English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News &
Editorials
For November 12/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news
The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.november12.26.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
Jesus said: For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that
I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own
accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up
again
John/10/17-21/ For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life
that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my
own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up
again. This charge I have received from my Father." There was again a division
among the Jews because of these words. Many of them said, "He has a demon, and
is insane; why listen to him?" Others said, "These are not the words of one who
is oppressed by a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?"
Titles For The English LCCC Lebanese &
Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on November
11-12/2026
Holy Lebanon in the Grip of Corruption and Occupation and the Heresies of
Satan Berri's Calls for Dialogue/Elias Bejjani/November 10/2026
A crime against freedom and human dignity… We call on the Egyptian authorities
to immediately release citizen Said Mansour Abdel Razek and stop his trial
because of his faith in Christ and his conversion to Christianity./Elias
Bejjani/November 09 2026
Machiavellian and Nietzschean Thinking in Politics and Among Politicians/Elias
Bejjani/November 07/ 2026
Pesach Wolicki/Iran CAN’T BELIEVE What Marco Rubio Just Said
Developments Regarding the Arrest of Hezbollah Operatives Between Batroun and
Bsharri
Waltz in Beirut on Monday; U.S. Inclined to Move Away from UNIFIL
Aoun: One Cannot Claim to Be a Proponent of Sovereignty While Criticizing the
Army
Council of Catholic Patriarchs and Bishops: Committee Formed to Monitor the
Situation of Residents in Southern Border Villages
Mark Daou: Protecting the Army Does Not Exempt Its Leadership from
Accountability
On the Sidelines of COP31: Salam Meets with Guterres and Various Heads of State
and Government
G7 Calls for Disarmament of Hezbollah; Aoun: Extending State Authority
Encompasses Achieving Security, Stability, and Socio-Economic Well-being for the
South
Hezbollah Tampers with Civil Peace... Right Under the State’s Nose
Nawaf Salam: The Era of Impunity and Sweeping Things Under the Rug Is Over
The mysterious killing of Al-Alwani sparks conflicting accounts and political
division... Baghdad awaits the conclusion of the investigation... while his
office calls for a review of airport surveillance footage.
Al-Alwani... From the Anbar Sit-ins to a Mysterious Death in Beirut / He Opposed
Al-Maliki and Spent 11 Years in Prison Following a Clash with Security Forces
The “Hezbollah State” Within the Lebanese State: Mapping the Network of Area and
Sector Heads That Sustains the “Resistance Society”/Alma Research/November 11,
2026
More Than One Million in Lebanon Face Acute Food Insecurity, UN Says
Etienne Saqr – Abu Arz: People’s Daily Bread First
Hezbollah reportedly rebuilding networks in southern Lebanon pilot zones/David
Daoud/FDD-Long war Journal/November 11/2026
Sheikh Qassem: No Resistance Disarmament Under Occupation, Hezbollah Open to
Talks After Israeli Withdrawal
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
Miscellaneous Reports And News published on November
11-12/2026
White House Describes Investigations Democrats Plan as Amounting to
“Flagrant Criminal Conduct”
Will Trump Settle the Iran War at the Negotiating Table? Experts Expect
Understandings… and Fear a Deal That Lets Tehran Rearm
Vance Exploring Direct Meeting with Rezaei to End War
Allianz Trade: Damage from Iran War in the Gulf Exceeds $200 Billion
Tehran Threatens “Asymmetric” War… and Closes the Door on Removing Uranium
Report: Iran Attacked Maritime Navigation Systems on an Omani Island
Ship Fires Continue in "Hormuz" Despite Hopes of De-escalation... Revolutionary
Guard Announces Explosion of Two Tankers "Under Protection of US Fighters"...
Army Speaks of a Third
"G7" Demands Iran Stop Attacks in "Hormuz"... Condemned Houthi Attacks on Saudi
Arabia and Called on Tehran to Stop Arming Them
Yemeni Official to Asharq Al-Awsat: Large Numbers of Foreign Leaders Working
with Militias Killed... Confirmed Unannounced Losses in Their Ranks
Evacuation of Hundreds of Schools in Italy After Bomb Threats... and Similar
Warnings in Britain and Ireland... Meloni Chairs Emergency Government Meeting
Netanyahu: Israel Will Gradually Dispense with US Military Aid
Netanyahu Dismisses Claims That Israel Is Blocking Supplies to Gaza
Trilateral Negotiations Round... Limited Initial Understandings Face Final
Settlement Complexities... European Security Architecture Dominated Discussions
and "Territorial Concessions" Are the Knot of the Solution
Yemeni Govt Forces Expand Operations as Houthis Face Fighting on Multiple Fronts
Yemeni Minister to Asharq Al-Awsat: Houthis Lose Foreign Commanders as Military
Setbacks Mount
Titles For The Latest English LCCC
analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on November
11-12/2026
Trump Won the War Against Iran. The Ceasefires Lost It/Pierre
Rehov/Gatestone Institute/November 11/2026
On the Dangers of Remaining Hostage to Grey Policies/Hanna Saleh/Asharq
Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
Numbers and Illusions/Lutfi Fuad Noaman/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
The US Elections… A Test of Cognitive Immunity/Dr. Abdullah Faisal
Alrabeh/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
The Midterm Elections and the Nature and Limits of Their Palestinian and Israeli
Achievements/Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
Jensen Huang Sex Scandal Could Bring Down Trump Officials/Gordon G.
Chang/Gatestone Institute/November 11, 2026
Europe Off the Table: Russia and America Shaping the Future of the
Continent?/Najwa Abi Haidar/Al-Markazia/November 11, 2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on November 11/2026
Latest English LCCC
Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on November
11-12/2026
(Some of the News reports below are
translated from Arabic by AI)
Holy Lebanon in the Grip of
Corruption and Occupation and the Heresies of Satan Berri's Calls for Dialogue
Elias Bejjani/November 10/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/159072/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9VRMbWQ5nc
Holy Lebanon's fate is controlled by clergymen who do not know God nor His
teachings, by merchant-rulers of the filthy Trojan ilk, and by a political and
partisan clique with no conscience, no integrity, and no sentiment, followers of
Iscariot and the scribes and Pharisees, and by media outlets and journalists who
are for the most part hired trumpets and cymbals skilled at nothing but
hypocrisy, verbal bluster, and marketing for their masters. And more dangerous
than all of that is the existence of an Iranian occupier, an enemy of its own
environment, of Lebanon, and of humanity, who has turned Lebanon into one of the
arenas for the wars of the insane mullahs.
And above all of this, the catastrophe of the Land of the Cedars lies in the
debauchery, prostitution, and insolence of the king of corruption and the
corrupt, Nabih Berri - Abu Mustafa - who was brought forth by the hatching
machines of the Palestinian, Syrian, and Iranian occupations.
Imagine that this ungrateful man holds in his grip a parliament whose members
are all castrated, and who were appointed through an electoral law tailored by
the mullahs to fit the evil scheme of their jihadist, terrorist, and criminal
Hezbollah, distributing seats to cowards, collaborators, and thugs.
Berri: King of Corruption and the Corrupt
Nabih Berri is not a Speaker of Parliament; he is the head of a fully integrated
corruption system. He is the protector of shady deals, the godfather of
quota-sharing, the engineer of obstructing the judiciary, the thief of the
Council of the South's funds, the cover for smuggling, drugs, and illegal
weapons, and the partner of the terrorist-Jihadist Iranian Hezbollah in
plundering the state, bankrupting it, and starving its people.
He is the one who obstructed the investigation into the Beirut Port explosion,
he is the one who protected criminals and murderers from justice, and he is the
one who turned Parliament from a legislative institution into a farm for
clientelism, bribery, and money laundering.
Berri is the last human barrier protecting Iran's mini-state in Lebanon. Without
Berri, the system of illegal weapons would have fallen. Without Berri, Hezbollah
would not have continued to control the decision of war and peace. Without
Berri, Iran would not have continued to use Lebanon as fuel for its absurd wars.
The Holy Bible says: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you
cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion
and self-indulgence" (Matthew 23:25).
This is Berri exactly: an outside polished with speeches about dialogue and
consensus, and an inside full of extortion, corruption, and collaboration.
The Holy Bible says: "No one can serve two masters... You cannot serve God and
mammon" (Matthew 6:24). And Berri chose money, chose Iran, and sold God, the
homeland, and the people.
Berri's Satanic Call for Dialogue
This satanic Berri calls for dialogue... a dialogue to circumvent what remains
of the state for the benefit of Iran's mini-state, and to foil the current
international and regional opportunity carrying the project of peace and
liberation. It is a satanic call par excellence, because it is not a dialogue
but a conspiracy. Dialogue with whom? With murderers? With thieves of the
homeland? With those who carry weapons against the state? With those who refuse
to surrender their weapons and implement international resolutions 1559, 1701,
and 1680? True dialogue takes place between free equals under the ceiling of the
Constitution and the law, not between executioner and victim, not between
occupier and occupied, and not between a corrupt man and a hungry people.
Berri wants a dialogue that keeps the weapons, keeps the corruption, keeps the
occupation, and keeps Lebanon hostage. He wants a dialogue that reproduces the
same system with new names and old faces.
But we say to him and to his masters in Tehran: the era of poisoned dialogues is
over. The era of bargaining at the expense of blood and dignity is over. No
dialogue with weapons, no dialogue with corruption, no dialogue with occupation.
The Bible says: "And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by
the renewing of your mind" (Romans 12:2). And we will not conform to this
corrupt age; we will reject it, expose it, and resist it.
The Importance of Peace with Israel: Closing the Lebanese Arena to Iran's Wars.
Peace with Israel is not treason; it is salvation. It is not normalization with
an enemy; it is the liberation of Lebanon from its real enemy: Iran. Lebanon has
paid exorbitant prices for wars that were not its wars, and its sons have paid
with their blood for the adventures of the mullahs in Gaza, Yemen, Syria, and
Iraq. How many villages were destroyed? How many young men were martyred? How
many families were displaced? How many economies collapsed? All of this because
Iran wanted to fight Israel from Lebanese territory, and with Lebanese blood.
Peace with Israel means closing the Lebanese arena permanently to Iran's wars.
It means removing the pretext for illegal weapons. It means restoring the
decision of war and peace to the state alone. It means opening the doors to
economy, investment, and prosperity. It means Lebanon's return to its leading
role regionally and internationally in the civilized world, after Iran and its
party kidnapped it into the axis of evil and destruction.
On peace, the Lord Christ says: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be
called sons of God" (Matthew 5:9). And He also says: "Peace I leave with you, My
peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your heart
be troubled, neither let it be afraid" (John 14:27).
Whoever rejects peace is a son of war, a son of Satan, a son of destruction. And
whoever stands as a barrier in the face of peace is Nabih Berri himself, Iran's
faithful servant, the guard of Hezbollah's weapons, and the enemy of every free
Lebanese who wants to live in dignity and security.
Berri stands as a barrier to peace because peace means his end. Peace means a
strong state with no place for militias. Peace means an independent judiciary
with no place for the corrupt. Peace means a free economy with no place for
shady deals. Peace means a free people with no place for slaves. For this
reason, the battle for peace is an existential battle: either a Lebanon of peace
and life, or a Lebanon of Berri, Iran, and death.
A Final Word to the Puppet Rulers
To the puppet rulers without a single exception, to the owners of local and
proxy party companies, and to the owners of mitres and robes, foremost among
them our Maronite Patriach, the shepherd who has abandoned his flock, we say:
You are devils, you are thugs, you are enemies of Lebanon and the Lebanese, and
with you there is no salvation, no liberation, and no freedom, but catastrophes,
destruction, and ruin, because he who lacks something cannot give it. Rest
assured that the fire of hell and its worms await you, no matter how long the
era of your prostitution lasts.
The Bible says: "For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and
loses his own soul?" (Matthew 16:26). And you have gained money and positions,
and lost your souls, your homeland, and your eternity.
*The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
Author’s Email: Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website:
https://eliasbejjaninews.com
A crime against freedom and
human dignity… We call on the Egyptian authorities to immediately release
citizen Said Mansour Abdel Razek and stop his trial because of his faith in
Christ and his conversion to Christianity.
Elias Bejjani/November 09 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/159029/
What Egyptian citizen Said Mansour Abdelrazek is enduring, after
freely choosing to convert from Islam to Christianity, constitutes a shocking
human rights, moral, and legal scandal, as well as a flagrant violation of the
most basic human rights and fundamental freedoms, foremost among them freedom of
conscience, freedom of belief, and the right to practice religious rituals.
In my own name, and in the name of every free person around the world, I
strongly condemn his continued detention since July 2025, as well as the reports
published by the press and human rights organizations concerning his alleged
torture, humiliation, and exposure to religious and psychological pressure.
These developments have led to his prosecution, with potential penalties ranging
from execution to 25 years in prison, according to his lawyer, as reported by
The Jerusalem Post on November 9, 2026.
As the published accounts indicate, Said’s real offense is not committing a
terrorist act, assaulting anyone, or threatening public security. Rather, it is
his decision to believe in Christ, declare his new faith, and exercise his
natural and legal right to correct the religious affiliation recorded on his
official identification documents. Has changing one’s religious belief become a
crime in Egypt punishable by imprisonment, torture, and execution?
First: Freedom of Belief Is Not a Favor Granted by the Authorities or a
Privilege That the Majority Grants to the Minority
Freedom of religion and belief is an inherent human right, not a privilege that
governments grant their citizens or withdraw from them whenever they please. It
is a personal and spiritual relationship between a human being and his Creator.
No state, institution, or religious group has the right to dictate the nature of
this relationship or punish anyone for choosing a different path of faith.
It is absolutely unacceptable that a citizen who converts to Islam from
Christianity is treated as someone exercising a personal freedom and choice, and
may even be celebrated, while a citizen who converts to Christianity from Islam
is treated as an apostate and a criminal, facing security and judicial
proceedings that could end in execution.
This is neither equality, nor justice, nor religious freedom. It is a blatant
double standard and flagrant religious discrimination that contradicts the very
essence of human rights and the most basic principles of citizenship.
Second: What Constitution, What Justice, and What Kind of State Allows a Citizen
to Be Punished for His Faith?
Article 64 of the Egyptian Constitution stipulates that freedom of belief is
absolute. Accordingly, we demand that the Egyptian authorities apply this
constitutional principle to all citizens without exception or discrimination,
and refrain from turning religious differences into criminal charges or grounds
for security persecution.
Charges of contempt of religion, spreading false information, or joining
terrorist organizations must not be used selectively or arbitrarily to punish a
person for his religious choice or force him to abandon his faith.
If the Egyptian authorities possess genuine evidence that Said Mansour
Abdelrazek committed criminal offenses independent of his religious beliefs,
they must present that evidence transparently before a fair court, while fully
guaranteeing his right to a defense and a fair trial. However, if his conversion
to Christianity is the actual reason for his prosecution, this is entirely
unacceptable and condemnable.
Third: Torture and Religious Coercion Are Crimes That Cannot Be Justified
What his fiancée, Sophia, reported, according to The Jerusalem Post, regarding
his alleged torture, attempts to remove the cross tattoo from his body, and the
pressure exerted on him to force him to return to Islam, constitutes extremely
serious allegations requiring an independent and transparent international
investigation.
No authority has the right to force anyone to change his beliefs or punish him
for wearing a cross, reading the Bible, or declaring his faith in Christ.
The body, conscience, and faith do not belong to the state. Prison is not a
means of reshaping citizens’ consciences according to the wishes of the
authorities or extremist groups.
Fourth: Egypt Must Choose Between the Rule of Law and the Logic of Religious
Extremism
We strongly condemn leaving an Egyptian citizen at the mercy of judicial
proceedings that could end in his execution simply because he converted to
Christianity, while the Egyptian state speaks of tolerance, coexistence,
interfaith dialogue, and the renewal of religious discourse.
A modern state cannot be built on double standards. Citizenship cannot be
meaningfully discussed while a citizen is deprived of the right to choose his
religion. Nor can a state claim to respect pluralism while persecuting those who
exercise it.
Respect for Christians is not demonstrated through speeches, celebrations, or
official occasions. It is demonstrated by protecting their rights and freedoms
and guaranteeing full equality between them and all other citizens, including
those who choose to convert from one religion to another.
Fifth: Our Clear and Urgent Demands
We call upon Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, the Egyptian government,
and the judicial and security authorities to take the following measures:
Immediately release citizen Said Mansour Abdelrazek and halt all proceedings
targeting him because of his conversion to Christianity or his exercise of his
right to freedom of belief.
Drop any charges based exclusively on his change of religion or the peaceful
expression of his beliefs, and do not allow terrorism or contempt-of-religion
charges to be used to criminalize freedom of conscience.
Absolutely reject any death sentence or life imprisonment on the basis of his
religious beliefs, and guarantee that he will not be subjected to torture,
coercion, or retaliation.
Open an independent and transparent investigation into all allegations of
torture and mistreatment, and guarantee his right to communicate with his lawyer
and family and receive the necessary care and basic necessities.
Allow him to correct his official records and religious affiliation in
accordance with his beliefs and free choice, without penalties or retaliatory
measures.
Call upon the United Nations, the Human Rights Council, international
organizations concerned with religious freedoms, and democratic governments to
intervene urgently, follow up on his case, and exert the necessary pressure to
protect his life and freedom.
Sixth: A Message to the Free World
The case of Said Mansour Abdelrazek is not merely the case of one Egyptian
citizen. It is a genuine test of Egypt’s respect for human freedom and dignity,
and a test of the international community’s seriousness in defending freedom of
belief without selectivity or double standards.
It is unacceptable under every standard of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights for religions to become instruments of oppression, or for a religious
majority to assume authority over the consciences of minorities and individuals.
Faith cannot be imposed by force. Christianity cannot be erased through torture,
and Islam cannot be protected by imprisoning someone who chooses another
religion. Any belief system that requires prisons and gallows to protect its
followers places itself in direct conflict with the most basic principles of
human freedom.
Said has the right to believe in Christ, just as every person has the right to
choose Islam, Judaism, any other belief, or no religion whatsoever. These are
personal rights that no state may confiscate or apply discriminatorily.
In conclusion, we say clearly and firmly to the Egyptian authorities: Release
Said Mansour Abdelrazek, stop prosecuting him because of his faith, protect his
life and dignity, and respect his right to be a Christian, as he himself has
chosen, not as you want him to be.
Attempting to execute a human being because of his faith is not a victory for
religion. It is a devastating defeat for justice and a stain of shame on the
record of any state that allows it to happen.
Freedom for Said Mansour Abdelrazek. No to religious coercion. No to torture. No
to persecution. No to execution because of religious beliefs. Yes to freedom of
conscience, freedom of belief, and full equality before the law.
*The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
Author’s Email: Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website:
https://eliasbejjaninews.com
Machiavellian and Nietzschean Thinking in Politics and
Among Politicians
Elias Bejjani/November 07/ 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/158942/
Introduction
In politics, there are two different ways of thinking about power, human nature,
morality, and government. The first is Machiavellian thinking, associated with
the Italian philosopher and political thinker Niccolò Machiavelli. The second is
Nietzschean thinking, associated with the German philosopher Friedrich
Nietzsche.Although both are sometimes associated with power and the rejection of
traditional moral rules, there is a major difference between them. Machiavelli
focuses on the realities of politics and the balance of power. He asks how a
ruler can protect the state, remain in power, and deal with threats and
political challenges.
Nietzsche, on the other hand, focuses on human nature, freedom, and values. He
asks how individuals can free themselves from blind obedience, common thinking,
and social pressure, and develop their own independent personalities. In simple
terms, Machiavelli is concerned with how to manage and maintain power, while
Nietzsche is concerned with changing human thinking and overcoming the ideas and
values that limit individual freedom. To understand how these two ways of
thinking influence politics and politicians, we need to examine their main
principles and how they appear in political behaviour and leadership.
Machiavellian Thinking: The Art of Managing and Maintaining Power
Machiavellian thinking is associated with the Italian thinker Niccolò
Machiavelli, who presented his political ideas in his famous book The Prince,
written in 1513. This way of thinking is based on a simple idea: politics is a
world of competing interests, power struggles, and risks. A ruler cannot govern
a country by relying only on good intentions and moral principles. From this
point of view, the ruler’s first responsibility is to protect the state, prevent
its collapse, maintain stability, and preserve its independence and ability to
make its own decisions.
The main principles of Machiavellian thinking
1. Results and interests come before slogans
A Machiavellian politician measures success by results, not by speeches or
political slogans. He is prepared to use political manoeuvres, alliances,
pressure, and force when he believes they are necessary to achieve his goals.
This is why Machiavellian thinking is often associated with the famous
expression, “The ends justify the means,” although these words are not a direct
quotation from Machiavelli.
2. Political realism
A politician must deal with people as they really are, not as he wishes them to
be. People have their own interests, fears, ambitions, and contradictions.
For this reason, a realistic politician does not base decisions on emotions
alone. He studies the situation carefully and makes decisions according to the
realities on the ground.
3. The importance of public image
Machiavelli believed that a ruler should appear to the public as kind, honest,
loyal, and religious. A ruler’s public image can strongly influence his
popularity and ability to remain in power.
However, this does not necessarily mean that his actual behaviour will always
match the image he presents to the public.
4. Fear and love
Machiavelli believed that it is best for a ruler to be both loved and respected
or feared by his people.
However, if he must choose between the two, fear is more reliable than love when
it comes to maintaining obedience. But the ruler must avoid becoming hated by
the people, because public hatred can eventually threaten his rule.
5. The ability to deal with changing circumstances
Political success depends not only on a leader’s abilities or on circumstances,
but also on his ability to recognize opportunities, respond to unexpected
events, and adapt to changing situations.
Machiavelli described these two elements through the concepts of political skill
and ability (Virtù) and luck or changing circumstances (Fortuna).
What is a Machiavellian politician like?
A Machiavellian politician is practical, realistic, and careful in his
calculations. He knows when to form an alliance, when to negotiate, when to step
back, and when to confront his opponents.
He does not see politics as a field governed only by ideals and principles. He
sees it as a struggle over interests, influence, power, and decision-making. He
may change his alliances and political positions when circumstances change, even
if this means abandoning previous promises or positions. In short, a
Machiavellian politician is mainly concerned with protecting his political
position, achieving his objectives, and managing the balance of power.
Nietzschean Thinking: Breaking Free from the Crowd and Developing a Strong
Individual
Nietzschean thinking is associated with the German philosopher Friedrich
Nietzsche, whose famous books include Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Beyond Good and
Evil, and On the Genealogy of Morality.
Unlike Machiavelli, Nietzsche was not a political theorist who developed plans
for governing states or managing political power. He was a philosopher concerned
with human beings, their values, and their beliefs. He criticized blind
obedience, intellectual dependence, and the habit of following others without
independent thought.
He encouraged people to think for themselves, question inherited beliefs, and
refuse to live as prisoners of what society expects or what others repeatedly
tell them.
The main principles of Nietzschean thinking
1. The Will to Power
Nietzsche believed that life is not simply about survival and staying alive. It
is also about growth, development, overcoming one’s limitations, and expressing
one’s ability to create and achieve.
For Nietzsche, the Will to Power is a broad philosophical idea. It means much
more than simply wanting to control other people.
2. Questioning established values
One of Nietzsche’s most famous expressions is “God is dead.”
In the context of his philosophy, this does not simply mean denying God’s
existence. It refers to the decline of traditional religious and moral beliefs
that had provided European society with meaning and established rules for life.
Nietzsche therefore called for people to question accepted values instead of
following them blindly, and to take responsibility for creating new values.
3. Master morality and slave morality
Nietzsche distinguished between two types of morality.
Master morality is associated with self-confidence, strength, initiative,
creativity, and pride in one’s achievements.
Slave morality, as Nietzsche described it, is associated with submission,
resentment, feelings of weakness, and a desire for moral revenge against those
seen as stronger.
This distinction was part of his philosophical criticism of traditional
morality. It was not a direct call to enslave or mistreat other people.
4. The Übermensch, or the Higher Human Being
Nietzsche’s idea of the Übermensch does not refer to a superhero or a person who
holds political power.
