The Iranian Armed Forces launched a massive response to the US aggression on the Islamic Republic on Tuesday, firing a large number of ballistic missiles on US Marines barracks in Jordan, killing a large number of American soldiers.
IRGC issued a statement affirming that the attack came in response to the US massacre against the civilians in Sirik area, stressing that the Iranian response will continue.
What follows is the full text of the IRGC statement:
The terrorist and defeated American army, incapable of direct confrontation with the fighters of Islam, launched a brutal attack on a residential home in Sirik that was hosting the wedding ceremony of two pure young people, turning it into a scene of bloodshed. By causing the martyrdom and injury of nearly fifty of our beloved people, it rekindled the memory of the atrocities committed at the Minab school and the Lamerd stadium.
In this criminal attack, the child-killing American regime has once again revealed the depth of its hatred and enmity toward the Iranian people through the martyrdom of several individuals, including a child.
In response to this brutal act, the brave fighters of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Aerospace Force, in the second wave of Operation ‘Punishing the Aggressor’ under the sacred code ‘O Messenger of Allah (PBUH)’, launched a dense ballistic missile attack on the U.S. Marines’ barracks in Jordan, known as ‘Camp Titin’ located on the coast of the Gulf of Aqaba. This resulted in the death of a large number of American forces and the destruction of several key facilities and enemy attack helicopters.
The retaliatory operation by the forces of Islam continues.”
IRGC had announced shooting down the 50th advanced MQ-9 drone belonging to the attacking U.S. military using a modern air and space defense system.
Posted on September 1, 2026 by uprootedpalestinians
لا يحسم أي وسيط في المفاوضات الأميركية – الإيرانية وجهة الأمور بصورة واضحة. ميزان التفاؤل والتشاؤم بات رهن حسابات من نوع مختلف. والتعب الذي يبدو واضحاً على جميع المتحاربين، ينعكس قلة حماسة في الحديث عن عودة الحرب.
لا يحسم أي وسيط في المفاوضات الأميركية – الإيرانية وجهة الأمور بصورة واضحة. ميزان التفاؤل والتشاؤم بات رهن حسابات من نوع مختلف. والتعب الذي يبدو واضحاً على جميع المتحاربين، ينعكس قلة حماسة في الحديث عن عودة الحرب. حتى بنيامين نتنياهو، لا يملك ما يحفّز أحداً على مشاركته جنونه الدموي. وفي الأثناء، تتحوّل لعبة «عضّ الأصابع» بين واشنطن وطهران إلى معضلة من شأنها أن تستمر طويلاً ما لم يحصل خرق كبير في المحاولة القطرية الجادّة التي يُعمل عليها الآن.
في حسابات الكلفة، كل العالم بات على يقين بأن الولايات المتحدة غير قادرة على الذهاب بعيداً في مغامرات عسكرية كبيرة. لكنّ الجميع يقول إن دونالد ترامب، لن يقدر على تقديم تنازلات تتيح إحياء مذكّرة التفاهم مع إيران من دون تعديلات. وهو يعلم مُسبقاً، أن طهران، وإن كانت تضرّرت كثيراً بفعل الحرب، وتتضرّر بفعل الحصار القائم، إلا أنها لا تجد نفسها مضطرة إلى العودة إلى اتفاق من دون تحصيل ضمانات من نوع مختلف، وجبي المزيد من الأثمان.
وسط كل الضجيج، بات الجميع يتصرف على أساس أن هناك عناصر أساسية قد تكون مدخل أي حلّ أو تعثّر. وهي المتصلة بالانتخابات المُرتقبة في إسرائيل (نهاية تشرين الأول المقبل) وفي الولايات المتحدة (مطلع تشرين الثاني المقبل)، علماً أن نتائج هذه الانتخابات، تحتاج بدورها إلى شهور حتى تتحوّل إلى وقائع يُبنى عليها في المرحلة المقبلة. ذلك أن إدارة الرئيس الأميركي، قد لا تنتظر موعد منتصف كانون الثاني المقبل، حيث يجري تثبيت نتائج الانتخابات النصفية، وقد تكون محتاجة إلى حل سريع للأزمة الناجمة عن تعثّر الاتفاق مع إيران.
أمّا في كيان العدو، فإن التقديرات حيال نتائج الانتخابات المقبلة، تفتح الباب أمام احتمال بروز صعوبة في تشكّل ائتلاف قوي يقدر على إقامة حكومة مستقرة، علماً أن الخلافات التي تعصف باليمين الذي يقوده نتنياهو، تشير إلى احتمال أن يلجأ في اللحظة الصعبة إلى طرح فكرة حكومة وحدة وطنية، وهو لن ينجح في فرضها من دون برنامج عمل جديد. وهنا مربط الفرس، ذلك أن التنافس يقوم حالياً ليس على من يفوز بعدد المقاعد الأكبر، بل حول أي برنامج عمل مختلف عن القائم منذ 3 سنوات، حيث تحوّلت إسرائيل إلى كتلة من نار تحرق كل شيء من حولها. وهو مسار لا يمكن لأي دولة في العالم أن تستمر فيه، حتى ولو كان كل أهلها على موقف واحد، علماً أن خصوم نتنياهو، يعملون على جذب الكتل التي تعاني من أزمة جدّية نتيجة التحوّلات في المزاج العام العالمي تجاه إسرائيل. وكل الحديث عن أن كيان الاحتلال يمكنه أن يعمل بمعزل عمّا يجري في العالم، لا معنى له في حالة كيان لا يمكن له الاستمرار من دون رعاية غربية.
في أميركا، يعيش العالم على تسريبات وتصريحات ترامب وفريقه بأن استراتيجيتهما لن تتأثّر بنتائج الانتخابات النصفية، لكنّ الأمور ليست على هذا النحو. فهناك تيار قوي في أميركا يريد دفع الإدارة إلى تسويات كبرى، كما أن الإدارة نفسها لم تعد تضمن نتائج مناسبة من أي مغامرات جديدة.
هل يتحمّل العام المزيد من الاحتقان بسبب تعطّل إمدادات الطاقة، وهل ينجو لبنان من جنون إسرائيلي جديد؟
وإذا كان الإعلام يغرق في تغطية تصريحات عن السيطرة الكاملة على مضيق هرمز وعلى موجة العقوبات ضد إيران وخلافها من الدعايات، فإن أهل منطقة الخليج العربي أولاً، وجماعة الأسواق المالية من جهة ثانية، والحكومات المتأثّرة بأزمة الطاقة من جهة ثالثة، كل هؤلاء يعرفون أن حقيقة الوضع لا تبشّر بالخير، وأن تراجع إمدادات الطاقة كبير جداً، وأن أميركا ليست مسيطرة على حركة التجارة في المضيق، وأن النتائج الأصعب، سوف تظهر تباعاً في الخريف المقبل، ولن يكون بمقدور أحد تجاهل ذلك، وأن العقوبات على إيران استعراضية أكثر منها حقيقية. ما يعني دفع الأمور صوب خيارات حاسمة: إمّا حرب واسعة وقاسية ومجنونة، وإمّا تسوية تجبر الكل على النزول عن الشجرة، والذهاب نحو تطبيع يقود إلى متغيّرات، ستظهر نتائجها تباعاً، وأهمّها سيكون في إسرائيل.
وإذا كان محمد بن سلمان يقود أكبر عملية «تحوّط» في تاريخ بلاده ربطاً بنتائج الحرب، فإن دولة مثل الإمارات العربية لا تعرف أن تستقر على خيار، وهي تقترب من التورّط في أمور قد تنعكس دماراً كبيراً على مستقبلها السياسي والاقتصادي والأمني، بينما يقف الآخرون في مربّع الانتظار، والعاقل منهم، يتسلّح بالصمت، بينما الغبي منهم، يُخرِج رغباته وترّهاته على شكل تقديرات سياسية، كما هو حال أركان سلطة الوصاية عندنا من جوزيف عون ونواف سلام إلى القوى الأخرى التي ترفع لواء إخراج فكرة المقاومة وقدراتها من لبنان بصورة نهائية.
