English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For September 18/2026
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2026/english.september18.26.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
Those who are ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of them the Son of Man will also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels
Mark 08/31-38: “Then he began to teach them that the Son of Man must undergo great suffering, and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. He said all this quite openly. And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. But turning and looking at his disciples, he rebuked Peter and said, ‘Get behind me, Satan! For you are setting your mind not on divine things but on human things. ’He called the crowd with his disciples, and said to them, ‘If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it. For what will it profit them to gain the whole world and forfeit their life? Indeed, what can they give in return for their life? Those who are ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of them the Son of Man will also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.”

Titles For The English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on September 17-18/2026
Clownish MPs spawned by the incubators of the Iranian occupation/Elias Bejjani/September 17, 2026
Elias Bejjani/Video link and full text of my interview with journalist Joe Ibrahim/An exposing reading of the situation and the heresies and narcissism of the owners of our party-companies and those in charge of our Church and our MPs and rulers... a group of scribes and Pharisees who sold our people and our homeland for thirty pieces of silver
A Mighty People Ruled by Pygmies/Abu Arz/Social Media/September 17, 2026
US Ambassador Michel Issa Affirms Continued US Support for Lebanon’s Sovereignty
President Aoun Returns from Paris This Evening
Trilateral Meeting Between Aoun, Abdullah II, and Macron to Support Lebanon’s Efforts to Ensure Security and Strengthen Sovereignty
Netanyahu Opens Fronts Against Iran, Gaza, and Lebanon: "We Will Topple the Iranian Regime and Deal with Hezbollah"
Israel: Forces to Remain in Security Belt Unless Hezbollah Is Disarmed
Israel Informs CENTCOM of Hezbollah Weapons Depots Near Baabda Palace; US Takes Action
Lebanon appeals to its friends: Help us transition to a new phase and invest in the state's success!
Aoun in Paris to bolster security agencies and secure a successor for UNIFIL: Empowering the army would yield manifold results.
Cabinet session following the vote of confidence... Geagea: Resolving the weapons issue is key to resolving crises... while gasoline and bread prices skyrocket.
Hezbollah Opts for Silence Over Withholding Confidence: Accusing the Government of Treason Is Now Off-Limits!
UNIFIL: An Instrument for Implementing International Resolutions That Lebanon Insists on Retaining
Hezbollah Has Yet to Grasp the Magnitude of What Has Befallen It/Ali Hamadeh | An-Nahar | September 17, 2026
Hezbollah-Linked Network and Remnants of Assad’s Forces Before Lebanese Military Judiciary: Explosives and Drones Smuggled to Syria via Food Containers/Youssef Diab/Asharq Al-Awsat/September 17, 2026
Judicial Development in the "Assad Remnants" Network Case in Northern Lebanon: Charges Filed Against 14 Individuals, Including Hezbollah Official "Hajj Alaa"
Facing Charges of Collaboration: Maria Maalouf Faces 15 Years in Prison!
Geagea: Parliamentary Sessions Confirmed Majority Lebanese Support for the Government
Raji Asks Britain to Pressure Israel to Halt Its Aggression
Hezbollah Falls: From Ali al-Taher to Nejmeh Square/Jean Fghali/Nidaa Al-Watan/September 18, 2026
The Subtext of Upcoming Negotiations: All Eyes on Al-Rihane and Its Environs/Alan Sarkis/Nidaa Al-Watan/September 18, 2026
The Revolutionary Guard repositions itself and Tehran tightens its grip on the party/Tariq Abu Zeinab/Call of the Nation/September 18, 2026
Deir al-Qamar Bids Farewell to Dory Chamoun in an Official and Public Funeral; Camille Chamoun: Our Strength Lies in Our Unity, and Without It, We Cannot Succeed

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on September 17-18/2026
Report 1: Satellite Images Show Acceleration of Iran's Rebuilding of Nuclear Facility Bombed by Israel
Report : Trump to "Axios": I Will Soon Make a Big Decision Regarding Iran / Trump: Decision to Eliminate the Iranian Regime is Big and All Possibilities Are on the Table
Report: US State Department Approves Potential Sale of F-35 Aircraft to Saudi Arabia
Report : Washington: Withdrawal from War Causes Energy Crisis / Trump Hopes for "Near End"... and Navigation in Hormuz Drops to 3 Ships
Report: Russian and Chinese Veto Ends Mandate of Independent Monitoring of Sanctions on Iran
US Sanctions on Iranian Cryptocurrency Trading Platform
Iranian Foreign Ministry Summons German Ambassador Over Remarks by Merz
America Grants Iranian Officials Visas to Attend UN General Assembly
US-China Contacts Pave Way for Trump-Xi Summit Next Week / Washington's Allies Fear Trading Taiwan Support for Economic Concessions
Turkey Hands Russia and Ukraine Draft Agreement to Halt Black Sea Attacks
Russian and Chinese Veto Ends Independent Sanctions Monitoring Mandate for Iran
Erdogan to Run for New Presidential Term in Early Elections
Turkey Displeased with US Decision to Extend Arms Embargo Waiver for Cyprus; Says Mitsotakis’s Visit to Islands Near Its Border Was "Monitored"
Over 90 Houthis Killed or Wounded in Clashes with Yemeni Army West of Taiz; Six Combat Vehicles and Two Tanks Destroyed
Italian Defense Minister: We Will Not Delay the Decision to Protect Our Ships in Bab al-Mandab; Warships to Be Deployed to Ensure Safe Passage
Turkey condemns Houthi attempt to attack Mecca and calls for an end to their attacks, asserting that their actions threaten regional security and global stability.

Titles For The Latest English LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on September 17-18/2026
The Heart Attacks Fueling Suspicion in Syria/Ahmad Sharawi/FDD-Insight/September 17/2026
Lebanon Cannot Be Left Alone to Resolve Hezbollah’s Disarmament Crisis./Toni Nissi/The Capitol Institute/September 17/2026
La mort de l’accord-cadre et sa portée/Dr. Charles Chartouni/ICI Beyrouth/September 17/2026
The Death of the Framework Agreement and Its Implications/Dr. Charles Chartouni/ICI Beyrouth/September 17/2026
Why Allowing Hamas to Participate in the Upcoming Elections Would Be a Catastrophic Mistake/Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/September 17, 2026
Jordan’s Strategic Importance to Washington Increases/David Schenker/Hoover Institute/September 17/2026
Selected Face Book & X tweets on September 17/2026

Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on September 17-18/2026
Clownish MPs spawned by the incubators of the Iranian occupation
Elias Bejjani/September 17, 2026
Clownish Lebanese so called MPs spawned by the incubators of the Iranian occupation—men held by the throat through dossiers involving moral misconduct, financial impropriety, corruption, or subservience. They are utterly worthless.

Elias Bejjani/Video link and full text of my interview with journalist Joe Ibrahim/An exposing reading of the situation and the heresies and narcissism of the owners of our party-companies and those in charge of our Church and our MPs and rulers... a group of scribes and Pharisees who sold our people and our homeland for thirty pieces of silver
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOdEG8ibka0
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/09/157518/
September 14, 2026
Christians in Lebanon, where to? Parties trading in representation and an absent Church
Headlines:
The Christian situation is catastrophic and the Church is absent from consciousness
Christian parties are family companies trading in representation
How they deprived expatriates of the right to vote in exchange for an MP seat in the North?
The latest American decision on Hezbollah and pushing the buttons on the files
Who owns the decision of the Christians today?
Introduction:
In a frank and bold interview with journalist Joe Ibrahim within the program "Pod Siyasi" on SBC LEBANON channel, Lebanese expatriate political activist and owner of Al-Monsaqiyya website Elias Bejjani opens files that have been silenced about the reality of Christians in Lebanon. Bejjani considers that the Christian situation has reached a catastrophic stage, and that the Church is absent from confronting existential dangers, while Christian parties have turned into family companies owned by individuals and families, whose first concern is their private interests and covering the occupation, first Syrian and today Iranian.
Summary:
Bejjani believes that Christian leaderships have abandoned Christian and national principles and 1450 years of martyrdom history, and accepted to work under the cloak of occupation in exchange for benefits. He describes these leaderships as playing the role of small dictatorships, and owning mouthpieces that attack anyone who criticizes them. He accuses the Lebanese Forces of colluding to deprive expatriates, 90% of whom are Christians, of their electoral right in exchange for a parliamentary seat in Tripoli or Baalbek.
And Bejjani links the recent wave of statements describing Hezbollah as a "Lebanese party" and a "partner" to the latest American decision which considered the party a non-Lebanese organization completely affiliated with Iran. He says this decision frightened the Shiite duo and the deep state, so buttons were pressed on the files they own against Christian leaders.
He cites the glorification by President of the Republic Joseph Aoun of Nabih Berri's speech at the White House and at the Embassy, and the statement of Tarek Mitri who considered Hezbollah Lebanese despite its connection to Iran, and Samir Geagea sending Melhem Riachy to dialogue with Hezbollah, and the sermon of the Maronite Patriarch who said Hezbollah is a "partner." He considers that whoever describes the killer and the occupier as a partner commits a great sin.
He directs sharp criticism at the Patriarchate, questioning the building of a house for Walid Ghayyad in Harissa on land where building is not allowed, and the relationship with Abdo Abu Kasm, considering it an abnormal and un-Christian relationship. He also strongly criticizes the method of the Lebanese Forces in dealing with critics of Samir Geagea, such as Alfred Madi and Charles Chartouni, where they are defamed and attacked via media machines.
He concludes that the Maronite political and religious class is the product of the occupation's machines, citing the visit of delegations of bishops and priests to the Mleeta museum belonging to Hezbollah. He stresses that Christians are expelled from the state, and reports show there are no Christians in the joints of the state, and none of the leaderships raise their voice. He considers that Samir Geagea and Sleiman Frangieh are not fit for the presidency of the Republic, describing Geagea as a small dictator who does not believe in democracy and is not fit to be president.
Full text of the interview
Question: Where are the Christians from everything happening in the region and Lebanon?
Our situation as Christians is not only miserable, it is a million degrees below miserable. Our Church is unconscious, and when it takes a position unfortunately it is a non-ecclesiastical, non-Lebanese, unethical and non-Christian position.
Our Christian leaders whom I have been calling for years "owners of party-companies," because there are no parties in Lebanon but companies owned by individuals and mostly inherited, their first concern is their personal interests.
And since the Palestinian occupation until today where there is the Iranian occupation, all these Christian leaderships accepted to work under the occupation and cover it in exchange for benefits. So they deviated from the Christian path, buried 1450 years of history, forgot the martyrs, and worked for their interests. They covered the Syrian occupation and worked with it, and covered the Iranian occupation and worked with it, and are still on the same path, far from everything that is a Christian existence, and far from Lebanon as a sovereign, free, independent state.
And more dangerous is that the majority of them play the role of small dictators. They have a company with employees, and they have trumpets and cymbals, and they consider that they alone have the right to speak in the name of Christians. And when any Christian activist comes out and criticizes a position of one of them, and in the eyes of their followers they are idols, they attack him with their trumpets and belittle him and assault him. We are in a catastrophic Christian situation.
I as an expatriate, the Lebanese diaspora is the hope. What did they do to us in the last election law? The Lebanese Forces and the "Aounists" and with them the actual ruler in Lebanon which is the Shiite duo and what is called the deep state, deprived us of the right to vote. Imagine, in exchange for an MP in Tripoli for the Forces or an MP in Baalbek, they deprived us expatriates, 90% of those registered among us are Christians, of our right to vote.
I as a Lebanese-Canadian, what are my expectations from the owners of the party-companies and from my Church? I can say with a clear conscience and based on thousands of documented facts that these are my enemies. I as a Lebanese expatriate Christian, these are my enemies and they work with the occupation.
Before we start, I want to raise the issue of the latest American decision issued about 10 to 15 days ago. The decision added to the designation of Hezbollah in America that it is not only terrorist, and it has been classified as terrorist for years, but considered it entirely non-Lebanese and affiliated with Iran. This decision frightened the ruling Shiite duo and all who cover it from all sects. So the sick minds in the deep state led by the Iranian moved and pressed the button on every Christian leadership they have a file on.
What they wanted to do and are still continuing to do is targeting everyone who considers that Hezbollah is not Shiite, and that Hezbollah is not Lebanese, and that Hezbollah did not liberate the South, and that Hezbollah is not representative of the Shiite sect in parliament, and that all its wars are absurd non-Lebanese wars.
And they started through the Supreme Islamic Shiite Council with Youssef Khoury and filed a lawsuit against him. What is the case? That Youssef said in more than one interview that Sheikh Naim Qassem and the rest of Hezbollah leaders call their absurd wars "Karbalaean," and they are not Karbalaean but suicide.
And for this conspiracy to be complete, let's follow whose buttons they pressed. Whoever presses someone's button has prepared a file for him and tells him move or we will start. They started with President Joseph Aoun who glorified Nabih Berri's speech on the occasion of the anniversary of Musa al-Sadr. And Nabih Berri's speech was completely devoid of any mention of Lebanon or the Lebanese identity of Lebanon or the non-Lebaneseness of Hezbollah and what is called the lie of resistance.
Even Fouad Siniora, the national hero, glorified Berri's speech. And Prime Minister Nawaf Salam does not want to talk, so he sent Tarek Mitri. This Tarek Mitri who was denying the Damour massacre, the leftist who was fed the milk of Arafat and Abdel Nasser, came out in a TV interview and said that Hezbollah is Lebanese despite its connection to Iran.
And with Samir Geagea, they brought out Melhem Riachy for us. He said he wants to have a dialogue with Hezbollah. My brother, if this is a terrorist and an Iranian army in Lebanon and an occupier of Lebanon and assassinated all the leaders in Lebanon and brought Lebanon to hell, do you dialogue with him? You put him on trial.
And more dangerous than all of these, the Patriarch came out in his sermon before last Sunday and said Hezbollah is a partner. How do you not want to upset the partner? What is this catastrophe?
We conclude in a scientific and academic way that someone pressed their buttons and threatened them with their files. So if our Church considers the killer and the criminal and the occupier a partner, and if our President of the Republic whose doors of the White House were opened to him and after two hours went to the Embassy and criticized all the talk he said in the White House and glorified Berri, as if he glorifies Satan in heaven, this is the interpretation of Joseph Aoun's marketing of Berri in the White House.
And in the Embassy he repeated the same talk that Hezbollah came as a result of occupation. My brother there are standards. On what standard was he chosen as president? If Hezbollah in its documents and speech says I am Iranian and I am a soldier in the army of Wilayat al-Faqih.
In 2012, I am one of the people who most carried a campaign against Patriarch al-Rahi when he came to Canada. I personally called the Foreign Minister and asked him not to receive him because he does not represent the Maronites. And he came marketing in America and Canada and France that the Assad regime and Iran are the protectors of Christians.
How did the Patriarch come? Everyone knows he came on the background of files and buttons. And the one he placed beside him and whose reputation is bad and gave him a piece of land and built him a house in the middle of Harissa monastery on land where building is prohibited is Walid Ghayyad. What is his story? Period. This is Abdo Abu Ghayyad with the Patriarch. The relationship is abnormal and un-Christian, it is a satanic relationship.
And the same applies to Abdo Abu Kasm. I have 20 videos of them appearing on Al-Jadeed and on LBCI, whenever someone hints that the Patriarch is against Hezbollah they come out and say never, the Patriarch loves Hezbollah and Hezbollah is resistance. We return to the same story of files and buttons.
As for Melhem Riachy, the Forces are on my head and my eyes, Samir Geagea is the biggest Christian leader he has 18 MPs, but we have 64 or 65 Christian MPs, and therefore these 18 or 20 are not all Christians. Dr. Geagea with respect to his person, whenever someone criticizes a position of his, not a personal criticism, they attack him. Alfred Madi, who is not only a Becharre native, this is from the bone of Bachir and from the founders of the Lebanese Forces, when he was beside Bachir and achieved countless accomplishments, others were still wearing shorts and playing in front of his house. When he criticized two positions of Geagea all the media machines attacked him.
And the same with Charles Chartouni who was a member of the Metn council and with the rank of minister and from the founders of all the organization in the Lebanese Forces. How do they criticize Melhem Riachy? What they do is unacceptable.
I want to say to Dr. Geagea you are the biggest leader existing today in Lebanon by virtue of reality. You must know that you do not represent Christians alone, you have part of the Christian representation, but you must leave freedom for people to criticize your positions. Whoever criticizes a position of yours you should not betray him and consider him an agent and attack him. This is the policy of Hezbollah and this is the policy of all owners of party-companies.
The real leader's most important quality is that he knows how to choose his advisors. This is what distinguishes Bachir Gemayel from Samir Geagea and from the rest of leaders and from the Patriarch and from the President of the Republic.
Today what governs Lebanon under the Maronite presidency is the government of advisors. Everyone knows that in the days of Elias Hrawi there was a government in the facade, Hariri or Hoss, but the actual ruler was a government from behind the curtain, Syrian. Today with all facts and with all of President Aoun's talk, he has a government of advisors that sometimes speaks of things he does not know, because they are the rulers and they are affiliated with Berri and affiliated with Hezbollah from the remnants of the loudmouths and the uprooted who were with Aoun and the nationalists and the rest of opportunists and arrivistes.
This political class and religious class and especially Maronite is all the hatching of occupation machines. Imagine a herd of bishops and priests went to Mleeta, to Hezbollah's museum in the South and cheered for Hezbollah. These have nothing called Christian, these are infidels. A bishop goes and glorifies the occupier and the killer and goes to Mleeta as one dragging his cow with a rope. Look at these bishops.
We as Christians who represents us in the government the answer is zero. We are expelled from the government, expelled from all departments. The three reports issued by Leila Nicola said that there are no more Christians left in the state. Did you hear the voice of Patriarch al-Rahi? Did you hear the voice of Walid Ghayyad? Did you hear the voice of Joseph Aoun? Did you hear the voice of Samir Geagea? Did you hear the voice of Amin and his son? Where are we? We are not existent, we are expelled.
Look at the officers who came in one of the dialogue sessions and refused to be photographed with the Israeli, they are Christians and not Shiites, they are affiliated with Michel Aoun and affiliated with Rudolph Haykal. Our Christian situation is tragic and Lebanon cannot rise unless the Christian leadership body is treated. From the Patriarch who should not only resign but should be tried in the Vatican, to the rest of Christian leaders imposed on us.
Is it reasonable that the Forces supporter sees Melhem Riachy? Melhem Riachy in 92 and 94 was an advisor to Michel Samaha, and it is said, and I have no confirmation, that he is the one who wrote Michel Samaha's statement when he was Minister of Information dissolving the Forces. He was brought to open channels with the Iranian and the Syrian. There are dozens of pictures of his meetings with Ferzli and Iranian leaders existing on the internet.
To Dr. Geagea, respect the leaders, respect those who oppose you.
The Patriarch's condition is like someone who has cancer in the liver and it is difficult to treat. If there remains something of faith he must resign and all the entourage around him from Ghayyad to Abu Kasm must go to their homes and be tried.
Question: Why do you attack the Patriarch despite his criticism of Hezbollah in previous statements?
Everything if you want to start with the history of any person do not start from above but from below. His coming as Patriarch was based on files and forgery. May God have mercy on Patriarch Sfeir, he refused to go to Syria and said if I want to go to Syria to bring one of the detainees. As for him, in the first week he went to Baalbek to the official representing Hezbollah, Sheikh Yazbeck, and was pictured under Hezbollah's rifle. And he said at the time that the International Tribunal has no right to demand Hariri's killers, then in the second Friday he went to Syria and returned empty-handed and came to Canada and France and America marketing Hezbollah and Assad's rule as protector of minorities. And not once did he criticize Hezbollah, and in my personal opinion this is an analysis, he has files, and he considered in his last sermon that Hezbollah is a partner. My brother how can it be a partner? Who killed Joe Bejjani? Who killed Hariri? Who occupied Beirut? Who went up to the mountain? Who caused three wars for Iran? Who wants to make an Islamic state in Lebanon? Who confiscated Christian lands? Who expelled Christians from the state?
I have been an activist since 86 and I have all the documents and about 20 videos in which I criticized Melhem Riachy who was saying that Geagea and Nasrallah meet and the Forces and Hezbollah liberated the South and Hezbollah is Lebanese and a component of the Lebanese strata.
Question: Hezbollah has MPs and ministers in the state
This is from the narratives of distorting the truth. First election laws were tailored by the Syrian to his measure, and the current law was tailored by Hezbollah to its measure and gave the rest shares and by force. The MPs, ask our free Shiite brothers who dared to run? Did they leave a delegate for any candidate? The story of al-Sahsouh and before it and after it, who dared to run? By force it is today.
Even to add more, when one of the poor young men is killed, sheikhs come to his mother and sister and tell her don't you dare cry, crying is forbidden. They prevent the mother from crying over her son and the wife over her husband and the children over their father. This is terrorism and this is oppression and injustice. There is nothing Lebanese in them, these are enemies of Lebanon.
Question: If you were given a choice between Samir Geagea and Sleiman Frangieh for the presidency of the Republic?
Both are not suitable. Sleiman Frangieh is tied to the line. And Samir Geagea is the product of the occupation situation and Samir Geagea is not suitable to be President of the Republic. Samir Geagea is a small dictator who does not believe in democracy and owner of a party-company and his history... who executed his three guards on charges of conspiring against him and the head of the court was "the cow Doni"... President Chamoun as a Christian pardoned those who tried to kill him, the Pope pardoned, Samir Geagea executed his guards. Whoever executes his guards is not Christian. At the time Patriarch Sfeir protested terribly against the execution.
His problem is that he does not have the quality of leadership, all his advisors say yes sir yes sir. And this is the reason they do not leave anyone to criticize a position of Dr. Geagea.
All what I said exists on my websites in articles and videos, and this is my approach to Christian topics documented since 86 and continuing and will not change. I consider that God is pleased with me because He created me Maronite and created me Lebanese, these are two blessings that every person from our society must preserve and know how much God loves him.

