their possession. Bechara was subsequently arrested and taken to an undisclosed location, while his friend was allowed to continue on his way. His family notified the relevant authorities and also contacted Apostolic Nuncio Archbishop Paolo Borgia, who reportedly assured them. According to residents of his village, Bechara has no involvement in security-related activities and currently has no known political affiliations. His permanent residence in Deir Mimas is reportedly motivated by his desire to tend to his land and olive trees. This is not the first such incident at this particular checkpoint. Several residents of Deir Mimas, Qlayaa and Borj el-Mlouk had previously been stopped and had their phones searched before being released about half an hour later. These serious Israeli violations, including opening fire to prevent farmers from harvesting olives on the outskirts of their villages, restricting their access to their land, and detaining some of them, require a firm response from the international community to rein in these actions, prevent further escalation and ensure that the remaining residents can stay on their land.

Papal Nuncio Visits Deir Mimas and Qlaiaa Amidst Warm Public Welcome: Peace and Security Are the Priority
Al-Markaziya / November 7, 2026
The Papal Nuncio, Archbishop Paolo Borgia, began his tour of the Marjeyoun region with a visit to the town of Deir Mimas. He met with local residents at the Church of Our Lady of the Assumption, in the presence of Mayor Tania Bernara, Mukhtar Nicola Suleiman, the Melkite Greek Catholic parish priest Father Joseph Suleiman, the Greek Orthodox parish priest Father Salim Asaad, the Latin-rite parish priest Father Tawfiq Abu Merhi, and other prominent local figures. Archbishop Borgia listened to the residents' concerns and the challenges they face given the difficult circumstances in the region, emphasizing "the importance of establishing peace and security in the South." Mayor Bernara thanked the Papal Nuncio for his visit—noting that it was not his first—and affirmed that his presence "serves as a source of moral support for the town’s residents and reflects his genuine care for them." She expressed her hope that "Deir Mimas will remain in his heart and his mission," and that he will "continue to convey the issues and concerns of its people to those capable of providing them with support." Following his visit to Deir Mimas, the Papal Nuncio traveled to the town of Qlaiaa—his second stop—where he was met with a large, enthusiastic public welcome in front of the Church of Saint George. He was received by the parish priest, Father Antonios Farah; priests Ghassan Nasr, Philippe Al-Aqlah, Youssef Basil, and Joseph Suleiman; Mayor Hanna Daher and members of the municipal council; as well as representatives from various church confraternities, religious groups, and a large crowd of local residents. As he stepped out of his vehicle, the Papal Nuncio was presented with a laurel wreath, amidst the sounds of ululations and the applause of those present, while doves were released as a gesture expressing a longing for peace. Children from the parish offered the Nuncio olive oil and bread to taste—a welcoming gesture rich in symbolism, as the olive tree is intrinsically linked to peace. This act also reflects the identity of Al-Qulay'ah and the deep attachment of its people to their land, with olive trees standing as one of the town’s most prominent features, for which it is renowned in its production of olive oil.

Philip Salem: Lebanon Needs "Active Neutrality" to Remain Globally Influential and a Peacemaker
Al-Markazia / November 7, 2026
Professor Philip Salem has asserted that adopting a strategy of "active neutrality" is a fundamental choice for the future of Lebanon’s foreign policy and its role in the region and the world. He emphasized that true neutrality does not imply withdrawal or disengagement; rather, it entails active involvement in peacemaking, conflict prevention, and the defense of human values. Salem’s remarks were made during a seminar on neutrality and Lebanese foreign policy, held at the Philip Salem Center for Studies at Saint Joseph University. He noted that the issue of neutrality has occupied a central place in his intellectual and political concerns for many years. Professor Salem pointed out that he has explored the concept of neutrality in his editorials for the newspaper *An-Nahar* since 2008, driven by his conviction that Lebanon requires "active neutrality"—a step beyond mere "positive neutrality" or a policy of non-alignment. He also highlighted the publication of his book, *Lebanon and Active Neutrality*, released last July, in which he presents his vision for Lebanon’s position and role within international relations. In his address, Salem highlighted a point from the introduction of his book regarding a meeting held in Geneva on June 26, 2025. The meeting brought together ninety experts in diplomacy, peacebuilding, and neutrality to promote the concept of "Active Neutrality"—a follow-up to the first global conference on neutrality, which took place in Bogotá, Colombia, in April 2024. He explained that the declarations issued by both conferences recommended that states wishing to adopt neutrality should embrace "Active Neutrality" rather than "positive neutrality" or a policy of non-alignment. Professor Salem outlined four fundamental pillars for this concept, most notably that neutrality must not devolve into indifference or disengagement. He noted that Active Neutrality goes beyond positive neutrality by playing a practical, proactive role in preventing crises and conflicts, and ultimately contributing to peacebuilding. He emphasized that "Active Neutrality does not merely establish neutrality; it also fosters peace," suggesting that this is the vision Lebanon should adopt in shaping its foreign policy. He added, "I believe Lebanon must embrace a strategy of Active Neutrality, as we want it to remain an active participant on the global stage—a supporter of peace that consistently stands on the side of justice, righteousness, and human rights." Concluding his remarks, Professor Salem wished the symposium success, expressing his hope that the discussions would yield practical and constructive recommendations to help refine Lebanon’s foreign policy, and thanked both the speakers and the attendees.

Raji, at a large gathering with the diaspora in Ottawa: Lebanon does not belong to any party, sect, or leader, and it will not be used as a bargaining chip for anyone else’s cause.
Al-Markaziya / November 7, 2026
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants Youssef Raji met with members of the Lebanese diaspora in Canada during a well-attended event hosted by Ambassador Bechara Touq. The gathering was graced by the presence of Minister of Immigration Lina Diab and Minister of Transport Steven MacKinnon. Also in attendance were Nabil Abbas, representing the Supreme Islamic Shia Council in Canada; Sheikh Mohammad Abu Hamdan, representing the Druze Sheikh al-Aql in Ontario; and representatives from the Maronite, Greek Orthodox, Melkite Greek Catholic, Armenian Orthodox, and Syriac Catholic churches. Representatives from the Canadian branches of various Lebanese political parties—including the Lebanese Forces, the Kataeb Party, the Free Patriotic Movement, the Progressive Socialist Party, the National Liberal Party (Ahrar), and the Future Movement—were present, alongside representatives from various Lebanese-Canadian associations. In his address, Minister Raji expressed his gratitude to Canada for opening its doors and its heart to generations of Lebanese. Speaking to the diaspora—not merely as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, but as a "Lebanese citizen"—he thanked them for their years spent abroad, their sacrifices, and their enduring faith in Lebanon, even during its most difficult times. Raji emphasized that the Lebanon in which they have never lost hope is a free, sovereign, and independent nation—a country where the only arms are those of the national army, where the authority to decide on war and peace rests solely with legitimate state institutions, and where the nation belongs to no single party, sect, region, or leader. He explained that Lebanon is not asking anyone to abandon their principles; however, "there is a vast difference between defending a cause and destroying your own country for the sake of someone else’s cause." He stressed that it is no longer acceptable for Lebanon to serve as the price for any cause, or as a theater for a war in which it has no say. He noted that many Lebanese have emigrated because their right to live in safety and dignity was stolen from them, affirming that the state has resolved to reclaim its authority and that the process of rebuilding has already begun. He invited the diaspora to become partners in building a nation where citizens are not compelled to leave in order to live with dignity. Furthermore, emphasizing that the commitment toward Lebanese-Canadians must be translated into concrete actions, Rajeh announced that he had discussed the establishment of direct flights between Canada and Lebanon with the Canadian side—a project he is determined to pursue—and informed them that biometric passport services would soon be available in Canada.

Hezbollah Bristles at ‘Friends of Lebanon’ Statement
Paula Astih/Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
Hezbollah lashed out at a statement by the embassies of five “Friends of Lebanon” countries — Britain, the United States, Australia, Canada and Japan — demanding that the state hold exclusive control over weapons and decisions on war and peace. The statement called for a public commitment from all lawmakers and political parties to uphold those principles. It also addressed the Dahr al-Baidar explosives case, urging a swift, independent judicial process, free from political interference, to ensure full accountability. A diplomatic source told Asharq Al-Awsat the statement sought to “reaffirm our support for the government's efforts to strengthen state sovereignty and establish its exclusive control over weapons.”Lebanese authorities had not been informed of the statement in advance, an official Lebanese source told Asharq Al-Awsat. The source said the statement nevertheless fully aligned with recent positions taken by President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam against dragging Lebanon into regional conflicts. It also came amid mounting fears that Hezbollah could join a possible future war involving Iran.
Hezbollah denounces 'brazen interference'
The statement drew a furious response from Hezbollah. Hezbollah lawmaker Ali Ammar called it “the height of vulgarity and insolence,” accusing the five countries of blatant interference in Lebanon's internal affairs. Ammar said the statement trampled on Lebanon's sovereignty, judicial independence, diplomatic norms and the dignity of its people, going so far as to dictate national choices and impose political positions. He also condemned Lebanese authorities for repeatedly turning a blind eye to such interference and treating it as routine. Ammar said the countries, which he accused of falsely presenting themselves as Lebanon's friends, should instead have condemned Israel's continued occupation of Lebanese territory, daily attacks on Lebanese sovereignty, killings, destruction, displacement and repeated violations of international agreements and resolutions. Rather than fueling divisions, stirring discord and defending Lebanon's enemies, he said, the countries should have called for dialogue and national consensus among the Lebanese.
Pressure mounts on Lebanese authorities
Lawmaker Michel Douaihy said the statement was a direct message to Lebanese authorities to act on the weapons issue and translate decisions already taken into concrete measures. “Lebanon has not yet missed the train. It can still catch up through concrete steps by the authorities and a change in their current approach,” Douaihy told Asharq Al-Awsat. On the Dahr al-Baidar explosives case, Douaihy said the matter could no longer be swept under the rug, particularly after a Hezbollah lawmaker claimed the explosives belonged to the group and demanded their return. He called for judicial action, arrests and trials, saying accountability must extend beyond those caught transporting the explosives.
US-French divide over Hezbollah's weapons
The absence of France and Germany — both closely involved in Lebanese affairs — from the five-nation statement stood out. Sami Nader, director of the Levant Institute for Strategic Affairs, said all five signatories were aligned with Washington in demanding concrete action on Hezbollah's weapons and rejecting warnings that such steps could spark a civil war. That position contrasts with the approach previously championed by France, which maintained that the Lebanese state could not push the army further into confronting Hezbollah without risking internal upheaval. “The American approach is fundamentally opposed to this position,” Nader told Asharq Al-Awsat. Washington believes Lebanese authorities must take at least some action on Hezbollah's weapons and no longer accepts the government's justifications for holding back, viewing them instead as cover for the group, he said.
Nader added that even France was beginning to retreat from its earlier position under diplomatic pressure, losing ground and influence in Lebanon to other countries.

From Tehran to Beirut: Who Controls Hezbollah's Decision to Go to War?
Paula Astih/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2026
As Lebanese citizens await the repercussions of the US and Israeli election results on their country's domestic situation, and whether these will lead to a regional war involving Lebanon or a major political agreement that inevitably includes it, reports have recently emerged of reassurances conveyed to several Lebanese officials that Hezbollah does not intend to participate in any future war in support of Iran. For many, however, these reassurances appear insufficient, given the experience of the latest round of fighting. At the time, Hezbollah was reportedly said to have informed Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri that it would not join the conflict, only to reverse its position and open fire toward Israel on March 2. Some reports at the time pointed to conflicting decisions between the group's political and military wings, with the position of those controlling operations on the ground, and Tehran behind them, ultimately prevailing.
This raises serious questions about whether decision-making within Hezbollah remains centralized, with a political and organizational leadership whose decisions are binding on all its institutions, or whether the military wing and commanders on the ground now have the final say.
More importantly, does Hezbollah still retain any independence in its decision-making, or are strategic decisions concerning war now determined in Tehran according to Iranian interests and calculations? Assessments differ between those who believe Hezbollah continues to operate under a centralized organizational structure that leaves no room for conflicting political and military decisions, and those who argue that the transformations the group has undergone, particularly following the latest confrontations and the losses suffered by its leadership, have made military decision-making more closely tied to Iran and significantly weakened the political leadership's room for maneuver.
What Is the Decision-Making Shura Council?
Political writer Dr. Qassem Qassir, who closely follows Hezbollah's positions, explained that the group's leadership is represented by the Decision-Making Shura Council, which makes decisions binding on all its bodies and institutions, including the Political Council and the Jihad Council.
Qassir denied that the Political Council could adopt one position while the Jihad Council made a conflicting decision. "There is one centralized decision made by the Decision-Making Shura Council, and everyone abides by it," he said. According to Qassir, the council includes Hezbollah's secretary-general, the head of its Executive Council, the head of its parliamentary bloc, the head of its Political Council and the secretary-general's political aide. But what about the reassurances reportedly delivered to Lebanese officials that Hezbollah does not intend to become involved in another war?
Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, Qassir stressed that "there are no serious, definitive guarantees or promises of this kind." He explained that Hezbollah determines its position according to developments on the ground and cannot make decisions in advance without knowing the nature of unfolding events.
He also argued that the likelihood of war had diminished following the US and Israeli elections, as Washington and Tel Aviv were preoccupied with their domestic affairs, unless Israel decided to launch a new attack on Lebanon.
The Decision Lies With the Revolutionary Guards
Political writer Ali Al-Amin, editor-in-chief of the Janoubia news website, offered a different assessment. He argued that "the final say within Hezbollah has always belonged, and continues to belong, to those on the ground," adding that the military wing controls operations and represents a direct and effective extension of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, Al-Amin asserted that "the decision to ignite a war in Lebanon, whether during the previous round or in any future confrontation, is primarily an Iranian decision governed by Iranian interests. Hezbollah has no real room to alter or oppose it." Al-Amin also pointed to recent statements by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei about opening the battle across multiple fronts and geographical areas. He argued that these remarks "reflect a single rhythm controlled by Tehran, which the other parties are required to follow."
Al-Amin maintained that the room for maneuver once available to Hezbollah's political wing under former Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah and other senior leaders no longer exists, given the changes that have affected the group's structure and leadership.