It refers to someone who rises above blind obedience and imitation, refuses to
follow the crowd without thinking, develops his own abilities, creates his own
values, and accepts responsibility for his choices.
5. Eternal Recurrence
This concept invites people to think about their lives and actions as if they
would have to live the same life over and over again forever.
The central question is simple: Would you be able to accept your life and your
decisions exactly as they are, without wishing you had lived differently?
What is a politician influenced by Nietzschean thinking like?
Such a politician has a vision for change. He refuses to surrender to common
beliefs and outdated political traditions. Instead, he calls for society to
question established ideas and move beyond inherited practices that stand in the
way of progress.
His main concern is not simply keeping his position or remaining in office. He
wants to change the way society thinks and help build a different future.
He may use bold and confrontational language and challenge traditional
institutions and political parties.
However, not every revolutionary or rebellious leader should be described as
Nietzschean in the true philosophical sense.
What Is the Difference Between a Machiavellian Politician and a Politician
Influenced by Nietzsche?
The main difference lies in what each politician wants to achieve and how each
one views power, people, and political change.
A Machiavellian politician sees politics as a struggle for power, interests, and
influence. His main concern is reaching government, staying in power, protecting
his political position, and maintaining control over the state he leads.
He therefore approaches political events through careful calculations and a
realistic understanding of the situation. He uses alliances, negotiations, and
political manoeuvres, and may change his positions when circumstances or
interests require it.
He does not measure success by principles and political slogans alone. He
measures it by his ability to achieve his goals and maintain his power.
A politician influenced by Nietzschean thinking, on the other hand, does not see
gaining and maintaining political office as his main purpose. His goal is to
bring about deep changes in society and in the way people think.
He does not simply manage the existing system or adapt to the reality around
him. Instead, he challenges established ideas and outdated political traditions
and encourages people to free themselves from blind obedience and imitation.
He wants to help develop individuals who think independently, believe in their
abilities, overcome their limitations, and contribute to building a new future.
The two approaches also differ in their attitude toward principles and morality.
A Machiavellian politician may place political interests and the continuation of
his rule above certain moral considerations if he believes this is necessary to
protect the state or achieve his objectives.
A politician influenced by Nietzsche, however, tends to question inherited
values and established beliefs. He encourages people to examine these ideas
instead of accepting them simply because society has followed them for
generations.
Their leadership styles are also different.
A Machiavellian politician relies on careful calculations, negotiations,
political alliances, and knowing when to confront opponents or when to step
back.
A politician influenced by Nietzsche relies more on the strength of his ideas,
the courage to express them, and his willingness to challenge traditional
thinking and open the way for change.
In simple terms, a Machiavellian politician wants to succeed within the existing
political system. He wants to know how to reach power and how to maintain it.
A politician influenced by Nietzsche wants to go beyond the existing political
and intellectual system. He wants to change the way society thinks and move it
toward a new reality.
The first asks: How can I govern and remain in power?
The second asks: How can I change reality instead of remaining a prisoner of
inherited ideas and practices?
This is the essential difference between the mindset of managing political power
and the mindset of intellectual and social change.
Which Approach Is Better in Politics?
Neither approach can be considered absolutely better than the other, because
each addresses a different aspect of political and intellectual life.
When can Machiavellian thinking be useful?
When a country faces war, a political crisis, internal division, or a serious
threat to its stability, it needs realistic leadership. Such leadership must
know how to deal with dangers, balance competing interests, and prevent the
collapse of state institutions. However, the danger begins when Machiavellian
thinking becomes a permanent method of governing. A politician may then become
willing to sacrifice principles, promises, and people’s rights simply to remain
in power. When this happens, politics becomes a network of manipulation and
deception, and citizens lose their trust in government and public institutions.
When can Nietzschean thinking be useful?
When a society suffers from intellectual stagnation, blind obedience, and fear
of change, independent thinking becomes especially important. There is a need
for people who have the courage to question inherited political ideas and
challenge outdated beliefs and practices. However, the danger lies in
misunderstanding Nietzsche’s philosophy and using it to justify authoritarian
rule, contempt for others, or the worship of a leader who claims to be the only
person with the truth and the vision for the future. Real change does not mean
destroying institutions or denying other people’s rights. It means building a
society that is more aware, free, and capable of development.
The practical conclusion
A successful politician needs realism and political skill to govern a country.
But he also needs a clear vision, principles, and intellectual courage so that
he does not become merely a trader in political interests and positions. Realism
without moral limits can turn into opportunism. Change without responsibility
and strong institutions can lead to chaos and dictatorship.
Conclusion
Machiavellian thinking teaches politicians how to deal with power and the
balance of political forces. Nietzschean thinking encourages them to examine
human nature, values, and the need to free people from intellectual dependence.
If Machiavellian thinking becomes a way of governing without moral limits, it
produces politicians guided only by their own interests and turns the state into
an arena of political manoeuvres and backroom deals. If Nietzschean thinking is
misunderstood, it can become an excuse for glorifying individual power and
showing contempt for institutions and political pluralism, instead of
encouraging creativity and personal development.
The real challenge for any politician is not to become entirely Machiavellian or
Nietzschean. It is to be realistic without becoming opportunistic, strong
without becoming authoritarian, courageous without becoming reckless, and
visionary without losing touch with reality. Politics is not simply the art of
staying in power, nor is it merely a revolution against everything that already
exists. Politics is the responsibility of governing the state, protecting
society, safeguarding citizens’ rights, and having the courage to change reality
for the better.
*The author, Elias Bejjani, is a Lebanese expatriate activist
Author’s Email: Phoenicia@hotmail.com
Author’s Website:
https://eliasbejjaninews.com
Pesach Wolicki/Iran CAN’T BELIEVE What Marco
Rubio Just Said
Video-link to a very important commentary by Israel Rabi Pesach Wolicki
addressing numerous Lebanese current vital issues related to the
Terrorist-Iranian Hezbollah's criminal atrocities
Pesach Wolicki/November 11/2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzqmFEGCSHY&t=910s
NB: As I have stated several times, the Taif Agreement did not mention Hezbollah
or its so-called resistance. It clearly stipulated that, within six months, all
Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias would be disarmed and that the legitimate
Lebanese armed forces would extend their authority throughout all Lebanese
territories. However, the Syrian occupier at the time protected Hezbollah and
prevented its disarmament.
Developments Regarding the Arrest of Hezbollah Operatives
Between Batroun and Bsharri
Al-Markaziya / November 11, 2026
Security sources reported that following the arrest of five Hezbollah operatives
in the mountainous area straddling the districts of Batroun and Bsharri, it was
discovered that they did not have their mobile phones in their possession at the
time of the arrest. Immediately after news of the detention spread, other
members of the group went to the house where the detainees had been staying and
retrieved the phones. The sources added that, upon the arrival of the patrol,
the men hurriedly tore up documents they were carrying in an attempt to destroy
them. It has not yet been determined whether these papers contained security
maps or detailed plans of the area; their nature and content are expected to
become clear as the investigation proceeds.
Waltz in Beirut on Monday; U.S. Inclined to Move Away from
UNIFIL
Al-Markaziya / November 11, 2026
According to MTV, U.S. Envoy to the United Nations Michael Waltz will visit
Beirut on Monday and meet with President of the Republic Joseph Aoun in the
morning. Informed sources confirmed that Lebanon has not yet been briefed on
what Waltz intends to bring to Beirut, but emphasized that Lebanon will not
accept any proposal that does not operate under the umbrella of the United
Nations, the European Union, or other influential states; it will specifically
reject any "civilian" approach involving non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
The reports further indicated that while the Americans and the French failed to
reach an agreement in Paris, the U.S. side may bring proposals to Beirut that
the Lebanese state could potentially accept—proposals that might align with the
government’s policy, though their specific content remains undisclosed. MTV also
reported that there is a U.S. inclination to move away from the UN Interim Force
in Lebanon (UNIFIL) in the south, replacing it with a verification committee and
adopting a "framework agreement" as a substitute for UN Security Council
Resolution 1701—a proposal that is considered acceptable to Lebanon.
Aoun:
One Cannot Claim to Be a Proponent of Sovereignty While Criticizing the Army
Al-Markaziya / November 11, 2026
The President of the Republic, General Joseph Aoun, emphasized the necessity of
maintaining internal cohesion in light of regional and international
developments. He stressed that no one can claim to be a proponent of
sovereignty—or profess love for their country—while simultaneously criticizing
the army and security forces. These institutions work to preserve security and
stability, extend the authority of the state—which includes ensuring that the
state alone holds arms—and safeguard the economic and social well-being of our
people in the South.
Council of Catholic Patriarchs and Bishops: Committee
Formed to Monitor the Situation of Residents in Southern Border Villages
Al-Markaziya / November 11, 2026
The 59th Ordinary Session of the Council of Catholic Patriarchs and Bishops in
Lebanon continued for its third day at the Maronite Patriarchal See in Bkerke.
Held from November 9 to 13, 2026, the session is themed "Towards a Renewed
Church in Times of Crisis." This day focused on the second pillar of the
session’s theme: "A Church Bearing Witness to Hope." Father Dr. Rami Wakim, Head
of the Chancery of the Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarchate in Rabweh, delivered
an introductory presentation exploring the dimensions of Christian hope and the
Church’s role in bearing witness to it amidst the crises and challenges facing
Lebanon and its people.Following the presentation, participants divided into
working groups, employing the methodology of "conversation in the Spirit." In an
atmosphere of mutual listening and communal discernment, they exchanged ideas,
experiences, and aspirations, with the goal of formulating pastoral and
practical recommendations to strengthen the Church’s witness to hope within
society. A significant portion of the day’s proceedings was dedicated to
discussing the situation in the southern border villages. The Council’s
Secretary-General, Father Jean Younes, presented an urgent appeal—addressed to
the patriarchs, bishops, and other Council members—from the mayors of five
Christian border villages: Alma al-Shaab, al-Qouzah, Debel, Rmeich, and Ain
Ebel. The appeal was titled, "A Cry from the Five Christian Border Villages in
Southern Lebanon: An Urgent Call for Resilience and for a Safe, Dignified
Return."The appeal outlined the humanitarian, living, and security-related
hardships faced by the residents of these villages—both those who have remained
steadfast on their land and those forced to flee—as well as the accompanying
concerns regarding the future of the Christian presence in the region. It called
for "urgent action to ensure the protection of the population, secure the
essentials for their resilience, and create the conditions for their safe and
dignified return to their towns and homes." Following an extensive discussion of
the appeal’s contents, the Council members decided to establish a special
committee—under the auspices of the Council of Catholic Patriarchs and Bishops
in Lebanon—tasked with monitoring the situation of the residents of these
southern border villages in coordination with the Lebanese state, the Holy See,
and relevant international entities. In its initial phase, the committee’s
mandate covers the five aforementioned villages, as well as the town of Yaroun,
with its scope set to expand later to include other southern villages affected
by the war. A statement from the General Secretariat of the Council of Catholic
Patriarchs and Bishops in Lebanon indicated that this decision "serves as an
expression of the Church’s solidarity with the people of these villages. It
reflects the Church’s commitment to standing by them through their suffering,
defending their right to remain on their land and live in safety and dignity,
and translating its mission—to bear witness to hope—into practical action and
initiative, rather than mere words." In the final session of the day, the
Council members reviewed annual reports presented by the secretaries of the
episcopal commissions, as well as the bodies and institutions affiliated with,
supervised by, or collaborating with the Council. These reports covered key
activities, initiatives, and projects undertaken, alongside the challenges and
difficulties encountered, as well as future aspirations to further their mission
in service to the Church and society.
The proceedings will continue on Thursday, November 12, and will conclude on
Friday, November 13, 2026, with the issuance of a final statement outlining the
primary recommendations and decisions.
Mark Daou: Protecting the Army Does Not Exempt Its
Leadership from Accountability
Al-Markazia / November 11, 2026
MP Mark Daou wrote on X:
From Dahr el-Baidar to the highlands of Bsharri, Hezbollah’s security and
military movements—conducted outside the authority of the state—are no longer
mere transgressions; they have become a direct threat to national security.
Reports regarding the arrest of Hezbollah operatives found in possession of maps
necessitate a judicial investigation to uncover the nature of their activities,
their objectives, and those behind them. The government has made the decision to
ban Hezbollah’s military and security operations and to consolidate all arms
under the control of the state. There is no longer any room for evasion or
procrastination. The Army leadership must move beyond rhetoric about extending
state authority and begin implementing a serious security plan that encompasses
the entire Lebanese territory—from the South to the Bekaa, Mount Lebanon, and
the North—with no exceptions and no "red lines."
Protecting the Army does not mean exempting its leadership from accountability,
and respecting the military institution does not mean accepting the obstruction
of decisions made by the political authority.
Lebanon does not have the luxury of waiting; the security of the Lebanese people
must not remain a hostage to the state’s hesitation or Hezbollah’s reckless
adventures.
On the Sidelines of COP31: Salam Meets with Guterres and
Various Heads of State and Government
Al-Markazia / November 11, 2026
Prime Minister Dr. Nawaf Salam is leading the Lebanese delegation to the United
Nations Climate Change Conference (COP31), currently being held in Antalya,
Turkey. He is scheduled to deliver Lebanon’s address tomorrow morning. On the
sidelines of the summit, Prime Minister Salam met with United Nations
Secretary-General António Guterres, as well as several participating heads of
state and government. Prime Minister Salam also held a bilateral meeting with
the Prime Minister of Kuwait, Sheikh Ahmad Abdullah Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah. During
the meeting, they discussed bilateral relations and ways to strengthen them,
while also reviewing the latest regional developments. The discussion further
addressed the support provided by the State of Kuwait to Lebanon—particularly
regarding fuel supplies—as well as cooperation with the Kuwait Fund for Arab
Economic Development, including a potential loan to finance the improvement of
Lebanon’s electricity grid. Additionally, Prime Minister Salam met with the
representative of the President of the Republic of Iraq, Nizar Amidi; their
talks focused on bilateral relations, avenues for enhancing cooperation between
Lebanon and Iraq, and the latest regional developments.
The meeting also touched upon the killing of former Iraqi Member of Parliament
Ahmed al-Alwani in Beirut. Prime Minister Salam reiterated his strong
condemnation of the crime, affirming that "Lebanese judicial and security
authorities are actively pursuing investigations to uncover the circumstances of
the incident, identify those responsible, and bring them to justice." He
emphasized that there will be no leniency when it comes to ensuring the security
of all residents and visitors on Lebanese soil.
G7 Calls for Disarmament of Hezbollah; Aoun: Extending
State Authority Encompasses Achieving Security, Stability, and Socio-Economic
Well-being for the South
Beirut/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11, 2026
G7 foreign ministers have underscored the necessity of disarming all non-state
armed groups in Lebanon—foremost among them Hezbollah—and placing all weaponry
under the authority and control of the state. Meanwhile, President Joseph Aoun,
speaking from Beirut, emphasized that extending state authority is not limited
solely to the state’s exclusive control over arms; it also entails achieving
security and stability, as well as securing the economic and social well-being
of the people in the south. In a statement issued following the conclusion of
the G7 foreign ministers' meetings in Paris on November 9–10, the participants
stressed the need for all parties to fully commit to the ceasefire. They
expressed their support for the implementation of the tripartite framework and
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701. The statement reaffirmed "the
critical importance of disarming all non-state armed groups (militias)—foremost
among them Hezbollah—to ensure that all arms are placed under the authority and
control of the Lebanese state." The ministers urged Lebanon and Israel to make
progress in implementing "pilot zones," which would facilitate the complete and
verifiable disarmament of Hezbollah, alongside the redeployment of Israeli
forces in tandem with the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces. They
reiterated their support for the efforts of the Lebanese authorities to disarm
all non-state armed groups, and reaffirmed their commitment to Lebanon’s
sovereignty and territorial integrity.
A Security Framework Beyond UNIFILFurthermore, with the mandate of the United
Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) set to expire at the end of the year,
the foreign ministers emphasized the importance of establishing a robust,
reliable, and sustainable security framework in Lebanon. This framework should
support the Lebanese Armed Forces, align with UN Security Council Resolution
1701, and facilitate the enhanced implementation of the tripartite framework
agreement. In this context, the statement called for strengthening the
capabilities of the Lebanese Armed Forces and welcomed the establishment of the
EU Security and Defence Mission in Lebanon (EUSM Lebanon), under the European
Union’s Common Security and Defence Policy. On the economic and financial front,
the ministers urged the relevant parties in Lebanon to make progress in adopting
and implementing financial reforms, which would pave the way for an agreement on
a program with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
Aoun: Calling for Security and Political Stability In parallel, the President of
the Republic, Joseph Aoun, emphasized the necessity of maintaining internal
cohesion in light of regional and international developments. He stressed that
"one cannot claim to be a sovereignist or profess love for one's country while
simultaneously criticizing the army and security forces—entities that work to
uphold security and stability, extend the state’s authority (including the
consolidation of arms exclusively under state control), ensure security, and
safeguard the economic and social well-being of our people in the South."
President Aoun made these remarks while receiving a delegation from the "Leaders
Club" initiative at the Presidential Palace. He highlighted the importance of
the private sector as the "backbone of the national economy," expressing his
conviction that "Lebanon does not need foreign aid; rather, it requires security
and political stability, which in turn foster economic growth." Addressing the
current regional and international landscape, he underscored that "it is of
critical importance, at this juncture, to preserve internal cohesion and steer
clear of any domestic conflicts." The President further emphasized the need to
capitalize on the opportunities currently available to Lebanon, reiterating that
"the framework agreement was the best possible outcome." He remarked that
"Lebanon is rich in its people—its thinkers, innovators, and entrepreneurs—who
possess the ability to transform crises into opportunities for recovery." He
enumerated the achievements realized by the government since 2025—progress that,
while slowed by the war, has not been brought to a halt. In this context, he
pointed to Lebanon’s inclusion in the network of ports linked to the
India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC). He pointed out that several
steps must be taken in the coming phase, noting that "the economic crisis
affecting Lebanon stems from the war imposed upon us, the Iran-US conflict, and
the prevailing greed of merchants." Regarding foreign relations, Aoun explained
that his visits to various Arab nations were aimed at restoring Lebanon’s place
within the Arab fold, stating: "We have achieved this, and we continue to work
on strengthening our ties with our sister nations across all sectors." He also
discussed the measures being taken by ministers—each within their respective
ministries—to revitalize the state’s administrative apparatus. He highlighted
the ongoing transition toward digitalization within the General Security, the
Ministry of Economy, and other departments, expressing optimism that an
electronic identification project would launch by the end of this year, which
would facilitate access to government, banking, and administrative services.
Reconstruction and the Consolidation of Arms
On the financial front, the President emphasized the necessity of passing a law
to address the "financial gap," stressing that this issue must be approached
without populism or personal interests. He further underscored the importance of
reconstructing the South—a core component of the Lebanese demands outlined in
the "framework agreement." He stated: "Extending the state’s authority is not
merely about consolidating arms under its control; it also entails ensuring
security and addressing the economic and social needs of our brethren in the
South—who have suffered since 1969—as well as providing alternatives, whether
through reconstruction or by fostering economic strength in their regions. It is
high time for them to live in security and dignity."
Hezbollah Tampers with Civil Peace... Right Under the
State’s Nose
Nawaf Salam: The Era of Impunity and Sweeping Things Under the Rug Is Over
Nidaa Al-Watan/ November 12, 2026
From Dahr el-Baidar to the barren highlands (jroud) of Tannourine and
Bsharri—and potentially in other, as-yet-undisclosed areas—Hezbollah is poking
its finger in the eye of the Lebanese state. It seizes the state by its most
vulnerable point: 'civil peace,' which it uses as a pretext to undermine the
state’s authority. While security forces do apprehend suspects and subject them
to interrogation, one must ask: has the detection of such suspicious activities
become a matter of mere coincidence or reactive, ad-hoc security responses,
rather than the result of proactive intelligence work? Where is the role of the
legitimate state apparatuses tasked with safeguarding civil peace—a goal that
fundamentally requires dismantling the military structures and security
apparatuses that operate outside state authority, foremost among them those
belonging to Hezbollah, in order to preserve national stability? Does the ruling
authority realize that by stalling on the consolidation of all arms under its
exclusive control, it is—day by day—depleting the popular, national, and
international capital it once enjoyed, and shattering the hopes that the
Lebanese people had placed in it?
Even as certain factions and mouthpieces aligned with the 'Axis of Resistance'
attempt to downplay the gravity of the 'Jroud Cell' case, security sources have
revealed to *Nidaa Al-Watan* that the arrest of five individuals led to the
discovery of torn documents inside an SUV. These documents contained references
to a 'Rashkida Plan' and a 'Koura Plan,' along with numbered operational axes
and the deployment of various groups under specific designations..." "Unit 1,"
"Unit 2," and "Unit 3"—along with requests for weaponry, including sniper
rifles—were identified, with tasks assigned to two separate groups operating in
Tripoli and Koura.
Notably, the individuals in custody attempted to flee and destroy documents upon
encountering a security patrol; none of them were carrying mobile phones.
According to reports, their names are identified by their initials: "H. D.," "H.
F.," "M. R.," "Q. A.," and "M. A."
Information obtained by *Nidaa Al-Watan* indicates that individuals affiliated
with "the Party" entered an apartment in the town of Banharan—which had served
as a base for the group—immediately after news of the arrests broke. They
removed communication devices, documents, and maps, while other members of the
group went into hiding. Sources revealed that the group had been under intensive
security surveillance, but the clandestine nature of their movements had
previously prevented the collection of sufficient evidence to warrant an arrest.
Reports also point to the existence of weapons caches in the town of Rashkida
(in the Batroun district) and armed activity within the forests of the North.
Meanwhile, the Information Branch conducted raids in Banharan, Bahboush, and
other areas, seizing surveillance camera footage to further the investigation,
uncover the details of the case, and identify the parties potentially behind
these activities.
Salam: No Limit to Investigations Other Than the Law
Against this backdrop, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has taken a direct hand in
overseeing the situation—despite being outside Lebanon to lead the Lebanese
delegation to the climate summit. He has held consultations with the Minister of
Interior and Municipalities, Ahmed Al-Hajjar; the Minister of Justice, Adel
Nassar; the Public Prosecutor, Judge Ahmed Rami Al-Hajj; and the Director
General of the Internal Security Forces, Major General Raed Abdullah. These
discussions focused on the individuals detained in the highlands (jroud) of
Bsharri and Batroun, as the circumstances of their arrest have raised serious
suspicions regarding the nature of their activities. Prime Minister Salam has
taken a firm stance, declaring that "the era of impunity and cover-ups is over,"
and emphasizing that "the investigations now underway will have no limit other
than the law itself."
Demands for Accountability and Warnings Against Strife
In parallel with the government’s actions, political voices have increasingly
called for an expansion of the investigations, arguing that responsibility
should not be limited to the five individuals currently in custody. In a joint
statement, Members of Parliament Sethrida Tawk Geagea and Melhem Tawk questioned
why this group was present in the northern highlands, the nature of the
documents they attempted to destroy—which reportedly contained references to
specific towns, organized groups, and sniper weaponry—and who might have
commissioned them. They further questioned whether the group had been planning
to target specific areas or individuals. The MPs called for the scope of the
investigation to be broadened to include anyone found to be involved in the
planning, financing, or directing of these activities, urging close coordination
between security agencies and the relevant judicial authorities. For his part,
the leader of the Kataeb Party, MP Sami Gemayel, escalated his rhetoric. Writing
on "X," he stated: "On the roads to Jerusalem, Damascus, and Sanaa, Hezbollah
has lost its way to the south—ending up instead in Fanar, and in the highlands
of Bsharri and Tannourine, well beyond Dahr el-Baidar." He argued that dragging
Lebanon into wars and defying state authority—compounded by the discovery of a
shipment of explosives and security-related movements in Mount Lebanon—poses a
direct threat to national security and civil peace. He demanded that the
leadership of Hezbollah be referred to the Judicial Council, adding: "Otherwise,
the Council itself should be abolished."