A Mighty People Ruled by Pygmies
Abu Arz/Social Media/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
For half a century, our people have been #crucified_on_the_cross_of_suffering, besieged by the fires of war, the fires of soaring prices, and the fires of anxiety over their destiny.
Meanwhile, the state is incapable of doing anything, active only in squandering resources, looting, and piling taxes onto the shoulders of the poor and struggling families.
Previous Gallup polls indicate that the Lebanese people are the most pessimistic about life—second only to the Afghan people...
And to our long-suffering people, we say: The street awaits you.
At your service, Lebanon.

US Ambassador Michel Issa Affirms Continued US Support for Lebanon’s Sovereignty
Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa reaffirmed his country's commitment to supporting Lebanon's sovereignty and bolstering the capabilities of its military and security institutions. He emphasized the importance of coordinating international aid directed at the Lebanese Armed Forces and the Internal Security Forces. Issa explained that he had participated in a conference hosted by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan—in cooperation with the French government—dedicated to discussing ways to support Lebanese security institutions, enhance their readiness, and develop their long-term capabilities. He noted that the conference brought together relevant partners to exchange ideas on mechanisms for coordinating aid to the army and security forces, thereby enabling them to carry out their missions and strengthen stability in Lebanon. Concluding his remarks, the US Ambassador affirmed: "We remain committed to supporting Lebanon's sovereignty and working with our partners to advance the success of the tripartite framework agreement."

President Aoun Returns from Paris This Evening
Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
President of the Republic General Joseph Aoun returned to Beirut this evening from Paris, where he held talks with French President Emmanuel Macron. Together with Macron and King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein of Jordan, he participated in the opening of the preparatory meeting for the international conference to support the Army and the Internal Security Forces, held at Les Invalides in the French capital.

Trilateral Meeting Between Aoun, Abdullah II, and Macron to Support Lebanon’s Efforts to Ensure Security and Strengthen Sovereignty
Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The Presidency of the Republic announced that, prior to the opening of the preparatory meeting for the international conference to support the Army and the Internal Security Forces at Les Invalides in Paris, a trilateral meeting was held involving President General Joseph Aoun, King Abdullah II of Jordan, and French President Emmanuel Macron. President Macron affirmed that Paris is hosting a meeting of international partners aimed at strengthening Lebanon's sovereignty and enabling it to fully ensure its security, emphasizing that Lebanon's stability constitutes a fundamental step toward peace in the Middle East. In a post on the "X" platform, Macron stated: "A peaceful Lebanon means renewed hope for the entire Middle East, and a sovereign, stable Lebanon represents a decisive step toward peace and stability in the region as a whole." He explained that, in cooperation with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and King Abdullah II of Jordan—and in close coordination with the United States, Saudi Arabia, and international partners—France is working to support the Lebanese Army, which he described as "indispensable for asserting the authority of the Lebanese state over its entire territory." Concurrently, France and Jordan announced in a joint statement... They affirmed their support for Lebanon’s efforts to ensure its security and strengthen its sovereignty over its territory. The trilateral meeting focused on mechanisms to enhance cooperation and coordination in areas of mutual interest. Discussions also addressed the significance of France hosting a new round of the "Aqaba Process" meetings, which explore ways to support the Lebanese Armed Forces—in cooperation with the Internal Security Forces—to enable them to carry out their duties in safeguarding the security and safety of the Lebanese people. The meeting also addressed the dangerous regional escalation; the three leaders emphasized the need to intensify international efforts to achieve a comprehensive and sustainable de-escalation that restores stability to the region, while also reviewing developments in Gaza, the West Bank, and Jerusalem. During the meeting, President Aoun underscored the interconnected nature of regional security and called for the formulation of a joint regional security strategy through shared energy projects and cooperation across economic, security, and political spheres.

Netanyahu Opens Fronts Against Iran, Gaza, and Lebanon: "We Will Topple the Iranian Regime and Deal with Hezbollah"
Janoubia/September 17, 2027 (Google translation from Arabic)
In an escalatory speech addressing the fronts of Iran, Gaza, and Lebanon simultaneously, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to topple the Iranian regime and eliminate Hamas, announcing that Israel would also deal with Hezbollah—a stance reflecting his government's determination to continue military operations across multiple theaters. Netanyahu’s remarks came during a ceremony honoring outstanding personnel from the Shin Bet (Israel’s internal security agency) for 2025, where he praised the cooperation between the agency, the Israeli military, and other security services. He stated that Israeli forces had thwarted approximately 1,000 attacks in the West Bank—which he referred to as "Judea and Samaria"—attributing these results to the joint efforts of the Shin Bet, the military, and Israeli security institutions. Turning to the Gaza Strip, he said: "We entered Gaza; one might have thought Hamas would be protected and become immune, but the exact opposite is happening." He added that Israel continues—in his words—to "settle the score" with those responsible for the October 7 attack, continuing: "We are reaching those who remain, and there are not many left. When we tell militants that no one is immune and that we will reach them all, we back those words with action." Regarding the Iranian front, Netanyahu observed that Israel’s adversaries continue to alter their tactics. He assessed that while the desire of Iran and its allies to destroy Israel "has not vanished, it has weakened" following the severe blows dealt to their capabilities. He continued: "We have accomplished most of the work, but there is still more to be done, and we will complete it. We will eliminate Hamas, and above all, we will defeat and topple the regime in Iran; we will also deal with Hezbollah, and it, too, will fall." Netanyahu’s remarks come amidst ongoing Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip, coinciding with escalating threats against Iran and Hezbollah and persistent tension on the Lebanese front—where Israel is conducting airstrikes and ground operations in the south—all while international efforts seek to prevent the conflict from widening and to restore calm. A loss of direction and the collapse of a dual logic: How did the vote-of-confidence session expose the limits of Hezbollah’s room for maneuver and raise questions among its own support base?

Israel: Forces to Remain in Security Belt Unless Hezbollah Is Disarmed
Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
An Israeli military source stated on Thursday evening that Israeli forces are deployed several kilometers deep into Lebanese territory—within what the source described as a "defensive security belt" intended to prevent threats originating from the south. The source added that the military operation conducted by the Israeli army in the Ali al-Tahir Hill area had yielded "dramatic results" and described the operation as decisive. The Israeli army had previously announced the dismantling of underground infrastructure in the Ali al-Tahir area, noting that the facilities extended for more than two kilometers and included command posts, weapons depots, and combat equipment. The military source emphasized that Israeli forces would remain within the security zone until—in his words—Hezbollah is fully disarmed. Regarding the political track, the same source noted that direct negotiations between Israel and Lebanon represent an unprecedented development in the history of the conflict between the two sides; the US-sponsored negotiation process is ongoing, with a new round scheduled to take place in Rome this coming October.

Israel Informs CENTCOM of Hezbollah Weapons Depots Near Baabda Palace; US Takes Action
Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The Israeli website "Ntziv Net" reported on Thursday that the Israeli military had handed over intelligence—described as sensitive and high-value—to US Central Command (CENTCOM) regarding Hezbollah weapons depots in Lebanon. The report specifically pointed to underground facilities located in the vicinity of the Presidential Palace in Baabda. While the report’s headline referred to "Hezbollah strategic weaponry located beneath the Presidential Palace," the text clarified that the facilities are situated "near the Presidential Palace in the Baabda area" and within adjacent underground complexes. The website stated that this information was shared with CENTCOM amidst efforts by Lebanese authorities—led by President Joseph Aoun—to consolidate arms under state control and disarm Hezbollah. "Ntziv Net" claimed the intelligence indicates that Hezbollah has established strategic weapons depots within underground facilities and complexes surrounding the Baabda Presidential Palace. The site alleged that the group selected this area based on the assessment that Israel would avoid striking the vicinity of the official presidential headquarters, thereby allowing Hezbollah to safeguard assets described in the report as among its most critical. The website further noted that positioning weapons and explosives near the Presidential Palace endangers the presidential complex and those inside it. The report further stated that the presence of such depots in close proximity to the President and the army leadership reflects—from the Israeli perspective presented by the site—Hezbollah’s capacity to operate near Lebanese state institutions. "Ntziv Net" cited Israeli intelligence assessments indicating that the stockpiles in these complexes were not limited to conventional ammunition but included weapons and equipment of strategic value. The site listed precision-guided missiles and long-range rockets among these assets, noting that the party had sought to shield them from Israeli Air Force strikes. It also reported the presence of advanced communication systems and funds, alongside standard and explosive-laden drones. Based on the information cited, the site added that the area contained fortified underground command-and-control infrastructure—similar to facilities the Israeli military claims to have uncovered and destroyed elsewhere in Lebanon—specifically pointing to the Ali al-Tahir Hill facilities. The Israeli site stated that the United States took action after receiving this intelligence via US Central Command (CENTCOM) and diplomatic channels. It claimed that Washington had asked General Joseph Aoun and Lebanese army commanders to take immediate steps to confiscate the weapons located in the Beirut and Baabda areas. According to the site, US officials informed their Lebanese counterparts that the continuation of American military and economic aid to Lebanon was contingent upon addressing this infrastructure. Notably, this section of the report does not refer to a personal request from the US President; rather, it attributes the move to the United States acting through CENTCOM and diplomatic channels. "Netsiv Net" went further, stating that the intelligence information was shared and discussed during secret security meetings organized by U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) Admiral Brad Cooper. It noted the participation of the Israeli Chief of General Staff and military officials from Arab nations, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The site reported that the objective of these meetings was to bolster a unified regional front against expanding Iranian influence and Tehran-linked arms transfers across the Middle East. While news of a regional military meeting organized by Cooper—involving the Israeli Chief of Staff and military commanders from several Arab states—had surfaced separately earlier this week, the specific link between that meeting and the alleged facilities near the Baabda Palace appeared in the "Netsiv Net" report. The Israeli site assessed that the intelligence—which it claims Israel obtained and shared with the U.S.—would enable Washington and Tel Aviv to exert greater pressure for the disarmament of Hezbollah. It added that the presence of sensitive weaponry near the presidential headquarters, if confirmed, would be used to portray the group as a threat to the stability of the Lebanese state itself, according to the report.

Lebanon appeals to its friends: Help us transition to a new phase and invest in the state's success!
Aoun in Paris to bolster security agencies and secure a successor for UNIFIL: Empowering the army would yield manifold results.
Cabinet session following the vote of confidence... Geagea: Resolving the weapons issue is key to resolving crises... while gasoline and bread prices skyrocket.
Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
While the preparatory meeting held today in Paris to support the army and armed forces did not yield concrete financial or logistical aid for military and security institutions—and while assistance remains contingent upon official Lebanon implementing its government’s decisions to disarm illegal factions—Lebanon’s very presence at the heart of Paris, amidst discussions involving major international and regional powers, represents an opportunity that must not be squandered. It is an opportunity demonstrating that international interest in the "Land of the Cedars" endures, and that the world is waiting for Lebanon to take sovereign steps so it can meet the country halfway with the necessary support across all sectors.
A decisive moment: During the preparatory meeting in Paris for the international conference to support the army and Internal Security Forces, President Joseph Aoun called for global support for Lebanon and its military to accelerate the fulfillment of international obligations, viewing the international community as a partner in this mission. He emphasized that "the tripartite framework formula reached with Israel—under US auspices and with the support of friendly Arab and European nations—aims to end the war and transition to a new phase." Noting that "the world sees today what the Army is accomplishing despite its limited resources"—and that "what it achieves today with little, it could achieve manifold if provided with the necessary capabilities"—President Aoun stated: "We ask our friends and partners for a clear stance: to assist in the full implementation of what has been agreed upon, and to treat Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity as a fixed principle not subject to selectivity. As we call for this stance today, the Army’s role is expanding, and the importance of the missions entrusted to it across Lebanese territory—particularly in the South—is growing. The Lebanese people have made their decision. They have chosen the State and its institutions; they have chosen for the protection of Lebanon, its sovereignty, and its stability to be the sole responsibility of the State’s military and security institutions. We have not stopped at mere words; we have already begun making difficult decisions and implementing them on the ground. Today, we call upon our friends and partners to support this choice. What we ask of you is not merely support for an institution, but an investment in the success of the Lebanese State and the stability of the region. For just as the results of Lebanon’s success will not remain confined within its borders, the repercussions of its collapse would not remain within its borders either. If we do not succeed together in seizing this opportunity today, the same opportunity may not be available to us tomorrow. This is a moment for decision, not a moment for waiting." Post-UNIFIL: A long day of Lebanese diplomacy in France began with the President of the Republic holding a meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron at the Élysée Palace. During the meeting, President Aoun thanked his French counterpart for the support France provides to Lebanon, for his personal monitoring of the country's current situation, and for his commitment to strengthening state authority and sovereignty while supporting official, security, and military institutions—particularly the Army and the Internal Security Forces. The two presidents reviewed the situation in Lebanon in light of recent developments, addressing ongoing Israeli attacks on Lebanese villages and towns, as well as efforts to halt these hostilities—viewed against the backdrop of the Lebanese-American-Israeli negotiations and the framework agreement signed during that process. President Aoun outlined developments in the South and discussed the post-UNIFIL phase. In this context, he thanked the French President for the initiative launched jointly with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni regarding the period following the expiration of UNIFIL’s mandate, and acknowledged his pivotal role in pushing for the deployment of a civil-military mission to Lebanon within the framework of the Common Security and Defence Policy. Discussions also covered the progress made in formulating UN Security Council proposals concerning the future of the international presence in the South, aiming to align with the diplomatic track and prevent a security vacuum following the end of UNIFIL’s mandate.
Trilateral Meeting: Prior to the opening of the international conference at Les Invalides in Paris—aimed at supporting the Army and the Internal Security Forces—a trilateral meeting took place involving the President of the Republic, King Abdullah II of Jordan, and French President Macron. According to the Lebanese Presidency, the meeting focused on mechanisms to enhance cooperation and coordination in areas of mutual interest. Discussions also addressed the significance of France hosting a new round of the "Aqaba Process" meetings, which explore ways to support the Lebanese Army—enabling it to carry out its duties in safeguarding the security and safety of the Lebanese people in cooperation with the Internal Security Forces.
Renewed Confidence: Domestically, and amidst intensifying livelihood crises compounded by the tense situation in the south, the Council of Ministers met this afternoon at the Grand Serail. This meeting followed the government’s securing of a renewed vote of confidence from Parliament—a development that dealt a setback to the government's opponents and critics, foremost among them Hezbollah. The party has lost much of its ability to criticize or accuse the government of betrayal, particularly after it walked out of yesterday’s parliamentary session rather than withholding its vote of confidence. Establishment of a Mission: During the cabinet session, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants will present a proposal to establish a European civil-military mission in Lebanon for a three-year period. The mission aims to "contribute to the full implementation of Resolution 1701 (2006) and assist the government in strengthening state institutions and authority, as well as consolidating its monopoly on the use of force, by supporting the Lebanese Armed Forces and the Internal Security Forces in asserting control over all Lebanese territory." Press reports indicate, however, that this item might be postponed.
Geagea: Meanwhile, commenting on the vote of confidence the government received, Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea stated that "the truth crystallized by the parliamentary debate sessions is that the majority of the Lebanese people rightly believe there is no way out of the current situation—or the state of perpetual war we are in—and no room for any reform, as long as the state fails to address the primary dilemma plaguing Lebanon: the illicit military and security wings, foremost among them the one affiliated with Hezbollah." He added, "On the other hand, these events have confirmed that the majority of the Lebanese people support this government." He continued, "Hopefully, the opposition political forces—which have not yet aligned themselves with the state—will take into account the realities revealed over the past two days and act accordingly. This would spare the Lebanese people further wars, casualties, ruin, destruction, stagnation, procrastination, and economic and living-standard deterioration—all of which are aimless and serve merely to benefit Iran."
Fuel and Bread: Turning to daily living conditions, George Brax, head of the Gas Station Owners' Syndicate, wrote on the "X" platform: "Regrettably—and naturally due to the military escalation in the Arabian Gulf and the Red Sea, as well as the Russian war..." ...regarding the Ukraine crisis, the price of a canister of diesel fuel is set to follow that of gasoline and surpass the $30 mark on Friday. Meanwhile, in accordance with the long-standing pricing mechanism that periodically calculates the actual cost of bread production components, the Ministry of Economy and Trade has issued a decision adjusting the price of a medium-sized bundle of white Lebanese bread—sold at bakery outlets—from 75,000 to 80,000 Lebanese pounds, an increase of 5,000 pounds.

