The Israeli occupation entity is facing mounting criticism and growing isolation across Europe, as opposition to its war in Gaza and policies in the occupied West Bank moves beyond public protests into professional and trade union decisions and economic pressure that is beginning to raise concerns within the Israeli enemy’s defense industry.
While European Union governments struggle to agree on coordinated measures, segments of European society are taking steps to impose practical costs on the continuation of Israeli policies.
In a report from Brussels, The Guardian correspondent Jennifer Rankin examines the contrast between rising public anger across Europe and the EU’s inability to translate it into a common policy.
Despite a shift in Britain’s position, including London’s announcement of broad trade sanctions on illegal Israeli settlements and its condemnation of what it described as ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, these steps have yet to translate into collective European action on the scale anticipated.
Widening Divide
France and Canada have joined commitments to restrict settlement products and penalize entities that facilitate or benefit from settlement activities. Other countries have also announced plans to restrict trade with companies operating beyond the Green Line. However, these measures have yet to produce a unified European front capable of changing the calculations of the Zionist government.
Opinion polls reveal a widening gap between official policies and the views of large segments of the public. According to a Pew Research Center survey covering 10 European countries, unfavorable views of “Israel” increased in several countries compared with the previous year.
The proportion of respondents expressing negative views reached 75% in Italy, 73% in Germany, and 70% in Green Line, indicating that criticism is no longer confined to countries most supportive of the Palestinian cause.
Cultural Boycotts
The shift is also extending into the cultural sphere. Five countries have chosen to boycott this year’s Eurovision Song Contest in protest against the Israeli participation, after organizers rejected calls to exclude the country over its conduct during the Gaza war and escalating violence in the West Bank. The Israeli enemy’s participation in European events is thus facing opposition extending beyond political circles to cultural institutions and the public.
These developments come amid the continuing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. The Guardian reported that the Palestinian death toll had exceeded 74,000, including at least 21,200 children, since the war erupted following the October 7, 2023, attack.
Humanitarian conditions remain dire, with shortages of water, food, medicine, and medical equipment, alongside economic collapse, the spread of disease, and continued fatalities despite the announcement of a ceasefire.
Yedioth Ahronoth reported that the repercussions could extend beyond companies operating in settlements to other Israeli businesses, as foreign companies may prefer to avoid Israeli suppliers to reduce legal and commercial risks.
Pro-Palestinian demonstrators march through the streets of Paris, France, after gathering at Place de la Bastille for a demonstration organized by CAPJPO-EuroPalestine on September 12, 2026. (Photo by Umit Donmez/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Internal Divisions Within the EU
The European Union, which maintains extensive trade ties with the Israeli occupation worth approximately €68 billion ($73.4 billion), remains constrained by internal divisions.
Spain and Ireland are pushing for a review of whether “Israel” complies with the human rights conditions set out in the EU-Israel Association Agreement. Germany and Austria oppose measures targeting the Israeli government, while the positions of the Czech Republic and Italy are closer to those of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. France, the Netherlands, and other countries have adopted more critical positions but have failed to secure consensus on sanctions.
Martin Konečný, director of the European Middle East Project in Brussels, described the EU’s stance as a continuation of a state of “self-imposed ineffectiveness.”
Pressure on Brussels intensified after more than 500 former European officials and diplomats issued a statement criticizing the bloc’s failure to act over developments in Gaza and the West Bank. They accused Germany and Italy of obstructing European measures, undermining the EU’s values and the two-state solution.
Pressure from Professional Bodies and Trade Unions
While governments have struggled to agree on collective action, pressure has begun to emerge through professional organizations and trade unions.
In another report for The Guardian, Denis Campbell wrote that Britain’s Royal Pharmaceutical Society had ended Israeli pharmaceutical company Teva’s sponsorship and participation in its annual conference following an internal review that raised concerns about company activities deemed inconsistent with the institution’s values.
The decision followed a similar move by the Royal College of Nursing, which severed its ties with the company after pressure from pro-Palestinian activists.
The campaign called on healthcare institutions to apply consistent ethical standards, noting that British professional bodies had taken action against Russian companies following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Activists have called for the same ethical scrutiny to be applied to commercial relationships and investments linked to the Israeli occupation entity, urging other healthcare institutions to review their ties with Teva.
The controversy surrounding the company, however, is not based solely on its connection to the Zionist entity. Teva has previously faced fines and legal settlements in the United States and Europe, including a €462.6 million ($499.6 million) European fine in 2024 over anticompetitive practices in the market for a multiple sclerosis drug. The company has also faced earlier cases involving drug price-fixing and bribery.
Teva has rejected the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s decision, warning against the politicization of healthcare.
Defense Industry Faces Mounting Risks
In a more sensitive sector, concerns are growing in the Israeli occupation entity that trade restrictions could develop into broader pressure on its defense industry.
Yuval Azulai, writing for Ynet, the news website affiliated with Yedioth Ahronoth, reported that British and Canadian arms manufacturers had begun questioning the so-called Israeli defense companies about their activities in settlements, their sources of raw materials, and their commercial relationships with businesses operating there.
The responses could become a decisive factor in determining whether cooperation continues, particularly if foreign companies fear violating sanctions regulations.
The risk is that the consequences could extend beyond businesses operating in settlements to other Israeli companies, as foreign firms may choose to avoid Israeli suppliers to limit legal and commercial exposure.
Replacing components used in fighter jets, helicopters, drones, and communications systems could also take months because of the testing and modifications required to ensure system safety and operational readiness.
Attempts to Disrupt Shipments
In France, pressure has moved beyond calls for boycotts to attempts to disrupt shipments linked to the Israeli occupation’s military industry.
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz, in a report by Hagai Amit in collaboration with TheMarker, said French labor organizations claimed to have prevented a shipment of components intended for Israeli defense company Elbit Systems from being loaded onto an Air France flight from Charles de Gaulle Airport to Ben Gurion Airport.
The unions announced that they would also seek to prevent the shipment from being transported on an El Al flight, calling on French authorities and airlines to stop it.
Air France, meanwhile, confirmed that the shipment had not been carried aboard its aircraft and said it does not transport weapons or ammunition to “Israel.”
These developments do not mean Europe has agreed on a unified policy or that public opposition will automatically translate into a comprehensive trade and arms embargo. They do, however, point to a changing European environment in which government positions are no longer the sole factor shaping relations with the Zionist entity.
As trade unions, professional institutions, and companies move to reduce or reassess their ties with the Zionist enemy, continued cooperation is becoming more costly and complicated.
This highlights the dilemma facing Netanyahu: while his government speaks of building security and industrial independence to make “Israel” less reliant on foreign partners, European pressure underscores how difficult that goal is to achieve in a world of interconnected manufacturing, technology, and defense supply chains.
Governments may continue to delay action, but the growing number of European societies and institutions withdrawing their ethical and commercial support for the Israeli occupation entity is gradually narrowing the room for maneuver available to it.
Source: Agencies (translated and edited by Al-Manar)
University of Tahran Professor Mohammad Marandi and Former FBI special agent and whistleblower Coleen Rowley on Al-Mayadeen’s the Grand Standoff: Iran and the World (Al Mayadeen English)
Marandi argues that Iran’s pressure on the Strait of Hormuz is complicating Trump’s calculations, while Rowley raises concerns about a possible false-flag operation influencing the US midterm elections.
Iran will not trust US President Donald Trump’s diplomatic assurances without concrete implementation of Washington’s commitments, University of Tehran Professor Mohammad Marandi said.
Speaking on Al Mayadeen‘s nightly program The Grand Standoff: Iran and the World, Marandi argued that pressure on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz is complicating the US president’s efforts to manage oil prices ahead of the midterm elections.
Marandi added that Tehran had repeatedly experienced US deception in negotiations and violations of agreements, including the 2015 nuclear deal and a more recent memorandum of understanding (MoU). He argued that the United States could not expect Iran to change its approach to the strategic waterway while Washington continued to refuse to fulfill its obligations.
“The only thing that we know is that so that we can say for certain is that he’s trying to bring down the price of oil because the higher the price of oil the higher the price of gasoline,” Marandi stressed, linking the administration’s statements about diplomacy to concerns over rising energy costs and the approaching elections.
Former FBI special agent and whistleblower Coleen Rowley, speaking separately on the program, pointed to mounting affordability pressures in the United States, divisions among Republicans and growing opposition to Trump’s handling of the war. She argued that the economic consequences of foreign wars were increasingly affecting Americans who had supported the president.
Marandi: Iran will not trust US promises without implementation
The Iranian professor said Tehran had little reason to regard assurances from the Trump administration as credible, citing a pattern of Washington violating agreements after signing them.
Marandi accused Washington of violating the more recent MoU by failing to ensure Israeli forces left Lebanon and ended the genocide in Gaza, refusing to return “stolen” Iranian assets, and attempting to establish a US-backed corridor through the Strait of Hormuz.
US failed to honor its obligations
He maintained that Iran had begun to implement the MoU, with shipping through the waterway increasing, before the United States failed to honor its obligations.
“The Iranians have been very clear that that can only happen through implementation because we already have Trump’s signature and obviously since he signed the MOU in front of the world and he refused to implement it that is a clear indication that he is completely unreliable,” Marandi said.
He added that communications between Washington and Tehran could continue, but that exchanges of messages alone would not be enough to secure an agreement.
“For the Iranians, negotiations can take place. These messages can go back and forth in direct negotiations, but unless the United States carries out its obligations, the Iranians are going to continue pursuing their policy of limiting shipping through the Strait of Hormuz,” he emphasized.
Marandi argued that Iran’s approach to the waterway was therefore tied to its broader dispute with Washington rather than to diplomatic statements coming from the White House.
Strait of Hormuz puts pressure on oil prices
The Iranian academic argued that Trump was attempting to contain rising oil prices through public statements about negotiations and the possibility of postponing further aggression against Iran.
He attributed the increase in oil prices to a substantial decline in crude shipments through the Strait of Hormuz over roughly 10 days, which he linked to Iranian attacks on ships that Tehran considers to have violated its regulations.
Marandi said much of the oil that continued to pass through the waterway did so with Iranian consent, while other vessels had been struck after attempting to transit without Tehran’s permission.
He also addressed reports in Western media that Iran was collecting fees from ships permitted to pass through the strait, while stressing that he could not independently confirm the claims.
“I don’t want to say that’s true or not, but the point is that that is what we’re hearing now in the Western media,” he said.
‘The prices will remain high’
Marandi argued that Iran had decided from the beginning of the war to exercise control over the waterway and collect fees, particularly from regional oil and gas exporters that he accused of complicity in the war against Iran. He named Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates among the countries he held responsible.
The Iranian professor also disputed claims that US economic pressure had brought Iran close to collapse. He said flights between Iran and other countries, including China, were continuing despite restrictions and warnings from US officials.
While he acknowledged that Iran’s economic situation was difficult, Marandi argued that Washington was also facing mounting costs and political consequences.
He said higher oil prices were feeding into gasoline and diesel costs, as well as the prices of goods produced through refineries and petrochemical plants.
“The prices will remain high,” he said, arguing that Trump’s public efforts to talk down the oil market had not succeeded.
Midterm elections add to Trump’s political pressures
Marandi said the economic fallout from the war could damage Trump’s standing ahead of the US midterm elections, although he cautioned that the outcome remained uncertain because of problems with US polling.
He argued that Trump’s repeated statements about diplomatic progress and his reluctance to launch further attacks before the elections reflected concern about the domestic consequences of a wider war.
Marandi stressed that Iran had not officially declared a policy of seeking to punish Trump electorally. However, he said Tehran’s pressure on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz was worsening the economic conditions the US president is facing.
“If Trump loses that doesn’t mean the war is going to come to an end by any means but if he loses badly especially in the Senate then the pressure on Trump will increase,” Marandi said.
He attributed that potential pressure partly to opposition among Democratic voters to “Israel” and the war, while acknowledging that hostility toward Trump would also shape the political response.
Iran is militarily stronger now
Marandi further argued that Iran’s military posture was complicating US calculations in the region. He said Tehran’s warning that it could launch a preemptive strike was intended to make Washington more cautious about its military deployments.
He suggested that the withdrawal of US aircraft from a base in the United Kingdom could reflect concerns about vulnerability, but said that he did not know the reason for the move.
Marandi also said Iran was militarily stronger than it had been seven or eight months earlier and was preparing for the possibility of war breaking out again.
He cautioned that a defeat for Trump in the midterms would not necessarily prevent further US aggression, arguing that the administration remained capable of escalating the war despite its domestic political difficulties.
Rowley points to affordability crisis and Republican divisions
On her part, Rowley said Republican candidates were showing signs of concern about their association with Trump as the midterm elections approached.
She cited instances in which Republicans were distancing themselves from the president and said some candidates were emphasizing affordability and promising to end the war in an effort to appeal to voters.
Rowley cautioned that electoral forecasts remained uncertain, noting that Trump had previously defied expectations. She also criticized his public remarks, including comments she said suggested that the bombing of San Diego and Los Angeles would be a good thing.
She interpreted those remarks as an attempt to divide Americans into political allies and opponents, arguing that the president was treating people in the two cities as “expendable”.
‘Affordability is the problem’
Rowley also questioned whether Republican candidates could be trusted to deliver on their campaign promises, despite their growing emphasis on the cost of living.
“Affordability is the problem, because right now the cost of everything in the United States is going up, including especially including things like fertilizer,” she stressed.
She pointed to fertilizer, sulfur, and phosphate producers laying off workers or shutting down operations, arguing that the economic consequences were reaching people who had repeatedly voted for Trump.
“You got to end the foreign wars in order to make things affordable,” Rowley said.
Her remarks echoed Marandi’s assessment that the economic costs of the war could become a significant political liability for the Trump administration, although the two speakers approached the issue from different perspectives.
Rowley warns of escalation ahead of the elections
Rowley said some commentators believed Trump might escalate the war after the midterm elections, while arguing that a ploy before the vote could also be used to influence the political debate.
She raised the possibility of a false-flag operation, describing it as an incident that could be exaggerated to provide a last-minute political advantage to Trump and Republican candidates.
“But what he could do before the election, very possible, is they could use some kind of what they call a false flag, which is any incident. It could be something like the fly Dubai or the thing in the UK with the base where they said people were attacking the base. Anything like that, that they can exaggerate to turn into a last-minute assistance for Donald Trump and the Republican candidates,” she warned.
‘October surprise’
Rowley linked that possibility to the US political tradition of an “October surprise”, in which a late development can influence an election campaign.
“In fact, you know, this was called they called this in politics in the United States. They called it October surprise. So it’s really common that a politician will try to pull out some October surprise, revealing something, usually a lie or a false flag,” Rowley added.
She also criticized Trump’s threats of nuclear war, saying that people who had helped elect him were now calling for his impeachment over the danger of nuclear escalation.
Reflecting on her own opposition to the genocide in Gaza, Rowley said she had been protesting for three years and continued to be distressed by the killing of children.
She argued that the war and its wider consequences had undermined the image Trump had sought to cultivate as a president who would end foreign wars.
The lesser of two evils
In Rowley’s view, the US two-party system left voters struggling to choose between candidates they viewed as the lesser of two evils, while offering few guarantees that campaign promises would be honored.
“I’m frustrated with our political process here, but it’s going to be an interesting midterm election, that’s for sure,” she said.
Marandi, meanwhile, maintained that Iran would continue to apply pressure through its policy toward the Strait of Hormuz and would not reveal its full military intentions. He argued that Washington’s options were becoming more difficult as the conflict continued to weigh on the US economy and Trump’s political position.
Neither speaker suggested that the midterm elections alone would determine whether the war would end. Marandi explicitly warned that even a significant Republican defeat would not necessarily bring the war to a close.
Leader of Yemen’s Ansarullah movement, Sayyed Abdul-Malik Badreddin al-Houthi, affirmed that the crimes of the Saudi regime against the Yemeni people will not break their will or force them to surrender. Instead, they increase their conviction in the justice of their cause and their drive to confront the aggression. He warned that any participation by Arab or Islamic countries, groups, or organizations in the aggression against Yemen represents complicity in sin, crime, and injustice, along with all the consequences that entail in this world and the Hereafter.
In his speech today, Thursday, marking the tenth anniversary of the 2016 bombing of the Grand Hall in Sanaa by Saudi regime aircraft, he described the Saudi regime as a criminal regime that kills children and women. He stated that it engages in continuous collective targeting of civilians, mosques, markets, and residential neighborhoods in the capital, Sanaa, and other Yemeni provinces.
He emphasized that the Saudi regime’s approach in its aggression against Yemen follows a Zionist, tyrannical approach that contradicts the values and teachings of Islam, innate human values, and international norms and laws, relying on methods of deception in the name of religion.
The Grand Hall Massacre and the Targeting of Social Gatherings
The leader of Ansar Allah explained that funeral gatherings in Yemen are major social events. He noted that the 2016 funeral was widely attended by various segments of Yemeni society, filling the hall before the Saudi regime targeted the gathering with missiles to kill as many people as possible.
He added that this remains the enemy’s objective when attacking social gatherings, noting that it continued targeting funeral halls and wedding celebrations. He recalled the crime targeting a wedding in Sanban, Dhamar Governorate, which resulted in 49 martyrs and 70 wounded.
He stated that the Saudi regime has committed horrific crimes against the Yemeni people, to the extent that hardly a day passes without a anniversary of a crime committed, asking: “Is this not excessive bloodshed?”
He pointed out that this criminality continued year after year, as Yemen enters its twelfth year while the Saudi regime insists on continuing its aggression and blockade against the Yemeni people.
He addressed the Attan bomb crime as one of the most famous major atrocities, emphasizing that the bomb that exploded in Sanaa was an internationally prohibited weapon, as evidenced by the massive destruction, casualties, and injuries it caused.
He also recalled the crime targeting a bus carrying children in Dhahyan, where the Saudi aggressor described the children on board as “military experts,” even though they were students, in addition to the targeting of weddings in Dhamar and Hajjah, the Al-Mocha crime in Taiz Governorate, and crimes across Al-Hudaydah and other Yemeni provinces.
He stressed that Yemeni provinces have witnessed crimes under various classifications, including crimes against humanity, war crimes, and major atrocities, alongside targeting people in markets and mosques, noting that the Saudi regime continues collective targeting and strikes on markets and residential areas.
He recalled the first crime committed at the start of the aggression on March 26, 2015, which targeted residential neighborhoods in Sanaa, emphasizing that this approach has continued ever since.
He stated: “Since the escalation resumed, the Saudi regime has returned to the same methods through its crimes in Sanaa, targeting female students and residents, as well as strikes in Al-Hudaydah, Taiz, and Saada, leading to child and female casualties.” He emphasized that the killing of thousands of children and women in Yemen represents a systematic criminal act.
Targeting Civilians and the American, Zionist, and British Role
The leader of Ansar Allah noted that Western media outlets have recently reported an increase in civilian, female, and child casualties since the Israeli enemy resumed cooperation with the Saudi regime. He explained that this role was evident in earlier stages as well, as the Saudi regime relied on them to identify targets—what to bomb and where to bomb—in accordance with this tyrannical approach.
He stated that Saudi behavior in the aggression against Yemen is built on a Zionist approach that contradicts Islamic teachings, values, norms, and international laws, and that it builds its military stance on this direction and trains its military formations accordingly.
He added that this includes treating prisoners in a brutal and despicable manner that has no relation to Islamic ethics or the innate customs of the Yemeni people.
He affirmed that the Saudi aggressor follows the Zionist path and fits those characteristics, describing it as “the most fierce of opponents.” He pointed to the painful scenes people watch on satellite channels showing wounded women and children, as well as affected families.
Among these scenes, he mentioned Ali Muhammad Adhli in Hajjah Governorate, whose family was targeted by the Saudi aggressor, leaving only one survivor, alongside painful scenes in Sanaa, Al-Hudaydah, and other provinces.
He emphasized that there is absolutely no justification for these attacks, recalling the targeting of citizens’ homes and central markets in Taiz, including the central market at the Mawiyah junction, which was described as targeting “Houthi gatherings” when it was actually a gathering of citizens from all walks of life in a central market, noting that documentation is clear.
He said: “The Saudi regime, under American supervision and with Zionist and British participation, deliberately commits the most heinous crimes against the Yemeni people,” stressing the importance of sharing footage documenting these crimes within the Islamic community, across various media outlets, and on a human level.
He added that these images have spread widely over past years, exposing the criminal nature of the Saudi regime.
Quranic Awareness in Confronting Deception Under Religious Titles
The leader of Ansar Allah stressed the importance of Quranic awareness in safeguarding the Islamic nation against methods of deception and misdirection. He opened his speech with the Quranic verse: “And among the people is he whose speech pleases you in worldly life, and he calls Allah to witness as to what is in his heart, yet he is the fiercest of opponents.”
He explained that the verse provides a precise divine evaluation and diagnosis of a group of people inside and outside the Islamic arena, and that the Quran aims to raise the nation’s level of awareness so it remains insightful and is not deceived by the methods of oppressors and criminals.
He noted that this group presents flashy religious or humanitarian slogans to mislead people and win their admiration, emphasizing that Quranic awareness must prevent the nation from supporting any tyrant or entity that follows a deviant path.
He explained that the gap between deceptive slogans and the reality of those behind them becomes clear during times of conflict and confrontation, where masks fall and true values are revealed.
He added that those described by Allah as “the fiercest of opponents” strip themselves of moral and human values during disputes, indulge in injustice and aggression, insist on oppression and stubbornness, and refuse to yield to truth, justice, or sincere advice.
He pointed out that the aggressiveness and excessive criminality of this group reach the point of destroying crops and livestock by targeting agricultural and economic sectors through various means, committing genocide, violating human life, and targeting animal resources, alongside committing major atrocities and refusing calls to truth.
He denounced the Saudi regime presenting itself as the bearer of the banner of Islam and placing the Shahada and the sword on its national flag, while that sword was never drawn against the nation’s enemies, nor did it take a single military stance against them.
He questioned whether the Saudi aggressor ever took a military stance against the U.S. or Israel at any time or on any issue, emphasizing that its criminal history has been directed against the Islamic nation, primarily the Yemeni people—who are among the most harmed—as well as tribes across the Arabian Peninsula that were largely eradicated, noting these as documented historical facts.
He also questioned why the Saudi regime commits these crimes while presenting itself as the Servitor of the Two Holy Mosques, describing it as an addict to crime and the shedding of innocent blood.
He pointed to heart-wrenching scenes of killed children and women, stressing that killing them is unanimously considered a crime among Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
He stated that the Saudi aggressor is a criminal and killer of children and women, and not as it presents itself under deceptive religious banners that fool the naive. Following the Zionist path demonstrates that it represents neither Islam nor the Sunnah, but rather a brutal Zionist criminal approach that violates sanctities and attacks people.
He added that these crimes represent a heavy burden and sin in the scale of divine justice, and that the Saudi aggressor faces an evil fate in this world and the Hereafter, becoming the object of divine punishment.
The Sanctity of Human Life and False Claims of Protecting Holy Sites
The leader of Ansarullah noted that this fate has befallen many tyrants and arrogant figures throughout history who thought their tyranny guaranteed their survival and the realization of their goals, only for divine decree to surround them, changing their circumstances until they fell into the abyss.
He said that tyrants possessed massive armies, immense resources, and political influence, but when they turned toward injustice, divine punishment struck them a decisive blow, making their capabilities useless, noting many such examples in both the modern and Arab world.
He emphasized that Allah has magnified the sanctity of human life and that targeting communities and killing people is no simple matter in divine justice, even if some believe American backing is enough, forgetting divine retribution.
He described the Saudi regime’s self-portrayal as a defender of holy sites—and its framing of the war against the Yemeni people as a sectarian defense of them—as a lie and crime exposed by its actions. He asked how anyone committing daily crimes and killing women and children can act with credibility under the title of “defending holy sites.”
He stressed that the Yemeni people are among the most eager to protect holy sites and are at the forefront of those moving to defend them.
Aggression Crimes Increase the Yemeni People’s Commitment to Their Cause
The leader of Ansarullah affirmed that the Saudi aggressor’s attempt to break the will of the Yemeni people and force them into submission is a delusion, as the people become increasingly convinced of the justice of their cause and driven to confront the regime that kills women and children.
He stated that the Saudi criminal history against the nation and the eradication of tribes in the Arabian Peninsula reflect the truth of the Quranic descriptions of these practices.
He added that the past twelve years bear witness that the Yemeni society’s response differs from what the aggressor hopes: the more excessive its bloodshed and commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, the more determined the people become to confront it.
He asked: “Are these feelings of brokenness, humiliation, and surrender, or does this noble, faithful people grow more determined to fulfill its moral and religious responsibility to confront the oppressive aggressor?”
He stressed that anyone counting on forcing the Yemeni people into surrender through these crimes is delusional, explaining that the armed forces and mobilization are moving earnestly out of this responsibility.
He added that tribes and social components reject these crimes with anger, taking a firm stance against those who commit them.
Supporting the Saudi Regime Is Complicity in Sin and Aggression
The leader of Ansar Allah warned any Arab or Islamic countries, groups, or organizations against getting involved in serving the Saudi aggressor in Yemen, stressing that whoever supports it implicates themselves in sin, crime, and oppression, with all the worldly and otherworldly consequences that follow.
He considered one of the nation’s greatest problems to be forgetting God in calculations of loyalty and enmity, which have strayed from religious and moral principles.
He stated that anyone involving themselves with the Saudi aggressor in killing women and children taints their own reputation and dishonors their country, adding that standing with a killer of children is the ultimate stain.
He added that such participation tarnishes history and honor, leaving dark pages of sin, crime, and aggression, burdening the participant with the sin of oppressing the Yemeni Muslim people.
He emphasized that the matter is not simple: the Yemeni people are a Muslim, oppressed nation, and the Saudi oppression against them is among the most heinous forms of injustice on earth.
He called on every country, government, army, and organization seeking a stance in the Islamic arena to support the oppressed Palestinian people, emphasizing that their cause is clear and deserving of the nation’s backing.
He questioned what the Saudi regime lacks in terms of money or military capabilities—being a partner to the U.S., Britain, and Israel with immense resources—stressing that it does not need support, and that standing with it is pure complicity in sin and aggression.
Financial Inducements and the Lesson of Sudanese Participation The leader of Ansar Allah noted that some who take stances far from God and Islamic principles act out of financial inducements, describing this motive as demonic when it leads to siding with oppressors against the oppressed for financial gain.
He called for taking a lesson from Omar al-Bashir, who believed changing his stances would achieve his interests, taking unjust positions against the Yemeni people without justification despite the brotherly relations between the Yemeni and Sudanese peoples.
He explained that Al-Bashir allied with the Saudi regime and supported its crimes against the Yemeni people, sending the Sudanese army and Janjaweed to participate in the aggression, where they committed terrible atrocities in the areas they attacked.
He asked about the outcome, emphasizing that financial gains proved to be a mirage in the face of divine punishment, as Omar al-Bashir lost everything and was overthrown, while the state of the Sudanese army and Janjaweed is now well known.
He expressed sadness over the crimes being committed in Sudan, emphasizing that it grieves the Yemeni people.
He added that governments turning into mercenaries for money reflects the issue of forgetting God, noting that some may act not out of financial motives, but due to political calculations and other drivers.
Advice to Qatar and Reviewing Stances on Aggression
noted that he advised Qatar yesterday, after it began adopting the Saudi aggression politically and media-wise, emphasizing that this represents participation in injustice, and quoting the tradition that whoever participates in the killing of a believer even with a single word will come on the Day of Resurrection written on him: “Despairing of Allah’s mercy.”
He stated that he reminded Qatar yesterday of what the Saudi regime did to it, and reminds it today of facts it lived in its own reality, after participating in 2015 in the aggression against Yemen, even at the military level. Yet the Saudi regime did not appreciate that, but rather mistreated it, launched a major campaign against it, and worked to blockade and isolate it.
He explained that Qatar was left with only an air corridor for civil aviation, while the Saudi regime worked to isolate it completely, boycotting it politically and economically, inciting others against it in the Gulf states and the United States, describing the Qataris as terrorists and supporters of terrorism, and inciting Trump against them.
He added that Saudi Arabia took negative stances toward Qatar in international files and public relations, almost isolating it from its Islamic surroundings, and even harassed it regarding the Hajj pilgrimage.
He emphasized that the Saudi regime did all of this without justification and that it despises Qatar, saying: “We know, and you know,” while pointing out that its ambitions toward Qatar are extremely negative, and that it wants to take control of it if it receives American permission.
He added that the bare minimum of Saudi Arabia’s goals is regime change in Qatar and installing a puppet emir who submits to all its dictates.
On the other hand, he pointed out that among Qatar’s virtues was working to resolve conflicts in Yemen and many other countries, describing that as a fine effort that allowed it to attain a prestigious status and aroused Saudi envy.
He considered that its return now to dependency on the Saudi regime represents a very significant decline from where it had reached and from the status it had attained.
Three years after Al-Aqsa Flood, Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza has claimed thousands of lives, including children, poets, academics, athletes, doctors and families whose stories reveal the human cost of the war.
Before Gaza’s martyrs were turned into statistics by the West-backed genocidal regime in Tel Aviv, they had names, families and dreams for the future.
A 13-year-old boy sat in front of a camera, excitedly talking about reaching 100,000 subscribers on YouTube. A poet kept writing as Israeli bombardment intensified around him. A grandfather held the body of his three-year-old granddaughter after an Israeli airstrike killed her, calling her “the soul of my soul.”
Three years after the historic Al-Aqsa Flood operation on October 7, 2023, which was followed by the Israeli regime’s all-out genocidal war on the besieged Palestinian territory, those images and words remain part of the record of a genocide that has transformed life in Gaza.
Since the regime launched its genocidal aggression, entire neighbourhoods have been destroyed, families have been eliminated, and people from across Palestinian society have appeared in long and dark casualty lists.
At least 74,000 Palestinians have been killed, including at least 21,000 children, since October 7, 2023. That is about one in every 30 people in Gaza, or roughly 3 percent of its pre-war population. The actual toll is likely higher, with thousands still buried under rubble.
The dead include children, parents, doctors, academics, athletes, journalists, artists and students. Some were killed by the regime with their families inside their homes.
Others were buried beneath buildings hit by Israeli airstrikes and are still not accounted for. Some were killed while sheltering in places they had fled to for safety.
Their cold-blooded murders were documented in news, photographs, videos, messages and the accounts of relatives and survivors.
The ten Palestinians featured here are among those whose lives and deaths became known beyond Gaza during the genocide.
Refaat Al-Araeer: Gaza’s beloved poet
Refaat Al-Araeer was killed when a missile struck his sister’s home in Al-Shujaiya on December 7, 2023. He was Gaza’s most prominent writer and professor of world literature.
He had taught creative writing at the Islamic University of Gaza, his classes a refuge for students who wrote under the brutal Israeli siege.
Before his death, he posted a short poem titled If I Must Die, ending with the line: “Let it be a tale.” The poem became Gaza’s anthem of endurance, recited at protests across the world.
Just two days before his death, Al Araeer wrote a tribute to the Palestinian resistance.
“More horrific Israeli bombardments…We could die this dawn. I wish I were a freedom fighter so I die fighting back those invading Israeli genocidal maniacs invading my neighbourhood and my city.”
In one of his last public interviews, the Palestinian poet vowed that, if necessary, he would die by the same pen through which he lived.
“I am an academic. Probably the toughest thing I have at home is an Expo marker. But if the Israelis invade and barge at us, charge at us, open door-to-door to massacre us, I am going to use that marker to throw it at Israeli soldiers even if that is the last thing that I would be able to do.”
Three-year-old Reem and five-year-old Tareq were among those killed when Israeli strikes levelled their home in Al-Nuseirat in November 2023.
Their grandfather, Khaled Nabhan, became a reluctant face of Gaza’s grief. In a viral video, he was seen kissing Reem’s lifeless body, holding her earring pinned to his chest.
“She was my ruh-el-ruh,” he said, the essence of my soul.
The haunting image joined a growing archive of unbearable civilian testimony, family photos turned into evidence.
Khaled Nabhan: ‘The soul of my soul’
Nabhan became a familiar face of Gaza’s grief after an Israeli airstrike killed his grandchildren.
Reem and Tareq had been inseparable from their grandfather. In a video, Nabhan fixed Tareq’s hair and photographed the bodies of the two children as they lay beneath white shrouds, waiting to be buried.
“We were inseparable. I loved her more than my soul,” he said after Reem’s killing.
The man who had lost his grandchildren did not leave the streets of Gaza after their killing.
Nabhan began appearing among displaced Palestinians, helping distribute food and assisting people who had lost their homes. He spoke about his own family’s losses while trying to help others endure theirs.
He also spoke of further Israeli attacks on his relatives, including the bombing of his brother’s home.
Then, in December 2024, Israel killed him. An Israeli airstrike struck a home belonging to the Abu Hajar family in Nuseirat refugee camp in central Gaza. Nabhan was among those killed.
In August 2022, 13-year-old Awni Eldous posted a video thanking his viewers for helping his channel reach 1,000 subscribers. Beaming at the camera, he spoke excitedly about his ambition to reach 100,000 subscribers, then 500,000, 1 million and, eventually, 10 million.
“I am Awni Eldous, a Palestinian from Gaza. I am 12 years old,” he said.
“The goal of this channel is to reach 100,000 subscribers. And 500,000, then 1 million, and God willing to reach 10 million subscribers with your support and love.”
More than a year later, in late October 2023, an Israeli airstrike struck Awni’s home in northern Gaza, killing him and his entire family.