وبمعزل عما يعتقده أركان هذه السلطة حيال مستقبل المفاوضات مع العدو، فإن الأميركيين أنفسهم، الذين يفضّلون مسار واشنطن، ويريدون إبعاد لبنان عن مسار المفاوضات مع إيران، صاروا يتحدّثون بلغة مختلفة، لكنهم يقولون في كل الأوقات، إنهم لا يقدرون على ممارسة الضغط على إسرائيل قبل انتهاء الانتخابات فيها، ما يدفع إلى الاعتقاد بقوة، أن لعبة المماطلة، من قبل إسرائيل أولاً، والولايات المتحدة ثانياً، سوف تعطّل أي نتائج لمسار واشنطن، وبالتالي فإن الحيلة الوحيدة بيدهم، هي إعادة رمي المسؤولية على حزب الله، وهو ما يتولاه عون وسلام وبقية جوقة الوصاية.
وكأنّ هؤلاء يعتقدون بأنهم في حال رفعوا مستوى التهويل والضغط، سوف يدفعون المقاومة إلى التنازل عن مواقفها، وهو ما حرص الأمين العام لحزب الله الشيخ نعيم قاسم على تكراره في خطبه الأخيرة، علماً أنه كان يجدر بفريق الوصاية التعامل بطريقة مختلفة مع قرار المقاومة عدم الدخول في مواجهة تكسر الهدوء النسبي القائم حالياً، رغم أنه يوجد ألف سبب وسبب لأن تستأنف المقاومة عملياتها العسكرية ضد قوات الاحتلال وأن تقود برنامجاً داخلياً يهدف إلى إسقاط هذا الحكم المجنون.
وإذا كان الجميع مضطراً إلى أن ينتظر نتائج انتخابات تشارين، سواء في كيان الاحتلال أو في الولايات المتحدة، فإن ذلك لا يعفي هذه السلطة المريضة، من تحمّل المسؤولية عن أحوال الناس، وها قد مرّت سنتان إلا بضعة أشهر على وجود هذه السلطة من رئاسة وحكومة، فيما تنهار البلاد ومؤسساتها يوماً بعد يوم، ولم يبقَ منها واقفاً على قدم واحدة، سوى الجيش، الذي لا يتوقّف عملاء أميركا وإسرائيل عن التحريض ضده، من أجل دفعه إلى مواجهة لا يريدها ولا يقدر عليها، وهو العارف بأن نتيجتها الوحيدة، هي إغراق لبنان في متاهة حرب أهلية جديدة!
Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei calls for greater solidarity among Muslim nations, urging their leaders to recognize shared threats and strengthen cooperation in defense of the Islamic world.
The Zionists and Americans are enemies of all Muslims around the world, the leader of the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei said, stressing that the lesson missing today is the need to confront enemies and defend ourselves and one another.
In a message marking Unity Week, Sayyed Khamenei called on Muslims to reflect deeply on the developments unfolding around them, saying that what happened to the Palestinians would not have occurred had Muslims stood united.
“We must deeply reflect on what is happening around us; had Muslims stood united, what happened to the Palestinians would not have occurred,” he emphasized.
He also urged the rulers of Islamic countries, particularly those in West Asia and the Gulf, to accurately identify the enemies’ plans and cooperate on the path of righteousness.
Islamic unity as a bulwark against division
Iran’s leader stressed that unity is a fundamental prerequisite for confronting the enemies of the Islamic Ummah and the Islamic message, warning against those who sow division among Muslims.
“Those who sow division among Muslims are aiding the enemies,” he stressed.
He noted that the Islamic message has endured difficult circumstances from the early days of Islam to the present, emphasizing that Muslims have played significant roles throughout history. The Iranian leader added that “we are witnessing with our own eyes” the prospects for Muslims’ victory over their enemies.
Sayyed Khomeini’s call for unity and Iran’s role
Sayyed Khamenei recalled the origins of the call for Islamic unity, noting that the late Iranian leader Imam Khomeini began advocating for unity while in exile. He said Imam Khomeini’s launch of “Islamic Unity Week” had angered the enemies of Islam.
Sayyed Khamenei concluded by stressing that Iran has consistently sought to unite the Islamic nation, pledging, “As a servant of the people, I will not allow any divisions among the members of the nation.”
His message was delivered during the closing session of the International Islamic Unity Conference, hosted by the Islamic Republic of Iran for its 40th edition. The conference was held this year under the theme “Islamic Unity in the Thought of the Martyred Imam,” with around 600 participants from inside and outside Iran representing 40 countries, including Iraq, Pakistan, Türkiye, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and the Gulf states.
The conference was held amid the ongoing war on Iran, with speakers emphasizing Islamic solidarity, cooperation, sovereignty, and the need for greater coordination among Muslim countries in the face of regional and global challenges.
The most damaging intelligence failures are often understood only after an operation collapses, a network disappears, or years of trust are exposed as an enemy asset.
Photo Credit: The Cradle
Every resistance movement has sensitive files it cannot open to the public. Palestinian and Lebanese archives are filled with accounts of agents, failed operations, and breaches whose full circumstances may never be disclosed. Other secrets died with the people who carried them, leaving black boxes scattered across Syria, Iraq, and beyond.
Some details are withheld to spare organizations embarrassment, while others could compromise methods, expose surviving networks, or show the enemy how a breach was uncovered. Public disclosure also risks turning an isolated case of collaboration into evidence of wider decay within the resistance.
Secrets the resistance cannot publish
Facing fewer restraints, retired Israeli officials publish memoirs, former operatives brief journalists, and the details of old assassinations become material for books and television. Former Mossad director Yossi Cohen’s 2025 memoir, “The Sword of Freedom,” is one recent example. Ronen Bergman’s “Rise and Kill First” drew on roughly a thousand interviews and thousands of documents to reconstruct Israel’s long assassination campaign.
Personal ambition, political rivalry, and institutional score-settling shape these accounts as much as the historical record. One former Mossad chief reportedly supplied analysts and writers with extensive details of past operations to settle political scores with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with some of that material finding its way into Bergman’s book. Israel’s freedom to publish also reflects a deeper confidence that its enemies may learn the method yet still lack the reach to answer it.
Other books in this field have a more overtly propagandistic purpose. Some appear designed to lead the resistance toward a particular version of events and close a sensitive file before the full picture emerges, especially when the operation is recent.
Yet these accounts can still yield useful fragments. The index to Bergman’s book, for example, names Noam Erez as the Israeli operational official responsible for Imad Mughniyeh’s assassination. Elsewhere, it claims that Yahya Ayyash met Hezbollah leaders in Marj al-Zuhur, despite Ayyash never having been among the Palestinians deported there in 1992.
Such discrepancies may result from poor sourcing or deliberate misdirection, but either way they show why Israeli accounts must be read for what they reveal inadvertently as much as for what they claim outright.
The resistance therefore needs its own record, even if names and countries must be withheld, to understand what each penetration changed, how it survived, and which defensive measures worked. Such protection and prevention belong to the practice of resistance as surely as the operations conducted in public view.
Recruitment without a handler
Israel’s recruitment methods have changed over more than eight decades. Agents were cultivated before the occupation of Palestine, but the communications revolution of the past thirty years has widened the number of possible entry points.
A recruiter no longer needs repeated face-to-face meetings. Financial distress, private correspondence, medical records, travel histories, and intimate relationships can be mapped from a distance before the target realizes that an approach has begun.
Recent wars have added harsher forms of coercion. In Gaza, Israel has sought to turn entire families into local auxiliaries by tying survival, aid, or permission to remain in place to cooperation. In September 2025, The Cradle reported that members of the Dughmush and Bakr families were killed after rejecting approaches from the Shin Bet.
Arabic reporting, citing the EuroMed Human Rights Monitor and family representatives, described offers of money, weapons, and protection in return for forming armed groups modeled on Yasser Abu Shabab’s militia.
Marwan Bakr, the family’s ‘mukhtar,’ said the occupation army offered to let them remain in exchange for cooperation, but they refused: “We will not be tools in the hands of those who kill us.” Nizar Doghmush, head of his family council, likewise believed that “death is easier than the stigma of betrayal.” These individual positions form the nucleus of collective steadfastness, but every refusal has a price.