Hezbollah Opts for Silence Over Withholding Confidence: Accusing the Government of Treason Is Now Off-Limits!
Lara Yazbek/Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Al-Markaziya – For the third time, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam’s government has won a vote of confidence from Parliament. Following two days of debate, Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Gebran Bassil called for a vote of confidence on Wednesday; the government secured the backing of 68 MPs, while 12 withheld their confidence and two abstained. However, political sources advocating for sovereignty noted a striking detail: MPs from the "Development and Liberation" bloc voted in favor of the government. In contrast, MPs from the "Loyalty to the Resistance" bloc withdrew from the session during the vote—meaning they voted neither for nor against. The stance of the "Amal" MPs was expected and well-known; Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri opposes undermining the government at this stage and has clashed with Hezbollah on this issue more than once, repeatedly curbing the party's drive to topple—or attempt to topple—the government through street protests or by withdrawing from it. Thus, the divergence between the two allies is not surprising; it can be viewed as coordinated—a case of "role-swapping." What *is* surprising, according to the sources, is the position of Hezbollah’s MPs. They accuse the government of treason day and night and incite their base against it, holding it responsible for the occupation of the South and deeming it complicit with the Israelis in the killing and displacement of the region's inhabitants. Yet, despite these accusations, the party not only remains in the government but also refrains from withholding its confidence in Parliament—a glaring contradiction and a tragicomic paradox. The accusations the Party levels against the government do not concern failures regarding electricity, healthcare, or sewage services; rather, they are grave charges bordering on "high treason." Although the Party attempted to justify its withdrawal during the vote by claiming that its exit from the government is precisely what the Israelis desire and celebrate, sources maintain that, from this point forward, the Party has no right to accuse the government, its head, or its choices of treason. By remaining silent during the vote of confidence—and silence implies consent—it effectively acquiesced to them. This is a fact that the Party’s support base must recognize and hold it accountable for whenever Party MPs take the podium or address gatherings to brand the government as traitors, the sources conclude.

UNIFIL: An Instrument for Implementing International Resolutions That Lebanon Insists on Retaining
Youssef Fares/Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Al-Markaziya – As anticipated, the UN Security Council failed to renew the mandate of UNIFIL, the peacekeeping force operating in southern Lebanon. During its session, the Council discussed Lebanon’s request to extend the UN force's mandate. The request did not secure the unanimous support of the members; while the majority backed it, the US representative did not. This development coincided with UNIFIL reiterating that the situation in southern Lebanon remains fragile and emphasizing the need for all parties to adhere to Resolution 1701 to de-escalate tensions and restore stability between Lebanon and Israel. It is worth noting that, through its request to renew UNIFIL’s mandate, Lebanon aimed to:
- Keep the south under the umbrella of UN legitimacy.
- Reject the presence of any forces—regardless of nationality—outside the UN framework.
- Reject the continued Israeli occupation of the south; the termination of UNIFIL’s mission without a UN-sanctioned alternative would leave the south facing an uncertain future. On one hand, it would strip Resolution 1701 of its substance; on the other, it would provide Israel with a pretext—not merely to establish security "red lines" or "zero lines," but to permanently entrench its occupation of the southern region. It is worth noting that the mandate of UNIFIL, operating in southern Lebanon, expires on December 31 of this year. Failure to extend the mandate would lead to a security vacuum in the south, raise questions regarding the fate of Resolution 1701, and create a state of confusion for Lebanon.
In this context, MP Ibrahim Mneimneh tells *Al-Markaziya* that Lebanon’s insistence on renewing UNIFIL’s mandate aims to maintain the international umbrella provided by its presence in the region. Various alternatives have been proposed, including the creation of a European force—comprising French and Italian troops, alongside other nations willing to keep their soldiers in the south to continue the mission of maintaining regional security and stability—or a force affiliated with the European Union.
He adds, however, that while such efforts are appreciated, these forces would lack the international legitimacy provided by the United Nations. Although UNIFIL has not—throughout its decades-long presence in the south—guaranteed sustainable security for the local population, it has served as the legal and international reference point for Lebanese complaints regarding Israeli violations and aggression. It has also acted as an umbrella for international agreements between Beirut and Tel Aviv, most notably Resolution 1701. Consequently, the force's departure would strip this resolution of its substance and deprive it of its fundamental pillar. It must also be noted that leaving the south without any UN security or military presence would provide Israel with a further pretext to prolong its occupation of southern areas, citing the vacuum created by the final withdrawal of UNIFIL troops at the end of the year. Israel seeks no pretexts to prolong its occupation of the South; however, the presence of an international force—acting as a point of reference—serves as a mild deterrent. It compels Israel to reconsider its calculations, knowing that a formal Lebanese complaint to the Security Council regarding its actions would damage its international reputation. In short, UNIFIL remains an instrument for implementing international resolutions—one to which Lebanon firmly adheres.

Hezbollah Has Yet to Grasp the Magnitude of What Has Befallen It
Ali Hamadeh | An-Nahar | September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Speaker Nabih Berri realized early on that the government enjoys high-level protection; consequently, toppling it—or even weakening it to the point of paralysis—is impossible. It is backed by Arab, American, and even European powers. All the "remote-controlled" unrest driven by various demands is insufficient to bring it down. This is a reality that must be acknowledged by the party—the one rebelling against legitimacy by refusing to hand over its weapons to the state. Although Speaker Berri largely shields Hezbollah’s conduct, he does not cross the red lines established after October 7, 2023; crossing them carries a heavy price. Berri understands this, whereas Hezbollah remains trapped in the illusion of the power it once held—before Israel inflicted defeats upon it during the wars of support for Gaza and, subsequently, for Iran. The party raises slogans it lacks the capacity to translate into realities on the ground. It criticizes the state for entering direct negotiations with Israel and for making decisions to restrict arms and ban the party's security and military activities, all while continuing to pave the way for the Israelis to expand their occupation and intensify their bombardment, destruction, and displacement of the South's residents. Even launching a single attack drone against Israeli forces results in the obliteration of dozens of homes and the displacement of more people from this cherished region—a consequence of a new military doctrine under which Israel has shifted from exercising restraint in responding to the party's threats to launching ferocious attacks in retaliation for any move. Thus, the slogan of "Resistance" has transformed into a recipe for the destruction of the South and the Shiite community everywhere. Instead of turning its attention to the affairs of its own constituency within the framework of Lebanese national interest—which would yield security and prosperity—Hezbollah prefers to embroil itself in Iranian-driven wars and drag Lebanon along, inviting death, destruction, and mass displacement. This is particularly perilous as the window for a quick return narrows by the day. This displacement is compounded by severe economic hardship for a population with limited income and financial means. Added to this is the death toll, which stands at a minimum of 12,000, alongside approximately 20,000 wounded. These figures rise daily in tandem with the expansion of Israeli occupation in southern areas. Speaker Nabih Berri has stated that Israel is capable of occupying new territories, signaling a lack of hope for any improvement in Hezbollah’s combat situation. Meanwhile, discontent is growing within its support base, particularly as people perceive the party as mired in unrealistic demagoguery while bringing catastrophe upon a foundational Lebanese community—all in the name of blind subservience to Iran. Concurrently, direct negotiations continue at various levels and through multiple channels to compensate for the suspension of the Rome talks—a pause caused by several factors, most notably the approaching elections in Israel and the United States, as well as a crowded international schedule spanning from Paris to New York.

Hezbollah-Linked Network and Remnants of Assad’s Forces Before Lebanese Military Judiciary: Explosives and Drones Smuggled to Syria via Food Containers
Youssef Diab/Asharq Al-Awsat/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The Lebanese military judiciary has taken charge of one of the most dangerous security networks uncovered in recent weeks. Preliminary investigations revealed the involvement of a group—comprising officers and personnel from the remnants of the Assad regime, alongside individuals linked to Hezbollah (most notably Yasser Alaa El-Din, known as "Haj Alaa")—in recruiting dozens of Syrians. The operation involved transporting them from the Syrian coast, providing training on weapons, explosives, and drone operation, and sending them back to Syria to carry out security operations. A significant development in the case occurred when the Government Commissioner to the Military Court, Judge Claude Ghanem, filed charges against 14 individuals—both Lebanese and Syrian. He charged them with offenses including "forming a criminal gang" and training in the use of military-grade weapons, explosives, sniper rifles, and drones for the purpose of committing terrorist acts on the Syrian coast—charges carrying penalties of up to life imprisonment with hard labor. He referred the case file to the First Military Investigating Judge, Ghada Abu Alwan, requesting the interrogation of the detainees, the issuance of arrest warrants against them, and appropriate legal action regarding those at large. Judge Ghanem’s filing of charges against the security network came more than a week after he received the preliminary interrogation records compiled by the Internal Security Forces' Information Branch. Judicial sources familiar with the case told *Asharq Al-Awsat* that the preliminary investigations "outlined a structured trajectory for the operations carried out by the network—ranging from bringing dozens of individuals from Syria to Lebanon and subjecting them to intensive training courses, to transporting military equipment into Syria." The sources confirmed that the detainees' initial confessions—most notably that of Manaf Ali Safi, a colonel in the Air Force Intelligence of Bashar al-Assad’s army—detailed the "entry of more than 40 officers and personnel from Assad’s remnants, arriving from the Syrian coast via illegal crossings in northern Lebanon in batches of five at a time."
They added that "Hezbollah official Yasser Alaa El-Din—who remains at large—oversaw the smuggling and training operations for the network's members." The sources noted that these individuals "underwent training in Hezbollah-run camps, covering the use of drones, explosives, combat weaponry, and sniper rifles, in preparation for security operations inside Syrian territory." These operations were reportedly directed by Major General Mohammad Jaber—commander of the "Desert Forces" in Assad’s army and a close associate of Bashar al-Assad—who is currently in Moscow. The network's activities were not limited to training; investigations revealed that it had "successfully smuggled quantities of explosives, weapons, and drones into Syria after dismantling and concealing them within containers and cartons designated for transporting aid from Hezbollah to specific groups along the Syrian coast." Judicial sources noted that the network "planned to target Syrian General Security forces and carry out acts aimed at destabilizing Syria, with the intention that the repercussions would gradually spread to other Syrian regions." The plot was described as "extremely dangerous and significant," given the scale of the network and the nature of the training and equipment involved. Authorities warned that "executing this plot would not only have threatened Syrian security but could also have backlashed onto Lebanon, potentially triggering extremely serious security consequences."

Judicial Development in the "Assad Remnants" Network Case in Northern Lebanon: Charges Filed Against 14 Individuals, Including Hezbollah Official "Hajj Alaa"
Janoubia/September 17, 2027 (Google translation from Arabic)
The case regarding the network linked to remnants of the former Syrian regime in northern Lebanon has entered a new judicial phase. Judge Claude Ghanem, the Government Commissioner to the Military Court, has filed charges against 14 individuals of Lebanese and Syrian nationalities. This move coincides with security agencies and the judiciary establishing the full identity of the Hezbollah official known as "Hajj Alaa," whose name surfaced during investigations into the network. According to *Al-Hadath* sources, "Hajj Alaa" was responsible for securing logistical support for the network. The same sources confirmed that network members underwent training at Hezbollah camps in the Bekaa Valley, while "Hajj Alaa" remains at large. Meanwhile, *Al-Modon* reported, citing a judicial source, that Judge Ghanem had concluded his review of the case file and formally charged the 14 individuals. The charges—according to the source—relate to forming a group with the intent to undermine security and state authority, as well as committing terrorist acts. These acts include preparing explosive devices and readying drones for use, alongside smuggling individuals across illegal crossings and possessing unlicensed weapons, ammunition, and explosives. The source clarified that the accused consist of six individuals currently in custody and eight who remain at large, against whom *in absentia* arrest warrants have been issued. According to data reported by *Al-Modon*, investigations with the detainees—along with technical analyses of seized phones and telecommunications data—revealed what the source described as the pivotal role played by "Hajj Alaa" in securing shelter, financial support, and logistical assistance for the trainees. Following the formal filing of charges, the case file and the accused were referred to the First Military Investigating Judge to conduct interrogations, expand the scope of the investigation, and take the necessary judicial measures against the network's members, according to the judicial source.

Facing Charges of Collaboration: Maria Maalouf Faces 15 Years in Prison!
Janoubia/September 17, 2027 (Google translation from Arabic)
The Permanent Military Court in Beirut has issued a verdict *in absentia* sentencing media personality Maria Maalouf to 15 years of hard labor. This ruling follows a formal complaint filed with the Military Public Prosecution by lawyer Ghassan Al-Mawla—acting on behalf of the Committee of Representatives of Released Prisoners and a group of media professionals. Maalouf was convicted of crimes involving "national treason" and inciting external aggression aimed at "displacing and killing the Lebanese people, violating sovereignty, and destroying the state," as well as violating laws prohibiting contact and normalization with Israel. The verdict stems from the lawsuit filed against her in the military justice system; the ruling was issued *in absentia* due to her failure to appear at the trial hearings.

Geagea: Parliamentary Sessions Confirmed Majority Lebanese Support for the Government
Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Samir Geagea, leader of the Lebanese Forces party, stated that the events of the past two days in Parliament—an institution that truly represents the Lebanese people—have revealed facts and realities that no one can deny or evade.
He observed that the truth crystallized by these sessions is that the majority of the Lebanese people rightly believe there is no way out of the current situation—or the state of perpetual war we are in—and no room for reform, no chance for improvements in infrastructure, water, electricity, or any state service, nor any hope for a normal economic cycle or better living conditions and wages, as long as the state fails to resolve the primary dilemma plaguing Lebanon: the illicit military and security wings, foremost among them those affiliated with Hezbollah. He added that these events also confirmed that the majority of the Lebanese people support this government, in contrast to a tiny—indeed, minuscule—minority that had wreaked havoc and corruption in the country on a scale Lebanon had never before witnessed. He concluded by saying that no one could henceforth claim this government acts without the input of the Lebanese people or against their will; it has become evident that the government’s policies and general direction truly represent their will and aspirations. "Hopefully, the opposition political forces—which have not yet aligned themselves with the State—will take into account the realities that have emerged over the past two days and act accordingly. This would spare the Lebanese people further wars, casualties, ruin, destruction, stagnation, procrastination, and economic and living-standard deterioration—all of which are aimless and serve merely to benefit Iran."

Raji Asks Britain to Pressure Israel to Halt Its Aggression
Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
Foreign Minister Bou Habib wrote on his X account: "I received a phone call from the British Minister of State for the Middle East and North Africa, Stephen Doughty, who affirmed his country's steadfast and enduring support for Lebanon. The call addressed the situation in Lebanon and the region, as well as the future of the UNIFIL mission upon the conclusion of its mandate. I requested that Britain exert pressure on Israel to halt its ongoing aggression against Lebanese territory and outlined the progress made thus far regarding the consolidation of arms control. At the end of the call, I invited Minister Doughty to visit Lebanon, and he promised to accept the invitation at the earliest possible opportunity."

Hezbollah Falls: From Ali al-Taher to Nejmeh Square
Jean Fghali/Nidaa Al-Watan/September 18, 2026
It is no coincidence that Hezbollah’s military decline has coincided with a waning of its political presence. In Lebanon, the Party’s influence was never rooted in the strength of its arguments within constitutional institutions, but rather in the balance of power enforced by its weaponry over the years. Consequently, every time it loses a military asset, it simultaneously loses a portion of its capacity to exert political influence. The collapse of the Ali al-Taher tunnels—long touted as a cornerstone of the Party’s military infrastructure in the South—dealt a blow that extends far beyond the battlefield. The issue is not merely about tunnels or combat positions; it represents the shattering of an image cultivated over decades—the image of an organization that holds the initiative and dictates the rules of engagement to its adversaries, both domestic and foreign. When this image crumbles, the repercussions manifest in the political arena before anywhere else. At Nejmeh Square, the scene looks vastly different from the Lebanon of the past two decades. The Party—which once toppled governments, stalled elections, and imposed settlements on its own terms—is now reduced to issuing statements, voicing objections, and delivering high-pitched rhetoric. Its MPs speak at length, yet their actual influence is diminishing. They raise their voices, but decisions move forward; they object, yet institutions continue to function. It is as if the Party has transformed from a decisive power broker into a mere loudspeaker within Parliament.
The clearest evidence of this shift is the formation of a new government and its securing of a parliamentary vote of confidence, despite all objections and pressures. Had "the Party" retained the same political clout it once wielded, it could have derailed the process, dictated terms, or shifted the balance of power. Today, however, it finds itself watching from the opposition benches as political realities take shape around it. The Party long derived its influence from a simple equation: arms generate political influence, and political influence safeguards those arms. Yet, this equation was profoundly shaken by the 2023 war and the ensuing battlefield losses and relentless attrition. With every military position lost, its political prestige erodes; with every security asset slipping from its grasp, its ability to impose its will on state institutions diminishes. Most critically for the Party, its adversaries sense that the era of political fear is drawing to a close, while its allies are increasingly inclined to prioritize their own interests over unconditional alignment with its agenda. Thus, the gap between rhetoric and reality widens: a narrative of victory clashes with a reality of mounting military and political retreats. Consequently, the events at Ali al-Tahir cannot be divorced from those in Parliament; both scenarios reflect the same pattern—lost positions, forfeited assets, and waning influence. If the fall of Ali al-Tahir symbolized a decline in military might, the events at Nejmeh Square may signal the erosion of the political influence that rested upon that very strength for decades. For the first time in years, Hezbollah faces an unfamiliar landscape: a force possessing MPs, rhetoric, and slogans, yet lacking the capacity it once had to dictate the course of action to the Lebanese state.