Awni’s fascination with computers was inspired by his father, a computer engineer. He would imitate his father by taking apart laptops and trying to put them back together.
Photos shared on the Facebook page of his school, Safad Primary School (A) for boys, show him standing before a blackboard with a motherboard in his hands, teaching other students about computer technology as part of the Little Teachers Initiative.
His relatives affectionately called him “Engineer Awni” because of his love for computers.
His aunt, Ala’a, said Awni looked up to YouTubers who had turned their hobbies into careers. “He wanted to be like them – to have followers and fans.”
Awni’s channel now has 1.72 million subscribers. He was killed with his family at a time when he was still building the future he had described in his videos.
The call lasted over three hours. Hind, trapped in her family’s car under Israeli fire, was talking to the Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) team.
Her family lay motionless beside her. “Please come take me,” she whispered to the PRCS dispatcher. “It’s getting dark and I am afraid of the dark.”
Hind’s voice, recorded and circulated worldwide, became one of the most haunting records of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. The PRCS rescue team sent to reach her was itself targeted by Israel and killed before arrival.
Her story would later be immortalised in The Voice of Hind Rajab, a docudrama that won the Silver Lion award and received a record 23-minute standing ovation at its premiere.
In May 2024, pro-Palestine student protestors at Columbia University renamed Hamilton Hall to “Hind’s Hall”, carrying her name into the global protest movement against genocide.
A human rights body was also named after her – Hind Rajab Foundation – which documents Israeli war crimes in Gaza and exposes the war criminals behind those crimes.
Ibrahim Hamed Hussein al-Astal: Professor who prayed for Gaza
A day after Israel launched its war on Gaza on October 7, 2023, Professor Ibrahim Hamed Hussein al-Astal took to Facebook with a prayer for his city and its people.
“Oh God, Lord of the worlds, protect us from troubles, and protect Gaza and its people, and be our aid, O God, sustain it with Your help,” he wrote on October 8.
Fifteen days later, an Israeli airstrike hit his home in Gaza City, killing the 62-year-old professor, his wife Nadia Yassin Hussein al-Astal and their two daughters.
A total of 87 members of Al-Astal’s extended family were killed in the strikes.
For years, Al-Astal had been part of Gaza’s academic life. He served as dean of the Faculty of Education at the Islamic University of Gaza and taught and researched education, including curriculum and mathematics teaching methods.
He earned his PhD in 1996 and later taught at universities in the United Arab Emirates before returning to Gaza and joining the Islamic University. He became head of the Curriculum and Teaching Methods department and was appointed dean in 2019.
His work was centred on education and the students who would shape Gaza’s future.
Mohammed Barakat was preparing for the pre-dawn meal on the first day of Ramadan when an Israeli airstrike hit his family home in Khan Younis.
The Israeli attack killed the Palestinian football star and several members of his family.
Barakat had represented Palestine’s national football team and played as a striker and captain for Khan Younis Youth Club, where he became one of Gaza’s best-known footballers. He began his career in 2015 and quickly became a familiar name among football fans in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
Supporters called him “the legend of Khan Younis.”
Over the course of his career, the 39-year-old scored 114 goals, including for several clubs in the occupied West Bank and Jordan, among them Al-Wehdat, as well as Saudi Arabia’s Al-Shoala.
Barakat, regarded as Gaza’s first centurion of goals and one of the besieged territory’s top scorers, also represented the Palestinian national team, making three appearances, and played for Ahly Gaza in the local league.
His final goal came on August 18, 2023, in a 1–1 draw against Shujayea Club at Yarmouk Stadium in Gaza City, during the second week of the Palestinian Premier League.
Ansar Allah supporters wave Palestinian flags during weekly rally against the US and the Israel regime in Sanaa, Yemen, Friday, July 11, 2025 (AP Photo/Osamah Abedulrahman)
The Yemeni Armed Forces’ Chief of the General Staff, Yousef al-Madani, tells the Al-Qassam and Al-Quds Brigades that Sanaa will stand with them in any new escalation.
Yemen’s Chief of the General Staff, Major General Youssef al-Madani, has pledged that Sanaa will stand with the Palestinian Resistance in any new phase of escalation, in two messages sent to the Al-Qassam and Al-Quds Brigades on the third anniversary of the Al-Aqsa Flood operation.
In his message to Al-Qassam, the military wing of Hamas, al-Madani said, “We are with you until victory, and our battle continues until Al-Aqsa and the site of the Prophet’s night journey are liberated.”
He said free people across the Ummah have joined the effort to support Gaza, with Yemen setting a “powerful lesson” in how to do so. Yemen, he added, has put its strategic location and all of its resources at the service of the Palestinian cause.
“Neither aggression, nor siege, nor wounds will deter us from supporting Palestine and Gaza,” al-Madani affirmed, stressing that Yemen stands with the Palestinian people and by their side in any new phase of escalation.
Al-Aqsa Flood drew the lines
Al-Madani said October 7 “revealed the truth” and put people and their positions to the test. The Al-Aqsa Flood, he added, dealt a decisive blow to the normalization project and drew a clear line between the Resistance front and the normalization front.
In his separate message to the Al-Quds Brigades, the military wing of the Islamic Jihad movement, al-Madani asserted that Gaza’s fighters “wrote the greatest epic” on October 7 and inflicted the biggest defeat the enemy has ever suffered.
He added that the United States, for its part, emerged defeated from its confrontation with Yemen.
He noted that the Yemeni people have done their Islamic duty since the Al-Aqsa Flood “to the fullest extent possible and at every level.” The military operations in support of Gaza, he stressed, “were carried out in large numbers and did not stop until the night the ceasefire was announced.”
Sayyed al-Houthi explained that Yemen’s stance was “the highest level the Yemeni people could offer.” He revealed that Saudi Arabia sought to cooperate with “Israel” from the start of Yemen’s operations in support of the Palestinian people, and took part in interception operations “even outside its airspace and over the sea.”
Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem stressed on Tuesday, October 6, 2026, that the liberation of southern Lebanon is “before our eyes”, and ‘Israel’ will not be able to remain in the south, even if it takes some time.
“This Resistance, which has stood steadfast, has been able to present a legend of steadfastness.”
Addressing a ceremony for launching the Foundation for the Preservation and Dissemination of Legacy of late Hezbollah S.G. Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, Sheikh Qassem said, “The steadfastness of the Resistance is among the blessings of the Master of the Ummah’s Martyrs and his guidance, as well as of this dear and pure people. We can only be a Resistance as long as aggression exists.”
“The solution begins with the enemy leaving in humiliation, along with the American who supports it with all his might in order to attack our region,” His Eminence added, “As for internal Lebanese affairs, we are ready to cooperate, but without any dictates from abroad.”
Wars unfold in rounds, but the final round belongs to the people of the land and the truth, and to those who have followed the path of the mujahideen and martyrs, Sheikh Qassem stressed.
Sheikh Qassem saluted the dear Iraqi people, their religious authority, leadership, and the Popular Mobilization Forces [Al Hashd Al Shaabi], because “they succeeded in expelling the American occupier from Iraq, and through their sacrifices and steadfastness, they were able to drive the American tyrant out of their country”.
He added: “Therefore, whether the one seeking to control Iraq is the Takfiri [forces], or the arrogant and colonial power seeking to dominate Iraq, the Iraqi people are, by the grace of Almighty God, capable of expelling the occupiers, whoever they may be and whatever their orientations, so that Iraq can remain independent, dignified, and strong.”
“The sacrifices of the Palestinian people are immense, and the Israeli, American, and Western injustice is extraordinary and unnatural. But given the nobility of this people and its sacrifices, it must emerge victorious,” Sheikh Qassem said, “I pray to Allah Almighty to grant them success in occupied Palestine, in Gaza, the West Bank, and Al-Quds, so that they may attain the highest ranks and positions, and that they may be liberated and liberate.”
Speaking on the occasion of the launch ceremony of the Foundation for the Preservation and Dissemination of the Heritage of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Sheikh Qassem said: “Today, we gather under the auspices of the memory of the two noble martyrs, the two esteemed Sayyeds: the Master of the Martyrs of the Ummah, Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, may God Almighty have mercy upon him, and the Hashemite Sayyed, may God Almighty have mercy upon him, as well as the righteous martyrs, to launch this foundation, which will be dedicated to preserving the works and heritage of the supreme martyr, Sayyed Hassan, may God Almighty have mercy upon him. Today, we announce the launch of the Foundation for the Preservation and Dissemination of the Heritage of the Master of the Martyrs of the Ummah, Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, may God Almighty have mercy upon him.”
He continued: “This foundation was established by the Shura Council of Hezbollah and is supervised by the Secretary-General. It has a comprehensive organizational structure aimed at preserving the heritage presented by the Master of the Martyrs of the Ummah and making use of it in all cultural, social, educational, and political fields.”
He added: “This vast heritage filled the public sphere throughout the years of his life, which he devoted to obedience to Almighty God and to Islamic, jihadist, national, patriotic, and liberation work at the level of Lebanon and, indeed, at the level of the entire region.”
Sheikh Qassem noted that “Hezbollah was established in 1982, and His Eminence Sayyed Hasan, may God Almighty have mercy upon him, assumed the Secretary-Generalship in succession to the Master of the Martyrs of the Resistance, Sayyed Abbas al-Moussawi, may God Almighty have mercy upon him, in 1992, ten years after the establishment of the party.”
He explained: “The establishment had its foundations, its principles, and its men, and Sayyed Hassan was one of the men of the founding generation.”
He continued: “However, from 1992 until his martyrdom—31 years—he worked to consolidate the foundations of the Resistance, the foundations of this authentic thought, and the foundations of an orientation that would govern and influence future generations in pursuit of liberation, dignity, honor, and a virtuous and happy life in obedience to Almighty God.”
Sheikh Qassem said: “We are dealing with a very vast heritage: words, speeches, meetings, dialogues, meeting minutes, and an oral memory accumulated over this long period spanning decades. We need to collect and archive this material and make it available to researchers and the public through social media platforms, as well as through publications, books, and various works. It should also serve as material for analysis by institutions and researchers at universities and in different fields, so that they may benefit from the abundance of material presented at the intellectual and cultural levels, as well as at the political and practical levels.”
He stressed: “We are dealing with a great treasure that must be collected and made available to the public, researchers, and future generations. This is why the Foundation for the Preservation and Dissemination of the Heritage of the Master of the Martyrs of the Ummah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, may God Almighty have mercy upon him, has been launched.”
Sheikh Qassem added: “On this occasion, I would like to mention some of the themes that constitute the pillars of this heritage and the foundations of this great structure, namely the structure of Hezbollah and the Resistance’s orientation in Lebanon and our region.
“First: One of the constants upon which he worked throughout this entire period was adherence to Islam and carrying the Islamic approach—the authentic Muhammadan Islam, which is concerned with cultivating the human being and providing him with a methodology that sets his life right and grants him reward in the Hereafter. Almighty God says: ‘Indeed, the religion in the sight of Allah is Islam.’ Islam excels through its methodology, its cultivation, its formation of the human being, its virtues and noble qualities, its construction of dignity, and its establishment of a happy life in this world and the Hereafter. This requires us to work according to it and to raise generations upon this great and righteous path.”
“Throughout that entire period, His Eminence Sayyed worked to highlight the concepts, ideas, and beliefs of Islam, as well as guidance and education based on Islam and the general policies upon which Islam is founded. This is extremely important, so that we understand that he was one of those who worked throughout history to preserve this approach and present it to humanity in a contemporary manner that remains consistent with the constants of this religion.”
“The second theme is education in jihad, and this is a fundamental point. Jihad is an essential principle and a foundation. In order to protect our generations, our land, our rights, and our dignity, we must struggle against the enemies, and we must confront those enemies who commit aggression for no reason other than domination and oppression, as is the case with America and Israel, as well as all enemies and colonizers who have come throughout history and may come in the future. Jihad is a fundamental principle and must be firmly established.”
“One of His Eminence the Sayyed’s distinguishing features was his strong emphasis, when addressing the issue of jihad, on the Karbala and Ashura dimension and on the leadership of Imam Hussein, peace be upon him, the undisputed Master of the Martyrs. The path embodied by Imam Hussein, peace be upon him, is the path of sacrifice in its highest form, a path that ensures the steadfastness of faith, the steadfastness of rights, and the steadfastness of the free and dignified human being.
“Likewise, in Ashura, there was Lady Zaynab, peace be upon her, who carried the banner and complemented the path of Imam Hussein, peace be upon him, within a system connected to the presence of family members, relatives, friends, and believers, conveying the message that the entire society is called upon to follow the path of Imam Hussein, peace be upon him.”
“The Master of the Martyrs of the Ummah excelled in conveying the Hussaini concept to the people and in emphasizing the commemoration of Ashura. In any case, Imam Khomeini, may God sanctify his soul, said: ‘Everything we have is from Ashura.’ The practical application of this statement was carried out by His Eminence, the Master of the Martyrs of the Ummah, Sayyed Hassan, who worked not only during the days of Ashura but continuously to encourage jihad, foster a culture of martyrdom, and educate the Ummah.”
“Thus, the path of jihad is an integrated path. We need to collect these themes and become acquainted with them, as well as with the details that he presented and upon which he educated people directly throughout these decades. This enabled us to experience in practice the true strength needed to confront challenges.
“Third: Wilayah. The third theme is wilayah. Wilayah is not something newly invented; it is a foundation and one of the principles of religion: ‘Indeed, your wali is only Allah, His Messenger, and those who believe—those who establish prayer and give zakat while bowing. And whoever takes Allah, His Messenger, and those who believe as his wali, then indeed the party of Allah will be victorious.’
“This wilayah extends from Allah to the Prophet, to Amir al-Mu’minin Ali, peace be upon him, to the Imams, peace and blessings be upon them all, to the authority of the Islamic jurist in our time, and ultimately to the handing over of the banner to Imam al-Mahdi, may God hasten his noble reappearance.”
“His emphasis on wilayah was part of this faith and part of his sincerity toward Almighty God. His emphasis on allegiance to Imam Khomeini, may God sanctify his soul, and then to Imam Khamenei, may God sanctify his soul, was an inseparable part of this integrated system, which falls under the banner of: ‘Indeed, the religion in the sight of Allah is Islam.’ It has also been proven through practical experience that this wilayah provides momentum, strength, and capability.”
“The fourth theme is the connection with Imam al-Mahdi, may God hasten his noble reappearance. His Eminence the Sayyed always spoke about the connection with Imam al-Mahdi and the Mahdist banner, and about being among the soldiers of Imam al-Mahdi, may God hasten his noble reappearance. Almighty God says: ‘And We desired to bestow favor upon those who were oppressed in the land and make them leaders and make them inheritors.’ This is one of the interpretations concerning the reappearance of Imam al-Mahdi, may God hasten his noble reappearance, and the leadership of victory at the level of humanity and the establishment of justice throughout the earth.”
“Our Sayyed always emphasized that we are living in the era of waiting, and that waiting means wilayah toward Imam al-Mahdi, may God hasten his noble reappearance; confidence in the overwhelming victory that will encompass the world; confidence in the justice that will spread throughout the world; and belief in the reappearance of the Proof, which the Lord of the Worlds, the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, and the Imams have promised us. This, therefore, is a fundamental matter. We need to understand the steps upon which he built his approach and through which he mobilized people.”
“The fifth theme is Islamic unity. He was extremely keen on unity between Sunnis and Shiites, as well as unity within the Shiite community, and on extending this unity to the national and broader human levels. This education and approach that he promoted was what created this broad popular support. Do you not notice how Muslims in different parts of the world love him, feel attached to him, and believe in his path and orientations? This is because he addressed them—he addressed their minds and their hearts—and appealed to sound principles.”
“Likewise, free people around the world viewed him in a positive light because he also stood with the oppressed, and this is an inseparable part of faith.
“At the domestic level, he was a patriot par excellence, standing for coexistence, the Taif Agreement, national unity, and for us to stand together: the Army, the people, and the Resistance. This is his famous formula through which he sought to make us all one bloc, one united body, in confronting external enemies, particularly the occupying and aggressor Israeli enemy that has long targeted our region. These are matters that require us to examine them and produce statements, positions, and analyses that affirm this principle.”
“The sixth and final matter in my discussion of these themes is defense and resistance. If we want to define resistance in the modern era, we can say that the first resistance figure is His Eminence Sayyed Hasan, may God Almighty have mercy upon him. Why? Because he laid its foundations, mobilized people on its basis, and worked with all resistance fighters throughout the world to create unity, connection, and interaction.
“He adopted the Resistance as a duty and a project from Imam Khomeini, may God sanctify his soul, and then from Imam Khamenei, may God sanctify his soul, and from Imam Musa al-Sadr, may God return him and his two brothers safely. In building and establishing this path, he followed the approach of Sheikh Ragheb Harb and Sayyed Abbas al-Moussawi.”
“All these are resistance paths that lead to consolidating determination, strength, and will, while ensuring the necessary means and capabilities. We must not forget in this regard the major role played by the martyred commander Hajj Qassem Soleimani, who was highly capable, influential, and a major source of support throughout the region.”
“We need to study this heritage and become acquainted with it.”
Hezbollah Secretary-General says the war has rounds, asserting that the last round “belongs to the people of the land.”
The liberation of southern Lebanon is within sight, Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem stated on Tuesday, stressing that the Israeli occupation would not be able to remain in southern Lebanon indefinitely, no matter how much time passes.
Speaking at the inauguration of an institution dedicated to preserving and publishing the legacy of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Sheikh Qassem said “Israel” will not be able to remain in southern Lebanon “even after a while,” adding, “Do not ask us what we will do because we cannot but be a resistance as long as this enemy exists.”
He credited the Resistance’s endurance, which he emphasized had “created a legend of steadfastness,” to the guidance of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and the resilience of the Lebanese people.
“We can be nothing but a resistance as long as the aggression continues,” Sheikh Qassem stressed, adding that “the solution begins when the enemy is forced to withdraw in defeat, along with the United States, which supports it with all its might and enables its aggression against our region.”
“The war has rounds, but the last round belongs to the people of the land and the rightful cause and to whosoever followed the path of the mujahideen and martyrs,” the Resistance leader asserted.
Sheikh Qassem hails Iraq, rejects US interference
Sheikh Qassem saluted the Iraqi people, their religious authority, leadership, and the Popular Mobilization Forces, saying they had succeeded in expelling the US occupier from Iraq.
On Lebanon’s internal affairs, he said Hezbollah is prepared to address domestic matters away from any US interference.
“We are ready to handle internal matters on the basis of the Constitution and laws and without American interventions,” Sheikh Qassem stated.
Hezbollah launches institution dedicated to legacy of Sayyed Nasrallah
On Tuesday, Sheikh Qassem announced the launch of an institution dedicated to preserving and publishing the legacy of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, saying the institution’s aim is to preserve Sayyed Hassan’s “immense legacy” and make its “vast body of material available to the public, researchers, and future generations.”
He added that the “institution was approved by Hezbollah’s Shura Council and operates under the supervision of the Secretary-General through a comprehensive organizational structure.”
Preserving Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s legacy
Sheikh Qassem highlighted Islam as one of the core principles that guided Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, particularly its teachings on nurturing the individual and providing a framework for life based on sound principles.
He also emphasized Sayyed Nasrallah’s commitment to cultivating a spirit of jihad, particularly through Karbala and Ashura.
Hezbollah’s leader stressed that the martyred Sayyed “excelled in conveying the Hussaini ethos to the people and placed great importance on preserving the memory and traditions of Ashura.”
‘Israel’ maintains ceasefire violations
Sheikh Qassem’s remarks come as Israeli occupation forces continue to carry out attacks and demolitions in southern Lebanon, underscoring the violations that persist despite the ceasefire agreement.
The daily attacks are part of persistent, unabated Israeli violations of the ceasefire agreement, with the Israeli military carrying out demolitions, destruction, and bulldozing operations inside occupied southern villages despite the Lebanese government reaching an agreement with “Israel” under US auspices.
Commander of the Islamic Republic of Iran Army Major General Amir Hatami
Commander of the Islamic Republic of Iran Army Major General Amir Hatami has warned that the Iranian Armed Forces will deliver a crushing response to any renewed hostile action, declaring that Iran remains fully prepared and vigilant.
Hatami made the remarks during a visit to Army units stationed in Fars Province, where he reviewed the personnel’s combat morale, equipment readiness and defensive capabilities.
Referring to the Armed Forces’ achievements in the recent US-Israeli war against Iran, the Army chief said that although war causes damage, what matters is its outcome, which, rather than surrender, brought honor and pride to the country.
He maintained that the war has not yet ended, saying the enemy has turned to other methods after failing on the military battlefield.
“After failing on the military battlefield, the enemy has resorted to other methods and, through sanctions and economic pressure, is trying to put the people under pressure, while at the same time pursuing many measures to create insecurity and unrest,” Hatami said.
“The Armed Forces, while maintaining readiness and vigilance, will deliver a crushing response to the enemy’s threats if it makes another mistake,” he added.
Hatami also described war as an arena of resilience, saying the side capable of demonstrating greater resistance and resilience would ultimately prevail.
“We consider ourselves to be on the path of defending the truth, trust in divine promises, and with this belief, we will continue the path of confronting the enemy and defending the country,” he said.
The US and the Israeli regime waged their first criminal war against Iran, which lasted 12 days, in June 2025. Their second aggression began on February 28, 2026, and came to a halt in early April after 40 days.
In both wars, Iran’s resistance and successful retaliatory operations forced the aggressors to accept a ceasefire.
Iran has also maintained a tight grip on the Strait of Hormuz since the early days of the second imposed war.
In July, the US conducted waves of deadly air raids on Iran and imposed a naval blockade of the country in violation of the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Islamic Republic, signed on June 17, to end the war.
In response, the Iranian Armed Forces launched devastating strikes against strategic American targets across West Asia and declared the Strait of Hormuz closed to all traffic.
Footage shows Yemeni strikes on Saudi concentrations in Ras al-Arah with several locally made ballidtic missles on October 5, 2026 (Yemeni mediavia Telegram)
Yemeni Armed Forces remain in Mokha and Bab al-Mandab, Yemeni field sources confirmed to Al Mayadeen on Monday, stressing that no breaches have been reported in the area.
Al Mayadeen’s bureau chief, citing sources, asserted that Saudi-backed forces control neither Mokha nor Bab al-Mandab or the surrounding areas.
The sources said Saudi-backed forces managed to make only a limited advance in al-Mudarabah, near Bab al-Mandab, where they were immediately targeted.
Al Mayadeen’s bureau chief also reported that the Yemeni Armed Forces are pressing ahead in Taiz governorate. He added that they expect further advances along the western coast under Saudi cover and are determined to strike them.
Al-Zubaidi: Claims of gains are psychological warfare
Brigadier General Abdul Ghani al-Zubaidi, a Sanaa-based expert in military and political affairs, told Al Mayadeen that fighting remains concentrated in an area bordering Dhubab. He noted the Saudi-aligned forces have made no gains on the ground and that claims otherwise amount to “media exaggeration and psychological warfare.”
Meanwhile, Iranian Professor Mohammad Marandi, citing a well-informed source, told Al Mayadeen that the news coming out of Yemen is “very good”, dismissing what some outlets have reported as “nothing more than a propaganda campaign.”
“We must not be fooled by what media outlets affiliated with the region’s regimes are saying about Yemen,” he added.
Similarly, Brigadier General Mujib Shamsan, a Sanaa-based political and military affairs expert, told Al Mayadeen that the Saudi-backed forces “fled as the Yemeni Armed Forces advanced,” just 48 hours after operations began on the western coast.
20+ strikes near Ras al-‘Arah
In a related development, the Yemeni Armed Forces carried out more than 20 strikes on Saudi troop concentrations between Ras al-Arah and al-Suqaya, a military source told Saba News Agency.
The strikes left dozens of forces killed or wounded and set a number of vehicles ablaze, the source said, adding that many of the wounded were taken to hospitals in Aden and Lahij.
The source also dismissed coverage by Saudi-aligned channels as “fake news” that points to their failure, accusing them of feeding their audiences “invented victories”. They added that the Yemeni Armed Forces are continuing to drive Saudi concentrations out of districts across Taiz governorate.
Yemeni forces advance in Taiz
Earlier on Monday, a senior military source told Al Mayadeen that the YAF have taken control of more than 2,000 square kilometers in Taiz governorate and expelled Saudi-backed forces from al-Ma’afer and al-Mawasit districts. The source said Yemeni forces reached Rashad al-Alimi’s residence and warned that any Saudi military buildup would be targeted wherever it takes place.
Saudi Arabia has escalated its aggression, bombing civilian infrastructure in Sanaa, Saada, Taiz, Hajjah, and Marib governorates and leaving civilians dead and wounded, according to Al Mayadeen’s correspondent.
Mohammad Abdul Salam, head of Sanaa’s negotiating delegation, said Monday that Riyadh was now stepping to the forefront of the aggression after the defeats suffered by the forces it mobilized, and that Saudi Arabia must bear all the consequences.
In response, the Yemeni Armed Forces continue to target vital facilities inside Saudi Arabia and Saudi military concentrations on Yemeni territory.
Iranian profesesor of English literature Orrientalism at the University of Tehran Mohammad Marandi and former US Pentagon official Mickael Maalouf (Al Mayadeen)
Michael Maalouf and Mohammad Marandi warn that a new Iran war could escalate rapidly, with US forces, “Israel”, NATO, and regional allies facing wider conflict.
“Israel” may act militarily against Iran before the November US elections and force Washington into a war it is committed to backing, Michael Maalouf, a former US government official, said, while University of Tehran professor Mohammad Marandi stated that Iran has adjusted to a wartime economy and will respond far more assertively to any new aggression.
On Al Mayadeen‘s The Great Standoff: Iran and the World, Maalouf said Trump “is being his usual hyperbolic self,” noting that US president has threatened “the annihilation, his words, of an entire civilization” while speaking of peace as close at hand.
Maalouf argued that Trump should return to the MOU he signed and is obliged to abide by it, but has chosen not to, attributing that choice to domestic pressure from the Israeli lobby within the United States, which is pushing a hardline approach.
“The usual thinking these days around here is that, well, he may do something militarily after the November elections,” Maalouf stated, noting that Trump’s own concern is more immediate.
Elections stand behind ‘Israel’ acting on its own
“Israel may do something on its own simply because they have their own elections come in October,” Maalouf said, adding that by late October, Netanyahu must show his people he is living up to what he promised in order to stay in office.
Maalouf explained that Netanyahu “May instigate something even before Donald Trump, which will force Donald Trump then to go militarily to back him up,” Maalouf continued, emphasizing that Washington is too committed to “Israel” at this point to pull out.
He further noted that many US assets are now based in “Israel” because most Gulf bases “have been eliminated or are useless.” With nothing new on the table, Trump refuses what he agreed to, and Maalouf does not see Iran backing off those points.
“I think that we’re on a collision course,” he stated, adding that it could come sooner than expected and “could be from Israel itself.”
NATO involvement would make Europe a target
Should European states get involved as NATO Secretary General Rutte suggested, Maalouf said, it “opens up them to attack.”
“If they were to attack and respond from their bases and let the United States use the bases, yeah, they are just as susceptible as a co-belligerent as the United States and Israel are themselves.”
Maalouf noted that the United States is reaching a realization that it is being pushed back by Iran’s increased military capabilities, which is why ships are being moved further out. Another carrier may bring the total to three strike groups, he said, but they will be “stuck out in the middle of nowhere,” with no ports or facilities to reload or restock.
Given Iran’s enhanced missile capabilities, Maalouf went on to explain that, “it’s very clear that they might be capable of hitting the aircraft carriers and strike groups as far away as Diego Garcia.” If so, US naval potential is very limited, he argued, since even launching aircraft would require refueling that puts those aircraft and the refuelers in jeopardy.
“I just don’t see any happy ending to this scenario as it’s now coming along,” he added.
Trump, Hegseth are offering no alternative
Maalouf said that Trump and his Secretary of War “are offering no alternatives,” while the Secretary of Treasury wants greater economic hardships, pointing to “the rise of a multipolar world order that just is going to reject working with the United States or feel pressured any longer,” because Iran has stood up to the United States over time.
This frustrates Trump’s calculations, Maalouf argued, since “he doesn’t have an easy way.”
On Europe, he said, “I don’t know what Route is talking about, frankly, when it comes to assisting the United States.”
Maalouf emphasized that Europe “never got involved when their own interests were involved and when the Strait of Hormuz was shut down,” despite depending on the strait more than the United States does. Their publics would likely be outraged at being drawn into further crises while their economies suffer from the Ukrainian war, he added.
He further clarified that involvement “also then thereby makes them targets,” since Iran “does have a missile capability to hit even targets in Europe.” Rutte, he said, “is just speaking out of, I think, just out of the corner of his mouth.”
Wartime production and shortages
Maalouf agreed that moving from a consumer economy to wartime production takes time and that the switchover has been difficult, with factories slow to reach production.
He also pointed to difficulties in obtaining components, noting that “every state in the United States has some aspect of production to contribute to that wartime production.” Delivery times, he added, are “much longer now,” while acquiring components takes longer and costs far more.
As an example, he cited limited supplies of some gasoline octanes for everyday US consumers and sky-high diesel costs that have driven many companies out of business. The disruption, he noted, “has really messed up the complete supply cycle.”
Rebuilding missiles could take years, Maalouf stated, while some may already be obsolete. The same problem applies to THAAD and Patriot systems, which “take years to rebuild, and we’re already very critically short in terms of supply,” including for European countries that have depended on US supplies.
Against that backdrop, Maalouf questioned Europe’s ability to sustain a war, saying, “I don’t see how they could conceivably go to war or fight a war,” since Europe is not sending supplies to Ukraine any longer and could not use limited stocks against Iran.
While “Pete Hegseth may brag about how completely capable the United States is,” Maalouf said, “the reality is, is that we are, the United States is very critically short on supply.”
Sophisticated systems take a very long time to produce and even longer to field, he added and restocking would also be limited because Iran can keep ships out of the area if they appear headed for use against Iran.
Direct action against Yemen will be costly, futile
Maalouf said direct military action against Yemen, which has been tried unsuccessfully before, “will just cost them the very limited stocks and supplies, stockpiles that they have of weapons.” The Yemenis, he added, “have shown a very capable way of surviving previous US, direct US attacks. And they are very mobile.”
He noted that even the Saudis are struggling against the Yemenis, while their supplies remain limited because they must come from the United States.
According to Maalouf, Yemen has demonstrated a strong ability to wage conflict against Saudi Arabia, shut down the Bab al-Mandab Strait, extend the conflict into the region, and withstand attacks from the Saudi-backed government of Yemen.
The Ansar Allah group is showing a tremendous capability and “a flexibility,” Maalouf stated, while noting that it has again targeted Aramco and pipelines, with a major impact on Saudi Arabia’s future economic capabilities that “could be destroyed entirely.”
For its part, the United States has chosen not to get involved, Maalouf said, arguing that it would rapidly run out of equipment and ammunition while also wanting to fight Iran.
He pointed to “a limitation that I think the American people have now begun to realize is reaching a very serious state,” with discussion already that the United States “has lost the conflict, the war in the Middle East, and has had to withdraw as a consequence.” Yemen, he added, “is holding its own.”
Marandi says Iran has prepared for a new round of warfare
“Fundamentally speaking, as you know as well as I, nothing has really changed,” Marandi said. Iran “has prepared itself for a new round of warfare” and “adjusted its economy to a wartime economy to make sure that it is prepared for a long war.”
As part of that preparation, the government has given the armed forces an exceptionally large budget for research and development, while also expanding underground missile and drone bases and other capabilities, Marandi explained.
Marandi pointed out that “the Iranians continue to say that we are willing to negotiate, but the negotiations must lead to the implementation of the MOU.”
That memorandum includes Article 1, which, Marandi noted, “means that the entire region must have peace.” Achieving that would require the Zionist regime to “end its occupation and end its genocide,” while other articles address Iranian stolen assets, sanctions, and other matters between Iran and the United States.
For now, however, Marandi sees little sign of a change in Washington. “We don’t see any fundamental shift in Washington, no major move,” he stated. Instead, “the expectation is that we may be moving or we will quite possibly be moving towards another round of US-Zionist aggression or US aggression against the people of Iran.”
Any such confrontation would be met with a different Iranian response, he warned: “But this time around, the Iranians are going to behave very differently. They’re going to be far more assertive in their response.”
The consequences would also extend to US coalition partners in the region. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and the Emirates, Marandi argued, “all of them will pay heavily because they are co-belligerents.”
He said those governments are “guilty of slaughtering Iranian children and Iranian citizens” and said they are already deeply vulnerable after seven months of war they helped impose on Iran. Meanwhile, Yemen’s forces and Ansar Allah “are imposing their will on the Saudi regime and its proxies,” he noted.
These governments therefore face a more precarious position if Washington escalates, in Marandi’s assessment. “It is not an ideal time for these regimes because if the United States escalates, these regimes are already much more fragile than they were before.”
He added: “They’ve always been fragile regimes, and this could ultimately lead to their collapse. So they should be very careful about the road that they tread upon.”
Iran is also continuing to upgrade its missile systems, particularly in terms of range and maneuverability. Marandi described those improvements as “obviously going to be very critical in the next war if that happens, which is quite likely.”
Aggression on Iran could happen after Israeli elections
Marandi asserted that Iran is prepared, explaining that Iranian missiles will strike not only US targets across the region but also bases hosting US jets or assets further away, with the US Navy a target as well. “If the war escalates, the Iranians are going to escalate,” he said, and if the United States targets Iranian infrastructure, then “all bets are off.”