Lebanon in Every Shade: More Than 60 Paintings Capture the Land of the Cedars
Beirut: Vivian Haddad/Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
In acrylic paintings where bright colors intertwine to transport viewers into a dreamlike world, Lebanese artist Jessy Tabet presents her works in an exhibition titled "Lebanon in Every Shade" at Rebirth Beirut. Clustered houses, clear skies and brilliant sunshine are recurring elements in her paintings, inviting viewers into a dreamlike journey across Lebanon, from one region to another. Traveling from north to south, Tabet photographed landscapes that caught her attention before reimagining them through her brush, highlighting details of a country she has always loved and never left. Across canvases large and small, the artist explores Lebanon's defining symbols, from its enduring cedars to its blue sea and towering mountains. She has devoted paintings to these subjects, giving them titles inspired by their themes. Some works form artistic series, including "The Cedar" and "Little Shadows of Lebanon," which brings together scenes from different Lebanese regions. Individual paintings capture particular moments and landscapes, such as "Batroun and the Orange Sunset" and "Coastal Reflections," which explores the Lebanese coastline. The mountains also have a place of their own, with houses and hills depicted in "Mountain Harmony." Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, Tabet said she had traveled through different parts of Lebanon, discovering scenes that inspired her. "I would photograph them and then rush back to my studio to paint them in my own way. I don't simply copy what my camera captures. I interpret what I see and complete it through my own artistic vision," she said. Tabet believes her choice of colors reflects the beautiful Lebanon she has always seen through her own eyes. By choosing pink as the background and dominant color in some of her works, she sought to invite viewers into a world of imagination. "When visitors contemplate a painting, they feel as though they have entered a moment of meditation and relaxation. They leave their worries and problems behind and embark on an artistic journey through Lebanon," she explained. Asked why houses and Lebanese architecture feature so prominently in her paintings, Tabet said: "Homes are the soul of a person, their anchor in their homeland. They embrace people's emotions, exhaustion, moments of rest, family life and sense of togetherness." "In my view, these houses clearly reflect the Lebanese way of life, filled with emotion and tranquility despite the tragedies people face. I also focused on details such as open windows, arched balconies and red-tiled roofs to revive scenes from a heritage dear to our hearts." In her "Cedars" series, Tabet depicts Lebanon's national symbol in meticulous detail, crowned with rich green foliage and touched with gold and white, transforming the cedar tree into a visual narrative of history.
Its sturdy roots appear to clasp two enormous hands, while branches full of life extend outward, seemingly immune to withering. In "La Vie en Rose," a cluster of closely packed houses welcomes visitors through open doors. A closer look reveals residents going about their daily activities or enjoying moments of relaxation. Through these scenes, Tabet preserves a sense of constant movement, giving her paintings a feeling of life and serenity. She said Lebanon's sea, stretching along the country's coastline, has profoundly influenced her because of the stillness and clarity it inspires. She paints its waters shimmering in the light, reflecting a way of life where warmth, tranquility and harmony come together.Tabet considers each painting a piece of Lebanon. "Anyone who acquires one of my paintings takes home a memory of their homeland, something they can enjoy looking at at any moment. It is like a remedy that eases the longing for home among those living abroad and soothes the wounds of war and destruction for those who remain," she said. Part of the proceeds from painting sales will support Rebirth Beirut's humanitarian and development initiatives, which aim to revitalize the capital and rehabilitate its infrastructure, including street lighting and traffic signals. Reflecting on her artistic approach and the meanings carried by each painting, Tabet concluded: "I love following the path of my brush and engaging in long conversations with it. When the words stop and silence takes their place, I know the painting is finished, and I move on to another.""With every painting, I dream and rise into a more beautiful world, where imagination has room to expand and colors are freed from the boundaries of reality."

Lebanon’s Imperiled Transition: The Need for an Urgent Reset
Commentary by Paul Salem/CSIS/Published November 5, 2026
Lebanon’s new leadership came into office last year with an ambitious promise: to restore state sovereignty and independence after years of Syrian and Iranian domination, rebuild institutions weakened by decades of corruption and political dysfunction, and pursue reforms to address the economic and banking collapse that began in 2019. Changes in the regional environment, particularly in Syria and in Hezbollah’s strategic position, offered Lebanon an unusual opening to make progress on these long-delayed objectives.
Important steps have followed. The Lebanese Armed Forces began expanding state authority in the south and developed a phased plan for wider deployment, but renewed war interrupted implementation. The government took significant decisions concerning Hezbollah’s military and security activities and the presence of Iranian military personnel. Long-vacant public positions were filled, ministers advanced reforms in several sectors, and efforts began to strengthen the judiciary and other institutions. Diplomatically, the president and government worked to repair Lebanon’s relations with Arab states and international partners, particularly the United States. The decision to enter direct negotiations with Israel was a bold initiative and opened a possible route toward more durable security arrangements.
Yet, as we approach the two-year mark of the new leadership’s mandate, progress toward real sovereignty and fundamental reform appears dangerously stalled. Progress toward achieving the state’s monopoly over the use of force is fitful and there is no clear goal horizon in sight; banking restructuring and an International Monetary Fund–supported recovery remain unresolved; and negotiations with Israel have yet to produce the security and territorial outcomes Lebanon needs. The talks have reduced attacks on Beirut, but escalation and occupation in the south have continued; the first pilot zones agreed upon included only three small villages, and no progress has been made to agree on new ones. Furthermore, renewed regional conflict—which appears dangerously likely—could include Lebanon and would further undo limited gains that have been made.
The problem is not simply a deficit of effort, nor can it be attributed solely to domestic leadership. Lebanon faces powerful entrenched interests—armed and not armed—and a difficult external environment. But the absence of a coordinated national strategy has made these obstacles harder to overcome.
This is not a time for business as usual. The promises made last year reflected real possibilities, and the historic opportunity for Lebanon, especially given the changes in the region and Syria, remains real. But the country will not get there by continuing the divided and hesitant politics of the past year. An urgent strategic reboot is necessary.
A key challenge is that the three principal players in the state—the president, the prime minister, and, given the importance of parliament in legislating fundamental change and the weight of the Shiite community, the speaker of the parliament—are not fully aligned. This absence of alignment includes differences over restoring the state’s monopoly over force and the financial reforms needed for an IMF-supported recovery. Differences over senior appointments and institutional responsibilities have further complicated implementation.
Part of the challenge is that the president and prime minister rose on a wave of public support for fundamental change, but they did not sufficiently sustain or build on that public support; instead, they relied on state insiders to deliver it. It’s true that both leaders are technocrats and not politicians, but they could and should have—and still can—rally public support for the changes they want to bring about. A popular majority wants fundamental change. But the bulk of the incumbent parties, politicians, special interest groups, and deep-state denizens are creatures of the old status quo and resist change. The president and prime minister need to work together to rebuild and actively mobilize the significant public support for change, without which the established forces of the status quo will win out.
As the head of parliament and the senior leader of the devastated Shiite community and one of its two main parties, Amal, Speaker of the Parliament Nabih Berri also has a critical role to play. He needs to decide whether he wants to maintain the old ruinous status quo, with Iran—especially the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)—and Hezbollah dragging the country into repeated wars for years and decades to come, or whether he wants to participate in building a state that can return sovereignty to the south, bring peace to the country, and serve its people—including his community—through capable state institutions and a vigorously revived economy. He is surely deeply pained by the ruin that Hezbollah and the IRGC have wrought on the south and the Shiite community, yet he seems to continue to put off difficult decisions, even as the south and his community spiral deeper into ruin. Significant progress on security or reform cannot be achieved without a proactive parliament and much bolder and more accountable leadership from the speaker.
The stakes extend beyond elite coordination. Many Lebanese people remain unable to recover their deposits; public services are still far from adequate, and accountability for the financial collapse and the Beirut port explosion remains incomplete. If the transition produces only negligible improvements in daily life, public confidence in the state may erode further. Internationally, despite historic goodwill and important support from the United States, Europe, and the Gulf states, there is mounting skepticism and dismay that perhaps Lebanon’s commendable leadership will not be able to fully achieve sovereignty and reform.
Need for Urgent Action
Lebanon’s historic opportunity risks slipping away. Rather than reemerging as a sovereign state and vibrant economy, the country risks sinking back into its familiar pattern of a state without real sovereignty that is riven with corruption, unable to effectively determine its own fate or to protect its own people. That pattern suits nonstate and illicit financial actors just fine, and some regional actors, including Iran and Israel, might also find it convenient.
Rescuing the transition will require a strategic reset. The president, in his institutional capacity and as the leader who first articulated the promise of this historic transition, is well placed to help lead this effort. He could use the upcoming November 22 Independence Day occasion to deliver a major national address, taking stock of what has been achieved since his inaugural speech, acknowledging the important goals that remain unfulfilled, and announcing an effort to put the transition back on track. Specifically, the president could propose a three-month emergency initiative, working closely with the prime minister, cabinet, parliament, and speaker, to agree on a time-bound and actionable national rescue and recovery plan that includes security, economic reform, and diplomatic components. The president and prime minister would provide executive leadership, the cabinet would be responsible for developing and implementing the necessary policy measures, and parliament would commit to a corresponding legislative calendar.
This would not require any extraconstitutional mechanism but would rather involve an intensive period of coordination among the presidency, the prime ministership, the council of ministers, and parliament, aimed at overcoming political obstacles, reaching agreement on outstanding priorities, and accelerating decisions that have been delayed.
The initiative should produce concrete commitments in three priority areas.
Economic and Financial Reform: The government and parliament should agree on a clear legislative and implementation timetable to complete the remaining banking, fiscal, and financial reforms required to advance an IMF agreement, with the necessary legislation adopted by February 2027.
Sovereignty and Security: The government should consolidate state authority, security, and public services in the initial pilot zones, while adopting and beginning to implement a phased, geographically sequenced plan to establish the state’s monopoly over arms and the use of force. This effort should extend beyond the south, beginning with the capital, Beirut, and progressively encompassing the rest of the country, with clear benchmarks, responsibilities, and timelines.
Diplomacy and International Support: The implementation of long-overdue decisions and reforms will strengthen Lebanon’s weakening hand in international and regional diplomacy. In such an environment of reinvigorated confidence, Lebanon can more effectively collaborate with the United States to move negotiations with Israel toward a full Israeli withdrawal and sustainable security arrangements. At the same time, Lebanon would be able to engage more convincingly with the regional and international community to increase support for strengthening state institutions and reviving its economy. International support should include expanded assistance to the Lebanese Armed Forces, Internal Security Forces, border control, and intelligence capabilities, as well as accelerated infrastructure reconstruction and measures to encourage private investment.
Such an initiative would not eliminate Lebanon’s political differences or the very real external constraints it faces. It would, however, establish a clearer national direction, create measurable commitments against which progress could be assessed, strengthen the credibility of state institutions, and mobilize greater regional and international support.
The Lebanese people have waited decades for a chance to reclaim an effective and sovereign state. That chance remains within reach, but it will not remain so indefinitely. Urgent and coordinated action is needed to renew the promise of Lebanon’s historic transition.
**Paul Salem is a senior associate (non-resident) in the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
Commentary is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).
© 2026 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Hezbollah Exploiting Public Infrastructure for Military Communications Network
Ralph Atrach/This Is Beirut/November 07/2026
Hezbollah is establishing new military communications networks in southern Lebanon, piggybacking on state infrastructure, in the latest challenge to Beirut’s stated commitment to disarming the group.
The Iranian-controlled militia’s new network appears aimed at reversing Israel’s successes against Hezbollah’s communications systems. On September 17, 2024, Israel detonated pagers used by Hezbollah militants, followed by the explosion of handheld radios the next day, causing thousands of injuries and exposing the extent of the group’s intelligence penetration.
The new communications network is another in a series of Hezbollah violations of the Lebanese government’s March 2, 2026, ban on the group’s military activities. In early October, the Internal Security Forces (ISF) foiled a Hezbollah attempt to transport hundreds of kilograms of explosives from the Bekaa Valley to Beirut. On October 16, Hezbollah obstructed an attempt by the ISF to raid a warehouse in Beirut’s southern suburbs, insisting that any such state action must be coordinated with the group.
In southern Lebanon, This is Beirut revealed how Hezbollah has worked to rebuild its security presence in Zawtar al-Gharbiyeh, the first “pilot zone” handed over from Israeli military control to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) as part of the U.S.-brokered Trilateral Framework. Now, Hezbollah’s new communications network near the Israeli border threatens to jeopardize efforts at resolving the conflict and reasserting state sovereignty.
Repurposing Public Infrastructure
Hezbollah militants in the Nabatieh district have been spotted installing cables on electricity poles and inside manholes belonging to public infrastructure, two local sources told This is Beirut.
A Hezbollah “rabet,” or local representative responsible for the group’s military affairs, has accompanied these teams to oversee the work, the sources said. The Israeli military considers Hezbollah’s “rabet” officers to be central pillars of the group’s dispersed security architecture, carrying out tasks such as smuggling weapons and preparing private property for military use.
When residents in the village of Charqiyeh outside Nabatieh approached the poles during the installation of cables, local municipal police would order them to keep their distance, a source said. Such mysterious cable installations have become increasingly common since the September-November 2024 War between Hezbollah and Israel.
Hezbollah has long held significant influence over Charqiyeh’s municipal authorities. Approximately 90% of the elected municipal council members are affiliated with Hezbollah, while the remainder are associated with the Amal Movement. In Nabatieh, another source said they personally witnessed Hezbollah fighters wiring cables on government-owned electricity poles and installing cables underground in manholes built by the state. These cables connect between different streets in the city and extend toward neighboring towns, the source said.
The source reported similar installations in nearby Kfar Roummane, close to Israel's Yellow Line marking the boundary of its security zone in southern Lebanon. Israel regularly conducts airstrikes and artillery fire along the Yellow Line to prevent Hezbollah attempts at infiltration and rebuilding its military infrastructure, including near Nabatieh.
Difficult to Jam
The pattern of Hezbollah installations points to the group attempting to set up a field telephone system, a conventional communications system often used by militaries and emergency responders, retired Lebanese Armed Forces General Khaled Hamadeh said.
In this model, Hamadeh said, when one user wants to contact another, the connection is established through the switchboard, and the person at the other end answers through a handset.
He compared the arrangement to older telephone systems used to connect locations within villages or limited geographical areas. In a military context, a similar principle could connect a small number of nearby positions without relying on wireless signals.
Hezbollah’s new communications installations could allow the militia to circumvent Israeli countermeasures, Hamadeh explained. “If [Hezbollah’s network] operates independently of civilian telephone and mobile networks, it cannot be jammed in the conventional sense,” Hamadeh said.
However, the retired general stressed that Hezbollah’s communications system should not be confused with a secure or sophisticated military network. While cables cannot be jammed electronically, they remain vulnerable to physical sabotage. Strategic Asset
Even if rudimentary, a wired communications system offers a key strategic asset for Hezbollah, Hamadeh said. Reliable links between commanders and operatives can support coordination, the transmission of orders, and the management of movements across different positions.
The importance of communications infrastructure to Hezbollah became clear in an infamous outburst of violence nearly two decades ago. On May 5, 2008, the Lebanese government issued an order for the dismantling of Hezbollah’s private telecommunications network on the grounds that it violated state sovereignty.
Hezbollah’s leadership treated the decision as a direct threat to the organization, saying the order was a “declaration of war.” On May 7, 2008, Hezbollah and its allies dispatched armed men to take control of western Beirut and attack the media and political offices of its opponents.
Hezbollah’s violence forced the fall of the government on May 25, 2008, but not before the cabinet reversed its decision to ban the militia’s telecoms network. The Doha Agreement, signed that month, granted Hezbollah a de facto veto in all subsequent Lebanese governments, a power the militia lost only with the formation of Nawaf Salam’s government in February 2025.
Now, President Joseph Aoun and Salam face the dilemma of how to dismantle Hezbollah’s military apparatus, even as the group actively rebuilds its infrastructure. As the Lebanese president and prime minister visited Nabatieh in October, Hezbollah militants installed cables on electricity poles and manholes belonging to the state.