The approaches to the two families form part of Israel’s wider effort to construct armed Palestinian alternatives to Hamas and place aid routes under their control. Its proxy strategy in Gaza turns existing clan disputes, criminal networks, and political rivalries into instruments of occupation. Elsewhere, the same logic allows Tel Aviv to encourage a local killing without exposing the outside hand that selected the target.
In Iran, access was pursued through a different route. On 26 June 2025, an X account identifying itself as Mossad Farsi advertised a telemedicine service for Iranians through WhatsApp, Telegram, and Signal.
The post offered Persian-speaking specialists in cardiology, diabetes, infectious disease, oncology, gynecology, and psychology, and advised prospective users to connect through a VPN. Israeli media treated the service as a Mossad initiative, although the agency declined to confirm the account when asked by Israel Hayom.
A screenshot of the Israeli advertisement for Iranians posted on X at the time.
Whether the account was officially run by Mossad matters less than the opening it created. A medical consultation can yield names, locations, family ties, health records, personal vulnerabilities, and a private line of communication.
The offer also served Israeli propaganda by presenting an enemy intelligence service as more attentive to Iranian citizens than their own government, while quietly probing loyalties and building access.
Scholarships, exchange programs, professional conferences, cafes, and diaspora associations can serve the same purpose. Students in sensitive technical fields are especially valuable because recruitment abroad is harder to detect once they return home. The method need not begin with an explicit request to spy. Access is built gradually through favors, status, travel opportunities, and proximity to people with money or influence.
Protocols written after the breach
Speaking to The Cradle, a Lebanese security source describes the problem bluntly:
“Someone recruited abroad is far more difficult to detect. The resistance therefore has strict protocols. For example, entering the embassies of certain countries, or even passing through those countries in transit, is sufficient grounds for suspension or dismissal.”
The source adds:
“If a cadre travels without permission, even to a country that is neither hostile nor suspicious, the minimum decision is to suspend that person for years. That is enough time for the handler to lose any hope of benefiting from the cadre if he has been recruited.”
Not every organization adopted such rules early enough. A Palestinian source points to the abduction of a mid-ranking cadre in an Asian country. Local authorities freed him before he was killed, but not before he surrendered the information he held. The source reveals:
“As a result of this incident, a decision was taken to prevent even those who had resigned from their duties from traveling until three years after the date of resignation. During this period, the direct superior must ensure that all relevant arrangements are changed immediately if any cadre travels or suddenly disappears.”
Beyond money, blackmail, or ideology, some captured agents have described a need to feel important, a desire for foreign citizenship, or the attraction of access to influential people. Recruitment often succeeds when an intelligence service identifies the private story a target wants to believe about himself, long before it assigns him a mission.
The scale of the danger is visible in Lebanon, where the Internal Security Forces and Hezbollah have repeatedly uncovered Israeli networks spanning sects and nationalities. In 2022, authorities announced the dismantling of what was described as the largest Israeli spy network discovered in the country.
Iran’s arrests after the June 2025 war likewise showed how recruitment can spread across logistics, transport, communications, and ordinary civilian work rather than remain confined to officials with obvious access.
Medical travel creates a particularly difficult exposure because patients and relatives must surrender documents, diagnoses, contact details, and travel plans to hospitals, charities, insurers, visa offices, and intermediaries.
Although most of those bodies are legitimate, a hostile service needs to compromise only one link in the chain to identify a vulnerable person or begin an approach that appears unrelated to politics. The danger grows when urgent treatment abroad leaves the patient dependent on whoever can accelerate an appointment, secure a visa, or cover the bill.
The 2024 Israeli war on Lebanon and Israel’s 2025 attack on Iran exposed security failures that public rhetoric could no longer cover. A resistance movement can compensate for weaknesses while the enemy remains uncertain about its capabilities.
Once Israel has mapped both, speeches carry little weight. By then, the battlefield has already been shaped by what was surrendered behind the lines.
When one agent ruins an operation
The most destructive agent does more than pass names or coordinates. Advance warning can allow Israel to abort an operation, redirect a target, or let the plan proceed far enough to turn it into a trap. The result is not measured only in casualties. A failed operation can provoke paralysis, internal accusations, and years of fear among cadres who no longer know which part of the chain was compromised.
Israeli officials and aligned journalists claim in their own defense that for many years they had no significant agent within Hamas’s senior military leadership. This, they say, is why Operation Al-Aqsa Flood proceeded without warning from “golden information” or a “high-level agent.”
Israel’s search for such sources is as old as the organizations it targeted. From the first operations of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), agents reached positions of consequence and, according to Palestinian accounts, sometimes entered command rooms.
Egypt and Syria faced the same effort. The conflicting literature surrounding the October 1973 war still shows how difficult it can be to separate a genuine human source from an ignored warning, a political cover story, or retrospective mythmaking.
Hamas may still have been penetrated despite Israel’s failure to obtain strategic warning. The Cradlehas documented a case involving access to the movement before Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, while the surprise achieved on 7 October suggests that any source was too low, excluded from the operation, or unable to transmit what mattered. Israel’s later success in Lebanon and Iran only sharpens the contrast.
Resistance sources in Lebanon and Palestine attribute several failed or compromised operations to internal breaches, including the 2005 Ghajar operation and the first Zikim naval assault in 2014. The Zikim raid itself is established, and footage later showed Qassam fighters reaching an Israeli military position. The claim that an agent sabotaged its first phase, however, is not supported by a public record and should remain attributed to the source.
Similar caution is needed over a source’s claim that more than 30 attempts to retaliate for the 2008 assassination of Mughniyeh were disrupted, and over accounts of an agent known only as ‘N.N.’ who allegedly remained inside a Gaza armed wing for 25 years.
Another Palestinian account involves a former female prisoner who had been sent on a bombing mission more than 15 years before her release. Days before she left prison, she says, Israel assassinated the commander who had dispatched her.
His killing ensured that the two could never compare what they knew or identify the suspected agent between them. Whether by design or consequence, the episode reflects a familiar intelligence method in which the only people capable of assembling the full picture are prevented from meeting.
A retired security source offers a more verifiable pattern from the occupied West Bank. Between 2017 and 2019, he says, Israel allowed a developing armed structure to expand while monitoring meetings abroad.
Arrests came only after members returned to their cities and the financing and weapons-transfer chains had been exposed. “One rotten tomato can spoil many others,” the source says.
At the time, the Israelis allowed the structure to develop and monitored every meeting held abroad. They waited until everyone returned to and settled in their cities, then waited further until the financing and weapons-transfer cells still operating inside the territories were exposed, before carrying out a major arrest operation.
The same source concludes:
“A shock of this kind causes organizational paralysis and mutual recriminations, and an organization cannot recover from it easily or quickly. It also creates frustration and fear among cadres on the ground, a reality that may take years of effort or a generational change to overcome. A masterstroke is worth a thousand ordinary blows. This explains why the West Bank did not rise up in the opening days of Al-Aqsa Flood and has not done so to this day.”
An Israeli penetration can survive the arrest of the agent who enabled it, leaving commanders to question compromised plans, exposed routes, and even one another. By then, the occupation has already planted suspicion where trust once held the organization together.
Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem delivers a speech during the central Prophetic festival marking the birth of Prophet Mohammad and Islamic Unity Week in Beirut’s southern suburbs, Lebanon, on August 28, 2026.
Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem said Friday that the group had broken the “Greater Israel” project and would remain steadfast, declaring: “We will hold our heads high and will not surrender.”
Sheikh Qassem made the remarks during a central religious festival organized by Hezbollah at the Ashoura Square in Beirut’s southern suburbs (Dahiyeh) to mark the birth anniversary of Prophet Muhammad (Al-Mawlid Al-Nabawi) and his grandson, Imam Jaafar Al-Sadiq, as well as Islamic Unity Week.
His Eminence said an aggressive US-Israeli project seeks to control and fragment the region and is being confronted by Iran and resistance forces. “The adversaries had left no opportunity for aggression but had failed and would continue to fail to achieve their objectives.”