Iran “will obviously destroy the infrastructure of the regimes that assist the United States,” he continued, which would collapse the global economy because those regimes would collapse. Additionally, Iran will target US naval ships, aircraft carriers, and bases hosting US forces wherever they may be if Washington chooses that road, Marandi said.
On the other hand, Marandi said that the United States may launch an all-out genocidal war, which Trump has threatened, or carry out more limited strikes. Even then, the NATO head has gloated that “5,000 flights took off from European airports to assist the United States in bombing Iran,” making the Europeans complicit, Marandi said.
Marandi cautioned that if Iran feels it necessary to strike US assets in European countries, “it will do so,” noting Iran has told Bulgaria it risks attack for hosting US planes and that those planes were ultimately withdrawn. “Iran has countless missiles. The number of Iranian missiles are enough to last for years,” Marandi stated.
Yemen also has very large numbers of missiles and drones that can last a long time, he said, so “Iran and Yemen have more than enough to continue fighting for the years to come. So the Americans should take all of this very seriously.”
Economic pressure runs both ways
Marandi said the President’s office cited personal reasons for the resignation of a ministry figure, with details expected to emerge in the coming days. He noted there were differences with others in the ministry, and the appointment had been controversial from the start, with many in the ministry welcoming the change.
“The economic situation in Iran is difficult, but the Iranians are also imposing a difficult situation on the United States and its partners,” Marandi said. Strikes on tankers violating Iran’s rules are increasing daily in the Strait of Hormuz, and the amount of oil leaving the strait has decreased significantly, he noted.
A tanker was also struck off Yemen’s coast, Marandi added, saying “the news is not good for the United States and its allies.”
Marandi noted that oil leaving the strait on small ships costs about $20 a barrel, meaning that what reaches global markets arrives at great cost even before insurance is counted.
Marandi argued that “while the United States is strangling, and the United States and its partners in this war have been trying to strangle Iran, the Iranians are strangling the United States and its partners back.”
The countries most at risk of collapse, he said, are “US proxies in the region”, particularly those dependent almost entirely on oil and gas, which “will not be sustainable” if the situation continues.
With the Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Kuwait holding stocks and bonds in the United States, Marandi doubts Washington will allow them to sell those assets, meaning their economic situation will deteriorate further.
Saudi Arabia’s bombing of Sana’a International Airport was “foolish behavior” against Yemen’s people, Marandi said, adding that Riyadh “is now being badly mauled by Yemen.”
Iran’s economic situation remains difficult, but the pressure has not changed Tehran’s determination to resist. “The United States intends to make ordinary people suffer,” Marandi said, “the Iranians know that they have no option but to resist, and resist they will.”
Marandi contrasts Iranian and US military production
“One thing that we have to keep in mind is that the Iranian military industry is designed very differently from that of the United States,” Marandi said, adding that the same is true of Russia and China.
Marandi explained that in Iran, the state controls industry and may use the private sector but determines the path forward. “In other words, it is the state that controls the capital. In the United States, it’s the capital that controls the state,” including the military industry.
“US weapon systems are far too expensive and do not meet the practical needs of the armed forces because profit is prioritized,” Marandi argued.
He pointed to the resulting mismatch in US military production, saying many systems, ships, and planes “are not necessarily useful for today’s warfare or tomorrow’s warfare, but they make a lot of money for the private industries.” Iran, by contrast, has expanded its missile program to meet the needs of its armed forces.
“So Iranian missiles are much cheaper. They’re much larger in number. They are much more swiftly produced,” Marandi stated.
Despite spending infinitely more on defense, the United States “is incapable of fighting this sort of war with Iran,” he said, while also being overstretched by Ukraine and its confrontation with China. “The Iranians take advantage of that, and they’ve taught the American government, the Trump regime, a major lesson during the last seven months,” Marandi added.
Yemen victories bad news for ‘Israel’: Marandi
The victories of Ansar Allah and Yemen’s forces and government are “very, very welcome news” and “major victories of the Yemeni people” that should give hope across the region, Marandi stated.
Marandi asserted the developments are a broader setback for “Israel” and the United States. “This is very bad news for the Zionist regime. It’s very bad news for the United States, and it’s good for the people of Gaza and the people of Lebanon and, of course, for the people of Iran as well,” he continued.
In addition, Marandi recalled that the capabilities of Yemen and the resistance in Iraq are enormous, while many of Iran’s own capabilities “have been left untouched.”
The capabilities of US partners such as the Saudi regime are being degraded daily, Marandi noted, while pressure from Iran in the Strait of Hormuz is adding to the strain on other US proxies.
“None of this bodes well for the United States in the weeks and months ahead,” he concluded. “And, of course, anything that weakens the United States weakens the Israeli regime too.”
The Associated Press reports that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asked UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed to deny a report that he had warned Netanyahu of an impending Hamas operation ahead of October 7, 2023.
This screengrab shows Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi, a senior advisor to the IRGC commander-in-chief and former IRGC Navy commander, speaking in an interview with the IRIB on September 4, 2026.
A senior Iranian military adviser said the United States has withdrawn its forces more than 1,000 kilometers from Iran’s borders, describing the pullback as a direct result of Iran’s authority and the power of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Ground Force.
Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi, a senior advisor to the IRGC commander-in-chief and former Navy commander, made the remarks in a televised interview on Sunday night.
“The Americans fled and moved more than 1,000 kilometers away from our borders. This was not their choice; it was due to the authority of the Islamic Republic and the authority of the IRGC Ground Force,” Fadavi said.
He stressed that for the first time, no American vessels are present in the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz, the Sea of Oman, or even the northern Indian Ocean.
Fadavi said the Strait of Hormuz has been under Iran’s control for many months and that the United States has failed to achieve any of its objectives in the war.
“The fighters who stood against the world’s material superpowers thwarted all their goals. The enemy—the Great Satan America—has not achieved any of its objectives in this war,” he said.
He noted that ship captains crossing the southern part of the Strait of Hormuz have formally objected to the route but are forced to pass due to insurance, financial, and liability concerns.
The IRGC Navy has warned that any vessel traversing this route could be subject to Iranian naval action.
“The IRGC Navy has informed the ships that if they pass through this route, their vessels may be targeted at any point,” Fadavi said. “The captains have officially stated they are forced to pass and would never choose this route if it were up to them.”
He added that only three to four million barrels of oil per day are currently transiting an alternative route outside the area officially designated by Iran, a negligible amount compared to pre-war traffic.
US vulnerability
Addressing US military capabilities, Fadavi stated that Washington cannot assert sovereignty in the region without a physical naval presence.
“The Americans must use their vessels because you cannot exercise full sovereignty with air power. You can bomb the region every day, but unless your forces have a physical presence, you cannot impose your will,” he said.
Iranian Parliament Speaker Ghalibaf says the Strait of Hormuz won’t reopen as long as Tehran’s seven conditions are not met.
He stressed that American vessels are “100 percent vulnerable” to IRGC forces and that past attempts to enter the Strait of Hormuz were met with attacks by the IRGC Navy and Aerospace Force.
‘We target US bases, not regional countries’
Fadavi said Iran has never targeted regional countries but has struck US bases hosted on their soil.
“We did not hit Muslim countries. We hit bases that were at the disposal of Iran’s enemy—not just the enemy of Islam, but the enemy of humanity—and were located in regional countries,” he said.
He called on regional states to stand up to the United States, citing Iraq’s insistence on the withdrawal of American forces and the recent US War Department announcement that its troops have left Iraq.
Warning against ground invasion
Asked about a potential US ground invasion, Fadavi said any such move would be met with a response that targets American interests wherever they are.
“Any base belonging to the Americans, any vessel belonging to the Americans, will be targeted by the grace of God,” he said.
He also dismissed US threats, saying Washington has failed in Afghanistan, Iraq, and in its Daesh project, and will fail again.
He noted that the US military budget equals that of the entire world, yet Washington has failed to achieve its objectives due to the direct impact of the conflict on the global and American economies.
The Persian Gulf Strait Authority says three Emirati oil tankers that were struck by unknown projectiles when transiting the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday were already on the authority’s Non-Compliant List.
Fadavi said Iran and Oman, as the two littoral states of the Strait of Hormuz, have written and agreed upon the rules governing the waterway and are implementing them.
He also highlighted that Iran and Oman, as the sovereign owners of the Strait of Hormuz, have jointly drafted and implemented the governing laws for the waterway, dismissing US attempts to impose its will from 10,000 kilometers away.
“We and Oman are the two parties that own the Strait of Hormuz. We have written the rules, agreed upon them, and are applying them,” he said. “The Americans, with all their material power, have not been able to impose their will.”
Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah told Al Mayadeen the party was close to internal solutions before being surprised by the government’s framework agreement with “Israel”.
Member of Parliament Hassan Fadlallah told Al Mayadeen the party had come close to internal solutions on the Resistance and its weapons before it was “surprised” by the move toward the framework agreement with “Israel”.
He said the agreement was handled in a “just sign” manner, without calm discussion or consultation with experts.
Fadlallah, a member of the Loyalty to the Resistance bloc, spoke in a special episode marking the second anniversary of the martyrdom of Sayyed Hashem Safieddine. Sayyed Safieddine was killed in an Israeli strike on Beirut’s southern suburbs on October 3, 2024.
The framework agreement and the Resistance’s stance
Lebanon, “Israel”, and the United States signed the US-brokered trilateral framework in Washington on June 26, following five rounds of direct US-sponsored talks that began April 14.
Its text ties any Israeli redeployment in southern Lebanon to the disarmament of the Resistance across the country. Hezbollah rejected the framework immediately, calling it a surrender and refusing any link between Israeli withdrawal and its own disarmament. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said “Israel” would remain in the so-called security zone in southern Lebanon while coordinating a withdrawal, that is yet to come.
Fadlallah said Hezbollah spoke with the president’s advisor to find a formula to reverse the treatment of the Resistance as illegitimate. On March 2, Lebanon’s cabinet banned Hezbollah’s military and security activities and demanded it hand over its weapons.
Ready for dialogue, with conditions
Fadlallah said Hezbollah is ready for dialogue on a national security strategy after the Israeli withdrawal. He said dialogue needs conditions so it does not produce the opposite results, adding that the party was “among the advocates of understanding despite all the wounds.”
On weapons, Fadlallah said the authorities must first secure the state in the South.
“Give me a state in the South before talking about restricting weapons, war and peace,” he said, adding that the authorities do not give the South enough attention.
“It is not possible to accept that there is a guardian over the Lebanese Army,” he underlined, saying that authorities “handed everything to the Israeli occupation.”
“It is not possible to govern the country by antagonizing half the Lebanese people,” Fadlallah stressed, questioning whether the president can complete his term amid the existing stalemate in the country.
Reconstruction: “Deliberate negligence”
On reconstruction, Fadlallah said Hezbollah proposed to Prime Minister Nawaf Salam that the file be broken into parts. He described “slowness that is not innocent” in handling it, saying the government has the money and that there is “deliberate negligence.”
He said a World Bank loan linked to war damage has not been disbursed, calling the delay “foot-dragging, some of it deliberate.”
The World Bank’s $250 million Lebanon Emergency Assistance Project is the first tranche of a $1 billion framework to repair infrastructure damaged in the 2023-24 war on Lebanon. Parliament approved it at the end of 2025.
Aid plan and the right to self-defense
Fadlallah said Hezbollah will not disclose the final sums tied to aid for residents of affected areas “because it would shock the Americans.”
He said a comprehensive plan to ease the burden on people will be announced by Hezbollah.
Fadlallah underscored that if the authorities are unable to protect people, they “have no right to prevent people from defending themselves.” He concluded by saying that security and political issues must be resolved through internal understanding.
Saudi Arabia’s strike on Sanaa International Airport in July brought an end to more than three years of uneasy calm. The truce that began in April 2022 had never become a final settlement, but it had largely kept the Saudi-led coalition and Sanaa from returning to full-scale war.
Now, the fighting has spread along Yemen’s western coast and across the border into Saudi territory, while the prospect of negotiations remains as distant as it is unavoidable.
For Yemenis, the cost of the war reaches far beyond the front lines. The Saudi-led intervention began on 26 March 2015, and the blockade and destruction of infrastructure have compounded the damage of combat.
A UNDP estimate projected 377,000 conflict-attributable deaths by the end of 2021, including 154,000 from direct violence and 223,000 from hunger, disease, and other indirect causes.
Subsequent deaths and the renewed fighting have only deepened the toll. In the south and east, Saudi and UAE-backed forces have also held areas containing much of Yemen’s oil and gas wealth.
The withdrawal of the UAE’s remaining forces early this year left Riyadh with greater responsibility for the military and political direction of its Yemeni allies. It did not erase the competing loyalties within those forces.
Saudi Arabia has spent the intervening months trying to bring them under firmer command, while Sanaa has built up its own military capabilities. Each side entered this round of fighting with the previous years of restraint behind it and unfinished business ahead.
The road map that never took hold
The diplomatic opening began with the Chinese-brokered Saudi–Iranian rapprochement in March 2023. Riyadh, unable to secure a military victory in Yemen after eight years of war, could present a negotiated exit as part of a wider easing of regional tensions.
A joint Saudi–Omani delegation headed by Saudi Ambassador Mohammed al-Jaber visited Sanaa the following April. Meetings in Sanaa, Riyadh, and Muscat continued through the year.
On 23 December 2023, UN envoy Hans Grundberg announced commitments toward a nationwide ceasefire, the payment of public-sector salaries, the resumption of oil exports, the opening of roads, and the easing of restrictions on Sanaa Airport and Hodeidah Port.
These commitments were intended to be put into a UN road map leading to an inclusive political process. The announcement offered a framework, but the road map itself was not signed and implemented. Its unresolved details would become more consequential as the region moved toward a wider war.
Following the start of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, Sanaa launched its Red Sea campaign against shipping it identified as linked to Israel. US and British attacks on Yemen followed. Washington pressed for an end to Yemen’s operations in support of Gaza, while the political track with Riyadh stalled.
Sanaa says Saudi Arabia also failed to deliver the economic measures discussed during the earlier talks. What had been presented as a path to settlement became another period in which the parties prepared for the possibility of renewed combat.
That possibility became reality after the July airport strike. In September, the Ansarallah-aligned Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF) advanced through western Yemen, taking Mokha and positions near Bab al-Mandab, along with Red Sea islands.
Sanaa declared Saudi-linked shipping a target and launched missiles and drones at sites inside the kingdom. Saudi airstrikes resumed across Yemen. The blockade has disrupted Saudi oil shipments through the Red Sea, although the claim that Saudi exports have fallen to zero is contradicted by reported September export volumes.
Talks on new ground
Yemeni researcher and journalist Talib al-Hassani expects any new negotiation with Saudi Arabia to reflect the current balance on the ground. Sanaa has never ruled out talks, he says, but it cannot simply resume the unfulfilled understandings of 2023.
The first shots and airstrikes of this round ended any realistic prospect of carrying on as though the old process had remained intact. Riyadh may still invoke parts of it to preserve the appearance of continuity, but Sanaa would bring new demands to the table.
Hassani, editor-in-chief of the Sanaa-based Al Masirah channel, tells The Cradle that the strongest guarantee of any agreement is Yemen’s ability to enforce it. The 2022 truce and the subsequent road map commitments, in his account, arose from military pressure on Saudi Arabia.
Riyadh then found room to delay their implementation without immediately returning to war. No effective monitoring mechanism or enforceable guarantees made such delay costly.
He believes Saudi Arabia could seek another truce to regroup before resuming the war. Sanaa’s answer, he says, should be to demand concrete steps from the opening session, with deadlines that cannot be stretched indefinitely. Otherwise, a ceasefire could once again give Riyadh time to repair weaknesses in its forces and reorganize the factions fighting on its behalf.
Brigadier General Abed al-Thawr, an advisor to Sanaa’s Ministry of Defense and Military Production, offers a similar reading of the previous negotiations. Since 2015, he tells The Cradle, Riyadh has used talks to improve its military and political position. He contends that Saudi Arabia accepted de-escalation in 2022 to address gaps in its security system. He alleges that it subsequently sought help from the US, Britain, and Israel to do so.
Guarantees beyond Riyadh
Thawr says decades of troubled relations have left Yemenis unwilling to accept Saudi assurances on their own. He wants guarantees from outside the region, naming the UN Security Council, Russia, and China among possible guarantors.
He also points to Arab states Sanaa trusts, including Oman, Algeria, and Tunisia, even though several of the governments he names do not formally recognize the authorities in Sanaa.
Thawr wants international recognition of Sanaa’s government, arguing that its support at home gives it the authority to negotiate on Yemen’s behalf. He also rejects Riyadh’s claim to a mediator’s role.
“As for the question of Saudi mediation, which Riyadh has tried in recent months to portray as an effort to bring about calm, that is rejected entirely. Saudi Arabia is a party to the war, not a mediator in it. The Yemeni people understand that Saudi Arabia is the enemy responsible for all this killing, destruction, and hardship, and that it has long-standing designs on their wealth and land.”
He also wants any funds attached to a settlement held in accounts that can be monitored, including in a trusted Arab country such as Oman and at the central bank in Sanaa. A promise to pay salaries or finance reconstruction would mean little, in his view, unless the money were secured and its release tied to an agreed schedule. These proposals show how far Sanaa’s demands now extend beyond an immediate ceasefire.
Reports since July have named Egypt, Turkiye, and Pakistan as possible participants in mediation alongside Oman. Sanaa has neither confirmed nor denied those contacts, and their precise roles remain unclear.
The closer those countries move toward Riyadh militarily, however, the harder it may be for them to present themselves to Sanaa as neutral intermediaries. Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, and Pakistan consulted under the Mecca Defense Pact in late September as the fighting intensified.
Hamid Asim, a member of Sanaa’s national negotiating delegation, insists the door to talks remains open. Sanaa wants “an end to the aggression, the lifting of the blockade, payment of compensation, the release of prisoners, and the withdrawal of forces occupying parts of the country,” he tells The Cradle.
In his view, the earlier road map could still inform a settlement, provided it incorporates demands arising from the latest escalation and Sanaa’s new position on the ground.
Thawr argues that broader political issues must be settled before older, secondary files are addressed on a fixed timetable. His principal demands include an end to Saudi intervention in Yemeni affairs, an end to what he calls Riyadh’s tutelage, the lifting of the blockade, and Saudi responsibility for the consequences of the war. These positions go well beyond the economic and confidence-building measures that dominated the UN’s 2023 announcement.
Asim, a former assistant secretary-general of the Nasserist Unionist People’s Organization, says Sanaa’s leadership has ordered its forces to keep every option available until commitments are carried out in practice.
He names Ansarallah leader Abdul Malik al-Houthi, the Supreme Political Council (SPC), and the government in describing that decision. Past Saudi delays, he says, have made Sanaa unwilling to halt its campaign merely in exchange for a declaration of intent. The armed forces, he adds, are ready for any scenario.
Armies built during the lull
The years of de-escalation gave both sides time to prepare. Sanaa expanded its arsenal while fighting the US and Israel following the 7 October 2023 Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. Saudi Arabia worked to restructure the forces aligned with it inside Yemen, particularly as its rivalry with the UAE sharpened in the south and east.
The Saudi-backed Homeland Shield Forces, known in Arabic as Dera al-Watan, became central to Riyadh’s effort to establish a command less dependent on formations historically backed by Abu Dhabi.
The Southern Transitional Council (STC), the Giants Brigades, and forces associated with Tariq Saleh remained on the ground after the UAE withdrew its remaining troops. Their rivalries and local interests have made a unified command difficult.
Sanaa watched those deployments and says it acted before Saudi Arabia could open a new offensive. Its seizure of western coastal territory, including Mokha and positions around Bab al-Mandab, gave it a stronger hold on the approaches to the Red Sea.
Its strikes on Saudi energy and military sites then brought the confrontation back into the kingdom. The shipping campaign has forced tankers to divert and placed additional pressure on Riyadh’s oil export routes, already strained by the wider regional war.
Saudi aircraft have since carried out repeated strikes across Yemen. The Ansarallah-aligned armed forces reported 52 air and missile attacks in a single 24-hour period in late September, while Saudi authorities reported intercepting Yemeni missiles aimed at targets inside the kingdom.
Riyadh has also sought support from Pakistan and Turkiye under their defense agreement. Public statements from those countries have not established that either intends to send troops into Yemen.
Hassani sees little in these Saudi moves to suggest an imminent return to negotiations. Yet war also carries a growing price for Riyadh. Sanaa, in his view, would approach any talks after consolidating territorial gains and imposing costs across the border and at sea.
The Yemeni parties beyond the front
Sanaa also has to decide how to deal with Yemeni factions outside its control. Some are fighting alongside Saudi Arabia; others have stayed out of the latest battles or lost ground as the western front changed hands.
Any settlement with Riyadh would leave these internal questions unresolved unless those factions were brought into a political process of their own.
Asim says channels in Sanaa are dealing with tribes and districts still under the influence of Saudi-backed forces, though he gives no details of the discussions. He describes Yemenis as standing alongside the armed forces against the Saudi campaign. That account does not mean all the country’s factions share Sanaa’s political aims, and the differing loyalties visible across the south and east remain an obstacle to a national agreement.
Hassani distinguishes between groups Sanaa believes it can approach now and those it expects to confront on the battlefield first. He names the STC and some components in Hadhramaut that are not currently involved in the fighting as possible interlocutors.
Direct dialogue is preferable when it can produce an understanding, he says. With factions still committed to fighting, he believes negotiations will become useful only after they have suffered a military setback.
Riyadh can negotiate an end to its intervention, but it cannot settle Yemen’s internal divisions on behalf of the factions it has armed. Sanaa’s coastal advance gives it a stronger hand across the Saudi negotiating table.
Whether it can turn that advantage into an agreement with other Yemenis is a battle of a different kind, one the missiles and the blockade cannot decide.
As US President Donald Trump threatens Iran with annihilation, Iranian missiles and drones have been targeting Israeli Mossad proxies, American bases and destroying tankers in the Strait of Hormuz. Washington’s allies in Riyadh are meanwhile suffering enormous losses due to their war on Yemen, which has collapsed a joint project that sought to inflict regime change.
In the latest episode of The Target stream, MintPress News’ Robert Inlakesh takes a look at the silent ballistic missile attacks that are being carried out against US bases in Jordan that are no longer even receiving comment from US Central Command. As President Trump’s rhetoric at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) suggested genocidal intent, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has been acting preemptively to take out rising threats.
With gas prices continuing to go up, hitting working class people in their pockets, the Trump administration is refusing to end the war on Iran and continues to back up Israel at every turn. The US media, on the other hand, is leaking more damning reports about the stunning military failure in the Persian Gulf, exposing that the Navy noted a total of 8 attempted suicides aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln strike group.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also addressed the General Assembly, speaking to an almost empty room as up to 77 nations delegates walked out upon him taking to the podium. During his speech, he played victim while also holding up a prop pager in reference to the Mossad operation carried out against Hezbollah in Lebanon two years ago. Up to 3,000 people were wounded in what the former head of the CIA, Leon Panetta, labelled an act of terrorism.
Beyond that, the Israeli Premier’s speech was received as weak. Robert Inlakesh notes that two years ago Netanyahu had ordered the assassination of Hezbollah leader Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah from the United Nations building, while this time around he decided to complain about popular streamer Hasan Piker.
Back in Tel Aviv, the Israeli media have been signalling that their aid in targeting the Yemeni Armed Forces could be a stepping stone towards normalisation with Saudi Arabia. Yet, it hasn’t proven a very successful one. Riyadh’s proxy forces in Yemen continue to take a beating, losing more territory by the day, as the Ansarallah-led government in Sana’a vows to deliver more crushing blows to Saudi infrastructure in retaliation for ongoing air strikes.
Israel’s presence on the strategic Mayyun Island in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait has officially come to an end, as Yemen keeps a close eye on its military buildups in Somaliland and Socotra Island.
Last year, the Israeli leadership were presenting their grand plans for regional hegemony to the world, openly discussing the Greater Israel Project, however, the repeated failures of the US-Israeli alliance in their war against Iran and its allies have left them lashing out irrationally with no clear route to victory.
The Target stream analyses this growing shift, the change in power dynamics, the footage coming from the battlefield in Yemen and the desperate propaganda of the US empire’s allies.
A fighter with Yemen’s Houthi rebels carries a rocket-prepelled grenade launcher as they march during a mobilazation campaign in Sanaa, Yemen, Thursday, Sepember 10, 2026 (AP)
The Yemeni Armed Forces continue advancing in Taiz despite intensified Saudi airstrikes, while Sanaa accuses Saudi forces of war crimes in Saada.
The Yemeni Armed Forces continued advancing across northern Taiz and areas east and south of the southwestern province, according to the Al Mayadeen‘s Yemen bureau chief, as reports indicated operations targeting Saudi military leaders and Saudi-backed troop concentrations in the province.
The developments came as Saudi airstrikes intensified across Taiz on Friday, with Al Mayadeen‘s correspondent reporting that the raids were the most intense yet. Despite the escalation, the strikes failed to halt the reported advance of the Yemeni Armed Forces on the province’s various fronts.
Reports also indicated that Yemeni forces carried out operations targeting Saudi military leadership and concentrations of forces backed by Riyadh in Taiz.
Sanaa says protecting Taiz residents is the priority
In a related development, the spokesperson for the Sanaa government said Friday that the sole target of Yemeni Armed Forces operations is the “Saudi enemy and its troop concentrations.”
The spokesperson reassured residents of Taiz, stressing that protecting their lives and property remains the foremost objective of the Yemeni Armed Forces during their military operations.
The statement came amid continued military developments in the province and Saudi airstrikes targeting areas linked to the ongoing fighting.
Sanaa forces target Saudi positions in Aden
Media outlets based in Aden, Yemen, reported that Sanaa forces carried out a combined missile and drone attack targeting positions in the al-Buraiqah district, west of Aden Governorate.
According to the reports, the targeted positions host Saudi forces operating in the area.
The reported attack comes as the Yemeni Armed Forces continue their military response to the ongoing Saudi aggression against the country, targeting Saudi-backed military concentrations on Yemeni territory.
As part of its response to the Saudi aggression, the Yemeni Armed Forces have also targeted vital facilities inside Saudi Arabia and imposed restrictions on the movement of Saudi-linked vessels in the Red Sea, according to Sanaa.
94 Saudi attacks on Yemen in 24 hours
Yemeni Armed Forces spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree announced on Friday that Saudi warplanes carried out 94 airstrikes on Yemen over the past 24 hours. He put the total number of Saudi airstrikes and missile attacks on the country at 1,350 since the escalation began.
Saree said the strikes hit civilian sites in the provinces of Sanaa, Saada, Taiz, Hajjah, Amran and Ibb, killing and wounding civilians.
According to his statement, the raids were flown by F-15 and Typhoon aircraft that took off from the Khamis Mushait and Taif air bases, while missile attacks were launched from Najran and Jizan.
Al-Masirah TV reported repeated Saudi airstrikes, missile attacks and artillery shelling on residential areas in Saada province, along the border with Saudi Arabia, causing heavy damage to homes and property.
Two years after Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s martyrdom, Nawaf al-Moussawi recalls his character, faith, compassion, and enduring legacy in an exclusive interview.
I, the writer of these lines, remember my friends and me waiting eagerly for an announcement regarding an address by Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah whenever the political situation in the region became too hot for comfort.
We always saw him as the voice of reason, a figure to whom we could look up to when the line between fact and fiction became blurred. Sayyed to us, and to many others, was the fix to our regional worries.
Two years following his martyrdom now, it feels like we haven’t really been given the chance to grieve the loss; 30 years in the same seat, raising a generation on the lessons of holding on to truth, forbidding falsehood, and never riding by the side of a tyrannical force.
The war on Lebanon and the region has continued since his loss, continuously pushing us away from sitting with the fact that he’s no longer with us.
To try to come to terms with his loss, and to try to understand how Hezbollah and its support group continue to live under his cloak, I spoke to the Head of Hezbollah’s Resources and Borders Department, Nawwaf al-Moussawi, about Sayyed Hassan, his memories with him, and the current state of Lebanese politics.
I, Hassan Fakih, representing Al Mayadeen, went to the location where the interview would take place.
The weather was nicer than in the few weeks that had passed; clouds covered the sky above us as we were expecting rain that afternoon.
When we arrived, we entered the room where the interview would be held. Three flags stood post in the corner, one Lebanese, one for Hezbollah, and one for the Resources and Borders Department. By the window, a large conference table with a couple of strategic maps scattered across it.
As the cameras were being set up, I examined the personal library; dozens of religious and academic texts filled the shelves, a small Quran crowned the shelves at the top.
A picture of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah was hanging near the door, smiling at all who enter the room.
We had just finished setting up the cameras and the seating arrangements when al-Moussawi walked in; after a few introductory remarks, we began.
I first asked him what he felt, on a personal note, about the Legacy of Sayyed Hassan two years after his martyrdom.
“His Eminence the Sayyed was as close to an Insān al-Kāmil (complete person) as he could be,” al-Moussawi said.
In Islamic theology, Insān al-Kāmil is the honourific title of the Prophet Mohammad, and is said about those who reflect deep Divine understanding and reflection of those attributes.
“[He] was not simply a leader of a party or of a specific population within a country, but he was a leader of the downtrodden and oppressed, who sought to rise from the grip of oppression and gain their rights,” al-Moussawi added.
Al-Moussawi told me that he first met Sayyed Hassan when he went to Beirut to serve as the Party’s official in the city, while he was managing the editorial operations of Hezbollah’s newspaper.
“From that moment, I discovered a unique individual, someone utterly devoted to the cause he served, who practiced complete self-effacement out of sincerity to God Almighty,” he told me. “Regarding his personality, what specific aspect comes to mind now?”
You can feel the proximity al-Moussawi and Sayyed Hassan had, his mannerisms when speaking about the memories he had of him with such grief.
He told me about a moment between Sayyed Hassan and his daughter during the war on Lebanon war.
“I was on a phone call with Sayyed Hassan, and my daughter, who was roughly ten years old at the time, was beside me. She told me that she would like to speak with Sayyed Hassan,” his face filled with warmth as he continued the story.
Al-Moussawi added that Sayyed Hassan heard his daughter and, in turn, asked for the phone to be handed over to her. The young girl asked for a meeting with Sayyed Hassan, probably unfamiliar with the reality of war.
“Of course, he told my daughter, ‘God willing,'” al-Moussawi said. But “a short amount of time after the war concluded, Hajj Jihad, the head of Sayyed Hassan’s security, told me that Sayyed Hassan would like to meet with you and your family.”
He emphasized the fact that even after all the horrors that Lebanon witnessed during that war, Sayyed Hassan made sure not to forget about the request of his daughter.
“This is a personal memory I have of him among many others,” he said. “I used to address him with the phrase ‘the beloved Sayyed,’ as I believe that no one, regardless of who they may be, can meet Sayyed Hassan without loving him.”
In an exclusive interview for Al Mayadeen English, Nawaf al-Moussawi, Head of Hezbollah’s Resources and Borders Department, recalled a deeply personal moment between Sayyed Hassan and his young daughter during the July 2006 war, offering a glimpse into the character of the… pic.twitter.com/YgQErEKo1v
He noted that even in political matters, Sayyed Hassan would conduct his business in a warm, compassionate, and understanding manner, noting that Sayyed would even discuss with political adversaries and enemies, within the Lebanese republic, of course, with a realistic and objective style, with the hope of avoiding confrontation whenever possible.
“Unless the enemy or adversary forced [conflict] upon him, in which case he would meet it with resolve,” he said.
Al-Moussawi noted that Sayyed Hassan’s approach came directly from the manners of Imam Ali, the cousin of the Prophet Mohammad and the first caliph in Shia theology.
His love for the people
Al-Moussawi made sure to highlight Sayyed’s love of the people when telling me about Sayyed Hassan’s character.
“Despite the fact that the most difficult thing for him was that security conditions prevented him from receiving people as he used to … he would go to the homes of the martyrs’ families, sit with them on the ground, talk to them, and share their simple meals,” he said.
He added, “I believe his love for people is evident in their love for him. Their love for him is a reflection of his love for them. He was very protective of them.”
“That’s why, when he was once asked if he would have done what led to the outbreak of war in 2006 if he had known about the Israeli bombing and the crimes they committed, he said no, he wouldn’t have done it,” he said. “He was protective of his family and his people, and even when forced to fight, he kept it to the minimum extent necessary to avoid further tragedies.”
During the days leading up to the anniversary of Sayyed Hassan’s martyrdom, media outlets began releasing exclusive footage of him, one of which showed him being driven in the back of a car in religious attire, checking in on us.
Al-Moussawi noted that Sayyed Hassan would also leave his post in civilian clothing to check in on the people. “For example, in 2006, in a disguise, he visited, from afar, the places to which people had been displaced. He toured them, looked after their affairs … those who thought he was in one fortified place were mistaken.”
In an exclusive interview for Al Mayadeen English, Nawaf al-Moussawi, Head of Hezbollah’s Resources and Borders Department, argued that Lebanon’s post-war administration does not reflect the will of the Lebanese people.
This was a question I’ve been looking forward to asking. I’ve spoken to friends who have taken up the path of becoming clerics before about Islamic mysticism, and we would always love to rewatch old Ramadan speeches by Sayyed Hassan, and small clips where he’d speak about the power of faith and supplication.
Sayyed Hassan, in his younger days, gave a lecture about the mysticism of Ayatollah Khomeini and his son, Sayyed Jawad Nasrallah, stated in an interview shortly after the martyrdom of his father that he, Sayyed Hassan, was of the mystic/Irfani school.