Because international pressure intensified and did not weaken.. Hezbollah towards confrontation with harsh tools!
Lara Yazbek / Al-Markaziya / 07 November 2026
In an old-new position on the Dahr al-Baidar explosives file, the Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc confirmed the need to "stop the accusatory and media bickering and make room for wise national treatments," registering its "denunciation and condemnation of all political positions that denied the sacred right of the Lebanese to defend their homeland and resist the enemy, and exceeded the logic of the Constitution and national legal givens." The bloc, in contrast, praised the "objective positions that dealt with a responsible national spirit with this issue."
But in parallel with this talk, devoid of the threats and intimidation that Hezbollah cadres had resorted to since the seizure of the shipment, Hezbollah was acting on the ground, with its usual intimidation tools and traditional terrorizing methods, to try to put an end, once and for all, to the ongoing investigations.
It was reported on Thursday that a Hezbollah delegation visited the Public Prosecutor at the Court of Cassation, Judge Ahmad Rami al-Hajj, at the Palace of Justice, lasting nearly two hours. The delegation included MP Hussein al-Hajj Hassan, Hezbollah's liaison and coordination unit official Hussein al-Abdullah, and lawyer Mohammad Hammoud. It was rumored that its aim was to pressure the course of the investigation into the Dahr al-Baidar explosives file and contain it. This behavior quickly brought back to mind the scene of Wafiq Safa in the Justice Palace, threatening the judicial investigator in the August 4 crime, Tarek Bitar, with "removal," if the investigations went towards what could incriminate the party, according to sovereign political sources speaking to "Al-Markaziya."The fact is that the party feels that the internal and also external political pressure, on its weapons file in general and its explosives in particular, which it had bet would recede after the Republicans' defeat in Washington, has not changed, even that it may intensify and expand, and has indeed turned into international pressure, with the issuance of a joint unified statement by the embassies of the United States, Britain, Japan, Australia and Canada, on Thursday, which directly addressed the explosives file where it said: We take note of the steps taken by the Lebanese authorities in the Dahr al-Baidar case, and encourage a swift and independent judicial path, away from any political interference, ensuring full accountability. The embassies renewed their support for confining weapons and the decision of peace and war to the Lebanese state. This reality, the sources continue, is expected to be answered by the party with more intransigence and rigidity. And there is great fear that it will resort to more violent methods, such as the street and assassinations, if it does not see that the transformations in the United States and Israel have reflected on Lebanon in disregard of Hezbollah's weapons and of the implementation of the ministerial decisions of 5 and 7 August and 2 March...

Between the Military Court and the Judicial Council... Where is the Dahr al-Baidar explosives headed?
Youla Hashem / Al-Markaziya / 07 November 2026
Al-Markaziya - The Dahr al-Baidar explosives case is considered one of the most prominent security and judicial files that have recently emerged in Lebanon, after seizing a truck loaded with about 500 kilograms of highly explosive materials heading to Beirut, and what followed of Hezbollah's acknowledgment of ownership of the shipment and its confirmation that it is intended to confront Israel. The case has raised widespread controversy between demanding accountability of those responsible and referring it to the Judicial Council, and fears of the impact of political bickering on its course. Will the judicial authorities be able to complete the investigations and reveal all the circumstances, or will the case meet the fate of previous files that ended in dilution?
Member of the "Kataeb" bloc, MP Salim al-Sayegh, confirms to "Al-Markaziya" that "there is no dilution of this case, as the one who raised it is the Minister of Justice who represents in this file the Lebanese Kataeb Party. Consequently, there is no reason to dilute it; this proposal is not political, but the path of justice inevitably leads to the existence of a clear acknowledgment of a threat to state security. There are also public admissions that if these explosives are not handed over to the resistance, there will be dire consequences, in a clear use of the language of threat and intimidation.
And it is not only the transfer and storage of these explosives that is a crime - and the perpetrators were caught red-handed - but the politicians who speak on behalf of Hezbollah are committing another crime when they demand the return of the explosives under threat of taking to the street and the consequences of what is not praiseworthy. And it is a crime added to the first crime and intertwined with it.
And by combining the flagrant crime and the crime of threat, we are before a described act that requires a conclusion by the Council of Ministers that the matter is not merely a challenge to its decisions - as stated in the request of the Government Commissioner at the Military Court - but a frank assault on state security, as threat is defined as the use of force or the brandishing of it to extract political goals. And today, the owners of these positions present an additional argument to the Council of Ministers to refer the case to the Judicial Council."
He adds: "We are not judges and we do not want to issue prejudgments, but we express our political opinion and present the reasons necessitating referral. But why do they assume every time fingers of accusation are pointed at them that they are accused? Why do they put themselves in the position of criminals instead of suspects? They may come out completely innocent of this case, so let the Judicial Council judge.
But every time we try to advance a step towards extending state sovereignty, they return to inventing pretexts, in a clear challenge to the state as if they are able to subject it to their will. They have not realized that this reality has changed completely, and that coexistence between the logic of the state and the logic of the mini-state cannot continue."Al-Sayegh continues: "This subject will lead to a major change in Lebanon at the political level, as coexistence with this mini-state is absolutely impossible. And they must realize that they are bringing upon themselves and upon Lebanon something more dangerous than civil war and greater than internal strife. Strife remains easier than the structural change that may affect Lebanon. And when we say that coexistence with this weapon is impossible, and that if they do not want to hand it over, Lebanon is heading towards conditions in which neither the system nor the geography as we know them today will remain, then the question becomes: Where are they taking Lebanon?
And then, the minimum requires that the path of judiciary and justice takes its course to the end. And this does not mean stopping the investigation before the Military Court, but each party must play its role. And according to the law, either the case is referred to the Judicial Council, then prosecutions before other courts stop and the Council takes over the entire file, or the Military Court continues its work to the end."He concludes: "No one should think that if referral to the Judicial Council stumbles for political reasons or pressures, the investigation will stop or that summons and arrest warrants will not be issued. The Military Court continues to perform its role, except that the completion of justice in all its aspects requires referring the case to the Judicial Council."

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November 07-08/2026 (Some of the News reports below are translated from Arabic by AI)
Herzog Tasks Eisenkot with Forming New Israeli Government
Riyadh - Al Arabiya.net/November 07/2026
Israeli President Isaac Herzog has formally tasked Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the "Yashar" party, with forming the new government, after he received the recommendation of parliamentary blocs comprising 67 members of the Knesset, compared to 46 members who recommended Benjamin Netanyahu, according to the results of consultations the President held with representatives of the parties that won the Knesset elections. The Israeli Presidency said Herzog met separately with Eisenkot and Netanyahu and informed them of his decision. Under Israel's Basic Law on the Government, Eisenkot has 28 days to form the government, with the President having the authority to grant him an extension of up to an additional 14 days if he needs more time. Herzog had explained, in a statement issued on November 2, that his consultations with the parliamentary blocs aim to explore various possible options and alternatives for forming a government coalition, stressing that he does not rule out holding an additional round of consultations if needed. Statement of the Israeli Presidency.
National Emergency Government
In his first comment after being tasked with forming the new Israeli government, Gadi Eisenkot said the time has come to form a national emergency government, stressing that he will do everything in his power to ensure that the government lives up to the responsibility placed upon it. Eisenkot's statement comes at a time when coalition formation negotiations face challenges related to the positions of opposition parties, and conditions for participation in the next government, amid anticipation of the position of Likud and Netanyahu's allies regarding his call to form a new government.
Netanyahu Warns
Netanyahu had called for the formation of a national unity government, warning against rushing to form it. Netanyahu published a video clip via his account on the "X" platform on Saturday, in which he said Israel is going through a phase that requires national unity, adding that he called for this during the election campaign and repeated the call after it ended, considering this to be "the will of the people" and what the current phase requires. Netanyahu also attacked efforts to form a government relying on the support of Arab parties, saying that "there are those who intend next week to install a government that includes supporters of terrorism, and people seeking to destroy Israel," according to his expression. He called for the formation of a national unity government that includes all parties of the national camp, including Zionist parties.
New American Move
In parallel, Israel's Channel 12 reported that people close to US President Donald Trump asked the leader of the "Yashar" party, Gadi Eisenkot, to speed up the formation of a new government and sideline Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, amid ongoing political moves to form a new government coalition in Israel. Trump had expressed readiness to intervene in efforts to form an Israeli unity government led by Netanyahu, and said in an interview with the "Axios" website on October 28 that he would consider the matter, adding: "I will look into it." The US President had previously announced his full support for Netanyahu before the Israeli elections, describing him as an important partner for the United States.