The Subtext of Upcoming Negotiations: All Eyes on Al-Rihane and Its Environs
Alan Sarkis/Nidaa Al-Watan/September 18, 2026
Negotiations cannot be divorced from the military track. On the ground, the Israeli army has advanced, dealing a crushing blow to Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) at Ali Al-Tahir. Meanwhile, on the diplomatic front, the defeated "Party" insists on placing obstacles in the path of the process led by President Joseph Aoun. Hezbollah’s myths and narratives collapsed at Ali Al-Tahir; the perception of the group shifted from that of a major military power to an armed faction that invites occupation. Events in Nabatieh serve as the ultimate proof that the Party’s conduct threatened to destroy the city and displace its entire population. Although the danger to Nabatieh has not been definitively eliminated, the State has managed to protect the city—at least temporarily. The United States has not yet communicated a new date for negotiations to the Presidential Palace. A meeting in Washington between the Lebanese and Israeli ambassadors failed to set a schedule; matters remain contingent on future developments, particularly as both Israel and the United States enter their respective election cycles. Meanwhile, the people of the South continue to live day-to-day. The Lebanese State cannot make progress in negotiations without asserting firm control on the ground, yet Hezbollah persists in creating obstacles, indifferent to the fate of the Southerners. Consequently, the situation grows increasingly complex, especially if negotiations stall or fail to yield practical solutions. Washington and the international community have set a fundamental precondition for progress toward a solution: the surrender of Hezbollah’s weapons. Washington attaches great importance to the Lebanese file—a priority underscored by US Ambassador Michel Issa’s visit to Zoutar to assess the situation firsthand.
Although negotiations are not imminent, this does not mean the prospect has vanished entirely; Washington insists on holding them, even if they have yet to achieve the desired outcome. In this context, reports indicate that the actual objective of these negotiations—or the behind-the-scenes contacts taking place—is to enable the Lebanese Army to deploy in areas where Hezbollah is present, thereby obviating the need for an Israeli military operation. Washington is attempting to revisit the precedent of Ali al-Taher, where it had proposed that the Lebanese Army—rather than Israeli forces—enter the military installations and tunnels in the area. Hezbollah, however, rejected this proposal; ultimately, it preferred to surrender the sites to the Israelis—albeit under duress—rather than hand them over to the Lebanese Army for the protection of the facilities and the region. While the fate of the Ali al-Taher heights is set to be decided in future negotiation sessions—determining whether the area will be handed to the Lebanese Army or remain under Israeli occupation—attention is shifting to another area of ​​equal importance: Jabal al-Rihane and its surroundings, extending to Birket Jabbour. This region may well serve as a new test for Lebanon’s political will and the capabilities of the Lebanese Army. The Lebanese state has received word from Washington of Israel’s determination to clear the entire South of Hezbollah and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) installations, leaving no presence that threatens its security. Consequently, the Israeli operation will not halt at the Ali al-Tahir ridge—or any other point—until the issue of Hezbollah’s weaponry is resolved. Mount Rihane—including Sajed Hill and the area surrounding Birket Jabbour—constitutes a strategic position for Hezbollah and the IRGC; Israel is intent on eliminating this threat once and for all. Current discussions therefore center on the potential withdrawal of Hezbollah and IRGC fighters from the area and the deployment of the Lebanese Army to dismantle the group's military infrastructure there. Should this proposal reach the negotiating table, the Lebanese state will inevitably consult Hezbollah, and the response will likely mirror the one given regarding Ali al-Tahir: essentially, "We would rather hand it over to the Israelis than to the Lebanese Army." Thus, the situation remains deadlocked, with the outcome resting in the hands of the Israeli military machine.

The Revolutionary Guard repositions itself and Tehran tightens its grip on the party.
Tariq Abu Zeinab/Call of the Nation/September 18, 2026
The reorganization of the military and security leadership in Iran does not appear to be just an attempt to fill the void left by the war and the killing of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, but rather reveals a clear shift in the center of gravity within the regime towards the Revolutionary Guard and solid security services. On August 10, 2026, the new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, confirmed Ahmed Vahidi as Commander-in-Chief of the Revolutionary Guard, and appointed Hussein Taeb as Commander of the Basij Forces, in a move that practically consolidated the position of the two men within the new structure of power, and returned security and the military to the heart of Iranian decision-making.
Wahidi’s selection carries a special significance, given his long record within the military system, after he previously assumed leadership of the Quds Force, the Ministry of Defense, and senior security and military positions. As for Taeb's return, it acquires greater security importance, after he headed the Revolutionary Guards' intelligence organization between 2009 and 2022, and then served as an advisor to the commander of the Guard. Thus, the new formation combines direct military command with deep intelligence experience, at a time when Tehran is rebuilding its security system.
Taeb's record is not limited to inside Iran. In July 2021, he visited Baghdad in his capacity as head of the Revolutionary Guard Intelligence Organization, and met with Iraqi officials, leaders of the Popular Mobilization Forces, and armed factions linked to Iran, and his discussions focused on the American military presence and attacks on American interests. This visit reveals the nature of the role played by Taeb in sensitive regional files, and his direct connection to the network of armed forces linked to Tehran.
According to Western diplomatic sources, the Iranian decision-making center is witnessing a sharp disagreement over the management of the current stage. The more hard-line current is pushing towards an open confrontation with the United States, and expanding pressure on American interests and allies in the region, including keeping open options for escalation in the Gulf, in parallel with strengthening military capabilities and tools of regional influence. On the other hand, another trend believes that negotiation and flexibility can be used to contain pressure and prevent the confrontation from turning into a broader war. The disagreement is not related to tactics alone, but rather to the future function of security and military institutions and the limits of their use in formulating foreign policy.
In Beirut, these transformations become more sensitive, because the Revolutionary Guard constitutes the main Iranian pillar in managing Hezbollah's military structure. The sources revealed that the Guard sent about a hundred officers to Lebanon after the ceasefire in 2024, to retrain the party’s fighters, supervise rearmament, and reorganize its military structure into more decentralized units. The sources also reported that the party rebuilt part of its capabilities with Iranian support during the following months.
Western diplomatic sources say that Hussein Taeb was present in the Iranian discussions related to rebuilding Hezbollah, and that the security department in Tehran adhered to preserving the party’s military structure and refused to give up its weapons. According to these sources, Tehran does not deal with Hezbollah’s weapons as an internal Lebanese file, but rather as part of Iran’s system of deterrence and influence in the region.
But Iranian extremism is also reflected in the party's leadership itself. After the killing of Hassan Nasrallah, Naim Qassem faces a very complex equation between maintaining the strategic connection with Tehran and dealing with Lebanese and international pressure to limit the decision of war and peace to the state. Diplomatic sources indicate that Taeb does not see in Qasim the person who represents the spearhead within the "party" with the same effectiveness that Nasrallah represented, which, according to these sources, reflects a difference in the Iranian view on the nature of the leadership required in the next stage.
Therefore, the rearrangement of leadership in Tehran is not only an internal Iranian matter, but also has direct repercussions for Hezbollah. The rise of Wahidi and Taeb puts the security and military system in a more advanced position within the Iranian decision, while the “party” remains one of the most important arenas for translating this decision. The question that imposes itself in Beirut is no longer only about the future of the party’s weapons, but rather about who determines its function and ceiling, and where Tehran’s calculations end and the responsibility of the Lebanese state begins. This means that the next stage may witness a clear test of the ability of the new leadership in Tehran to impose its regional priorities, and of the ability of the “party” leadership to manage the balance between the Iranian decision and the Lebanese reality, amid mounting pressures and accelerating security and political changes.

Deir al-Qamar Bids Farewell to Dory Chamoun in an Official and Public Funeral; Camille Chamoun: Our Strength Lies in Our Unity, and Without It, We Cannot Succeed
Al-Markaziya/September 17, 2026 (Google translation from Arabic)
The National Liberal Party, the Chouf region, and the town of Deir al-Qamar bade farewell to former MP and Honorary Party President Dory Camille Chamoun during an official and public funeral held in his hometown of Deir al-Qamar.
The funeral service was presided over by the Maronite Bishop of Sidon, Maroun Ammar—representing the Maronite Patriarch, Cardinal Mar Bechara Boutros al-Rahi—while Father Fadi Thabet read the patriarchal message at the town’s Our Lady of the Hill (Sayyidat al-Talleh) Church. Leading the attendees were MP Farid Boustani, representing the Presidents of the Republic, Parliament, and the Council of Ministers; MP Taymour Jumblatt, head of the "Democratic Gathering," leading a delegation that included MPs Marwan Hamadeh, Wael Abu Faour, and Raji Al-Saad, alongside a delegation from the Progressive Socialist Party; MP George Adwan, Vice-Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Lebanese Forces party, leading a party delegation from the Chouf region; MP Ghassan Atallah, representing the leadership of the Free Patriotic Movement; MPs Nadim Gemayel, Ibrahim Kanaan, Elias Hankach, Melhem Khalaf, and Najat Saliba; as well as several former ministers and MPs. Also present were Patriarch Youssef Younan, Father Edmond Rizk, Chouf District Commissioner Marlene Kahwaji, and various political, partisan, municipal, social, and civic figures. They were joined by officials, leadership, and a large number of party members and supporters from the National Liberal Party (Ahrar)—led by MP Camille Dory Chamoun—as well as residents of the town and region, and a group of priests who assisted Bishop Al-Ammar during the Mass.
The Patriarchal Decree
Father Thabet read the Patriarchal message, which stated: "With deep sorrow, we join you in bidding farewell to your—and our—dear departed, the former MP Dory Camille Chamoun. We accompany him in prayer to the Father’s house in heaven, crossing the bridge of the Holy Cross—on whose feast day he passed away. We bid him farewell alongside the Parliament, the National Liberal Party, and the Municipality of Deir el-Qamar, of which he was the former head. The deceased was born in Deir el-Qamar on November 8, 1931, to President Camille Chamoun—President of the Lebanese Republic—and Mrs. Zalfa Chamoun. Raised in a home steeped in wise and steadfast politics, he grew up grounded in Christian faith, moral values, and a love for both his country and the political vocation. He graduated from the Faculty of Law at Saint Joseph University (run by the Jesuit Fathers) after completing his secondary education in Lebanon and England. He worked in commerce and industry before dedicating himself fully to politics by joining the National Liberal Party, founded by his father. He served as its Secretary-General and later assumed its presidency in 1958. He upheld his father’s wise and weighty legacy and carried forward the path of his brother, the martyr Dany Chamoun, who was assassinated alongside his wife and two of his children in 1990.
Dory led the party with wisdom and courage, serving as an honest, brave, and impartial voice.
Dory Chamoun distinguished himself within the ranks of the opposition to Syrian influence during the period of the Syrian presence in Lebanon. He was a key figure in the Qornet Shehwan Gathering, established in 2001. Following the withdrawal of the Syrian army in 2005, the National Liberal Party became part of the March 14 Alliance. The late Dory took great pride in seeing his son, Camille, continue the political legacy of the family by being elected as a Member of Parliament." ...Lebanese, and this was a heavy responsibility he bore. Today, the former MP Dory concludes his earthly journey—having been blessed by God with a life of ninety-five years—and his remains are laid to rest near his family. His spirit echoes the words of the Psalm: 'With long life I will satisfy him, and show him My salvation' (Psalm 91:16)."
**Tributes**
Following the Mass, speeches were delivered to mark the occasion. Naji Germanos, Mayor of Deir el-Qamar, paid tribute to the deceased, stating: "His approach was one of coexistence in the Mountain and the Chouf; the value of living together was fundamental to him. His parting counsel was always to uphold these values ​​and to regard them as a sacred trust incumbent upon us all. As we bid him farewell, we affirm that preserving this trust and this path is paramount. The town of Deir el-Qamar—as Dory Chamoun envisioned it and as we envision it—remains a town of coexistence and a meeting place for all Lebanese."
**Jabr**
Former Bar Association Head Nihad Jabr said: "As we bid you farewell, a part of Lebanon departs with you. You were a political school of thought that never compromised on sovereignty. Your stance was clear: Lebanon must be sovereign, the decision-making power must rest with the Lebanese State, and the nation stands above all other interests."
**Chamoun**
After speeches by several family members and grandchildren of the deceased, MP Camille Chamoun thanked the attendees on behalf of the family and the National Liberal Party (Al-Ahrar), saying: "I thank you for joining us in bidding farewell to a unique individual who taught us how to be true to oneself and loyal to one's comrades—never compromising the national interest, which rises above all parties and principles for the sake of the homeland and its people." He concluded: "We must be united; without unity, we cannot succeed. The fragmentation that occurred among us—both within and outside the March 14 alliance—is what destroyed us. Our strength lies in our unity." Finally, he was laid to rest in the family cemetery in Manshiyat Deir al-Qamar. Earlier that morning, the funeral procession had paused in the town of Kfarhim in the Chouf region, where a large number of residents—joined by a delegation from the Progressive Socialist Party, the municipal council, and local dignitaries—lowered the coffin and carried it for a distance along the main street before it continued toward Deir al-Qamar. There, a large crowd of residents awaited the procession at the town’s main entrance and in front of the church; the body was laid in state, and prayers were conducted by Father Joseph Abi Aoun, while the family received condolences in the church hall.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on September 17-18/2026
Report 1: Satellite Images Show Acceleration of Iran's Rebuilding of Nuclear Facility Bombed by Israel
Riyadh: Al Arabiya.net/September 17/2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
Iran is moving forward quickly with rebuilding a nuclear facility that was previously bombed by Israel, according to satellite images referenced in a report issued Thursday by the Institute for Science and International Security.
The Washington-based institute said that Iran is "advancing rapidly in rebuilding the Taleghan 2 facility," located inside the Parchin military complex about 30 kilometers (20 miles) southeast of Tehran, according to the Times of Israel on Thursday. Israel had bombed the "Taleghan 2" facility in October 2024, as part of its response to an Iranian missile attack that targeted Israel earlier that same month. It was also bombed again by the Israeli Air Force in March - amid the current war - after the army reported that Iran was working to restore the site following the initial strikes.
The Israeli army stated that Iran had used the site in recent years for the purpose of "developing advanced explosives and conducting sensitive experiments within the framework of the 'Amad' project," the alleged secret Iranian program to develop nuclear weapons that lasted from the late 1990s until 2003. Western intelligence agencies also indicated that Tehran conducted tests related to the detonation of nuclear bombs at the "Taleghan 2" site more than two decades ago.
In its latest report, the institute said that satellite images taken by Vantor Technologies on September 13 show that "Iran has erected a cover over the destroyed and fortified underground facility, concealing the ongoing rebuilding activities underneath from satellite or aerial reconnaissance." The report added: "Intensive activity can be observed throughout the construction site; construction vehicles - including dump trucks, bulldozers, concrete pump trucks, concrete mixers, and cranes - are actively working to rebuild the facility."[tarpaulin]
The institute noted that in June 2026, initial repair work was carried out at "Taleghan 2," where Iran "repaired and placed concrete covers over the penetration holes created by several bunker-buster bombs dropped by the Israeli Air Force" on the facility. The images show that Iran also built a "new concrete fortification for the surrounding area [the concrete yard] on the right side of the facility," which will provide - according to the report issued by the institute - "additional protection against explosions in the event of an air attack."
The institute said that "fundamental questions remain about Iran's plans for this facility, the most important of which is: why does Iran continue to rebuild it?" It added: "What is clear is that Iran remains determined to rebuild this facility, a development that raises great concern given the long history of nuclear weapons-related research and development activities that took place at that site."While Iran - whose leaders have pledged to destroy Israel - denies seeking nuclear weapons, it has amassed a stockpile of enriched uranium at levels that serve no peaceful purpose. Israel has pledged to destroy the Iranian nuclear program. It is believed that Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium was buried underground following strikes launched by Israel and the United States on Iranian nuclear facilities during the 12-day war between Israel and Iran in June 2025. Since that war, Iran has prevented the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] from accessing the damaged nuclear sites, preventing the UN agency from verifying the status of Iran's stockpile of uranium enriched to levels approaching weapons-grade purity. Rafael Grossi, director of the IAEA, stated last week that the agency had observed construction work in the area of Pickaxe Mountain in central Iran, a site that Western intelligence agencies have indicated is likely intended for storing nuclear materials.