“People are accustomed to calling someone ‘Wali Allah’ (guardian/protector appointed by God) who secludes himself in a corner or sits in a cave worshipping God Almighty,” al-Moussawi said. “But the true guardians are those who are engaged in the affairs of life and remain close to God Almighty, sincerely devoted to Him.”
Sayyed Hassan would constantly tell us in his speeches that we should hold prayers and supplications close to our hearts and to keep steadfast in our faith.
In a previous speech of his, he said that our worship and prayer make us soldiers of God, with all the spiritual might that it provides us.
“Even if you besiege us in a small piece of land – just so you know who you are killing and besieging – we don’t feel that we are besieged, as we have the earth, the mountains, the valleys, the soil, the rivers, the seas, the oceans, the clouds, the winds, the sun, the moon, the stars, the seven heavens, the angels, and what God has created of what we know and don’t know [on our side],” Sayyed Hassan stated.
This list, as Sayyed Hassan noted, is the backing that the believers of God have in their fight against tyranny, adding that the US, with all its military might, is the one being besieged in this scenario.
“Whoever believes in God cannot feel besieged even if the entire geography in which he exists is closed off to him,” Sayyed Hassan said in the speech.
Al-Moussawi said that mystics are usually known for their consistent prayer and remembrance of God through various litanies and acts of worship, but given Sayyed Hassan’s security concerns, he could not afford such lengthy acts.
He noted that one of the mountains of mysticism, Sheikh Taqi Bahjat, relayed to Sayyed Hassan that he should limit himself to two things: “intend everything you do, even drinking water, for God Almighty, and at all times keep death before your eyes,” emphasizing that it’s exactly what the martyr did.
“You find many mystics saying that our foremost figure in mysticism is His Eminence,” al-Moussawi said. “He gave mysticism a new definition: practical mysticism based on engaging in action to defend and protect people, not seclusion in a private corner.”
He concluded the point by stating that “Sayyed, may God be pleased with him, established a new school of mysticism, or rather, gave a new definition of mysticism.”
In an exclusive interview with Al Mayadeen English, Nawaf al-Moussawi, Head of Hezbollah’s Resources and Borders Department, addressed claims that Hezbollah operates as an Iranian proxy and reflected on Sayyed Hassan’s relationship with Iran.
After 40 minutes of discussing Sayyed Hassan and internal political matters, I asked al-Moussawi what he missed most about the martyred Hezbollah secretary-general.
Those who have lost a loved one know the mannerisms of al-Moussawi well. After being asked this question, a smile caused by a wave of memories came out, then the anxious hand movements, the lack of eye contact as one tries to collect their thoughts.
“There’s no way for me to put it into words,” al-Moussawi said. “I tell you this with full honesty: I turn away whenever – for example, on TV, there’s a broadcast of Sayyed Hassan’s speeches; I avoid listening to it; if there’s a picture of him, I look away; his absence is still a deep, burning wound.”
He added, “It’s painful. That is why I try to avoid this subject because I have little strength to withstand this pain.”
Al-Moussawi added that he agreed to speak about the loss of Sayyed Hassan and accept requests to speak about him as part of an obligation that fell on him and those who knew the martyr personally, to continue sharing his legacy.
He relayed a story about the love that he and his family had with the martyr.
“One time I told Sayyed Hassan, ‘You know, if you and I ever had an argument and my children found out that we had an argument, they would take your side over mine?’ … I’ve raised them to be like that,” he said.
Al-Moussawi added that he lost the person dearest to him, someone he cherished more than his own existence.
In an exclusive interview with Al Mayadeen English, Nawaf al-Moussawi, Head of Hezbollah’s Resources and Borders Department, spoke about the profound personal grief he continues to experience following the martyrdom of Sayyed Hassan.
He said that if someone went to him, or anyone else who loved the martyr, and asked to take the remainder of their lives and add on to the life of Sayyed Hassan, that he and others would willingly and wholeheartedly accept.
“However, what’s done is done, and it is our responsibility to move forward with [his movement] until we leave this world and meet with him, God willing, in purgatory and in the afterlife,” al-Moussawi said.
As al-Moussawi spoke to me about the life, legacy, and loss of Sayyed Hassan, his words were heavy, full of pain and remorse.
Sayyed Hassan was such that even those who only knew him from behind a screen speak of him with the same grief.
A hole was carved out of the hearts of millions with his martyrdom. The grief still lingers in the air, and the roads are decorated with the martyr’s smile, as all anyone wishes to see or hear again is his laugh and humanist takes on this world.
As we ended the interview, al-Moussawi wished us luck and good tidings in our attempts to share the legacy of the martyr. A prayer, I feel, stretches to all who love Sayyed Hassan.
The withdrawal of US troops leave Iraq facing the ecconomical and insituutional damage accumulated through sanctions and occupation (Illustrated by Batoul Chamas for Al Mayadeen English)
As the September 30 deadline ends the US military presence, Iraq is left with wrecked industry, a payroll state, and a financial system Washington controls.
Iraq’s government has declared September 30 the final date for ending the US-led coalition’s military mission. Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi’s office says October 1 will find the country “free of any foreign military presence,” closing a deployment that once reached about 170,000 US troops.
But withdrawal leaves intact much of the damage inflicted by the invasion and the 13 years of sanctions that preceded it, along with the financial arrangements through which Washington continues to exert influence.
The US left Iraq’s productive economy devastated, its institutions dismantled and reshaped, and its workforce left increasingly dependent on a state funded by oil. Access to that income remains vulnerable to US pressure.
The question after the troops leave is how much control Iraq will have over the economy they leave behind.
Thirteen years of sanctions
The erosion of Iraq’s economy began long before March 2003. The UN Security Council imposed sweeping sanctions after Saddam Hussein’s regime invaded Kuwait in 1990. Drawing on internal UN records, Joy Gordon’s Invisible War describes one of the most comprehensive and devastating sanctions regimes ever imposed.
The embargo quickly collapsed incomes. Reconstructed World Bank estimates showed GDP per capita collapsing to a third in a single year, going from about $3,527 in 1990 to $1,255 in 1991.
Public employees who had earned $150 to $200 a month before sanctions were earning $3 to $5 by 1996, according to a 1997 assessment. By 2000, the International Committee of the Red Cross reported salaries as low as $2 a month and unemployment around 50 percent.
Factories, power stations, and water plants could not recover without imported equipment and spare parts. Yet any member of the sanctions committee could hold an entire contract indefinitely, even over a single disputed item. Gordon documents Washington’s use of the “dual-use” designation to restrict goods as basic as water pipes. By August 2002, the UN counted 2,058 contracts worth about $5.2 billion that had been placed on hold, including $745 million in oil industry equipment.
The restrictions also placed Iraq’s oil income beyond Baghdad’s direct control. Under the Oil-for-Food program, buyers paid into a UN-administered escrow account. After deductions for compensation, administration, and weapons inspections, the proceeds could finance only approved purchases. Iraq exported roughly $65 billion in oil under the program but could not use that money as ordinary budget revenue for wages, maintenance, or local services.
The collapse pushed skilled workers out of their professions. A UN humanitarian survey of 1,157 degree holders employed by aid organizations found 725 in general-service or menial jobs, including doctors, engineers, and scientists working as drivers, clerks, and guards.
By the time US troops arrived, Iraq had endured years of falling wages, industrial decline, and lost expertise. The occupation’s first decisions deepened that damage.
Dismantling the state, contracting out reconstruction
On May 16, 2003, the occupation authority issued Order 1, barring senior Baath Party members from public employment and requiring the screening of senior staff in ministries, hospitals, and universities. A week later, Order 2 dissolved the Defense Ministry, army, Republican Guard, and intelligence bodies.
The International Center for Transitional Justice estimates that Order 2 alone left about 400,000 conscripts, officers, and officials without jobs. The World Bank counted more than 2 million unemployed Iraqis, nearly 30 percent of the labor force, around 2003–2004. Meanwhile, Iraq’s health minister estimated that roughly half the country’s prewar doctors had fled as kidnapping and assassination made their work increasingly dangerous.
The occupation then opened the weakened economy to foreign competition. Order 39 allowed wholly foreign-owned companies and guaranteed investors treatment no less favorable than Iraqi businesses, while excluding natural resource extraction. Other orders suspended tariffs, later replaced by a flat 5 percent levy, and capped income tax at 15 percent from 2004. The World Bank warned that rapid opening would cost jobs in a country whose private sector was too weak to employ displaced workers.
Reconstruction brought billions of dollars, but much of the spending flowed through foreign contractors. The United States spent more than $60 billion over roughly a decade, according to the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR). More than $25 billion went to training and equipping security forces after the occupation had dissolved Iraq’s existing military institutions.
SIGIR found that reconstruction began without adequate security, consultation with Iraqi ministries, or planning for long-term maintenance. Its final report estimated waste at $3 billion to $5 billion from the main reconstruction fund and as much as $8 billion overall. The largest early infrastructure contracts went mainly to US firms. A $1.8 billion award to Bechtel in January 2004 was open only to American bidders.
Iraq’s own money followed a similar path. UN Security Council Resolution 1483 established the Development Fund for Iraq to receive oil revenue, with the occupation authority directing spending until June 2004.
An Iraq Revenue Watch analysis of contracts paid from Iraqi funds found that US companies received 74 percent of their value. US and British companies together received 85 percent, while Iraqi firms received 2 percent. Audits found that 73 percent of the value of Development Fund contracts above $5 million had been awarded without competitive bidding.
Oversight was inadequate even to establish how some of that money had been used. A 2010 SIGIR audit found that the Defense Department had failed to establish required accounting controls for about $8.7 billion of the $9.1 billion it received from the fund. It could not document spending of about $2.6 billion.
The result was a reconstruction process that directed vast sums abroad while leaving Iraq with damaged services, limited productive capacity, and institutions struggling to rebuild.
An oil-funded system of patronage
With factories closed or looted and no private industry to replace them, the state became the place where Iraqis look for work. An assessment by the International Fund for Agricultural Development, using World Bank data, says public employment accounts for nearly all formal jobs and 40 percent of all jobs. Salaries and pensions took about 90 trillion dinars, roughly $69 billion, more than 40 percent of the 2024 budget, and the World Bank says another half a million government jobs were added during the spending expansion that preceded 2025.
The private sector has not filled the gap. Estimates put imports at more than 90 percent of the goods in Iraqi shops, while manufacturing makes up only around 2 percent of GDP. The World Bank says nearly 29 percent of the population is aged 15 to 29, and that this large group is entering the labor market amid limited job creation, a preference for public-sector work, and a private sector too small to absorb them. Youth unemployment is about 32 percent, and only around 11 percent of women take part in the labor force.
The IMF’s 2025 assessment describes the same pattern, citing high unemployment, an excessive state footprint, corruption, a weak banking system, and an inefficient electricity sector, and it called the wage trajectory fiscally unsustainable. Analysts describe a cycle in which secure public wages raise the pay that educated workers expect, private firms struggle with unreliable power and weak finance, and young graduates keep turning to the state for jobs, which raises the demand for more public hiring.
Oil pays for all of it. The World Bank estimates that oil supplied about 88 percent of government revenue and 91 percent of exports in 2025.
The financial levers Washington keeps
Iraq’s oil income has passed through outside hands since 1996, first a UN escrow, then the occupation authority’s fund, and now the New York Fed.
The Development Fund’s accounts were opened at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, where Iraqi oil revenue still flows. Buyers pay dollars into a Ministry of Finance account, and the Central Bank of Iraq converts part of the income into dinars for government spending. US jurisdiction over dollar clearing, correspondent banking, and physical cash shipments gives Washington substantial influence over Iraq’s access to its money.
In January 2020, after Iraq’s parliament called for foreign troops to leave, the Trump administration threatened to block access to the account. Iraqi officials said it then held about $35 billion and warned that losing access would disrupt salary payments and the exchange rate.
US restrictions introduced in November 2022 forced banks seeking dollars for international transfers to disclose the final beneficiaries and purposes of transactions through an electronic platform, with requests screened by the New York Fed. US and Iraqi accounts linked the measures to concerns about transfers to sanctioned Iranian actors.
Consequently, more than 80 percent of daily wire requests were initially blocked or returned. Transfers fell from $224.4 million on October 17, 2022, to $22.9 million on January 17, 2023. Demand shifted to the parallel market, where the dinar traded at about 1,588 to the dollar in February against a newly set official rate of 1,300. In a country dependent on imported food and consumer goods, restricted dollar access raised costs for ordinary households.
In April 2026, Washington applied pressure through physical cash, halting a shipment of about $500 million and suspending parts of security cooperation. Iraqi officials said the halt affected banknotes used for travel, medical treatment, education, and retail exchange, while electronic transfers for imports continued. Some shipments resumed in July. On September 26, Baghdad announced that Washington had agreed to continue them.
US sanctions have also reshaped access to Iraq’s oil fields. Russia’s Lukoil left West Qurna 2 after sanctions, and Chevron signed agreements to take over its development. During al-Zaidi’s July visit to Washington, Iraq signed dozens of agreements with companies including ExxonMobil, KBR, Halliburton, and Shell. US Energy Secretary Chris Wright cited more than $60 billion in commercial agreements, while al-Zaidi told The National that US companies would receive top priority. According to the Atlantic Council, Donald Trump framed the deals as American oil companies taking the place of US forces.
As US forces prepare to leave Iraq, they leave behind a trail of devastation. Decades of sanctions and occupation have weakened its productive economy, dismantled state institutions, and left livelihoods dependent on an oil-funded system of patronage. The consequences will endure long after the troops depart.
Washington retains substantial power over Iraq through its influence over dollar access and the financial channels that sustain the state. The withdrawal ends a military mission, while leaving Baghdad to contend with both the damage of US intervention and the control Washington continues to exercise.
After 23 years of the US’ invasion of Iraq, a new era is expected to begin on October 1 with the announcement of the official withdrawal of all US troops from Iraq.
Iranians attend a rally commenrorating the martyrdom of Lebanese Resistance leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah as they hold posters of him in downtown Tehran, September 30, 2024 (AP)
Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei honors martyr Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, hails Iran’s legacy of resistance, and declares that the era of subservience will never return.
Martyr Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah was a man “who held immense love for his nation and his school of thought,” the Leader of the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei, stated.
In a message marking Sacred Defense Week – which commemorates Iran’s resistance during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war – and the second anniversary of the martyrdom of Lebanese Resistance leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Sayyed Khamenei noted that his “sincere speeches and courageous actions strengthened the hearts of his people, and indeed, the hearts of the free peoples of the world.”
He described the martyred leader as “a man who elevated Lebanon,” which for years had been a “backyard” for certain powers, “to a position of great stature” with divine support and victory as his “constant companions”.
“Throughout the history of the Levant, until now, after the prophets and their successors, no man of such stature has emerged,” Sayyed Khamenei stressed.
Sayyed Khamenei hails Lebanon’s Resistance
The Iranian Leader noted that the “honorable banner of the Resistance is now in the hands of Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem, who will courageously carry forward Sayyed Nasrallah’s path at the forefront of Hezbollah’s steadfast ranks.”
On Lebanon, Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei described the days that Lebanon is passing through as “distinctive and glorious days for them and for all the Resistance fighters,” while for those who placed their hopes in the false promises of their oppressors and protectors when it came to confronting the Israeli enemy, they are “humiliating and degrading days.”
Iran’s Sacred Defense broke the grip of colonial powers
On Sacred Defense Week, Sayyed Khamenei recalled the opening days of the month of Mehr as an occasion to commemorate the “Days of Allah” and the imposed war that the Iranian people endured for eight years, in a way that embodied national solidarity and steadfast adherence to revolutionary Islam, while contributing to the confrontation of hegemony and colonialism.
Sayyed Khamenei said Iranians today are recalling the period nearly 20 years before the outbreak of the war, together with the hostility of the colonial powers during that era, particularly the nationalization of Iran’s oil industry and the US-orchestrated coup. He noted that the Islamic Revolution, under the leadership of Imam Khomeini, brought an end to an era in which the ambassadors of the great powers dictated their orders to Iran’s ruling authorities.
Iran’s imposed war became a crucible of resistance and faith
On the Islamic Revolution, he asserted that its victory and the subsequent establishment of the Islamic Republic constituted a profound transformation for the powers that coveted Iran’s wealth and sought to “return the revolutionary nation to its previous course.”
He stressed that the imposed war was “their most important undertaking during the first decade of the Islamic Republic’s existence.”
He noted that the war, launched by the “anti-people Baath Party” on the basis of the illusion that it would last only a few days and result in an easy victory, ultimately served to strengthen the Islamic system.
He said this transformation became “a defining feature of this system in the face of subsequent hostile events.”
Sayyed Khamenei stressed that those years were transformed, “through the Revolution and the raising of the banner of Islam and jihad amid the imposed war, into glorious days which, even 38 years after the war’s end, remain rich with lessons in worship, courage, resistance, morality, and humanity.”
Iran will never return to days of subservience, disgrace
Sayyed Khamenei said “Iran’s enemies” seek to return the country to the days of “backwardness, humiliation, subservience, and disgrace,” while the Islamic Republic is now living through days marked by “progress, dignity, independence, and a lofty standing in the Islamic world.”
To this end, he highlighted the participation of millions of Iranians in public squares and streets in recent days, as well as the declaration by more than 30 million Iranians of their readiness to defend their country. He further noted that a call for renewed readiness reached its target of 500,000 people within the first 100 minutes.
In his message, he said Iran emerged stronger from the imposed war and subsequent confrontations, stressing that the country remains committed to its rightful positions, including maintaining control over the Strait of Hormuz.
Sayyed Khamenei concluded, “As a servant of the dear Iranian people, I declare that those bygone days whose return our enemy longs for have passed and will never return.”
Ayatollah Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei, Leader of the Islamic Revolution in Iran.
Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei stressed on Monday that the days of foreign domination that Iran’s enemies seek to bring back are over and will never return.
In a message on the occasion of the Sacred Defense Week and the second martyrdom anniversary of late Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Leader Sayyed Khamenei praised Sayyed Nasrallah as “a man whose greatness is unparalleled in Levant’s history since the prophets and their successors.”
His eminence said the years preceding the Islamic Revolution were marked by foreign domination, dependence and the intervention of Western powers in Iran’s affairs, adding that the Revolution led by Imam Khomeini (RA) ended that situation and established the Islamic Republic.
Leader Sayyed Khamenei described the imposed war launched by the Baathist regime of Iraq as a major effort by Iran’s adversaries in the first decade of the Islamic Republic to reverse the course of the Revolution. He said Iran emerged from the war stronger and more resilient, a pattern that continued through subsequent crises and conflicts.
His eminence contrasted Iran’s situation in the early years after the victory of the 1979 Islamic Revolution with its current position, saying the country had once inherited limited means to defend itself but has since developed the capabilities to confront its adversaries. The Leader said Iran today enjoys greater progress, independence and standing in the Islamic world.
“The past days that our enemy wishes to return have passed and will never be repeated,” the Leader said, stressing that the Islamic Republic’s future would be stronger as a result of the experiences and legacy of the Islamic Revolution and the Sacred Defense.
The days preceding the Islamic Revolution were dark and bleak, when ambassadors of the Arrogant Powers would dictate their demands and prohibitions to the Shah of Iran and he would execute those demands
“Enemies Halted Given Painful Blows of Brave Iranians”
On the ongoing tensions with Iran’s adversaries in the region, including developments involving the Strait of Hormuz, Leader Sayyed Khamenei said those who once sought to dominate Iran have been forced to confront the country’s military capabilities, adding that Iran’s defense capabilities have fundamentally changed the balance compared with previous decades.
In those days, two seas in southern Iran were once like a “playground” for enemy forces, but they no longer today venture beyond the Arabian Sea “given the painful blows they have received from brave Iranian fighters and the defenders of the Strait of Hormuz,” his eminence said.
Those days to which the enemies long to return Iran were days of backwardness, humiliation, dependency. And the days we live in today are overflowing with progress, dignity, independence, and an elevated level of reputability in the Islamic world and indeed across the globe.
Iran’s current achievements should be viewed in light of the sacrifices of Imam Khomeini (RA) and martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution Imam Sayyed Ali Khamenei, whose leadership contributed to Iran’s present standing, Leader Sayyed Khamenei stressed, noting that their legacy would help shape a stronger future.
“Sayyed Nasrallah Unparalleled in Levant”
The Leader then paid tribute to Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah on the second anniversary of his martyrdom, describing him as a prominent figure of the resistance front and a sincere advocate of the Lebanese people and the cause he represented.
“His sincere counsel and courageous actions strengthened hearts of his people and free people worldwide.”
Leader Sayyed Khamenei highlighted Sayyed Nasrallah’s role in the history of the resistance and said his legacy continues under Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem.
“Sayyed Nasrallah elevated Lebanon, which once a backyard for some powers, to greatness. His greatness was unparalleled in Levant’s history since the prophets and their successors”
He said the current period in Lebanon would remain an important chapter in the history of the resistance, adding that the sacrifices of Sayyed Nasrallah, Sayyed Hashem Safieddine and other Resistance fighters would continue to influence future generations.
“Lebanon’s current days are glorious for Resistance fighters and humiliating for those relying on oppressors.”
His eminence concluded by expressing hope that, through divine assistance, the Iranian people and the Resistance Front would continue to achieve “victory, triumph and dignity,” while their adversaries would face defeat and humiliation.
Attendents listen to speech during the central event commemorating the the second annveersary of the martyre of Isslam and humanty, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, in Sanaa, Yemen, Septemper 27, 2026 (AP Masira TV)
Speaking at the central event for the second anniversary of Sayyed Nasrallah’s martyrdom in Sanaa, religious scholar Fouad Naji, a member of the Yemen Scholars Association, said ٍSayyed Nasrallah was “the first to change the equation and registered a victory over Israel.”
He added that the Hezbollah leader “was the heart of the axis and the safety valve of the region when he stood before the crime of the century and was and still is a nightmare in the throat of the Zionists.”
Sayyed Nasrallah: Islamic symbol not framed by geography
The cleric said the greatest description of the late Sayyed was the one given by Sayyed Abdul Malik al-Houthi, who called him the “Martyr of Islam and humanity,” asserting it as “worthy of his stature.” He also said the late Hezbollah leader is “an Islamic symbol not confined by geography” and “provided the living proof that religion can lead life.”
Sayyed Nasrallah “was the man of the stage by standing in the face of the New Middle East project,” Naji said, emphasizing that the Yemeni people “will not forget his stance with us when he stood with us while everyone else abandoned us.”
“Our generations will not forget him.”
Naji further stated that “the blood of the martyr Nasrallah and his companion Sayyed Safieddine is a sweeping flood that will change the face of the world and overturn the balances in favor of the believers.”
Sayyed Nasrallah devoted his life to resisting hegemony, colonialism
The acting prime minister of Yemen, cleric Mohammed Muftah said, “We commemorate the martyrdom of Sayyed Nasrallah, one of the most important leaders and great figures of humanity.” He stated that Sayyed Nasrallah “devoted his life to the Palestinian cause and to the option of resistance in the face of occupation and projects of hegemony and colonialism.”
“The assassination of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah is not considered a victory for the enemy after 40 years of planning, surveillance, and attempts,” Muftah noted, asserting that “the enemies thought that by assassinating Sayyed Nasrallah they would assassinate his project, but they failed.”
Sayyed Nasrallah “created a fixed equation when he did and said, ‘We never lose; when we win, we achieve victory, and when we are martyred, we achieve victory.'” He described Sayyed Nasrallah’s school as “legendary and exceptional” and said it “will extend to broad generations.”
Muftah pledged to the late leader, saying, “We remain faithful to the covenant, and we will proceed on the path and approach until the liberation of Al-Aqsa and we pray in it.”
Two years after the assassination of Lebanese Resistance leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, commemorations were held across Lebanon and the wider region, with supporters gathering around his shrine in Beirut’s Southern Suburb from the early morning hours under the slogan “We remain true to our pledge.”
Al Mayadeen‘s correspondent in Beirut reported that preparations around the shrine were completed as citizens began arriving from the early morning, with large attendance expected amid continuing Israeli aggression against southern Lebanon.
In southern Lebanon, the town of Deir Qanoun al-Nahr hosted large crowds for a central ceremony commemorating the martyrdom of Sayyed Nasrallah and Sayyed Hashem Safieddine, who was assassinated after him, with photographs of both lining the streets.
In Tehran, the second anniversary is being marked with another public ceremony.
Al Mayadeen‘s correspondent reported that the event is being held at the municipal building, where Hezbollah’s flag and banner have been raised, alongside flags, banners and slogans associated with the Resistance.
Meanwhile, Al Mayadeen‘s bureau chief in Baghdad said Sayyed Nasrallah’s image is present in the Iraqi consciousness, with supporters viewing him as a regional leader who confronted “Israel” and helped shape a regional political path built around resistance.
A ceremony was held at the municipal building in Tehran, Iran, where Hezbollah’s flag and banner were raised alongside flags and slogans associated with the Resistance, conveying a message of continued Iranian commitment to supporting Hezbollah in confronting the Israeli occupation and defending sovereignty, according to Al Mayadeen‘s correspondent.
In Sanaa, Yemen, a central ceremony is underway to commemorate the second anniversary of the martyrdom of the “Martyr of Islam and Humanity,” Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, with participants recalling his steadfast support for Yemen and his solidarity with its people throughout years of Saudi-led aggression.
On November 3, 2023, as Palestinian children were being pulled from beneath the ruins of Gaza, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah spoke not only about war, strategy, or Resistance.
He spoke about them.
He invoked the women and children emerging from beneath the rubble. He argued that the images coming out of Gaza had exposed the contradiction between Western proclamations of human rights and Western support for the Israeli assault.
His argument was ultimately about something larger than geopolitics.
What did witnessing such suffering demand of a human being?
The martyred leader did not see Gaza as a cause to be supported from afar. To him, defending its people was a duty born of humanity itself, and remaining silent in the face of their suffering meant confronting uncomfortable questions about one’s humanity, faith, and honor.
That conviction had been articulated more than a decade earlier.
During the Israeli assault on Gaza in November 2012, he declared that Iran, Syria and Hezbollah would not abandon Gaza and its Resistance, describing standing with its people as a “religious and moral and humanitarian obligation.”
“How can we accept peace and security while the Palestinians have no peace and no security?”
This was Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah: a man who could not rest while Gaza bled, who rejected safety while Palestinian children lived beneath bombs, and who carried Palestine not as a… pic.twitter.com/XSOweSqf0x
Eleven years later, as Gaza endured devastation on an unprecedented scale, those words took on a darker weight: humanitarian obligation was no longer something merely spoken, but something paid for in sacrifice.
The children who exposed the horror
The November 3 speech offers perhaps the clearest insight into the humanitarian dimension of Sayyed Nasrallah’s position on Gaza.
⚡️⭕️ The goals set by the Lebanese support front on November 3rd 2023, in the first speech of Martyr Sayed Hassan Nasrallah after October 7th 2023.
Today the war on Gaza stopped, with Hamas specifically victorious and still on the ground after the pre-planned war of annihilation… pic.twitter.com/wkpEaGv6zD
By then, thousands of Palestinians had been killed. Children appeared daily in footage from bombed homes and overwhelmed hospitals. Families dug relatives from collapsed buildings as access to water, food, medicine, electricity and fuel deteriorated.
Children, in particular, repeatedly appeared in his moral argument.
For Sayyed Nasrallah, their suffering stripped away the comfortable language through which wars are often discussed.
The child beneath the rubble was not somebody else’s child. The mother searching hospitals was not somebody else’s mother. The father carrying his child did not become morally distant simply because he lived beyond Lebanon’s border.
International institutions would later document the severity of what Gaza’s civilian population had endured.
The human cost behind the war
In November 2024, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Security Minister Yoav Gallant, finding reasonable grounds to believe they bore criminal responsibility for the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare and crimes against humanity including murder, persecution and other inhumane acts. The chamber also cited reasonable grounds concerning intentionally directing attacks against Gaza’s civilian population.
The ICC said Gaza’s civilians had been deprived of objects indispensable to survival, including food, water, medicine, fuel and electricity. It also said shortages of anesthetics had forced doctors to conduct procedures, including amputations on children, without adequate anesthesia.
This was the reality behind the political vocabulary.
“Collateral damage” could mean a child losing a limb.
“Evacuation” could mean a family carrying what remained of its life from one unsafe place to another.
Destroyed infrastructure meant hunger, thirst, disease, and hospitals unable to adequately treat the wounded.
It was this human reality that Sayyed Nasrallah insisted could not be reduced to a distant tragedy.
🚨 Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah:
"Israel" It defies the will of the world, the international community, and the International Court of Justice, which ordered an end to the attack on Rafah." pic.twitter.com/MQqrER2gRI
Over the following months, that connection remained central to Sayyed Nasrallah’s speeches.
The position carried an increasingly high cost for Lebanon. Southern villages were repeatedly struck, civilians were killed, homes and agricultural land were damaged or destroyed, and tens of thousands were displaced as Israeli attacks escalated.
Yet Sayyed Nasrallah did not publicly sever the Lebanese front from Gaza.
By June, as Israeli threats of a wider war against Lebanon intensified, Sayyed Nasrallah warned that if such a war were imposed, “the Resistance will fight without restraints, without rules and without limits.”
Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah underlined in a televised speech the substantial role played by the Lebanese support front in the war on #Gaza in the face of the Israeli occupation. pic.twitter.com/0VgvmHJ5NS
— Al Mayadeen English (@MayadeenEnglish) June 19, 2024
A month later, amid ceasefire negotiations, he reiterated that Hezbollah’s operations remained tied to Gaza, saying the Resistance would halt them if a ceasefire were reached there without requiring a separate Lebanese agreement.
“What Hamas accepts, we all accept,” he said.
For supporters of the Resistance, this is where his position acquired its deepest moral significance.
It was easy to stand with Gaza when solidarity cost nothing.
The real test came when that solidarity demanded sacrifice.
A fatherly conception of responsibility
That distinction also gives meaning to the paternal image through which many supporters remember Sayyed Nasrallah.
For them, he represented more than the secretary-general of Hezbollah. He was associated with protection, guidance and reassurance among communities shaped by occupation, invasion and repeated war.
Two years after his martyrdom, Al Mayadeen revisits the life, political vision, and enduring impact of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.
From building a cohesive organization that weathered the region's hardest trials to defining a doctrine of resistance amidst immense human and economic… pic.twitter.com/yqBKPrTtD6
Placed beside Gaza, that image acquires another dimension.
To speak symbolically of Sayyed Nasrallah as a father to Gaza’s children is not to suggest that he could shelter every child from an Israeli bomb or replace every parent they lost.
It describes instead the moral instinct reflected in the position he repeatedly articulated.
A father does not ask whether a suffering child is politically convenient before recognizing pain. He does not examine nationality before recognizing fear. He does not see hunger and decide that geography has absolved him of concern.
This is why Gaza’s children were central to his humanitarian language. They were not statistics or military terminology, but children whose suffering, in his view, demanded a human response.
“No matter what the sacrifices are”
By September 2024, that principle had become intensely personal.
On September 17 and 18, communication devices exploded across Lebanon, killing dozens and injuring thousands. Explosions occurred in homes, markets, and other civilian spaces, and children were among the casualties.
In his September 19 speech, Sayyed Nasrallah described the attacks as an unprecedented security and humanitarian blow, but rejected the possibility that they would force Hezbollah to abandon its support for Gaza.
The Resistance, he said, would continue supporting Palestinians “no matter what the consequences are, what the sacrifices are, what scenarios will unfold.”
On September 19, 2024, Martyr Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah reaffirmed the Resistance’s support for the Palestinian people, vowing amid the ongoing Israeli genocide to never stop supporting Gaza no matter what.
Eight days later, on September 27, 2024, he was killed in an Israeli airstrike on Beirut’s southern suburbs.
Those words carry a different weight two years later.
He spoke of consequences after the consequences had already reached Lebanon. He spoke of sacrifice while the country was bleeding. He maintained the connection with Gaza when the danger was no longer theoretical.
Then the sacrifice included him.
"When we are also partners in martyrdom, together we will achieve the inevitable and forthcoming victory, God willing."
During his eulogy for martyred leader Fouad Shokor last month, #Hezbollah's martyred Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah reassured Resistance supporters… pic.twitter.com/kNZBdEyh5y
The words he had once offered to console the Resistance after the martyrdom of its commanders would soon acquire a painful new meaning after his own.
Whatever disputes remain over Hezbollah’s strategy, the continuity in Sayyed Nasrallah’s publicly stated position is clear: he did not abandon Gaza when maintaining that position became costly.
Two years later, Gaza’s children remain
Perhaps the most painful part of remembering those speeches today is that the children at their center continue to suffer.
In August 2026, UNICEF reported that at least 300 children had reportedly been killed in Gaza during the 300 days following the October 2025 ceasefire announcement — an average of one child every day. Hundreds more were injured, while malnutrition, disease, unsafe water and damaged sanitation systems continued to shape children’s lives.
"A ceasefire that leaves an average of one child dead each and every day is failing children," – @UNICEFmena Regional Director Edouard Beigbeder. "With hundreds more children injured, many severely, children in Gaza are still waiting for the end to the violence they were… pic.twitter.com/pkm34Mqj16
By September, OCHA reported that Israeli airstrikes and other attacks continued to affect populated areas, while 91% of assessed households faced moderate-to-high water insecurity.
The ruins themselves have become part of childhood.
A damaged home can become a grave. A destroyed water network can threaten life without another bomb falling. A crippled hospital can turn a survivable wound into a death sentence.