Meanwhile, MP Ghiath Yazbek condemned the presence of individuals linked to "the
Party" in the highlands of Batroun and Bsharri, questioning the purpose of their
activities in areas far removed from the border with Israel. He warned that
security laxity invites strife, noting that the interception of the shipment at
Dahr el-Baidar and the detention of the group in the northern highlands were
merely coincidental. He urged officials to take decisive action before "the
structure of the state collapses upon everyone’s heads."
Qassem Rejects State Monopoly on Arms and Negotiations
Conversely, Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem continued to
challenge and threaten state authority. He reiterated his rejection of any
disarmament of the party and called on the government to withdraw from the
"framework agreement," asserting that "there is no longer any need for
negotiations." Thus, Qassem’s position once again raises the question of who
holds the right to determine Lebanon’s sovereign choices: constitutional
institutions, or an armed party that reserves for itself the authority to decide
on the fate of its weapons, negotiations, war, and peace—all while
simultaneously calling for support for the Lebanese Army and the rejection of
conditional aid?
Washington’s Vision for the Post-UNIFIL Era
Amid the ongoing tug-of-war between the state and the "mini-state" [Hezbollah],
the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations—or, as noted in the text, Mike
Waltz—is set to visit Lebanon next week. He brings with him a vision for the
post-UNIFIL phase, advocating for direct communication between the Lebanese and
Israeli militaries to coordinate conditions on the ground in the south, while
also calling for the repeal of the law that criminalizes contact with Israelis.
Should this prove unfeasible, Washington might instead support increasing the
number of UNTSO (United Nations Truce Supervision Organization) observers, or
establishing a limited international force consisting of no more than 100
personnel.
The Killing of al-Alwani: An Investigation That Transcends Borders
In a separate security matter, the murder of former Iraqi MP Ahmed al-Alwani in
Beirut has sparked concerns that regional score-settling may be spilling over
into Lebanon. His chief of staff, Bashar al-Dulaimi, revealed to *Nidaa
al-Watan* that the last contact with al-Alwani took place on the evening of
November 5, shortly after he arrived at an apartment in the Tariq al-Jadida
neighborhood. Communication was subsequently lost, and his body was discovered
on November 9. Al-Alwani, who had been released in April 2025, was preparing to
participate in a conference in London on November 11 (yesterday). Al-Dulaimi
called for a comprehensive Lebanese-Iraqi investigation that does not rule out
political motives, while Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam condemned the
crime, asserting that "Beirut cannot remain an arena for crime and a lack of
security."
The mysterious killing of Al-Alwani sparks conflicting
accounts and political division... Baghdad awaits the conclusion of the
investigation... while his office calls for a review of airport surveillance
footage.
Baghdad: Hamza Mustafa / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
Conflicting accounts have emerged regarding who might be behind the killing of
former Iraqi Member of Parliament Ahmed Al-Alwani in the Lebanese capital,
Beirut. As investigations into the circumstances of the crime continue, the
timing of movements captured by surveillance cameras has raised questions
regarding his arrival at the apartment where his body was later discovered.
Anwar Al-Alwani, a lawyer and cousin of the deceased, has directly accused the
Lebanese group "Hezbollah" of being behind the crime, though no public evidence
has been presented to substantiate these claims. According to another
account—relayed by activists and attributed to Al-Alwani’s wife—a Sunni
political figure had contacted him, urging him to travel to Beirut immediately,
while insisting that their identity remain concealed, even from his own family
members. It has not been possible to independently verify either account or to
establish a link between any of the mentioned parties and the crime, amid a
political debate that has reignited the country’s sectarian divisions.
Reviewing Airport Surveillance Footage
On Wednesday, Al-Alwani’s media office released a detailed statement regarding
his arrival in Beirut on November 5. Citing timelines allegedly derived from
surveillance camera footage, the office has called on Lebanese authorities to
identify the individuals appearing in the recordings and to investigate their
potential connection to the apartment and the crime itself. According to the
statement, Al-Alwani arrived at Rafic Hariri International Airport on Middle
East Airlines flight ME325 from Erbil at 16:41—14 minutes ahead of the scheduled
arrival time. The office noted that recordings show individuals leaving the
apartment at 16:55, approximately 14 minutes after the plane landed. The office
stated that Al-Alwani likely completed entry procedures and collected his
luggage, departing the airport around 17:15; however, it noted that the exact
time he reached his accommodation and the route he took remain to be verified.
It added that the last documented communication between Al-Alwani and the media
office took place at 21:05 and lasted two minutes and thirty seconds, during
which he confirmed his arrival in Beirut and his transit from the airport to his
place of residence. Regarding subsequent movements, the office indicated that
preliminary information suggests the individuals in question may have returned
to the building around 23:00, while recordings show them departing at 23:57. The
statement emphasized that these timestamps do not establish the time the crime
occurred—a determination that remains the purview of forensic medicine and
criminal investigation. Furthermore, the office refuted reports circulating that
Al-Alwani had stayed at a hotel in Beirut, confirming that he was not in any
hotel on the day of his arrival. The office requested a review of footage from
cameras at the airport, the building, and the surrounding roads, and that this
be cross-referenced with flight data and entry logs. It also called for the
identification of individuals appearing in the footage, and an investigation
into whether there were any prior communications or arrangements linked to
Al-Alwani’s arrival and the movements of those individuals. Furthermore, it
urged the Iraqi government, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Iraqi
Embassy in Beirut to follow up on the matter and coordinate with the Lebanese
authorities.
Awaiting the Completion of the Investigation
Indicating that multiple hypotheses are being explored, a Lebanese judicial
source stated that there is currently no evidence of financial motives or
robbery. The source suggested that the theories under investigation may include
a political motive or a background related to a clan-based vendetta. It was
noted, however, that this is not a final conclusion, as the motives for the
killing have not yet been established, nor has any evidence been found to
clarify the underlying circumstances. The source added that the perpetrators
concealed Al-Alwani’s phones and passport, which have yet to be recovered. In
Baghdad, Parliament Speaker Heibat al-Halbousi called for the completion of the
investigation and for coordination between the relevant authorities in both
countries to uncover the circumstances of the incident and determine legal
responsibility. In a statement, he affirmed that the Parliament is monitoring
the case and expressed his condolences to the Albu Alwan clan and the Al-Alwani
family. The Sovereignty Alliance (Tahaluf al-Siyada), led by Khamis al-Khanjar,
also urged the Iraqi government to follow up on the investigation and hold those
involved accountable, condemning what it described as the assassination of
Al-Alwani. The alliance stated that Al-Alwani was known for advocating on behalf
of his community and defending their rights, adding that he had been targeted by
unnamed parties. In Anbar, Governor Omar Mashaan al-Dabbous mourned Al-Alwani,
writing in a post that his death followed his previous experience of
imprisonment, and describing him as having been "wronged and murdered."
Al-Alwani rose to political prominence during the protests in Anbar in late
2012, where he opposed the government of former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
He was subsequently arrested in December 2013 following an armed clash during a
raid on his home in Ramadi—an incident that resulted in the death of his
brother, Ali, and several members of the security forces. In 2014, he was
sentenced to death, but he was later released in April 2025 under legal
procedures falling within the scope of a general amnesty law.
Jurisdiction
Legal expert Ali al-Tamimi stated to *Asharq Al-Awsat* that the Lebanese
judiciary holds primary jurisdiction over the investigation and trial, given
that the crime took place in Beirut and the body was discovered there. He added
that Article 6 of the Iraqi Penal Code pertains to crimes committed within Iraq
and, in his view, does not apply to the case under investigation. Al-Tamimi
explained that, at this stage, the crime is legally classified as "homicide,"
while the term "assassination" serves as a political or media descriptor; it
only acquires a specific legal significance—linked to a political motive—if such
a motive is established by the investigation. He further noted that if a
political motive is proven, it could potentially trigger the application of
Lebanon’s 1958 Counter-Terrorism Law. Lebanese authorities remain the primary
source for determining the circumstances of the crime, its motives, and the
parties responsible; as of now, no definitive findings have been announced
regarding the identities of the suspects or any potential links they may have to
Al-Alwani.
Al-Alwani... From the Anbar Sit-ins to a Mysterious Death
in Beirut / He Opposed Al-Maliki and Spent 11 Years in Prison Following a Clash
with Security Forces
Baghdad: Hamza Mustafa / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
The career of Iraqi politician Ahmed Al-Alwani—whose body was discovered on
Tuesday in an apartment in the Lebanese capital, Beirut—was deeply intertwined
with the shifts and conflicts that have defined Iraq since 2003. He transitioned
from parliamentary work to the forefront of protests against the government of
former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. This culminated in his arrest and an
11-year imprisonment, following a bloody security operation at his home in the
city of Ramadi. He later returned to public life after his release in April
2025. Al-Alwani belonged to the Albu Alwan tribe, one of the major tribes in
Anbar, western Iraq. He represented the province in the Iraqi Parliament and was
a member of the "Iraqiya" list, led by former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi. He
held a PhD in Earth Sciences from the University of Baghdad and served as the
head of the parliamentary Economic Committee. Al-Alwani rose to prominence in
late 2012 when he joined the protest movement that began in Anbar before
spreading to other Sunni-majority provinces. The protests—centered in sit-in
squares in Ramadi, Fallujah, and other cities across the province—demanded an
end to what participants described as the political marginalization and
security-related targeting of the Sunni community, as well as a review of the
government’s policies regarding the western regions. Regarding the confrontation
with al-Maliki, al-Alwani was among the most prominent figures to champion the
demands of the protesters and escalate the political standoff with al-Maliki’s
government. His stance went beyond mere support for the protests; his speeches
and statements were marked by sharp criticism of the then-prime minister, making
him a central figure in the political conflict between the central government
and Sunni leaders in Anbar. Meanwhile, factions within the government and among
Shiite political forces viewed the sit-ins as a threat to political and security
stability, accusing some participants of allowing armed groups to exploit the
protest sites. As tensions mounted, the protests became a primary focal point of
division in Iraq—a period that preceded the collapse of the security situation
across large parts of Anbar in 2014 and the rise of the Islamic State (ISIS). A
critical turning point in al-Alwani’s trajectory occurred on December 28, 2013,
when he was arrested by security forces during a raid on his home in Ramadi. The
operation was preceded by armed clashes between the security unit tasked with
executing the arrest warrant and al-Alwani’s guards and family members; the
exchange resulted in the deaths of his brother, Ali, several of his guards, and
an officer and personnel from the security force.
At the time, Iraqi authorities stated that the force was executing a judicial
warrant against his brother, Ali, and that they had come under fire, resulting
in casualties among their ranks. However, al-Alwani’s arrest drew political and
legal objections—notably because he was a member of parliament and, as such,
enjoyed parliamentary immunity. The incident served as an additional catalyst
for escalating tensions between the central government and the protest movement
in Anbar. Its repercussions extended well beyond his arrest; it was followed by
a government decision to dismantle the sit-in in Ramadi, which triggered armed
clashes in Anbar. Subsequently, in early 2014, the organization known as "ISIS"
expanded its presence into Fallujah and other areas.
Death Sentences and Imprisonment
Al-Alwani later faced a series of legal charges stemming from the clashes that
accompanied his arrest. In November 2014, the Central Criminal Court sentenced
him to death for the killing of two security personnel during the confrontation,
in addition to life imprisonment sentences in other cases involving injuries to
members of the security forces. Al-Alwani denied the charges, while human rights
organizations questioned the integrity of the judicial proceedings, citing
concerns regarding trial guarantees and his right to a defense. The
Inter-Parliamentary Union also monitored his case for years, concluding that his
arrest took place under circumstances that violated his parliamentary immunity.
Despite the death sentences, Al-Alwani remained in prison for over a decade
before his case became eligible for a general amnesty. On April 23, 2025, he was
released following a legal and tribal settlement—which included the withdrawal
of a complaint by the family of one of the victims of the raid, in exchange for
financial compensation—thereby enabling him to benefit from the General Amnesty
Law.
The Final Journey
Following his release from prison, al-Alwani did not return to his former
position in parliament; however, he resumed his political and social contacts.
He spent some time in Ramadi before relocating to Erbil, the capital of the
Kurdistan Region. His reappearance and his engagement with various political and
tribal figures reignited questions regarding the role he might play in the
coming period—particularly amid discussions concerning the future of
Sunni-majority regions, including proposals for the establishment of a federal
region in Anbar and other areas. He arrived in Beirut on November 5, traveling
from Erbil. According to information reported by Lebanese media, he stayed
briefly at a hotel in the Hamra district before moving to an apartment in the
Tariq al-Jadida neighborhood—a property that had been rented by other
individuals. After contact with him was lost for several days, his body was
discovered inside the apartment. Preliminary security and judicial reports
indicate that he was killed by strangulation. With the death of al-Alwani, the
spotlight returns to a figure whose political rise was closely tied to a period
of intense polarization in Iraq following 2011—a time marked by protests,
security clashes, and shifts in the balance of power in Anbar and across Iraq as
a whole. Nevertheless, the circumstances surrounding his death in Beirut—and
whether it was linked to his political activities or his recent contacts and
movements—remain open questions.
The “Hezbollah State” Within the Lebanese State: Mapping
the Network of Area and Sector Heads That Sustains the “Resistance Society”
Alma Research/November 11, 2026
Tal Beeri & Dvir Peri
By: Tal Beeri & Dvir Peri
https://israel-alma.org/the-hezbollah-state-within-the-lebanese-state-mapping-the-network-of-area-and-sector-heads-that-sustains-the-resistance-society/
Overview:
Hezbollah conducts its local civilian activities in Lebanon through a structure
of areas and sectors. While Lebanon is officially divided into nine
administrative regions, Hezbollah has divided the country into five areas: the
two southern Areas, known as the ‘First Area’ of Jabal Amel and the ‘Second
Area’ of Jabal Amel; the Beirut Area, designated the ‘Third Area’; the Bekaa
Area, designated the ‘Fourth Area’; and the Mount Lebanon and North Area,
designated the ‘Fifth Area’ (see further details below).
The Area Head (مسؤول منطقة) is Hezbollah’s senior civilian representative within
a geographical area encompassing several local Sectors. The role involves
coordination, participation in ceremonies, meetings with local leadership, and
representation of Hezbollah’s positions in Lebanon’s public and civilian
spheres.
The Sector Head (مسؤول قطاع) operates within a more narrowly defined local area,
maintaining ties with municipal authorities, mukhtars, institutions, religious
figures, associations, and political actors.
Area and Sector Heads enable Hezbollah to maintain continuous contact with local
society and help address the population’s needs. In doing so, they deepen
Hezbollah’s influence and strengthen its standing among the Lebanese public,
particularly its core constituency, and its presence in citizens’ daily lives.
They are not military officials or commanders, but their activities sustain the
“resistance society” that enables Hezbollah’s military activity.
Area and Sector Heads are a highly significant component of the “Hezbollah
state” operating within the Lebanese state. They serve an important function in
Hezbollah’s civilian infrastructure, which supports the daily lives of its
Shiite base and provides services, some of a state-like character, while taking
advantage of the Lebanese government’s persistent weakness.
Hezbollah’s civilian infrastructure is its “game changer.” It is more than a
support mechanism for the organization: it is one of the central sources of
strength that enable its continued existence as a military force.
Hezbollah’s Geographical Division of Lebanon:
Hezbollah divides Lebanese territory into five areas: the two southern Lebanon
Areas, Jabal Amel (red); Beirut (green); the Bekaa (yellow); and Mount Lebanon
and the North (white).
In the south, the ‘First Area’ of Jabal Amel (the part shaded red on the map
south of the Litani River) is associated with the expanse of southern Lebanon
south of the river. A September 2025 statement by Hezbollah’s media apparatus
listed eight Sectors within this Area: Tyre, al-Qasmiya, al-Sahel, Qana, Jouaya,
al-Hujair, Bint Jbeil, and Khiam.
The ‘Second Area’ of Jabal Amel (the part shaded red on the map north of the
Litani River) is associated with the expanse of southern Lebanon north of the
river. It includes the Sidon, al-Zahrani, Jebsheet, Iqlim al-Tuffah, Nabatieh,
and al-Shaqif Sectors.
Under Hezbollah’s geographical division, the Western Bekaa Sector also belongs
to the ‘Second Area’ of Jabal Amel rather than to the Bekaa Area. In July 2025,
the municipal affairs apparatus of the ‘Second Area’ of Jabal Amel organized a
meeting of mukhtars in the Western Bekaa, attended by Sector head Hassan Hisham
(حسان هشام). A notice reviewing the reconstruction activities of “Jihad
al-Binaa” (جهاد البناء) also places the Western Bekaa Sector within the ‘Second
Area’ of Jabal Amel.
Although the Litani River broadly divides Hezbollah’s two southern areas, it
cannot be treated as a precise organizational boundary. While Bint Jbeil and
Nabatieh both formally belong to the Nabatieh Region, Hezbollah has placed them
in different southern areas.
The ‘Third Area’ of Beirut (green) encompasses the city of Beirut, its southern
suburbs (the Dahieh), and apparently also the Northern Metn Coastal Strip (ساحل
المتن الشمالي). Hezbollah’s ‘Fourth Area’ of Bekaa (yellow) encompasses several
official Regions: the Bekaa Region, the Baalbek Region, and the Hermel Region.
Hezbollah’s ‘Fifth Area’ of Mount Lebanon and the North (white) likewise
encompasses four official Lebanese Regions: Mount Lebanon, Jbeil and Keserwan,
the North, and Akkar.
The Organizational Structure of Hezbollah’s Area and Sector Heads:
The mapping of these officials was compiled from local Arabic-language reports
on their activities, including meetings with municipal leaders and mukhtars,
visits to institutions, events held by various Lebanese political parties,
social and welfare activities, and election campaigns. Within these reports, we
sought explicit references combining an official’s name, title, and Area or
Sector of responsibility, comparing publications from different dates. This also
made it possible to identify officeholders for whom no formal appointment
announcement had been published.
The Role of Hezbollah’s Area and Sector Heads in Local Politics:
The public activities of these officials connect Hezbollah’s ongoing operations
with civilian life in local communities. The Area head helps shape an agenda
affecting numerous authorities and institutions, while the Sector head
frequently engages directly with local actors.
At the Area level, a prominent example is a meeting reported in October 2026
between Abdullah Nasser (عبد الله ناصر), Head of the ‘First Area’ of Jabal Amel,
and the heads of 29 municipalities in the south. The meeting addressed work
plans for 2027, including water, electricity, and road services, coordination
with the municipal affairs apparatus, and assistance to displaced residents.
This activity places the Area Head in a position of considerable standing
vis-à-vis local and government authorities and makes him a full participant in
discussions of the area’s needs. In effect, the Lebanese state cooperates with
an officeholder whose position has no formal status within the state and who
holds no legal authority under it.
At the Sector level, engagement is more local and focused. For example, in
October 2026, Hussein Suleiman (حسين سليمان), Head of the Qana Sector, met with
the municipality of Rshaf to discuss the needs of residents and displaced
people. In January 2026, Sheikh Wahid Hawi (وحيد حاوي), Head of the Jouaya
Sector, attended a meeting of the association of mukhtars of Jouaya and the
surrounding villages. The agenda covered services and administrative issues, and
Hawi called for closer coordination with village election committees. Both
examples illustrate the interface between the officeholder and institutions that
channel residents’ needs.
During election campaigns, these officials are visibly involved in forming
electoral lists and negotiating local agreements. In May 2025, the
Hadath-Baalbek municipal council published a message thanking Hassan Hamieh (حسن
حمية) of the Western Baalbek Sector, along with Hezbollah and Amal, for their
contribution to the agreement that enabled the council’s election. That same
month, Abbas Mazloum (عباس مظلوم), Head of the Brital Sector, participated in
the launch of a local electoral list. These are examples of the officials’
involvement in the local electoral arena.
The organization is also represented locally through ties with institutions
serving the civilian population. In October 2026, Dr. Hussein al-Nimr (حسين
النمر), Head of Hezbollah’s Bekaa Area, attended the opening of clinics at
al-Batoul Hospital in Hermel and pledged to promote the hospital’s development.
The officials’ participation in social events also carries ideological
significance. In January 2026, Hussein Fadlallah (حسين فضل الله), Head of
Hezbollah’s Beirut Area, sponsored an event honoring the wounded, organized by
the union of Dahieh municipalities. That same month, Ali Daoun (علي ضعون), Head
of the ‘Second Area’ of Jabal Amel, addressed an organizational gathering of the
Imam al-Mahdi Scouts and emphasized the movement’s contribution to religious and
values-based education. Such events give public visibility to Hezbollah’s
concept of resistance and integrate it into the activities of local
institutions.
Sector Heads sometimes also participate in mediating disputes. In August 2026,
Bilal Dagher (بلال داغر), Head of the al-Jabal Sector, was reported to have
participated alongside an Amal representative in a reconciliation committee in
Khaldeh. The committee presented an agreement between families to the Supreme
Islamic Shiite Council.
This extensive and active civilian engagement with the population serves the
organization’s efforts to consolidate its presence, create dependency,
indoctrinate the population, and build support.
The importance of these officials extends beyond their organizational standing.
They help maintain Hezbollah’s ties with its core constituency, and with the
wider population of each area or sector more generally, strengthening the
organization’s position as an actor involved in community life.
Through these ties, Hezbollah establishes itself as an almost exclusive point of
contact for the civilian population’s needs. In this way, it sustains the
“resistance society,” whose very existence also enables the organization’s
military activity.
Case Study: Sheikh Zayd Daher, Head of Hezbollah’s Sidon Sector
Zayd Daher (زيد ضاهر), a native of Sidon, is a longstanding representative of
the organization in the local arena. As early as July 2010, local media
identified him as a senior Hezbollah official in Sidon, and he was documented in
the same role in September 2026.
On November 21, 2024, the funeral of his son, Hadi Daher (هادي ضاهر), was held
in Sidon. In May 2025, an event was held at the city’s “al-Sayyida al-Zahra”
Hall to screen his recorded testament. Those attending included a member of
Hezbollah’s Political Council and a member of Amal’s Political Bureau,
representatives of Lebanese parties and Palestinian factions, mayors, mukhtars,
heads of civil society organizations, and figures from education, the media, and
culture. At the event, Daher declared his commitment “to continue on the path of
jihad and resistance until all the land of Palestine is liberated, from the
river to the sea,” while pledging to follow Hassan Nasrallah’s path, “no matter
how high the price and no matter the scale of the sacrifices.”
Zayd Daher’s activities illustrate how these organizational functions converge
in a single individual. He engages with religious leaders, associations, and
government offices while also presenting Hezbollah’s political positions to
local audiences and allies.
In April 2024, Daher headed a delegation that visited Sunni Mufti Salim Soussane
(سليم سوسان), Jaafari Mufti Mohammad Oseiran (محمد عسيران), and religious judge
(qadi, قاضي) Jamal Faqih (جمال فقيه). Alongside Ramadan greetings, the
discussions addressed economic hardship and the work of aid committees. These
visits indicate channels of communication that cross sectarian boundaries.
His ties with institutions involved in aiding were evident in September 2023,
when he led a delegation to the offices of the heads of administrative units at
the Government Serail in Sidon. These included officials responsible for land
registration, education, the economy, agriculture, civil registration, and
housing. The delegation also included the head of the Sidon Sector’s relations
branch and members of its relations committee, indicating a local structure with
additional officeholders working in coordination with the Sector head.
Institutional activity is combined with political representation. According to a
November 2025 publication by the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Daher
addressed one of its events in the Sidon and al-Zahrani area, opposed the
surrender of Hezbollah’s weapons, and described the struggle in political,
economic, and social terms alongside its military dimension. In these remarks,
he presented the organization’s position to a local audience and allies, linking
activity in the civilian sphere to the concept of resistance.
Another arena of his activity is the close relationship he maintains with
Palestinian factions in the Sidon area. Daher meets periodically with
representatives of the various factions to discuss a range of social, security,
political, and other issues.