Report : Trump to "Axios": I Will Soon Make a Big Decision Regarding Iran / Trump: Decision to Eliminate the Iranian Regime is Big and All Possibilities Are on the Table
Al Arabiya.net and Agencies/September 17/2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
US President Donald Trump told the Axios website on Thursday that he will soon make a big decision regarding Iran. Trump added, saying "We may have to resume large-scale military operations against Iran," noting that "the decision to eliminate the Iranian regime is big and all possibilities are on the table." The US President confirmed that the world is approaching a critical turning point in the war with Iran. In contrast, Iran's First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref demanded on Thursday that the United States implement what was stated in the "memorandum of understanding," on the basis of which a ceasefire was reached between the two sides.Iran's Tasnim news agency quoted Aref as saying that his country hopes that "the enemy will come to its senses" and fulfill its obligations contained in the signed memorandum of understanding, but he nevertheless said that its implementation will not end the existing differences with what he described as the "hegemonic system."Aref said, during the ceremony of the professional assembly of the Association of Iranian University Professors, that Iran has faced over 4 decades what he described as an "indirect war" from its adversaries, adding that they are now engaged in a direct confrontation with it. In another context, Trump said he will announce the location of the US military base in Poland soon, noting that there is significant progress in establishing a US Army base in Poland. In parallel with his talk about the "final stages" of the war with Iran, US President Donald Trump intends to hold a meeting with the leaders of the Gulf delegations participating in the UN General Assembly meetings in New York next week, to discuss the course of the war with Iran. It is expected that Trump will brief the Gulf states on ideas for a post-war strategy with Iran, at a time when the US President and his team of senior officials are working on preparing a "day after" plan, expected to be completed after the midterm congressional elections, according to Axios, citing three sources directly familiar with the meeting.
The sources said that Trump will meet with leaders or foreign ministers of the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, which are Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait and the Sultanate of Oman, while the US State Department sent initial invitations for the meeting on Wednesday. One source also said that the meeting may expand to include other Arab and Muslim leaders, at a time when the White House declined to comment.
This came at a time when Trump said that the war with Iran is nearing its end, pointing at the same time that Tehran wants to reach an agreement, adding: "They desperately want to reach an agreement. We will see how things go." Trump had previously spoken about the possibility of the war in Iran ending after the midterm elections, and said that Iran is seeking to negotiate, while details of any potential negotiation path between Washington and Tehran remain unclear. In June, Washington and Tehran reached a temporary memorandum of understanding, but it did not put a final end to the conflict, before confrontations renewed later, particularly against the backdrop of the dispute over the status of the Strait of Hormuz and the mechanism for reopening it to international navigation.

Report: US State Department Approves Potential Sale of F-35 Aircraft to Saudi Arabia
Asharq Al-Awsat/September 17, 2026 /September 17/2026    (Google translation from Arabic)
The US State Department said today, Thursday, that it has approved a potential sale of F-35 Lightning II fighter jets to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for an estimated $24.3 billion. A statement by the US State Department said that "The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has requested to purchase 48 F-35 Lightning II fighter jets with conventional take-off and landing; and 49 Pratt & Whitney F135 engines." It added: "This proposed deal will support the foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by improving the security of a major non-NATO ally that is a force for political stability and economic progress in the Gulf region."

Report : Washington: Withdrawal from War Causes Energy Crisis / Trump Hopes for "Near End"... and Navigation in Hormuz Drops to 3 Ships
Washington - London: Asharq Al-Awsat/September 17/2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
US Vice President JD Vance defended his country's continued military role in the region, saying that a US withdrawal and leaving the countries of the region to face the crisis alone could lead to a global energy crisis. Vance said that the administration of President Donald Trump is working to ensure the continued flow of oil and gas to global markets, considering that the continued targeting of ships makes withdrawal from the region an option that carries wide implications for global energy markets. Vance's statement came amid a growing debate about the continuation of military operations and the president's war powers, as the US House of Representatives voted, for the third time, on a resolution related to war powers, in a move aimed at limiting President Trump's ability to continue fighting against Iran without authorization from Congress. Trump said yesterday to reporters: "We hope we are on our way to the end of the war," noting that he received a message from Iran "directly," without providing details about the nature of the ongoing contacts between the two sides. Preliminary ship-tracking data, compiled by the company Kepler, showed that only three commercial ships crossed the Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday, compared to 12 ships the previous day, and an average of about 17 ships during the past ten days, and also compared to about 125 ships per day before the war.[Thursday]

Report: Russian and Chinese Veto Ends Mandate of Independent Monitoring of Sanctions on Iran
Asharq Al-Awsat/September 17/2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
Russia and China today ended the UN Security Council's mandate for independent monitoring of international sanctions on Iran, and reaffirmed their view that all UN measures against Tehran were cancelled under the nuclear agreement concluded with world powers. All UN sanctions on Iran were reimposed a year ago, after France, Britain and Germany accused it of violating the 2015 nuclear agreement aimed at preventing it from developing a nuclear weapon. Tehran denies seeking nuclear weapons. That measure included the return of an independent panel of experts to monitor violations, report to the 15-member Security Council, and provide recommendations on further actions. Nevertheless, the Council has operated without an Iran expert panel for the past year, because it could not reach consensus on appointing this panel, as it is a step that can only be done by unanimity.[Thursday]
Russia and China used their veto today against a draft resolution that would have extended the mandate of independent monitoring of sanctions. Eleven members of the Council voted in favor of the resolution, while Pakistan and Somalia abstained. US Deputy Ambassador to the United Nations Jennifer Locetta said after the vote: "Without an independent panel of experts, this Council loses its main source of neutral, evidence-based reporting on sanctions violations, creating a monitoring gap that only serves the interests of the Iranian regime and those who benefit from evading those measures." The United States and Israel began a war on Iran about 7 months ago, and indicated that their goal is to prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon. The United States withdrew from the Iranian nuclear agreement in 2018 during Trump's first presidential term, and described the agreement at the time as "the worst agreement ever." Russia and China today accused their Western counterparts of politicizing the Security Council. Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Vasily Nebenzya told the Security Council: "We strongly urge our Western colleagues to stop their very dangerous actions on the Iranian front, which threaten to exacerbate the settlement of the crisis in the Gulf. The only way to resolve differences and calm concerns... related to Iran's nuclear program is through political and diplomatic efforts."[Thursday]

US Sanctions on Iranian Cryptocurrency Trading Platform
Washington: Asharq Al-Awsat/17 September / 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
The United States announced today, Thursday, sanctions on an Iranian cryptocurrency platform controlled by the sanctioned financier Babak Zanjani, accusing it of processing payments received in exchange for safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz. Since the start of the conflict in February, the United States has imposed a series of economic measures on Iran targeting oil exports, shipping networks, arms procurement channels, financial intermediaries, digital asset trading platforms, and airlines.

Iranian Foreign Ministry Summons German Ambassador Over Remarks by Merz
Tehran: Asharq Al-Awsat/ 17 September/2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
The Iranian Foreign Ministry summoned the German ambassador on Thursday to protest "inappropriate statements" made by officials in Berlin, in reference to Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Following a meeting with his guest, Iraqi Prime Minister, on Tuesday, Merz called on Iran to lift the restrictions it imposed on the Strait of Hormuz, stop its support for armed groups in the Middle East, and end its "military nuclear program," a program which Tehran has consistently insisted is civilian in nature. The Iranian Foreign Ministry announced that Ambassador Axel Wilhelm Dittmann was summoned following "inappropriate statements made by senior German officials against Iran, as well as some interfering practices carried out by the German Embassy in Tehran," according to Agence France-Presse.
During the meeting, the Director of the Western Europe Department at the Ministry, Alireza Yousefi, rejected Merz's statements and "conveyed Iran's strong protest against the unjustified and destructive German approach towards issues related to the region and Iran," stressing the "need to correct this approach." Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei accused Merz on Wednesday of presenting a "deliberately distorted" narrative, recalling that the United States and Israel are the ones who launched the war on Iran, adding that "Germany failed to show even the minimum moral courage necessary to condemn it."
The Ministry had summoned the German ambassador in Tehran in 2025, over statements made by Merz regarding the war launched by Israel on Iran in June of that year.
At the time, the Chancellor described the conflict as a "dirty job that Israel is doing on behalf of us all," considering that the Iranian government "has brought death and destruction to the world."

America Grants Iranian Officials Visas to Attend UN General Assembly
Washington: Asharq Al-Awsat/17 September/2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
The United States will grant visas to an Iranian delegation to attend the meetings of the United Nations General Assembly in New York next week, according to a State Department spokesman on Thursday, despite the ongoing war which has entered its seventh month.
The spokesman said: "In line with our obligations as the host country, the main delegation of the Iranian regime will be able to attend the UN General Assembly." A source familiar with the matter confirmed to Agence France-Presse that the delegation includes Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.

US-China Contacts Pave Way for Trump-Xi Summit Next Week / Washington's Allies Fear Trading Taiwan Support for Economic Concessions
Washington: Heba Al-Qudsi/Asharq Al-Awsat/17 September/2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
A week before US President Donald Trump receives his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping in Washington, the foreign ministers of the two countries held a telephone call to discuss bilateral relations and the situation in the Middle East. Wang Yi told Marco Rubio that Beijing and Washington must "prepare for the next phase of high-level exchanges in a spirit of equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit," according to China's official Xinhua News Agency. Wang added in his call with Rubio that bilateral relations have recently developed "in general" in the direction of achieving "constructive strategic stability." The two officials also exchanged views on the situation in the Middle East, as Beijing seeks to mediate between Tehran and Washington, according to Xinhua. The conflict between the United States and Iran casts its shadow over bilateral relations; China seeks to avoid sanctions that Washington is working to impose on countries that trade with Tehran, while reports indicate that the Chinese side provided Iran with intelligence information that helped launch attacks targeting American soldiers in the Middle East. The trade war also raises growing concern; the world's two largest economies are still trying to ease the repercussions of the sweeping tariffs imposed by Trump.
The Taiwan Issue
Preparations for the Trump-Xi summit are not confined to the American and Chinese negotiating rooms over tariffs, rare earth minerals and artificial intelligence. In Tokyo and Taipei, diplomatic moves are underway governed by fears that Taiwan will become part of a broader deal through which Trump seeks to extract economic gains from Beijing before the midterm elections in November. The Chinese President is scheduled to arrive in Washington on September 23, with talks to be held the following day and departure on the 25th. This will be the first visit by Xi to the White House in more than a decade, and Trump plans to hold a formal state dinner in his honor. Reuters revealed on Thursday a growing state of anxiety among US allies in Asia about the possibility that Trump may soften Washington's stance toward Taiwan in exchange for economic concessions offered by Chinese President Xi. Officials do not necessarily expect a formal reversal of US policy, but concerns focus on a change in the language Washington uses regarding the island, or a delay in arms sales, or a signal from Trump that Beijing could interpret as a retreat in the American commitment to Taiwan's security. The agency quoted Emma Chanlett-Avery, Director of Political and Security Affairs at the Asia Society Policy Institute, as saying there is a great deal of concern among allies about the direction in which Washington's policy toward China will settle, warning that any indication of softening the position on Taiwan would be cause for concern. These fears carry additional weight because Beijing describes Taiwan as a core issue in its relationship with the United States, and has not abandoned the option of using force to annex the island.
A $14 Billion Bargaining Chip
A large part of the concern goes back to Trump's own words. After meeting Xi in Beijing in May, the US President said that the Chinese leader repeatedly raised the Taiwan issue with him, including US arms sales and Washington's readiness to defend the island. The President delayed approval of an arms deal for Taiwan worth about $14 billion for several months. After the May summit, the President said he kept this package on hold and described it as a "very good bargaining chip."This does not mean that the administration has already decided to make a concession. Washington has repeatedly affirmed that its policy toward Taiwan has not changed, and Trump said that Xi personally assured him that China would not attack the island while he is in the White House. But the President, unlike his predecessor Joe Biden who said more than once that the United States would defend Taiwan if it were attacked, refused to specify whether he would do so. The United States has for decades followed a "One China" policy, and recognizes the government in Beijing as the Chinese government.
Japanese Concern
Perhaps the most telling indicator of the scale of concern comes from Japan. Reuters revealed that Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi is seeking to communicate with Trump before his meeting with Xi, and that a senior official in the Japanese Foreign Ministry visited Washington last week to help arrange a meeting that could be held on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly meetings in New York. Tokyo wants, according to Japanese government sources, Trump to stick to the traditional American language on Taiwan, and not allow the issue to become a bargaining point. Senior lawmakers in the ruling party said Japan's biggest fear is that Trump will give a softer signal toward Taiwan in exchange for a Chinese pledge to buy more American products, allowing him to declare an economic victory before voters ahead of the November elections. Tensions between Tokyo and Beijing escalated after Takaichi angered Beijing last year when she said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could represent a situation that threatens Japan's survival and would lead to a military response. China responded with a campaign of sharp criticism, while Chinese Defense Minister Dong Jun warned of a return of militarism and provocative acts that threaten regional stability, remarks widely understood to be directed at Tokyo.
Settling Trade Disputes
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer are preparing to meet Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng in New York, in a final round of negotiations before the September 24 summit. The Financial Times indicates that the files include extending the trade truce, Chinese restrictions on rare earth mineral exports, artificial intelligence, in addition to discussion about establishing a bilateral trade council to identify non-sensitive goods on which tariffs can be reduced. China wants to extend the trade truce for the remainder of Trump's term, while Washington prefers an extension of only six months because it believes Beijing has not fully implemented its commitments regarding rare earth minerals. Here the Taiwan dilemma emerges; the longer the list of files in which Xi can offer concessions, the higher the fears that he will in return ask for a political price related to the island.
Artificial intelligence will be at the heart of the talks, as the two countries compete for advanced chips and the most advanced models, while Washington and Beijing are also exploring the possibility of setting rules to reduce the risks of using artificial intelligence in military and nuclear fields. US restrictions on exporting advanced chips to China remain one of the most prominent points of contention.
What Does Xi Want?
For Beijing, what is required from Trump may not be recognition of China's sovereignty over Taiwan, a shift that is difficult to imagine in current US policy. The more realistic gain could be less dramatic: slowing arms sales, reducing high-level political visits to the island, or adjusting the wording Washington uses regarding Taiwan's independence. The Chinese President had tried with Biden at the 2023 summit to obtain an explicit American declaration opposing Taiwan's independence, but Washington refused. Therefore, Japanese officials fear that Trump's tendency toward off-the-cuff statements could grant Beijing, even linguistically, what it did not previously obtain. In contrast, Beijing has already begun presenting its vision of what the equation should be. China's former ambassador to Washington, Cui Tiankai, said in press statements this week that "reunification with Taiwan will bring stability, and that it is in the interest of the United States. And Washington must now deal seriously with Beijing's objections to arms sales to Taiwan."

Turkey Hands Russia and Ukraine Draft Agreement to Halt Black Sea Attacks
Asharq Al-Awsat / September 17, 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
A Turkish diplomatic source told Agence France-Presse (AFP) on Thursday that Turkey had handed both Ukraine and Russia a draft agreement to halt attacks on commercial vessels in the Black Sea. "We have exchanged a draft agreement with the Russians and Ukrainians aimed at finding a solution to the attacks in the Black Sea," the source told AFP. On Thursday, Ukraine reported that Russia had targeted a Tanzania-flagged civilian vessel in the Black Sea, killing its captain and injuring three crew members, amidst ongoing fighting and intensified attacks by Moscow. The Ukrainian Sea Ports Authority stated, "A Tanzania-flagged vessel was attacked by a Russian drone while en route to a Ukrainian port," adding, "As a result of the strike, the ship's captain was killed and three other crew members were injured." For its part, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced in its daily report that its forces had targeted a cargo ship 11 kilometers off the coast of Odesa that was carrying a shipment "intended to supply the Ukrainian armed forces." Both Russia and Ukraine have been escalating drone attacks on cargo ships in the Black Sea for months, as each side seeks to disrupt the other's exports and damage its economy. Moscow's raids have led to a near-total halt in Ukrainian agricultural exports by sea, while Kyiv's attacks have forced Russia to seek alternative routes for its own exports. Turkey proposed a mutual halt to these raids, but Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that such an initiative would be "impossible to monitor." Meanwhile, the official Belarusian news agency BelTA reported that Moscow and Kyiv exchanged the bodies of soldiers killed in the war today (Thursday); Russia handed over 252 bodies and received 23 in an exchange that took place at the border between Belarus and Ukraine.

Russian and Chinese Veto Ends Independent Sanctions Monitoring Mandate for Iran
Asharq Al-Awsat / September 17, 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
Russia and China today (Thursday) ended the UN Security Council mandate for independent monitoring of international sanctions on Iran, reiterating their position that all UN measures against Tehran were lifted under the nuclear deal concluded with world powers. All UN sanctions on Iran were reimposed a year ago after France, Britain, and Germany accused it of violating the 2015 nuclear deal, which aims to prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon. Tehran denies seeking to acquire nuclear weapons. That measure included the return of an independent panel of experts to monitor violations, report to the 15-member Security Council, and make recommendations on further actions. However, the Council has operated without an Iran-focused panel of experts for the past year, as it was unable to reach a consensus on the panel's appointment—a step requiring unanimous agreement. Russia and China exercised their veto power today (Thursday) against a draft resolution that would have extended the independent sanctions monitoring mandate. Eleven Council members voted in favor of the resolution, while Pakistan and Somalia abstained. Following the vote, US Deputy Ambassador to the UN Jennifer Luscita said:
"Without an independent panel of experts, this Council loses its primary source of impartial, evidence-based reporting on sanctions violations, creating a monitoring gap that serves only the interests of the Iranian regime and those who benefit from evading these measures." The United States and Israel launched a campaign against Iran about seven months ago, stating that their goal was to prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon. The United States withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018 during Trump’s first term, describing the agreement at the time as the "worst deal ever." Today (Thursday), Russia and China accused their Western counterparts of politicizing the Security Council. Vasily Nebenzia, Russia’s UN ambassador, told the Council: "We strongly urge our Western colleagues to halt their extremely dangerous actions regarding Iran, which threaten to complicate the resolution of the crisis in the Gulf. The only way to resolve disputes and allay concerns... regarding Iran’s nuclear program is through political and diplomatic efforts."

Erdogan to Run for New Presidential Term in Early Elections
Asharq Al-Awsat | September 17, 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
A senior advisor to Recep Tayyip Erdogan revealed that the Turkish president will run for a new presidential term in early elections likely to be held in April 2028, according to media reports on Thursday. The private broadcaster NTV and the newspaper *Cumhuriyet* quoted Mehmet Uçum as saying, "If 360 MPs support the decision to call for new elections, they will be held on April 16, 2028"—moving the date up from the constitutional schedule of May of that year—according to Agence France-Presse (AFP). Under Turkish law, elections are scheduled for May of that year; however, the constitution allows parliament to call for early elections if 360 out of 600 MPs support the move, thereby paving the way for Erdogan to run for a new term. The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP)—which holds conservative Islamist leanings—and its nationalist ally, the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), control 326 seats in parliament. The government has repeatedly affirmed that elections would take place on their scheduled date. Erdogan first assumed power as prime minister in 2003 and was elected president in 2014 after serving three terms as head of government. Following Turkey's transition to a presidential system, he was re-elected in 2018 and again in 2023.