Gaza’s children, the measure of solidarity
Fourteen years have passed since Sayyed Nasrallah described standing with Gaza as a “religious and moral and humanitarian obligation.” Nearly three years have passed since he invoked Gaza’s children beneath the rubble. Two years have passed since his own death. Yet the question running through those speeches remains: What does solidarity mean if it disappears the moment it demands sacrifice?
For Sayyed Nasrallah, Gaza’s suffering could not be made distant by borders or political calculations. Its children mattered because they were children.
Perhaps that is why the paternal image associated with him resonates so deeply among those who mourn him.
Fatherhood, at its most elemental, means refusing indifference to a child’s pain — to protect where one can, to remain when leaving would be easier, and to say: your suffering concerns me.
Two years after Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s death, Gaza’s children remain the most painful measure of that principle. And the question he posed through his speeches remains before a world that saw their suffering unfold: What does silence mean when the children beneath the rubble can be seen by everyone?
Member of the Loyalty to the Resistance Block, MP Hasan Fadlallah, emphasized that the main battle today is liberating the land, protecting the people, returning to the southern villages and towns, and rebuilding them. He stressed that Hezbollah and the Amal Movement have not closed the doors to a political solution, but they reject submission and surrender.
Speaking during a memorial ceremony held in Beirut’s Dahieh, Fadlallah stated that the resistance supports diplomacy based on rights and indirect negotiations if it leads to the liberation of the South, the withdrawal of the occupation, and the return of the residents. He considered that any agreement linking the Israeli withdrawal to the disarmament of the resistance perpetuates the continuation of the occupation.
He pointed out that the resistance arose as a result of the occupation, affirming that it remains in a defensive position, and that steadfastness, resistance, and local and regional dynamics are what will lead to the liberation of the South.
Fadlallah also criticized the government’s performance, stating that the continued presence of Hezbollah and the Amal Movement within it is tied to “national and political necessities” rather than an endorsement of its policies. He called for an end to what he described as incitement against the resistance and its community, urging a move away from disinformation and division, while confirming that its resistance is “as firmly rooted as our existence in our country.”
Special Coverage | Sana’a threatens a sweeping response targeting Saudi bases and strategic interests should the blockade continue… تغطية خاصة | صنعاء تتوعد برد واسع يستهدف القواعد والمصالح الاستراتيجية السعودية إذا استمر الحصار …https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e16M9El_68M
Long before Yemen emerged as a regional force, Sayyed Nasrallah recognized the strength of a people who would refuse to bow, endure the war, and reshape the balance of West Asia.
The world saw bombs falling on Yemen. Martyred Lebanese Resistance leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah saw what lay behind them.
When a US-backed, Saudi-led coalition launched aggression against Yemen in March 2015, it was presented under the guise of an “effort to restore a political order in Sanaa.” But Sayyed Nasrallah rejected that claim from the outset.
Beneath the language of “restoring legitimacy and security,” he saw an attempt to impose a political outcome on an entire people through overwhelming military force, to break Yemen’s will, restore outside influence, and compel its people to surrender their sovereignty.
Sayyed Nasrallah’s assessment was not confined to a single speech.
Beyond the aggression
Across years of Saudi aggression, the former secretary general of Hezbollah returned to the same themes: Yemen’s resistance, its sovereignty, the limits of military coercion, and the ability of the Yemeni people to withstand pressure that had been expected to produce political submission.
More than a decade later, Yemen occupies a markedly different place in the regional landscape.
The Saudi-led aggression that began with an attempt to reshape Yemen’s political balance became a prolonged war. The Yemeni resistance survived years of military pressure and locally developed increasingly sophisticated military capabilities. The war eventually became intertwined with wider regional calculations involving Saudi Arabia, the United States, “Israel”, and the Red Sea.
After October 2023, Yemen’s role expanded again. Sanaa’s Yemeni Armed Forces began launching operations in solidarity with Gaza amid the Israeli genocide, drawing the country directly into the regional struggle for Palestine.
The question, looking back, is not whether Sayyed Nasrallah foresaw every development that followed.
It is more precise, and historically more useful, to ask what he actually identified about Yemen at different moments, what happened afterward, and why prominent Yemenis today believe his reading of their country was significant.
The first days
Sayyed Nasrallah’s first major solidarity came as the Saudi-led aggression on Yemen was still in its opening hours.
On March 27, 2015, two days after the launch of the aggression, he challenged the argument that developments in Yemen constituted an “existential security threat to Saudi Arabia.”
He asked why Saudi Arabia viewed Yemen as a threat while “Israel”, with one of the region’s most powerful militaries, remained a far more obvious strategic challenge.
The question reflected one of the foundations of his interpretation of the war: that Yemen was being viewed through the interests of outside powers rather than through the political aspirations of the Yemenis themselves.
Sayyed Nasrallah also challenged claims that Yemen’s emerging political order was simply an Iranian project, asking where the Iranian armies and military bases in Yemen were.
His argument was that the war could not be understood simply as an extension of Iranian-Saudi tension at the time.
He went further, arguing that Saudi Arabia had lost the degree of influence it had previously exercised over Yemen and that the war was intended to restore that influence.
‘A balm for Yemenis’ wound’
For Yemenis experiencing the first hours of the war, the significance of Sayyed Nasrallah’s speeches was immediate.
Dr. Ahmed Ahmed Saleh al-Arami, professor of modern history, president of Al-Bayda University, and deputy chairman of the Preparatory Committee for the International Palestine Conference, remembers the atmosphere vividly.
“That speech was like a balm in the early hours of the coalition aggression against Yemen,” al-Arami said. “At the time, we were following the media, regimes, and statements, all of which were mobilizing against the Yemeni people. The only position that came forward with such strength was that of the late Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.”
Al-Arami said Sayyed Nasrallah did not merely condemn the aggression. He explained its underlying objectives and challenged the assumption that military superiority would translate into political victory.
He recalled Sayyed Nasrallah concluding the speech with a declaration of confidence in Yemen’s ability to withstand the aggression.
“The Yemeni people will rub the noses of the Saud family in the soil of Yemen,” al-Arami recalled him saying during his speech at a crowded ceremony to mark the Tenth of Muharram in Beirut’s Southern Suburb (Dahieh) in October 2016.
“The Saudi war on the Yemeni people does not seem to be fought on the basis of achieving political goals, but reflects the level of grudge and revenge. This form of crime, which grinds humans, stone, children, and adults, and targets everything in Yemen, is Saudi Arabia’s hatred war of a Wahhabi taste,” Sayyed Nasrallah added at the time.
Inevitability of Yemen’s victory
Dr. Khaled Yahya al-Emad, a member of the Yemeni Shura Council, similarly places Sayyed Nasrallah’s position at the very beginning of the war.
“When we remember or speak of the late resistance leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, he was someone who saw with the light of God,” al-Emad stressed. “From the very first day of the aggression by the Saud family against Yemen, he said that victory would be on Yemen’s side.”
For al-Emad, Sayyed Nasrallah’s assessment remained consistent throughout the war.
“He consistently spoke about the Yemenis, Yemen, and their suffering at the hands of the Saud family, as well as the inevitability of their victory,” he stressed.
“And that is what happened. The Yemenis emerged victorious, and today they are rubbing the noses of the Saud family in the mud,” he affirmed.
The language was emphatic, but it reflected a broader assessment that Yemen’s resistance possessed the determination to withstand an aggression built on military superiority.
That understanding would inform Sayyed Nasrallah’s subsequent speeches as the war entered a prolonged phase.
The limits of force
As the war continued, Sayyed Nasrallah’s analysis increasingly focused on the widening gap between military power and political outcomes.
In a 2016 Al Mayadeen interview, he described the war on Yemen as unjust. He questioned the logic of continuing an aggression that had already failed to produce the political submission its backers sought.
“Their scheme in Yemen has failed,” he emphasized.
He also challenged the assumption that Saudi Arabia could ultimately use its financial resources to reconstruct Yemen and translate that reconstruction into political control.
The point was central to his broader understanding of resistance: destruction could be inflicted from the outside, but political submission could not simply be purchased or imposed.
By then, the war was already demonstrating its durability.
Sayyed Nasrallah described the Yemeni people as having endured an extraordinary period of fighting and emphasized the role of their determination and military capabilities in preventing their defeat.
‘The unjust war’
Years later, in December 2020, he returned to the same argument.
“The Yemeni people have fought for more than 2100 days,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, pointing to the Yemeni people’s determination and access to weapons as fundamental sources of their ability to continue fighting.
“Look, my understanding is that Saudi Arabia—particularly in recent years—does not act rationally. Rather, it acts out of spite and hostility. This war on Yemen—tell me, what is the reason for it? What logic? What basis? What law? What interests? What principle? What is the rationale behind this unjust war?” he said at the time.
The significance of the statement lies partly in its timing.
By late 2020, the war had lasted for more than five years. Whatever expectations had accompanied the opening of the Saudi-led aggression, the war had not produced a quick political settlement.
For Sayyed Nasrallah, the persistence of the war highlighted the distance between the scale of military force deployed against Yemen and the political objectives it was supposed to achieve.
When the battlefield became regional
The war’s trajectory increasingly complicated the idea that the war could be contained within Yemen.
In 2019, Yemeni Armed Forces operations against Saudi oil facilities demonstrated the ability of the aggression on Yemen to spill over to critical infrastructure beyond Yemen’s borders.
They showed the extent of deterrence Sanaa managed to establish.
For Sayyed Nasrallah, the war on Yemen was never entirely separate from the wider balance of power in West Asia.
He said in a televised speech on September 20, 2019, “The thing that will protect the installations and infrastructure in Saudi Arabia is halting the war against the Yemeni people.”
Noting that the YAF’s operation had initially halved Saudi oil output, he added, “Your house is made of glass, and your economy is made of glass….”
After all, Yemen’s own leadership had made decisions, developed military capabilities, and increasingly affected the strategic significance of its geographic position.
For the top Yemeni figures interviewed by Al Mayadeen English for this article, Sayyed Nasrallah’s significance cannot be explained entirely through military or geopolitical analysis.
Abdul Rahman Alahnomi, chairman of the General Corporation for Radio and Television, described Sayyed Nasrallah as a prominent voice defending the injustice inflicted upon the Yemenis.
“The late Resistance leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah was a beacon of defense against the injustice suffered by the Yemeni people,” Alahnomi said. “His positions of solidarity with Yemen in confronting the Saudi-American aggression were like a balm for our wounds, while also serving as a source of inspiration for other free people around the world and encouraging them to adopt similar positions toward what was happening in Yemen.”
For the Ambassador in the Ministry of Interior in Sanaa, Abdullah Ali Sabri, Sayyed Nasrallah’s speeches became something Yemenis actively awaited.
Sabri heartfully recalled Sayyed Nasrallah, describing his speech on the second day of the aggression as the greatest position he had taken in his life.
He also remembered Sayyed Nasrallah asking, “If the Yemenis are not Arabs, then who are the [true] Arabs?”
In a similar vein, Abu Aqil Abdullah Alnimi, a member of the Political Bureau of Ansar Allah, stressed that “Sayyed Nasrallah was the icon of his time and the leader of his era; his speeches were a balm and a source of healing.”
Profound loss
The significance of Sayyed Nasrallah’s words came from their perceived sincerity.
Yemenis believed that Sayyed Nasrallah was not speaking about their suffering as an abstract geopolitical issue.
“He spoke to Yemenis with emotion, loved Yemen deeply, and made that clear through his words and speeches,” Alnimi said.
That emotional connection became particularly important during an aggression in which Yemenis often felt isolated internationally.
“There was no one in the world who would wipe away our tears or tend to our wounds except the late Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah,” Alnimi emphasized.
A relationship beyond political solidarity
Alnimi recalled a relationship that, in the perception of many Yemenis, went beyond political solidarity.
“We considered him as though he were among us, as though he were the leader who taught us, advised us, guided us, and raised our morale,” Alnimi said.
“Sayyed Nasrallah’s absence was, for us, a great wound that will never heal and can never heal,” Alnimi stressed. “He left behind a great and profound void that no one else can fill.”
Orphaned Yemen
Alnimi described Yemen during the war as an isolated country.
“Yemen was an orphan. It had no one to support it, no one to stand by its side, and no one to wipe away its tears or tend to its wounds except the martyr, the martyr of humanity, and the martyr of all Muslims, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah,” Alnimi said.
On his part, Sabri likewise described Sayyed Nasrallah’s speeches as a key source of confidence and morale during the confrontation.
Their recollections reveal why Sayyed Nasrallah’s Yemen speeches acquired a significance that cannot be reduced to their geopolitical content.
For these Yemeni figures, he was not merely an outside political leader commenting on a foreign war. He was someone who repeatedly acknowledged Yemen’s suffering, defended its right to resist, and treated its people as actors who should be able to determine their own future.
2017: ‘I wish I were a fighter in your ranks’
Meanwhile, Al-Arami remembers another moment that, in his view, demonstrated the depth of Sayyed Nasrallah’s identification with the Yemeni resistance.
During the escalation of the Battle of the Western Coast in 2017, al-Arami recalled Sayyed Nasrallah saying on June 30, 2018, “I wish I were a fighter in your ranks, under the banner of your dear and courageous leader, Sayyed Abdul-Malik Badr al-Din al-Houthi.”
The statement came at a time when fighting was intensifying along Yemen’s western coastline.
Al-Arami said the words resonated with fighters and strengthened their morale.
The episode is significant not because one speech can be shown to have determined the course of a battle, but because it demonstrates how Sayyed Nasrallah’s public language about Yemen had evolved.
He was no longer merely explaining the struggle to an external audience.
He was addressing the Yemeni resistance itself.
Bread under siege
Another recollection from al-Arami reveals a different side of Sayyed Nasrallah’s relationship with Yemen.
After Sayyed Abdul-Malik Badr al-Din al-Houthi said on May 23, 2021, that Yemenis were prepared to share their daily bread with Palestinians, Sayyed Nasrallah reportedly responded on May 25, 2021, by asking whether Yemenis themselves had enough food under the Saudi blockade.
“Sayyed, you yourselves are under siege. Do you even have bread to spare to share with the Palestinian people?” Sayyed Nasrallah asked at the time, reflecting the depth of the Yemenis’ altruism.
The exchange captured a defining thread running through Sayyed Nasrallah’s speeches on Yemen: the connection between resistance, human dignity, and the suffering of peoples under siege.
Yemen’s support for Palestine was not occurring in conditions of prosperity or security. It was being articulated by a society enduring war and deprivation itself.
Historical moment
For al-Arami, Sayyed Nasrallah understood the significance of that gesture and responded to it emotionally.
The moment also foreshadowed a development that would become increasingly important years later: Yemen’s identification of its own struggle with the Palestinian cause.
From war on Yemen to the Red Sea
The next transformation in Yemen’s role occurred after the Saudi-led aggression had already reshaped the country’s military and political landscape.
The emergence of increasingly capable Yemeni missiles and drones altered the strategic equation with Saudi Arabia and later created a wider regional dimension to the struggle.
Then came October 2023.
As “Israel” launched its genocide in Gaza, the Yemeni Armed Forces declared on October 19, 2023, that their military operations would target Israeli-linked interests and shipping in support of the Palestinian cause.
The Red Sea consequently became one of the most important theatres in the broader regional confrontation.
What had begun in 2015 as a Saudi-led aggression centered on Yemen’s political order had acquired consequences for international maritime traffic, regional security, and US occupation forces’ deployments in West Asia.
This marked a profound change in Yemen’s position.
A country long neglected, exploited, and subjected to devastating aggression had emerged as a force capable of shaping strategic calculations far beyond the Arabian Peninsula.
Reshaping the regional balance
For years, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah insisted that Yemen should never be viewed as politically passive or strategically marginal.
Yemeni leaders made their own decisions. Their actions reflected their own political calculations, their interpretation of the Palestinian cause, and their assessment of Yemen’s interests.
Sayyed Nasrallah told Al Mayadeen‘s Chairman of the Board of Directors, Ghassan Ben Jeddou, that “in the war on Yemen, Hezbollah is not qualified to play the role of mediation, because we are a party that sides with Sayyed Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, the Yemeni people, and Ansar Allah movement.”
Sayyed Nasrallah delivered these remarks during the “Dialogue of the 40th Anniversary” on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of Hezbollah’s founding on July 25, 2022, adding that “the mediator usually requests concessions from the two parties, but what concessions can be requested from Ansar Allah?”
He stressed that “the Iranians gave a clear answer regarding mediation in the Yemeni war, which means that the Yemenis won’t, in any circumstances, waive their rights.”
Yemen and Palestine
The connection to Palestine was not an afterthought in Sayyed Nasrallah’s understanding of Yemen.
From his earliest speeches, he repeatedly challenged Arab governments over their focus on Yemen while “Israel” remained at the center of the region’s strategic landscape.
“If the aim of the war on Yemen is to save the Yemeni people, then why did Saudi Arabia abandon the Palestinian people for long decades?” the martyred leader said in a speech aired on Al Manar TV in March 2018.
Over time, he increasingly described the different resistance fronts as interconnected.
That framework became particularly relevant after October 2023.
Yemen’s military operations in support of Gaza transformed the country’s regional role and placed it directly within a confrontation involving “Israel”, the United States, and other Western imperialist powers.
An explicit connection
For Yemeni figures such as Alahnomi, the connection was explicit.
He linked the Yemeni confrontation with the broader struggle for Palestine and viewed Yemen’s later military posture as part of its commitment to the Palestinian cause.
The significance of this development extends beyond the language of regional alliances.
It demonstrated how Yemen’s geographic position on the Red Sea and near Bab al-Mandeb could give a relatively isolated country considerable strategic leverage.
That was a dimension of Yemen’s importance that became increasingly difficult to ignore.
Looking back
What, then, can be said with confidence about Sayyed Nasrallah’s reading of Yemen?
The record establishes that he envisioned every subsequent event.
He questioned whether military aggression could produce political submission. He treated Yemen as a political actor rather than merely a theatre for a wider regional confrontation. He emphasized the capacity of its people to endure pressure and repeatedly warned that the consequences of the war could extend beyond Yemen’s borders.
The subsequent course of the war gave those arguments a historical record against which they could be assessed.
The Yemeni resistance survived the aggression and developed significant military capabilities. The war affected Saudi territory and later international maritime routes in the Red Sea. Yemen emerged as an actor capable of shaping regional calculations, while its resistance became increasingly connected to the Palestinian cause.
These developments help explain why top Yemeni figures continue to return to Sayyed Nasrallah’s speeches.
Yemen’s suffering matters in its own right
Alnimi embraced them for championing Yemen with a depth of feeling that was unmistakable.
Al-Emad sees in them an early confidence in Yemen’s ability to endure.
Al-Arami remembers them as moments that provided reassurance when Yemen appeared isolated.
Alahnomi recalls them as a form of solidarity that transcended conventional political statements.
Sabri remembers them as words that made Yemenis feel that someone beyond their borders was listening.
Their testimony also reveals something that a purely strategic reading of Sayyed Nasrallah’s speeches would miss.
His importance to many Yemenis was not only that he assessed the war differently from Saudi Arabia or Western imperialist governments.
It was that he spoke about Yemen as its suffering mattered in its own right.
A window into Sayyed Nasrallah’s wider vision
The Yemen story ultimately points beyond Yemen.
Sayyed Nasrallah’s understanding of the region was built around a recurring set of ideas: resistance, sovereignty, deterrence, Palestinian centrality, and the limits of external power.
Those ideas appeared in his discussions of Lebanon, Iran, Syria, and Palestine as well.
Lebanon was viewed through the question of resistance to Israeli aggression.
Syria was understood within a wider struggle involving the state, armed groups, and foreign meddling.
Palestine remained, in his speeches, the central cause around which much of the region’s political struggle continued to revolve.
Yemen became another expression of that broader worldview.
An emerging power in West Asia
Yemen’s trajectory was particularly significant because the country underwent, within a decade, a dramatic transformation in its regional position.
The record shows a regional leader who consistently argued that Yemen’s political agency and capacity for resistance were being underestimated.
The years that followed provided substantial evidence against which that argument could be assessed.
Perhaps that is the most enduring significance of Sayyed Nasrallah’s Yemen speeches.
They were not simply predictions about how a particular war would end.
They were part of a broader argument about power in West Asia: that military superiority does not automatically translate into political control; that local actors cannot always be reduced to proxies of larger powers; and that societies subjected to external pressure can, under certain conditions, transform resistance into strategic influence.
What happens when a country refuses to surrender simply because a more powerful coalition demanded so?
For Yemen, the answer unfolded over more than a decade of war.
For Sayyed Nasrallah, it was a conviction he articulated from the very first days.
For the wider region, Yemen stands as a powerful testament to how an aggression launched to subjugate a nation can instead transform the strategic map of West Asia. What began as an attempt to break Yemen’s political will could not extinguish its resistance or silence its voice.
And through those years, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s unwavering belief in Yemen became part of the country’s own story, a legacy carried in the memory of its people and preserved among those who continue to see Resistance as a force capable of defying domination.
His words endure not simply as memories of a revolutionary leader, but as part of Yemen’s history and the wider history of resistance.
Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Major General Ahmad Vahidi lauded Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian’s address to the UN General Assembly, saying his declaration that Iran is not afraid of war echoed the “loud and steadfast voice” of the Iranian nation.
In a message issued following the president’s speech at the UNGA, Major General Vahidi said, “’We are not afraid of war’ is the loud and steadfast voice of the Iranian nation.”
He noted that this message was conveyed from the podium of the United Nations by the Iranian president and “resounded in the ears of the world.”
Pezeshkian, addressing the UN General Assembly on Wednesday night, said the Iranian people have experienced firsthand the consequences of military power and the destructive decisions of those who used it, adding that Iran’s resilience has been tested and that the enemies now know well that Iran cannot be forced to surrender through war.
Pezeshkian: “Iran will not seek anyone’s permission to defend itself”
▪️ Iran will not accept being deprived of peaceful nuclear knowledge.
The Iranian president stressed that Iran has never initiated a war and has consistently demonstrated its commitment to the negotiating table. “They imposed war on us, but we proved that we are not afraid of war when it comes to defending ourselves, and we do not shy away from negotiations for the sake of peace,” Pezeshkian said, adding, “We will stand to the last breath to defend our beloved Iran.”
President @drpezeshkian in an interview with Fox News: “If they want to continue the war, we will respond decisively.”
🔻 “We have never been the ones to start a war, but if they want to continue fighting us, we will respond decisively.
In July 2021, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah revealed a significant battle unlike any the Resistance had faced, stating that “[the media battle] is a fundamental part of the grand battle and full confrontation.” He went on to repeat this in an August 2021 speech during Ashura and in October 2023 in his speech commemorating Prophet Muhammad’s birth anniversary.
For Sayyed Nasrallah, resistance requires a holistic approach. The military aspect is just one facet of an all-encompassing battle that extends into many other areas, and one of the main elements in this battle is the media, around which he built a philosophy based on truthfulness and credibility, ethical conduct, and development.
It is from this philosophy that he derived the most important weapon in this battle: credibility, arguing that for the Resistance, its strength does not lie in piles of cash or fancy equipment, but in its honesty and truthfulness.
Credibility as a weapon
In his July 2021 speech, the Resistance’s leader emphasized that “the enemy [Israel] and settlers believe the Resistance’s media more than their own leaders and outlets,” attributing this to the honesty of the Resistance since its founding.
According to Sayyed Nasrallah, this trust is an admission that credibility, once earned, becomes a significant force that enemies cannot easily counter.
This credibility does not come from a vacuum, but from a track record of promises kept and rhetoric grounded in reality, building a philosophy of a Resistance that says what it does, and does what it says.
Perhaps the strongest manifestation of this philosophy is the Israeli withdrawal in 2000. In his May 26, 2000 speech in Bint Jbeil, Sayyed Nasrallah vowed to return all detainees in Israeli captivity, asserting, “Sheikh Abdul Kareem Obeid, Abu Ali ad-Dirani, Samir al-Kintar, and every captive in the Israeli prisons shall soon return to you, God willing.”
This was not merely a celebratory announcement stemming from the triumph over the Israeli occupation, but a clear declaration of the Resistance’s objectives and the road map it is working toward. Years later, Hezbollah fulfilled this promise and secured the release of its captives through two exchanges in 2004 and 2008.
Sayyed Nasrallah’s guiding principles in media
The media is not a communications concern separate from the battle, but an operational strategy. The same logic that governs military confrontation was applied to the battle over perception.
Sayyed Nasrallah’s strategic thinking can be organized around three pillars: media as a direct command responsibility, a tool of psychological warfare, and a frontline that must be defended.
One of the most revealing aspects of Sayyed Nasrallah’s media philosophy is that he did not delegate it to a team, instead assuming a direct role and hands-on involvement in this battle. During the 2006 war, the leader of Hezbollah was in direct contact with Al Manar TV through an internal telephone line, according to the news outlet’s then-director Abdallah Qassir.
According to Qassir, Sayyed Nasrallah “would follow even some details being reported on Al Manar, give instructions, and was keen that Al Manar sustain its coverage.” In Sayyed Nasrallah’s view, the channel’s staying on air was itself a victory for the Resistance, proving the importance of this battlefield for him.
Defense of the media frontline
On the defensive front, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah laid out a set of principles in his 2021 Ashura speech that read like a manual on how to fight this battle, grounded in reality, truthfulness, ethical guidance, and collective responsibility.
For Sayyed Nasrallah, immunity is the first defensive line: according to him, the media war waged by enemies “must not affect us. This war must not shake us. This war must not make us doubt, hesitate, get lost, despair, or wander off.” He emphasized that “you must not take every piece of news that comes to you, build on it, distribute it, and adopt it because this means destruction and the end.”
The second principle is truth and honesty in transmission, with the leader of the Resistance emphasizing reliance on the truth and being careful that “our position is right, and what we have to say is true”. He also called for honesty in conveying facts, asserting, “We must not falsify, distort, or invent facts.”
The third principle Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized was an ethical one: discipline in language. He called for no insults, no baseless accusations, no personal attacks, because these actions erode the credibility that made the Resistance’s media effective.
The fourth principle Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah outlined is collective responsibility. “This media battle today is the responsibility of everyone. All men and women, young and old, must participate in it, regardless of their specialization. The most important and most dangerous thing during this time is social networking. This allows everyone to be part of the media campaign, whether attacking or defending friends and enemies,” he affirmed.
The psychological front
Credibility and defensive lines shine when they are deployed for the purpose of psychological warfare. In a December 2009 speech, Sayyed Nasrallah explained that the primary goal of the psychological war is to “create fear, terror, and panic on the other front,” immediately inverting this framework and applying it to the Resistance’s media.
Just as the enemy uses the media to wage psychological warfare and break the Resistance’s will, the Resistance can use it to break the enemy’s confidence.
In the same speech, he identified specific methods the enemy uses: exaggerating capabilities, threatening destruction, and broadcasting military exercises. He argued that the Resistance must understand these methods to counter them and, where possible, deploy them in return.
One aspect of this offensive is using credible threats as a weapon. Ron Schleifer, head of the Center for National Security and Media Studies at Ariel University and a researcher specializing in information warfare, told the Israeli outlet Walla in 2016 that Israelis had learned the importance of psychological warfare from the positions, statements, and conduct of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, realizing that wars are not decided solely through bombing and shelling.
“A fundamental principle in psychological warfare is that if you cannot confront the enemy’s weapons, you influence the fingers that pull the trigger,” Schleifer noted, emphasizing that Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah was “100% successful” in this domain, since the Resistance’s threats to strike Haifa or the Saar Warship crystallized into real events that became ingrained in Israeli collective memory.
This builds upon the points the leader made regarding truthfulness and honesty, since a threat that the enemy simply does not believe has no use in the psychological battle.
Without media, victories are nil
Part of this psychological war that the media wages is the transmission of victories and achievements, a role that goes beyond reporting on victory and becomes a crucial part that leads to these accomplishments.
In his July 2021 speech, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that “if it were not for the Resistance media, the victories and achievements of the Axis of Resistance would not have been transmitted to the public, and all these victories would have been lost.”
Here, media is not simply a tool to transmit the victories; the media becomes an inseparable part of these victories, and without it, these victories would simply be wasted. Resistance media contributed to “making the victory” by relying on facts, data, and research rather than mere rhetoric.
Why does this matter for psychological warfare? Because a victory that is seen becomes a psychological fact on the enemy’s side as well. When Hezbollah’s achievements are transmitted credibly, they don’t just reassure the Resistance’s own base; they demonstrate to the enemy that the Resistance is capable of delivering on its threats.
The integrated deterrence equation
The success of this psychological war plays into an integral element of resistance: deterrence. While military capabilities fight the physical battle, the mental battle is fought through the media, a weapon as important as missiles and drones.
In his July 2021 speech, Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized the development of the media as a parallel path to developing military capabilities, saying, “Media confrontation must develop just as military confrontation develops, because it is an authentic part of the battle.”
Media supports military power not from the sidelines; it must be developed in the same way as military confrontation, using the same logic and the same seriousness, because it is part of the same battle, not a separate activity. The tools of military, security, political, and media confrontation are listed together as one integrated arsenal.
In his October 2023 speech commemorating the Prophet’s birth, he goes as far as putting the media war above the military one in terms of danger and destructiveness, calling it “a war more dangerous and more destructive than military war.”
This equation of media with military power is not abstract. Sayyed Nasrallah directly links the media to the construction of what he calls a “new deterrence equation.” In the same July 2021 speech, he stated that the Resistance must “formulate and consolidate the discourse and strategy of the new deterrence equation: al-Quds against the entire region.”
This strategic doctrine holds that the use of the media to create reverse psychological warfare is one of the central pillars of his asymmetric deterrence model, alongside missile capabilities and the strategy of targeting the enemy’s social vulnerabilities.
Spider web speech
This is best displayed in his 2000 Spider Web speech: his deterrence model does not rest on matching Israeli military capabilities; it rests on targeting the vulnerability he identified there, Israeli society’s unwillingness to endure sustained casualties and pressure.
A threat that is not believed does not deter. A victory that is not transmitted is a victory lost. And a media that is not trusted cannot transmit anything at all.
For deterrence to function, that vulnerability must be communicated, and the media is the mechanism to achieve that. It transmits the threat, projects the image of a Resistance that will not break, and turns psychological pressure into a permanent condition rather than a passing tactic.
Deterrence is not an abstraction here; it is the mechanism that prevents war, protects Lebanon, and preserves the Resistance’s ability to function. The media battle is fought so that deterrence functions, so that the enemy believes the threat is real, so that the Spider Web thesis is internalized on the Israeli side, and so that what the Resistance has built is protected.
The media isn’t merely about reporting and describing what is happening; it becomes how the Resistance fights its battles, and Sayyed Nasrallah’s framework is how the media turns from a resistance tool into resistance itself.
Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian holds an imageof martyred Iranian Leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei during the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly at on Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2026 (AP)
Iran’s president tells the UNGA that Iran will not surrender, defends its nuclear rights, and calls for diplomacy and justice for Palestine.
Iran will not bow to US pressure, and Tehran remains committed to diplomacy and negotiations without accepting the language of force, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian told the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday.
Pezeshkian’s address came a day after US President Donald Trump used his UNGA speech to issue a warning to Iran and call for its economic isolation, threatening to “annihilate the Islamic Republic.” Reuters reported that Pezeshkian’s speech reaffirmed Tehran’s position that it would not surrender while keeping open the possibility of diplomacy.
The Iranian president focused much of his address on the US war on Iran, the Israeli occupation’s actions against Gaza, Iran’s nuclear program, regional security, and double standards in the international system.
He rejected accusations that Iran is a source of regional instability, arguing that Tehran has acted in self-defense and does not seek military power for aggression or hegemony.
‘We have only defended ourselves’
Pezeshkian opened his address by rejecting the characterization of Iran as “terrorist”, saying that Iranians have themselves been victims of US and Israeli terrorism and aggression.
He carried pictures showing students from Minab and Lamerd who were killed by US-Israeli airstrikes on the Islamic Republic, commemorating them in his speech alongside martyred Iranian Leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei, whose picture he also held.
He referred to attacks on Iranian cities and facilities, including a strike on a school in Minab and a sports hall in Lamerd where children were present. He said Iranian scientists, civilians, and children had been killed in attacks carried out with US and Israeli weapons.
“Those who are terrorists and train and protect terrorists describe us as such. We have only defended ourselves. We are not terrorists,” Pezeshkian said.
He accused the United States and the Israeli occupation of targeting Iranian universities, healthcare centers, schools, hospitals, and infrastructure, describing such attacks as violations of international law.
Pezeshkian also recalled the assassination of Hamas political bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on the day of his presidential inauguration, saying the incident demonstrated the threats facing Iran.
Turning to Gaza, he said more than 80,000 civilians had been killed and hundreds of thousands displaced, accusing the Israeli occupation of committing genocide while those who resist it are labeled “terrorists”.
Iran defends its right to peaceful nuclear technology
A central part of Pezeshkian’s address focused on Iran’s nuclear program.
He said Tehran seeks nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, including medicine, agriculture, industry, and electricity generation, rejecting restrictions that would prevent Iran from developing such capabilities.
“Iran does not accept for nuclear technology to be at the exclusive disposal of some, of a handful,” he said. “We will not, we will not bow our head and give up the right that is inherently ours. We say it clearly, no nuclear weapons and no limitations to peaceful nuclear technology.”
Pezeshkian maintained that Iran does not seek nuclear weapons while insisting that its right to peaceful nuclear technology should not be restricted.
He also framed Iran’s military capabilities as defensive, arguing that Tehran needs sufficient strength to deter attacks against its territory.