Eisenkot's party invites members of Netanyahu's Likud to join a unity govt
LBCI/November 07/2026
Yashar, the party led by Gadi Eisenkot, who is expected to be tasked on Sunday with forming Israel's next government, called on allies of incumbent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's party to join his coalition."If Likud and its allies are suddenly interested in 'unity' and a broad government, they are more than welcome to publicly announce the dissolution of their alliance with the extremists... and their willingness to join a government under Prime Minister Eisenkot," Yashar wrote on X, shortly after Netanyahu called for a national unity government in a video speech. AFP

US Treasury Sanctions Canadian Money Services Firms Over Iran-Related Transactions
Washington: Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
The United States on Friday announced a new round of sanctions targeting networks and entities connected to Iran, according to a notification published on the US Department of the Treasury’s website. “Today, as part of Operation Economic Outcast, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated eight money services businesses based in Canada that enable the Iranian regime, sanctioned entities associated with the regime, and other illicit actors that move assets into and out of Iran,” it wrote. The sanctions effectively cut the firms off from the dollar-based financial system, blocking any assets that the firms may have in the United States and prohibiting any transactions with US persons or entities. The actions are the latest ⁠in a series of Treasury moves against firms outside the United States that it says help Iran get around US sanctions, as Washington keeps up pressure on Tehran.
“Canada cannot be a safe haven for illicit financial facilitators that provide sanctions evasion services to the Iranian regime and its proxies,” said Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent. “Treasury will pursue and disrupt the Iranian regime’s financial channels anywhere in the world.”
The Treasury identified the designated businesses in Ontario and British Columbia as Diverse Trade ⁠Inc doing business as Million Exchange, 1380079 BC Limited, Top PC Technician Inc, NIA Nations Currency Ltd, 2397639 Ontario Ltd doing business as Farah Exchange, CCC Inc and B Galaxy Inc and Darvish Exchange. Separately, the Treasury said its Financial Crimes Enforcement Network division ⁠issued an order that also cuts off virtual currency exchanger MEXC Global from the US financial system over transactions that it says are linked to sanctions evasion by Iran, North ⁠Korea and Russia.
FinCEN, the Treasury's anti-money laundering unit, said that the order prevents US financial institutions from processing fund transfers involving Seychelles-incorporated MEXC Global, which it ⁠says has facilitated at least $16 billion in illicit transactions linked to Iran, North Korea and Russia as well as transactions with other sanctioned actors.

US in new targeted strikes on Iran as Tehran leaders weigh mediator's proposals
Associated Press/November 07/2026
U.S. President Donald Trump said the U.S. military on Friday carried out new limited strikes on Iran, targeting an Iranian air defense system. Iranian state media reported the sound of two explosions in the Suza area of Qeshm Island, which is in the crucial waterway for oil shipments. Trump in an exchange with reporters described the military action as "minor." "They knocked out -- they built a little bit of an anti-aircraft device and we knocked it out in about 15 minutes, maybe five," Trump told reporters shortly after arriving in West Palm Beach, Florida, on Friday evening. Trump did not offer further details about the target. But U.S. officials have reported that most of Iran's air defense systems were destroyed or severely degraded during a June 2025 bombardment by Israel and in the early stages of the current conflict. U.S. officials have assessed that Iran would try to rebuild them and other military infrastructure over time. The U.S. military also reported carrying out what it described as defensive strikes on Monday. Explosions were heard on the islands of Qeshm and Hengam in the strategic Strait of Hormuz, and in the nearby mainland area of Bandar Abbas. Friday's strikes are the first since Trump's Republican Party was dealt a stunning repudiation in Tuesday's midterm elections in the U.S. The electoral setback — Republicans lost both chambers of Congress — was stoked in part by voter dissatisfaction with Trump's execution of the conflict and elevated fuel prices, a byproduct of the war that's affected nearly every sector of the global economy. In the days since Republicans' shellacking at the polls, Trump has vacillated between threatening to "destroy" Iran and suggesting a resolution to the war is near.Earlier Friday, two Middle East government officials said Iran was reviewing proposals presented by chief mediator Qatar aimed at addressing differences with the United States about Tehran's nuclear program.
But one of the officials stressed that the Iranians, at least at the moment, remain unwilling to engage in negotiations with the Trump administration over their atomic activities until the U.S. agrees to several core conditions that Iran has been demanding be part of any ceasefire agreement. Differences with Iran over its nuclear program remain the thorniest issue and one that Trump insists must be resolved as part of any deal meant to end the more than 8-month-old war. Both officials were not authorized to comment publicly on the delicate negotiations and spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Meanwhile, U.S. Central Command, which oversees U.S. military operations in the Middle East, announced in a post on X late Friday that the United States was offering "a reward of up to $20 million and possible relocation for information about Iran's nuclear program, including its facilities, equipment, and associated personnel, such as those in the scientific community, or the movement of any of the above." The post included a link to the State Department's Rewards for Justice program.
The White House declined to comment about the Qatari-presented proposals on Iran's nuclear program, but Trump noted earlier Friday in an exchange with reporters that mediators' discussions with Iran continue. "We are talking to Iran. We have been," said Trump, who insists the U.S. military remains in control of the conflict with a battered Iran. Yet, Tehran insists on several concessions from the U.S., which Trump has declined in the past. Among the core demands Iran says must be met before engaging in nuclear talks: ending the U.S. blockade on Iran's ports, lifting sanctions, unfreezing its assets, issuing compensation for war damage and ending hostilities throughout the region, including Israeli operations in Lebanon. Mediators and Iran have discussed a potential bridge deal aimed at helping pave the way for further talks on Tehran's nuclear program, according to regional officials.
They said the proposal, which was recently presented to the two sides by Qatari mediators, called for implementing trust-building measures over the course of two days.
These measures include lifting the U.S. blockade and releasing some of the billions of dollars in Iranian frozen funds seized over the years as part of a U.S. campaign to isolate Iran over its nuclear program. In return, Tehran would allow International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors at its sites bombed by the U.S. and Israel, the officials said. On the second day, Iran would reopen the Strait of Hormuz in line with a modified agreement that Iran and Oman have reached on the waterway but has not been approved by the United States, the officials said. That mechanism would be temporary until a permanent deal is reached on the strait in cooperation with other Gulf countries, they said. Following the implementation of the measures, the U.S. and Iran would embark on extensive talks addressing Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium as well as other aspects of its program, the officials said. Iran has long maintained that its nuclear program is peaceful. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran has 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium that is enriched up to 60% purity, a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels of 90%. A flurry of diplomatic phone calls in recent days between leaders in the Persian Gulf and beyond has been aimed at easing tensions in the region. Concerns have mounted over the possibility that Trump could still order the U.S. military to carry out new strikes against Iran.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth spoke Friday with his Qatari counterpart, Sheikh Saoud bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, about developments, according to the Qatari government.
The Qatari government announced the call between the countries' defense officials after confirming earlier Friday that Trump and Qatar's emir had a separate call to discuss efforts to deescalate tensions. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also held phone calls with his Iraqi and Tunisian counterparts on Friday to discuss tensions in the region. Araghchi and Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein discussed Tehran's vision for resuming negotiations with the U.S., according to Iraq's News Agency.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty, who held two calls with Araghchi this week, said Friday in a post on X that it was critical that both sides demonstrate "flexibility" to achieve the "compromise solutions" necessary to prevent the region from sliding into a new wave of escalation.
Egypt's top diplomat also held a phone call with his Emirati counterpart, Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, to emphasize the importance of political negotiations to prevent another military confrontation that could fuel violence and destruction, according to a statement by Egypt's Foreign Ministry.

US Military Carries Out New Targeted Strikes on Iran
Washington/Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
President Donald Trump said the US military on Friday carried out new limited strikes on Iran, targeting an Iranian air defense system. Iranian state media reported the sound of two explosions in the Suza area of Qeshm Island, which is in the crucial waterway for oil shipments.
Trump in an exchange with reporters described the military action as “minor."“They knocked out -- they built a little bit of an anti-aircraft device and we knocked it out in about 15 minutes, maybe five," Trump told reporters shortly after arriving in West Palm Beach, Florida, on Friday evening.
Trump did not offer further details about the target. But US officials have reported that most of Iran’s air defense systems were destroyed or severely degraded during a June 2025 bombardment by Israel and in the early stages of the current conflict. US officials have assessed that Iran would try to rebuild them and other military infrastructure over time. The US military also reported carrying out what it described as defensive strikes on Monday. Explosions were heard on the islands of Qeshm and Hengam in the strategic Strait of Hormuz, and in the nearby mainland area of Bandar Abbas.
Friday's strikes are the first since Trump’s Republican Party was dealt a stunning repudiation in Tuesday’s midterm elections in the US.

Washington Offers $20 Million Reward for Information on Iran's Nuclear Program
Washington/Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
Washington is offering a $20 million reward “and possible relocation” for information about Iran’s nuclear program, the US military said Friday, as President Donald Trump reiterated Tehran wants to make a deal to end the war. The US Department of State’s Rewards for Justice program said in an announcement posted to X that the “government remains committed to countering any attempt by Iran to develop a nuclear weapons program.”The State Department agency said it was seeking information on “nuclear scientists and staff, nuclear program-related technologies, and capabilities, associated organizations and personnel.” “If you have information on Iran’s nuclear program, assets, or associated individuals, send it to us via Signal or our Tor-based tip line. You may be eligible for a reward and relocation,” it added.
Anticipating Trump’s Decision
The announcement came a day after Trump said he would decide “soon” on whether to resume the war on Iran following a meeting with his top national security advisers.“I would rather not destroy the rest of the country if possible, but maybe I will have to. You'll know soon enough,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. US-Iran negotiations remain deadlocked over Iran's stockpile of near-weapons-grade uranium. Trump has said Iran must give up the stockpile, which he has referred to as “nuclear dust.” But Iranian officials have been adamant that they will not ship the uranium outside the country. Earlier on Friday, two Middle East government officials told AP that Iran was reviewing proposals presented by Qatar to address differences with Washington over Tehran's nuclear program. The Qatari draft involves lifting the US blockade on Iran's ports and releasing some of Tehran's frozen funds in exchange for allowing International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to visit sites bombed by the US and Israel, according to regional officials cited by AP. Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said on Thursday that the Strait of Hormuz would not reopen to Washington and no negotiations would take place until Tehran’s “seven conditions” were met.
Reviewing Nuclear Doctrine
In Iran, calls are growing for a reassessment of the country’s nuclear doctrine and a withdrawal from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Despite those demands, Rezaei said earlier this month that Iran has made no official decision to change its nuclear doctrine.
“So far, no official decision has been made by the government or the Supreme National Security Council to change the nuclear doctrine,” Rezaei said, according to remarks carried by the semi-official Tasnim News Agency. Last week, Mohammad-Javad Haj-Ali-Akbari, Tehran’s interim Friday prayer leader, called for a revision of Iran’s nuclear doctrine and a move toward acquiring nuclear weapons. He claimed that the issue has now become a “national demand.”Few days later, Nasrollah Pejmanfar, head of the Iranian parliament’s Article 90 Commission, called for Iran to seriously consider withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, intensifying the debate over Tehran’s nuclear policy amid escalating tensions with Western powers. On Thursday, Iranian lawmaker Mohammad Taghi Naghdali said that public demands had shifted from nuclear energy to nuclear warheads, calling on parliament to prioritize Iran's withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The New York Times wrote on Thursday that senior Iranian officials and clerics are also debating whether Iran should withdraw from the NPT, which prohibits the development of a nuclear weapon. Iran’s Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has not taken a clear public position on the issue. His father, former Leader Ali Khamenei had stated that nuclear weapons are forbidden.
Late last month, International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi said there were no signs of suspicious activity at Iranian nuclear sites bombed by the United States in June. “We do not see anything that would give rise to hypotheses of any substantive work going on there,” Grossi said in New York. Grossi told reporters that inspectors had no access to the two sites stricken in June, but confirmed that some inspection was under way. “We are trying to build it back, and we are inspecting in Iran,” he said. On Friday, a BBC report said Iran appears to be undertaking significant new construction near at least two of its major missile sites and repairing bases damaged by months of US and Israeli air strikes, according to analysis of satellite images. It said evidence of digging and new buildings are visible in satellite imagery taken in November at the Garmdareh military base in Karaj near the capital Tehran and the Shahroud base in the north, analysts at British intelligence company MAIAR, who reviewed the photos, told BBC Verify.

Army Spokesman: Iranian Forces 'Stronger' Than at Beginning of War
Tehran: Asharq Al Awsat/Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
Iran's military is "stronger" and more motivated than it was when the United States and Israel started the war in February, Iranian state media reported on Saturday, citing an army spokesman. "Today, the Islamic Republic's armed forces... having gained experience from direct confrontation with the United States and the Israeli regime, are on higher alert and are stronger than they were at the beginning of the war," Mohammad Akraminia said, according to the state news agency IRNA. "They now possess greater motivation, commitment, and self-confidence." The war, which began when the United States and Israel carried out a massive wave of strikes in late February, has been deadlocked for months. Tehran has sought to limit traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, which normally carries about one-fifth of global oil consumption. According to AFP, Akraminia said that Iranian armed forces retained control over the strategic waterway and that it would remain closed until the United States accepted Tehran's demands. "Under the order of the Supreme Leader, the response of the armed forces will be immediate, effective, and without geographical limitations," he added. US President Donald Trump this week confirmed new strikes on Iran, after American media reported attacks on Iran's Qeshm Island in the Strait of Hormuz. On Saturday, the local Tasnim news agency reported that two missiles had struck Qeshm, adding that there was no official information so far on the damage. Iranian state television reported two explosions on the island. The Iranian army said early Saturday that its air defenses had "struck and destroyed" a US drone that was flying over the island, according to state media. It did not say whether the island was attacked.