Sources:
Hezbollah’s Geographical Division of Lebanon:
https://awraq.org/articles.php?id=21814
https://www.almanartv.com.lb/article/1260707
https://alahednews.news/news/330016
https://alahednews.news/post/82729/%D8%A7%D9%
More Than One Million in Lebanon Face Acute Food
Insecurity, UN Says
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
More than one million people in Lebanon face acute food insecurity, the United
Nations warned on Wednesday, following years of war and economic crisis.
Lebanon has endured two successive wars with neighboring Israel since 2023 and
remains mired in an unprecedented economic collapse triggered seven years ago.
Nearly a quarter of the population face crisis levels of acute food insecurity
or worse, said a joint statement by the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization,
the World Food Program and the Lebanese agriculture ministry.
They called for "urgent action" to alleviate the situation.
The number is expected to rise to 1.15 million by the middle of next year, they
added.
"Employment opportunities remain limited, savings have been depleted and debt
remains high, while the cost of food, fuel and other essentials continues to
strain household budgets," the UN bodies said.
The UN defines such levels of food insecurity as households facing malnutrition,
or only being able to meet minimum needs through emergency measures such as
selling assets.
Of most concern are conditions in conflict-affected areas of south Lebanon, as
well as in impoverished regions in the north and east, they said. Lebanon's
authorities estimate that the cost of two wars between Israel and Lebanese group
Hezbollah since October 2023 amounts to around $27 billion. The last war,
launched in March in support of Hezbollah's patron Iran, displaced more than one
million people in Lebanon. That number has fallen to around 300,000 since
violence subsided in June.The fighting broke out as Lebanon struggled to recover
from its worst ever economic crisis, which began in 2019. Beirut has been
seeking a bailout from the International Monetary Fund but has yet to implement
reforms demanded by the institution to release the aid.
Etienne Saqr – Abu Arz: People’s Daily Bread First
November 11, 2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/11/159170/
Statement issued by the Guardians of the Cedars Party – The Lebanese Nationalist
Movement
People’s Daily Bread First
The most dangerous aspect of the Lebanese crisis is that poverty is no longer a
temporary emergency; it has become a harsh reality haunting families regarding
their daily bread, medicine, and children's education.
In September 2026, annual inflation in Lebanon reached 17.53%, compared to 1.6%
in Israel in the same month. (cas.gov.lb, boi.org.il)
UNICEF reported that four out of five assessed families are struggling to secure
their basic needs, while 1.24 million people face acute food insecurity.
Meanwhile, the World Bank projects the economy to contract by 6.4% this year.
(unicef.org, wfp.org, documents.worldbank.org)
These terrifying figures are not merely numbers on paper; they represent
families groaning under the weight of soaring prices, patients unable to secure
their treatments, and children going to sleep hungry.
As for the pillars of power, they remain glued like idols to their chairs,
indifferent to the tragedy of their people, lifting not a finger to alleviate
its burden, as if the suffering of the people does not concern them.
Conclusion:
A state that fails to protect its people's daily bread inevitably fails to
protect the homeland.
Let the pillars of power remember that hunger is the fuel of revolutions… Beware
of the wrath of a people crushed under the weight of hunger and despair.
And let them also remember that governance is an honor and a responsibility, not
transient chairs and privileges.
At Your Service, Lebanon
Etienne Saqr – Abu Arz
Hezbollah reportedly rebuilding networks in southern Lebanon pilot zones
David Daoud/FDD-Long war Journal/November 11/2026
November 10, 2026
Hezbollah is reportedly reestablishing its presence and rebuilding intelligence
networks in three southern Lebanese villages designated to test the group’s
disarmament, despite the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) declaring operational
control over those areas in September. The reports come amid stalled
negotiations over independent verification of the LAF’s operations and new
reporting that the US-led military coordination mechanism considers the pilot
program unsuccessful.
On November 9, George Hayek of the Beirut-based newspaper Al Modon reported that
the Military Coordination Group for Lebanon (MCG4L), headed by US Marine Corps
Lieutenant General Joseph Clearfield, had assessed the pilot program as
unsuccessful in Zawtar al Gharbiyeh, Froun, and Srifa. Hezbollah, the report
said, was exploiting the return of displaced residents to restore its presence,
while disputes over searches of private property and implementation delays
impeded the LAF’s work.
Citing diplomatic sources familiar with Washington’s position, Al Modon also
reported that US officials viewed a lack of political will, rather than
inadequate LAF capabilities or international assistance, as the main obstacle to
implementation. Military negotiations held at US Central Command (CENTCOM)
headquarters in Tampa, Florida, from October 20 to 22 had failed to produce an
agreement on independent verification, the newspaper said.
The three pilot villages were selected as initial implementation areas under the
June 26 US-brokered Trilateral Framework between Lebanon, Israel, and the United
States. The agreement’s security annex establishes a four-stage process:
clearing unauthorized armed personnel, weapons, and military infrastructure;
verifying clearance through an agreed third party; establishing exclusive LAF
operational control to prevent their return; and beginning Lebanese-led
reconstruction. The annex also calls for ongoing verification alongside
clearance operations.
Israel withdrew its forces from Zawtar al Gharbiyeh in July, allowing the LAF to
deploy there. Froun and Srifa were already outside Israeli-held territory,
although the LAF reinforced its existing presence in the villages.
Ongoing reports of Hezbollah’s return to the pilot zones
On November 5, the Israeli outlet Ynet reported that Hezbollah was gradually
returning to the three villages more than 100 days after the pilot program
began. According to military correspondent Elisha Ben Kimon, Hezbollah had
resumed some of its civilian activities and reintroduced operatives as part of
broader efforts to restore its intelligence-gathering capabilities. The report
also described Hezbollah reconnaissance of Israeli military positions along the
northern border.
Ben Kimon reported that Israel considered the LAF’s searches insufficient,
particularly its reluctance to enter and inspect private property. Negotiations
over independent verification remained stalled.
A November 6 investigation by the Arabic-language outlet Erem News provided
additional details. Citing Lebanese security sources, the outlet reported that
local Hezbollah operatives were moving covertly in Zawtar al Gharbiyeh, Froun,
and Srifa to collect intelligence, survey former military positions, assess
damage to the group’s infrastructure, and examine opportunities for
redeployment.
The sources described efforts to preserve local communications networks, former
supply routes, and access to underground facilities. They said Hezbollah was
avoiding an overt armed presence and relying on operatives familiar with the
villages and their residents. Surveillance and military restrictions reportedly
complicated moving heavy weapons into the areas.
The reported return predates the November accounts. On October 7, Israel’s
public broadcaster Kan reported that Hezbollah operatives had resumed limited
activities in all three pilot zones, operating under civilian cover and through
local intermediaries to collect intelligence, assess damage, and reestablish the
group’s presence.
Kan’s Arab affairs correspondent, Roee Kais, also quoted an unnamed Lebanese
political figure opposed to Hezbollah who criticized Beirut’s inability to
prevent the group’s return and argued that disarmament was as important as
securing Israel’s withdrawal.
Hezbollah’s civilian organizations resume operations
Hezbollah-affiliated civilian organizations have also returned to the pilot
villages.
On August 20, This Is Beirut published an investigation by Claudia Groeling and
Ralph Atrach documenting the return of Hezbollah’s Islamic Health Organization,
its healthcare and emergency-services arm, to Zawtar al Gharbiyeh.
During a July 23 visit, the reporters observed an Islamic Health Organization
ambulance entering the village under LAF escort, while ambulances belonging to
the Lebanese Red Cross and the Risala Scouts of Amal, a Hezbollah-allied
Lebanese Shiite political party, were denied entry. A security source told the
outlet that only Hezbollah-affiliated emergency vehicles had been permitted to
enter.
A local source also reported that Hezbollah’s rabet, its local liaison officer
responsible for military affairs, had returned and was moving openly around the
village. The source said Hezbollah personnel were using affiliations with the
Islamic Health Organization and the Hezbollah-linked Wa Taawano relief
association to facilitate their return.
Ynet’s November 5 report also cited October footage showing Islamic Health
Organization personnel operating alongside LAF soldiers and Amal’s Risala Scouts
in Froun during the recovery of a body following an explosion involving remnants
of war.
Representatives of Hezbollah’s broader civilian network have openly rejected
restrictions associated with the pilot program. In an October 19 investigation,
the independent Egyptian outlet Mada Masr interviewed Wa Taawano director Afif
Shuman, who asserted his organization’s right to operate anywhere in southern
Lebanon and rejected coordination with the ceasefire-monitoring mechanism. Hajj
Ali Khazaal, Hezbollah’s municipal affairs official for southern Lebanon,
separately rejected the framework itself.
The LAF claims operational control as verification remains unresolved
On September 9, the LAF announced that it had achieved operational control over
the three pilot zones. The army reported establishing six checkpoints and 13
observation posts, conducting continuous patrols, and confiscating approximately
1,818 weapons and pieces of ammunition.
However, 1,560 items—approximately 86 percent of the total—were classified as
unspecified light ammunition. The army did not identify how many seized items
belonged to Hezbollah, any Hezbollah operatives disarmed or arrested, or any
Hezbollah command centers, tunnels, or weapons depots dismantled in the
villages.
The LAF said it had searched an unspecified number of residences with their
owners’ consent. It acknowledged that the program’s phases and subsequent
implementation measures had not been fully agreed upon.
Arrangements for independent verification remain unresolved. The October
negotiations at CENTCOM’s Tampa headquarters failed to settle the identity and
authority of a mutually acceptable third-party verifier. According to Al Modon’s
November 9 report, Washington continues seeking an arrangement allowing
independent inspections and certification of areas cleared by the LAF.
Israeli military activity has also complicated implementation. On November 6,
the Lebanese publication L’Orient Today reported that Israeli military vehicles
had advanced toward Zawtar al Gharbiyeh’s water reservoir the previous evening,
prompting Lebanese soldiers to take positions opposite them. The confrontation
ended when the Israeli vehicles withdrew toward Israeli-held Zawtar al Sharqiyeh
around midnight.
The LAF’s posture toward Hezbollah
On November 6, LAF Commander General Rodolphe Haykal reiterated the army’s
priorities during a meeting with senior officers at LAF headquarters in Yarzeh,
southeast of Beirut. Haykal identified the preservation of “internal unity,
stability, and civil peace” as the army’s foremost priority, while reaffirming
its commitment to implementing the political authorities’ decisions and
extending state authority throughout Lebanese territory. He also identified the
continued presence of Israeli forces in Lebanon as “the fundamental problem and
the foremost threat facing our nation.”
Haykal’s latest statement echoes his repeated refusal to clash with Hezbollah
after the Lebanese government banned Hezbollah’s military activities on March 2
and ordered the LAF to disarm the group. Accordingly, the army has adopted a
non-confrontational posture toward Hezbollah.
The LAF and Hezbollah maintain various forms of security coordination and
deconfliction, including negotiated access to Hezbollah positions and transfers
of military sites and equipment to the army since the November 2024 ceasefire.
An LAF officer told This Is Beirut in August that troops encountering Hezbollah
obstruction during disarmament operations would refer the matter through their
chain of command for a political decision.
On September 3, Colonel Raja Amer, deputy commander of the LAF’s South Litani
Sector, told CNN that soldiers would proceed gradually and avoid violence
against Lebanese citizens while refusing to tolerate illegal activity. Asked
whether concerns about another civil war drove the approach, he emphasized
acting slowly and reasonably.
That month, Al Modon reported that the LAF’s additional deployment in Nabatieh
did not include orders to initiate Hezbollah’s disarmament. The report concerned
Nabatieh, rather than the pilot villages. An anonymous senior LAF officer told
the Hezbollah-sympathetic outlet The Cradle on October 12 that the army was
obligated to implement decisions of Lebanon’s constitutional authorities but
must consider civil peace, military cohesion, and the consequences of
confronting Hezbollah.
On October 20, Israeli military spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Ella Waweya
accused LAF personnel of coordinating with Hezbollah to facilitate weapons
transfers, citing a military facility in Kafra, outside the pilot zones. The LAF
rejected the allegations, disputed Israel’s identification of the footage, and
said the ceasefire-monitoring committee documented its clearance operations.
*David Daoud is Senior Fellow at at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
where he focuses on Israel, Hezbollah, and Lebanon affairs.
Sheikh Qassem: No Resistance Disarmament Under Occupation, Hezbollah Open to
Talks After Israeli Withdrawal
Al-Manar Website/November 11/2026
Sheikh Naim Qassem delivers a televised address marking Hezbollah’s Martyrs’
Day, November 11, 2026.Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem called on
the Lebanese authorities to withdraw from the framework agreement, saying they
now had clear grounds to do so given that the Israeli occupation army had failed
to implement any of its provisions for months.
Speaking at Hezbollah’s “Loyalty” rally on Wednesday evening, marking Martyr’s
Day, Sheikh Qassem urged the authorities to stop discussing placing weapons
under state control while Israeli aggression continued. His Eminence stressed
that there would be no state monopoly on the resistance’s weapons, no
regulation, prohibition, or disarmament under occupation.
Sheikh Qassem said Lebanon’s priority must be ending Israeli aggression, calling
on the government to fund the Lebanese Army through the state budget and reject
conditional foreign assistance.
“They openly tell you, ‘We will provide assistance to the army if it kills its
own people, and you follow them.”“Come, let us rebuild our country together,
save it from the darkness of failure, and protect it from the empty rhetoric of
those who sow discord and those who rely on American tutelage. Lebanon belongs
to all of us. We are partners in building it and sharing the cost of protecting
its sovereignty,” his Eminence added.
Israeli Aggression and the Regional Conflict
Addressing regional developments, Qassem said Israeli aggression against Lebanon
and the region was fully backed by the United States and formed part of a major
and dangerous project.
Responding to claims that the Palestinians had initiated the conflict through
the 2023 Al-Aqsa Flood operation, he questioned where the conflict had actually
begun, arguing that Britain had set it in motion and that its real starting
point was the establishment of “Israel” in 1948.His Eminence described the
project as fundamentally one of extermination, saying the Israeli enemy had
killed and displaced Palestinians, transformed infrastructure across Palestine,
and forced millions from their homes to establish the Israeli entity.Sheikh
Qassem criticized the lack of attention to the suffering of Gaza’s population,
saying international parties continued to meet in support of “Israel” and its
claimed right to self-defense while overlooking the plight of Palestinians.
“Where are the international voices, the voices of the people, and the effective
and influential voices? Where are the governments? Where is the United Nations?”
he asked, describing what was happening in Gaza as a “clearly defined crime.”
On Lebanon, Sheikh Qassem rejected the argument that Hezbollah’s involvement in
the war in support of Gaza was the source of the country’s problems, insisting
that occupation was the root cause. His Eminence said “Israel” had maintained
its occupation and pursued territorial expansion, adding that the war of support
was not the cause of the conflict. “Occupation is the problem. Resistance is a
response, a confrontation, and a path to liberation,” he said.
Sheikh Qassem also accused the United States and “Israel” of initiating
aggression against Iran, saying Tehran had the right to defend itself. He
described the regional situation as one of American tyranny and Israeli
criminality, arguing that confronting the threat required resistance involving
the army, the people, and everyone capable of bearing arms across the region.
Sheikh Qassem Defends ‘Unity of Fronts’
Sheikh Qassem said the concept of “unity of fronts” referred to cooperation in
resisting and expelling occupying forces.His Eminence criticized those who
objected to cooperation among resistance groups, arguing that the United States
itself sought alliances with major and smaller countries to pursue what he
described as aggression, while condemning similar cooperation among resistance
movements.
He described such cooperation as a natural right and said the resistance front
should be broader and more inclusive.“Resistance in Lebanon and Palestine needs
Iran, Yemen, Iraq, and every free and honorable person. They do not need us; we
need them.”
National Unity and Protection of Lebanon’s Sovereignty
Turning to domestic affairs, Sheikh Qassem called for a national effort bringing
Lebanese together to defend the country’s territory, protect its sovereignty,
and prevent its enemies from controlling Lebanon. His Eminence warned that the
country faced dangerous and expansionist Israeli aggression, affirming “Israel”
is a criminal entity rejected on humanitarian and international grounds.
He said Israel was seeking to strip Lebanon of its sources of strength in
preparation for occupying its territory and establishing settlements, adding
that Israeli officials had openly declared these objectives.
“There can be no resistance without occupation, but there are people who accept
occupation and reject resistance because they lack sufficient national awareness
and the will to confront it,” he said.
Sheikh Qassem added that the Israeli occupation army would have advanced as far
as Sidon had been able to do, but that the resistance and its supporters had
prevented it from reaching the city.
He said Iran’s assistance through the Iranian-American memorandum of
understanding had contributed to reducing escalation and bringing Lebanon to its
current situation.He also credited the resistance with limiting the Israeli
advance and preventing it from achieving its objectives of consolidating the
occupation and establishing settlements.
“We heard calls for Israel to withdraw because of the resistance.”
Sheikh Qassem said Lebanon faced two choices: surrender or fight. “We have two
options: either surrender or fight, and we choose to fight. Fighting involves
losses, that is true, but surrender leaves nothing. That is why we choose the
better course, which is resistance,” he said.
His Eminence stressed that the resistance must remain in place, continue,
maintain its readiness, and fight whenever necessary to defend the land.
Addressing the Lebanese authorities, Qassem referred to a United Nations report
warning of the risk of ethnic cleansing of Shiites in southern Lebanon,
describing it as an impartial report. He called on the state to provide all the
necessary conditions for the Lebanese Army to confront the Israeli occupation.
“We ask the government: What have you done to enable the army to protect Lebanon
and its people? What have you done to protect your own people?” he said.
Criticism of Foreign Embassies and Calls for Army Support
Sheikh Qassem criticized a statement issued by five embassies, accusing them of
inciting against the resistance, urging Lebanese lawmakers and officials to
confront their own people, and openly interfering in Lebanon’s internal affairs
without addressing the Israeli occupation. He also criticized foreign
representatives who visit Lebanon and press the government to disarm Hezbollah
under the banner of establishing a state monopoly on weapons, while making no
mention of the occupation.
“The problem in Lebanon is the occupation, not the resistance, which defends,
protects, and prevents Israeli expansion,” he said.Sheikh Qassem stressed that
the Lebanese Army’s role was to preserve civil peace and defend the country,
accusing some parties of wanting an army that would kill its own people, plunge
Lebanon into internal conflict, and destabilize the country. He said those
demanding Hezbollah’s disarmament were effectively advancing the same demands as
“Israel.”
Addressing those seeking to surrender the resistance and the country to “Israel”
in exchange for personal gains, he said Lebanon belonged to all its citizens and
that everyone shared responsibility for protecting it. His Eminence also
questioned the political authorities’ commitment to sovereignty while “Israel”
continued its attacks.
No Disarmament Under Occupation
Sheikh Qassem reiterated his rejection of calls to place the resistance’s
weapons under state control while Israeli aggression continued, arguing that
such demands amounted to the disarmament the Israeli enemy wanted to impose
under the cover of its military campaign. “There will be no state monopoly on
the resistance’s weapons, no regulation, no prohibition, and no disarmament
under Israeli occupation,” he said.He questioned why the Lebanese authorities
were making commitments that served the Israeli objectives, urging them to focus
instead on the country’s interests, living conditions, and protection. “Why are
you binding yourselves before the world to positions that serve the Israeli
project?” he asked. His Eminence called on the authorities to stop making
commitments that would constrain Lebanon, saying they should prioritize issues
that benefit the country and protect its population. Sheikh Qassem stressed that
the immediate priorities were ending Israeli aggression, securing the withdrawal
of Israeli occupation forces, allowing residents to return to southern Lebanon,
and beginning reconstruction.
Call for Withdrawal from Framework Agreement
Sheikh Qassem described the Lebanese authorities’ approach to the framework
agreement as involving gratuitous concessions to “Israel.”He identified two main
problems with the agreement. First, he said, it had opened the door to
engagement with “Israel” without securing any gains for Lebanon.
Second, he argued that the Lebanese side had conceded everything before
negotiations began, while the other side had offered nothing in return. Sheikh
Qassem said negotiations were no longer necessary because the framework
agreement had already granted the Zionist enemy everything it wanted without
leaving Lebanon anything in return. He therefore called on the Lebanese
authorities to withdraw from the agreement, saying the Israeli enemy’s failure
to implement any of its provisions for several months provided them with clear
grounds to reconsider their position. He also argued that the framework
agreement violated the Taif Agreement, the Constitution, and national
sovereignty and divided the country along what he described as an erroneous
vertical line. Qassem Says Trump’s Defeat and Netanyahu’s Setbacks Have Regional
Implicationsز Sheikh Qassem referred to what he described as an “earthquake” in
the United States, citing Trump’s electoral defeat and Netanyahu’s political
setbacks. His Eminence said these developments could have positive implications
for Lebanon. He described Lebanon’s choice as clear: sovereignty, protected
through the army, the resistance, and the people, or foreign tutelage,
occupation, and surrender.
“Our choice is sovereignty.”
Sheikh Qassem called on the Lebanese authorities to stand together with the
resistance within the framework of sovereignty, unity, and liberation and to
support the Lebanese Army through the state budget rather than accept
conditional foreign assistance. He said Iran had established itself as a pivotal
regional country and that the future regional landscape would be shaped with the
support of Iran and other countries in the region. He predicted that the
regional order would change, but not according to the American-Israeli model,
which he said had come to an end.
Sheikh Qassem also said Gulf countries and other regional states had an
opportunity to reach an understanding with Iran on shaping the region’s future.
He called for an end to the war in Yemen and urged that Yemenis be allowed to
determine their own future.“The killing of civilians under any pretext is
unacceptable.”Sheikh Qassem added that “Israel” would never be able to establish
stability in Lebanon and would eventually withdraw. “We are strong and stronger
than them because of our faith and our rights. We are the people of this land,
through our great sacrifices and the blood of the martyrs that restores dignity
and liberates the land. We are the people of ‘We are at your service, Oh
Hussein,’ and we are strong through our unwavering steadfastness and firm
determination,” he said.
Survey Shows Support for Resistance, According to Consultative Center
Sheikh Qassem cited figures from the Consultative Center, saying 82% of
respondents considered ending the aggression the most important issue. He said
90% viewed resistance as necessary at the current stage, while 84% considered
weapons essential for protection and deterrence as long as threats persisted.
Another 86% believed the framework agreement compromised the national interest.
He noted that the survey had been conducted among the Shiite community before
the provision of shelter and accommodation for displaced families. Sheikh Qassem
said the Lebanese people and their families remained exceptional in their
willingness to make sacrifices and give without expecting anything in return,
adding that support for the resistance would remain at 85%, 90%, and 95%.
Qassem Praises National Gathering and Calls for Joint Reconstruction Effort
Sheikh Qassem said Hezbollah was not alone and that it had allies among Lebanese
patriots.
He praised participants in the National Gathering, saying they had demonstrated
their commitment to a free, independent, and patriotic Lebanon.Addressing the
Lebanese state and political forces, he called for joint efforts to rebuild the
country, recover depositors’ funds, improve living conditions, and protect
Lebanon from foreign tutelage and internal discord. “Come, let us rebuild our
country together, save it from the darkness of failure and protect it from the
empty rhetoric of those who sow discord and those who rely on American tutelage.
Lebanon belongs to all of us. We are partners in building it and sharing the
cost of protecting its sovereignty,” he said.
He warned against allowing advocates of internal discord, supporters of American
tutelage, and the Israeli enemy’s allies to surrender any part of Lebanese
territory.
Martyr’s Day: Qassem Pays Tribute to Martyrs and Their Families
In the opening section of his address, Qassem spoke about martyrdom, describing
it as a path to upholding and defending the truth and a source of dignity,
pride, and success.
He said martyrdom was undertaken at God’s command and guidance for the benefit
of humanity, carrying the meanings of victory and spiritual reward. Sheikh
Qassem paid particular tribute to Ahmad Qasir, whose death on November 11, 1982,
is commemorated by Hezbollah as Martyr’s Day.