“The major sacrifices made in Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, Yemen, and Iraq had halted the Zionist-American project targeting the region. We have sacrificed much and will not lose. Loss comes when we surrender and hand them everything with our own hands,” His Eminence declared.
Sheikh Qassem: We broke the “Greater Israel” project, preventing it from reaching Beirut and stripping Lebanon of its strength; today, "Israel" dares not establish a settlement in the south or draw borders beyond occupied territory for fear of the resistance and its supporters pic.twitter.com/cWpmjEQAyq
Sheikh Qassem said the Lebanese authorities had chosen a course that did not honor Lebanon by abandoning the November 27, 2024, agreement and entering direct negotiations with the enemy. “Honorable people, resistance fighters, those who had sacrificed, and their supporters from all sects rejected the authorities’ concessions. Who authorized you to surrender Greater Israe?”
His Eminence said the Lebanese authorities’ negotiations had not stopped the war but had instead legitimized it, describing them as “a humiliating surrender to the enemy with nothing in return.”
“You are paying the price for the country in negotiations to remain on your thrones and appease America, which is complicit with Israel.”
The Hezbollah secretary general stressed that the group did not want war, pointing to its acceptance of and commitment to the November 27, 2024, agreement. What is happening today, he said, “is not a mutual war but a defined Israeli aggression that ebbs and flows,” adding that it would not have eased without the 1701 of understanding.
Sheikh Qassem affirmed the Israeli occupation’s project was “Greater Israel,” citing developments in Syria as evidence. He stressed that Hezbollah would remain in the field and reject the projects being proposed.
Hezbollah’s Sheikh Qassem: – Lebanon’s authorities dishonored Lebanon by abandoning the Nov. 27, 2024 agreement and entering direct talks with Israel.
– The talks failed to stop the war and instead legitimized it, amounting to a humiliating surrender with nothing in return pic.twitter.com/dHNau8sfbk
“We broke the ‘Greater Israel’ project and prevented it from reaching Beirut and stripping Lebanon of its strength so that the enemy could not take control and settlements could begin,” he said.
His Eminence added that “Israel” now dared not establish a settlement in southern Lebanon because the area remained unstable in the presence of the resistance. He also asserted that the Israeli occupation forces were afraid to draw borders beyond the territory it had occupied because it feared the resistance, its people, and those standing with it.
Sheikh Qassem said Hezbollah was “in a state of confrontation” and would remain steadfast, accepting only the implementation of the October 27, 2024, agreement under the framework of UN Security Council Resolution 1701.
“We oppose the framework agreement and call for its rejection,” he said, describing it as illegitimate, unlawful, and humiliating, and saying it undermined Lebanese sovereignty and failed to restore rights.
Sheikh Qassem said that those who possessed such resistance, such as young people and a people willing to sacrifice for their country, could not be defeated.
“Israel cannot achieve gains in the presence of the resistance, its people, the honorable, the martyrs, and the sacrifices. We are Karbala-inspired in achieving our goals.”
“The sacrifices of our people are immense, and we will work together for their dignity, continue social assistance, and support reconstruction and restoration,” Qassem said. “We will hold our heads high and will not surrender. Let them do whatever they want.”
#Hezbollah Sec. Gen. Sheikh Naim Qassem, speaking at the central prophetic festival in #Beirut: – Islamic unity must strengthen Muslims and promote cooperation among states and peoples -Islamic unity is needed to confront #US and Israeli projects aimed at fragmenting our region pic.twitter.com/ahKzI34sHy
Addressing Islamic unity, Qassem said the unity sought was one that would strengthen Muslims and foster integration and cooperation among them, particularly among states and peoples.
He said Islamic unity was intended to free the nation from dependency and subjugation, confront sectarian, religious, and political divisions, and counter US and Israeli projects aimed at fragmenting the region. Unity, he said, meant turning toward the nation’s real enemy and moving beyond internal conflicts.
Sheikh Qassem said Islamic unity had two outcomes: first, remaining united to prevent strife and extend that unity to the national and humanitarian levels; and second, uniting around the central cause of Palestine, which he said represented the future of the entire region.
“It is time for our region to become secure through understanding among its states and to put an end to arrogance,” he said.
On the anniversary of the disappearance of Imam Mous Sadr, Qassem said the imam had been “an icon, a leader, a role model, and a man of great vision,” adding that he had disappeared because he represented justice and humanity.
Sheikh Qassem affirmed that Hezbollah would continue along the path of “the Imam of the Resistance,” Sayyed Mous Sadr, and that of Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, whom he described as the “Master of the Nation’s Martyrs.”
Iran will ultimately outlast the United States in the ongoing six-month war, according to Professor Mohammad Marandi, who described the sanctions imposed on Tehran as unprecedented in human history. Former Pentagon Senior Security Policy Analyst Michael Maloof, meanwhile, characterized the conflict as the most catastrophic outcome of a longstanding US policy shaped by flawed Israeli intelligence.
On Al Mayadeen‘s The Great Standoff: Iran and the World, Marandi stated that “The United States has been engaged in a type of warfare for well over a year now, since the 12-Day War, or a bit before that”, noting that “this war in particular, the Ramadan War, it has been ongoing for six months”.
Marandi said the current phase of the war is siege warfare, which he emphasized is a war crime. “Instead of bombing the Minab school and slaughtering 168 little girls, or instead of bombing the sports complex in Lomert and killing large numbers of teenage girls who are practicing volleyball, they’re targeting all teenagers and all elementary school children across the country through siege warfare”, he said.
Iran has outlasted US in previous phases and will do so again
Marandi stated that current sanctions are unprecedented in their severity. “These sanctions today are sanctions that have never existed, the likes of which have never existed in human history,” Marandi said. “But the Iranians continue to remain steadfast, and they will punish the aggressor”.
He argued that Iran has consistently outlasted the United States in previous phases of the war, citing the 40-day war, the siege warfare period, and the 13 days of fighting after the United States undermined a memorandum of understanding. “Each phase was an attempt by one side to overcome the other, to outlast the other,” he said. “And so far, we’ve seen that both during the 40 days, siege warfare, the 13 days, it was the Iranians who outlasted the United States”.
For 40 days, the central question of the #US war on Iran was simple: Who could outlast the other?
Marandi acknowledged that the current siege warfare will harm Iranians and make life more difficult, but maintained that Iran will prevail. “The Iranians know that this is a war for survival,” he said, adding that “the Iranians have a resilience, along with its partners and allies across the axis of resistance, that is, to be very blunt, unique in the world that we live in today.”
Chance of renewed war significant, substantial: Marandi
Regarding the possibility of renewed military war, Marandi said the chances are “significant and substantial.” He said Iran has warned the United States that if it tries to crush the Iranian economy and if regional governments cooperate, “the Iranian response will be swift and decisive,” which he said would include the use of Iran’s military capabilities.
He noted that the United States may also launch a strike on Iran, and that renewed war could occur after the elections. “But we are in such a situation,” he said.
Marandi also addressed the link between the war in Ukraine and the war in West Asia, stating that Russia and Iran have benefited from each other’s resistance to the United States and Europe. “The Russians benefit enormously from the fact that Iran has defeated the United States,” he said. “And the Iranians have benefited enormously from the fact that the Russians have severely weakened the United States and the Europeans as well.”
War reveals limitations of US power and flawed Israeli intelligence
For his part, former Pentagon Senior Security Policy Analyst Michael Maloof offered a broader critique of US policy, describing the war as “the most tragic and volatile consequence so far to date” of what he said was a longstanding US approach to West Asia.
“Every time the United States has followed the intelligence of the Israelis, and it’s turned out to be wrong,” Maloof said, adding, “And so consequently, this is just the latest iteration. It’s the most catastrophic so far.”
He said the war has revealed the limitations of US power. “It has shown that a country such as Iran, which is far less capable militarily, can stand up to a superpower, and did so successfully, to the point that it’s at a stalemate,” he said. “Economically, it has withstood years and years of sanctions. It has withstood them.”