Trump Names Miller Chief of Staff after Midterms Rout
Washington/Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
US President Donald Trump on Friday named Stephen Miller, architect of his hardline immigration policy, as his new chief of staff, signaling a bare-knuckle fightback after Republicans were hammered in the midterms. Ultra-loyalist Miller, 41, will replace Susie Wiles, who becomes the first major White House casualty from the Democratic landslide earlier this week. Democrats pledged they would fight "every step of the way" against Miller, who became synonymous with scenes of masked immigration agents committing violence after he backed federal agents who shot and killed two Americans.
"I wanted to make a change," Trump told reporters at the White House when asked why he named Miller to replace Wiles.
"Sometimes in life you have to make moves."
Trump's move was particularly startling as he had repeatedly insisted before the midterms that there was "zero chance" of replacing Wiles. A White House official told AFP that Wiles had resigned on Thursday night. But naming the combative Miller was the clearest possible signal from Trump that the gloves are now off after his brief conciliatory gestures to Democrats in the wake of the Republican midterms collapse. "He's a great fighter," Trump said later at the airport in West Palm Beach, Florida, where he was accompanied by Miller. "He's been with me right from the beginning...and he's very loyal."Known for his sharp suits and sunglasses, Miller has been one of Trump's closest aides for decades, pushing nativist policies that gelled with Trump's "America First" agenda. As Trump's deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security advisor, he was the brains behind the mass deportation program that defined the first year of the president's second term. But he faced widespread criticism after the deadly shootings of two protesters by immigration agents in Minneapolis in January -- incidents that sparked mass demonstrations. "Stephen Miller is the architect of the most barbaric, inhumane policies of this administration. Trump couldn't have made a worse choice," Minority Leader Chuck Schumer posted on X.
"Our Democratic majorities will fight him every step of the way."
In a post on Truth Social earlier announcing Miller's appointment, Trump described him as "one of my most trusted advisors."Trump said Wiles had "done an outstanding job" and would be "moving over to the Trump Political Operation. I want to thank her for her service as Chief of Staff -- She has done a great job!"White House communications director Steven Cheung said Miller was a "Trump OG, someone who has been with the President since the very beginning. "He will help the Administration deliver on monumental victories for the rest of this historic second term." Top administration figures also praised Wiles, the first female White House chief of staff, whom Trump dubbed the "ice maiden" for maintaining discipline in the West Wing. For most of the last two years, the 69-year-old had largely prevented the chaotic staff movements and infighting that marred Trump's first term.
But as the midterms loomed the writing was increasingly on the wall for Wiles, who announced recently that she had been given the all-clear from breast cancer. "Serving President Trump in the White House has been the honor of a lifetime," Wiles said in a statement on X, adding that Friday would be her last day in her job. "I'm so proud to have been a part of what we've accomplished together from securing our border and cutting taxes to strengthening our economy and putting America First." Major figures in Trump's Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement -- reeling since the midterms -- hailed Miller's appointment. "It's Miller Time," posted right-wing journalist Jack Posobiec, referring to a famous slogan for an American beer brand. Trump sat with CBS News program "60 Minutes" for an interview that airs Sunday, and in published excerpts he said he expects to make a "little bit" of additional staff changes. "I'll...be doing maybe a few changes. I don't wanna mention who," he said.

Iranian Discontent Heightens Cross-Border Threat to Syria, Experts Say
Damascus : Souad Jarous/Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
Syrian authorities' announcement late Friday that they had foiled a major drug-smuggling operation from Lebanon in the Serghaya area of rural Damascus drew attention for one particular reason: the operation was handled by Defense Ministry troops rather than internal security forces, security expert Diaa Qaddour told Asharq Al-Awsat. Another military analyst linked the growing tensions along Syria's borders with Lebanon and Iraq to Iran's dissatisfaction with the Syrian government. The Defense Ministry's Media and Communications Department said border guards had intercepted an attempt to smuggle narcotics into Syria from Lebanon near Serghaya, along the border in the Damascus countryside. The smugglers opened fire on the patrol, prompting troops to return fire and forcing the gunmen to retreat into Lebanese territory, the ministry said. According to Syria's Internal Security Forces, the authorities seized 280 kilograms of hashish and 28,000 Captagon pills. The incident followed extensive raids carried out by the Lebanese Army on November 4 in the rugged outskirts of Arsal, which led to the arrest of suspected smugglers and the interception of vehicles attempting to cross the border illegally. It also came days after Syrian authorities arrested members of a cell allegedly plotting an attack on the Homs oil refinery. Damascus accused the cell of having ties to Lebanon's Hezbollah, an allegation the group denied. Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, Qaddour accused Hezbollah of stepping up what he described as terrorist activities inside Syria, including attacks targeting sensitive sites. He warned that the border region had become extremely volatile, with tensions liable to escalate at any moment, requiring Syrian security forces to remain on constant alert.
Damascus has been working to strengthen security cooperation with neighboring countries in an effort to close illegal border crossings and dismantle cross-border smuggling networks.
Security coordination topped the agenda during Iraqi Prime Minister Ali Al-Zaidi's visit to Damascus on October 28, when he led a high-level ministerial delegation. Border control was also a priority in talks between the Syrian government and a Lebanese delegation headed by Deputy Prime Minister Tarek Mitri, which visited Damascus on November 2. Since the start of the country's liberation, Damascus has sought to reassure its neighbors by tightening border controls and reopening crossings in ways that benefit both sides economically. Military affairs analyst Rashid Hourani described the approach as "border-crossing diplomacy." Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, Hourani said Damascus had sought to resolve its disputes with neighboring countries by securing its borders and ensuring they posed no threat to Syria or its neighbors.
But developments along the Syrian-Lebanese and Syrian-Iraqi borders, he argued, point to growing Iranian frustration with Damascus. He attributed Tehran's displeasure partly to Syria's success in tightening border security and partly to recent discussions about its possible participation in the Makkah Agreement, alongside an announcement that Damascus would provide Saudi Arabia with military expertise to confront the Houthis, Iran's ally in Yemen. "Iran therefore sought to cause trouble for Syria and instructed Hezbollah, whose regional influence has diminished, to stir up tensions along the Syrian border," Hourani said. He argued that a similar dynamic was at play along the Iraqi border, where Iranian-backed militias exert considerable influence over decision-making within the country's military and security institutions. Securing Syria's borders remains one of the most pressing security challenges facing Damascus. Qaddour assessed the threat entering Syria across its borders as "moderate to high in the near term," although he said it could still be contained if current security efforts were sustained. He identified the border with Lebanon as particularly vulnerable because of its rugged terrain and numerous illegal crossings.
The Iraqi border, by contrast, has seen substantial fortification through the construction of walls and trenches, while active security coordination with Jordan has helped authorities intercept major smuggling shipments. Hourani also pointed to Syria and Jordan's participation in an anti-ISIS alliance established in March 2025 alongside Türkiye, Iraq and Lebanon. He said their membership in the coalition made it likely that the two countries would overcome the fallout from a Jordanian military operation in Syria's Daraa Governorate, where an operational error resulted in civilian casualties.
Meanwhile, recent developments have underscored the growing security threat along the Syrian-Lebanese border, with successive operations exposing what analysts describe as coordinated attempts to destabilize Syria. Qaddour said drug trafficking remained the most serious threat, with evidence pointing to longstanding links between smuggling networks, elements of Syria's former regime and Hezbollah. He also warned of an increasingly troubling development: smuggling cartels resorting to armed resistance against security forces. The latest incident, in which smugglers exchanged fire with Syrian troops before fleeing into Lebanon, illustrated the growing danger, he said.
Qaddour argued that the situation demanded more than routine security coordination. He called for tighter joint control over illegal crossings, expanded intelligence sharing and a systematic crackdown on cross-border criminal networks. He also raised the possibility of urgent operations at particularly vulnerable points along the Lebanese border, warning that failure to close these security gaps could turn them into a persistent source of instability for both countries.

Coalition: Houthi Cruise Missile Launched Toward Riyadh Region Destroyed
Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
Official Spokesperson for the Coalition to Restore Legitimacy in Yemen Major General Turki Al-Malki stated on Saturday that a cruise missile launched by the terrorist Houthi militia toward Riyadh Region was intercepted and destroyed. Al-Malki said on Friday night that a UAV was intercepted and destroyed in Riyadh Region.

Yemeni Government Rallies European Support to Confront Houthis, Protect Shipping
Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
The Yemeni government has intensified its diplomatic efforts in Berlin to mobilize European political and economic support for confronting Houthi escalation and restoring state institutions. The diplomatic push comes amid warnings that the threat posed by the Iran-backed group could extend to international maritime security and global trade interests, alongside calls to correct what the government describes as misleading narratives about the Yemeni crisis. During a series of meetings with German officials and lawmakers, Arab diplomats, experts and representatives of research centers, Foreign Minister and Minister of Expatriates Dr. Afrah Al-Zouba said continued international tolerance of Houthi violations had emboldened the group to expand its destabilizing activities and extend its threats beyond Yemen to vital regional shipping routes. At a roundtable organized by Germany's Körber Foundation as part of the Berlin Political Breakfast, Al-Zouba outlined the roots of Yemen's crisis, beginning with the Houthi coup against the national consensus and internationally recognized government in September 2014. She recalled the group's armed takeover of the capital, Sanaa, and its undermining of the outcomes of the National Dialogue Conference, leading to the latest military escalation and attempts to target international shipping in the Bab Al-Mandab Strait. Al-Zouba said the group's escalating actions posed a direct threat to regional and international peace and security, warning that international silence and tolerance of its violations gave the Houthis greater room to continue threatening global trade.
Expanding Houthi Threat
As part of the same diplomatic efforts, Al-Zouba warned during another roundtable organized by Germany's Konrad Adenauer Foundation that the Houthi threat was expanding to regional security and international shipping. She pointed to attacks on shipping routes and coordination with terrorist groups in the Horn of Africa, including Somalia's Al-Shabaab. Al-Zouba linked the Houthis' rejection of peace efforts and attempts to establish control over the Bab Al-Mandab Strait to the launch of Operation Fajr Yemen. She said the operation aimed to restore state institutions and protect maritime routes against threats to international shipping and trade. The minister urged participating officials, experts and members of Germany's governing party to convey an accurate picture of developments in Yemen to their institutions and policymakers and to correct misleading narratives about the crisis.
She stressed the need to ensure that Yemenis' voices were heard and that the military escalation's humanitarian consequences received appropriate attention. Al-Zouba emphasized that political, economic and humanitarian support for the Yemeni government was essential to strengthening its ability to fulfill its responsibilities, consolidate stability and restore state institutions.
Siege of Taiz and Collective Punishment
The humanitarian situation in the city of Taiz featured prominently in the minister's discussions.
She highlighted the continuing Houthi siege and its consequences, including restrictions on the entry of food, medicine and essential supplies, the closure of healthcare facilities and obstruction of efforts to evacuate patients and wounded civilians through safe corridors. Al-Zouba described these practices as collective punishment against civilians, saying they had intensified the suffering of the most vulnerable groups, particularly women and children. She added that the siege had caused civilian deaths because people were unable to obtain necessary medical care and supplies. During a meeting with Armin Laschet, chairman of the German Bundestag's Foreign Affairs Committee, Al-Zouba discussed developments in Yemen and their regional repercussions. She stressed that threats to freedom of navigation and global trade represented an extension of the Houthis' destabilizing activities since the group seized control of state institutions. Al-Zouba also outlined the internationally recognized government's efforts, operating from the temporary capital Aden, to fulfill its public service and development responsibilities. She emphasized that stabilizing state institutions and securing their own revenue sources were essential to addressing the humanitarian crisis sustainably. The foreign minister called on Germany and European partners to provide urgent political and economic support to the government, with particular emphasis on strengthening national capabilities. These include the coast guard and maritime border surveillance, which would improve Yemen's ability to combat the smuggling of Iranian weapons and military technology to the Houthis. According to Yemen's official media, Laschet expressed concern over Houthi human rights violations, particularly the recruitment of children and deteriorating living conditions among civilians. He stressed that attacks on shipping in the Red Sea threatened the economic security of European Union countries and the wider world. The German official also emphasized the need for Germany's parliament and government, in coordination with the European Union, to develop a new strategy for addressing the Yemeni crisis, one that keeps pace with rapidly evolving developments and protects regional and international security.