Addressing Qasir, he said: “We chose Martyr’s Day to coincide with the
anniversary of your martyrdom because your operation was great, and you were a
pioneering model for specialized martyrdom operations.”He added: “Ahmad, you
were inspired, and those who inspired you were the late Imam Khomeini, the
martyred Imam Khamenei, Sayyed Musa al-Sadr, and the master of the nation’s
martyrs, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.”
Sheikh Qassem said Martyr’s Day honored all martyrs and missing persons whose
fate Hezbollah was seeking to establish, as well as their families, the wounded,
prisoners, and all those killed in Lebanon.He said the martyrs remained alive
through their sacrifices, their families, and the continuation of the
resistance. He also described the occasion as a day for the families of martyrs,
who had made sacrifices without counting the cost, and an opportunity to renew
their commitment and preserve the legacy of those killed. Sheikh Qassem
described these families as “great and honorable,” adding that Lebanon had
reached what he called the stage of a “martyr society.”
“We have reached a stage in which we have become a martyr society, and together
we are all alive, those of us present on earth and those looking down upon us
from the heavens,” he said.
Addressing the families and supporters of the resistance, he said, “You are the
noblest, purest, and most honorable. You are the steadfast and the sacrificing.
You are the living, and with you come dignity and honor. You are the guardians
of the call: ‘Never to humiliation.'”
Hezbollah’s Sheikh Qassem concluded by paying tribute to all the martyrs,
particularly Sheikh Ragheb Harb, Sayyed Abbas Al-Mousawi, Sayyed Hasan
Nasrallah, Sayyed Hashem Safieddine, and Hajj Imad Moughniyeh. His Eminence
ended his address by expressing confidence in eventual success and citing the
Quranic verse: “And it is Our duty to grant victory to the believers.”
Source: Al-Manar Website
The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News
published on November
11-12/2026
(Some of the News reports below are
translated from Arabic by AI)
White House Describes Investigations
Democrats Plan as Amounting to “Flagrant Criminal Conduct”
Washington / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
The White House has issued a warning to Democrats over investigations they plan
to conduct into the administration of US President Donald Trump, going so far as
to claim that such investigations — which are part of Congress’s traditional
oversight duties — could amount to “flagrant criminal conduct,” according to the
Associated Press. White House Counsel Will Scharf issued the warning in a letter
dated Monday, addressed to Representative Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the
House Oversight Committee. Garcia is likely to chair the powerful committee in
the new Congress, which will begin its work in January, where Democrats hold the
majority. Garcia had advised Trump administration officials to “lawyer up”
following his party’s surprisingly large victories in last week’s midterm
elections. In response, Scharf wrote in Monday’s letter that “threats directed
at executive branch officials, intended to deter them from public service, or
any actions intended solely to abuse or instill fear in the recipients, may
cross the line into flagrant criminal conduct.” For his part, Garcia commented
on the letter, saying: “It sounds like Donald Trump has something to hide,”
stressing that Congress’s investigative powers do not require “permission from
the White House.”Garcia added: “Congress has broad powers to conduct
investigations and exercise oversight, a power inherent in the power to
legislate. The American people voted overwhelmingly for us to pass laws aimed at
rooting out corruption and abuse of power.” In an interview with CNN aired
Sunday, Todd Blanche, who serves as Attorney General, said there “could be” a
crime warranting investigation if Democrats’ statements turned into threats.
However, he appeared to adopt a more conciliatory tone during an appearance in
Missouri this week, saying: “Congress has oversight authority; it always has had
it, and it always will. The Department of Justice and the federal government
work with Congress to respond to its inquiries — whether through subpoenas or
formal letters — so we will not stop cooperating with Congress.” He added:
“There is nothing I said this weekend, or in the past, that suggests otherwise.”
Democrats have expressed a desire to examine Trump’s real estate projects around
the US capital, in addition to his cryptocurrency dealings in cooperation with
his special envoy Steve Witkoff.
Will Trump Settle the Iran War at the Negotiating Table?
Experts Expect Understandings… and Fear a Deal That Lets Tehran Rearm
Washington: Heba Al-Qudsi / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
US President Donald Trump has opened the door to a new phase of negotiations and
bargaining to end the war with Iran, after speaking of “positive momentum”
following his meeting with Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh
Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani at the White House on Monday, and saying the
war had ended “effectively from a military standpoint.”But American optimism was
not accompanied by a lifting of the naval blockade or economic concessions to
Tehran, placing Qatari mediation before a complex test oscillating between
turning the declared readiness to negotiate into an agreement, or diplomacy
remaining a tool to improve positions before a new round of confrontation.
Trump, in a surprise appearance in the press briefing room, said resuming
large-scale operations was not necessary now, but US forces were ready to move
if circumstances changed. The Qatari Prime Minister described his talks with
Trump and his Vice President JD Vance as “positive.” Jon Alterman, holder of the
Brzezinski Chair in Global Security and Geostrategy at the Center for Strategic
and International Studies, and Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense
of Democracies, told Asharq Al-Awsat in exclusive remarks that there was
divergence in assessing the chances of a settlement. While Alterman believes
Trump has not settled his options and expects near-term understandings between
Iran and its neighbors, Dubowitz warns that Tehran could exploit the US
President’s desire to end the war to obtain concessions allowing it to rebuild
its military capabilities.
Negotiation Under Threat
Alterman believes Trump’s optimism does not mean abandoning military pressure.
He said: “The President believes the only way to get a good deal with Iran is to
make clear that he is prepared to go to war again. And the Iranians believe the
only way to get a good deal with the President is to show that they do not fear
anything the United States can do to them.”For his part, Dubowitz said Trump
faces the risk of conceding too early. He said: “Trump wants a deal, but Tehran
sees in his desire for a diplomatic breakthrough, especially after Republican
losses in the midterm elections, an opportunity to extract concessions without
fundamentally changing its behavior.” He added: “I still strongly doubt that the
Iranian regime is negotiating in good faith. Tehran has repeatedly used
diplomacy to buy time, obtain sanctions relief, and preserve its nuclear and
military capabilities.” He said Trump’s strongest cards are “a credible threat
of overwhelming military force, along with maximum economic pressure, and
supporting Iranians when they return to the streets.” He warned against
squandering them in exchange for a deal that allows the Iranian regime to
“survive, regroup, and rearm.”
Signals from Tehran
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian had said the Supreme Leader issued
directives to end the state of “neither war nor peace.” But Alterman was
cautious about reading that as a decisive shift, saying: “I don’t know if anyone
can speak credibly on behalf of the Supreme Leader, and the Iranian President is
not the first person I would turn to inside leadership circles to understand
what the Supreme Leader wants.” Dubowitz warned against “confusing the
desperation the Iranian regime is going through with moderation.” He said Tehran
might offer tactical concessions, including temporary restrictions on
enrichment, limited inspections, and reopening the Strait of Hormuz, without
necessarily abandoning its nuclear ambitions or regional policies. Dubowitz set
out five tests for any serious deal: Iran giving up its stockpile of enriched
uranium, dismantling the enrichment infrastructure, accepting a strict
inspection regime, imposing restrictions on the ballistic missile program, and
ceasing to use maritime navigation as a tool of pressure. He said: “Anything
less risks repeating the mistakes of previous agreements. Tehran wants sanctions
relief and security guarantees, while retaining the capabilities that threaten
its neighbors.”
Will Trump Choose to End the War?
Qatar, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey are participating, to varying
degrees, in the contacts. Mediators are discussing a phased proposal beginning
with easing the blockade and releasing part of Iran’s frozen funds, in exchange
for International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors visiting damaged nuclear
facilities, paving the way for reopening Hormuz and negotiating over enriched
uranium. But Washington wants nuclear guarantees before giving up pressure
tools, and Tehran demands an end to the blockade and easing of sanctions first.
Alterman said: “The President’s team is presenting him with options, and I see
no indication that he has chosen any of them. The President likes to keep his
options open, and that is what I expect to continue in the coming period.” He
added: “I expect that we will see some kind of understanding in the near term
between Iran and its neighbors, and that the United States will not try to
undermine it.” Dubowitz warned against any phased deal that provides major
sanctions relief, releases Iranian funds, or reduces naval pressure, in exchange
for temporary, reversible pledges. He said: “A bad deal would be worse than no
deal. The goal should not be merely ending the current confrontation, but
ensuring that Iran cannot use a new diplomatic pause to rebuild the capabilities
that led the region to war.” Trump wants to end the war from a position of
victor, and Iran seeks to lift the blockade without giving up the deterrent
tools it considers a guarantee of its survival. Between the two goals begins the
battle over terms, which will determine whether the “positive momentum” is a
prelude to a deal or merely a truce preceding a new confrontation.
Vance Exploring Direct Meeting with Rezaei to End War
London / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
US Vice President JD Vance is considering holding direct talks with Iranian
Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei, after he emerged as a
key negotiator with Tehran. The Wall Street Journal said President Donald Trump
told his aides of his openness to Vance resuming talks and granting him
negotiating authority. Vance had sent a letter to Rezaei in October requesting a
meeting, with no date set yet. Doha was floated as a possible venue for the
meeting. US officials said discussions were still preliminary. The role of
envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner on the file has receded in favor of
Vance, who met Monday morning with Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister
Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani before their meeting with Trump. Tehran
denied on Tuesday that there were any plans for a meeting. Foreign Minister
Abbas Araghchi described the reports as “baseless media fabrications.”
25 Tankers
Mediators proposed immediate confidence-building measures, according to Middle
Eastern officials. The measures include the United States moving its aircraft
carriers to a distance that reduces the risk of major strikes, and easing the
blockade on Iranian ports, in exchange for Iran allowing 25 oil tankers to
transit the Strait of Hormuz. Tehran stipulates lifting the blockade, releasing
its frozen assets, and easing oil sanctions before resuming any talks. Its
officials see the Republicans’ loss in the midterm elections as an opportunity
to extract better terms. Iranian diplomats doubt a near-term deal is possible,
and fear Trump will attack Iran again, after US and Israeli strikes halted
previous rounds. Mediators also doubt it, due to “more aggressive” messages
reaching them from officials in the Revolutionary Guard. Officials in the region
fear that Guard commander Ahmad Vahidi is more influential than Rezaei, and
capable of undermining any talks. Rezaei’s escalation of his rhetoric in recent
days may help fortify his position, according to the newspaper. The
“conciliatory positions” of Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Vance’s
interlocutor in Islamabad, led to his marginalization.
June Memorandum
Trump privately criticized the memorandum of understanding that Vance helped
reach in June, and wondered whether it was a “costly mistake” that gave Iran
time to regroup and reap oil revenues before the blockade, according to two US
officials. A White House official denied that.
The June talks led to a truce and a memorandum of understanding, but did not
extract from Iran commitments to restrict its nuclear program or give up its
control over navigation in Hormuz. The debate inside the administration has
shifted from resuming war to choosing between reviving negotiations and
maintaining the blockade. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House Chief
of Staff Stephen Miller support continuing pressure until Tehran “submits.” US
officials believe Vance’s leading the file carries political risk. He could
become the face of failed negotiations, or of having ended an unpopular war.
Allianz Trade: Damage from Iran War in the Gulf Exceeds $200 Billion
Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
The cost of physical damage caused by the war between the United States and Iran
in Gulf states is estimated at more than $200 billion, while cumulative economic
losses could reach about $790 billion by 2030, according to a report by insurer
“Allianz Trade” issued Wednesday.
Gulf states bore the brunt of the Iranian response, following attacks launched
by the United States and Israel on Iran on February 28, which ignited the war.
Tehran responded by restricting navigation in the strategic Strait of Hormuz,
and targeting civilian facilities including airports, seaports, energy
facilities, and prominent landmarks, alongside US assets in countries allied
with Washington, according to Agence France-Presse. The company said in its
report that physical damage across the region is estimated at slightly more than
$200 billion, concentrated mostly in economies bordering the Strait of Hormuz,
particularly in energy sector infrastructure. The report added that more than 80
energy facilities were targeted during the war, concentrated mostly in Kuwait,
Qatar, and Bahrain, noting that about a third of these facilities suffered
severe damage. The war’s repercussions were not limited to physical damage to
energy infrastructure, but extended to other sectors, including tourism and real
estate, which are expected to see slower growth in coming years. Allianz Trade
estimated the total cost of the war to Gulf Cooperation Council states at about
$790 billion, equivalent to a cumulative gap of 5.9 percent of GDP compared to
the growth path expected before the war and up to 2030. The report explained
that these estimates reflect cumulative losses in economic output during the
period between 2026 and 2030, i.e., the difference between the volume of output
that was expected under the pre-war growth path, and what the region’s economies
are likely to achieve after its outbreak. To offset part of these losses, Gulf
states are expected to redirect part of their sovereign wealth fund investments
toward domestic projects. The report predicted the external surplus would fall
by half, to be partially offset by increased reinvestment of sovereign fund
assets inside the region, providing about $120 billion in additional domestic
investments until 2030, at the expense of international investments. The report
added that the war is accelerating the need to increase domestic spending, as
government priorities shift from mega-projects to enhancing resilience and
security-related projects. It expected Gulf states to raise their spending on
infrastructure and defense domestically to between $380 and $400 billion until
2030, providing investment opportunities estimated at about $160 billion for
private sector investors and foreign investors.
Tehran Threatens “Asymmetric” War… and Closes the Door on Removing Uranium
London - Tehran / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
Tehran threatened Wednesday to respond to any source of threat with “asymmetric
operations,” and to target distant US bases if attacks resume, and rejected the
removal of “even a single atom” of enriched nuclear material from the country.
Senior Iranian security and military leaders continued to raise the ceiling of
their threats a day after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told his G7
counterparts that President Donald Trump had chosen to “strangle” Iran
economically, instead of resuming war or striking a deal, according to what the
Axios website revealed.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi responded to Rubio’s statement: “In the
end, you have to eat.” He wrote on X: “Eight years ago, a cartoonish figure like
(former Secretary of State Mike) Pompeo said Iranians must follow White House
dictates (if they wanted to eat). Today Rubio, whose Cuban compatriots are
victims of the same policy, repeats this nonsense.” He added: “Forget
inhumanity. It is delusions that produce failed American policy.” Araghchi
called, in a letter to the UN Secretary-General, the Security Council, and the
Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, for an “explicit and
unambiguous” condemnation of a US reward of $20 million for information about
Iran’s nuclear program. He described the reward as “odious and regrettable,” and
reiterated that the program is peaceful. The US military had announced the
reward Friday, with “the possibility of relocation to another place,” for
whoever provides information about the program’s “facilities,” “equipment, and
associated individuals.”
“Not Even a Single Atom”
Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei said that “any new
attacks by the United States will also be met with targeting distant US bases,”
and that Tehran and Washington are not currently holding any negotiations,
according to Reuters. He added: “If the Americans commit any folly, the Iranian
response will not be limited to nearby US bases.” He said: “We announce from now
that if US aircraft take off from the territory of any country to attack Iran,
we will consider that base a threat to our national security.” He continued: “We
need enriched material to design nuclear-powered ships and submarines.” He said
Tehran told Moscow that this material will remain in the country, and “we will
use it ourselves.” Russia had offered to transfer uranium from Iran as part of a
potential deal, and said the decision rests with Tehran. Rezaei said the Supreme
Leader “is following the country’s affairs fully,” and that Russian President
Vladimir Putin told him, during their meeting in Moscow, that he told the
Americans that the Islamic Republic “is not a regime that can be overthrown.”Two
senior Iranian sources had told Reuters in May that Supreme Leader Mojtaba
Khamenei issued directives not to send uranium enriched to near weapons-grade
level abroad. The International Atomic Energy Agency estimates that Iran had
440.9 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 percent when Israel and the United
States attacked its nuclear facilities in June 2025, and the remaining quantity
is unclear. Tehran has since prevented inspectors from visiting the bombed
facilities in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Washington insists on including the
nuclear file in any initial negotiations to end the war. A senior Iranian
official told Reuters last week that Tehran sent via Qatar a proposal concerning
the nuclear file, which will not be discussed until after its seven demands are
met.
Missile Messages
The Chief of the General Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces and Operations
Commander Ali Abdollahi, in a letter to the commander of the Revolutionary
Guard’s missile unit Majid Mousavi, said that “any point that becomes a source
of threat to the existence of the Islamic Republic” will be a direct target of
the Armed Forces’ “asymmetric operations.” Abdollahi sent his letter on the 15th
anniversary of the killing of missile program founder Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam.
He addressed the United States and Israel, saying: “We warn again that the
previous slaps were only the beginning of the story, and in case of any new
miscalculation, far more lethal strikes await them. This is a credible threat,
and falls within the circle of capabilities and facts available to the Armed
Forces.” He did not specify targets or means. Abdollahi, accompanied by Mousavi,
visited an underground “strategic missile site,” of which state television
broadcast footage Tuesday. Iranian media described the site as a new “missile
city,” and the footage showed ballistic missiles inside tunnels and mobile
launch platforms. Abdollahi said during the tour that Iran would “inevitably”
destroy Israel, and that “surprises will appear successively in the next war.”
In a related context, the senior adviser to the Revolutionary Guard commander
Mohammad Reza Naqdi said the Supreme Leader’s new instructions “left the hands
of the Armed Forces open,” and that “permission to carry out operations in any
geographic scope has been issued.” The newspaper Kayhan, which is overseen by
the Supreme Leader’s representative, said that after the lifting of geographic
restrictions, the enemy should “hear the roar of new missiles in US bases
thousands of kilometers away, in Germany, Britain, Albania, Greece, Cyprus, and
some neighboring countries.” It said that a “connected network of missile cities
and deep tunnels” of the Revolutionary Guard extends across most provinces, “in
the heart of strategic mountains hundreds of meters deep.” For his part,
Judiciary Chief Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejei, during his meeting with Tehrani
Moghaddam’s family, said that “our missiles today have become, like Noah’s Ark,
a means of salvation for the nation.” He added that “some people in various
agencies” mocked Tehrani Moghaddam when he began missile work and “considered it
impossible.”His brother Mohammad Tehrani Moghaddam claimed, at a night gathering
in Borujerd reported by the Rokna agency, that Iran possesses a “supernuclear
missile” and a “plasma missile” that reaches “any point in the world,” and
disables “all electronic systems” before hitting its target. He said the missile
carries an 8-ton warhead and covers 80 square kilometers, and that Iran is
capable of destroying “all the enemy’s military and security facilities at
once.” He provided no evidence for that. Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam is considered
the founder of Iran’s missile program, and is nicknamed “Father of Missiles.” He
was killed with 16 Revolutionary Guard members in an explosion near Tehran on
November 12, 2011, which the Guard described as accidental, and which Western
reports attributed to Israel. His brother had said at the time that he was
killed during the “final test” of a missile in a secret project.
“Limited Strike”
Supreme Leader adviser and aide Mohammad Mokhber warned that “any participation
in the hostile blockade on Iran is an act of war,” whose consequences fall
“regardless of any geographic restrictions, on all participants.” Defense
Ministry spokesman Reza Talaei Nik said that “weapons support for Iran...
exceeds the misleading statistics fabricated by Trump and the House of Losers,”
in reference to US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. He added that “the fate of
the war is clear: either acceptance of Iran’s rightful demands, or the enemy’s
surrender on the battlefield.” Mehdi Mohammadi, adviser to Parliament Speaker
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said in an audio recording published on Telegram that
Washington requested “direct negotiations” with Tehran before presenting its
final response to the Iranian proposal, “and we did not accept that.” He added:
“We confirmed that negotiations will not begin before all of Iran’s conditions
are met.” He described the US response as “completely deceptive,” and said Trump
gave his Vice President JD Vance authority to negotiate “not authority to make
concessions.” He said the Americans “prepared everything for a limited strike,”
and warned that any US attack on “Jabal al-Fa’s” would lead to a “wide war.” He
expected Washington to focus on the blockade, “weakening people’s confidence in
the regime,” and limited military and intelligence attacks, and cited the attack
on part of the South Pars field.
Another adviser to Ghalibaf, Majid Shakeri, wrote on X: “The best time to attack
the blockade is before the change of Congress, not after it.” In the Strait of
Hormuz, the Revolutionary Guard’s naval unit announced the explosion of two oil
tankers by naval mines after they tried to cross “secretly” through an
“unauthorized route.” The Iranian Army navy said a third tanker caught fire at
dawn Wednesday east of the Strait after colliding with a mine. The British
Maritime Trade Operations Authority reported receiving a report of an incident
involving a tanker in the Strait, without details about the crew. It was unclear
whether the reports referred to the same incident.
“The Third Option”
Meanwhile, Axios reported, citing three people who attended the G7 meeting in
Paris, that Rubio said: “The President does not have only two options: returning
to war or signing a silly peace agreement... The third option is to continue
doing what we are doing now.” He added that “devastating” sanctions on Iran
continue, with no end date. US officials told the site that Rubio, Treasury
Secretary Scott Bessent, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and Trump adviser and
son-in-law Jared Kushner pushed toward a strategy of “strangulation.” The site
added that Israel prefers renewed strikes, and most Arab Gulf states oppose it.
The site saw that the Revolutionary Guard might consider continued stalemate and
escalating pressure a green light for more aggressive attacks in the region. It
reported that the Qatari mediator wants to involve China and European countries
as guarantors of any deal, to dispel Tehran’s fears of war resuming. Iranian
President Masoud Pezeshkian met Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, whose
country is leading with Qatar mediation efforts to end the war, on the sidelines
of the UN Climate Change Conference in Turkey. Sharif, according to his office,
called for “dialogue and restraint” to ease tension in the region, and expressed
“deep concern” over prolonging the conflict. He said it was necessary to build
on the interim agreement reached by the United States and Iran in June.
Report: Iran Attacked Maritime Navigation Systems on an
Omani Island
Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
Three informed sources told Reuters that Iran attacked ship navigation systems
on the Omani island of Didamar in the Strait of Hormuz. The attacks demonstrate
Tehran's ability to target infrastructure used to restore oil flows from the
Gulf. The three sources did not provide an assessment of the damage, and Reuters
said it could not independently verify whether any navigation systems were
destroyed in the attacks announced by Tehran on Tuesday. Oil exporters are
increasingly resorting to alternative solutions to raise flows through Hormuz,
including ship-to-ship transfers off the coasts of Oman and the UAE. The US
military is helping commercial vessels transit the Strait, after Iranian attacks
disrupted navigation there since the outbreak of the US-Israeli war on Iran in
late February. Two other sources in the shipping
sector and a source in maritime security said the impact of the attacks on
Didamar Island on commercial navigation in the Strait would likely be limited.
One of them attributed that to the existence of other systems in different
locations.Iranian state media had announced Tuesday that the Revolutionary Guard
carried out strikes that destroyed "hostile navigation systems" on the island.
Reuters verified a video showing smoke rising from the island, without it being
clear what was burning. An image from the European Copernicus satellite program
showed thermal activity. The attacks come after Gulf oil exports recovered to
more than 80 percent of their pre-war levels in September and October. This was
helped by vessels transiting with US military assistance, and increased Saudi
exports via the port of Yanbu on the Red Sea. Large tankers, mostly Very Large
Crude Carriers, carry shipments from Gulf ports to ship-to-ship transfer sites
near Oman's Sohar and the UAE's Fujairah.
Ship Fires Continue in "Hormuz" Despite Hopes of De-escalation... Revolutionary
Guard Announces Explosion of Two Tankers "Under Protection of US Fighters"...
Army Speaks of a Third
London - Tehran / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
The Revolutionary Guard announced Wednesday the explosion of two oil tankers by
naval mines in the Strait of Hormuz. The Iranian Army navy said a third tanker
caught fire east of the Strait. This comes a day after the Guard announced
hitting three tankers, and despite markets betting on a de-escalation of the
war. The Revolutionary Guard's naval unit said the two "violating" tankers tried
Tuesday night to leave "secretly" via the "unauthorized and dangerous route" in
the Strait, "under the protection of fighters of the plundering and aggressor US
Army," and collided with naval mines and "exploded in a majestic explosion." The
statement explained that the two tankers were "abandoned and burning fiercely,"
despite attempts by those "colluding" with the US Army to extinguish the fires.