Turkey Displeased with US Decision to Extend Arms Embargo Waiver for Cyprus; Says Mitsotakis’s Visit to Islands Near Its Border Was "Monitored"
Ankara: Said Abdel-Razek / Asharq Al-Awsat / September 17, 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
Turkey has expressed its displeasure with the US decision to extend the waiver of the arms embargo on the Republic of Cyprus for another year—until September 30, 2027—viewing it as a move that negatively impacts the delicate balance and security environment on the island. Turkish Ministry of Defense Spokesperson Zeki Aktürk said during a weekly briefing on Thursday: "We expect third parties to refrain from any activities that could harm the delicate balance on the island, to abandon practices that disregard the Turkish Cypriot people, and to contribute to peace and stability through a fair and impartial approach." He emphasized that Turkey, as a guarantor state for Cyprus, would continue to take the necessary measures to ensure the security, safety, and well-being of Turkish Cypriots.
US Decision and Turkish Concern
In September 2020, the United States decided to lift an arms embargo it had imposed on Cyprus in 1978—originally intended to prevent an arms race on the island—and has extended this waiver annually since then. The US also expanded the scope of the waiver in 2022, signed a "roadmap for enhancing defense cooperation" with Cyprus in 2024, and deployed Chinook helicopters to a base near the city of Larnaca for transport and logistics operations. Turkey has viewed the lifting and expansion of the arms embargo—along with subsequent related measures—as a violation of Washington’s neutral stance and a threat to regional stability, making it difficult to reach a lasting solution to the Cyprus issue. Turkey’s concern regarding military cooperation between the US, Cyprus, and Greece is mounting; it has expressed unease over the rapid proliferation of US military bases established in recent years across various Greek territories and islands near its borders. Between 2019 and 2021, the US and Greece signed several military and defense agreements. In 2022, the Pentagon announced the establishment of nine new military bases in Greece, while reports indicated the total number had risen to twenty. The largest of these is located in the Alexandroupoli area (known as Dedeagach in Turkish)—overlooking the Aegean Sea and situated just 14 kilometers from the Meriç River, which marks the Turkish-Greek border. Greece maintains that these bases and other measures are intended to ensure its security against a potential Turkish attack amidst their strained relations, whereas some observers view this US expansion in the region as being directed against Russia. In a related context, Aktürk stated that the visit by Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis and his accompanying delegation to the island of "Meis" (known as Kastellorizo ​​in Greek)—and their interactions with military units stationed there on September 12—were under "close monitoring" by Turkey. The island was ceded to Greece under the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty on the condition that it maintain a demilitarized status; the presence of military personnel and warships on the island—as well as their public display during high-level visits—violates this status. Turkey will not accept any attempt to create a *fait accompli* that contradicts the island's demilitarized nature or contravenes international obligations. Mitsotakis had concluded a three-day tour of several islands on September 13; the tour included Kastellorizo—the easternmost Greek island, known in Turkey as "Meis" and located just 1.5 kilometers off the Turkish Mediterranean coast near Antalya. Observers viewed this rare visit as a strong political message amidst a renewed escalation of tensions between the two neighboring NATO allies. During the visit, Mitsotakis emphasized that his country threatens no one but will accept neither threats nor dictates from any quarter. He affirmed Greece's desire for friendly relations with Turkey and an environment free from tension and provocation, as well as its commitment to international law and the Law of the Sea; however, he stressed that this commitment to reason should not be mistaken for weakness. Following Mitsotakis's visit, the Turkish army redeployed the "51st Commando Brigade" from Tunceli in the country's east to the Söke district in Aydın—directly facing the island of Samos, the Greek territory closest to Turkey—a move that sparked deep concern in Greece. Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan accused Greece of militarizing Aegean islands that hold non-military status—describing this as a "threat"—and warned the country against becoming a tool for "parties that do not desire stability in the region."
Greek Foreign Ministry spokesman Panagiotis Giannakoulias responded by rejecting what he termed "allegations that Greece is being used as an instrument to destabilize the region." He stated that such claims are detached from reality and emphasized that Greece, like any other nation, acts to ensure the defense and security of the entire region. He asserted that "unilateral" claims regarding the status of Greek islands in the Aegean "have no basis in international law and are entirely unacceptable," adding that characterizing the defensive fortification of Greek territory as a "threat" is baseless. He further accused Turkey of persistently seeking a pretext for war against Greece simply because the latter is exercising its legitimate sovereign rights.

Over 90 Houthis Killed or Wounded in Clashes with Yemeni Army West of Taiz; Six Combat Vehicles and Two Tanks Destroyed
AlArabiya.net: Awsan Salem | September 17, 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
Thirty Houthi militia members were killed and approximately 60 others wounded on Thursday during fierce clashes with the Yemeni Armed Forces on the Al-Wazi'iyah district front, west of Taiz Governorate. The Yemeni Armed Forces Media Center, citing a military source in the Taiz axis, reported that the fighting centered around the Al-Darifa junction. This coincided with several precision airstrikes by the Armed Forces targeting Houthi militia vehicles and gatherings in the combat zone and other areas of Al-Wazi'iyah. The source confirmed that the clashes and airstrikes resulted in the destruction of six combat vehicles and two tanks, in addition to the aforementioned casualties among the Houthi militias. The source praised the high combat proficiency and readiness of the Armed Forces' troops, as well as the effective coordination and integration between ground and air operations during combat activities in the Taiz axis.

Italian Defense Minister: We Will Not Delay the Decision to Protect Our Ships in Bab al-Mandab; Warships to Be Deployed to Ensure Safe Passage
Reuters | September 17, 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto said on Thursday that Rome is preparing for a potential naval mission to protect its commercial fleet amid growing security concerns in the Bab al-Mandab Strait. Crosetto added that he had agreed with the Chief of Defence Staff to mobilize naval forces to prepare to take "whatever measures are necessary" to ensure the safe passage of Italian vessels, noting that delays in responding to mounting maritime risks could have direct consequences for the economy and consumers. Concerns regarding Red Sea shipping have intensified this month after the Iran-aligned Houthi group seized parts of the Yemeni coast overlooking the Bab al-Mandab Strait, threatening Saudi oil exports that had been rerouted away from the Strait of Hormuz. "I have decided... to task the Italian Navy with preparing to take all necessary measures to ensure the safe passage of Italian ships," Crosetto said in a statement. "We cannot allow bureaucratic decision-making delays to exacerbate an already complex situation, with direct consequences for our economy and the lives of our citizens," he added. Crosetto did not specify the measures under consideration or the naval assets that might be deployed to the region. He stated that disruptions to key shipping routes would drive up transport costs and delay deliveries, ultimately leading to higher prices for households and businesses. "Every economic crisis hits the most vulnerable groups the hardest, jeopardizing social cohesion and the country's stability," he added. The Defense Minister also highlighted the vulnerability of undersea infrastructure, including data cables and power transmission lines. "For a major maritime nation like Italy, monitoring and protecting the seas—both on the surface and underwater—means safeguarding its security, prosperity, and future," he said. He added, "The Italian Ministry of Defence and the Navy will continue to safeguard the sea and intervene decisively whenever necessary to protect national interests and the security of the Italian people."

Turkey condemns Houthi attempt to attack Mecca and calls for an end to their attacks, asserting that their actions threaten regional security and global stability.
Ankara: Saeed Abdel-Razek / Asharq Al-Awsat / September 17, 2026   (Google translation from Arabic)
Turkey has strongly condemned the Houthi attempt to attack the holy city of Mecca with a drone, as well as other actions carried out by the group, deeming them a threat not only to regional security but also to international maritime trade routes and global stability. The Turkish Foreign Ministry strongly condemned the Houthi targeting of Mecca with a drone, reaffirming Turkey's support for Saudi Arabia's sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security, as well as its solidarity with the Kingdom. The Turkish Ministry of Defense also denounced the Houthi attacks and condemned their other actions against Saudi Arabia, stressing the need to put an end to activities that threaten regional stability. It noted that their continued threats in the Red Sea and the Bab al-Mandab Strait negatively impact not only regional security but also international maritime trade and global stability. Zeki Aktürk, the Turkish Ministry of Defense spokesperson, said in a press briefing on Thursday: "We condemn the actions carried out by the Houthis, including the drone attack targeting Saudi Arabia last weekend, and we emphasize the need for an immediate end to such actions, which threaten not only regional stability but also international maritime trade and global stability." In a statement issued late Wednesday, the Turkish Foreign Ministry had also strongly condemned the Houthi targeting of Mecca with a drone, reaffirming Turkey's support for Saudi Arabia's sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security, and its solidarity with the Kingdom. The statement reiterated Turkey’s call for an immediate halt to these attacks—which threaten regional stability and security—and urged restraint from any actions that could further escalate tensions. In remarks to Turkish journalists published on Wednesday, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan emphasized that attempts to target Saudi Arabia from both the south and the north by attackers based in Iraq are "unacceptable." He explained that such attempts aim to harm not only Saudi Arabia but the region as a whole, and that they cannot be met with indifference. Fidan noted that Turkey is acting in the spirit of the "Mecca Joint Defense Agreement" and that technical discussions among the signatories—Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey—are currently focused on matters such as the alliance's headquarters structure and staffing levels. In a related development, the Turkish Ministry of Defense spokesperson stated that the "Mecca Agreement" framework is driving activities aimed at developing military cooperation, enhancing interoperability, and strengthening defense capabilities through trilateral coordination, with ongoing efforts to institutionalize the alliance between the three nations.

The Latest LCCC analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on September 17-18/2026
The Heart Attacks Fueling Suspicion in Syria
Ahmad Sharawi/FDD-Insight/September 17/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/09/157585/
When a commander in the Syrian army’s 52nd Division died in March, a Syrian Telegram channel announced the news in the language of an ordinary obituary: Nader Mutlaq, better known as Abu Hatem al-Eis, had suffered a sudden heart attack. There were condolences and prayers for the dead. Then, one minute later, the same channel posted again. “This is the third military commander to die of a heart attack,” it told its more than 38,000 subscribers. “Something isn’t right.”
As the deaths accumulated, users increasingly began to notice the pattern of cardiac events. After another Syrian officer died in April, one user stated, “This is the sixth … how does this happen?” Others began calling directly on the government to intervene. “Open an investigation,” one wrote. “Something abnormal is happening.”
The Syrian government’s lack of explanation soon fed the suspicion. “What is strange is that all these heart attacks have happened and there is still no move to investigate their causes,” one Syrian wrote.
Eventually, suspicion became familiar enough to joke about. When a Defense Ministry commander died in May, one Telegram channel remarked that it had become “impossible for a week to pass without heart attacks.”
The author’s survey of major news-oriented social media channels shows that at least 25 Syrian military and security officers have died over the past six months in cases publicly attributed to heart attacks and cardiac arrest. There is no evidence that any of those deaths were connected, much less that the causes were unnatural. The dead fit into a single political category, nor is there a clear demographic pattern. The precise age of the deceased is rarely given, yet their biographies show this is no collection of old men. Some were veteran officers who had served for decades, while others belonged to a younger generation of commanders who rose through opposition ranks after 2011. But the meaning of these deaths has come to lie in what Syrians believe they might mean. Under the Assad family’s 50-year dictatorship, the opacity of official explanations and the unexplained patterns of death taught many Syrians to treat the state’s account of events with suspicion.
Some Syrians have interpreted the deaths as a purge of figures from the armed opposition that coalesced in the first years of the civil war, particularly officers who defected from Assad’s military and later served in the Free Syrian Army. After two Assad-era defectors died within 24 hours in June, one channel asked whether “the phenomenon of defected officers dying specifically from heart attacks warrants scrutiny.”
But the biographies of the dead resist such a neat explanation. Some were indeed Assad-era defectors, whose loyalty might remain suspect to Syria’s new leaders, who seized power from Assad nearly two years ago. Yet other heart attack victims came from Islamist factions that are much closer to the current leadership.
These theories, despite their inconsistency, draw on a real struggle for power within Syria’s new military. Syria’s rulers are undertaking an extraordinarily sensitive restructuring of the armed forces by turning former insurgents, individuals who have defected from Assad’s army, Islamist factions, Kurdish forces, and Turkish-backed militias into a single unified military. They have done this by breaking apart wartime chains of command and separating commanders from forces they once controlled personally.
Damascus wants to weaken the factional structures inherited from the war and centralize authority under the new leadership. But the rapid integration of opposition forces that followed the fall of the Assad regime produced an undisciplined force that Damascus struggled to control, and that became a liability during moments of heightened tension, primarily during the violence against Alawites and Druze in 2025.
The changes to the Syrian army’s hierarchy produced radically different reactions. When Sayf Boulad, a U.S.-sanctioned militia commander and Turkish-backed officer, was removed from command of the 76th Division in August, some Syrians on social media described the move as part of the continued “exclusion and marginalization” of former rebel commanders.
Days after Boulad lost his divisional command, reports circulated that he had suffered a heart attack after traveling to Turkey. The story was false. But by then, months of similar reports had conditioned some Syrians to connect a commander’s political sidelining with the increasingly familiar story of a sudden cardiac death.
The term “heart attack” has historically become a plausible shorthand for political removal in Syria. For decades, the term appeared in circumstances in which official accounts of death were difficult or impossible to verify, embedding in many Syrians’ memory.
During the civil war, human rights organizations reported accounts from former Assad-era Syrian security officials describing bodies being transferred from intelligence branches to hospitals. There, the paperwork could record cardiac failure even when detainees had died after torture or horrific detention conditions. Families of the disappeared were sometimes given death notifications listing heart attacks or respiratory failure as the cause of death.
At the time, Syrians responded with the same dark humor that has resurfaced in response to the latest cardiac events. In 2014, after Assad’s authorities told the family of a 28-year-old detainee that he had died of a heart attack, his father toldUN investigators, “It seems now everyone in Syria has a heart attack.”
These “heart attacks” extended to Assad’s own security apparatus. When a senior officer in Air Force Intelligence was found dead at his home, the reported cause of death was a heart attack. Opposition activists immediately alleged that he had been eliminated amid rivalries inside the security establishment.
Heart attacks also took the lives of rebel commanders serving under President Ahmad al-Sharaa when he led the Nusra Front, al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate. In 2015, a prominent Jordanian Nusra Front commander died while being held in the group’s own prison. Nusra claimed that he had suffered a heart attack, but evidence later showed signs of abuse and torture to his body.
None of these examples prove that Syrian officers are being eliminated today. However, they do help explain why some Syrians may instinctively view the term “heart attack” with suspicion and perceive connotations far beyond a medical condition.
The government has acknowledged some individual deaths but has made no effort to address concerns about the overall pattern. Nor have Syrian media taken much notice, with only one outlet taking an interest. When it asked the Defense Ministry about the recurring deaths, officials said the matter did not require an official clarification.
Some former opposition officers have publicly rejected claims of an assassination campaign, pointing to the age and medical histories of some of the dead. False reports have circulated claiming that other officers had died or suffered heart attacks, including, this month, Syria’s defense minister, whose reported death received ample attention before being proven false. The deeper challenge for Damascus is to build institutions whose explanations do not immediately invite conspiratorial alternatives. Until Damascus can narrow the distance between what the state says and what its citizens are prepared to believe, a heart attack may remain a political event no less than it is a medical one.
** Ahmad Sharawi is a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), focusing on Middle East affairs and the Levant. For more analysis from Ahmad and FDD, please subscribe HERE. Follow FDD on X @FDD. FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.