Talks Underway to Avert Split into Rival Administrations in Iraqi Kurdistan
Erbil: Hisham Elmayany/Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
Iraqi Kurdistan's deepening political crisis has revived the prospect of rival administrations, with the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) announcing its withdrawal from the regional government even as its longtime rival, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), says talks are underway to resolve the standoff. A senior KDP official said the party, led by Masoud Barzani, was in contact with the PUK, headed by Bafel Talabani, and representatives of other political groups in a bid to break the deadlock. The threat of a return to separate administrations has grown since the Kurdistan Regional Parliament convened last Wednesday for the first time since elections nearly two years ago, electing its leadership without the PUK, which denounced the move as unilateral and rejected it. The KDP won 39 seats in the October 2024 elections, ahead of the PUK's 23. The PUK later joined forces with the New Generation Movement, which secured 15 seats, to strengthen its hand in negotiations to form a government with its historic rival. On Thursday evening, Talabani declared that the PUK would not recognize the parliamentary session and would withdraw from the government. The KDP, however, defended the session as "neither a victory for one side nor a defeat for another, but a victory for the people of Kurdistan as a whole." The PUK, New Generation Movement, Kurdistan Islamic Union, National Stance Movement and Kurdistan Justice Group had all previously announced they would boycott the session. In a televised address, Talabani raised the prospect of a separate administration in Sulaymaniyah, warning that his party would match any move by its rivals to form a government. "If they appoint a prime minister, we will appoint a prime minister here. If they choose a minister, we will choose a minister here," he said. "They started this ... and I will be the one to end it." KDP leader Masoud Barzani, meanwhile, urged the parties that boycotted the session to return to parliament, attend future meetings and work together to serve the people of Kurdistan, support the political process and advance its next steps. Vala Fareed, the newly elected speaker of the Kurdistan parliament, told local media that reviving the legislature was essential to protecting the region's constitutional status and was not directed against any political party.
The PUK is pressing ahead with its withdrawal.
Senior party official Mahmoud Khoshnaw told Asharq Al-Awsat that PUK representatives would begin vacating their government offices on Sunday, the first working day of the week. He warned that the parliamentary session could have "negative repercussions," saying its outcome could give outside powers grounds to intervene. Khoshnaw said the PUK could go further, potentially seeking administrative independence for Sulaymaniyah from Erbil.
The KDP rejected suggestions that the parliamentary session was unlawful.
Senior party official Dijwar Faiq said the legislature had convened nearly two years after the elections with 52 lawmakers from different blocs, parties and communities present, meeting the required legal quorum. Faiq told Asharq Al-Awsat that the KDP, as the largest party in parliament, had wanted the PUK and other groups to take part and had spent nearly two years trying to bring them on board. Despite repeated meetings and negotiations, he said, the PUK and other parties refused to participate. He said parliament would meet again on Monday to elect its legal committee and open nominations for the Kurdistan region's presidency.
Rival parties clash over parliamentary quorum
At the heart of the dispute is a question that has quietly divided the two parties for nearly two years: who could secure the parliamentary quorum first? Khoshnaw said the PUK could have rallied its allies to convene parliament but chose not to, preferring a negotiated settlement that included all parties.
"The Kurdistan region cannot be governed solely by the arithmetic of parliamentary seats," he said, arguing that governance must also rest on principles that ensure all influential forces representing the Kurdish people have a role. Faiq challenged that account, saying the PUK had spent two years trying, unsuccessfully, to secure a quorum with New Generation to convene parliament and form a government. "If they had been able to secure a quorum, they would not have hesitated to convene parliament and form a government that excluded the KDP," he said. Together, the PUK and New Generation hold 38 of the Kurdistan parliament's 100 seats. Their alliance demanded half the positions in the regional government, a proposal the KDP rejected. The KDP argues that support from other parties would tip the balance in its favor, though it says it remains willing to share power with its historic rival on fair and balanced terms. Faiq urged parties seeking a place in government to participate according to their parliamentary strength and legal and electoral entitlements, and to help draft the government's program. Those unwilling to govern could choose the opposition, he said, but they must still attend parliamentary sessions.
 "Otherwise, what was the point of their participation in the elections in the first place?" he asked.

Hamas Awaits Positive Response from Board of Peace to Salvage Gaza Agreement
Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
Tony Blair, a prominent member of the Board of Peace, is seeking to salvage the Gaza ceasefire agreement by pressing Israel to begin implementing some of its provisions in stages, pending full implementation, following the conclusion of Israel's Knesset elections in recent days. Meanwhile, Hamas is awaiting a positive response concerning the fate and future of the agreement, as security and humanitarian conditions in the Gaza Strip continue to deteriorate. Blair met Israeli President Isaac Herzog on Thursday morning, followed by a meeting that afternoon with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who will lead a caretaker government until a new administration is formed. On Friday afternoon, Blair also met Gadi Eisenkot, a potential candidate for prime minister, to discuss the situation in Gaza. According to the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation, Blair held meetings with senior Israeli officials over the past three days to discuss advancing US President Donald Trump's 20-point plan, which was agreed upon in late September 2025 before taking effect with the ceasefire announced on October 10 of that year. The broadcaster and Israel's Channel 13 reported that Blair emphasized the need to allow the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) to enter the territory and assume its responsibilities. He also called for allowing the International Stabilization Force (ISF), which is still being assembled, to begin deploying soon to designated locations. These would constitute initial steps toward bringing the weapons of Hamas and other Palestinian factions under control. Blair's visit coincided with a trip by the Board of Peace's High Representative for Gaza, Nickolay Mladenov. It was not immediately clear whether Mladenov participated in Blair's meetings or held separate discussions. Both Blair and Mladenov visited the US-led Civil-Military Coordination Center in Kiryat Gat, southern Israel, where senior military officers from dozens of countries are monitoring implementation of the ceasefire agreement. According to Israel's Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, US pressure to advance Trump's plan to end the war has continued even after the Israeli elections, despite stalled talks with Hamas and ongoing Israeli military operations in Gaza. The newspaper noted that developments on the ground showed no indication of meaningful progress toward the next phase.
Citing sources familiar with the details, the newspaper reported that negotiations remain frozen, with no substantial progress in implementing the US plan. This comes as Hamas remains armed and continues rebuilding its ranks, while the Israeli military continues operations aimed at thwarting its plans, with those operations intensifying recently. The newspaper argued that the security and political situation would become more complicated because of the political turmoil following the Knesset election results. Israel's political system is facing uncertainty amid the absence of a clear majority and questions over whether a stable government can be formed. The newspaper said this directly affects Israel's ability to formulate a long-term policy toward Gaza, particularly regarding how to proceed with the American plan. While Washington is seeking progress on Trump's initiative, Israel remains uncertain about its political future in the coming months. Israel is skeptical about the prospects of successfully implementing or advancing any new measures, partly because Hamas refuses to disarm or surrender control of its weapons. Citing Israeli officials, the Hebrew-language Walla news website reported several days ago that the political situation following the Knesset elections has further complicated efforts to advance the agreement. It added that the Israeli military is also making preparations for a possible operation to occupy Gaza City in an effort to force Hamas to disarm.
Hamas Awaits a Response
Hamas, which appears to have few options remaining, is growing increasingly impatient over the failure to implement previously reached agreements, particularly as daily killings and bombardment continue and humanitarian conditions deteriorate. In a statement documenting daily Israeli violations, Hamas said: "Peace is not measured by the signing of agreements alone, but by an end to the killing and the return of life to our people in Gaza." In a video message published on its website, the movement added: "Gaza has never been a marginal consideration in political calculations, and the lives of its people must not be treated as something that can be postponed."A Hamas official in the Gaza Strip told Asharq Al-Awsat that the movement is awaiting a response from mediators who are in direct contact with Board of Peace officials, following Blair's diplomatic efforts and meetings with Israeli leaders. The official explained that the mediators had informed Hamas that the Board of Peace intended to undertake new efforts to move the Gaza agreement forward, and that the movement would await the outcome of those efforts. Asked whether Hamas was counting on stronger US pressure, particularly following calls for a change in Washington's policy toward Israel after the Republican Party's defeat in the midterm elections, the official said such a possibility existed. However, he added that past experience did not suggest the United States had any genuine intention of pressuring Israel, which was why progress remained extremely slow.

Jordan Steps up Security with Overnight Raids as Terrorism Threat Resurfaces
Amman: Mohammed Khair al-Rawashdeh/Asharq Al Awsat/November 07/2026
Just days after the deadly attack on Saint George Church in Hamoud village in southern Jordan and retaliatory airstrikes against ISIS in southern Syria, another attack struck the capital, Amman, on Thursday, killing one security officer and wounding another.The assailant, described as a “terrorist,” had recently been released from prison after serving a sentence in a 2020 terrorism case involving plans to carry out attacks. Attacks on security personnel guarding ministries, embassies and government institutions are not new. But Thursday’s assault has revived concerns about the threat posed by lone-wolf attackers and their possible links to ISIS. Observers say the attack may have appeared isolated, but that does not rule out instructions being delivered through online accounts linked to the militant group. ISIS makes no secret of its hostility toward Jordan. Communications between the group and the cell behind the Hamoud Church attack revealed a list of potential targets. Retired security experts warn that bladed weapons are easy to conceal and use, particularly when attackers strike without warning. The threat is compounded by the nature of police work, which requires Public Security Directorate personnel to maintain close, direct contact with civilians.
Jordanian security under attack on multiple fronts
Jordan's efforts to combat terrorism and extremism have made it a target for militant groups. A string of attacks in recent years has claimed the lives of civilians and security personnel and struck sovereign state institutions, raising questions about the methods used to monitor and pursue militants at home and abroad.
ISIS's targets extend well beyond security forces.
The Hamoud Church attack in Karak killed nine people and wounded 40. More troubling, however, was what appeared to be an attempt to sow sectarian discord between Muslims and Christians in a governorate widely regarded by Jordanians as a symbol of religious coexistence. The challenge for security agencies lies partly in the unpredictable nature of lone-wolf attacks. Even suspects under surveillance may develop plans suddenly, driven by revenge or extremist religious edicts urging the killing of security personnel. Experts argue that surveillance alone cannot contain the threat. They say rehabilitation must become a priority, particularly through open dialogue between terrorism convicts and moderate religious leaders. One figure involved in such efforts is Bassam al-Amoush, a former Muslim Brotherhood leader and former member of the Islamic Action Front who is now affiliated with the Umma Party. Al-Amoush won parliamentary seats on the Islamic Action Front ticket in several elections before leaving the party over internal disagreements. He has since engaged imprisoned ISIS members in discussions aimed at exposing the religious violations committed by terrorist and takfiri groups.
The concern is not theoretical. Several perpetrators of terrorist attacks in Jordan had previously been convicted of terrorism offenses, served their sentences and returned to civilian life. Image taken from a video of militants during their attack on the church in the Jordanian village of Hamoud. Human rights reports indicate that terrorism convicts are held in shared prison wards, while years behind bars have failed to dislodge the extremist beliefs that underpin their ideology. Those beliefs remain deeply rooted among militants, whether they operate in organized cells or as lone wolves living within their communities.
The latest attack has brought those concerns into sharper focus. The assailant who targeted a security guard outside the Sri Lankan Embassy on a major road in western Amman had previously pledged allegiance to the ISIS leader in 2019. He was arrested in 2020 and sentenced to nine years in prison in 2022, raising questions about the gap between his sentence and the time he actually served. A similar pattern emerged among those involved in the Hamoud Church attack in Karak, with former terrorism convicts featuring prominently among perpetrators of attacks in Jordan. The threat has also been fueled by years of cross-border recruitment. Since the outbreak of the Syrian conflict, terrorist organizations in Syria and Iraq have used social media to recruit young Jordanians, while militant cells spread along Jordan's northern border. Some of those areas remain outside the control of Syria's new government, providing potential bases for threats to Jordanian national security.
Sleeper cells and fears of coordinated attacks
Security experts say the pattern points to possible links between militants inside Jordan and organizations abroad, as well as the presence of sleeper cells within the kingdom. After years of relative dormancy, ISIS has reassessed its operations, plans and the distribution of its cells among communities in southern Syria, exploiting weak security and vast areas beyond effective state control. Security assessments suggest the group has adapted its deployment and methods to changing conditions, taking advantage of Jordanian security forces' focus on countering Iranian attacks against Jordan and Gulf states since late February.
The threats come from more than one direction.
ISIS remains active to Jordan's north, while Tehran-backed Shiite militias operate along its eastern border with Iraq. Despite their differences, the groups share an interest in targeting Jordanian security. Such threats also have roots in areas once supported by Syria's former government, including territory that housed drug-manufacturing facilities and cross-border smuggling networks used to threaten Jordan through various means. Informed sources say Jordanian security officials are increasingly concerned about renewed, intensive communications between sleeper cells inside the kingdom and terrorist organizations abroad. The concern has fueled calls to widen surveillance using databases of Jordanians affiliated with terrorist groups, including those still in prison and those who have been released. The priority, according to the sources, is to close potential security gaps before militant groups can exploit them.
One question remains particularly pressing. Some perpetrators of the Hamoud Church attack had been released from prison only shortly before the assault. The attacker behind Thursday's operation had also recently completed his sentence. Could they have received instructions from convicted militants with whom they had shared prison cells? Fears that security gaps could complicate intelligence gathering and investigations prompted Jordanian security agencies to launch a sweeping series of raids across the kingdom as the case unfolded. The operations began Thursday night and continued into early Friday, reaching northern, central and southern Jordan. Security forces raided areas including Southern Mazar in Karak governorate and Irbid in the north, as well as Marka, Al-Rajm al-Shami and Jubeiha in and around northern Amman. The raids also extended to Russeifa in Zarqa governorate.

Syrian Diplomatic Source Denies Sending Troops to Yemen
Riyadh - Al Arabiya.net / November 07 / 2026
A Syrian diplomatic source denied on Saturday circulating reports about sending Syrian troops to Yemen, confirming that they have no basis in truth. The source explained, in a statement to the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA), that military cooperation between Syria and Saudi Arabia currently focuses on training and exchanging expertise, in addition to consultations. He also pointed out that Saudi military coordination visits to Syria are scheduled to begin next month. The Syrian source added that military cooperation with Saudi Arabia could develop into a joint defense agreement or Damascus joining the Mecca Defense Agreement. The Syrian denial came after Yemeni officials told Agence France-Presse that thousands of Syrian soldiers would be deployed in Yemen, noting that some had already arrived. Three military sources and a defense official who requested anonymity said that hundreds of Syrian soldiers are already present on the Yemeni border. A source in the "Presidential Leadership Council" and another in the Ministry of Defense also added that thousands more will be deployed to help fight the Houthis, according to Agence France-Presse. These statements come as military operations continue in Yemen on several fronts between government forces and the Houthi militia, while Operation "Fajr Yemen", launched by Yemeni Presidential Leadership Council Chairman Rashad al-Alimi on October 5, has entered its second month, with the aim of extending control over state institutions and liberating the capital Sanaa from the Houthi militias.