Iran has learned to live with sanctions, reshaping Middle East dynamics
Maloof argued that Iran, like Russia and China, has learned to live with sanctions and reduce its reliance on the US dollar. “They’ve learned to no longer rely solely upon the US dollar,” he said. “They have learned ways now to get out under the dependency on the dollar and its weaponization.”
“As a consequence, it has shown the world that a power such as Iran can stand up to a superpower,” Maloof said. “And I think this has created a whole new perspective and outlook now throughout the Middle East, even with the GCC countries on new security arrangements.”
He said Gulf Arab countries are now having to reevaluate whether they want US bases to remain, noting that those bases, which were meant to be a deterrent, “turned out to be a detriment to the United States in particular, and to those countries, because they were involved in a preemptive strike on Iran.” He added that “the Middle East of old is no longer going to return to what it was.”
US military readiness diminishing, Trump leadership criticized
Maloof was critical of US President Donald Trump’s leadership, describing his statements as “bluster”. “He likes to paint a good picture when it’s all falling apart,” Maloof said. “And he’s not to be believed. He lies. He even lies to the American people.”
Regarding the US military posture, Maloof said readiness is suffering. “As each day goes by, it is diminishing, and it’s diminishing tremendously, especially in this climate in the Middle East,” he said. He also noted that the United States is “critically short on the ability to rearm” and cannot keep its naval flotilla in place indefinitely without replacement.
Maloof said he does not believe a military approach can succeed. “I don’t see that anything would be worthwhile pursuing a military approach, once again, knowing that it has failed once,” he said. “And there is a limitation on everything across the board.”
War on Iran part of struggle between unipolar, multipolar world orders
Maloof also addressed the broader geopolitical context, describing the war as part of a larger struggle between a US-led unipolar world order and a rising multipolar order. “Trump is seeing the rise of this,” Maloof said. “The sanctions that he’s trying to impose and get everybody else involved, including China, isn’t going to work because they’ve been sanctioned to death.”
He said the multipolar world order is now developing its own financial system, which Trump views as a threat to the dollar and the Western financial system overall. “This is what he’s really fighting against,” Maloof said. “And Iran is just an instrument of that fight, even though he uses nuclear weapons as an excuse.”
Maloof said the wars in Ukraine and Iran are becoming intertwined. “It all has to do with sanctions and with hegemony and with influence in order to challenge the rise of the multipolar world order,” he said. “And Trump realizes now that he cannot stop it.”
Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem rejects Lebanon’s negotiations with the Israeli occupation, opposes the Framework Agreement, and reaffirms resistance.
Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem rejected the Lebanese authorities’ decision to enter direct negotiations with the Israeli occupation, arguing that the talks had failed to stop the war and amounted to concessions that yielded nothing for Lebanon.
Speaking at a ceremony marking the birth anniversary of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in Beirut’s southern suburb, Sheikh Qassem also addressed Islamic unity, the Palestinian cause and the American-Israeli project seeking to control and fragment the region.
On Islamic unity and support for Palestine
Islamic unity, according to Sheikh Qassem, requires turning toward the nation’s true enemy while overcoming internal divisions. Such unity should also extend to national and humanitarian solidarity, he added.
Palestine remains the central cause around which Arabs and Muslims should unite, the Hezbollah chief stressed, describing it as an Islamic, national, Arab, and humanitarian cause rather than a sectarian one.
He urged Arab and Islamic states and their peoples not to remain spectators as enemies enter the region while their fellow peoples suffer.
The speech also recalled Imam Sayyed Musa Al-Sadr, who was kidnapped and disappeared on August 31 along with his two companions. Sheikh Qassem highlighted Al-Sadr’s early warnings about the Zionist entity and his focus on southern Lebanon, recalling his words: “Lebanon cannot smile while its South is suffering and in pain.”
Tribute was also paid to the martyred Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, whom Sheikh Qassem said had repeatedly highlighted Al-Sadr’s qualities and championed Islamic unity. He pledged to continue along the path of both figures.
Sheikh Qassem warns of US-Israeli plans for the region
A broader American-Israeli project aimed at controlling and fragmenting the region was also a central theme of the speech. Iran and Resistance forces, Sheikh Qassem maintained, are confronting this project.
Washington, he argued, is laying the groundwork for “Greater Israel,” taking advantage of its military capabilities and what he characterized as prevailing submission in the region.
The sacrifices made in Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, Yemen, and Iraq have halted the project, according to Sheikh Qassem, who insisted that the resistance has not been defeated despite the scale of the losses.
“We have made great sacrifices, and we will not lose. Loss comes when we surrender and hand everything over to them with our own hands, allowing them to take everything,” he said.
Developments in Syria were cited as further evidence of the “Greater Israel” project. Resistance forces, he declared, will remain in the field and reject attempts to impose such projects on the region.
Rather than stopping the war, he argued, the negotiations have granted legitimacy to the fighting without securing anything in return for Lebanon.
“The Lebanese authorities’ negotiations did not stop the war; rather, they granted it legitimacy and amounted to a humiliating surrender to the enemy without receiving anything in return,” he said.
Sheikh Qassem directly challenged Lebanese officials over their authority to make concessions affecting the country’s sovereignty, accusing them of placing Lebanon’s interests at risk to remain in power and satisfy the United States, which he said is complicit with the Israeli occupation.
“Who authorized you to relinquish sovereignty?” Sheikh Qassem asked.
At the same time, he rejected claims that Hezbollah seeks war, pointing to its acceptance of the October 27, 2024 Agreement and its commitment to the deal.
The current situation, he argued, is not a mutual war but continued Israeli aggression that periodically escalates and subsides. Sheikh Qassem attributed the easing of the fighting to Iran and the memorandum of understanding.
Sheikh Qassem opposes Framework Agreement
Implementation of the October 27, 2024 Agreement within the framework of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 remains acceptable to Hezbollah, Sheikh Qassem said, while any alternative arrangement is rejected.
“We are in a state of confrontation and will remain steadfast. We accept the implementation of the 27 October 2024 Agreement under the framework of Resolution 1701, and nothing else,” he said.
The Framework Agreement should be annulled, he declared, describing it as illegitimate, unlawful and humiliating while arguing that it undermines Lebanese sovereignty and fails to restore rights.
Negotiations, Sheikh Qassem added, cannot be presented as an alternative to resistance while fighting continues.
“Negotiations are taking place under war and grant legitimacy to the war,” he said.
10hResistance, he maintained, has prevented the “Greater Israel” project from reaching Beirut and stripping Lebanon of its strength. The Israeli occupation, he added, also does not dare establish a settlement in southern Lebanon or redraw borders beyond occupied territory because of the resistance.
Concluding his speech, Sheikh Qassem reaffirmed that Hezbollah and its supporters would remain steadfast, while pledging continued assistance, reconstruction and restoration for communities affected by the war.
“We will remain proud and hold our heads high. We will not surrender, and let them do whatever they want.”
Special Coverage | Iranian Government: Diplomacy and Defense Are Inseparable, and We Will Confront US Sanctions | … تغطية خاصة | الحكومة الإيرانية: الدبلوماسية والدفاع لا ينفصلان وسنتصدى للعقوبات الأميركية | …https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JsEhBekKAk
Iranian Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Major General Mohsen Rezaei speaks in an exclusive interview with Al-Manar TV (August 27, 2026).
Iranian Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Major General Mohsen Rezaei said Tehran views Lebanon’s security as an integral part of the security of the entire West Asian region, calling for an end to wars and military operations in Lebanon, Gaza, and Syria and stressing that continued tension in one arena has political, economic, and security repercussions across the region.
In an exclusive interview with Al-Manar TV on Thursday evening, Major General Rezaei discussed developments in the confrontation in Lebanon and the wider region. He paid tribute to the Lebanese people across all sects and segments of society, commemorated the martyrs of Lebanon and Hezbollah, and praised Lebanese unity in confronting “Israel.” He also expressed particular appreciation for Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem, saying he had successfully led the resistance during the current phase, and for Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, praising his role in Lebanon’s political arena.