Lebanon Cannot Be Left Alone to Resolve Hezbollah’s Disarmament Crisis.
Toni Nissi/The Capitol Institute/September 17/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/09/157591/
Lebanon has been repeatedly asked by the international community to restore its sovereignty, implement United Nations Security Council resolutions, disarm Hezbollah and place all weapons under the exclusive authority of the Lebanese Armed Forces, yet the fundamental question remains whether a country as small as Lebanon, weakened by decades of conflict, institutional paralysis and economic collapse, possesses the capacity to accomplish this mission alone when the organization whose weapons it is expected to dismantle has developed military, ideological, financial and operational relationships extending far beyond Lebanese territory.
The issue is not whether the Lebanese state has the constitutional responsibility to exercise exclusive authority over weapons and decisions of war and peace, because that responsibility is inherent in the very definition of sovereignty, but whether it is reasonable to expect Lebanese institutions to confront, without substantial international assistance, an organization whose military activities and financial networks have become intertwined with regional conflicts and international security concerns.
To understand the magnitude of this challenge, we must first acknowledge that Hezbollah cannot be examined exclusively as a Lebanese political party or as an armed organization operating within Lebanon’s borders.
An ideological project extending beyond Lebanon
Hezbollah’s founding Open Letter of 1985 advocated the establishment of an Islamic state inspired by the Iranian Revolution and declared allegiance to Ayatollah Khomeini through the doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih, establishing an ideological relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran that has remained an important element of the organization’s identity.
Although Hezbollah’s 2009 political manifesto adopted a different approach to Lebanon’s political system, no longer explicitly calling for the immediate establishment of an Islamic state and instead accepting consensual democracy, the relationship between its transnational ideological commitments and the exclusive authority of Lebanese constitutional institutions remains a legitimate subject of political and constitutional examination.
The essential question is whether any armed political organization can maintain commitments extending beyond the Lebanese constitutional framework while independently exercising military authority and participating in decisions that expose the entire Lebanese population to the consequences of regional wars.
From Lebanon to regional battlefields
Hezbollah’s military involvement has not remained confined to Lebanese territory or to confrontations with Israel.
Its intervention in the Syrian civil war in support of Bashar al-Assad, its relationships with armed organizations in Iraq and its participation in wider regional confrontations demonstrate that its military activities have developed an international dimension, while its relationship with Iran raises additional questions concerning the extent to which Lebanese national security decisions may be influenced by strategic calculations originating outside Lebanon.
This does not establish that every Hezbollah military operation is directly ordered by Tehran, but it does demonstrate that the organization cannot be understood solely through Lebanon’s internal political arrangements.
When an armed organization operating from Lebanese territory participates in conflicts beyond Lebanon’s borders, the consequences of those decisions are not confined to its members or supporters, because the entire Lebanese population may bear the humanitarian, economic, diplomatic and security consequences of a war that its constitutional institutions did not authorize.
The question of war and peace therefore cannot remain separated from the question of sovereignty.
The international financial dimension
The problem extends beyond weapons and military operations.
Investigations conducted by United States authorities have identified networks linked to Hezbollah involving international drug trafficking, money laundering, sanctions evasion and commercial operations extending across several continents.
In 2016, the United States Drug Enforcement Administration announced operations targeting Hezbollah-linked networks involved in cocaine trafficking and money laundering, stating that proceeds were used to purchase weapons for Hezbollah’s activities in Syria.
Other investigations and sanctions have concerned networks operating through South America, including Venezuela, as well as financial and commercial activities involving West and Central Africa, where US authorities have identified individuals and companies allegedly involved in laundering money or providing financial support to Hezbollah.
These cases must be examined according to their evidentiary status, distinguishing allegations, sanctions designations and criminal convictions, and they must never be used to cast collective suspicion upon Lebanese expatriate communities, whose members cannot be held responsible for the activities of particular individuals or organizations.
Nevertheless, the international scope of these investigations raises a fundamental question: how can the Lebanese government independently dismantle financial networks, freeze assets, arrest suspects or prevent illicit transactions when substantial elements of those activities operate beyond its jurisdiction?
The answer necessarily involves cooperation with foreign governments, international financial institutions and law-enforcement agencies.
Disarmament cannot be separated entirely from the networks that may finance, supply and sustain an armed organization.
The responsibility of Parliament and the government
The Lebanese Parliament and government have responsibilities that cannot be transferred to foreign governments or international organizations, because sovereignty begins with the authority of national institutions to legislate, govern and enforce the law throughout their territory.
Parliament can establish the legislative framework for exclusive state control over weapons, exercise oversight over the government and provide the legal and financial foundations necessary to strengthen the Lebanese Armed Forces, while the Council of Ministers is responsible for directing national policy and exercising constitutional authority over the armed forces.
Yet legislation alone cannot dismantle international financing networks, government decisions cannot independently prevent weapons transfers across foreign territories, and the Lebanese Army cannot be expected to resolve every regional security confrontation through its own resources.
This is where the distinction between constitutional responsibility and practical capacity becomes essential.
Lebanese institutions must exercise their authority, but the international community must also recognize the external dimensions of the challenge and the consequences of leaving them unresolved.
The responsibility of the international community
The United Nations Security Council has already established an international framework addressing Lebanon’s sovereignty and the question of unauthorized weapons.
Resolution 1559 calls for the disbanding and disarmament of Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias and supports the extension of Lebanese government control throughout the country, while Resolution 1701 addresses the cessation of hostilities, the authority of the Lebanese state and security arrangements in southern Lebanon.
These resolutions demonstrate that Lebanon’s sovereignty is already a matter of international concern, although their implementation depends upon the actions of the relevant parties and the mechanisms available under international law.
International cooperation can address dimensions that exceed Lebanese jurisdiction, including illicit financial flows, cross-border weapons transfers and regional diplomatic arrangements, while assistance to the Lebanese Armed Forces can strengthen the state’s ability to implement its own lawful decisions.
Such cooperation must also address Israeli military actions and respect for Lebanon’s territorial integrity, because a comprehensive security arrangement cannot be sustainable if the obligations of one party are examined while those of others are disregarded.
International assistance should reinforce Lebanon’s constitutional institutions, protect civilians and avoid measures that could expose the country to further internal or regional conflict.
The Lebanese people must be heard
Beyond the constitutional, military and diplomatic questions lies the position of Lebanese citizens who seek a state capable of protecting them, enforcing the law equally and ensuring that no armed organization can independently determine whether their country enters a war.
Their demands deserve serious consideration by Lebanese institutions and international governments alike, without assuming that every Lebanese citizen shares an identical position on the means of achieving disarmament or on the country’s wider political future.
A sustainable settlement must protect the rights of all Lebanese communities, distinguish political participation from independent military authority and ensure that the transfer of weapons to the state does not become a source of collective punishment or sectarian confrontation.
The objective is not to replace one form of domination with another, but to establish institutions that exercise authority under the Constitution and remain accountable to the Lebanese people.
Conclusion Responsibility must be matched by capacity
The question of Hezbollah’s disarmament cannot be reduced to another declaration by the Lebanese government or another demand addressed to the Lebanese Army, because the organization has developed relationships and networks whose activities extend beyond the jurisdiction of the Lebanese state.
Lebanon’s institutions must fulfill their constitutional responsibilities, but foreign governments and international organizations also have a role in addressing illicit financing, unauthorized weapons transfers, regional hostilities and the practical requirements of implementing the relevant Security Council resolutions.
This requires a comprehensive approach in which Lebanese political decisions are supported by international diplomatic, financial, judicial and security cooperation, with clearly defined responsibilities and safeguards for Lebanon’s sovereignty and civilian population.
Ultimately, the issue is not simply the possession of weapons by one organization, but the principle that must govern every armed actor operating in Lebanon: national defense and decisions of war and peace belong to the constitutional institutions of the Lebanese Republic.
A lasting resolution must therefore establish exclusive state authority over weapons, preserve equal political rights for all citizens and ensure that no domestic organization or foreign power can independently determine Lebanon’s security future. Lebanon must exercise its sovereignty, and international cooperation must give its institutions the means to do so.
https://capitolinstitute.org/others/lebanon-cannot-be-left-alone-to-resolve-hezbollahs-disarmament-crisis/

La mort de l’accord-cadre et sa portée
Dr. Charles Chartouni/ICI Beyrouth/September 17/2026
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/09/157594/
L’accord-cadre signé entre le Liban et l’État d’Israël serait-il mort, moribond ou dans les limbes? La question se pose plus que jamais, surtout en raison de l’impact de cet accord sur la concorde civile. En réalité, le rejet de l’idée de paix avec l’État d’Israël repose sur de nombreux blocages qui se sont indûment prolongés, alors que l’affrontement sur le terrain entre l’armée israélienne et le Hezbollah poursuivait son cours. L’épuisement prématuré de l’accord-cadre n’est pas fortuit, il correspond aux clivages internes d’un État qui arrive difficilement à les surmonter, laissant la place à des facteurs d’érosion qui vont venir à bout de l’État national et de la possibilité de sa recomposition.
Le fait d’entériner l’état de fait constitué par les extraterritorialités politiques et militaires explique l’incapacité de l’État à prendre des engagements et à les honorer. Nous avons là affaire à des verrouillages systémiques qui rendent compte de l’impossibilité d’avancer sur les dossiers sécuritaires et stratégiques. On ne peut pas se hasarder sur les terrains marécageux d’un ordre régional éclaté avec des désarticulations qui ponctuent chaque étape d’une négociation rendue aléatoire au point de départ.
L’état des lieux est éminemment chaotique et prête peu à l’élaboration d’une politique étrangère cohérente, alors que les États se débattent dans des crises cycliques qui remettent en cause leur viabilité. Le cas libanais est illustratif, dans la mesure où l’État libanais s’est empêtré dans des négociations sur une base aléatoire qui contredit les stipulations de l’accord-cadre. Le dilemme du désarmement réside dans le fait que l’implémentation de cet accord pèse sur la concorde civile. En réalité, le rejet de l’idée de paix avec l’État d’Israël repose sur de nombreuses antinomies. Le paradoxe de l’État libanais tient aux scotomes qu’il s’est imposés en estompant intentionnellement leurs liens comme condition préjudicielle à la mise en œuvre de l’accord-cadre.
Les raisons sous-jacentes à cette disjonction évoquent les risques liés à l’implémentation de l’accord-cadre. Il est vain de s’attendre à un épilogue heureux en l’absence d’une volonté de règlement consentie par les deux parties. Israël, pour sa part, ne s’est pas départi de sa devise stratégique : le désarmement est la condition préalable à tout retrait, autrement l’État israélien entend poursuivre sa politique de sanctuarisation de manière unilatérale. La réaction de l’exécutif et du parlement libanais s’inscrit dans les interstices du rejet et du déni qui récapitulent de manière sommaire les conditions de ce blocage.
Tant que le Liban se cantonne dans une logique d’enfermement, il serait inutile de s’attendre à des changements de trame, d’approche et de déconstruction des conflits en cours. Toute approche qui se structure en deçà des seuils sécuritaires mutuellement consentis par les parties du conflit finira par s’éteindre au bénéfice d’un chaos institutionnalisé. En outre, la dureté de la contre-offensive israélienne révèle l’intolérance de l’État hébreu envers le laxisme qui a longtemps caractérisé la position de l’État libanais. Cette posture est continuellement reconduite par la gauche islamiste et ses liens de consubstantialité avec le Hezbollah et les camps palestiniens.
Autrement, les chiites libanais sont appelés à des conversions idéologiques et stratégiques qui les mettent en phase avec une stratégie de paix alternative. Ils ne peuvent plus camper dans une zone grise que les millénaristes chiites peuvent exploiter en vue d’entretenir des foyers de tension ou de guerre ouverte ou larvée. Le retour à l’accord d’armistice de 1949, et l’application scrupuleuse de la résolution de 1701 ne suffisent plus dorénavant. Le plan sécuritaire fait preuve d’échec alors que les enjeux de stabilisation ne font qu’empirer.
L’État libanais est fragilisé plus que jamais et la survie du Liban est soumise une nouvelle fois à de sévères épreuves. Le Liban est divisé sur des choix essentiels, et depuis longtemps, les questions du désarmement et de la fin des extraterritorialités soulèvent des interrogations fondamentales concernant la raison d’être du pays. Depuis longtemps, les questions du désarmement et de la fin des extraterritorialités sont au bout du compte des questions qui portent sur la raison d’être du pays et l’avenir de la démocratie libérale et de l’État de droit.
La mouvance totalitaire, accompagnée de la criminalité organisée qui a prévalu en milieu chiite, ainsi que leurs équivalents fonctionnels au niveau national et régional, laissent peu de choix aux acteurs démocratiques, surtout dans le contexte des guerres régionales et des conflits en prolifération continue. Le conflit au Sud et à l’Est du Liban laisse peu de choix et peu de temps, tandis que l’État libanais se morfond dans un attentisme autodestructeur. Le pouvoir exécutif se réfugie dans l’exorcisme, la fuite en avant et se dérobe devant les grandes décisions se rapportant au plan de désarmement, de restauration de la souveraineté nationale et de mise à terme des extraterritorialités mutantes.
Les réunions de Rome sont condamnées à une mort certaine même si leur maintien formel demeure une nécessité pour ne pas verser dans les abîmes d’un nihilisme rampant et lié à l’islamisme chiite et ses clones en milieu sunnite. Cependant, le nihilisme prédominant dans l’islam contemporain est doublé de l’influence grandissante de l’impérialisme islamique et de l’affaiblissement des États territoriaux et de la reconstruction de la matrice de l’État de droit.
La guerre va incessamment reprendre dans divers théâtres opérationnels et le Liban est comme d’habitude voué à sa fonction expiatoire à laquelle il risque de succomber. Le pouvoir en place est truffé de contradictions et son aptitude à pouvoir se redresser est presque nulle. Y aurait-il une alternative concrète ou sommes-nous condamnés à une désintégration lente comme le suggère l’état de léthargie auquel nous sommes voués ? Les acteurs du pouvoir en place n’ont jamais pris la mesure des défis et ne sont sûrement pas à la hauteur des tâches qui leur incombent.

The Death of the Framework Agreement and Its Implications
Dr. Charles Chartouni/ICI Beyrouth/September 17/2026
(Translated from French by the AI)
https://eliasbejjaninews.com/2026/09/157594/
Is the framework agreement signed between Lebanon and the State of Israel dead, moribund, or in limbo? The question arises more than ever, especially because of the impact of this agreement on civil concord. In reality, the rejection of the idea of peace with the State of Israel rests on numerous blockages that have been unduly prolonged, while the confrontation on the ground between the Israeli army and Hezbollah continued its course. The premature exhaustion of the framework agreement is not accidental; it corresponds to the internal cleavages of a State that struggles to overcome them, leaving room for erosion factors that will bring down the national State and the possibility of its recomposition.
The fact of endorsing the fait accompli constituted by political and military extraterritorialities explains the inability of the State to make commitments and honor them. We are dealing here with systemic lock-ins that account for the impossibility of moving forward on security and strategic files. One cannot venture into the swampy terrain of a fragmented regional order with dislocations that punctuate each stage of a negotiation rendered random from the outset.
The state of affairs is eminently chaotic and lends itself little to the elaboration of a coherent foreign policy, while States struggle in cyclical crises that call into question their viability. The Lebanese case is illustrative, insofar as the Lebanese State has become entangled in negotiations on a random basis that contradicts the stipulations of the framework agreement. The dilemma of disarmament lies in the fact that the implementation of this agreement weighs on civil concord. In reality, the rejection of the idea of peace with the State of Israel rests on numerous antinomies. The paradox of the Lebanese State lies in the scotomas it has imposed on itself by intentionally blurring their links as a prejudicial condition for the implementation of the framework agreement.
The underlying reasons for this disjunction evoke the risks linked to the implementation of the framework agreement. It is futile to expect a happy epilogue in the absence of a will for settlement consented to by both parties. Israel, for its part, has not departed from its strategic motto: disarmament is the precondition for any withdrawal, otherwise the Israeli State intends to continue its policy of sanctuarization unilaterally. The reaction of the Lebanese executive and parliament falls within the interstices of rejection and denial which summarily recapitulate the conditions of this blockage.
As long as Lebanon confines itself to a logic of enclosure, it would be useless to expect changes in the fabric, approach and deconstruction of ongoing conflicts. Any approach that is structured below the mutually agreed security thresholds by the parties to the conflict will eventually die out to the benefit of institutionalized chaos. Furthermore, the harshness of the Israeli counter-offensive reveals the intolerance of the Hebrew State towards the laxity that has long characterized the position of the Lebanese State. This posture is continually renewed by the Islamist left and its consubstantial links with Hezbollah and the Palestinian camps.
Otherwise, Lebanese Shiites are called to ideological and strategic conversions that put them in phase with an alternative peace strategy. They can no longer remain in a grey zone that Shiite millenarianists can exploit in order to maintain hotbeds of tension or open or latent war. The return to the 1949 armistice agreement, and the scrupulous application of Resolution 1701 are no longer sufficient. The security plan has proven to be a failure while the stakes of stabilization only get worse.
The Lebanese State is more fragile than ever and Lebanon’s survival is once again subjected to severe trials. Lebanon is divided on essential choices, and for a long time, the questions of disarmament and the end of extraterritorialities have raised fundamental questions concerning the raison d’être of the country. Ultimately, the questions of disarmament and the end of extraterritorialities are questions that concern the raison d’être of the country and the future of liberal democracy and the rule of law.
The totalitarian movement, accompanied by organized crime that has prevailed in the Shiite milieu, as well as their functional equivalents at the national and regional levels, leave little choice to democratic actors, especially in the context of regional wars and continuously proliferating conflicts. The conflict in the South and East of Lebanon leaves little choice and little time, while the Lebanese State wallows in self-destructive wait-and-see. The executive power takes refuge in exorcism, headlong flight and evades the major decisions relating to the disarmament plan, the restoration of national sovereignty and the termination of mutant extraterritorialities.
The Rome meetings are condemned to certain death even if their formal maintenance remains a necessity so as not to fall into the abyss of rampant nihilism linked to Shiite Islamism and its clones in the Sunni milieu. However, the predominant nihilism in contemporary Islam is doubled by the growing influence of Islamic imperialism and the weakening of territorial States and the reconstruction of the matrix of the rule of law.
War will incessantly resume in various operational theaters and Lebanon is as usual doomed to its expiatory function to which it risks succumbing. The power in place is riddled with contradictions and its ability to recover is almost nil. Is there a concrete alternative or are we condemned to a slow disintegration as suggested by the state of lethargy to which we are doomed? The actors in power have never taken the measure of the challenges and are certainly not up to the tasks incumbent upon them.