The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on November 07-08/2026 /(Some of the News reports below are translated from Arabic by AI)
Question: How can I learn to trust in God?
GotQuestions.org/November 07/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/158969/
Answer: We cannot trust someone we don’t know, and that is the secret of learning to trust God. When someone says, “Trust me,” we have one of two reactions. Either we can say, “Yes, I’ll trust you,” or we can say, “Why should I?” In God’s case, trusting Him naturally follows when we understand why we should.The main reason we should trust God is that He is worthy of our trust. Unlike men, He never lies and never fails to fulfill His promises. “God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?” (Numbers 23:19; Psalm 89:34). Unlike men, He has the power to bring to pass what He plans and purposes to do. Isaiah 14:24 tells us, “The LORD Almighty has sworn, ‘Surely, as I have planned, so it will be, and as I have purposed, so it will stand.’” Furthermore, His plans are perfect, holy, and righteous, and He works all things together for good for those who love Him and are called according to His holy purpose (Romans 8:28). If we endeavor to know God through His Word, we will see that He is worthy of our trust, and our trust in Him will grow daily. To know Him is to trust Him.
We can learn to trust God as we see how He has proven Himself to be trustworthy in our lives and the lives of others. In 1 Kings 8:56 we read, “Praise be to the LORD, who has given rest to his people Israel just as he promised. Not one word has failed of all the good promises he gave through his servant Moses.” The record of God’s promises is there in His Word for all to see, as is the record of their fulfillment. Historical documents verify those events and speak of God’s faithfulness to His people. Every Christian can give personal testimony to God’s trustworthiness as we see His work in our lives, fulfilling His promises to save our souls and use us for His purposes (Ephesians 2:8-10) and comfort us with the peace that passes all understanding as we run the race He has planned out for us (Philippians 4:6-7; Hebrews 12:1). The more we experience His grace, faithfulness, and goodness, the more we trust Him (Psalm 100:5; Isaiah 25:1).
A third reason to trust God is that we really have no sensible alternative. Should we trust in ourselves or in others who are sinful, unpredictable, unreliable, have limited wisdom, and who frequently make bad choices and decisions swayed by emotion? Or do we trust in the all-wise, all-knowing, all-powerful, gracious, merciful, loving God who has good intentions for us? The choice should be obvious, but we fail to trust God because we don’t know Him. As already stated, we cannot hope to trust in someone who is essentially a stranger to us, but that is easily remedied. God has not made Himself difficult to find or know. All we need to know about God, He has graciously made available to us in the Bible, His holy Word to His people. To know God is to trust Him.

On the Rights of the Arab Minority in Israel
Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2026
In 1968, Fatah movement put forward the idea of a single democratic state for Israel's Jews and Arabs, in which citizens would enjoy equal rights regardless of religion and language. In 1969, at the fifth and sixth sessions of the Palestine National Council, two ideas were adopted: a democratic society of Muslims, Christians, and Jews, and a democratic state that does not discriminate on the basis of religion or race. Thirty years later, building on his critique of the Oslo Accords, Edward Said published an essay stressing the priority of the two peoples living together in justice and equality rather than being separated, and of grounding rights on citizenship, without the Palestinians giving up their identity or the Jews their own collective life. Now, following the recent elections and the increase in Arab turnout, popular mobilizations and demonstrations have broken out, some of them massive, demanding a Jewish-Arab government. This may not amount to a binational state of the kind Said had proposed, but it may open a path that leads toward such a target. The truth is that Palestinian calls made since 1968, in all their various formulations, are more than justified in principle. They champion universal citizenship and would put an end to the heresy contained in the "Jewish and democratic" state formula and the discrimination it entails, while qualitatively widening the space for Arab integration into the state. But whatever prevented Israel from positively receiving the proposals that emerged between 1968 and 1999 will again prevent any positive reception of similar proposals that may emerge today. After "Al-Aqsa Flood" in particular, as we well know, Israeli extremism surged to its outer limits, and any call carrying a whiff of needling Zionism or threatening its demography has come to amount to a declaration of war within Israel itself.
This extremism is strong, and beyond the instruments of violence, it is reinforced by public opinion. Netanyahu and his allies won nearly 60 percent of the Jewish vote. More importantly, most of his opponents, Eisenkot and Lieberman above all, match his bellicosity, extremism, and reliance on security concerns. When they criticize him, they focus on his "security failure," along with objections that are partly personal and partly technical, concerning his performance.
Beyond the fact that the sympathetic Zionist left won no more than eight seats, the climate of war, with Iran and in Lebanon, and the charged climate that the "Flood" has produced mean that haste in demanding Palestinian rights is akin to a costly gamble that may backfire on those making haste. In an episode bearing some resemblance to our current moment, the second Palestinian intifada could be reduced to terrorism in the climate unleashed by the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington. Likewise, Israel today can recycle the battle for Palestinian rights and attach it to the regional war, casting its Arab population as a "fifth column" working for the external enemy, and the tepid condemnations of October 7, 2023, can be offered as proof. The Arab minority’s experience is defined by two contradictory conditions: it is a victim of the Jewish state, especially since the 2018 "Nation-State Law" and under the leadership of Netanyahu and his alliance with the religious settlers. At the same time, it enjoys rights and freedoms far exceeding those of its Arab neighbors, the latest proof being the recent elections. Accordingly, unbridled radicalization, even in pursuit of just demands, becomes a pretext for entrenching the first condition, which could otherwise potentially be gradually improved, and for pouncing on the second, in a confrontation that would drain the Arabs before the right conditions have ripened. With these factors in mind, the Arab political representatives are acting with wisdom and rationality, whether in the conduct of the Joint List, which declares that it does not want to join the government, or in that of the United Arab List, which ties the idea of participation exclusively to civil and service-oriented tasks. The list's leader, Mansour Abbas, took part on that basis in the Bennett-Lapid government in 2021.
Most of the tasks and slogans Arab politicians are putting forward, as they draw on the momentum of the recent elections, have been sensible and wise. Into this category fall the efforts to prevent Netanyahu, and with him his games and lies, from returning to the premiership, treated as the priority of priorities; backing a government formed by the opposition without joining it; and keeping the Likud candidate out of the Knesset speakership... Through intensive, carefully considered effort, one may even count on restoring the climate that preceded October 7, which was then dominated by the dispute over the judicial overhaul. All this is coupled with near-self-evident goals, urgent as they are: fighting crime in Arab society, which the government’s indifference is fueling, economic development and providing services for Arab citizens, and curbing the terrorism of Jewish settlers in the West Bank, especially since this final goal enjoys American, not just European, support...What outweighs all the other considerations, and what best explains the need for patience and for long, circuitous routes, is that change will come to Israel only in response to change in the region. We had better not deceive ourselves into thinking that Israeli public opinion will turn from radical hostility to sympathy for Palestinian rights while the ethnic, religious, and sectarian minorities of the Arab neighborhood suffer as they do now, and politics becomes confined to a contest of numbers. For what is decisive and determining is a regional mood that takes shape, or does not, and finds its reflection in Israel. To assume the opposite is to extend a sickly, self-demeaning idea: that Israel's domestic elections are the sole source of change in our world.

How Will US Election Results Affect the Future of the Region?
Dr. Abdulaziz Hamad Al-Aweisheg/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2026
US Vice President JD Vance has become the most outspoken administration official regarding the Republicans’ defeat in the midterm elections. In a lengthy statement on Tuesday, he predicted that there would be a lot of debate and internal fighting over what happened and why, but argued that the main reason is obvious to everyone: the war. He said the government, by insisting on a military solution, ignored the economic damage and the suffering of ordinary citizens while drawing even closer to Israel. However, while Vance appears ready to pursue a diplomatic solution, Iran has hardened its demands and has openly expressed satisfaction over Trump’s electoral setback, making a resumption of the conflict seem almost certain unless mediators intensify their efforts to prevent it. Vance has long preferred diplomacy, a position shaped by his experience in the Iraq War, which he has strongly criticized, pledging to avoid similar wars in the future. Notably, after the conflict with Iran began, Vance did not support it as enthusiastically as other administration officials. When he did offer support, it was qualified, stating: “If the war succeeds in producing beneficial changes in the Middle East, then it will have been a justified effort.” Such caution is unusual because Vance is otherwise known for his unwavering support of Trump’s policies. For the same reason, Vance, unlike Trump, refrained from endorsing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the elections and publicly criticized Israel for opposing diplomatic efforts to resolve disputes with Iran. Because of these positions, Vance was often dismissed as a lightweight and criticized for failing to support Trump’s Iran policy. However, his political standing appears to have improved after voters delivered a sharp rebuke to Republicans over the war. As a result, Vance is now eager to highlight the extent of his disagreement with his colleagues in the administration on this issue. On October 29, Vance reportedly proposed in a message to Mohsen Rezaei, Secretary-General of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, a return to diplomacy to avoid renewed conflict. He asked Iran to present its commitments regarding its nuclear program at the outset of negotiations and to reopen the Strait of Hormuz within seven days of talks beginning. In return, Washington would be prepared to ease some sanctions.
However, Iran’s chief negotiator, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, responded the same day that Iran’s seven conditions, previously conveyed to mediators, remained unchanged. He argued that the “carrot and stick” approach would not persuade Tehran to abandon those demands and that there would be no progress until they were met, including sanctions relief, the release of frozen assets, and an end to the war “on all fronts.” Iran in particular refuses to make nuclear commitments, such as transferring enriched uranium to another country, before seeing tangible American concessions. For this reason, during meetings held in New York last September, Tehran proposed that nuclear talks begin only seven days after sanctions on its exports were lifted.
For similar reasons, Iran has resisted the return of International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, claiming that they could reveal sensitive information regarding the location and enrichment level of its uranium before negotiations begin. Yet despite the hardline rhetoric, negotiations have largely revolved around timelines and guarantees rather than the substance of the concessions themselves. This is why the involvement of “guarantors” for any future agreement has become increasingly important. These negotiations have unfolded against the backdrop of US preparations for what Democratic Senator Christopher Murphy, a vocal opponent of the war, described as a major military campaign. Writing on October 29, Murphy warned that Trump was preparing to resume military action after the elections, calling the plan “crazy” and describing it as another round of escalation that would harm American interests and conflict with US obligations under international law. Iran, of course, appears to have its own “crazy” plans. Iranian leaders have publicly threatened not only to target American interests in the region but also objectives outside it, as well as internet cables, power grids, and other civilian infrastructure in Gulf countries. Faced with these serious threats, Vance’s message emphasized diplomacy even before American voters endorsed that approach on Election Day.
Vance was not acting alone; Trump largely approved the message. The ball is now in Tehran’s court. Yet Iran’s response appears to have grown even more rigid after the US elections. In a post on X last Wednesday, Ghalibaf mocked Vance’s comments about the election and advised him to confront President Trump directly instead of giving lectures. It would be dangerous for Iran to conclude that the Republican defeat means Trump will abandon the military option. It is true that Democrats now hold majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives and will have a greater opportunity to advance their domestic agenda. Trump will lose the nearly automatic approval he often enjoyed from Congress. However, these changes will mainly affect domestic policy, where a Democratic Congress will wield greater influence. They are unlikely to significantly alter US policy toward Iran.
Indeed, Trump may become even more determined to secure foreign policy achievements, an area where American presidents traditionally enjoy broader authority than Congress. For this reason, Trump will remain the primary driver of US foreign policy.
Democrats may try to stop the war, but Trump could use his presidential veto, and his opponents would likely lack sufficient votes to override it. Congress might also attempt to cut off funding for the conflict, but there is little precedent in American history for doing so while US troops are actively engaged in the field. As a result, the elections are likely to have only a limited impact on foreign policy in the short term. The effect could even be the opposite. Historically, presidents who lose supportive congressional majorities often shift their focus from domestic affairs to foreign policy in pursuit of achievements that will define their historical legacy. In any case, the current Republican-controlled Congress will remain in office until January 3. During that period, Trump will still be able to push through many decisions, agreements, and arms sales with little opposition. What does all this mean for the Gulf crisis? Mediation efforts by Qatar, the Makkah Alliance, China, and others will continue in an attempt to prevent what appears to be an almost inevitable resumption of hostilities. At the same time, the Gulf Cooperation Council states will continue strengthening their defensive capabilities to prepare for any potential attack.