“Iran must be powerful so as to avoid being threatened, to avoid its future being threatened,” he said, adding that Tehran does not seek hegemony or security at the expense of other countries.
Justice for Palestine key to Lasting peace in West Asia
The Iranian president devoted a significant portion of his speech to Palestine, describing Gaza as evidence of the failure of international mechanisms to prevent civilian suffering.
“Palestine remains an open wound on the conscience of the international community and Gaza remains a symbol of the failure of international mechanisms to prevent civilian suffering,” Pezeshkian said.
He argued that lasting peace in West Asia cannot be achieved without justice for Palestinians, linking the continuation of resistance to the persistence of occupation, aggression, and displacement.
“Lasting peace in West Asia is impossible without justice for Palestine,” he said. “As long as occupation, aggression and injustice persist in the world, resistance will continue.”
Pezeshkian also rejected the notion that resistance could be eliminated through military force, arguing that Palestinians would continue resisting attempts to remove them from their land.
He called for regional issues to be addressed by countries in the region rather than through the intervention of outside powers.
Iran calls for regional security, diplomacy
Addressing regional relations, the Iranian president said Iran does not regard neighboring countries as security rivals and instead wants strong neighbors and regional cooperation.
On the Strait of Hormuz, he said Iran could not accept a situation in which outside powers benefited from the waterway while using it to impose military pressure and insecurity on Iran.
“We will not succumb to that. The expansion of warfare will not result in security,” he said.
His remarks came amid heightened tensions surrounding the strategic waterway and the wider US war on Iran. Iran has previously signaled that the Strait of Hormuz could form part of discussions over de-escalation if US military and economic pressure is reduced and the blockade is lifted.
Pezeshkian said regional security cannot be achieved by one country alone, arguing that neighboring states must cooperate to establish a broader security framework.
Iran remains open to negotiations
The Iranian president also directly addressed those responsible for aggression against Iran, saying Tehran had demonstrated that it could not be forced into surrender.
“Iran has never, ever been an aggressor, has never started a war, and has always shown her commitment to the negotiating table,” Pezeshkian said.
He stressed that Iran would continue defending itself while maintaining its readiness for diplomacy.
Addressing Trump directly, Pezeshkian said Iran was prepared to engage in dialogue and negotiations but would not accept negotiations conducted under military pressure.
“Iran must be understood by Mr. Trump and those who seek to bully us that we are ready for dialogue and diplomacy and negotiations without accepting the language of force,” he said.
The speech came as Iranian and US officials were communicating indirectly through mediators on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly. Reuters reported that Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner communicated through mediators on Wednesday, marking the first such contacts in months.
Pezeshkian concluded by calling for an international order based on equal rights, justice, human dignity, and the rejection of double standards.
“A peace that does not encompass all is no peace and fairness and justice that does not embrace all is not worthy of being called justice and fairness,” he said.
Hezbollah MP Mohammad Raad during an interview with AL-Manar (August 2025).
Head of Hezbollah’s Loyalty to the Resistance parliamentary bloc MP Mohammad Raad said a national consensus on a comprehensive security and defense strategy requires a sovereign authority, stressing that the resistance group’s red lines remain unchanged.
In an interview with Al-Modon, published on Wednesday, MP Raad linked any discussion of the state’s monopoly on weapons to Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory, an end to Isrseli attacks, and the deployment of the Lebanese Army south of the Litani River, describing these steps as a prelude to reaching agreement on a comprehensive national defense strategy.
On negotiations, MP Raad voiced Hezbollah’s readiness to engage positively with any agreement that guarantees an Israeli withdrawal and a cessation of hostilities, provided it is reached through indirect negotiations and entails no concessions to the Israeli enemy.
The senior Hezbollah lawmaker called on President Joseph Aoun to uphold the Constitution and the National Accord Document while safeguarding national unity.
MP Raad reaffirmed the strength of Hezbollah’s ties with Iran, stressing the Israeli Republic’s keenness to keep Lebanon as the first item on the agenda for implementation under the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding.
The Hezbollah MP, meanwhile, referred to strong relation with Amal Movement, saying they “remain in a strong position,” while declining to comment on the possibility of direct US dialogue with Hezbollah.
TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Mohsen Rezaei warned regional countries against joining a US plan to restrict Iranian aviation, saying any attempt to prevent Iranian aircraft from using regional airports could affect flights from those countries as well.
Speaking to Iranian state television on Wednesday, Rezaei said Iran would respond to US President Donald Trump’s remarks about the war against Iran, describing Trump’s UN General Assembly speech as the address of “a defeated criminal” seeking to defend himself.
Rezaei said Iran has not attacked other countries since the victory of the 1979 Islamic Revolution and has only defended itself. He hit back at the US and the Israeli regime for waging aggression and said Iran has emerged from the war with greater power.
Rezaei also stated that Iran has inflicted serious damage on US military assets during the conflict, including striking advanced US aircraft and targeting the USS George Washington. He further noted that Iran has seized a US submarine and is conducting reverse engineering on it.
On diplomacy, Rezaei said there has been no change in Iran’s position and that Tehran is pursuing a new diplomatic approach.
“We are not returning to the past,” he said, stressing that the US must take concrete steps to regain the trust of the Iranian people.
“If America does not first fulfill our conditions, neither will the Strait of Hormuz open nor will we negotiate,” Rezaei said.
He said Iran has seven conditions, which have been put in writing and conveyed through Pakistan and Qatar. He added that Tehran’s conditions must be fulfilled before the Strait of Hormuz is reopened.
Rezaei said Iran is seeking guarantees as part of its new diplomacy, stressing that the Strait of Hormuz remains an instrument for securing Iran’s rights.
He also rejected accusations that Iran seeks war, saying Yemenis are independent and that Tehran does not want a conflict between Yemen and Saudi Arabia.
Reacting to the US plan to sanction Iranian aircraft, Rezaei urged regional states not to cooperate with Washington in restricting Iran’s aviation sector.
“We ask all the countries of the region not to join America’s adventure,” he said.
“If they do not allow Iranian aircraft to travel, their own airports will not be able to have flights either,” Rezaei warned.
“You are our friends, but you should not join America’s ranks. You should prevent the war from spreading,” he told the regional and neighboring states.
Four decades after the massacre, activists from Italy, Argentina and international solidarity movements gathered at the Sabra and Shatila cemetery, linking the memory of those killed to the harrowing genocide still unfolding across Palestine, Lebanon and the wider region.
Rain fell over the entrance of the Sabra and Shatila cemetery as mourners and activists made their way toward the graves, some weeping beneath the gray sky. The passage into the cemetery carried the weight of 44 years of memory, as if the people massacred here had never truly left the place.
Their names, their killings, and the grief of their families remain embedded in the site, where international activists joined Palestinians and Lebanese to mark the 44th anniversary of the massacre.
A memory inseparable from the present
But for those who traveled from abroad, the commemoration was not simply an act of looking back.
It was a declaration that memory remains inseparable from the present.
For Italian activist Caterina Mari, the responsibility to remember Sabra and Shatila has been passed from one generation to the next. She recalled Italian journalist Stefano Chiarini, who repeatedly visited Lebanon and helped bring attention to the cemetery and its victims.
“Now in Italy we take the testimony,” Mari told Al Mayadeen English. “As young people we have the obligation to do that.”
She said that obligation is also connected to the complicity of Western governments in supporting “Israel”.
Same bloodied hands
Mari argued that international activists gathering at Sabra and Shatila are not there to dictate how Palestinians should live, but to stand alongside those resisting oppression.
“The Palestinians and all the oppressed people in the world, they must choose by themselves,” she told Al Mayadeen English. “We are not the people that come here and say how to live.”
For Mari, the connection between Sabra and Shatila and the Israeli aggression across West Asia today is direct.
“The perpetrators are always the same,” she said, pointing to Western governments that support “Israel”.
“And the massacre here is the same massacre that happened today. Because it’s the same hands.”
She added that activists must go beyond commemorating the victims.
“We, as a testimony, have to stop all of this,” Mari said. “Not only to march, but to stop all of this.”
‘More important than ever’
Eulalia Millaret, an Italian activist with the organization Don’t Forget Sabra and Shatila, said the passage of time has made remembrance more urgent rather than less relevant.
“It’s more important than ever right now,” she stressed.
For Millaret, remembering Sabra and Shatila also means remembering the victims of subsequent massacres.
“We will never forget, not only Sabra and Shatila, but all the massacres that have been going on during all these years,” she told Al Mayadeen English, referring to the Israeli genocide in Gaza as well as Israeli aggression in Lebanon, most notably in south Lebanon, Beirut and the capital’s Southern Suburb.
“And we will never forget any of these massacres and any of the people that have lost their lives, any of the martyrs,” she added.
Millaret said international activists are also working in their own countries to pressure governments to sever relations with “Israel”.
“We try to fight always with the same message, to pressure our governments to stop any kind of relationship with the genocidal state of Israel,” she said.
She linked the continuation of aggression to the persistence of Israeli occupation.
“Because Israel still exists. That’s the main problem. The occupation is still ongoing,” Millaret emphasized.
In Millaret’s view, activists would continue supporting resistance in both Palestine and Lebanon.
From Gaza to Sabra and Shatila
For Vincenzo Fullone, an Italian activist with the Freedom Flotilla, arriving at Sabra and Shatila was part of a wider effort to stand with Palestinians.
Fullone told Al Mayadeen English that he had participated in the latest Freedom Flotilla mission toward Gaza aboard the Conscience and was abducted by “Israel” for five days at Ketziot.
He recalled demanding the release of Palestinian doctor Hussam Abu Safiya and urged people not to forget Palestinian medical workers.
“Please, don’t forget Hussam. Don’t forget the doctors of the children,” he pleaded.
Fullone added that when activists are prevented from reaching Gaza, their solidarity does not stop.
“We are in Lebanon today because if they block us toward Gaza, we arrive in Sabra Shatila because the Palestinian is here too,” he said.
For him, the Palestinian presence in Lebanon is itself part of the story of forcible displacement and continuing occupation.
“The Palestinian is in a refugee camp,” he said. “The Palestinian is under genocide in Lebanon.”
“Free Palestine”
Asked what message international activists were sending by gathering at the cemetery, Fullone responded simply, “Free Palestine!”
He said activists should learn from Palestinian resistance rather than speak on behalf of Palestinians.
“We learn the resistance from Palestinian people,” he said. “To learn the resistance because the West forgets the resistance.”
Fullone also drew a direct line between the massacre commemorated at the cemetery and the current regional Israeli aggression unfolding today across West Asia.
“It’s the same mind. The same terrorists,” he stressed.
He pointed to the continued Israeli occupation and incursions in Palestinian cities and territories, as well as Lebanon, saying, “They occupy Palestine in Ramallah. They occupy Palestine in Jenin. They occupy Palestine in Gaza. They occupy Palestine in Lebanon.”
Memory as an act of resistance
For Argentine activist Lissandro Brusco, the gathering was rooted in the idea that people retain the memory of massacres and transform that memory into political action.
“Because the people have memory, because the people choose to resist,” Brusco told Al Mayadeen English when asked why activists continue to gather at Sabra and Shatila 44 years later.
He described the gathering of Palestinians, Lebanese and international activists in Beirut as a refusal to forget the massacre or reconcile with those he holds responsible.
“We do not forget, we do not forgive, we do not reconcile,” Brusco said.
His message extended beyond commemoration.
“The message for all of us is not to resign, to follow the path of the struggle,” he said, pointing to Palestinians as well as people in Yemen, Iraq and Lebanon.
A struggle extending beyond Palestine
Brusco framed the present struggle as extending beyond Palestine, describing it as a confrontation involving North American imperialism and the Israeli colonial entity.
“Today is the message precisely of not forgetting to continue the struggle,” he affirmed.
For him, the significance of the anniversary therefore lies not only in remembering those massacred in 1982, but in carrying their memory into the present.
“Not only to vindicate and make a commemorative act, but to continue this struggle,” Brusco said.
Forty-four years later
As the rain continued around the cemetery, the anniversary brought together people whose lives and backgrounds stretch far beyond Beirut, activists from Italy, Argentina and international solidarity movements standing alongside Palestinians, Lebanese, Iranians, Iraqis and Yemenis.
Their political positions differ in language and emphasis, but their interviews converge on one point: Sabra and Shatila remains, for them, a living memory rather than a closed chapter.
The cemetery has become a place where remembrance meets activism, where the victims of 1982 are remembered alongside those killed in subsequent genocides.
Forty-four years on, Sabra and Shatila remains more than a memory for those who return each year. The voices of survivors, the memory of those killed, and the testimony of activists keep the massacre in the public record, drawing a line between a tragedy remembered and genocides still being documented today. For those gathered at the cemetery, remembrance is not an endpoint; it is a demand that the victims not be forgotten and that history not be allowed to repeat itself.
Supporters of Yemeni Ansar Allah march with a poster showing Seyyed Abdul Malik Badreddine Al-Houthi during a rally to markthe 12-years anvirsary of September 21 Revolution, Yemen, Sunday, Sept. 20,2026 (AP)
Ansar Allah marks the September 21 Revolution, highlighting Yemen’s regional role, sovereignty efforts, and continued opposition to the Saudi-led blockade.
The September Revolution enabled Yemen to play the role of a regional actor, noting that the Yemeni people continue to fight for independence and the lifting of the Saudi-led blockade, the Ansar Allah movement said on Monday.
In a statement marking the September 21 Revolution, the movement’s Political Bureau said, “The steadfastness and resilience of our people in the face of the aggression represented the hallmark of their blessed revolution, which united societal efforts.”
The Political Bureau affirmed that “the youthful revolution and the principles on which it was founded moved Yemen to the position of a regional actor,” noting that “the army of the September 21 revolution carried out its humanitarian and moral role in supporting Gaza and confronting the war of extermination.”
It also stressed that the Yemeni people “continue to wage the battle for sovereignty and independence until the aggression is halted, the blockade is lifted, and their legitimate goals are achieved.”
The September 21 Revolution refers to September 21, 2014, when the Ansar Allah movement took control of political decision-making headquarters in the capital, Sanaa, following armed clashes in response to large popular protests in the capital that rejected the previous government’s decisions to lift subsidies on petroleum derivatives.
Security apparatuses on full alert to foil enemy schemes: Interior Ministry
Elsewhere, the Interior Minister of Sanaa, Major General Abdul Karim al-Houthi, affirmed that security agencies are fully ready and prepared to thwart all plans of the enemy and its tools and to respond to security challenges.
The minister explained that security agencies have already begun providing all security and administrative services to the residents of the liberated districts in the western coast region.
This comes as the head of Yemen’s Supreme Political Council, Mahdi al-Mashat, affirmed on Sunday that what the Yemeni Armed Forces carried out in some coastal areas was “a national operation to impose sovereignty and expel Saudi mobilizations.”
He also stressed that “the options will escalate and take more painful forms,” adding, “We will not retreat from our rights even if we offer our lives as the price for that.”
This comes as the Yemeni Armed Forces confront Saudi-backed forces in several governorates, after launching preemptive strikes against their field mobilizations, in parallel with Yemeni forces targeting vital facilities in Saudi territory in response to its aggression and blockade of the country.
The Major Confrontation – Latest Edition | The New York Times: Saudi Arabia’s request for military support puts Trump in a bind | …المواجهة الكبرى – آخر طبعة | “نيويورك تايمز”: طلب السعودية دعماً عسكرياً يضع ترامب في مأزق | …
The “Fedayeen for Iran” drills began in Tehran on Friday morning, with 313,000 Iranians taking part, according to the Mehr News Agency. The gathering marks Sacred Defense Week and the 200th night of the Iranian people’s steadfastness in the face of US-Israeli aggression.
The drill began at 8:00 am, with participants from across Iran marching from Imam Hussein Square and the nearby highway intersection toward Enqelab Square.
The drill is organized under the “My Life as a Sacrifice” initiative, run by the IRGC’s Mohammad Rasoul Allah Corps. Brigadier General Hassan Hassanzadeh, commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps’ Mohammad Rasoul Allah Corps in Tehran, told Al Mayadeen that roughly 33 million Iranians have registered to join the initiative nationwide, with registrations in Tehran alone surpassing 400,000 ahead of Friday’s event.
On Friday morning, Iranians took to the streets to participate in the Fedayeen of Iran military and popular maneuver.
Hassanzadeh said that Friday’s event was one of the largest drills and organized popular gatherings in the country’s history, adding that “friends and enemies alike” would witness it.
Iranian officials have repeatedly affirmed that the Iranian people stand fully prepared to mobilize and make sacrifices in defense of their land, country, and national achievements.
Iran more prepared than before the 12-Day War
Speaking to Al Mayadeen ahead of the drill, Hassanzadeh said Iran is now more prepared than it was before the 12-Day War and the Ramadan War, noting that Tehran operates within a defensive strategy to protect itself, its country, its values, and its people.
He stressed that the US and “Israel” failed to defeat or destabilize Iran, and that the hostilities against the country instead strengthened national cohesion.
“Throughout history, the Iranian people have proven that whenever they face aggression, they become more united,” Hassanzadeh said.
Continued missile production
Hassanzadeh said the IRGC holds extensive military capabilities and equipment that have not yet been disclosed, adding that Iran used only a portion of its capabilities in prior confrontations. He warned that Iran’s adversaries would “experience these capabilities” if necessary.
He added that Iran’s missile and drone production and development continue at full pace without interruption, and that Iranian forces have reached a higher level of readiness to respond to any aggression targeting the country.
Riyadh Shelled, Shock in Tel Aviv… Yemen Is Being Slaughtered with Cotton Wool, Yet Saudi Arabia Is Surrendering! The F-35 Has Fallen for Good – Najah Mohammed Ali قصف الرياض وصدمة في تل أبيب.. اليمن يذبح بالقطنة والسعودية تستلم! ال f35 سقطت للأبد نجاح محمد علي
A battalion of volunteer forces parades in Tehran during the Janfada drill on September 18, 2026, as Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and other officials attend the event (Photo by ISNA).
The massive “Janfada-ye Iran / Sacrifice for Iran” rally began in Tehran on Friday, bringing together hundreds of thousands of people, including women, youth and other segments of the Iranian public, with simultaneous gatherings held across the country.
In Tehran, the main rally features a 313,000-strong parade stretching from Imam Hussein Square to Enghelab Square, highlighting the broad public participation in the Janfada-ye Iran campaign.
The figure 313 carries particular significance in Islamic tradition. It is associated with the Battle of Badr in 624 CE, the first major battle of the early Muslim community, whose victory became an important symbol of faith and steadfastness in Islamic history.
The rally also features a display of Iranian drones, showcasing part of the country’s indigenous unmanned aerial capabilities.
Thousands of people took part in the “Sacrifice for Iran” campaign in Tehran, staging a march from Imam Hossein Square to Enghelab Square to demonstrate national unity.
Thousands of people took part in the “Sacrifice for Iran” campaign in Tehran, staging a march from Imam Hossein Square to Enghelab Square to demonstrate national unity.
Veterans of the Sacred Defense wars have also joined the gathering, while women and Iranian youth are taking part in separate sections of the parade, according to Tasnim news agency.
Participants wearing burial shrouds have also joined the rally, symbolizing their readiness to sacrifice themselves in defense of Iran.
⚡️BREAKING: Mobilization has Begun in Tehran with the aim of Forming 1,000 Battalions and will now be Expanded to the Entire Country pic.twitter.com/p2hI6HizRH
According to General Hassan-Zadeh, commander of the Greater Tehran Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, about 500,000 people had registered in Tehran to participate in the event.
The “Janfada-ye Iran” campaign began on March 29 following the US-Israeli aggression against Iran, and has since grown into a nationwide mobilization with more than 32 million participants, as a symbol of faith, steadfastness and readiness for sacrifice in defense of the country.
On the Second Anniversary of the Israeli Pager Massacre, the Wounded sent a message to affirm steadfastness and allegiance to the Resistance path, command and community.
What follows is the full text of the message:
On the second anniversary of the epic of patience and blood, when betrayal wore the cloak of technology, a light shines from the darkness of wounds that does not fade. Two years since the “pager” massacre; the enemy thought through its betrayal that it would break the will of the resistance and paralyze its community, only to be astonished when those wounds turned into a bridge of certainty, and the loss of sight became a insight illuminating the path to victory.
We stand before a story crafted by blood and limbs—a story of men who defied the impossible and wrote a new chapter of pride and dignity through their pain.
Before that fateful day, the lives of these noble men were full of vitality and vigor, flowing with tireless jihad across various fields. In their community, they were a beneficial rain, racing day and night so that no price was too high for the dignity of this proud environment. They served people with love and humility, defending their families and villages with all their strength and might. They were stern against enemies, merciful among themselves. In their homes, they were tranquility and joy—affectionate fathers, dutiful sons, and supportive husbands who filled every corner with laughter and hope. They watched their children grow day by day, caring for their comfort, sharing the smallest and largest details of life, instilling values of pride, surrounding them with overflowing affection, and leading social life with unflagging energy.
Then came that moment—the moment of betrayal that the enemy intended to be the end, but God made a passage toward a higher glory. Explosions echoed, shrapnel flew, and blood mixed with the soil. The features of the body changed, but the identity remained untouched.
Limbs that used to greet the dawn were lost, eyes that guarded the borders were extinguished, and fresh bodies were transformed into records telling stories of steadfastness. From the womb of those pains, and after a long and arduous treatment journey, these heroes did not bow to the storm, nor did they surrender to the wounds that marked their bodies as badges of honor.
The wounded of the resistance have never surrendered, and never will.
The proof lies in what we witnessed in previous stages of conflict and during the battle of “Al-Asf Al-Ma’kul” (The Eaten Chaff). Heroic fighters were injured by pagers and lost an eye, yet they unhesitatingly continued the path of jihad with their remaining eye, inspired by the resolve of Hussein. Some had a limb amputated, yet carried their weapon with the other hand, armed with the might of Abbas. Among these free men were those who continued the path until later earning the honor of martyrdom, while others suffered new injuries resulting in paralysis—yet their spirit remained vibrant and their determination was never paralyzed.
Today, these proud men pass their days not on the margins of life, but once again in the very heart of the battle. The loss of sight or limbs did not prevent them from continuing the path; they awoke to announce a new jihadi beginning. In their lexicon, jihad is not limited to carrying weapons on the frontlines; it is a vast and expansive field. They transformed into knights in the “Jihad of Clarification,” carrying the free word, pursuing knowledge, and memorizing the Holy Quran, dedicating whatever health remains to raising a resistant generation that does not break. It is the spirit that merges human emotion and deep pain with firm resolve and unrelenting Husseini might.
Our Message to Our Honorable Resistance Community: “Our Insight Is the Secret of Our Steadfastness”
O people of patience and loyalty, O environment of pride that embraced our blood and wounds: we are from you, and through you we continue. Our pledge to you is that these wounds will remain a beacon illuminating the path of honor, and that we will be nothing less than an impregnable shield for you. Your sacrifices with us and your pride in our wounds are the fuel that enables us to overcome every pain, building together an invincible resistance community.
“O our loyal people, the enemy intended through its deceit and treacherous crime to sear our consciousness, weaken our resolves, and rob us of the will to fight in order to cast despair and frustration into your hearts. But today, through our blood and wounds, we convey to you a message of pride and lofty dignity: Do not worry about us, and do not look at us with pity or defeat, for we are still in the heart of the battle. All this devotion we have offered, and all the sacrifices you have made in homes, wealth, and beautiful patience, will not be in vain, but will inevitably be crowned with a near victory, and God does not break His promise. We will break the enemy’s malicious plans, and as long as our insight pulses and our patience grows stronger, we see on the horizon nothing but the tidings of victory and a clear conquest.”
A Message to the Enemy: The Wounds Are Our Weapon
“To this brutal enemy who is ignorant of the nature of our men: You thought that by cutting hands and taking eyes you would extinguish God’s light in our hearts or deter us from the choice of resistance. Know that you are delusional; every wound in our bodies has become a mouth speaking the truth, every amputated palm has turned into a raised flag, and every lost eye has become an insight illuminating the path of the mujahideen toward Jerusalem. We say to you with the might of Abbas and the insight of Hussein: You will never be able to erase our mark, and every wound in us is a promise of your destruction. We do not die; we extend, and our wounds today are our strongest weapon with which we will disturb your sleep, and tomorrow is near for those who await it.”
A Message to the Leader of the Resistance: Remaining Faithful to the Covenant
“To his eminence, our inspiring leader and dear secretary of our resistance: O Sheikh Qassem, our wounds are our renewed oath of allegiance to you every day. A pledge to you from our hearts—which have never beat and will never beat except with loyalty—and from our bodies that take pride in what they bore in the cause of God: We are at your command, and what our bodies failed to do, our spirits and determinations will carry out. Take from our blood and wounds until you are satisfied, and know that you lead men who, even if blood flowed from their veins as rivers, would never leave the arena, nor abandon the path. We are with you, and through you we will cross to the great prayer of victory.”
To the Remnant of God on His Earth, the Master of the Era and Refuge of Hearts (may our souls be sacrificed for the dirt beneath his feet):
Peace be upon you, my master, in our trial and our patience. Peace be upon you the day you were born and the day you are raised alive to wipe over hearts that have bled with longing and wounds.
My master, O Master of the Affair… Here we stand today on the second anniversary of our wounds, carrying to you scars that we count on our bodies as badges of dignity. Yesterday we were in a position of silent giving, moving in the fields of daily jihad—planting resistance in the land and guarding the borders with eyes fixed on victory. Suddenly, on that memorable day, a door of a great test opened before us, and we transitioned from the stage of obscure field work to the threshold of bleeding wounds; a threshold where limbs and eyes were taken from us, but which granted us an unextinguishing insight and an unyielding resolve. The conditions of our bodies changed, but our hearts remained on the same covenant, moving today in a state of strategic patience, dressing the wound and continuing the journey—neither disability has sidelined us, nor has pain turned us away from supporting your religion.
My master, these wounds of ours are but a ray from the eternal Husseini revolution. We learned in the school of Karbala that the body perishes while the creed remains. Even if we have lost eyes or limbs, today we embody the might of Abbas (peace be upon him)—that might which knows no defeat. If hands are severed from us, our spirits will remain defending the tents of resistance, and if eyes are injured, we see the splendor of your coming victory with even greater clarity.
They threw us into the well of darkness, as Joseph was thrown into the depths of the pit, thinking that absence swallows the story, unaware that God was with him, and that the shirt emerging from the heart of trial was good news that loss may conceal within it the secret of reunion.
In the depth of the wound, we learned to shake the trunk of light; we do what we can, then leave it to the Unseen to drop upon us the fresh dates of His mercy. Joseph emerged from the pit as a noble ruler, Moses emerged from the river to fulfill his message, and Mary stood beneath the palm trunk carrying a secret greater than her capacity to speak. Thus, God does not ask the wounded person to be a stone that feels no pain; He only asks them to be a soul that knows how to turn its pain into a path toward Him.
O Master of the Era… Our wounds complain to you of the length of absence, and beseech God by the blood of the oppressed to hasten your honorable relief, so that we may be in your ranks as soldiers, the wounded, and martyrs.
Palestinians carry the body of Nael Abo Obeida commander of Qussan Brigades in Rafah during funeral after he was killed in an Israel attack in Khan Younis, Wednday, Sept, 16, 2026. (AP Photto/Yousef Al Zanoun)
Anonymous IOF sources claim the assassinations dealt a severe blow to the Resistance’s command, and that Hamas sees them as crossing red lines.
The Israeli occupation forces’ Southern Command is preparing for a possible response by the Palestinian Resistance after assassinating a string of senior Hamas commanders in the Gaza Strip in recent weeks, according to sources cited by “Israel’s” i24NEWS.
The report, published Wednesday by i24News’ military affairs analyst Yossi Yehoshua, says that the IOF has killed two brigade commanders, a battalion commander, and a number of company commanders in an assassination campaign in Gaza.
The anonymous sources within the Southern Command claimed the killings were a severe blow to the Resistance’s command structure and said Hamas views the assassinations as a crossing of red lines.
The IOF has therefore stepped up security measures alongside its ongoing aggression in Gaza, the sources said, running a “parallel defensive effort” to thwart any Hamas attempt to carry out an attack.
Commanders martyred in the campaign
Among those martyred were Rafah Brigade commander Nael Atiya Mohammad Abu Obeid, known as “Abu Atiya,” killed in an Israeli assassination operation on Tuesday, and Khan Younis Brigade commander Mohammed al-Yazouri, martyred in an assassination operation carried out by enemy aircraft on September 11.
Both were members of al-Qassam Brigades’ General Military Council, and both were mourned by the group in statements vowing to continue their path.
The count, published September 14, includes 1,787 live-fire attacks, 1,967 airstrikes and shelling incidents, 184 military incursions, 453 home demolitions, and 90 detention operations, amounting to roughly 14 violations a day since the ceasefire began.
The violations have killed 1,381 Palestinians, including at least 278 children, and wounded 4,757 others, with 186 Palestinians detained.
The Yemeni Armed Forces have released footage showing the downing of the Saudi F-15 fighter jet and its wreckage in Marib, while announcing another operation targeting a Wing Loong II drone.
The Yemeni Military Media released footage of the downing of a Saudi F-15 fighter jet over Marib Governorate, as the Saudi aggression against Yemen continues while the Yemeni Armed Forces respond with top-tier operations targeting hostile aircraft and enemy ground forces.
The aircraft downed by the Yemeni Armed Forces, tail number 5529, was Saudi Arabia’s most advanced F-15 variant, surpassing the older F-15C/D in radar, ground-attack capability, flight controls, countermeasures, and several other systems, and costing up to $110 million or more.
Only Qatar’s F-15QA and the newer F-15EX, which has yet to enter service in significant numbers, are more modern.
Earlier today, spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree said the aircraft was targeted and brought down using a homegrown surface-to-air missile, marking a successful operation against Saudi aerial aggression.
Saree said the operation comes in response to Saudi aerial aggression after Saudi warplanes carried out more than 450 airstrikes during the past week using F-15 and Typhoon aircraft launched from the Khamis Mushait and Taif air bases.
YAF down Wing Loong II over Marib
In another operation, spokesperson Yahya Saree announced that the armed forces had intercepted and successfully shot down a Saudi-operated Wing Loong II drone over Marib.
According to Saree, the aircraft was downed while carrying hostile missions over the governorate using the appropriate weapons.
The first operation targeted Saudi Aramco facilities in Yanbu with dozens of ballistic missiles and drones, according to the statement. Saree said the strikes directly hit their targets, causing major fires and extensive damage.
The second operation targeted the Khamis Mushait airbase with several ballistic missiles. The statement said the attack also achieved a direct hit.
Yemeni Armed Forces Spokesman Brigadier General Yahya Saree in an image from archive.
Spokesman for the Yemeni Armed Forces Brigadier General Yahya Saree announced in a statement two qualitative military operations against Saudi targets in response to the Saudi aggression and ongoing siege.
What follows is the full text of the statement:
The criminal Saudi enemy continues its unjust aggression and oppressive siege against our country and our people for twelve years, and has escalated its aggression this week by launching more than 450 airstrikes targeting most Yemeni governorates.
In response to this brutal aggression against our country and people, the Yemeni Armed Forces, with Allah’s help, carried out two qualitative military operations:
The first targeted the Aramco facility in Yanbu with dozens of ballistic missiles and drones, the strikes were precise and direct, thanks be to Allah, causing large fires and widespread destruction.
The second targeted the Khamis Mushait Air Base with a number of ballistic missiles, and the strikes were also precise, thanks be to Allah. The Yemeni Armed Forces will continue to defend our country and our people, and will teach the criminal Saudi enemy lessons they will never forget, relying on Allah Almighty and placing their trust in Him, the best of protectors and the best of helpers.
We will continue our military operations deep inside Saudi territory, targeting Saudi troop buildups, and maintaining the equation of “a siege for a siege” and “an escalation for an escalation” until the aggression ceases and the blockade on our beloved country is lifted.
The Yemeni Armed Forces on Wednesday declared a new operation in which they shot down a Saudi F-15 fighter jet over Marib Governorate while it was conducting hostile mission.
The aircraft was downed by a locally manufactured surface-to-air missile, Yemeni Armed Forces Spokesman Brigadier General Yahya Saree said while reading a statement.
He said Saudi warplanes had carried out more than 450 airstrikes across seven Yemeni governorates this week, using F-15 and Typhoon aircraft launched from Khamis Mushait and Taif airbases, causing Yemeni civilian casualties.
“In the face of this brutal aggression against our country and people, the Yemeni Armed Forces, with God’s help and grace, were able to shoot down a Saudi F-15 fighter jet,” Brig. Gen. Saree said.
In a related operation, Yemeni forces engaged two Saudi F-15 and Typhoon fighter formations over Marib with locally manufactured missiles, forcing them to retreat while searching for the wreckage of the downed aircraft, according to the Yemeni military spokesman.
“The Yemeni Armed Forces will continue to protect our country’s airspace and sovereignty from any aggression or violation by all available means,” he said, adding that Yemen’s airspace “will not be violated.”
In a related operation, Yemeni forces engaged two Saudi F-15 and Typhoon fighter formations over Marib with locally manufactured missiles, forcing them to retreat while searching for the wreckage of the downed aircraft, according to the Yemeni military spokesman.
“The Yemeni Armed Forces will continue to protect our country’s airspace and sovereignty from any aggression or violation by all available means,” he said, adding that Yemen’s airspace “will not be violated.”