It said they had switched off navigation and identification systems, and were
crossing "under the guidance of an officer in the US Army." The statement saw
the incident as adding "another page to the black record" of US Central Command
(CENTCOM) commander Brad Cooper. The statement addressed US officials saying
they do not need a "media show" aboard a helicopter outside the Strait "to prove
their lies," because "aerial images of the Strait of Hormuz reveal the full
story without censorship."In a separate statement, the Iranian Army navy said a
"violating oil tanker" caught fire at dawn Wednesday "in the prohibited and
unsafe area" east of the Strait of Hormuz, after colliding with a naval mine,
according to Agence France-Presse. Iranian media had reported similar news about
a tanker hit by a naval mine late Tuesday. Neither statement revealed the names
of the tankers nor their flags, nor provided information about their crews. It
was unclear whether the Army's tanker was one of the Guard's two tankers or a
separate incident. The British Maritime Trade Operations Authority said it
received a report of an incident involving a tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, and
that the crew's condition, the extent of damage, and the environmental impact
were "not yet known." The Authority did not link its report to what Tehran
announced.
Rising Toll
The Revolutionary Guard had announced Tuesday that two tankers that took an
"unauthorized route" caught fire. It said one of them collided with a mine, and
the second was "under the protection of US Army fighters," then later announced
the explosion of a third tanker by a naval mine. On the same day, the UAE's
ADNOC Logistics and Services said one of its vessels was damaged following an
attack in UAE territorial waters. The British Authority reported a tanker hit by
an "unidentified projectile" off the Omani coast near the Strait, and another
tanker attacked northeast of Lima in the Sultanate of Oman. It was unclear
whether these vessels were among the tankers Tehran spoke about. Video footage
showed the oil products tanker "Navig8 Messi," flying the Singapore flag,
burning near the Omani coast on Sunday, according to Reuters. On the same day,
the European satellite Copernicus Sentinel-2 captured an image of a dense cloud
of black smoke at the location. The Revolutionary Guard's naval unit said the
tanker was one of three targeted that day for taking "unauthorized routes." The
vessel is operated by Navig8, in which ADNOC Logistics and Services owns a
majority stake.
Data from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy showed that attacks did
not decline in November, after 37 vessels were targeted in October, the highest
monthly number since the war began. The International Maritime Organization
counted 130 incidents in the region since the outbreak of the war, most of them
attacks, in which at least 25 sailors were killed. An
oil spill resulting from the attacks reached Omani shores, according to a video
verified by Reuters, and satellite images showed oil slicks off the coasts of
Oman and the UAE.
Two Conflicting Narratives
The US military had recently announced the removal of all mines from the
waterway. Revolutionary Guard spokesman Hossein Mohbi denied that, saying "not a
single war mine has been cleared in the Strait of Hormuz." Tehran has imposed
strict restrictions on navigation in the Strait since the outbreak of war in
late February, which before the war carried about a fifth of the world's oil,
and requires vessels to take a route it designates. It considers the southern
route near Omani coasts, where the United States protects vessels, illegal. The
United States imposes a naval blockade on Iranian ports.
CENTCOM said one of its aircraft fired Saturday on a cargo ship flying the flag
of Saint Kitts and disabled it, after it tried to leave territorial waters
following docking at an Iranian port. The Command had announced last month that
it had helped Gulf Arab states export 1.5 billion barrels of oil through Hormuz
since the summer. Oil prices fell Tuesday to their lowest level in two months,
after US officials downplayed the need for new military action against Iran. US
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the economic campaign on Iran was
"devastating" to the point that currently no "major combat operations" are
needed. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the war "will not end
either by the military path or by increasing sanctions." Qatar's Foreign
Ministry warned Tuesday that the approach of winter with the continued closure
of the Strait of Hormuz exacerbates the global energy crisis.
"G7" Demands Iran Stop Attacks in "Hormuz"... Condemned Houthi Attacks on Saudi
Arabia and Called on Tehran to Stop Arming Them
Paris / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
The G7 demanded Iran stop its "continuing" attacks on civilian vessels in the
Strait of Hormuz. It pledged, "in the absence of a diplomatic solution," to work
in coordination to limit Tehran's ability "at both the economic and political
levels" to "fuel instability" in the region and the world. The group's foreign
ministers praised the efforts of regional mediators, in a statement issued after
their meetings in Paris on November 9 and 10. They renewed support for "all
diplomatic efforts" aimed at a "lasting settlement" responding to international
concerns about Iran's nuclear program. They said Iran "must never be allowed to
develop or acquire a nuclear weapon," and called on it to stop supporting
non-state armed groups in the region. The statement "strongly" condemned Iranian
attacks on neighboring countries, and the disruption caused by obstructing
transit in the Strait of Hormuz to international trade, energy security, and the
global economy. The ministers renewed their commitment to freedom of safe
passage in the Strait, and their opposition to "imposing any illegal taxes or
fees or costs," and any discrimination or restrictions on navigation. They
praised the "defensive activities" carried out by US Central Command (CENTCOM)
to remove mines from navigation channels and escort civilian vessels. They said
a "multinational and independent" defensive initiative led by France and Britain
could contribute to resuming navigation in the Strait, "particularly by
supporting verification of the removal of all mines." The ministers pledged full
implementation of UN Security Council resolutions imposing sanctions on Iran,
and the measures reimposed in September 2025 under the "snapback" mechanism in
Resolution 2231. They called on UN member states to take similar steps, and
called on Tehran to resume its full cooperation with the International Atomic
Energy Agency.
The statement expressed "deep concern" over Iran's involvement in "violent plots
and acts" targeting citizens and territories of G7 countries. It pointed to
Britain's announcement of Iran's responsibility for the incident that occurred
near RAF Fairford base on September 27. It concluded: "Iran should have no doubt
that we are united." On the Yemeni file, the statement condemned "in the
strongest terms" the Houthis' "continuing and unacceptable" attacks in Yemen and
against Saudi Arabia, particularly those targeting civilians and civilian
infrastructure. It called on the Houthis to "immediately stop" all military
actions and threats. The ministers called on "all actors, particularly Iran," to
stop supplying the Houthis with weapons and end their support, saying that
constitutes a violation of UN Security Council resolutions. They expressed
solidarity with the Yemeni government and Saudi Arabia, and renewed affirmation
of their right to defend their security, sovereignty, and territorial integrity
"in accordance with international law." They demanded the immediate and
unconditional release of all humanitarian workers, including 70 UN staff
detained by the Houthis, and the urgent opening of a humanitarian corridor in
Taiz. They praised the European naval operations "Aspides" and "Atalanta" in
protecting navigation in the Red Sea, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, and the Gulf of
Aden.
Betting on Sanctions
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said at the conclusion of the meetings that
"the economic campaign is devastating to the point that there is no need, at the
moment, for major combat operations... This is what I told our allies here
today." He warned that the US military is "ready to respond" if Iran crosses
"some red lines." He said Iranian oil exports are drying up due to the blockade,
and that the economic cost to Tehran is "exceptional, and increasing every day."
He described Iran's conditions for a deal as "ridiculous," adding: "In the end,
you have to eat."
Reuters quoted four G7 diplomats as saying Rubio told his counterparts that
Washington has options other than war or accepting Iranian demands. Two of them
said he described Iranian officials as "crazy." Qatari Prime Minister and
Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani had met in Paris,
returning from Washington, with the foreign ministers of France, Britain,
Germany, Italy, and Saudi Arabia. Two European diplomats said he expressed
cautious optimism that a diplomatic solution remains possible.
Tehran's Response
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tuesday that the war "will not end
either by the military path or by increasing sanctions," and that "the only way"
is to act according to Iranian conditions in the "two-day proposal." Supreme
Leader adviser and aide Mohammad Mokhber wrote Wednesday that "any participation
in the hostile blockade on Iran is an act of war," whose responsibility and
consequences fall "regardless of any geographic restrictions, on all
participants." Parliament Speaker adviser Mehdi Mohammadi said Washington
responded Tuesday to the "two-day proposal" with a response "not only
unsatisfactory, but completely deceptive." He added that Washington insisted on
"direct negotiations" before presenting its final response, "and we did not
accept that," and that the Americans "prepared everything for a limited strike."
Tehran denies mines have been removed from the Strait. Revolutionary Guard
spokesman Hossein Mohbi said "not a single war mine has been cleared in the
Strait of Hormuz." The Revolutionary Guard's naval unit announced Wednesday the
explosion of two tankers by naval mines after they took an "unauthorized route,"
saying the incident added "another page to the black record" of Cooper.
Yemeni Official to Asharq Al-Awsat: Large Numbers of Foreign Leaders Working
with Militias Killed... Confirmed Unannounced Losses in Their Ranks
Jeddah: Saeed Al-Abyad / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
A senior Yemeni official revealed the loss by the Houthi militias of a large
number of foreign leaders participating in managing their military operations
and developing their offensive capabilities targeting all areas. Walid
Al-Qadimi, Minister of State in the Yemeni government, told Asharq Al-Awsat that
airstrikes and field targeting led to the killing of influential leaders of
foreign nationalities participating with the Houthi militias in their battles,
in addition to prominent Houthi leaders whose deaths the militias have not yet
announced, at a time when the militias face increasing decline in their military
capabilities and fracturing in their ranks. He added that airstrikes targeting
militia sites, alongside military operations on various fronts, contributed to
weakening their capabilities and inflicting large losses on leaders, elements,
and military capabilities, noting that the foreign leaders who participated in
managing operations and targeting liberated areas and the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia with missiles and drones suffered impactful losses. Despite the militias'
attempts to develop some weapons and military technologies, they face a state of
decline and collapse, according to Al-Qadimi, who noted that this comes in
conjunction with increasing awareness by tribes, sheikhs, and citizens of the
project led by the militias, and their beginning to refrain from pushing their
sons into confrontations, after large human losses and numbers of missing
persons whose fate the militias have not disclosed.
Al-Qadimi said Yemeni forces are fighting their confrontations with the militias
within unified leadership of the fronts through the Joint Forces, stressing that
Operation "Dawn of Yemen" continues with support from the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia and direct supervision by the Chairman of the Presidential Leadership
Council, and will not stop before achieving its goals. The Yemeni Minister of
State pointed out that Yemeni society has become aware of the nature of the
Houthi militias' connection to Iran, and that they represent one of its tools in
the region, expressing his belief that broad sectors of Yemenis await salvation
from these militias and restoration of state institutions.
Regarding external support received by the militias, he pointed out that the
confrontation is not limited to the Houthis alone, given the military and
logistical support they receive from external parties, noting the importance of
Yemeni diplomatic moves in this regard by addressing countries that facilitate
militia activities or provide them with support, as this represents a violation
of diplomatic and political relations and affects those countries' relations
with Yemen. The minister's remarks came amid
continuing military operations by the Yemeni Armed Forces, and what is being
achieved on the ground in terms of progress on a number of fronts, through
intensifying airstrikes and drone and artillery attacks against Houthi sites,
movements, and reinforcements, in conjunction with achieving new field progress
in Al-Jawf Governorate, and continuing confrontations on a number of axes in the
governorates of Taiz, Al-Dhalea, and Marib.
Returning to Minister of State Al-Qadimi, he spoke about the Taiz file, saying
that "the city represents an important key to achieving victory over the Houthi
militias," noting that the steadfastness of its people reflects the will of
Yemenis in confronting the Houthi project, despite repeated militia attempts to
break the city militarily, after controlling coastal areas, and using various
human and military capabilities to achieve that. He explained that those
attempts failed in the face of the steadfastness of Taiz's people and government
forces, expressing hope that the coming phase will witness military moves by the
Yemeni army to lift the siege imposed on the city and restore freedom of
movement and access to besieged areas. Al-Qadimi stopped at what he described as
the strange paradox in the Houthi militias' rhetoric, which speaks of supporting
Gaza and solidarity with the Palestinian people, while continuing to besiege its
own people in the city of Taiz, and depriving them of the most basic rights to
movement and life, explaining that the group that raises slogans of supporting
the oppressed outside Yemen practices siege and restriction on its own people,
and uses human suffering as a means of pressure on them, in a contradiction that
reveals the gap between its slogans and practices on the ground.
Evacuation of Hundreds of Schools in Italy After Bomb
Threats... and Similar Warnings in Britain and Ireland... Meloni Chairs
Emergency Government Meeting
Rome / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni will chair an emergency government meeting
today (Wednesday), after hundreds of schools were closed across the country,
following a bomb threat via an anonymous email, while hundreds of schools in
Britain and Ireland received similar warnings that turned out to be false.
Meloni and intelligence agencies will discuss measures aimed at preventing
further disruptions and similar incidents, according to an official in her
office, as reported by Bloomberg News today. Education Minister Giuseppe
Valditara said he asked students in more than 300 schools to leave buildings,
after a threat sent by email. Authorities did not disclose the source of this
email. It is noted that cyberattacks are increasing in Europe with targets
including flights and supermarket stores. Attackers disrupted a range of
activities, including operations in funeral homes and freezers in supermarket
stores, according to Bloomberg News. Meloni and her officials blamed pro-Russian
hackers for recent cyberattacks that also affected Foreign Minister Antonio
Tajani, after increased hybrid sabotage operations from entities suspected of
being allied with the government of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Similar Messages in Britain and Ireland
In a related context, authorities in Scotland and Northern Ireland in the United
Kingdom and authorities in the Republic of Ireland announced the arrival of a
threat message to a large number of schools via email Wednesday that turned out
to be fake and originating from outside Britain, according to Reuters.
Irish police said they were aware of a "general message" sent to many schools,
and that they concluded the threat has no credibility and there is no need to
evacuate schools. Police in Northern Ireland said more than 300 schools also
received an email containing a threat and it was treated as fake, adding that
the email originated from outside Britain. Assistant Chief Constable Anthony
McNally said: "We take incidents of this kind seriously, and we understand the
concern prevailing in the community and among schools and students and parents."
Irish police pointed out that recent times have seen "an increase in activity of
false and unreliable bomb threats," and advised the public to contact
authorities if they receive such threats. Police in Scotland said the messages
were immediately deemed fake, and dealt with on that basis. They added in a
statement: "Our investigations concluded there is nothing to indicate they
constitute a credible threat, nor any danger threatening people."
Netanyahu: Israel Will Gradually Dispense with US Military
Aid
Tel Aviv / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said today, Wednesday, that Israel
will gradually dispense with US military aid, after US President Donald Trump
announced ending this aid, worth billions of dollars, by the end of the year. A
statement issued by Netanyahu's office said Israel has become economically
strong enough to be able to dispense with US military aid. It added that the
transition from receiving US financial support to a phase of partnership with
the United States should take place gradually, without setting a timeframe for
that. Trump had announced this approach suddenly during an interview with Fox
News last week, considering that Israel no longer needs this aid. Israel
currently receives about $8.3 billion annually from the United States, under a
10-year agreement, until the end of September 2028.
Netanyahu Dismisses Claims That Israel Is Blocking
Supplies to Gaza
Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
Netanyahu said Israel was not to blame for the worsening conditions for
Palestinians in Gaza’s tent camps that have been hit with severe winter floods.
His remarks came after the US-created Board of Peace — established under US
President Donald Trump's plan to end the Israel-Hamas war and oversee Gaza’s
recovery — said Monday that Israel's delaying of the entry of winter supplies
into Gaza had “exacerbated the consequences of a foreseeable humanitarian
challenge.”Torrential rain has battered the war-torn enclave in recent days,
damaging tens of thousands of makeshift tents. Four people, including three
children, were killed on Sunday when a large sandstone slab collapsed onto tents
during the rains. Netanyahu said the Palestinian group Hamas is to blame because
it continues to refuse to disarm, a condition of the deal announced by Trump,
and seizes humanitarian aid in order to use it for military purposes. “Hamas
alone is responsible for the suffering of the people of Gaza, and it is now
cynically exploiting that suffering to shift blame onto Israel once again,” he
said Tuesday. British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said the situation in Gaza
was “intolerable” and demanded Israel end “arbitrary restrictions” on aid.
In Washington, Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii, the top Democrat on the Senate's
foreign spending subcommittee, called for Israel to immediately allow winter
gear into Gaza. “There are a lot of challenges when it comes to Israel and
Palestine that are complicated, and fraught, and contentious,” Schatz said on
the Senate floor on Tuesday. “But we should all be able to agree that repairing
torn tents and helping people to dry out, and providing warmth to freezing
children is a basic human obligation.”
Trilateral Negotiations Round... Limited Initial
Understandings Face Final Settlement Complexities... European Security
Architecture Dominated Discussions and "Territorial Concessions" Are the Knot of
the Solution
Moscow: Raed Jabr / Asharq Al-Awsat / November 11, 2026
The round of trilateral talks in Abu Dhabi, which included delegations from
Russia, the United States, and Ukraine, concluded with limited understandings
including agreement on a "broad exchange" of prisoners from both sides, and
setting general priorities for upcoming discussions. The European security file
occupied a fundamental part of the talks, despite Europeans not being present at
the negotiating table, and it appeared that this point, along with the issue of
territorial concessions, still constitute the most prominent knot on the road to
achieving a major breakthrough, although optimism dominated the atmosphere of
dialogue which US sources described as constructive.
The dialogue round on the second day of negotiations lasted about two hours,
after which delegations left the meeting hall without announcing details, thus
concluding the latest round of negotiations conducted with US mediation to end
the war.
"Huge" Prisoner Exchange
It appeared from the brief press conference held by the head of the Russian
delegation, Vladimir Medinsky, that the parties failed to narrow views on core
issues. But he said its details would become clear later. To be this the only
tangible result so far. The chief Russian negotiator avoided addressing details
of the discussions, and said the settlement formulas proposed should not be
discussed before reaching specific results on them. But he touched on two basic
points, which showed the level of divergence in positions. The most prominent
was the European security file, which he said was a central focus of discussion,
and mentioned that during discussions on it "some points were agreed upon and
disagreements emerged on other points."For its part, Ukraine praised Wednesday
what it described as "positive momentum" with the end of the second day of the
talks round. Ukrainian negotiator David Arakhamia said: "I think we have
positive momentum to reach a solution before the new year," without providing
further details. He added that he hopes to hold another session "as soon as
possible."
Europeans Should "Stay in Hotels"
The second was the nature and level of European participation in discussing the
files on the table, as Medinsky launched a sharp attack on European parties and
said he did not know why they were in the UAE capital during the round, and
invited them to "stay in the hotels." He said the Russian delegation had no
contacts with Europeans present outside the meeting hall. He also renewed the
accusation that Europeans continue to fuel the conflict, and bear responsibility
for bloodshed. When asked: When can Europeans sit at the dialogue table to
discuss files related to the security of the continent? He answered: "When they
awaken their conscience." In contrast, there were no details in Medinsky's talk
about the features of the awaited settlement, and the files put up for
discussion, including the issue of ceding territory, amid continued US pressure
on Kyiv to acknowledge "the shrinking map of Ukraine and changing its features."
The Russian state news agency Novosti quoted a source in the negotiating
delegation as saying the talks "aimed to discuss key aspects of forming a new
continental security system. And that settling the Ukrainian file is only one
point within a broader discussion." But Medinsky confirmed that Russia will
continue talks with Ukraine, but stressed that Moscow sees no justification for
meeting with Europeans on this matter. Medinsky told reporters: "Certainly the
discussion will continue," adding that Moscow "has not received a single peace
initiative or a single concrete peace proposal from European countries.
Therefore it is not clear what could be discussed" with them. Ukraine had
announced earlier Wednesday that its negotiators would hold a separate meeting
with Europeans and the two US envoys in Abu Dhabi, after talks with the Russian
delegation ended.
Putin Followed Moment by Moment
Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov, who said President Vladimir Putin
was informed moment by moment of the course of discussions, confirmed the issue
related to the complete Russian boycott of European attendance, and said any
contacts with Europeans, "were not planned. And no such contacts took place."
Peskov told reporters in response to a question about the negotiation path: "Of
course, we must wait until the end of the current part of the Abu Dhabi talks.
And our delegation will submit an immediate report to the presidency on that."It
became known that the American sponsor of negotiations focused in the first-day
round, which lasted about four hours, on the European security file, while the
discussion on the second day, which lasted about two hours, was devoted to the
issue of possible territorial concessions. Media leaks showed US negotiators
focusing on creating two working groups, according to Axios, as the military
group, led by US Forces Commander in Europe Alexus Grynkewich, focused on
security and monitoring a potential ceasefire, while the political group focused
on the core of the conflict and mechanisms for territorial settlements.
Kushner and Witkoff to Moscow Thursday
The British newspaper The Telegraph reported that the United States proposed a
territorial settlement based on acknowledging the new geographic reality, while
a Ukrainian source told the newspaper that "the Ukrainian delegation did not
discuss any territorial concessions." The assessments on the first day of talks
were mixed, as US Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the talks as
"extremely fruitful," while Presidential Envoy Jared Kushner described them as
"constructive." Meanwhile, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov, a
member of the negotiating delegation, said it was "premature" to evaluate the
results. In contrast, Zelenskyy renewed rejection of the possibility of offering
territorial concessions, and rejected withdrawing forces from areas still under
his forces' control in the Donbas region. Despite that, Russian sources said the
composition of the Russian negotiating team clearly indicates the importance the
Kremlin attaches to this round of negotiations. US envoy Jared Kushner said
Wednesday that he and his colleague Steve Witkoff will head to Moscow Thursday
then meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Irish capital Dublin
after their trip to Russia. Kushner added that talks between Ukraine and Russia
in Abu Dhabi were a "good first step."
New American Approach Toward Russia
Compared to previous meetings, the weight of the Russian delegation in
negotiations increased. In addition to Presidential aide Medinsky who headed the
delegation and Deputy Minister Ryabkov, Yuri Zigarlovsky, Deputy Head of the
Main Operations Directorate in the General Staff, joined, as did representatives
of the Russian Federal Security Service, where the main delegation included
Alexei Komkov, Head of the Operational Information and International Relations
Service, and Dmitry Minaev, First Deputy Head of the Federal Security Service
and Head of the Counterintelligence Operations Directorate, within the expert
team. From Moscow, Yuri Ushakov, Presidential aide for foreign affairs, directly
coordinated the delegation's work. Notably, the main
details of the talks remain confidential, as Ukrainian media disclosed only the
agreement of the two parties on a large prisoner exchange. Media sources saw
Ukrainian secrecy as hiding discontent with continued pressures on Kyiv, and
that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy seeks to evaluate the situation with European
parties before giving specific assessments.
Nevertheless, Russian experts saw the US administration's focus on the European
security architecture file and giving priority to discussions on it over the
Russian-Ukrainian conflict itself, as a new approach by the US administration
toward Russian positions. The political commentator for Novosti saw this as "a
fundamental shift in the US position: Moscow has repeatedly confirmed that one
of the root causes of the conflict is the West's aggressive policy of expanding
its influence, completely ignoring Russia's legitimate interests. And now,
Washington implicitly acknowledges its mistake." However, in Europe itself, this
was considered betrayal. European diplomacy chief Kaja Kallas sharply criticized
US negotiators for the US focus on this file and ignoring other causes of the
conflict. She said: "We already have a European security architecture - where
both NATO and the European Union play the designated role." The two sides
exchanged accusations of launching attacks overnight coinciding with the talks.
Ukrainian Prime Minister Sergei Koritsky said Russia targeted six major
electricity substations in four regions in central Ukraine. The Ukrainian energy
company Naftogaz announced Wednesday that Russian jet drones bombed a facility
belonging to it in the Dnipropetrovsk region in eastern Ukraine, causing a fire
and damage to equipment. In Russia, the TASS news agency quoted the governor of
the Smolensk region, which lies on the border with Belarus, as saying debris of
a drone fell on a residential building, resulting in the killing of two people.
The Russian Defense Ministry announced that its forces targeted a cargo ship in
the Black Sea, southwest of the Ukrainian port of Odesa, saying the ship was
carrying weapons and military equipment designated for the Ukrainian Armed
Forces.