A Reading of the US Midterm Election Results
Mohammed al-Rumaihi/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2026
Contrary to the celebratory reaction with which a considerable segment of Arab public opinion greeted the results of the US midterm elections, a political reading requires some patience. The Republicans’ loss of their majority does not mean that the United States has abandoned its interests, nor that the American voter went to the ballot box to settle Middle Eastern disputes. What happened deserves analysis, but projecting our own wishes onto it repeats an old mistake: interpreting US politics according to what we hope for, then expressing surprise when events unfold according to domestic calculations and economic interests. I would like to focus on six points to offer some explanation:
First, it is customary for the president’s party to lose seats in midterm elections, especially in the House of Representatives. Voters use these elections to hold the administration accountable, and the opposition’s supporters are usually more motivated than the governing party’s base. However, this should not diminish the significance of the current Democratic gains. The shift is substantial and reflects dissatisfaction with the administration’s performance. The result should be viewed in context, without declaring the end of the Republican Party or treating every electoral setback as a permanent reversal in the direction of American society. Second, the economy and the cost of living were at the heart of the contest. The administration bears responsibility for its trade and economic policies, as well as for assessing the consequences of the conflicts it has engaged in. Likewise, the personalization of politics practiced by President Trump should not be exempt from criticism, just as rising prices cannot be separated from disruptions in energy supplies. The war in Ukraine and interference with navigation through the Strait of Hormuz increase the costs of oil, transportation, and insurance, with the bill ultimately passed on to the American consumer, even though the United States is a major energy producer. Markets are global, and supply disruptions affect prices far beyond the war zone.
These costs are compounded by Houthi threats to shipping in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait and attacks on Saudi oil facilities. Here, the Iranian issue emerges as a matter that goes beyond the dispute between Washington and Tehran.
Using maritime passages and the security of neighboring states as tools of pressure makes the international economy hostage to conflict. Therefore, this issue will not disappear with a change in the congressional majority, nor will Democrats be able to ignore it after making Americans’ living standards the basis for criticizing their opponents. Yet the persistence of the challenge does not necessarily mean agreement with the president’s military approach, even if he enjoys broad authority in this area. This also requires distinguishing between opposition to war and tolerance of Tehran’s behavior. An American politician may oppose the conduct of military operations because he considers them ineffective, while at the same time supporting measures to prevent Iran from threatening its neighbors. Reducing these positions to simple notions of friendship or hostility obscures the real alternatives and weakens our ability to see the situation clearly. Most likely, the debate will revolve around methods of addressing the problem: negotiations backed by guarantees, sanctions, or military deterrence to protect navigation. Accepting threats to energy supplies as a normal situation serves neither American nor international interests. It is in the Gulf states’ interest to advocate a lasting solution that prevents recurring coercion and preserves national sovereignty. A prolonged war may worsen the very economic problems it is intended to solve and provide hardliners with new reasons to persist.
Third, the election of Abdulrahman El-Sayed to the Senate deserves recognition as evidence of American society’s ability to integrate citizens from diverse backgrounds. However, Arab celebrations become exaggerated if they assume that he entered the Senate as a representative of Arabs or Muslims outside the United States. He is an American politician, accountable to his voters for healthcare, employment, education, taxes, and other domestic concerns.
He follows a long line of Black, Arab American, and Latino figures who have reached positions of influence. America is a nation built by successive waves of immigration, a “people of peoples.” His election is part of that evolution, not a commitment to champion our causes.
Fourth, policies restricting immigration do not eliminate the United States’ need for immigrants, from scientists and skilled professionals to workers in production and service sectors. Such policies are ultimately unsustainable. The American economy depends on immigrants, and the contradiction between closing the door rhetorically and meeting economic needs has concerned a segment of the American public.
Likewise, the declining share of non-Hispanic whites does not mean an inevitable racial conflict, nor does it guarantee a future Democratic majority. Ethnic origin alone does not determine voting behavior, and immigrants themselves may support conservative policies.
Fifth, there are broad American interests that transcend party divisions, such as national security, economic strength, and the protection of trade. The Constitution organizes governmental powers but does not provide a fixed interpretation of those interests or the means of achieving them.
As a result, policies change and administrations differ, while institutions and laws impose limits on decision-making. Arab observers need to understand both the areas of continuity and those of change. It is a mistake to expect a complete reversal in foreign policy, just as it is a mistake to assume that election results will have no impact on funding, oversight, or the president’s freedom of action. Sixth, losing seats does not mean the disappearance of the Republican base. Assessing its resilience requires examining voting percentages, turnout levels, and district-by-district differences once counting is complete, rather than relying solely on seat totals. Republicans could regain both the presidency and congressional majorities within two years if Democrats fail to convert their victory and promises into tangible results. This is a political possibility, not a prediction. The voter who punishes those in power today can punish those who promised reform tomorrow, especially if living costs remain high and poor decisions continue to drain resources. The lesson for us is to build our positions on an understanding of institutions and the balance of interests, and to strengthen our ability to engage with both parties. Celebrating the victory of one side is no substitute for working with the American state itself. Final thought: The interests of nations do not change simply because a congressional majority changes.

The West in Crisis
Samir Atallah/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 07/2026
Just one week ago, the entire world seemed to have resigned itself to the rule of the two most powerful men among world leaders: Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. The two men shared everything: visits, wars, treaties and discussions about the future of the world. The people of this planet accepted this political shift as they had accepted others before it. In the West, political parties come and go, power changes hands, and victories and defeats are part of the process. This time, however, the change amounted to a complete upheaval. The Trump hurricane is fading, while the "King of Israel" is losing his majority to a former soldier of Moroccan origin. For some time, two names have dominated the political stage, whether together or separately: Trump and Netanyahu. Now both are falling from the highest political positions either has ever attained. This may mark the end of their political careers, or at least the first major setback for Trump. The sounds of celebration have faded in Tel Aviv. The crowds of supporters have dwindled. No one expected such a meager showing for the man who has been waging Israel's wars on every front. This vote on Netanyahu is no ordinary event. It is as consequential as his initial rise to power, when Yigal Amir assassinated Yitzhak Rabin as he was moving toward peace with Yasser Arafat. At the time, extremists cheered the "King of Israel," while Rabin's widow refused to accept condolences from the man she accused of being behind her husband's murder.
The situation in Israel today resembles the aftermath of Rabin's assassination: deep political divisions and profound anxiety over the country's fate, rather than merely the formation of a government in a multiparty state. Coincidentally, divisions have reached a similar depth in the United States. This is no passing partisan or political crisis, but a state of anxiety gripping the entire world, a broader sense of weakness that extends far beyond the concerns of America's two political parties.

They Cannot Tolerate America's Existence: It Proves Them Wrong
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Gatestone Institute/November 07/2026
The United States has demonstrated, in full public view, that a society can reject the core demands of Islamist Sharia rule and still become the world's most powerful, advanced, and prosperous country. This single fact demolishes the central promise made to their own people: Submit to our version of Allah's law, follow the leaders who claim to represent Allah, and you will receive prosperity, dignity, and success. America stands as daily proof that the opposite is possible. You do not need their system. You do not need to be dominated by it. You can flourish without it. That is intolerable.
[America's] very existence functions as a permanent rebuttal. It tells their ideology: you are wrong, you produce backwardness and suffering, and people can do better without you.
For this reason, the United States is not just another country. It is the number one target.
Do not grant positions of governmental power to those who remain committed to Islamist Sharia-derived rule.
America is the living proof that a nation can become the most advanced and most prosperous on earth... by practicing the opposite of what Sharia demands. They will not rest until they take the lead in the United States. Great countries, civilizations, and empires once laughed at the idea that these Islamist movements could ever overrun them. They laughed—then they fell. Do not make the same mistake. Do not become complacent. Do not take America's freedoms you inherited for granted. It is what we witnessed growing up inside Islamist societies. We sat in their schools, heard the conversations, and saw the hostility directed at the United States of America with our own eyes. They hate America for a reason. The United States has demonstrated, in full public view, that a society can reject the core demands of Islamist Sharia rule and still become the world's most powerful, advanced, and prosperous country. This single fact demolishes the central promise made to their own people: Submit to our version of Allah's law, follow the leaders who claim to represent Allah, and you will receive prosperity, dignity, and success. America stands as daily proof that the opposite is possible. You do not need their system. You do not need to be dominated by it. You can flourish without it. That is intolerable. Just about everything America stands for runs directly against their framework. Freedom of speech is not a value it is possible to accept. Independent speech does not exist; only listening and obedience to the leader—whether supreme guide, imam, or sheikh—who is treated as the authorized voice of Allah. Questioning is forbidden; it is deviance.
Individualism is equally banned. You are not a person free to chart your own course within the bounds of mutual respect. You are expected to submit. You are a subject. Daily life exists only under a system that enforces Islamist Sharia law. In many Islamic countries, clothing is regulated; eating in public during Ramadan is policed, speech is constrained, movement and associations are watched and suppressed. Women are placed in inferior legal and social positions. Leaving the faith is a capital offense. The late Egyptian unofficial leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi -- who was forced to flee to Qatar, openly stated on television, "If they had gotten rid of the apostasy punishment, Islam would not exist today." Iran's late Supreme Guide Ali Khamenei declared on Twitter in 2019 that the death penalty against the author Salman Rushdie for publishing a work of fiction, a novel, The SatanicVerses, "was solid and irrevocable."America's operating principle is the reverse: wide personal freedom is respected and limited only by the requirement not to violate the rights of others. This difference is fundamental. America has shown the Muslim ummah (nation) that a country can become prosperous without following their Islamist Sharia law. A society can preserve its moral foundations without forcing everyone to follow Islamist interpretation. Because America has succeeded while living that difference, its very existence functions as a permanent rebuttal. It tells their ideology: you are wrong, you produce backwardness and suffering, and people can do better without you. For this reason, the United States is not just another country. It is the number one target. Even if Americans stayed completely out of Islamic affairs, just the grating presence of its success would keep this hostility alive. They cannot leave America alone and still maintain the claim that their system is the path to human flourishing.
That perceived rebuke to Islamic ideology is why constant vigilance is required. These movements have shown themselves to be strategic, patient, have absorbed regions before. They understand how to operate inside open societies — sometimes through overt activism, sometimes through covert and quieter organizational work that presents itself as charity, faith community, or civil-rights advocacy while advancing a political-religious project. Open societies that treat this as harmless or unmentionable have paid a huge price for the mistake -- as we are now seeing throughout Europe.
American citizens and the broader Western world need watch the ideology and the networks that advance it, both outside countries and inside them. Do not grant positions of governmental power to those who remain committed to Islamist Sharia-derived rule. Examine every appointment with clear eyes. Do not grant positions of governmental power to those who remain committed to Islamist Sharia-derived rule. Countries that relaxed their attention have discovered too late that the project of "exporting the revolution" does not stop on its own.
America is the living proof that a nation can become the most advanced and most prosperous on earth without Islamist Sharia law -- by practicing the opposite of what Sharia demands. They will not rest until they take the lead in the United States. Great countries, civilizations, and empires once laughed at the idea that these Islamist movements could ever overrun them. They laughed—then they fell. Do not make the same mistake. Do not become complacent. Do not take America's freedoms you inherited for granted. Watch them constantly—outside the country and inside it. Be on guard at every level. Expose what they do. They are relentless. They will not stop of their own accord. Stay awake, stay informed, keep watching.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22967/they-cannot-tolerate-americas-existence
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a political scientist, Harvard-educated analyst, and board member of Harvard International Review. He has authored several books on the US foreign policy. He can be reached at dr.rafizadeh@post.harvard.edu
*Follow Majid Rafizadeh on X (formerly Twitter)
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Selected Face Book & X tweets on November 07/2026
Zéna Mansour ܙܺܝܢܵܐ ܡܲܢܨܘܪ
It's the wisest decision, President Meloni.
@GiorgiaMeloni
In Lebanon, the same tools and tactics were used under the guise of a popular uprising with economic and social demands, and the result was an unprecedented, historic bankruptcy imposed on Lebanon.
Italy is entrusted to you - save it from the populist left, the ally of political Islam.
È la decisione più saggia, Presidente Meloni.
In Libano sono stati usati gli stessi strumenti e le stesse tattiche con il pretesto di una rivolta popolare con rivendicazioni economiche e sociali, e il risultato è stato un fallimento storico senza precedenti imposto al Libano. L'Italia è affidata a te - salvala dalla sinistra populista, alleata dell'Islam politico.

Susie Wiles
Today is my last day as White House Chief of Staff. Serving President Trump in the White House has been the honor of a lifetime. I’m so proud to have been a part of what we’ve accomplished together from securing our border and cutting taxes to strengthening our economy and putting America First.
More than anything, I’m grateful for the extraordinary people I’ve had the privilege of working alongside. While my role may be changing, my commitment to the President and the mission never will.

Rep. Mary Miller
Congratulations to @StephenM on his new role as White House Chief of Staff! President Trump has made a tremendous selection. Stephen has been an indispensable part of this administration and a steadfast champion of the America First agenda.

Shadi khalloul שאדי ח'לול
Lecturing native Christians at our Gap Year about their Christian History since developed right here 2026 years ago at sea of Galilee, Israel, from Lord Jesus time and his Jewish disciples. Exposed for them our Aramean people and Aramaic language as native Christians that was hidden from them by learning under Arab Islamic curriculum during their school time. This is the type of work that build better future for our people in Israel.

Hanin Ghaddar
Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism until it is! And that thin line had been broken by a rhetoric that turned against the Jews everywhere. A rhetoric that hold Jews responsible for everyone else’s suffering even when one is responsible for his/her own suffering. It’s a rhetoric that eliminates agency, and turns anti-Zionism into daily attacks against Jewish people everywhere! Stop!

toni mrad
A Source close to Lebanese Consul in Michigan told me
@LBCI_NEWS The Lebanese consul in Michigan will return to Lebanon tomorrow. According to the source, the tweet that sparked controversy was posted from an old account that was hacked several years ago.Regarding the photo showing the consul alongside Abdul El-Sayed, the source explained that they happened to be seated next to each other during the annual dinner of an Arab-American organization, stressing that the consul has no ties to El-Sayed.
Quote
Hiba Nasr
The State Department declares the Lebanese consul in Michigan persona non grata over social media posts attributed to him praising Hezbollah’s 1983 attack on U.S. Marines in Beirut.