Claims on Targeting Mecca
Meanwhile, Brig. Gen. Saree firmly rejected Saudi claims that Yemeni operations had targeted the holy sites, saying Yemen’s attacks are directed at Saudi oil facilities and military bases and “are far removed from the holy sites.”
Earlier, the Saudi-led Coalition claimed that Saudi air defenses intercepted and destroyed a Yemeni drone before it entered the restricted airspace over the holy city of Mecca.
For his part, Member of Yemen’s Ansarullah politburo Hizam Al-Assad dismissed Saudi claims as a “tired, worn-out lie.”
“No one believes anymore, O’ Jeffrey Epstein’s widows,” he said on his X account, adding an insulting reference to the Arab allies of the US.
مزاعم استهداف مكة المكرمة كذبةٌ ممجوجة استُهلكت سابقًا، ولم تعد تنطلي على أحد، يا أرامل جيفري إبستين!
A new Pentagon Inspector General Report revealed that Operation Epic Fury cost an estimated $33.4 billion between February 28 and June 30, 2026, leading to critical munitions shortages.
“Operation Epic Fury (OEF) was launched by U.S. forces on February 28, 2026, as a joint U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran. The operation was carried out through coordinated air, land, sea, cyber, and space capabilities,” the report maintained.
“Before the operation began, the United States had already strengthened its military presence and regional partnerships. Thousands of service members, fighter aircraft, refueling tankers, aircraft carriers, supplies, and intelligence assets were moved into the region. During the major combat phase from February 28 to April 7, U.S. forces reportedly struck about 13,500 targets and conducted approximately 36,000 combat sorties and more than 1,800 fire missions. Targets included missile bases, air defenses, command centers, naval facilities, weapons-storage sites, and parts of Iran’s defense industry.”
The Strait of Hormuz became a major focus of the operation because of its importance to international shipping and energy supplies, the Pentagon report added.
“A ceasefire with Iran was announced on April 7 in order to create an opportunity for negotiations, although U.S. forces remained prepared to resume combat. Diplomatic efforts continued with the involvement of Pakistan and other regional actors. On June 17, the United States and Iran signed the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, with Pakistan acting as mediator. The agreement included arrangements for safe navigation through the Strait of Hormuz and proposed an initial 60-day period for negotiations on a final agreement.”
“The operation required a very large U.S. military deployment. More than 50,000 U.S. service members were deployed throughout the U.S. Central Command area. At the height of the conflict, the force included numerous fighter squadrons, destroyers, air-defense batteries, THAAD missile-defense systems, HIMARS, and part of the 82nd Airborne Division. Two carrier strike groups and two Marine Expeditionary Units also supported the operation,” the report added.
The Pentagon report indicated, “The United States also worked closely with ‘Israel’ and other regional partners. American Patriot and THAAD systems operated alongside Israeli Arrow, David’s Sling, and Iron Dome systems. Gulf countries strengthened their own air defenses with U.S. military sales, training, and information-sharing.”
“The conflict caused significant damage to U.S. military facilities and equipment. Iranian attacks damaged or destroyed hundreds of buildings and structures at U.S. bases in several Middle Eastern countries. Dozens of U.S. aircraft were also damaged or destroyed, including fighter aircraft, refueling aircraft, helicopters, and unmanned systems. These losses increased the financial and logistical burden of sustaining the operation and replacing damaged equipment.”
“The estimated cost of Operation Epic Fury reached $33.4 billion as of June 29. This figure included $7.4 billion in additional operational obligations, $22.3 billion for expended munitions, and $3.7 billion for equipment losses. However, the estimate did not include infrastructure-repair costs or some broader economic effects. The difficulty of calculating the full cost was partly due to the fact that Congress had not provided a specific FY2026 appropriation for OEF.”
“The conflict also affected U.S. diplomatic operations throughout the region. Iranian strikes damaged U.S. diplomatic facilities in Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, with estimated damage of about $184 million. Approximately 3,500 diplomatic personnel were at some point on authorized or ordered departure or outside their posts. Several facilities, including U.S. diplomatic missions in Baghdad and Beirut, temporarily closed or suspended operations.”
“Protecting and evacuating American citizens became another major U.S. government responsibility,” the Pentagon report noted.
Mohsen Rezaei Appointed Sayyed Khamenei’s Representative, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secretary (August) 9, 2026)
Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Major General Mohsen Rezaei said Iran will not enter negotiations with the United States until Tehran’s conditions are met, dismissing mixed signals from US President Donald Trump.
“Don’t get distracted by the U.S. president’s mixed signals—from ‘no negotiations’ to ‘we’re ready to talk,’” Rezaei said in a post on X in English language.
Don’t get distracted by the U.S. president’s mixed signals—from “no negotiations” to “we’re ready to talk.” The stakes around oil and the straits have changed. Damage control won’t stop what’s coming. No talks until Iran’s conditions are met. Period!
He added that “the stakes around oil and the straits have changed,” warning that “damage control won’t stop what’s coming.”
“No talks until Iran’s conditions are met. Period!” Rezaei stressed.
Trump’s Shifted Rhetoric
The warning by the top Iranian security official came hours after US President Donald Trump claimed on Truth Social that “Iran wants to make a deal, quickly and badly,” while saying he would decide “whether or not the USA will choose to engage” and acknowledging that Washington was open to the idea.
The failing Nation of Iran wants to make a deal, quickly and badly. I will determine whether or not the U.S.A. will choose to engage – The concept of which we are open to. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP
— Commentary Donald J. Trump Truth Social Posts On X (@TrumpTruthOnX) September 14, 2026
Trump’s latest remarks contrasted with his earlier statements. In August, he claimed that “there are no talks or conversations going on, or scheduled, with the Islamic Republic of Iran,” while insisting that the naval blockade remained in place and falsely stating that the Strait of Hormuz was “open and operating.”
On the same day, however, his son-in-law and envoy Jared Kushner said discussions with Iran were “probably more robust than it’s maybe ever been.”
Trump has repeatedly shifted his rhetoric, at times threatening to “keep the oil like Venezuela,” claiming Iran was “calling constantly” to negotiate, and suggesting that the war would end only after the US midterm elections.
TEHRAN (Tasnim) – A rapid advance by Yemen’s Ansarullah toward the Bab el-Mandeb Strait has opened another strategic challenge for US President Donald Trump as the war on Iran enters its seventh month, adding pressure on Washington amid growing disruption to regional energy and shipping routes.
Ansarullah forces have advanced south along Yemen’s Red Sea coast, seizing the strategic port city of Mocha and moving toward positions around the Bab el-Mandeb, including Perim Island in the middle of the strait.
The development comes as the Strait of Hormuz remains heavily disrupted, leaving Washington facing the prospect of simultaneous pressure on two of the Middle East’s most important maritime corridors.
The widening crisis has further complicated Trump’s efforts to contain the consequences of a war that has already placed pressure on US energy prices, military resources and domestic politics.
Separately, the advance has increased pressure on Saudi Arabia, which has relied more heavily on Red Sea ports to move oil while shipping through the Strait of Hormuz remains severely constrained.
Reuters reported that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman spoke with Trump on Thursday and sought US military assistance against Ansarullah, but Washington has so far declined to intervene directly and has instead offered intelligence support.
Trump confirmed the conversation on Saturday and said Ansarullah had also contacted his administration and asked Washington not to become directly involved.
A senior Trump administration official said the United States remains focused on national security interests, including freedom of navigation in the Red Sea, while seeking to have regional partners take the lead in addressing regional security challenges.
The situation leaves the United States facing a difficult strategic choice.
Direct military intervention against Ansarullah would open another front for US forces already engaged in the conflict with Iran, while declining to intervene could leave Saudi Arabia and its regional partners to confront the advance themselves.
Analysts and former US officials have warned that a renewed American military campaign in Yemen could require significant naval, air and intelligence resources and further strain US stocks of munitions and air-defense interceptors.
The prospect also threatens to unravel an agreement reached last year under which the United States halted bombing Ansarullah in exchange for a halt to attacks on Red Sea shipping.
Any renewed US strikes could expose American forces to missile attacks from Yemen and expand the geographic scope of the conflict.
“This was always the worst-case scenario, that the Iranians exert control not only of Strait of Hormuz but Bab el-Mandeb, two of the leading energy choke points in the world,” said David Schenker, who served as Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs during Trump’s first term and is now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a think tank.
“It’s an enormous amount of leverage that they have in hand.”
Meanwhile, the growing pressure on Washington comes as the economic consequences of the war on Iran intensify.
The International Energy Agency said global oil supply in 2026 is expected to decline by 5.7 million barrels per day because of continuing Middle East conflict and disruptions to Persian Gulf energy routes, while Saudi oil production has fallen sharply.
Reuters has also reported that crude prices have risen above $100 a barrel amid the continuing disruption, while US fuel prices have added to domestic political pressure on the Trump administration.
The military consequences are also becoming more difficult for Washington to contain.
The advance by Ansarullah now adds another layer to that conflict, potentially forcing Washington to choose between expanding its military involvement and accepting greater pressure on regional shipping and energy routes.
“Just weeks ago, Trump adopted a strategy of squeezing Iran’s economy while keeping military conflict at levels too low to squeeze the American economy,” said Stephen Wertheim, a senior fellow at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Command of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy, Rear Admiral Brigadier General Ali Azmaei, indicated that the supertanker “Al Gaya” (IMO number 9325336), which intended to pass through the prohibited area in the southern Strait of Hormuz, exploded after striking naval mines.
Attempts to control the fire were to no avail, and the entire tanker was engulfed in flames. A warning regarding the danger of this illegal passage had been issued earlier, he added.
“The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy firmly declares that the Strait of Hormuz is closed and remains under our smart control.”
Tunisian wave national flags to show support for their government in front of the prim minster’s office in Tunis, Friday, May 26, 2017. (APPhoto/Riadh Diradi)
Tunisian activists rallied in central Tunis in support of Sanaa on Sunday, expressing solidarity with Yemen amid the ongoing Saudi military campaign and blockade.
The demonstration was organized by the Tunisian Network Against Normalization, with participants saying Yemen had achieved what they described as an exceptional strategic victory in confronting the Saudi-led aggression.
“The world is witnessing these days an exceptional strategic victory achieved by the Yemeni people in confronting the aggression and blockade,” demonstrators said.
Participants raised the flags of Yemen, Iran, Palestine and Hezbollah, alongside slogans expressing support for the various fronts of the Resistance.
تونس: الناشطون المتظاهرون في العاصمة يرفعون رايات اليمن وإيران وفلسطين والحزب وشعارات داعمة لكل جبهات المـقاومـة#الميادينpic.twitter.com/BtqQVqe0H2
The demonstration comes amid renewed escalation between Sanaa and Saudi Arabia, with Yemeni officials continuing to frame their military operations as a response to the ongoing aggression and blockade.
The protesters expressed support for the Yemeni people and praised their continued retaliation against Saudi military pressure, portraying Yemen’s actions as part of a broader regional struggle against aggression.
The rally also reflected the Tunisian network’s opposition to normalization and its support for Palestinian and regional Resistance movements.
Demonstrators back Yemen’s confrontation with Saudi Arabia
The protest followed a series of developments announced by the Yemeni Armed Forces.
On Friday, the Yemeni Armed Forces announced that they had completed their control of the Bab al-Mandab Strait and Mayyun Island and reached the Dhubab district, amid the ongoing escalation with Saudi Arabia.
The developments came after the Yemeni Armed Forces announced a large-scale military operation on September 3 targeting what they described as Saudi military concentrations.
Sana’a said the operation was conducted in response to the continuing aggression and blockade against Yemen, as well as escalating attacks against residents and villages along the western coast.
The Yemeni military has repeatedly said it will maintain pressure on Saudi Arabia in response to attacks against Yemen.
Yemeni forces escalate operations against Saudi targets
Earlier on Sunday, Yemeni Armed Forces spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree announced a military operation targeting weapons depots and command-and-control rooms at a Saudi military base in the Sharurah area.
Saree warned that Saudi Arabia would face “more severe and larger” operations if the aggression against Yemen continued.
He also warned that continued attacks would carry “grave consequences,” reiterating Sana’a’s position that escalation would be met with further escalation.
The Yemeni Armed Forces have stated that this policy rests on maintaining an equation of “blockade for blockade and escalation for escalation” until the aggression ends and the blockade on Yemen is lifted.
The Israeli enemy continued on Sunday its attacks on the various towns and areas in South Lebanon.
In this regard, Al-Manar reporter indicated that Israeli warplanes raided Ali Al-Taher area as well as the two towns of Kfartebnit and Nabatiyeh Al-Fawqa.
The Zionist artillery also targeted Kfar Roumman town. Moreover, the Israeli enemy carried out a bombing in Al-Qantara town.
Israeli occupation forces start fires among the houses of the civilians in Beit Yahoun, South Lebanon pic.twitter.com/juXUFEh2O0
Yemen’s Military Media released footage from a wide-scale military operation, showing the recapture of positions and an ambush on 10 military vehicles.
Yemen’s Military Media on Saturday released footage from the large-scale military operation “Allah Is Stronger in Might and More Severe in Punishment,” showing Yemeni Armed Forces advancing along multiple fronts simultaneously.
Yemeni soldiers shown on the footage shared by the Yemeni Military Media on September 12, 2026 (Screengrab)
The footage showed Yemeni forces regaining control of several areas, while one fighter said the forces were “now driving the enemy out of its positions” and preparing to liberate the remaining areas.
#WATCH | Footage published by Yemeni Military Media from the large-scale, multi-pronged military operation "And Allah God, Mightier in Power and More Severe in Punishment". pic.twitter.com/BBo75V1oOU
The operation, according to the footage, involved coordinated movements across several axes.
Yemeni forces ambush military convoy
The Yemeni Military Media‘s footage also showed a carefully planned ambush targeting a force consisting of 10 military vehicles as they attempted to flee.
Yemeni soldiers shown on the footage shared by the Yemeni Military Media on September 12, 2026 (Screengrab)
During the ambush, one fighter was heard saying, “Behold the enemy armored vehicles burning.”
The footage also showed the downing of a drone belonging to the Saudi regime during the operation.
A Saudi UAV flying in Yememi’s airspace in the Yemeni Military Media on September 12, 2026 (Screengrab)
Other scenes showed Yemeni fighters saying that the enemy had used a school as a military barracks.
A Yemeni soldiers is shown on the footage shared by the Yemeni Military Media on September 12, 2026 (Screengrab)
The Yemeni Armed Forces announced on Friday that the operation, “Allah Is Stronger in Might and More Severe in Punishment,” was launched on September 3.
Footage shows Yemeni advances, operations
Among the feats shown in the footage are the following:
Fighters advance through the mountainous Jebel Habashi area and deploy heavy weapons and drones.
Yemeni Armed Forces ambush retreating Saudi-led coalition-aligned forces, destroying several vehicles and capturing personnel.
Fighters storm and clear fortified positions inside Khalid bin Walid School, seizing weapons, ammunition, communications equipment, and other military gear.
Destroyed and burned military vehicles following several ambushes on fleeing forces.
Fighters inspect captured personnel and equipment and secure the surrounding wreckage.
The capture of Jebel Tariq military camp, including armored vehicles, radar systems, and other military hardware left behind.
Fighters clear remaining positions and uncover ammunition caches, barracks, and intelligence material.
The operation concludes with fighters and commanders celebrating the complete capture and clearance of the area.
Al Mayadeen dissects Yemeni military operation
Al Mayadeen’s bureau chief in Yemen said the footage released from the operation was preliminary, with further footage still in the possession of the Yemeni Armed Forces.
He said the Yemeni military had been preparing for the battle for an extended period and had extensive knowledge of the region’s terrain.
The correspondent described the reported liberation of 5,400 square kilometers within a week as a remarkable development, saying the Yemeni Armed Forces had employed a direct military tactic despite the potential losses involved.
He also said the Yemeni military leadership had issued binding instructions to treat prisoners and residents of recaptured villages humanely and ethically.
5,400 km² retrieved: YAF detail western coast gains
Yesterday, the Yemeni Armed Forces said a large-scale operation launched on September 3 along Yemen’s western coast expelled Saudi-backed forces from six districts across Taiz and Hodeidah governorates, covering 5,400 square kilometers.
The operation, carried out with support from local tribes, resulted in hundreds of Saudi-backed personnel being killed, wounded, or captured, while several Yemeni detainees held for years were also freed.
YAF spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree said the operation followed years of attacks on local communities and was aimed at driving out Saudi-backed forces and preventing attempts to impose Saudi control over Yemeni territory. He said Yemeni forces struck seven military divisions comprising 38 brigades and secured the retaken areas.
The YAF said their ground operations continued despite intensive Saudi air support, while their air defenses carried out 32 operations and reportedly downed nine aircraft.
They also reaffirmed that maritime navigation remains safe for all vessels except Saudi ships covered by its announced ban, pledging to maintain its “blockade for blockade” policy and respond to escalation with escalation until the aggression and blockade on Yemen end.
Related Videos
1h
Special Coverage | Sana’a confirms the continuation of its military operations and heavy losses among forces allied with Saudi Arabia. تغطية خاصة | صنعاء تؤكد مواصلة عملياتها العسكرية وخسائر فادحة في صفوف القوى المتحالفة مع السعودية
Iran launches newly acquired precision missiles towards US warships in the Persian Gulf as the Trump administration’s ‘Economic D-Day’ backfires tremendously. In this Monday’s episode of The Target Stream Mint Press News’ Robert Inlakesh takes a look at the latest developments reshaping the US-Israeli war on the Islamic Republic.
Tel Aviv has raised its level of alert anticipating a potential surprise attack during the Jewish holiday period of Yom Kippur, fearing that Tehran may have in store a major multi-front offensive in the coming month. Whether the fears of a large-scale missile attack are based upon dependable intelligence or not, the Israelis have decided to escalate the war on neighbouring Lebanon regardless.
The Israeli army recently claimed that it had secured full “operational control” over the strategically important Ali Al-Taher Hills area in southern Lebanon, without providing any proof that such control has in fact been established. Seemingly contradicting their claims, they have continued to launch hundreds of strikes against the Ali Al-Taher hills and its surrounding area, which is of military value due to its position overlooking southern Lebanon’s Nabatieh governorate. An advance of this magnitude, which includes an attempt to dismantle a known missile base there, constitutes yet another flagrant violation of the shaky Lebanon ceasefire.
Meanwhile, Hezbollah has occasionally launched drone operations against Israeli soldiers and military vehicles, while holding itself back from reviving its daily operations against the occupying army.
On this edition of the stream we also look at the decision taken by the Ansarallah-led Yemeni government to launch new offensive actions to capture strategic locations towards the south of the country. The offensive led to major breakthroughs, including the encircling of the city of Taiz. In reaction, Saudi-proxy forces unsuccessfully launched their own counter-offensives in a bid to capture new territory in the province of al-Jawf and towards the city of Bayda.
Inlakesh also analyses the latest battle footage from Yemen, including new video documentation of the Yemeni Armed Forces using anti-personnel munitions dropped from Quadcopter drones and precision missile strikes, one of which eliminated an entire convoy of trucks carrying munitions.
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) also released footage of its missile strikes against US targets and for the first time drone strike documentation against tankers in the Strait of Hormuz. All of this contributes to the continued spike in oil prices, which US President Donald Trump has continually stated will begin falling.
Another issue addressed at length in the newest edition of The Target is the viral debate ongoing with Streamer Sneako, on whose show a number of guests have argued that former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is responsible for more civilian deaths than Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. We look at what the figures actually show and why so many people are engaged in spreading disinformation that works to undermine the Gaza genocide.
As Riyadh fights 9/11 families in US courts, buried intelligence testimony points beyond the kingdom to a far more protected hand.
Photo Credit: The Cradle
Kit Klarenberg @KitKlarenberg Kit Klarenberg is a British investigative journalist whose work explores the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions.
On the eve of 9/11’s silver anniversary, it was widely reported that a forthcoming New York District Court civil case brought against notorious Saudi government operative Omar Bayoumi would deliver “smoking gun” proof tying Riyadh directly to the attacks. Yet evidence alleging that Saudi intelligence managed two future hijackers as potential assets and did so through a “liaison relationship” with the CIA has lain largely unexamined in plain sight. As scrutiny of Riyadh grows, the agency’s shadow remains almost entirely outside the frame.
Bayoumi has long been accused by major news outlets and US officials of maintaining an intimate and suspicious relationship with hijackers Nawaf Hazmi and Khalid Mihdhar, immediately upon their arrival in the US in January 2000.
A subsequent FBI investigation, dubbed Operation Encore, concluded there was a “50/50 chance” Bayoumi (and the House of Saud by extension) had detailed advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks. This explosive finding was not publicly divulged until March 2022.
Far less attention followed a year later, when a bombshell filing lodged in the Office of Military Commissions – the military court system overseeing prosecutions of 9/11 defendants – surfaced publicly.
The document summarizes classified government discovery disclosures and private interviews conducted with anonymous high-ranking US intelligence officials. Its contents set out confidential-source allegations that the CIA sought to recruit at least Hazmi and Mihdhar, if not others who later participated in the 9/11 attacks, “via a liaison relationship” with Riyadh’s General Intelligence Directorate.
The declaration also alleges that the 9/11 Commission was deliberately sabotaged by its chief Philip Zelikow, who personally endeavored “to blunt” inquiries “into Saudi involvement with the hijackers.” Concurrently, senior FBI officials tasked with investigating the attacks were prohibited from interviewing Saudi nationals, despite “many” leads pointing directly to Riyadh’s Washington, D.C., embassy. According to the filing’s sources, probing those connections risked exposing the Saudi General Intelligence Directorate (GID) as a CIA “cutout” in its clandestine dealings with the future hijackers.
High-ranking FBI officials quoted in the filing discuss how the GID was a longstanding CIA “proxy,” exploited by the agency whenever it was “unwise or not practical … to undertake an operation directly.”
This need was particularly pronounced in the context of cloak-and-dagger CIA connivances conducted “on US soil.” After 25 years, it appears Riyadh could finally take the fall for a dastardly CIA operation that one way or another resulted in 9/11. As planned, there is little chance of the agency itself landing in the dock.
‘CIA team’
Among the court filing’smost dynamite excerpts is the insider testimony of an FBI special agent, who was posted to Alec Station – the CIA’s Al-Qaeda tracking unit, ultimately responsible for recruiting Hazmi and Mihdhar as assets.
When, in January 2000, the special agent learned the pair – known Al-Qaeda operatives under intensive CIA and NSA surveillance – had multi-entry visas to the US, they produced a report warning Bureau headquarters. Its dispatch was blocked by an unnamed CIA analyst.
According to the agent’s account, the same analyst directed the GID to make contact with Hazmi and Mihdhar upon their arrival, then falsely told subsequent US government inquiries that the FBI had been informed of the pair’s presence in the US.
The agent also alleged having witnessed CIA director George Tenet and operations director James Pavitt boast about how they “conspired to obstruct the 9/11 Commission” by concealing the analyst’s activities and identity from investigators.
In the process, an extraordinary, hitherto unreported component of Riyadh’s relationship with the hijackers remained determinedly unexplored. The FBI special agent alleged Hazmi and Mihdhar were explicitly provided US visas by the American consulate in Jeddah, “to facilitate the operation run by the Saudis’ GID and the CIA team.”
This disclosure is all the more tantalizing given that 15 of the 19 hijackers obtained a total of 18 visas in Saudi Arabia. Fourteen were issued at the US consulate in Jeddah, 11 of them by a single consular officer, Shayna Steinger. Many of the applications were incomplete or contained details that should have invited far greater scrutiny.
Steinger arrived at the Jeddah consulate in July 2000, fresh out of Columbia University, and went on to approve visa applications for 11 future hijackers. At the time, consular officers in Jeddah were divided over how rigorously Saudi applicants should be screened. Some argued that young Saudi men should be interviewed and required to demonstrate a clear purpose for travel, but the consulate generally followed a more permissive approach.
However, Steinger personally took it upon herself to reverse this policy. Moreover, she issued visas to future 9/11 hijackers despite their applications frequently being incomplete or error-strewn, based on forged documents, and their contents giving ample grounds for suspicion.
Steinger nonetheless interviewed Hani Hanjour, who purportedly piloted Flight 77, which struck the Pentagon. Afterward, she rejected his application for a three-year US visa, due to apparent doubts over his stated purposes in the country. Nonetheless, Steinger approved Hanjour’s renewed application two weeks later.
In ensuing official investigations, she offered wildly contradictory accounts of why the hijackers’ visas were granted. In Hanjour’s case, Steinger initially claimed he provided requested supporting documentation.
She subsequently admitted he actually hadn’t, but Hanjour’s “middle-class” background purportedly led her to conclude he was trustworthy.
If the court filing’s account is accurate, future 9/11 hijackers were granted entry to the US so the CIA could recruit them upon arrival, raising the troubling possibility that Steinger was acting on Agency instructions.
A network hidden in plain sight
Once Hazmi and Mihdhar touched down in Los Angeles in January 2000, almost immediately they crossed paths with Omar Bayoumi at an airport restaurant. FBI reports cited in the court filing indicate a witness who observed their meeting saw Bayoumi “dropping a piece of paper” near the pair’s table, “then striking up a conversation with them” in a manner that appeared “unnatural.” The witness relayed this account to the Bureau in 2002, but it was never publicized.
In interviews with Operation Encore investigators years later, Bayoumi maintained that his meeting with Hazmi and Mihdhar was pure happenstance. The extraordinary assistance he gave them immediately thereafter – including finding them an apartment, co-signing their lease, setting up bank accounts for them, and gifting them substantial sums toward their rent – was simply charity for fellow Muslims who could barely speak English and were unfamiliar with western culture, Bayoumi asserted. But the filing offers numerous striking insights into the dark reality of his contact with the future hijackers.
For example, it appears Bayoumi was secretly instructed to recruit Hazmi and Mihdhar at the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles by extremist cleric and Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs official Fahad Thumairy.
The filing cites evidence indicating Bayoumi was himself in California “to spy on local dissidents” of Saudi extraction. He was seen with the two 9/11 hijackers “on numerous occasions,” going to the extent of organizing “a social gathering for the hijackers.” We can only guess who may also have been in attendance.
Another stunning exposure in the filing concerns Hazmi and Mihdhar lodging with long-time FBI informant and asset Abdussattar Shaikh from September 2000 onwards. Shaikh failing to provide their surnames to his handler despite being asked has been known for many years.
The joint congressional and Senate intelligence committee probe into 9/11 ruled the pair’s stay with Shaikh was “the [US] intelligence community’s best chance to unravel the September 11 plot.” Insulating Hazmi and Midhar from Bureau scrutiny may have been his explicit objective.
The filing indicates he himself “was receiving funds” from Riyadh, while simultaneously serving as an FBI informant. “Prominent” Saudis “would stay at Shaikh’s boarding house while visiting California,” it states.
His mission was “to monitor the activities of [Saudi] citizens while they were abroad.” Hani Hanjour also stayed with Shaikh alongside Hazmi, after Mihdhar returned to Saudi Arabia in late 2000. It appears that at every stage Stateside, the hijackers were in intimate proximity with figures connected to Saudi intelligence.
If the filing’s account that the GID was acting on the CIA’s behalf is accurate, this contact raises the obvious prospect that the agency – via its Riyadh “proxy” – was directly monitoring the movements of Hazmi, Mihdhar, and Hanjour – if not other Saudi-born hijackers – from the moment they entered the US at the agency’s direction, until 9/11 itself.
How far the CIA could have tracked or influenced their actions and movements remains unknown. The proximity described in the filing nevertheless demands an explanation.
The files Langley kept from the FBI
The established record shows that Alec Station repeatedly withheld the presence of Hazmi and Mihdhar in the US from the FBI until it was too late. The filing records how in June 2001 Station representatives showed senior Bureau officials photographs of three Al-Qaeda operatives, including Hazmi and Mihdhar.
However, the CIA refused to answer questions about the individuals in the photos, or provide identifying information. Had it done so, the FBI could have readily found Hazmi and Mihdhar’s names and addresses listed in San Diego’s local phone directory.
This was a flagrant dangle, obviously intended to gauge the Bureau’s knowledge of the identities of the individuals pictured, and their presence in the US. The filing also indicates the FBI conducted a dedicated counterintelligence investigation into Bayoumi prior to 9/11, due to suspicions that “he was operating as an intelligence officer.” Yet, when the Bureau contacted the CIA for information on Bayoumi, they were told the agency “held no files” on him at all – a “falsehood.”
In reality, the CIA maintained plentiful “operational” records on Bayoumi, which were “never passed to the FBI.” Such brazen stonewalling persisted long after 9/11. Upon learning tens of thousands of dollars had been sent from Haifa bin Faisal, wife of Saudi ambassador to the US Bandar bin Sultan, to Bayoumi’s wife, the Bureau attempted to subpoena their financial records from Washington, D.C.’s Riggs Bank. Per the filing, “officials at Riggs thwarted the FBI’s efforts to obtain the records for a year.”
Riggs Bank, which counted US presidents and CIA-installed Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet as clients, collapsed amid major money laundering scandals in 2005. Post-9/11 investigations identified financial improprieties in accounts held by several wealthy Saudis – including a lack of required background checks and consistent failure to alert regulators over large transactions violating federal banking laws.
Riggs’s downfall precisely mirrors the unceremonious end of many confirmed CIA front banks past, such as Bank of Credit and Commerce International, which assisted criminal cloak-and-dagger connivances including Iran/Contra.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the filing records how “diplomatic pressure” was exerted on the FBI not to investigate Riyad’s myriad connections to 9/11. Bureau agents testifying to the joint inquiry into the attacks were moreover “instructed not to reveal the full extent of Saudi involvement with Al-Qaeda.”
Senior officials at FBI headquarters knew “of both Bayoumi’s affiliation with Saudi intelligence and … the existence of the CIA’s operation to recruit Hazmi and Mihdhar,” but “suppressed investigations” into these burning matters.
The filing concludes by noting Bayoumi was subsequently arrested in Britain on immigration charges immediately after 9/11, with authorities finding “extremist literature in his apartment.” The significance of this disclosure has gone entirely unnoticed since 2022.
Only now, as a result of the New York court case, has the media acknowledged how, within days of the attacks, “game-changing” evidence directly implicating Bayoumi in 9/11 was seized from his British home by counterterror police, then shared with the FBI, which British investigators say failed to provide crucial information in return.
The evidence Britain could not pursue
The seized material reportedly included a phonebook listing over two dozen Saudi government officials in the US and Saudi Arabia; flight simulator software; tickets and travel documents; and a notepad featuring a sketch of an aircraft.
An accompanying note from a British counterterrorism officer stated of the latter: “contains handwritten notes mathematical calculations re height of planes.” A member of the 9/11 families’ legal team behind the court action told BBC, “it’s the mathematical calculation of the [Pentagon] crash.”
By 22 September 2001, this seemingly incontrovertible windfall was in the Bureau’s possession. So too were highly illuminating home video tapes of Bayoumi roaming around Washington, D.C. in 1999, highlighting security measures in place at the Capitol building, openly discussing nearby Reagan National Airport, and referencing an unspecified “plan” on camera. Other tapes feature Bayoumi in close quarters with senior Al-Qaeda figures such as US-born cleric Anwar Awlaki, assassinated in a September 2011 US drone strike in Yemen.
While British detectives apparently believed the evidence could support an extradition request, the FBI did not supply the material needed to sustain one. Bayoumi was released after seven days without charge and later returned to Saudi Arabia.
The US response takes on darker significance alongside allegations that the CIA used its Saudi liaison to approach Hazmi and Mihdhar while withholding their presence from the FBI.
It does, however, strengthen the case for investigating whether an aborted recruitment operation was concealed after ending in catastrophe. Media reluctance to examine the filing’s “proxy” allegations ensures that question remains safely outside the courtroom.
We must ask ourselves whether the 2016 Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), which permitted the families of 9/11 victims to sue Riyadh in US courts, was purposefully passed to keep the House of Saud in line.
Successive Saudi governments have fought tooth and nail to overturn the legislation, while released correspondence indicates that Saudi representatives sought help from convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein to lobby for its repeal behind closed doors.
JASTA proved controversial in some quarters, with some critics warning it could trigger reciprocal legislation in foreign countries, given criminal US activities abroad. Legal experts argued it undercut the principle of sovereign immunity.
The plaintiffs’ evidence may yet establish that Saudi officials provided material support to the hijackers. The military filing raises a separate and more dangerous question: whether some of those officials were acting as a CIA cutout in their dealings with future 9/11 hijackers.
But the CIA is not a defendant in the civil action, and Bayoumi is not personally on trial. The state-secrets privilege has repeatedly shielded the agency’s clandestine operations from meaningful judicial scrutiny.
Unless the alleged liaison channel is examined, the Saudi case may expose one layer of the 9/11 support network while leaving the most protected layer untouched.
Arab states have spent billions on US weapons, only to discover that the decisive layer of military power was never included in the sale.
Photo Credit: The Cradle
Kamran Yeganegi @DYeganegi Dr. Kamran Yeganegi is an Iranian academic and researcher specializing in energy diplomacy, geopolitics, AI governance, and public policy. He is an assistant professor, university adviser, board member of the Iranian Industrial Engineering Association, and contributor to MEM and IRNA.
Arab governments may hold legal title to some of the world’s most advanced weapons, yet ownership does not confer operational sovereignty. A fighter aircraft without approved munitions, spare parts, software updates, mission data, or specialist maintenance is an expensive object on a runway.
Washington does not need a secret button to switch off an ally’s arsenal. Control over the system surrounding the weapon can produce the same result gradually, selectively, and under the cover of contracts, export rules, and routine technical support.