Yemeni Govt Forces Expand Operations as Houthis Face Fighting on Multiple Fronts
Aden:/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
Yemeni government forces launched 874 strikes against Houthi positions across
several governorates under Operation Dawn of Yemen, as ground fighting continued
and troops repelled attacks and attempted advances by the militia. The
operations targeted Houthi positions, troop concentrations and reinforcements in
Marib, Al-Jawf, Taiz, Hajjah and Dhale, the military said. Armed forces
spokesperson Colonel Majed Al-Nuzaili said the strikes included 29 airstrikes,
39 drone strikes, 62 rocket launcher strikes and 744 artillery strikes.
Preliminary battlefield reports showed about 190 Houthi commanders and fighters
killed or wounded and roughly 130 military vehicles and pieces of equipment
destroyed or damaged, he revealed. In Al-Jawf, warplanes struck a Houthi tank.
Other airstrikes hit Houthi positions and military vehicles near Jabal Han, west
of Taiz, and Dar Al-Saynah in the south. The army released footage showing
strikes on Houthi fighters and equipment in both provinces. In Marib, artillery
pounded Houthi positions, concentrations and vehicles on the southern front.
Drones struck reinforcements and vehicles on the northern front, while other
strikes targeted newly established positions and fortifications in the south.
Fighting also continued on northern fronts and southeast of Al-Hazm, the capital
of Al-Jawf, where government forces repelled Houthi movements and attacks while
striking firing positions, troop concentrations and military vehicles. In
Hajjah, drones targeted Houthi sniper positions and fighters in the Hiran sector
as part of wider operations against the militia's positions and fortifications.
Fierce fighting displaces families in Lahj
Heavy fighting and intensified military movements gripped the Al-Mudaribah and
Ras Al-Arah in western Lahj. The Southern Giants Brigades and National Shield
Forces said they had repelled major Houthi attacks on the Al-Bukrah and
Al-Ruwais fronts. Military sources reported the destruction of Houthi military
vehicles. The Giants Brigades released footage showing strikes on Houthi
fighters and vehicles in Lahj. In Al-Maqatirah district, northwest of Lahj,
Houthi-affiliated media reported a series of airstrikes on areas under the
group's control on Wednesday. Government forces said they had destroyed Houthi
military vehicles on the same front as fighting spread across areas bordering
southwestern Taiz. The clashes have worsened humanitarian conditions and driven
more families from their homes as fighting nears populated areas in
Al-Mudaribah, Al-Maqatirah and around Tur Al-Baha. Families from other frontline
areas have begun fleeing toward Aden and safer locations, raising fears of
further displacement if fighting spreads to more residential areas.
Clashes persist in Taiz and Dhale
Government forces and the Popular Resistance continued battling the Houthis
across several fronts in Taiz, particularly Al-Shaqab and Al-Aqroud, with
fighting entering its 61st consecutive day, military sources said. Airstrikes
hit Houthi positions near Jabal Han, west of Taiz, and Dar Al-Saynah as troops
continued repelling attacks in the province's western countryside. Colonel
Muwaffaq Al-Sabai, of the Fifth Presidential Guard Brigade in Taiz, said the
Houthis had failed to break through government defenses despite massing fighters
and launching attacks over more than a month. He attributed the failure to
government forces and the Popular Resistance taking the offensive initiative and
improving coordination. In Dhale, government troops repelled a Houthi attack on
the Hajar front in the province's northwest. Clashes at the foot of Jabal
Al-Hasha forced the attackers to retreat after suffering casualties and
equipment losses, a military source said. Meanwhile, the Giants Brigades,
National Shield Forces and National Resistance continued operations on the
southern and southwestern fronts. The military spokesperson reported the
recapture of positions in some sectors, while fighting continued and troops
confronted Houthi movements elsewhere.
Yemeni Minister to Asharq Al-Awsat: Houthis Lose Foreign
Commanders as Military Setbacks Mount
Jeddah: Saeed al-Abyad/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
The Houthis have lost numerous foreign commanders involved in directing military
operations and developing offensive capabilities, a senior Yemeni official said,
as the group faces mounting battlefield losses and internal divisions. Walid
al-Qudaimi, Yemen's minister of state, told Asharq Al-Awsat that airstrikes and
battlefield operations had killed key foreign commanders fighting alongside the
Houthis, as well as senior Houthi figures whose deaths the group has yet to
disclose. He said airstrikes and fighting across several fronts had weakened the
militia's military capabilities, inflicting heavy losses in personnel,
leadership and equipment. Foreign commanders involved in directing operations
and launching missile and drone attacks on government-held areas and Saudi
Arabia were among those hit, he added. Despite efforts to develop weapons and
military technology, the Houthis were facing mounting setbacks and internal
disintegration, al-Qudaimi said. He said tribal leaders, sheikhs and ordinary
Yemenis were increasingly recognizing the militia's agenda and refusing to send
their sons into battle amid heavy casualties and growing numbers of missing
fighters whose fate remained undisclosed.Al-Qudaimi said Yemeni forces were
fighting under a unified command through the joint forces, adding that Operation
Dawn of Yemen would continue with Saudi support and under the direct supervision
of the chairman of Yemen's Presidential Leadership Council until its objectives
were met. He said Yemenis increasingly understood the Houthis' ties to Iran and
their role as one of Tehran's regional instruments, expressing his belief that
large segments of the population were awaiting the group's removal and the
restoration of state institutions. The conflict extended beyond the Houthis
because of the military and logistical support they received from foreign
parties, al-Qudaimi said. He stressed the importance of Yemeni diplomatic
efforts to confront countries facilitating Houthi activities or providing
assistance, saying such support violated diplomatic and political relations and
harmed those countries' ties with Yemen. His remarks came as Yemeni forces
pressed ahead with military operations, intensifying airstrikes, drone attacks
and artillery fire against Houthi positions, movements and reinforcements.
Government forces also made fresh gains in Al-Jawf province, while fighting
continued on several fronts in Taiz, Dhale and Marib. Turning to Taiz,
al-Qudaimi called the city "an important key to victory over the Houthi
militia," saying its residents' resistance reflected Yemenis' determination to
confront the group. He said repeated Houthi attempts to defeat the city
militarily had failed despite the deployment of extensive manpower and military
resources following the group's seizure of coastal areas. Al-Qudaimi expressed
hope that the Yemeni army would launch further operations to break the siege of
Taiz and restore freedom of movement and access to besieged areas. He also
accused the Houthis of hypocrisy, saying they proclaimed solidarity with Gaza
and the Palestinian people while besieging fellow Yemenis in Taiz and denying
them basic rights to movement and daily life.
The Latest English LCCC analysis &
editorials from miscellaneous sources published
on November 11-12/2026 /(Some of the News reports below are
tran
Trump Won the War Against Iran. The Ceasefires Lost
It
Pierre Rehov/Gatestone Institute/November 11/2026
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22973/trump-won-iran-war-ceasefires-lost-it
The war is possibly the reason that Riyadh, Washington, Buenos Aires, Tel Aviv
and Berlin are not either cinders or targets of nuclear blackmail threats — a
minor detail Vance left out.
Trump had already answered the night before. "I did the right thing. I would
have done it again," he said, adding on November 4, "They're not going to have a
nuclear weapon."
For more than a decade, Trump had been warning that a nuclear-armed Iran would
hold Israel and the Gulf monarchies hostage to atomic blackmail wielded by the
"world's top state sponsor of terrorism for the 39th year in a row." Trump
withdrew from Obama's Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which was due to
"sunset" in October 2025 anyhow, providing Iran with unlimited, legitimate,
nuclear weapons.
A war machine posing as a theocracy — one that chanted "Death to America" for
nearly half a century — discovered what American power could do. The
alternative, a regime crossing the nuclear threshold under the protection of its
missiles and proxies, would have posed a danger incomparably greater than
anything the war has cost.
In March [Trump] gave Tehran 48 hours to reopen the Strait or see its power
plants "obliterated," Then he extended the deadline twice — understandably
viewed by Iran as two "blinks." The ultimatum of April 7, which warned that an
"entire civilization" would perish, ended hours before its own deadline in a
two-week truce requested by Pakistan's prime minister and its army chief.
Six weeks later, a strike scheduled for the following day was postponed at the
request of the rulers of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. In
August, planned weekend strikes were called off after a telephone call from
Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman -- whose own defense minister
had warned in January that failing to strike would only embolden Iran's regime.
By October, Trump was promising that no attack would come before the November
midterm elections. Washington presented every pause as a gesture toward peace,
but Tehran drew the obvious conclusion that the US had been neutered.
Vance led the Islamabad talks, which collapsed after 21 hours, before helping
produce June's capitulation to virtually all of Iran's demands, the incompetent
Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, a framework he co-signed by Trump. Under
the 14-point text that American officials read to reporters, Washington
undertook to lift its naval blockade and to impose no new sanctions. Treasury
waivers would allow Iranian oil exports to flow, frozen assets would be made
available under the framework, and the United States even undertook, with its
regional partners, to develop a reconstruction plan worth at least $300 billion
for the Islamic Republic, subject to a final deal.
The nuclear question that had justified the war was deferred to a final
agreement, with Tehran merely committing to freeze its program in place. In
return, Iran promised its "best efforts" to arrange toll-free passage through
Hormuz for 60 days only, in a waterway it had no right to obstruct at all.
That is the record Vance now leaves out of his indictment. The man who blames
"the war" was the same man who led the negotiations not to have one — and that
gave Iran its reprieve and the framework that rewarded it.
Vance is entitled to believe that the intervention was a mistake, but those who
promoted and negotiated the ceasefires cannot take credit for opposing the war
while escaping responsibility for a truce that turned a military victory into an
open-ended collapse.
Trump's instinct in February was sound. Every pause granted since then to a
mediator or an ally has eroded the advantage that instinct had won.
The United States has not been defeated on the battlefield, where its
superiority was never in doubt. Instead, each truce has handed part of that
victory back to Tehran. Iran's rulers are counting on Washington to accept their
survival as the price of peace, and in time to do what their armed forces could
not -- with the help of Russia and China, to rebuild their nuclear weapons and
ballistic missile programs and once again attack their neighbors in the region —
and potentially the United States.
Trump still has two years and the instruments to finish what he began, starting
with the economic strangulation and especially the military elimination of the
IRGC — along with demands for the verifiable dismantlement of Iran's nuclear
program, backed this time by threats that are actually carried out.
Should Trump settle for another ceasefire, the regime he came closer to
destroying than any of his predecessors will present its survival as a victory
over the most powerful nation on earth, and a war won in February will be
remembered as one squandered in the pauses that followed.
US Vice President JD Vance, the man who blames "the war," for the results of the
midterm elections, is the same man who led the negotiations not to have one —
and that gave Iran its reprieve and the framework that rewarded it. Pictured:
Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif (C) speaks next to Vance and Qatar's
Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani during a meeting
between the US, Iran, Pakistan and Qatar at the Burgenstock Hotel at Lake
Lucerne, Switzerland, on June 21, 2026. (Photo by Nathan Howard/Pool/AFP via
Getty Images)
The day after the November 3 midterm elections, Vice President JD Vance
delivered his verdict on the war against Iran, which has been — and still is —
waging a 47-year war on the United States, Israel, South America, Europe and the
Gulf States.
Iran was reportedly "a week away" from being able to threaten them with nuclear
weapons.
"The reason we lost," Vance wrote on X, "is the war."
No, the reason the administration lost the midterm elections is not the war. The
war is possibly the reason that Riyadh, Washington, Buenos Aires, Tel Aviv and
Berlin are not either cinders or targets of nuclear blackmail threats — a minor
detail Vance left out.
Trump had already answered the night before. "I did the right thing. I would
have done it again," he said, adding on November 4, "They're not going to have a
nuclear weapon."
Vance's comments raise a question of far greater consequence. Was the decision
to strike Iran a mistake, as he now suggests, or did the real failure lie in the
succession of truces and postponements and opposition — largely created by Vance
himself — that allowed a militarily defeated regime to survive and even claim
victory? Did the United States win the war in Iran only to lose it at the
negotiating table?
Trump's position on Iran has been clear for years. For more than a decade, Trump
had been warning that a nuclear-armed Iran would hold Israel and the Gulf
monarchies hostage to atomic blackmail wielded by the "world's top state sponsor
of terrorism for the 39th year in a row." Trump withdrew from Obama's Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action, which was due to "sunset" in October 2025 anyhow,
providing Iran with unlimited, legitimate, nuclear weapons.
In June 2025, Trump's Operation Midnight Hammer sent B-2 bombers against Fordow
and Natanz, while submarine-launched Tomahawks struck Isfahan, producing severe
damage to all three sites.
On February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel went further. Iran's Supreme
Leader Ali Khamenei was killed in the opening strikes, along with much of the
regime's military leadership. A war machine posing as a theocracy — one that
chanted "Death to America" for nearly half a century — discovered what American
power could do. The alternative, a regime crossing the nuclear threshold under
the protection of its missiles and proxies, would have posed a danger
incomparably greater than anything the war has cost.
The trouble began when the guns were supposed to finish the job. Little more
than a week after his father's death, Mojtaba Khamenei was named Iran's new
"Supreme Leader" and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), battered but
intact, adopted the only strategy they knew: holding the Strait of Hormuz
hostage in order to outlast Trump's term in office.
Trump answered with ultimatums of rare ferocity. In March he gave Tehran 48
hours to reopen the Strait or see its power plants "obliterated," Then he
extended the deadline twice — understandably viewed by Iran as two "blinks." The
ultimatum of April 7, which warned that an "entire civilization" would perish,
ended hours before its own deadline in a two-week truce requested by Pakistan's
prime minister and its army chief.
Six weeks later, a strike scheduled for the following day was postponed at the
request of the rulers of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. In
August, planned weekend strikes were called off after a telephone call from
Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman -- whose own defense minister
had warned in January that failing to strike would only embolden Iran's regime.
By October, Trump was promising that no attack would come before the November
midterm elections. Washington presented every pause as a gesture toward peace,
but Tehran drew the obvious conclusion that the US had been neutered.
Between those postponements came the diplomacy, and with it Vance. By April,
Iranian officials had quietly sought to negotiate with Vance, whom they seem to
have regarded, correctly, as one of the most anti-war figures in Trump's inner
circle and therefore the American most likely to settle. A regime under
bombardment selecting its preferred interlocutor should have set off alarm bells
in Washington. Sadly it did not.
Vance led the Islamabad talks, which collapsed after 21 hours, before helping
produce June's capitulation to virtually all of Iran's demands, the incompetent
Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, a framework he co-signed by Trump. Under
the 14-point text that American officials read to reporters, Washington
undertook to lift its naval blockade and to impose no new sanctions. Treasury
waivers would allow Iranian oil exports to flow, frozen assets would be made
available under the framework, and the United States even undertook, with its
regional partners, to develop a reconstruction plan worth at least $300 billion
for the Islamic Republic, subject to a final deal.
The nuclear question that had justified the war was deferred to a final
agreement, with Tehran merely committing to freeze its program in place. In
return, Iran promised its "best efforts" to arrange toll-free passage through
Hormuz for 60 days only, in a waterway it had no right to obstruct at all.
The results are visible today. The June framework did not survive the summer,
and the IRGC still claims to blow up tankers that stray from the routes they
"authorize." On November 5, they reported fires aboard two tankers and a
tugboat. Kharg Island, through which roughly 90 percent of Iran's oil exports
passes, was spared in March, with Trump warning that he would "immediately
reconsider" his actions if shipping were obstructed. Shipping was indeed
obstructed, but the June framework answered with waivers for Iranian oil.
Americans paid an average of about $4.15 a gallon for gas on election day, the
highest ever recorded for an election day, and that economic pain was compounded
by a stalemate the ceasefires prolonged.
That is the record Vance now leaves out of his indictment. The man who blames
"the war" was the same man who led the negotiations not to have one — and that
gave Iran its reprieve and the framework that rewarded it. By early September,
he was also among the senior aides, Marco Rubio included, pushing to keep the
conflict "quiet" until November.
In the same post, Vance listed "change our relationship to Israel" among the
lessons to be drawn from the midterm meltdown. It is a grievance that owes
nothing to gasoline prices or to the relative pittance of military aid that the
US supplies to Israel each year, mainly to help Israel purchase US military
hardware. Vance is entitled to believe that the intervention was a mistake, but
those who promoted and negotiated the ceasefires cannot take credit for opposing
the war while escaping responsibility for a truce that turned a military victory
into an open-ended collapse.
Where would Trump stand today had he carried out the threats he issued in March
and April? Had the power plants he promised to obliterate gone dark, had Kharg
Island and land routes been closed to the regime's oil exports, and had the
naval forces of the IRGC been destroyed before they could mine Hormuz, Tehran's
strategy of attrition would most likely have been destroyed within weeks, long
before the November calendar could come to its rescue. Oil prices would have
spiked, as they did anyway, but a short shock followed by a reopened Strait
would have cost Americans far less than the chronic disruption of tankers being
set ablaze.
A regime that drowned mass protests in blood in January, killing tens of
thousands, would have faced its own people without much of the machinery of
terror that keeps it in power. Nothing guarantees that Iran's theocratic
dictatorship would have fallen -- the risks were real. There could have been
retaliation by Iran against Gulf states' energy facilities, and there was a
depletion of American munitions. Yet the Gulf monarchies that pleaded for
restraint now live beside a wounded and vengeful Iranian regime that still
targets their oil facilities and airports and still controls the strait through
which their oil must pass. Israel still faces an adversary whose nuclear file
remains open.
Trump's instinct in February was sound. Every pause granted since then to a
mediator or an ally has eroded the advantage that instinct had won.
The United States has not been defeated on the battlefield, where its
superiority was never in doubt. Instead, each truce has handed part of that
victory back to Tehran. Iran's rulers are counting on Washington to accept their
survival as the price of peace, and in time to do what their armed forces could
not -- with the help of Russia and China, to rebuild their nuclear weapons and
ballistic missile programs and once again attack their neighbors in the region —
and potentially the United States.
Trump still has two years and the instruments to finish what he began, starting
with the economic strangulation and especially the military elimination of the
IRGC — along with demands for the verifiable dismantlement of Iran's nuclear
program, backed this time by threats that are actually carried out.
Should Trump settle for another ceasefire, the regime he came closer to
destroying than any of his predecessors will present its survival as a victory
over the most powerful nation on earth, and a war won in February will be
remembered as one squandered in the pauses that followed.
**Pierre Rehov, who holds a law degree from Paris-Assas, is a French reporter,
novelist and documentary filmmaker. He is the author of six novels, including
"Beyond Red Lines", "The Third Testament" and "Red Eden", translated from
French. His latest essay on the aftermath of the October 7 massacre " 7 octobre
- La riposte " became a bestseller in France. As a filmmaker, he has produced
and directed 17 documentaries, many photographed at high risk in Middle Eastern
war zones, and focusing on terrorism, media bias, and the persecution of
Christians. His latest documentary, "Pogrom(s)" highlights the context of
ancient Jew hatred within Muslim civilization as the main force behind the
October 7 massacre.
© 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.
On the Dangers of Remaining Hostage to Grey Policies
Hanna Saleh/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
All indicators suggest the region is on the precipice of a wide-scale war that
will compound losses and tragedies. The Americans have tightened the naval
blockade, initiated steps to impose a land blockade and close the Caspian Sea,
and resumed the destruction of air defenses established by Tehran in areas
overlooking the Arabian Gulf. Meanwhile, successive statements from Iran declare
full readiness, reiterating threats attributed to the "hidden" supreme leader
about an "unrestricted geographic response," and asserting that the coordinated
"unity of fronts" will "reshape the political and security architecture of West
Asia!"Against the backdrop of diplomatic initiatives failing to achieve any
breakthrough, a full-scale war may reflect an American vision that views
conflict as an inevitable path to secure President Trump's political legacy by
consolidating gains. The foundation of these gains is the structural overhaul
triggered by the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation in Gaza, the "support" wars in Lebanon,
and the emergence of a new Syria, which effectively dismantled what was once the
crown jewel of the Persian Crescent.
Concurrently, at the apex of the mullahs' regime, there remains an inability to
read the dimensions of field realities or to absorb the lessons of the past
three years following the Al-Aqsa Flood; instead, they believe the Iranian
expansionist project is ascendant and on the verge of establishing political
regimes orbiting its sphere of influence!
Amid this landscape, what is expected for Lebanon? What is the fate of the
opportunity that revived hopes for the establishment of a capable sovereign
state? These hopes were launched by the formation of a new administration 22
months ago, driven by the implementation of an agenda set by the November 2024
ceasefire agreement, centered on dismantling illicit weapons after the agreement
included Hezbollah's consent to relinquish its arsenal.
This opportunity was renewed a second time with the "Framework Agreement," which
rested on a "land-for-weapons" formula. Under this setup, Israel committed to
redeploying outside Lebanese borders, restoring sovereignty and dismantling the
security belt project. However, the non-negotiable prerequisite remains full
disarmament and the complete dismantling of the parallel military, security,
financial, educational, and social infrastructures that enabled the mini-state
to systematically encroach upon the state.
From the presidential oath of office and the ministerial statement to the August
5, 2025, directives restricting arms control, followed by the March 2, 2026,
decree banning Hezbollah's military and security activities, the government has
consistently maintained that Lebanon's resurgence and the restoration of its
sovereignty hinge on a single voice, a single weapon, and a single army, with
the authority over war and peace resting solely with the state. Domestically,
the public wagered on the implementation of these mandates, banking on the
premise that no force stands above state legitimacy. Externally, Lebanon's
regional allies and international friends awaited concrete operational steps.
Ultimately, however, the results failed to live up to those towering
expectations.
Beirut has been repeatedly notified of the need to move past mere declarations
of intent and establish an implementation roadmap that can be executed in
phases. No internal or external actor has called for waging a violent
confrontation, particularly given that unlawful forces lack the actual capacity
to drag the country into a civil war. Instead, demands have centered on the need
to kick off steps to assert effective territorial control, both in towns not
subject to Israeli occupation, as well as in the capital, Beirut, and other
Lebanese regions.
Such a trajectory would secure the borders and prevent the transport or storage
of weapons - a move that would confine arms to legitimate state forces,
therefore leading to the end of the Israeli occupation on one hand, and the
termination of Iranian influence on the other. This remains the core of the
Framework Agreement, in which the US is a partner.
On the eve of the US midterm elections, the administration was well aware that
the results would not alter the priority of disarmament - an arsenal that failed
the test of defending its holders, invited occupation once again, and brought
the greatest catastrophe upon southern Lebanese. It became clear that achieving
this is the path that will prevent Hezbollah from dragging Lebanon into a new
"support" war for Iran. Here, it is worth noting that the "unity of fronts,"
which the statement attributed to the supreme leader referred to, aims in
essence to defend Iran's investment in its proxies.
In the face of excessive adherence to wait-and-see policies, the "Friends of
Lebanon" appeal was issued by the embassies of Britain, the US, Canada,
Australia, and Japan, carrying notable messages regarding the international
approach to the issues of arms control and sovereignty. While the statement
commended the government's official stance on sovereignty, it demanded a
practical roadmap to translate rhetoric into action. It called on the entire
political establishment, including parliament and political parties, to abandon
the sidelines and adopt unequivocal positions to build a broad consensus around
confining weapons to the state to demonstrate true capacity to implement these
decisions.
Crucially, the appeal coincided with a precise statement by US Secretary of
State Marco Rubio, in which he indicated that Washington entered the mediation
track on the condition of disarmament.
Waiting is dangerous, and even more dangerous are the same grey policies. While
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has asserted that "the necessary condition
for the state to restore its role, and indeed its existence, is by extending its
authority over its entire territory through its own forces," and that "there is
no sustainable stability without sustainable security," what is truly needed now
is a tangible, operational shift on the ground. At the very least, such action
must address the mounting grievances of citizens from within the Shiite
community itself, who flatly refuse to allow southern Lebanon to serve as a
geographical safety valve for Iran's failures or a mere card in the calculations
of regional conflict.
Numbers and Illusions
Lutfi Fuad Noaman/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
Just as the best words are those backed by actions, numbers provide the clearest
statement of reality. Indeed, there are figures regarding certain aspects of
Yemenis' lives that are far more truthful than the illusions propagated by
militias and reported by certain newspapers - even major international ones!