Major General Rezaei said Iran’s conditions for any understanding with the United States include an end to the war across the various arenas of West Asia, particularly Lebanon, the withdrawal of “Israel” from Lebanese territory it has seized, an end to the war in the Gaza Strip, and a halt to Israeli attacks on Syria. He said the region had become “an interconnected chain,” in which any deterioration in one country’s security raises investment costs and undermines development prospects elsewhere.
He described Iran’s relationship with Lebanon as “historic and deeply rooted,” pointing to ties forged centuries ago between scholars from Jabal Amel and Iran, and said Tehran would continue supporting Lebanon with all the capabilities at its disposal.
On the military situation, Rezaei said “Israel” was no longer capable of advancing toward Beirut or its southern suburbs, citing the losses Hezbollah had inflicted on “Israel” over the past three or four months, as well as the full impact of the “Iranian threat.” He said the southern suburbs and Beirut constituted a “red line” for Iran, stressing that Tehran was monitoring developments “with the utmost seriousness” and that “Israel” would ultimately be forced to withdraw from the Lebanese territory it had entered.
Rezaei attributed this assessment to the fact that “Lebanon’s terrain is resistant to control and occupation.” He argued that controlling Lebanese territory and besieging the resistance forces operating there was not possible, comparing the situation with Gaza, where he said “Israel,” despite its blockade, had failed to achieve its objectives decisively.
On Syria, Rezaei ruled out the possibility of Damascus entering the confrontation in Lebanon, saying the Syrian government faced multiple challenges. He pointed to continued Israeli attacks on Damascus and its surrounding areas as having diminished the prospects for such an alignment, and said the Syrian government had reached the conclusion that “Israel has trampled on all agreements.”
Rezaei also stressed that Iran does not interfere in Hezbollah’s military structure or battlefield decisions, saying the group now has military cadres capable of managing its affairs and making its own decisions, particularly with the emergence of two new generations of young leaders.
Iran Faces the United States and “Israel”
Rezaei issued a series of firm positions on the United States and “Israel,” saying Iran does not seek war but is preparing for a new phase should the confrontation resume, stressing that any future war would be “different” from previous ones.
He said Iran had approached the various stages of the war incrementally, initially refraining from targeting US bases in Gulf states before subsequently expanding the scope of its responses to include US sites and bases in other countries. He said this gradual approach was intended to increasingly take humanitarian considerations into account, ensure that Iran’s victories had supporters across the region and the world, and give those victories a higher degree of legitimacy.
Rezaei said the shift by the United States toward economic pressure reflected, in his view, the limited effectiveness of military force alone, warning that Tehran would respond to any economic escalation with countermeasures targeting US economic interests in the region.
Strait of Hormuz
On the Strait of Hormuz, Rezaei linked its full reopening to Washington’s implementation of Iranian conditions, foremost among them working to end the wars in West Asia, particularly in Lebanon and Gaza. He said Iran had prepared a list of conditions to present to the Americans and had, for the time being, allowed a temporary and limited corridor for ships to pass through the center of the strait, with the future of maritime traffic to depend on developments in understandings with Washington.
He stressed that the Hormuz issue could not be separated from the broader regional conflict, saying the United States must “prove its seriousness” in implementing the required commitments before any new trust could be established, amid a “deep chasm of mistrust” between the two sides.
Rezaei also addressed relations with Türkiye, emphasizing the depth of trade ties between the two countries and ruling out the possibility of Ankara imposing economic pressure on Tehran. He recalled Türkiye’s role as a trade corridor for Iran during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s.
Rezaei also issued a direct threat against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying: “We will send him to hell, and we will prove that his grave mistakes have brought the end of the Israeli entity closer.” He said a “great and sacred anger” was building across the Muslim world against the entity, which he said would one day emerge and translate into action, adding that “it will be different from before.”
Islamic Unity and Lebanon’s Reconstruction
Concluding the interview, Rezaei said Iran supports any project aimed at Islamic unity, provided it is “inclusive” and gives the region’s principal states an equal role. He said Iran and Egypt should be founding members of any comprehensive framework, rather than merely two states joining arrangements prepared in advance.
Rezaei also conveyed his greetings to the Lebanese people, saying they were “present deep in our hearts” and that the Iranian people “recognize no borders or distance between themselves and the Lebanese people.” He affirmed that the Islamic Republic, in cooperation with Muslim countries, would seek to compensate for the damage and rebuild destroyed homes, concluding: “They will be rebuilt, God willing.”
Israeli occupation forces block a street and fire tear gas during an Israeli raid on the UNRWA Vocational Training Center, located between the Kafr Aqab neighborhood and the Qalandia refugee camp, south of the West Bank city of Ramallah, on August 25, 2026. (Photo by Zain JAAFAR / AFP via Getty Images)
The Israel Hayom Hebrew newspaper reported that political officials are concerned about a scenario in which the guns in the West Bank are turned against the Israeli occupation forces, with Palestinian Authority forces using their weapons against them. It can now be revealed that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and War Minister Israel Katz requested, during a meeting held two days ago at the Central Command headquarters, a briefing on the command’s readiness for such a scenario. The occupation army, meanwhile, requested a discussion of settler violence.
According to sources who attended the meeting, Netanyahu asked to see the war plan in the event of such a shift in the guns’ direction. He was told that the Central Command chief and the IOF chief of staff would present their plan at the next meeting, as they had attended this meeting primarily to discuss other issues on the agenda.
The data presented to Netanyahu at the Central Command meeting apparently point to one of the quietest periods in the West Bank. The concern, however, is that this calm may be a harbinger of a coming storm.
Security establishment data obtained by Israel Hayom show that in the first half of 2024, from January through June, the West Bank saw 35 attacks and 301 attempted attacks. In the second half, from July through December, there were 40 attacks and 13 attempted attacks.
In 2025, the figures declined: 15 attacks and 41 attempted attacks in the first half, followed by 12 attacks and 31 attempted attacks in the second half. While in 2026, the decline became dramatic: two attacks and five attempted attacks in the first half, followed by four attacks and two attempted attacks from July to date.
Israeli occupation forces detain a Palestinian man during a raid on the UNRWA Vocational Training Centre, located between the Kafr Aqab neighbourhood and the Qalandia refugee camp, south of the West Bank city of Ramallah, on August 25, 2026. (Photo by Zain JAAFAR / AFP via Getty Images)
Israel Hayom learned that a senior political official warned during recent discussions on the issue: “If the guns are turned, there will not be another intifada; there will be an all-out war.” The implication is that if the Palestinian Authority or its armed personnel in the West Bank attack the Israeli enemy, the Israeli military is preparing for a war involving the air force alongside tanks, similar to wars on more distant fronts, rather than a limited confrontation.
According to the newspaper, Israeli security research institutes that examined the possibility throughout the past year presented dire scenarios involving the trained forces maintained by the Palestinian Authority for “policing” duties, which could instead turn against “Israel.”
Israel Hayom also noted that the reference scenario for which “Israel” is preparing this time is not a limited round of violence resembling previous intifadas but a war scenario. The reason is that Palestinian Authority forces possess substantial manpower, training, and capabilities that, under the Oslo Accords, were not supposed to be available to them, as Palestinian police forces were restricted to carrying light weapons.
According to information compiled by the Regavim movement and the “OCAINT Behind the Scenes” cell, the Palestinian Authority also possesses anti-armor weapons, RPG-7 launchers, which have been widely documented in training exercises in Jericho and during displays of force, as well as PKM heavy machine guns. The PKM is a belt-fed 7.62 mm machine gun used by national security forces and provides sustained and substantial firepower.
There have also been documented cases of assault rifles, including M16, M4, and AK-47 rifles, being converted into sniper rifles using long-range telescopic sights, enabling accurate fire over considerable distances. In addition, Palestinian forces possess armored vehicles, explosives, and a large number of improvised explosive devices, despite the Oslo Accords prohibiting Palestinian Authority forces from possessing or manufacturing offensive explosives.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s announcement of the so-called “Operation Economic Outcast” on Monday marks another reckless – and ultimately doomed – escalation in Washington’s long-running campaign of economic warfare against Iran.
Like every similar campaign before it, this latest gambit is also bound to fail.