The arsenal behind the umbrella
According to SIPRI’s 2021–25 data, the US supplied 54 percent of all major arms imported by states in the “Middle East.” Saudi Arabia alone accounted for 6.8 percent of global arms imports, while Qatar took 6.4 percent and Kuwait 2.8 percent.
These purchases include combat aircraft, air and missile defenses, precision weapons, sensors, and command systems. Each platform also binds the buyer to the supplier’s technical ecosystem for years to come.
These systems are designed to function together through radar coverage, secure communications, identification systems, training, and US-compatible doctrine. Dependence therefore extends beyond individual weapons. Disrupting one support layer can reduce the effectiveness of several connected capabilities.
The dependency is visible in Washington’s own rules. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency calls major Foreign Military Sales a “Total Package Approach,” covering not only the platform but training, technical assistance, software, ammunition, follow-on support, and intelligence mission data.
Each element is also a potential point of control. A buyer can own the airframe while relying on the US for the data that defines threats, the software that integrates sensors, the missiles that arm it, and the expertise that returns it to service. This is the institutional foundation beneath the so-called American protection umbrella.
No magic button required
Public debate often reduces this relationship to a literal remote “kill switch.” The Pentagon’s F-35 Joint Program Office denied in 2025 that such a switch exists, and that there is no verified public evidence that Washington can transmit a command that instantly grounds every exported US aircraft or disables every missile.
That denial addresses the narrowest version of the claim. It does not remove the deeper dependency. Modern weapons are sustained by software releases, cryptographic material, threat libraries, proprietary test equipment, source-controlled components, and supply chains that remain beyond the buyer’s sovereign control.
The F-35 makes this structure unusually visible. Its Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) is being replaced by the Operational Data Integrated Network, or ODIN. The program office describes ALIS as the system that turns aircraft maintenance data into decisions that keep jets flying, while the US Government Accountability Office has documented the difficulties surrounding its replacement.
Foreign operators do not receive unrestricted control over the aircraft’s core software. The US decided to withhold the F-35 source code even from partner countries. That does not mean a jet requires Washington’s permission before every takeoff, but it places long-term modernization, fault diagnosis, mission-data support, and much of the sustainment chain inside a US-led system.
The limits of GPS control
The same distinction applies to satellite-guided weapons. JDAM kits, Excalibur artillery rounds, and other precision munitions use GPS alongside inertial navigation. Their reliance on a US-operated constellation creates an obvious strategic vulnerability, particularly where access to encrypted military signals, updates, or compatible mission-planning equipment is restricted.
But the claim that Washington can revive “Selective Availability” to degrade civilian or export GPS over one chosen country is inaccurate. The US government ended Selective Availability in May 2000 and later removed the feature from new GPS satellites. The old mechanism also affected the constellation globally rather than creating a neat, country-sized exclusion zone.
The loss or denial of GPS would not necessarily turn every guided weapon into an unguided one. Systems combining satellite and inertial navigation can retain some capability, usually with degraded accuracy. Nor is there credible public evidence that Excalibur rounds or modern anti-tank missiles contain a remotely activated US software lock that makes a launcher reject them as “unverified.”
Washington’s real leverage lies elsewhere. It controls which munitions are exported, in what quantities, which upgrades and encryption standards are released, and whether depleted stocks are replenished during wartime. An arsenal can be neutralized without an invisible signal ever crossing the sky.
Saudi Arabia: The aircraft stays, the mission changes
Saudi Arabia’s F-15 fleet illustrates the distinction between possessing a platform and controlling its full combat potential. In February 2026, the US approved a possible $3-billion F-15 sustainment package covering spare and repair parts, classified and unclassified software, technical documentation, training, and US government and contractor support.
The package contains no new fighter fleet. Its value lies in keeping the existing one operational, exposing how a combat aircraft remains tied to decisions made long after the original sale.
This dependence became political leverage during the Yemen war. In February 2021, former US president Joe Biden declared: “We are ending all American support for offensive operations in the war in Yemen, including relevant arms sales.”
The White House statement simultaneously promised continued support for Saudi territorial defense. Riyadh retained its aircraft and air defense systems, but Washington drew a line between the missions it would continue to enable and those it would restrict.
Iraq purchased 36 F-16s from the US, but the fleet’s readiness remained heavily dependent on American technical personnel. In May 2021, Lockheed Martin withdrew its maintenance team from Balad Air Base after repeated attacks by resistance factions.
The decision was taken for security reasons, not as punishment by Washington. Its military effect was nevertheless revealing. Air & Space Forces Magazine reported that the withdrawal was likely to limit fleet operations.
The episode exposed the extent of Iraq’s dependence. If the departure of contractors could restrict fleet operations, Washington could exert similar pressure by suspending export licenses, contracts, or technical support. Iraq owned the jets but not the full chain needed to keep them flying.
The UAE negotiates the limits of sovereignty
The Emirati case shows that leverage can be exercised before a platform arrives. A proposed $23 billion package included 50 F-35 fighters, up to 18 MQ-9 armed drones, and advanced munitions. Negotiations stalled amid US concerns about China’s technological presence in the UAE and the conditions attached to operating the aircraft. Explaining Abu Dhabi’s suspension of the talks in 2021, an Emirati official cited “technical requirements, sovereign operational restrictions, and cost/benefit analysis.”
Those “sovereign operational restrictions” exposed the limits of the deal. Washington had no Emirati aircraft to disable; it used its grip over the technology to dictate the terms of access before a single jet was delivered. The kill switch came with the sale itself.
Washington pulls the plug on Turkiye
Turkiye provides the clearest regional case. It was not merely an F-35 customer but a NATO ally and manufacturing partner producing hundreds of components. Turkish firms had invested in the program, Ankara had paid roughly $1.4 billion, and Turkish pilots had already begun training in the US.
After Ankara accepted Russia’s S-400 air defense system, the Pentagon removed it from the F-35 program. A senior US defense official stated: “Turkey can choose to acquire the S-400 or the F-35. It cannot have both.” The Pentagon then began unwinding Turkiye’s participation, despite Ankara’s investment, industrial role, and alliance status.
The episode is more concrete than claims that US software would stop a Turkish F-35 from targeting Greek forces. No credible public evidence shows that NATO identification-friend-or-foe coding automatically prevents weapons from locking onto allied aircraft and ships, or that Washington can remotely freeze a Turkish mission computer once a target is selected.
Washington’s power was exercised long before the aircraft could take flight. It blocked delivery, expelled Turkish firms from the production chain, ended pilot training, and withheld access to software and maintenance. The aircraft did not have to be remotely grounded because the US ensured that Turkiye never received it.
Ankara’s response has been to place greater weight on the domestically developed KAAN fighter and to seek alternative procurement routes. Yet Turkiye has also continued to pursue a return to the F-35 program, with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan saying in 2025 that technical-level talks had resumed.
An architecture of permission
None of these cases proves that Washington possesses a hidden code capable of remotely disabling every exported weapon. Nor does it need one. The real kill switch runs through ammunition approvals, spare parts, software, technical data, contractors, training, mission files, and upgrades.
Each pressure point can be presented as an ordinary administrative, legal, or contractual decision. Together, they define the boundaries of military autonomy and allow Washington to impose costs selectively without announcing that an ally’s arsenal has been switched off.
Washington’s leverage has limits. Arab states can turn to European or Chinese suppliers or develop weapons at home, while US pressure does not always force a change in policy. But replacing an established military system takes years, and combat readiness cannot wait.
Arab states own the hardware, while Washington retains considerable influence over the readiness of those weapons, the missions they can sustain, and the strategic choices they can support.
Israeli massive bombing operation of Ali Al-Taher in southern Lebanon (Thursday, September 11, 2026).
The Israeli army withdrew its forces from Ali Al-Taher Heights in southern Lebanon following a massive bombing operation, positioning occupation troops in rear lines in the Shaqif area, Israeli army radio reported on Friday.
The broadcaster said Israeli forces would seek to exercise fire control over the strategic heights and confront any attempt by Hezbollah to return to the area.
According to Israeli army radio, the operation to seize Ali Al-Taher Hill lasted three months and involved fierce resistance from Hezbollah fighters. It claimed Israeli forces offered the fighters the option of surrendering and raising a white flag, but they refused and continued fighting.
The Hebrew newspaper Maariv similarly reported that Israeli forces gave Hezbollah fighters on the hill a choice between surrender and death.
“Israeli army gave Hezbollah fighters stationed in Ali Al-Taher the choice between surrender and death. The fighters refused to surrender and engaged Israeli forces in clashes, some at point-blank range,” the Israeli daily’s Avi Ashkenazi wrote.
He likened Hezbollah fighters’ battle in Ali Al-Taher to the Battle of Karbala.
Channel 12 cited estimations within the Israeli army that Hezbollah fighters could have withdrawn and surrendered but chose to remain. It added that the occupation army said Hezbollah repeatedly sought to reinforce the entrenched fighters, evacuate the wounded and deliver supplies throughout the operation.
The massive Israeli bombardment of the Ali Al-Taher Heights on Thursday also triggered a 4.1-magnitude earthquake detected in southern Lebanon, according to the US Geological Survey. Lebanese reports said the strikes involved more than 1,000 tons of explosives.
Lebanon’s National News Agency reported that the explosions completely blocked the Al-Khardali road after falling rocks and debris made the route impassable. The road had already been restricted to military traffic, with army buses using it to travel toward Marjayoun and Hasbaya. The army was forced to use the Bekaa road as an alternative route after the latest debris blocked the passage.
Meanwhile, Israeli attacks on southern Lebanon continued at dawn, with Israeli forces detonating explosives on a hill in Baraashit and shelling Wadi Al-Hujayr. Israeli aircraft also raided Al-Mansouri amid a heavy demolition campaign, while the National News Agency reported that Israeli forces destroyed most of the town’s public school, leaving only a small section standing.
Sanaa now holds a command position on the Yemeni side of Bab al-Mandab, a corridor carrying global trade, energy supplies and some of the world’s most important subsea cables (Illustrated by Batoul Chamas for Al- Mayadeen English)
The Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF) announced Friday that a large-scale operation launched earlier this month had expelled Saudi-backed formations from six districts across Taiz and Hodeidah governorates, culminating in the capture of the historic Red Sea port of al-Mokha and the advance to Dhubab and Mayyun Island, which sits at the narrowest point of the Bab al-Mandab Strait.
In a statement issued Thursday, YAF spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree said the operation, codenamed “And Allah Is Stronger in Might and More Severe in Punishment,” was launched September 3 and covered 5,400 square kilometers, striking seven military divisions comprising 38 brigades and downing nine Saudi aircraft.
The Saudi-backed government confirmed to AFP that the YAF had completed its takeover of the Bab al-Mandab area and Mayyun Island, while officials told Reuters that their own forces had withdrawn from the island.
The YAF released a statement on Friday detailing the operation they carried out on September 9 along Yemen's western coast, saying it was conducted along several fronts with the participation and support of the Yemeni people and their tribes.
What changed hands this week was a stretch of coastline that sits astride one of the world’s most important maritime choke points, a position that took a Saudi-Emirati coalition close to three years to build the first time around and that Sanaa has now retaken in a matter of days.
Why Bab al-Mandab, al-Mokha matter
Bab al-Mandab, Arabic for the Gate of Tears, connects the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean, making it one of the world’s most critical maritime choke points. Roughly 10 to 15 percent of global maritime trade and millions of barrels of crude oil and fuel daily transit through this narrow channel toward the Suez Canal. Whoever commands the coastlines of Bab al-Mandab holds decisive leverage over the trade routes linking Asia, the Arab world, and Europe.
In the past few days, headlines were flooded with reports about the Yemeni city of al-Mokha as Sanaa reclaimed it from Saudi-backed forces.
The coastal city overlooks the significant Bab al-Mandab Strait, positioning yet another maritime chokehold as a major piece in the grand… pic.twitter.com/0kXBk7dpgH
Commanding those coastlines starts with commanding the port that sits closest to them. That is what makes al-Mokha, rather than any other point on Yemen’s western coast, the city worth fighting over.
Long before it was a military prize, al-Mokha was the reason the word “mocha” exists at all. From the 16th to the early 18th century, the port was the dominant hub of the world’s coffee trade, exporting beans grown in Yemen’s cooler highlands and carried down to the coast by caravan.
Located on Yemen’s southwestern coast, the city and port of al-Mokha sit roughly 75 kilometers north of the narrowest passage of Bab al-Mandab. Consolidating control over al-Mokha and the surrounding coastal districts gives Sanaa solid territorial depth along the western coast, extending its reach south from Hodeidah and removing what had been the principal base of forces aligned with the Saudi-backed government.
Territorial depth is only the first layer of what changed on September 10. The second is what that depth actually gives the YAF control of.
What control of al-Mokha means
Control of al-Mokha and the coastal districts around it grants the YAF immediate coastal radar oversight, launch positions, and monitoring vantage points over the shipping lanes running through Bab al-Mandab.
It strengthens the YAF’s ability to enforce its declared restrictions on Israeli-linked shipping and hostile vessels, and it tightens the pressure on the occupied port of Eilat by further constraining its already crippled southern maritime access.
What the YAF took control of on the ground was not empty coastline. Al-Mokha’s port was rehabilitated by the UAE, and its airport runway, along with military camps including Khalid Camp Base and Jabal al-Nar Camp, the command headquarters for forces on the western coast, had served for years as the operational backbone of a Saudi-Emirati-backed military presence.
Beyond the obvious: What else transits Bab al-Mandab
Oil tankers are the most visible traffic through Bab al-Mandab, but they are far from the only cargo that makes the strait matter. Beneath the surface, roughly 15 to 17 subsea fiber-optic cable systems carry a substantial share of the data traffic connecting Europe, East Africa, West Asia, and South Asia, making the strait a crucial node for global digital communications as much as for shipping.
Wheat, rice, sugar, and fertilizer move through this corridor alongside crude and LNG, a category of food security and agricultural trade that US officials have repeatedly flagged when assessing the risks of a Bab al-Mandab disruption.
As news broke of the YAF’s control over the coast overlooking Bab al-Mandab, the US national average diesel price crossed $6 a gallon for the first time in history, reaching roughly $6.06 on September 11. The rise came as markets absorbed a widening set of pressures, from the US war on Iran and the subsequent disruption of Gulf energy flows to tight inventories and refinery constraints, with Yemen’s advance compounding the sense that Washington now faces mounting risk at two chokepoints instead of one.
Bab al-Mandab, Hormuz together
With Bab al-Mandab now in the hands of Sanaa and the Strait of Hormuz under Tehran’s control, the Axis of Resistance gains more leverage in facing Western imperialist agendas in the region.
The two chokepoints do not hand Iran and Yemen a single, unified command over the flow of West Asian energy, but they give aligned forces complementary pressure points on both maritime gateways serving the Arabian Peninsula, at a moment when Saudi Arabia has increasingly rerouted its own crude exports through the Red Sea to avoid the risks at Hormuz.
Years to build, days to lose
The coastline Sanaa now holds took the Saudi-UAE coalition nearly three years to secure the first time, and it never captured the whole of it. Coalition-backed forces took Bab al-Mandab and Mayyun Island in October 2015, seven months after the Saudi-led aggression began.
Al-Mokha did not fall until January 2017, some 22 months later, in an operation known as “Golden Spear”, while coalition forces did not reach the outskirts of Hodeidah until June 2018, more than three years into the war, and the push stalled there after the Stockholm Agreement froze the front in December 2018. Sanaa retained Hodeidah and the northern Red Sea coast throughout.
The UAE turned al-Mokha into the principal base of Tareq Saleh’s “National Resistance Forces,” growing the force from an initial nucleus of roughly 3,000 fighters to about 20,000, while stationing its own officers there, paying salaries, supplying weapons and vehicles, and rehabilitating the port itself.
On Mayyun Island, construction on a military runway began in late 2016, was abandoned, then resumed years later. By 2021, satellite imagery showed a completed 1.85-kilometer runway with three hangars, and the UAE sought a 20-year lease over the island.
Saudi Arabia picked up much of the financing after the UAE’s drawdown, continuing to pay the “National Resistance Forces” and fund reconstruction projects in the area.
Why the collapse happened so fast
Until shortly before al-Mokha fell, reports from the western coast had pointed to government advances, not retreat, after a week of fighting that saw Saudi-backed forces briefly recapture some of the ground they had lost. Their lines then collapsed within hours on September 10.
Ansar Allah’s explanation for that collapse centers on command structure. Political Bureau member Hizam al-Assad told Al Mayadeen the entry of the YAF into the western coastal areas was widely welcomed by local residents and that the operation was an internal one aimed at restoring Yemeni sovereignty over Yemeni territory.
Retired Brigadier General Ali Abi Raad, a strategic military expert, told Al Mayadeen the coalition’s defeat was the product of a fundamentally divided force, describing the roughly 30,000 fighters aligned with Tareq Saleh, a member of the Saudi-backed presidential council, and the “Giants Brigades” as a patchwork of Salafist, jihadist, and mercenary elements with Arab and Western nationalities among them, and no single unified command.
The YAF, by contrast, is described as having built its campaign under one command structure over two full years since the start of its operations in solidarity with Gaza, developing domestically manufactured missiles and drones that gave it a decisive edge.
The “National Resistance Forces” and the “Giants Brigades” had been marketed for years as an elite, specially trained counterweight to the Yemeni Armed Forces, equipped and funded by Saudi Arabia. Whatever the precise mix of factors behind their sudden withdrawal, the result was a collapse that undid in days what had taken the coalition the better part of three years to build the first time around.
The Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF) announced major military gains against Saudi-backed forces along Yemen’s western coast, revealing that a large-scale operation launched earlier this month resulted in the expulsion of Saudi-backed formations from six districts across Taiz and Hodeidah governorates and the capture, killing, and wounding of hundreds of their personnel.
In a statement issued on September 11, the YAF spokesperson, Brigadier General Yahya Saree, said the operation, launched on September 3 and codenamed “And Allah Is Stronger in Might and More Severe in Punishment,” was carried out across multiple axes with extensive participation from Yemeni forces and local tribes.
The operation was launched following years of escalating attacks by Saudi-backed formations against residents, villages, and local communities along the western coast. Residents of the affected areas had repeatedly appealed to the Yemeni Armed Forces to intervene, prompting the military operation aimed at driving out enemy forces and preventing attempts to impose Saudi control over Yemeni territory, the Saree said in the statement.
#WATCH | Videos circulating on social media showed YAF driving down the tarmac of al-Mokha airport following the liberation of the coastal city.
The western Yemeni city, overlooking Bab al-Mandab, was captured by Yemeni forces on Thursday after Saudi-backed forces fled the city.… pic.twitter.com/Md9yXrcNGZ
The forces said the areas had subsequently become “secure and stable,” marking a significant territorial gain along Yemen’s western coast.
The statement also said Yemeni forces struck seven military divisions belonging to the Saudi-backed formations, which together comprised 38 military brigades.
Hundreds of personnel from those formations were killed, captured, or wounded during the operation, the Yemeni Armed Forces revealed.
The military also announced the liberation of several Yemeni detainees who had been held for years by Saudi-backed forces along the western coast, hailing their liberation as another major outcome of the offensive.
#WATCH | Footage circulating on social media captures the joy of Yemeni prisoners held by forces backed by the Saudi enemy along the country's West Coast, following the liberation of these areas by the Yemeni Armed Forces.#Yemen#SaudiArabia#AlMayadeenpic.twitter.com/6QeFeDKx2B
Saree said the YAF ground operation continued despite intensive Saudi air support provided to the formations targeted by the operation. “Despite the heavy air cover from the Saudi enemy in support of its forces, the enemy failed, by God’s grace, to influence the operation,” the statement said.
The Yemeni forces further reported that its air defenses carried out 32 operations to repel Saudi warplanes, resulting in the downing of nine aircraft.
The statement saluted Yemeni fighters and the people and tribes for their role in the operation, commending the “high level of awareness” demonstrated by the Yemeni public in confronting Saudi-backed media campaigns, enemy propaganda, and disinformation.
“The Yemeni Armed Forces affirm that maritime navigation is safe for all companies except Saudi vessels that were previously subject to the announced ban,” the statement said.
The forces vowed to continue enforcing its broader deterrence policy, declaring that it would maintain the “blockade for blockade” equation, strike Saudi-backed military formations, and respond to escalation with escalation.
Concluding the statement, Saree reaffirmed the YAF’s commitment to the struggle for liberation, independence, and the restoration of national sovereignty, while praising the Yemeni people and tribes for their continued support.
“Long live Yemen, free, dignified, and independent,” he said, concluding with a declaration of victory for Yemen and “all the free people of the nation.”
Strategic Bab al-Mandab secured as Yemen emerges in triumph
Earlier today, the Yemeni Armed Forces advanced along Yemen’s western coast, reaching Dhubab and the area overlooking the strategic Bab al-Mandab Strait after taking control of al-Mokha and other key Red Sea positions.
In the past few days, headlines were flooded with reports about the Yemeni city of al-Mokha as Sanaa reclaimed it from Saudi-backed forces.
The coastal city overlooks the significant Bab al-Mandab Strait, positioning yet another maritime chokehold as a major piece in the grand… pic.twitter.com/0kXBk7dpgH
The Saudi-backed government confirmed the YAF had taken control of Bab al-Mandab and strategic Mayyun Island, while Saudi-backed officials told Reuters that their forces had withdrawn from Perim Island.
The advance has also placed Saudi-backed forces on the Greater and Lesser Hanish Islands under siege, with sources saying more than 2,000 personnel were trapped there and appealing for food, water, rescue, and air support.
The YAF have additionally taken al-Khokha, Hays, and al-Wazi’iyah, while seizing key military positions around al-Mokha, including Khalid Camp Base and Jabal al-Nar Camp, the command headquarters for forces deployed along the western coast.
The rapid gains have been described by The Guardian as a “strategic disaster” for Washington and Riyadh, while Israeli Channel 14 called the capture of al-Mokha a strategic development with potentially far-reaching repercussions.
The false flag attacks are coming in fast and furious in an attempt to keep both Donald Trump and Bibi Netanyahu in office beyond their normal expiry date. What they really reveal, though, is the extent of how Western media is now a dirty tool of intelligence agencies.
With both leaders of the U.S. and Israel facing an unprecedented challenge to their office, is it not reasonable to assume that both will use their power to indulge in skulduggery and dirty tricks to survive? For Trump, he knows he is facing impeachment if he loses both houses, and I have speculated in earlier articles that he will be looking at unprecedented ways of either calling off the midterm elections or refusing to acknowledge their results – using a pretext of war with Iran. For something, in legal terms, like that to be pulled off, the circumstances would have to be on a scale of Pearl Harbour or 9/11. America would have not only to be at war, but under attack on its own soil for Trump to attempt such a stunt, which many argue isn’t possible in the constitution. But Trump is always breaking rules and pushing the boundaries of what he can do in office, and so it would not be uncharacteristic for him and his legal team to be burning the midnight oil plotting something which is so huge and so significant.
The same story plays out for Benjamin Netanyahu, who is facing seven counts of corruption if his case ever gets heard in Israel. A surefire way of making sure it doesn’t is to keep Israel in a permanent state of war with Iran and to raise the stakes to the point where it appears that this tiny country is under attack.
And so, at the risk of being called a conspiracy theorist, many will assume a false flag attack – or even a series of them – might be coming our way soon, both in Israel and in the West – for the justification of war. Trump’s claims that the U.S. will resume bombing after the midterm elections may well have been a masterly move, when all along he is planning an attack sooner against Iran. To go ahead earlier with a large-scale attack is of course very risky, as, if gas prices go even higher or we see U.S. casualties, this could be a final suicide pill that Trump takes even before Americans go to the polls. But this is a U.S. president who believes he is significantly more intelligent than he really is, and who has fired all the advisers around him who can give him sound advice which would probably not chime with his childish, moronic ideas about what America’s military capability is in the Middle East. Yet it would seem that the plan is to not allow Iran the possibility of a pre-emptive strike.
How else could any cynical analyst interpret two key “attacks” on both Israel and the West recently brought to us dutifully by Western mainstream media? The so-called terror attack on the Dubai flight heading towards Israel is very suspicious, not least of all because Iran issued a warning just a few hours before it happened that a false flag attack was going to take place on a plane, framing Iran. A scuffle in the cockpit which involved a stabbing certainly happened, but the plane spiralling out of control for it to be rescued at the last moment by Israeli pilots who just so happened to be aboard and were able to apprehend the pilot sounds like a really bad Hollywood movie script with B-class actors. The timing is questionable, as is how fast Netanyahu and media were ready to present it to the world as a terror attack.
Just a few days earlier we saw a similar fanciful story in the UK at an RAF airbase where men were arrested under terrorism laws, with Andy Burnham reacting quickly to blame Iran. But where is the evidence? Was Burnham asked to go ahead with a false flag attack by Trump when they met earlier in the month at the UN assembly in New York? The men, although arrested and charged under terrorism laws, were remarkably allowed to walk free on bail. And nothing in their vans, which were parked in woods, has been found which would suggest they were planning any attacks. Were these men set up? Were they paid to do a certain job late at night knowing they were certain to be intercepted? If Iran were behind such fun and games, surely there would not be this level of amateur dramatics.
A more sober take on both the Israeli hostage flight and the UK airbase being a target of terrorism is that they were both staged by the desperate leaders of both the U.S. and Israel in a bid to prepare the Western public for an imminent war which, clearly, the UK will play a considerable role in – despite the window dressing of its foreign minister’s statements about bringing Israel into line on its Gaza genocide (which was also probably a PR ruse).
In many ways this was inevitable, made even more so by the temptation of using Western press as willing partners in crime in a massive, gross misrepresentation of facts to serve a bigger agenda of the elites who own legacy media. A war with Iran is coming on a scale which is certainly going to be greater than the previous “incursions”. The only real question is who blinks first and kicks it off. But the old rules always apply for those who want to seek the truth. In Western media, never believe those who are presented as the culprits, as these usual suspects are nearly always not those who have the finger on the trigger. And in any case, ask yourself: why would Iran need to plan such attacks? What would it gain? The only winners are those who have presented themselves as victims to justify what they are about to do. The lies in the past which we have been presented by both the U.S./UK and of course Israel (which is really the grand master of packing fake news, in particular video) are too great, too exhaustive to ignore. And as long as Western media is happy to play its role, what we are witnessing is what their real role is required to be – given that nearly all of them are loss-making ventures.
Head of Head of the Political Council of the Iraqi al-Nujaba Movement, Sheikh al-Asadi, during an interview for Al Mayadeen, aired on September 29, 2026 (Screengrab)
Iraqi al-Nujaba Political Council chief criticizes Iraq’s suspension of Iranian flights, warns of popular pressure, and calls for Iraqi sovereignty
Head of the Political Council of the Iraqi Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba, Sheikh Ali al-Asadi, criticized Baghdad’s decision to prevent Iranian aircraft from landing at Iraqi airports, stressing that it constitutes compliance with US pressure and warning that popular action could follow if the decision is not reversed.
Speaking to Al Mayadeen, al-Asadi said, “We regret the decision by the Iraqi authorities to prevent Iranian aircraft from landing in Iraq.” He described the decision as “submission to American bullying,” adding, “The Iraqi decision-maker must reconsider it; otherwise there will be popular pressure aimed at changing the decision.”
He said the issue extends beyond Iraqi airports, invoking longstanding ties between Iraq and Iran. “The issue goes beyond airports. There are close relations with Iran, and therefore we must not bow to an irresponsible decision by America,” he said. “Popular options will be the most pressing, and all possibilities are on the table.”
Sheikh al-Asadi attributed growing US influence in Iraq to weaknesses among domestic political actors. “The weakness of the domestic political actor has allowed the American occupation to impose its decisions in Iraq,” he said, adding, “The decision-maker can choose not to implement American decisions, as some countries do.”
He stressed that “the decision must be sovereign and independent politically, economically, and in terms of security,” defining sovereignty as “complete independence, with Iraq being the decision-maker in all aspects of life.
According to Sheikh al-Asadi, “There are personal and partisan interests behind the absence of independence in decision-making.” He also accused Iraq’s political class of adopting contradictory positions toward Washington, slamming duality in the political class: on the one hand, it agrees to American decisions, while on the other, it condemns them.
He added, “The Resistance’s positions have been clear from the beginning, while the Iraqi politicians have ambiguity and complications.”
Iraq’s main problem is corruption
Turning to the issue of weapons and the debate over their regulation, Sheikh al-Asadi said his movement had held discussions with the Coordination Framework and rejected the term “weapons confinement”. “We discussed the matter with the Coordination Framework and rejected the term ‘weapons confinement.’ We established that the term is harmful and changed it to ‘weapons regulation,’” he said. “Iraq’s biggest problem is corruption, not weapons,” he asserted.
“We are in favor of the Dawn Strike against corruption, but we want it to continue. There are clearly identified corrupt figures, and the law must be applied to them,” the Iraqi leader said. He also expressed deep distrust of Washington, saying, “We do not trust the Americans one iota, and they do not keep their word.” He added, “What happened with Iran is the biggest proof that the Americans do not keep their word. They struck Iran during negotiations, and this is proof of their treachery.”
US assassination unit, like Blackwater
Shikh al-Asadi said Iraq should remain free of US interference in its internal affairs. “Iraq must be free, and the American envoy must not interfere in economic, security, or political affairs,” he said. He added that his movement had information about US activities in Iraq, saying, “We have information about all the American movements and about the division they established, which includes Iraqis under their supervision.”
“We know where this division is located and what its duties will be in the coming phase, and all of this is being monitored,” Sheikh al-Asadi warned. He revealed that the goal behind the creation of this division is to carry out assassinations and create discord, saying, “It is like ‘Blackwater’ under another name.”
He added, “The American movement is suspicious, and they have security companies that entered to compensate for the American military withdrawal.”
Al-Nujaba rejects political participation under current system
Sheikh al-Asadi said Nujaba had no decision to participate in Iraq’s political process. “We in Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba have no decision to engage in the political process, and we are not convinced by the way it is being managed,” he said.
On the issue of weapons, he told Al Mayadeen, “The conditions for handing over weapons are ending the American occupation and all foreign presence, including the Turkish presence.”
He added that the Peshmerga should fall under the command of Iraq’s commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces and warned that “the separatist factions are one of Iraq’s problems, and whenever Resistance intervention is necessary, we will intervene in every inch of Iraqi territory.”
Sheikh al-Asadi further argued that the continuation of armed resistance was linked to the circumstances that justify it: “The resistance has its justifications for resistance, and when these justifications end, so does resistance,” reminding that the justifications do not end with the mere withdrawal of the remaining foreign troops in the country.
In an interview for Al Mayadeen, the Head of the Political Council for the al-Nujaba Movement, Sheikh Ali al-Asadi, said that the justifications for resistance in Iraq would only end if the country regained full sovereignty away from any US interference in its affairs.
Al-Nujaba’s top official said Iraq’s political leadership must understand the country’s sources of strength and leverage and use them to advance its independence and sovereignty.
Speaking about Iraq’s leadership, Sheikh al-Asadi said he believed the current political figure in question “wants to serve the public interest and do the required work,” describing him as someone who is acting “based on his Shia identity, if I may put it that way.” However, he said the figure is “new to politics” and lacks advisors genuinely committed to helping him succeed.
“Unfortunately, he does not have advisors who are genuinely committed to making his experience successful. Rather, his advisors are concerned with making themselves successful,” Sheikh al-Asadi said.
Speaking to Al Mayadeen, Head of the Political Council for the al-Nujaba Movement, Sheikh Ali al-Asadi, said that Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi wants to serve the public interest but is still new to political work.
He stressed that the advisors attempt to influence the political leadership based on what they receive from Washington, adding, “They do not want to help him become a successful figure who can lead during this stage and perhaps the next stage.”
“Whoever leads Iraq must understand what Iraq truly is and what the cards of strength and leverage in Iraq are,” he said. He questioned the interests of foreign powers in Iraq, asking, “Who needs Iraq? Does Europe not need Iraq? Does Turkey not need Iraq?”
Sheikh al-Asadi also pointed to the Development Road project, asking, “Doesn’t the Development Road that they are talking about need Iraq?”
“All of these are leverage cards a political actor can use to achieve what he wants,” he said. “He can even use the cards held by the Resistance factions as leverage. We are offering him this card and telling him: Use us for the sake of serving Iraq.”
Al-Asadi says US sought to persuade factions to give up weapons
According to Sheikh al-Asadi, several US allies had contacted his movement seeking a truce. “Many of America’s allies sent us messages asking for a truce, including the American chargé d’affaires who “tried to contact us through one of the politicians and asked to meet with us.”
In an interview for Al Mayadeen, Head of the Political Council for al-Nujaba Movement, Sheikh Ali al-Asadi, revealed that a US chargé d'affaires told an Iraqi politician that Washington wanted to sit down with the Resistance factions and discuss only one issue: “handing over… pic.twitter.com/RdE2cmFm7p
He also said US officials had offered projects and incentives in exchange for abandoning strategic weapons. “The Americans offered projects and incentives on condition that we give up our strategic weapons that reach Israel, but we rejected them,” the Iraqi official said. He warned that US pressure would continue even if armed factions surrendered their weapons, saying, “American pressure does not stop at any point. Even if the factions hand over their weapons, they will move on to the Popular Mobilization Forces and then to the Defense Ministry.”
He concluded by highlighting that Washington had sought for years to alter the leadership of the Popular Mobilization Forces. “The main American project for years has sought to change the leadership of the Popular Mobilization Forces and dilute it, but the religious authority and some politicians rejected that,” Sheikh al-Asadi said.