The latest figures were included in a statement by the Presidential Leadership
Council one month after the launch of Operation Dawn of Yemen, detailing "40,761
targeting operations" against the Houthi militias, during which "around 20,000
of their terrorist leaders and members were neutralized, and more than 5,000
vehicles were destroyed or disabled". This may have driven the terrorist militia
to frantically launch drones and missiles indiscriminately at various locations
inside Yemen and Saudi Arabia, prompting Coalition forces to retaliate by
targeting those missile launchpads, according to the official account of the
Coalition forces spokesperson.
On another front, successive statements from the Masam project for clearing
landmines from Yemeni territories have announced the success of its teams in
removing 601,041 mines, unexploded ordnance, and explosive devices - out of
millions of mines planted by the militia, which continues to lay them wherever
it expands, forcing citizens to flee those mined areas. Most recently, between
September and November 2026, some 300,000 Yemenis were displaced to other
governorates and abroad, to Djibouti in particular, in addition to the millions
displaced before them.
As for the number of dead and wounded, it is beyond count - not to mention
United Nations data estimating that "18.3 million people could face acute food
insecurity," alongside the disruption of education for millions of children, the
worsening suffering of patients, and the spread of epidemics.
Congratulations to those of "great might" on the great misery they have brought!
Despite the grim conditions and troubling developments, one feels somewhat
reassured and at ease when seeing a helping hand extended to Yemenis amid waves
of tragedy. Aid convoys bearing the emblem of the King Salman Humanitarian Aid
and Relief Center (KSrelief) are making their way to the governorates of Taiz,
Lahj, Aden, and Hajjah, and a campaign has been launched to support "our
brothers in Taiz."
The value of aid provided by KSrelief to Yemen over the past ten years has
reached $4.821 billion; "and under the directives of the Custodian of the Two
Holy Mosques and his Crown Prince, assistance continues until it encompasses all
parts of Yemen," according to remarks by Dr. Abdullah Al-Rabeeah on October 28.
That same day, PLC Chairman Dr. Rashad Mohammed Al-Alimi inaugurated the
Emergency Response Project for Yemen during a visit to the center's headquarters
ahead of an anticipated visit to displacement sites and the frontlines where
stationed forces are deployed.
Arms of good erase the harm inflicted by hands evil, and numbers refute
illusions. Yemenis' hopes grow for the alleviation of their suffering and the
return of the displaced and homeless to their homes so they may find peace after
the end of a period of displacement caused by wars and chaos.
It is deeply comforting to see Yemen's brothers standing alongside its people
and legitimate leadership in times of hardship, yet what brings even greater
comfort to both Yemenis and their brothers is focusing on what comes after the
hardship eases.
Will Yemenis draw the lesson of what has happened and is happening? Will they
reconsider and take stock of the support offered by their brothers and friends,
examine the casualty figures and the extent of the losses, and recognize both
the efforts to ease suffering and the false narratives fueled by this ongoing
conflict? Perhaps Yemenis will realize that the
assistance of their brothers will be far more effective once they avoid the
paths of intransigence and division, allowing the bloodshed in Yemen to cease
and its people to become a significant factor in global calculations and a
constructive force in the present and future, rather than turning their homeland
into a hotbed of illusions and a field of landmines.
The US Elections… A Test of Cognitive Immunity
Dr. Abdullah Faisal Alrabeh/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
Having set out the concept of cognitive immunity and examined the psychology of
emotional consumption, it is now worth testing these ideas against real events,
to see how far they shape public awareness. US elections are among the clearest
of these tests. They attract wide international attention and a flood of
forecasts and analyses, not all of which rest on a methodical reading of the
electoral landscape. In this landscape, political data sometimes intertwines
with preconceived stances, causing efforts to understand voter trends to recede
in favor of the desire to see specific outcomes.
One manifestation of weak cognitive immunity is projecting political aspirations
onto the ballot box. Some commentators do not read the trajectory of US
elections based on domestic American dynamics, voter orientations, and
state-level balances, so much as they do based on their own stances toward the
candidates and what they wish to see for Middle Eastern issues.
As a result, analysis shifts from an attempt to explain electoral behavior to a
moral evaluation of the candidates, as if an analyst's rejection of a candidate
serves as evidence of that candidate's declining chances of winning. Here, a
confusion occurs between one's personal stance toward a candidate and an
objective reading of their electoral prospects; the former expresses the
conviction - or inclination - of its holder, whereas the latter requires
different tools and testable data.
This flaw is not limited to stances and impressions, but extends to how numbers
and opinion polls are utilized. Some commentators resort to cherry-picking
indicators or percentages that align with their preconceived conclusions without
placing them within their broader statistical and political context. This issue
becomes particularly critical when reading US elections; the popular vote,
despite its importance in gauging the general mood, is not sufficient on its own
to determine the winner of the office, given the Electoral College system and
the decisive role played by swing states.
Consequently, treating a single poll or an isolated percentage as conclusive
evidence of the outcome's direction ignores the nature and complexities of the
electoral system, giving the audience an impression of precision that the data
does not necessarily support.
This exposes a fundamental difference between analysis rooted in specialized
knowledge of domestic US affairs and a reading based on impressions or
ideological stances. Understanding voter trends requires examining a set of
interrelated factors, including economic performance, demographic shifts,
working-class priorities, turnout levels, and the nature of competition in
decisive states. These factors cannot be reduced to a candidate's stance on a
foreign issue, regardless of its importance to observers outside the US. The
priorities governing the American voter's ballot may differ from those from
which an Arab or regional commentator evaluates the candidates.
Therefore, the importance of activating the authority of critical
questioning among the audience emerges, not as a stance against the analyst or a
questioning of their intentions, but as a tool to test their methodology. The
fundamental question is not whether the analysis aligns with our convictions,
but rather whether it is grounded in genuine knowledge of domestic US affairs,
understands the nature of the electoral system, and offers a balanced reading of
the available data. A distinction must also be drawn between methodical
assessment based on verifiable indicators and wishful thinking that presents
personal preferences as objective conclusions.
Ultimately, the problem does not lie in an observer holding a political stance
or a preference for a particular candidate, but rather in that stance becoming
the criterion for reading and interpreting reality. US elections, much like
major international events, are not an arena for projecting wishes; rather, they
are a test of the ability of both the analyst and the audience to separate
desire from fact, and value judgments from political assessment.
This is where cognitive immunity begins: reading results and indicators as they
are, not as we wish them to be, and recognizing that understanding shifts within
major powers requires a precise knowledge of their societies and institutions,
rather than merely following the clamor of television screens or echoing
forecasts that align with our preconceived views.
The Midterm Elections and the Nature and Limits of Their
Palestinian and Israeli Achievements
Hazem Saghieh/Asharq Al-Awsat/November 11/2026
A broad consensus around a conspicuous fact has emerged following the American
midterm elections: supporting Israel, be it in the wrong or the right, which
used to be a prerequisite for political success, has now become a burden that
can end a politician's career. The most frequently cited example was the victory
of Abdul El-Sayed in the Michigan Senate race.
This development's significance renders how it is read significant as well.
Indeed, our traditional reading is built on shoddy underlying assumptions: a
broad swath of mainstream Arab political discourse has long oscillated between
two contradictory myths that have sometimes been merged into a single ragged
myth. The first is that Israel controls the US; the second, that the US Israel.
Reading the latest development demands that we leave behind the accumulated
myths that do nothing but worsen our reading. We recall how, with Israel's war
on Gaza in response to Al-Aqsa Flood Operation, we were flooded with analyses
categorically concluding that democracy is a sham, and even that Western
civilization is a lie on its last legs. Shortly afterward, however, we were
surprised by elections in the US, and others in Israel, that could allow for
major achievements for the Palestinians. Instead of an acknowledgment of our own
inertia, twisted obstinacy has reared its head again, in yet another perverse
formula: boasting that Iran brought down the American regime instead of the US
bringing down Iran's.
The achievements these elections yielded remain hostage to shoddy
interpretations, mostly offered by the very voices that had declared democracy a
lie and the West finished. While a few have spoken of conspiracies, many more
have cast the elections and their results as military battles in which "the
enemy's nose was rubbed in the mud." Some have presented these achievements as
the first step toward America's exit from the region, or toward an open,
absolute rupture between the US and the Jewish state. And, of course, those who
glorify the catastrophe of October 7 have loudly credited it with these
achievements.
As more than one observer has noted, sympathy for the Palestinians grew out of
Israel's savage response to the catastrophe, not out of the catastrophe itself,
which many of those who later became sympathizers had previously denounced.
Broader and more forceful Palestinian and Arab condemnation of the "Flood" would
probably have earned even greater solidarity.
Understanding where the opposition to Israel and the revulsion at its war come
from requires making a few basic distinctions. Outside narrow circles, attitudes
toward Netanyahu, his genocidal bent, and settler terrorism in the West Bank
remain a far cry from attitudes toward Israel and its self-defense. The same
applies to the distinction between a war waged with no political offer to the
Palestinians, which is what Netanyahu did, and a war paired with a political
offer, which is what he did not do; or between a swift, decisive, and cheap war
on Iran and a war that is waged reluctantly and punctuated by truces driven by
illusions of deal-making, engendering economic costs that are hard to bear.
Trump's announcement that aid to Israel would be halted falls within the same
frame: a theatrical gesture, meant to boost the Republicans at the polls, that
backfired. The aid, after all, is estimated at $4 billion, while the Jewish
state's annual budget exceeds 700 billion. Moreover, all such talk comes with a
distinction between offensive and defensive aid, amid widely circulated
estimates from many sources regarding cooperation programs in intelligence,
artificial intelligence, weapons development, and more.
The caveats that keep our reading of the situation in check must therefore be
taken into account. While there have been major shifts that go against Israel,
especially among the young, its base of support remains active and influential
for many reasons. Likewise, opposition to the war on Iran, to how it was waged
and what it cost, does not mean that the US has room for sympathy with Iran's
rulers, their doctrines, their expansionism, or their partisans in the region.
Moreover, while the "progressives" swept into Congress by the "blue wave" have
gained undeniable weight, the Democratic Party's "moderates" remain the
majority. One of them, Hakeem Jeffries, is all but certain to be elected Speaker
of the House, and Chuck Schumer, another "moderate," may well stay on as their
leader in the Senate. The need to legislate in ways that allow the party to win
Republican and swing states will likely safeguard the "moderate" line and ensure
that it prevails.
Nor is the "progressive" bloc a monolith. It is split between those who focus on
the economy and a fairer distribution of wealth, Bernie Sanders foremost among
them, and the latest crop of newcomers, who are fixated on identities and
infatuated with NGOs. Even on Israel, the most radical position does not speak
for everyone opposed to Netanyahu and his wars, Senator Jon Ossoff among them.
And who knows: the decline of Israel's standing in America, and with it the
decline of the Likud-settler camp in Israel, could create conditions that help
open the bolted doors of politics. Were that to happen, it would weaken Iran and
its followers more than wars can.
This is what defines the nature of the achievements and their potential
trajectories, certainly not ludicrous hyperbole that does as much harm to the
achievements as they do to efforts to develop and consolidate them. When things
are blown out of proportion in this way, all we can do is wake up mid-nightmare,
chant "We won, we won," and sink back into a deep sleep.
Jensen Huang Sex Scandal Could Bring Down Trump Officials
Gordon G. Chang/Gatestone Institute/November 11, 2026
The Singapore-based customer of Nvidia bought chips for data centers, and as the
New York Times reported on November 9, U.S. officials were concerned that
Megaspeed was illegally routing sophisticated chips to China.
Nvidia chips require export licenses from the U.S. Commerce Department. It
appears, at least at this moment, that China was able to illicitly obtain Nvidia
chips because of the Huang-Huang affair. In fact, Alice Huang had recently been
bragging to investors about her access to Nvidia chips and about Megaspeed's
sale of these devices to Alibaba, the Chinese tech giant.
Even more disturbing is Commerce's leniency when it comes to chip sales.
McGuire, now at the Council on Foreign Relations, points out that the department
"has publicly stated it will not enforce those regulations, and also has not
bothered to replace them."
The Trump administration in May of last year rescinded Biden-era rules that
imposed limits on such transactions. Jensen Huang has repeatedly called for the
scrapping of chip-export rules.
Worse, Lutnick's Commerce Department has issued export licenses for Nvidia chips
even when there was a high probability of illicit diversion to China. The New
York Times, for instance, reported that Commerce approved a chip export license
to New Matrix, which appears to be nothing more than a "ghost office," a front
operation for China.
"The sale of chips to New Matrix appears to be part of a pattern that has
concerned technology experts inside and outside the government: The Commerce
Department is giving clearance to buy and handle Nvidia chips to Chinese
companies with ties to firms that have been subject to national-security-related
trade restrictions," the paper noted on November 7. Approvals, that publication
reports, are going to firms with ties to companies blacklisted by the U.S.
government or are military contractors in China
The president was informed in October 2025 that China had targeted Jensen Huang
but did not say anything to the Nvidia boss or to the American public until now.
From what we now know, his government fundamentally failed to protect America.
Trump, regrets or no regrets, has an obligation to explain it.
The scandal triggered by Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang's sexual relationship with a
suspected Chinese agent could bring down senior Trump administration officials
and damage President Donald Trump himself. Pictured: Trump greets Huang
following a meeting on artificial intelligence at the White House on September
29, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
The scandal triggered by Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang's sexual relationship with a
suspected Chinese agent could bring down senior Trump administration officials
and damage President Donald Trump himself. At this moment, the blast radius is
expanding fast.
On November 8, Huang admitted to an extramarital relationship and apologized to
family members and Nvidia employees. The admission followed the revelation that
he had a long-running affair with Alice Huang, a suspected Chinese Ministry of
State Security asset. He had previously lied about the affair.
On the same day, November 8th, the company announced an internal investigation
of Huang but did not relieve him of his duties.
In view of the allegations, Huang should be suspended immediately, pending the
conclusion of the Nvidia probe.
This is no ordinary sex scandal. Ms. Huang — no relation — is an executive of
Megaspeed. The Singapore-based customer of Nvidia bought chips for data centers,
and as the New York Times reported on November 9, U.S. officials were concerned
that Megaspeed was illegally routing sophisticated chips to China.
Bloomberg reports that Nvidia underreported to the U.S. government the number of
chips it had sold to Megaspeed, an action that helped that hide illicit
diversions of chips.
Nvidia chips require export licenses from the U.S. Commerce Department. It
appears, at least at this moment, that China was able to illicitly obtain Nvidia
chips because of the Huang-Huang affair. In fact, Alice Huang had recently been
bragging to investors about her access to Nvidia chips and about Megaspeed's
sale of these devices to Alibaba, the Chinese tech giant.
*Jensen Huang is not the only figure at risk. The New York Times reported that
late last year the Commerce Department spiked an investigation into Nvidia sales
to Megaspeed after an unusual contact from Tim Teter, Nvidia's general counsel,
to Commerce Department investigators. Teter, before reaching out to the
investigators, had apparently spoken to Commerce Department Under Secretary for
Industry and Security Jeffrey Kessler.
The investigation was swiftly transferred to the Department of Justice. It is
not known whether DOJ has pursued this matter. "It is beyond inappropriate that
leadership at the Department of Commerce apparently discussed an ongoing law
enforcement investigation involving Megaspeed and Nvidia with Nvidia's General
Counsel," wrote Chris McGuire, a former State Department and National Security
Council official, on X. It would also be unusual for Kessler to interfere in an
ongoing matter without the approval of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, to
whom Kessler directly reported.
The New York Times account has been confirmed in a general outline by Bloomberg
reporting about Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security. "In the weeks that
followed Teter's call," Bloomberg reports, "BIS staff were restricted in their
ability to look into Megaspeed, including being told not to mention the company
in external communications and having to route all requests of Nvidia through
Kessler or seek his approval for outreach."
Even more disturbing is Commerce's leniency when it comes to chip sales.
McGuire, now at the Council on Foreign Relations, points out that the department
"has publicly stated it will not enforce those regulations, and also has not
bothered to replace them."
McGuire was referring to regulations restricting bulk chip sales. The Trump
administration in May of last year rescinded Biden-era rules that imposed limits
on such transactions. Jensen Huang has repeatedly called for the scrapping of
chip-export rules.
Worse, Lutnick's Commerce Department has issued export licenses for Nvidia chips
even when there was a high probability of illicit diversion to China. The New
York Times, for instance, reported that Commerce approved a chip export license
to New Matrix, which appears to be nothing more than a "ghost office," a front
operation for China.
"The sale of chips to New Matrix appears to be part of a pattern that has
concerned technology experts inside and outside the government: The Commerce
Department is giving clearance to buy and handle Nvidia chips to Chinese
companies with ties to firms that have been subject to national-security-related
trade restrictions," the paper noted on November 7. Approvals, that publication
reports, are going to firms with ties to companies blacklisted by the U.S.
government or are military contractors in China.
There are also concerns about Trump himself.
The president was informed in October 2025 that China had targeted Jensen Huang
but did not say anything to the Nvidia boss or to the American public until now.
On November 8, Trump told reporters, in the words of the New York Times, that
"he had no regrets about his own lack of action."
Perhaps there are good reasons for the president to have failed to act, but he
now owes the American public an explanation, especially if there were, as is
almost certain, illicit diversions of advanced Nvidia chips to China in the
intervening period.
From what we now know, his government fundamentally failed to protect America.
Trump, regrets or no regrets, has an obligation to explain it.
*Gordon G. Chang is the author of Plan Red: China's Project to Destroy America,
a Gatestone Institute distinguished senior fellow, and a member of its Advisory
Board.
Follow Gordon G. Chang on X (formerly Twitter)
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22980/jensen-huang-sex-scandal
© 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.
Europe Off the Table: Russia and America Shaping the
Future of the Continent?
Najwa Abi Haidar/Al-Markazia/November 11, 2026
(Translated by AI by AI)
The Abu Dhabi talks between Russia and Ukraine, sponsored by the United States,
were not merely another round in the search for an end to the years-long war;
rather, they once again exposed a parallel battle over who holds the right to
shape the contours of a settlement and post-war arrangements. While Washington
seeks to monopolize the role of primary mediator, Moscow appears adamant about
keeping the Europeans—and specifically France—out of direct negotiations,
despite the fact that the security of the European continent lies at the very
heart of the conflict and its repercussions.
Just prior to the launch of the talks on the 10th and 11th of this month, French
Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot announced the participation of European
representatives, including French officials, in the Abu Dhabi meetings,
following an announcement by U.S. Envoy Steve Witkoff regarding preparations for
the gathering without specifying the identities of the participants. Conversely,
the Kremlin stressed that the negotiations on Ukraine remain trilateral,
involving Russia, Ukraine, and the United States. Ukraine's chief negotiator
clarified that Kyiv is holding separate meetings with the Europeans and NATO
countries on the sidelines of the talks. Western
diplomatic circles revealed to Al-Markazia that Moscow refused to include the
Europeans in the direct negotiations, preferring to limit them to the American
side, which is managing the settlement track. This Russian stance does not
appear to be a mere matter of protocol; rather, it reflects a desire to deal
with Washington as the party capable of influencing the course of the war and
the terms for ending it, without granting European capitals a parallel
negotiating status—despite their political, military, and economic involvement
in the crisis and the fact that they bear a major share of its fallout.
At the conclusion of today's Abu Dhabi round, U.S. Envoy Jared Kushner described
the talks as "very productive," despite the complexity of the issues on the
table, announcing progress on several fronts and an agreement on a large-scale
prisoner exchange. He noted that discussions addressed security guarantees for
Ukraine, potential territorial concessions, and post-war arrangements,
confirming that certain matters require additional rounds. He also announced
that he and Witkoff will travel to Moscow to meet with President Vladimir Putin,
and will subsequently meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to brief
him on the outcomes of the talks. On the other hand,
the head of the Russian delegation, Vladimir Medinsky, defended the necessity of
discussing the future of European security within the negotiations, arguing that
the war has exposed the shortcomings of the existing security architecture and
calling for the formulation of a fairer system that takes into account the
interests of all nations. This presents a paradox that raises a fundamental
question: How can the future of security in Europe be drawn up without the
participation of the Europeans themselves in drafting its settlement?
Paris, which dispatched representatives to Abu Dhabi alongside Germany and
Britain, maintains that Europe's role is essential in ending the war and
guaranteeing the continent's security. Zelenskyy, in turn, has stressed the
importance of involving Europe in the negotiating process and the reconstruction
of his country.Meanwhile, diplomatic circles indicate that Moscow is signaling a
readiness to open a new page with the European Union, end the state of
hostility, and rebuild relations. Will direct negotiations between Russia and
Europe be a milestone preceding an agreement on the Ukrainian settlement, or are
Washington and Moscow heading toward an understanding through which they will
chart the future of the continent, leaving Europe merely to follow what is
decided regarding its own security from outside the negotiating table?
Selected Face Book & X tweets
on November 11/2026
Joshua T. Hosler
BREAKING: Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) is pushing to ban Sharia Law
nationwide and called out the genocide of Christians by Muslims."This extreme
ideology is straight from the pit of HELL, and it has no place in American
society!" "You won't hear from Democrats about how radical Islamic terrorists
are currently carrying out a mass genocide of Christians in Nigeria.""Think
about this. More than 62,000 Christians have been slaughtered since 2000 by
radical Islamic terrorists in Nigeria. You heard that right, 62,000." "And just
this year alone, more than 7,000 Nigerian Christians have been murdered because
of their faith alone. You can't turn on the TV without hearing about Israel's
so-called mass genocide of Palestinians every day. And yet when it comes to
62,000 Christians being slaughtered by radical Muslims, it's radio silence."
Cissie Graham Lynch
https://x.com/CissieGLynch/status/2120308965795926130/video/1
It was an honor to appear before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee
today as the nominee to serve as Ambassador at Large for International Religious
Freedom. This is the opening statement that I shared, and I'm grateful for my
husband, Corey, who was with me, as well as all who have supported me. I want to
thank everyone who has been praying for me and my family during this process.
Time is short and the needs are immense, but if I am confirmed, I will do all
that I can to be a fierce advocate and defender for all who are persecuted for
their faith.
Alberto Miguel Fernandez
"Recent days in Jordan have seen “a lot of pushback on extremist Muslims by
other Muslims,” said Jibril. But there remains “a long way to go” to neutralize
an extremist ideology that “needs to be defeated,” he said. “This attack doesn’t
start and end with those three good-for-nothing bums.”
Tevin Macharia Mukabana
The Kuwait Prince, states, " if they kill me because of my convertion to
Christianity, then I will appear before Jesus Christ and be with him for all
eternity". HALLELUJAH
Congressman Andy Barr
The Abraham Accords was a historic peace deal to advance relations between
Israel and multiple Arab countries. I look forward working with all parties
involved to strengthen the Abraham Accords.
PeriklestheGREAT "Vox Populi, Vox Dei"
https://x.com/FamilieB3/status/2120067645559173275/video/1
The Communists & Islamists alliance is a rerun!
It happened before Europe & America.
It was in IRAN.
Matthew Levitt
Report: Military Coordination Group for Lebanon (MCG4L), headed by US Marine
Corps Lieutenant General Joseph Clearfield, had assessed the pilot program as
unsuccessful in Zawtar al Gharbiyeh, Froun, and Srifa. Hezbollah, the report
said, was exploiting the return of displaced residents to restore its presence
Faraz Pervaiz
🇵🇰 Eight-year-old Christian girl Abniha Arjun has been missing since November
8, 2026. She is a resident of Christian Colony, Gujranwala, Pakistan. Her
parents are deeply frightened & fear that their daughter may be subjected to
sexual abuse or forcibly converted to Islam.
Sir_Charlsss Unchained!
BREAKING: The fiancée of Egyptian Christian convert Said Mansour Rezk Abdelrazek
says authorities tortured him and tried to remove his cross tattoo as he faces
possible execution for leaving Islam. Sophia told The Jerusalem Post that
Egyptian authorities tortured