Beginning August 24, the Treasury and other US agencies are expected to pursue what Bessent described as a “zero leakage” policy, seeking to close every channel through which Iran can generate revenue. The stated objective is to deprive Iran of resources.
Countries that do business with Iran could face exclusion from the US dollar-based financial system, with Bessent warning that even major powers such as China could be targeted.
Yet the strategy begs a fundamental question: how many times can Washington recycle the same failed policy before its bankruptcy becomes undeniable?
The new measures are little more than ‘maximum pressure’ repackaged – the same gambit that once promised to bring Iran to its knees, only to watch Tehran successfully adapt, diversify its economic partnerships, and fortify its strategic defenses.
This renewed sanctions push follows a US military aggression that, rather than delivering the outcome Washington so desperately wanted, only laid bare the limits of American coercion.
Doubling down on economic warfare now is an admission of defeat, a desperate attempt to weaponize sanctions. After nearly five decades of the similarly harshest sanctions, multiple forms of economic warfare, and two full-scale wars imposed on Iran in less than a year, the empirical record shows economic strangulation has never broken Iran, and it never will.
The United States should instead abandon its failed economic warfare, lift illegal sanctions as outlined in the memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed in the aftermath of the 4-day Ramadan War, and pursue diplomacy rather than coercion.
A chronicle of escalation without success
The history of American sanctions against Iran is a chronicle of foolhardy escalation without a semblance of success. Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, when the US-backed regime in Tehran was overthrown, successive administrations in Washington have imposed harsh sanctions on Iran with the stated goal of toppling the Islamic Republic or forcing it into submission.
Each campaign has been heralded as the most crippling in history, and each has ultimately failed. The pattern is remarkably consistent and reveals a profound strategic blindness that has cost the United States dearly in terms of credibility, resources, and global standing.
In 2012, the Obama administration described its measures as the most crippling sanctions ever imposed. They failed to bring Iran to its knees. In 2018, President Trump launched the maximum pressure campaign after unilaterally and illegally withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal.
That too failed to produce the desired results. Biden continued the same hard-nosed approach with no better results. Now, the Trump administration, in its second innings, has vowed the most crushing economic campaign ever taken against any country.
Yet the pattern is clear and the outcome predictable. The United States has exhausted its economic arsenal without achieving its political or military objectives, yet continues to cling to the illusion that just one more round of pressure will produce a different outcome.
This is the very definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results. The Iranian leadership has weathered these storms for decades and has developed sophisticated mechanisms to survive and even thrive under duress.
Each new round of sanctions is met with greater ingenuity, deeper regional integration, and a more diversified economy. The Iranian people have not risen against their government in the way Washington had hoped. The resilience of the Islamic Republic has confounded every prediction and every model that American policymakers have relied upon.
'Bullying won't work': Pezeshkian warns US as he meets Pakistan's army chiefhttps://t.co/sEKeH8tIbX
The failure of US sanctions against Iran is not accidental but structural, embedded in the very logic of coercion. For decades, experts and veteran Iran watchers have cautioned that neither economic strangulation nor military threats can force Tehran’s surrender.
American rulers have already lost whatever was left of their credibility. They pulled out of the JCPOA in 2018 despite Iran’s verified compliance and imposed two wars of aggression in the middle of diplomacy. This credibility deficit is the fatal artery of America’s coercive strategy.
Over successive sanction cycles, Tehran has demonstrated that it can not only neutralize the sanctions but make them redundant. While the Islamic Republic has learned to adapt, the Americans have not. American consumers are also paying a heavy price for this failed policy. International oil prices surged following the announcement of new sanctions. US gasoline prices have increased approximately twenty-nine percent over the past year, putting a significant strain on American households already struggling with inflation.
If the Strait of Hormuz remains closed for even a quarter, reports suggest oil prices could drive a significant increase in US inflation. The paradox is clear and growing more acute: sanctions against Iran are increasingly becoming sanctions against the American consumer and the global economy. The economic war is having a significant cost backlash on the US itself.
The question is no longer whether Iran can endure the pressure, but whether the United States can afford to continue a policy that punishes its own citizens while failing to achieve its objectives. The American people are not well served by a strategy that raises their fuel costs, disrupts global supply chains, and inflames regional tensions without producing any results.
The cost-benefit analysis of sanctions has become increasingly unfavorable, yet Washington seems unable or unwilling to change course, which is a sign of strategic inertia, a reflexive adherence to failed policies because the alternatives appear politically difficult.
The military option has been tested and found wanting
The recent two wars of aggression against Iran represent perhaps the most dramatic illustration of Washington’s strategic bankruptcy. After years of economic warfare failed to produce the desired results, the US war machine resorted to direct military action against Iran, imposing two unprovoked wars in June of last year and February of this year.
Both wars failed catastrophically, and none of the United States military objectives were realized. The financial cost of these wars runs into the hundreds of billions of dollars for US taxpayers, which produced nothing but the killing of innocent Iranians, from scientists and athletes in Tehran to schoolchildren in Minab. This is how the US taxpayers’ money is used.
The military option was supposed to be the ultimate guarantor of American dominance, the final arbiter when all other tools had failed. Yet it too proved incapable of achieving any of Washington’s stated goals. The Iranian military and the Iranian people demonstrated a capacity for resistance that surprised American war planners.
Rather than bringing Iran to heel, the wars only strengthened Iranian resolve and deepened its regional alliances. The failure of the military option should have been a wake-up call, a moment of reckoning that forced a fundamental reassessment of United States strategy. Instead, Washington has simply reverted to the same old economic warfare that had already failed.
This pattern of escalation and failure reveals a profound inability to learn from experience. The United States has exhausted both its economic and military tools without achieving its objectives, yet it continues to cycle through the same failed approaches. The Iranian leadership has watched this pattern unfold and has drawn the logical conclusion that Washington has no real strategy, only a series of reflexive responses that are ultimately self-defeating.
The new round of sanctions planned by the Trump administration faces the same fundamental obstacles that have defeated every previous round. The Iranian economy has already adapted to the maximum pressure campaign. The networks and mechanisms that have been developed to circumvent sanctions are already in place and are continually being refined.
Each new round of illegal and draconian sanctions faces diminishing returns because the most effective measures have already been deployed. The additional sanctions are unlikely to impose significant new pain on Iran while carrying significant risks for the global economy.
Moreover, the context for sanctions is fundamentally different now than it was even a few years ago. The geopolitical landscape has shifted dramatically. China and Russia have deepened their economic and strategic relationships with Iran, providing alternative markets, financing, and diplomatic support. The US no longer enjoys the unquestioned economic dominance it once did, and its ability to enforce sanctions unilaterally is more limited than ever.
The global economy has become more multipolar, and countries are increasingly reluctant to align themselves with US sanctions policies that damage their own economic interests.
The Iranian leadership has also developed a more sophisticated understanding of how to weather sanctions. The economy has been restructured to reduce dependence on oil exports, non-oil exports have been expanded, and domestic production has been incentivized through various policies.
While these measures have not eliminated the pain of sanctions, they have made the Iranian economy more resilient than it was during earlier rounds of pressure. The leadership has also developed a more nuanced diplomatic strategy, engaging with regional powers and building coalitions that make it harder for the US war machine to isolate Iran internationally.
The framework for a sustainable solution
The current stalemate demands a fundamental shift in approach. The MoU signed between Tehran and Washington following the 40-day Ramadan War provides a clear framework, explicitly requiring the lifting of all primary and secondary sanctions imposed against Iran over the decades to definitively end the ongoing war.
This is a precondition for any sustainable deal. The document deserves to be taken seriously as a foundation for negotiations. Its provisions were carefully calibrated to address the legitimate concerns of both sides while providing a path toward long-term regional peace and stability.
For a deal to have any chance of success, Iranian demands must be fulfilled in letter and spirit. Sanctions relief must be genuine, comprehensive, and durable. Partial or reversible measures will only reinforce Iranian skepticism and incentivize continued resistance.
The United States must demonstrate that it is willing to honor its commitments and that diplomacy is not merely a prelude to renewed war or sanctions. This requires a fundamental shift in how Washington approaches negotiations, moving away from the take-it-or-leave-it ultimatums that have characterized previous attempts and toward genuine give-and-take diplomacy.