Why Allowing Hamas to Participate in the Upcoming Elections Would Be a Catastrophic Mistake
Khaled Abu Toameh/Gatestone Institute/September 17, 2026
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22863/hamas-elections-mistake
Dr. Fadel Ashour, a [Palestinian] psychiatrist, behavioral-science professor and political analyst, has described in unusually blunt terms the psychological, social and political damage caused by Hamas and its ideology, which is rooted in Islamist principles, rejection of Israel's existence, armed struggle and the establishment of an Islamic Palestinian state in its place.
His message is urgent: Gaza cannot be rebuilt merely by putting up new buildings, repairing roads, or providing humanitarian assistance. The Palestinians' entire mindset must be rebuilt.
"Over 20-25 years [of Hamas rule], a culture was established that normalized violence, legalized it, and glorified death as if it were a means of survival. This is extremely dangerous for an entire generation that grew up saturated with this culture." — Dr. Fadel Ashour, Palestinian psychiatrist, interview, Jusoor News, September 13, 2026.
"A society that wants to win achieves victory through building, not through death and violence... When you open a school or a university, that is a victory. When you build a prosperous society that doesn't push its youth to flee, that is a victory. Making their lives a hell that everyone wants to escape from is a defeat." — Dr. Fadel Ashour, interview, Jusoor News, September 13, 2026.If Hamas is merely regarded as another political faction, then the international community will continue to accommodate a terrorist group, negotiate with a terrorist group, and incorporate a terrorist group into Gaza's political system.
If Hamas, however, is understood from the outset as an Islamist armed organization that created a parallel society and subordinated Gaza's interests to its ideology and military objectives, the policy implications will be entirely different.
"They [Hamas's leaders] took complete control of Gaza's economy. They crushed the commercial class, became the merchants, the importers, and the tax collectors themselves... They exploited society in a parasitic manner." — Dr. Fadel Ashour, interview, Jusoor News, September 13, 2026.
"Hamas controlled the incoming external aid, taking it and selling it to fund itself... In the very midst of death and extreme poverty, they were looking to fund themselves from the begging done on behalf of the people.... Fundamentalist groups like this, are obsessed with two things: gaining access to money and getting that television shot for their media." — Dr. Fadel Ashour, interview, Jusoor News, September 13, 2026.
What is important is the broad picture Ashour presents: an Islamist terrorist group that claims to exist for the Palestinian people has instead become an instrument for controlling, exploiting, and indoctrinating them.
His assessment should be required viewing for anyone negotiating with Hamas. The question is not whether Hamas will hand over some weapons or accept a temporary political arrangement. The question is whether Gaza can ever develop a fundamentally different political and social culture while Hamas's ideology remains embedded in its society and institutions.
Ashour is warning the international community not to make the mistake of believing that Gaza's problem can be solved simply by reaching an agreement with Hamas's leaders.
A society cannot simultaneously teach its children that martyrdom and violence are heroic and expect these same children to build peaceful institutions, prosperous businesses, universities, and a functioning political system.
That is why allowing Hamas to retain a political and military role — particularly by including Hamas-affiliated political figures in future elections — would only perpetuate the problem Ashour is describing.
The members of the Board of Peace and the international community need to ask themselves a basic question: Hamas's ideology has helped produce a culture of violence, death, and destruction, so can Gaza really be successfully rebuilt while that ideology — along with its institutional machinery for perpetuating it — remains intact?
The answer, it would seem, is unfortunately not.
A society cannot simultaneously teach its children that martyrdom and violence are heroic and expect these same children to build peaceful institutions, prosperous businesses, universities, and a functioning political system.
For years, politicians, activists, journalists and organizations around the world have claimed to speak on behalf of the Palestinians. Many have blamed Israel for virtually every Palestinian problem while treating the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas as legitimate "resistance" movements whose political and military role should be preserved.
Now, a Palestinian psychiatrist who has lived and worked in the Gaza Strip is offering a rather different diagnosis.
Dr. Fadel Ashour, a psychiatrist, behavioral-science professor and political analyst, has described in unusually blunt terms the psychological, social and political damage caused by Hamas and its ideology, which is rooted in Islamist principles, rejection of Israel's existence, armed struggle and the establishment of an Islamic Palestinian state in its place.
His recent interview with the Arabic-language outlet Jusoor News deserves to be watched and studied by everyone involved in trying to determine the future of Gaza.
Ashour's testimony is not coming from an Israeli or Western analyst. It is coming from a Palestinian professional with firsthand experience of life in Gaza.
His message is urgent: Gaza cannot be rebuilt merely by putting up new buildings, repairing roads, or providing humanitarian assistance. The Palestinians' entire mindset must be rebuilt.
This means finally, actually confronting the ideology that has shaped at least two generations.
Ashour warns that for the past two decades, Gaza has experienced a process of social conditioning in which violence and death are universally acclaimed and celebrated:
"Over 20-25 years [of Hamas rule], a culture was established that normalized violence, legalized it, and glorified death as if it were a means of survival. This is extremely dangerous for an entire generation that grew up saturated with this culture."
The observation is exceptionally important.
For years, many Western governments and so-called pro-Palestinian organizations have spoken almost exclusively about the physical destruction in Gaza. Ashour, however, is drawing attention to another form of destruction: the destruction of social values, institutions, and aspirations.
Palestinian society, he states, has been taught to associate victory with death rather than with construction and development:
"A society that wants to win achieves victory through building, not through death and violence... When you open a school or a university, that is a victory. When you build a prosperous society that doesn't push its youth to flee, that is a victory. Making their lives a hell that everyone wants to escape from is a defeat."
These are not the words of an Israeli government spokesman. They are the words of a prominent Palestinian physician describing what he has seen.
Ashour is equally blunt about rejecting the notion that Hamas should be treated simply as another political party representing the Palestinian people. "These groups are not political parties or political movements," he states, referring to Hamas and other Islamist organizations:
"They create a closed parallel society – marrying among themselves, conducting their own businesses, and running a private economic cycle. They view the rest of society with a sense of superiority, as if they are the chosen ones and the rest are just commoners."
Gaza, Ashour continues, was not home to a normal government, but something quite different:
"What existed was not a state authority; it was the rule of the oppressive, terrifying militias... In Gaza, the public found itself facing ghosts and tunnel militias. About 300,000 youths fled the Gaza Strip."
If Hamas is merely regarded as another political faction, then the international community will continue to accommodate a terrorist group, negotiate with a terrorist group, and incorporate a terrorist group into Gaza's political system.
If Hamas, however, is understood from the outset as an Islamist armed organization that created a parallel society and subordinated Gaza's interests to its ideology and military objectives, the policy implications will be entirely different. Ashour goes on to describe Hamas's economic domination of Gaza:
"They took complete control of Gaza's economy. They crushed the commercial class, became the merchants, the importers, and the tax collectors themselves... They exploited society in a parasitic manner."
Discussing humanitarian aid he discloses that Hamas controlled the incoming external aid, taking it and selling it to fund itself:
"In the very midst of death and extreme poverty, they were looking to fund themselves from the begging done on behalf of the people.... Fundamentalist groups like this are obsessed with two things: gaining access to money and getting that television shot for their media."
What is important is the broad picture Ashour presents: an Islamist terrorist group that claims to exist for the Palestinian people has instead become an instrument for controlling, exploiting, and indoctrinating them.
Ashour's analysis of Hamas's leadership is equally revealing. Hamas leaders, he states, "are very skilled at small details..."
"When they execute an operation like October 7, they plan the minute details very meticulously and successfully. But their problem is that they cannot see the forest as a whole. They do not understand the broader strategic, regional, and international environment."
He describes what happens when this strategic blindness meets ideology:
"Because of their ignorance of the big picture, gaps emerge that they fill with magical, childish, and mystical thinking – expecting unseen forces to intervene on their behalf to alter international politics."
His assessment should be required viewing for anyone negotiating with Hamas. The question is not whether Hamas will hand over some weapons or accept a temporary political arrangement. The question is whether Gaza can ever develop a fundamentally different political and social culture while Hamas's ideology remains embedded in its society and institutions.
This is especially relevant now that the Trump administration's Board of Peace announced in July that it had reached an agreement with Hamas and other terrorist groups concerning their complete disarmament — a process to be completed in stages. The announced framework envisages a new Palestinian administration for Gaza and an international stabilization mechanism.
Palestinian parliamentary elections are also scheduled for November 28, 2026.
Both developments make his assessment particularly timely. Ashour is warning the international community not to make the mistake of believing that Gaza's problem can be solved simply by reaching an agreement with Hamas's leaders.
The physical reconstruction of Gaza, according to Ashour, is the least part of the challenge. What is required is "rebuilding the human being," as he calls it, through deradicalization, mental health care, restoration of social trust, and the development of a life-affirming, forward-looking culture.
Above all, a new Gaza cannot be built on the same ideological foundations of the old Gaza.
A society cannot simultaneously teach its children that martyrdom and violence are heroic and expect these same children to build peaceful institutions, prosperous businesses, universities, and a functioning political system.
That is why allowing Hamas to retain a political and military role — particularly by including Hamas-affiliated political figures in future elections — would only perpetuate the problem Ashour is describing.
The members of the Board of Peace and the international community need to ask themselves a basic question: Hamas's ideology has helped produce a culture of violence, death, and destruction, so can Gaza really be successfully rebuilt while that ideology — along with its institutional machinery for perpetuating it — remains intact?
The answer, it would seem, is unfortunately not.
Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.
*Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter)
© 2026 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Jordan’s Strategic Importance to Washington Increases
David Schenker/Hoover Institute/September 17/2026
US military bases in the Arabian Peninsula were pounded during the war with Iran. Shortly after the onset of “Epic Fury,” the Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) at Al Udeid airbase in Qatar—command post for all US and coalition air operations in the Central Command area of responsibility—was destroyed in a missile attack.
US military bases in the Arabian Peninsula were pounded during the war with Iran. Shortly after the onset of “Epic Fury,” the Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) at Al Udeid airbase in Qatar—command post for all US and coalition air operations in the Central Command area of responsibility—was destroyed in a missile attack. Iran also targeted and degraded key US facilities in the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. Most of the more than 13 US military bases hit by Iran during the hostilities were in the Gulf adjacent to Iran and within striking distance of its large supply of short-range missiles and attack drones.While the extent of damage to US bases—estimated at up to $5 billion—may have exceeded expectations, the vulnerability of these facilities was anticipated. Indeed, prior to the war, most US troops and assets were dispersed to facilities far removed from the front line. The redeployment was consistent with US contingency planning during the Biden Administration—or earlier—to mitigate tactical and logistical complications posed by the proximity of facilities to Iran. The so-called Western Basing Initiative relied on US access to facilities in Saudi Arabia like King Fahd Air Base and Logistics Support Activity Jenkins near the Red Sea. Perhaps the most important relatively safe western base for US operations, however, has been Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan.
The devastation of Washington’s Persian Gulf bases and the key role played by the Kingdom in US operations against Iran is likely to have long-lasting implications for future US military deployments and basing in the Middle East. Long before the war, Jordan was a critical if underappreciated US partner. Since February 28, the kingdom’s stock has risen dramatically in Washington.
Washington’s mil-to-mil relationship with Amman began in 1994 after Jordan and Israel signed the Wadi Araba peace agreement. Since then—and particularly after King Abdullah II, the former commander of the Jordanian Army’s Special Operations, ascended to the throne in 1999—US financial support and military cooperation have deepened considerably. During the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Kingdom provided basing for US aircraft involved in the operation. Nearly a decade later, US troops and aircraft were stationed in Jordan to participate in coalition military activities against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.In 2021, seemingly in preparation for Epic Fury, the US and Jordan signed a defense cooperation agreement allowing US forces access to twelve facilities in Jordan, including five air bases. Today, Jordan has emerged as a critical—if not the most critical—US logistics and operations base in the war with Iran.
Before the start of hostilities, Muwaffaq Salti Air Base served as a key logistical hub for US C-17 airlifts; as of February 2026, some sixty US combat aircraft were stationed at the base. In recent years, the US also deployed a broad range of advanced anti-missile interceptors in Jordan, including Patriot missiles and Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) systems, to protect both the kingdom and Israel from drones and missiles fired by Iran and its Iraqi proxies. In April 2024, these systems—as well as the combat aircraft of the US, Israel, and some European states —downed hundreds of incoming projectiles over Jordanian territory. During Epic Fury, Iran and its Iraqi proxies launched more than 200 drones and missiles at US forces and Jordanian targets in the kingdom, the vast majority of which were downed.
Of course, while Jordan is more secure, that security is not foolproof. In mid-July 2026, three US soldiers were killed and several wounded when an Iranian missile evaded interceptors and hit Muwaffaq Salti. Back in November 2016 during the campaign against ISIS, three US Special Forces servicemen were killed by a rogue Jordanian guard at King Faisal Air Base. The Green on Blue attack was attributed to anti-American sentiment, and the guard was sentenced to life in prison. Notwithstanding these tragic casualties, however, the kingdom has proved far safer and more resilient under fire than US bases located in the Gulf. Indeed, in March at the very beginning of the war, 6 US servicemembers were killed in a single strike on a command center in Kuwait.
As the King Faisal Air Base incident suggests, not all Jordanians are pleased with the US military presence. Periodically, the kingdom has seen protests surrounding US deployments. During the Syrian civil war in 2013, the King requested that a contingent of American soldiers exercising in Jordan remain after the drill to help secure the realm. In response, dozens of tribal origin “East Bankers”—traditionally the monarchy’s leading supporters—wrote an open letter to the King describing US troops as “a legitimate target for all honorable Jordanians.” More recently, this past July hundreds of Jordanians signed onto a public missive disparaging the US military presence, arguing that it served “no national interest” and threatened to drag the kingdom into a “regional conflict.”
Despite a lack of widespread popular support for US basing, the Palace has cast its lot with Washington. To be sure, the Government has sought to downplay the US presence in order to insulate the kingdom from Iranian attacks: in July Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said “there are no US bases in Jordan,” but rather American soldiers within the framework of long-term military cooperation. Safadi was right—with the possible exception of the Tower 22 logistics outpost in the northeast of the kingdom—the US has no dedicated bases in Jordan. Still, the US presence has opened Jordan to extensive Iranian strikes. To be fair, long before Epic Fury—by virtue of its 1994 peace agreement with Israel and longstanding strategic relationship with Washington—Amman was already in Tehran’s crosshairs. The threat increased after Jordan helped defend Israel during Iran’s April 2024 missile and drone barrage. Today, not surprisingly, Iran is even more hostile toward the kingdom. In addition to firing missiles and drones into Jordan, Tehran is looking to undermine the US-Jordan ties. After the July 2026 missile strike on Muwaffaq Salti, for example, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps issued a statement thanking Jordanian informants for providing targeting details to Iran aiding the attack. The IRGC is also urging Jordanians to demand the departure of US military personnel from the kingdom.
The IRGC push to end the US presence in Jordan is part of Iran’s effort to end US basing in the Middle East. Indeed, Tehran made this demand early on during the negotiations to end the war. (Shockingly, Iran somehow managed to incorporate a vague reference to a US withdrawal in the final text of the now defunct agreement, with the Trump Administration agreeing to “remove its forces from the proximity” of Iran within 30 days). However, while the US military may not soon fully return to its frontline bases in the Gulf, it’s not leaving the Middle East. Based on Iranian capabilities and Washington’s requirement for a regional base with operational freedom, moving forward, Jordan—rather than Qatar—is likely to emerge as a key center of US military activities in the region.
It’s not clear that the president was thinking of this scenario when early on in his second term, Trump exempted Jordan from his administration’s draconian cuts to foreign assistance. This year, Jordan will receive $425 million in Foreign Military Financing, $845 million in direct budgetary support, and close to $200 million in additional aid. This amount makes the kingdom the second largest recipient of US non-emergency foreign assistance. US support is considerable, but commensurate with Washington’s interest in ensuring the stability of this economically-challenged moderate pro-West peace partner. Given the increasing strategic importance of Jordan with the war in Iran, there’s a good argument that US assistance should be increased.

Selected Face Book & X tweets on September 17/2026
Pamela Geller
Saudi Arabia Reaches Out to Israel for Intelligence Help on Houthi Threat; ‘The Timing is Almost Ironic”The Mecca Accords? Not so much.
If only the Saudis had had the sagacity and boldness to join the Abraham Accords. Their bigotry will be their undoing.

American Jewish Committee
Six years after the Abraham Accords, Israel-Morocco ties are reaching a new milestone.
Today in New York, Israeli Foreign Minister @GideonSaar, Moroccan Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita, and @USAmbUN Mike Waltz came together for a historic trilateral summit focused on deepening the relationship between Israel and Morocco. The three countries agreed on concrete steps to further strengthen Israel-Morocco relations, including upgrading diplomatic missions to embassies, appointing ambassadors, expanding direct flights, advancing investment and tax agreements, and facilitating high-level reciprocal visits. AJC's Center for a New Middle East will continue working to strengthen the relationships and partnerships th

Fatima Alasrar
What stands out in reading this alert is how relentless the IRGC is in hunting down Iranian dissidents and seeking ways to ruin their lives. The fact that the alert was in Europe and the US also shows the breadth of these operations; they are clearly not short of manpower to pursue their transnational intimidation strategy.

The Hormuz Letter
BREAKING: Trump made a deal with Yemen’s Houthis in a secret meeting, promising not to strike seized Houthi-held territory or support Saudi Arabia and Saudi-backed forces in any form, in exchange for keeping the Bab el-Mandeb open to shipping, except to Saudi vessels, per

EWTN News Nightly
https://x.com/EWTNNewsNightly/status/2099649403321466883/video/1
Human rights groups are raising alarms over the detention of Suleiman Khalil, a Christian who has been detained without charge in Syria since February 2025. His daughter, Natalie Khalil, and Joel Veldkamp with @CSI_humanrights discuss what we know about her father's imprisonment.

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis Office
Turkey is a NATO ally on paper but we are concerned about Turkey’s close relationship with Russia and Iran, about its harboring of Hamas leadership, about Erdogan’s calls for the destruction of Israel and illegal occupation of Cyprus military flights above Greek islands. https://ekathimerini.com/politics/foreign-policy/1315076/turkey-is-often-an-ally-on-paper/

Alberto Miguel Fernandez
That the Bible was "rewritten" (or distorted " تحريف") is a basic tenet of anti-Christian and anti-Jewish Islamic polemics going back centuries. Zomlot doesn't mention that. Of course, scholars like Christoph Luxenberg would say the same thing is true of the Qur'an.

MEMRI
https://x.com/MEMRIReports/status/2100215500655436288/video/1
Palestinian Ambassador to UK Husam Zomlot: Palestinian History Was Stolen; We Are the Original Christians; The Bible Was Rewritten to Be Used Against Us; Jesus Is Our Gift to the World

i24NEWS English
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qgama1jIxB4&feature=youtu.be
'Erdogan is the most complex and one of the most intelligent politicians that I have ever seen in my life'Dr. Hay Eytan Cohen Yanarocak (@hayeytan) to @Ariel_Oseran #OnTheRecord
Watch the full interview: https://youtu.be/Qgama1jIxB4

Julian Paul Assange
https://x.com/DeepLeaksHQ/status/2100206098980745302/video/1
Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman confirms that Barack Obama is the world’s number one sponsor of terror. He gave Iran $150B in cash, and the IRGC didn’t even build a single street with that money.

Hanin Ghaddar
I’m very pleased to join Pepperdine University’s School of Public Policy this semester as an Adjunct Professor. I am teaching Shia Politics in the Middle East Policy Studies graduate program, which is jointly run by @PepperdineSPP and @WashInstitute
It is extremely rewarding to bring years of research and field experience on Shia politics, Iran, Lebanon, and Hezbollah into the classroom—and to have the opportunity to engage with the next generation of Middle East policy professionals.

Women's Policy Centre
At the Women’s Policy Centre, we strongly oppose the decision of the Archbishop of Canterbury
to award a man who subjects his wife to abuse by concealing her identity in such a barbaric manner. No religion can permit anyone to deny the dignity and freedom of women. Centuries of gradual adaptation and applied theology have established gender equality in the Church of England, with a woman now holding the highest office. Yet the same woman allows a man from another religion to deny his wife the same rights. This is unacceptable. No awards should ever be given to such men in the UK. We shall not normalise the subjugation of women, for any reason, whatever the religion.