The Strait of Hormuz will only be reopened when legitimate Iranian demands are fulfilled – not one, but all of them. The reopening of the strait would benefit the global economy but the dynamics have changed and the administration of the waterway will now be decided by Iran.
The United States faces a critical strategic choice: continue down a path of proven failure or embrace a new approach rooted in ground realities and the new world order. The current policy has achieved none of its stated goals. American credibility has been eroded, alliances have been strained, and the global economy has been disrupted.
The so-called “maximum pressure” campaign has been attempted in various forms for over a decade, and each time it has failed. The military option has been tested and proven catastrophic for the US war machine. The only remaining path is diplomacy and a clear-eyed understanding and acknowledgement of Iranian red lines.
The fundamental flaw in United States strategy is the absence of an exit ramp. Economic pressure does not produce capitulation but only fuels resistance and sharpens the incentive to find workarounds. The United States has created a situation where the people of Iran have no incentive to negotiate because they have no confidence that any agreement would be honored. Restoring that confidence requires more than just promises; it requires concrete actions that demonstrate a genuine commitment to diplomacy over coercion.
The time has come to acknowledge that the US war machine has exhausted all its options – military and economic. The path forward is clear: lift all primary and secondary sanctions as called for in the MoU and allow Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
The United States must understand that it cannot force Iran to its knees through military aggression or economic pressure. It must accept the reality that Iran is a new regional superpower. The US must also recognize that its current approach is not merely failing to achieve its objectives but is actively undermining its own interests.
The sanctions imposed over decades are not only illegal but manifestly inhumane. Their continuation serves no American interest other than perpetuating a failed policy. For the American people, it only results in diminished global standing and frayed alliances.
The only coherent course is the full and irrevocable removal of all sanctions, coupled with a binding guarantee on any future imposition as recognition that a policy devoid of legal foundation, moral justification, and strategic viability has no rightful place in today’s multipolar world.
Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:
Then Iran’s Ambassador to International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, Kazem Charibadi, waits for the start of the IAEA board of governnors meeting at the international Center in Viena, Austria on November, 21, 2019 (AP)
ran’s Deputy FM Kazem Gharibabadi said Tehran alone knows the location of mines in the Strait of Hormuz, contradicting Trump’s claim that the waterway is now clear.
Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said Tuesday that Iran remains the only party that knows the precise locations of mines in the Strait of Hormuz, warning that any US naval minesweepers entering the waterway would become very good targets for Iranian forces.
He said statements by US President Donald Trump about removing the mines were aimed only at calming markets. The claim runs directly counter to a separate statement from Trump, who said Tuesday that the US Navy had removed or detonated all mines in the strait’s international waters, warning Iran of a “zero tolerance” policy toward the placement of any new ones.
Gharibabadi said Iran remains in a state of war and that the Strait of Hormuz will stay closed, with passage limited to commercial vessels under the terms of the existing memorandum of understanding.
He said a full reopening of the strait would only come in exchange for ending the war on all fronts, lifting the blockade on Iran, and determining Yemen’s fate. He added that Iran would reveal new capabilities if American measures continue, warning Washington against assuming it is the only side capable of inflicting economic damage.
A new corridor with Oman, but no military ships
Gharibabadi said negotiations between Iran and Oman would begin to replace the previous maritime traffic arrangement with a new transit corridor. In remarks to state television, he said the arrangement with Oman would allow only commercial vessels through the strait.
“No military vessel will be allowed to pass,” he said, adding that the route would be temporary while Iran and Oman negotiate a permanent one within 30 to 60 days.
“We had expected to close the southern route in the Strait of Hormuz with the help of our Omani friends, but US pressure prevented that and we were forced into a military confrontation,” Gharibabadi said, adding that the arrangement does not mean the strait will reopen immediately and that Washington must fully meet commitments it has previously failed to uphold before any move to reopen it.
A joint Iranian-Omani statement said the two countries’ foreign ministers had discussed a phased framework for managing the situation in the strait, including an agreement to establish a temporary, jointly run navigation corridor alongside a joint project to clear naval mines.
The statement said technical negotiations would continue toward a permanent navigation corridor and a future management arrangement for the strait, including a mechanism for information-sharing, traffic coordination, and maritime and security services, with both sides stressing the importance of opening dialogue with other Gulf states.
Iran had previously stressed that any agreement with Oman on navigation arrangements does not mean the Strait of Hormuz is reopening, insisting a full reopening requires Washington’s compliance with the terms of the Islamabad memorandum of understanding.
Escalating economic pressure in the background
The statements come as Washington escalates economic pressure on Iran. Trump announced what he called an “unprecedented economic war” against Tehran last week, and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Monday that countries continuing business with Iran past a set deadline could face penalties under an expanding sanctions campaign.
Gharibabadi has repeatedly rejected US claims of control over the strait; earlier this month, responding to Trump’s suggestion that he would declare Hormuz US territory, he said the strait “cannot be seized with a tweet, an aircraft carrier, an executive order, or a campaign speech,” adding that Iran “neither fears threats nor is intimidated by displays of force.”
Al-Moussawi surprises everyone with a shocking statement… leaving the presenter and guest in a state of stunned silence! 🔥😱الموسوي يفاجئ الجميع بتصريح صـ.ـادم… ويترك المذيع والضيف في حالة ذهول! 🔥😱
Leader of Ansarullah Movement, Sayyed Abdul-Malik Badreddin Al-Houthi, called on the Yemeni people to seek help from God, rely on Him, and intensify efforts until extracting their legitimate rights and fending off the injustice of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
In a speech today on the occasion of the event commemorating the Prophet’s Birthday (Mawlid al-Nabi), he emphasized the right of the Yemeni people to their just cause: ending the unjust Saudi aggression, blockade, and occupation of our country, which has blockaded the Yemeni people since 2015 and closed airports, while opening the airspace of the Land of the Two Holy Mosques to Zionist Jews.
He explained that the Saudi regime’s blockade of a neighboring Muslim nation highlights the necessity to act to put an end to such tyranny and injustice. He added that it proves the correctness of the people’s action in a battle framed by the equation of “a blockade for a blockade,” holding the Saudi regime fully responsible for everything that results from it.
He also affirmed the steadfastness of the people in their faith-based direction, their jihadist liberation movement, their Quranic journey, and their endeavor to achieve complete independence based on their faith identity, stressing that the Yemeni people will never accept the confiscation of their rights, regardless of the scale of challenges and sacrifices.
Furthermore, he reiterated the steadfastness of the Yemeni people’s principled stance in supporting the Palestinian people and their just cause, stemming from the Yemeni people’s stance against the Zionist enemy, who is an enemy of the nation. He affirmed, “We will spare no effort in supporting Palestine and its fighters until God’s promise is fulfilled, the holy sites are restored, and Palestine is liberated.”
He also affirmed the steadfastness of our stance against American and Israeli tyranny, which targets our entire nation under the pretext of establishing “Greater Israel” and “changing the Middle East,” while launching continuous aggression against Iran. He asserted that Yemen stands alongside Iran, supports consolidating the principle of the “unity of fronts,” and supports the resistance in Lebanon, Palestine, and all other fronts of the axis, calling on the nation to join the axis of jihad and resistance.
He touched upon the terrible suffering of the Palestinian people caused by Zionist tyranny in Gaza, the West Bank, and throughout Palestine, as well as the violation of the sanctity of Al-Aqsa and Ibrahimi mosques. He emphasized that these dangers threaten the nation and are the result of Zionist ambitions and moves toward establishing Greater Israel, which framed the aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran, the aggression against Lebanon, the ongoing violation of Syria, and the continuous targeting of Yemen. He noted that all of this shows that the correct choice is to act according to God’s teachings, carry the banner of jihad, take up the means of victory, and adhere to the Quran.
Sayyid Abdul-Malik al-Houthi congratulated the Yemeni people and the Islamic nation on the occasion of commemorating the Prophet’s Birthday, stressing that the turnout of Yemenis into the squares on this occasion is unmatched anywhere in the world.
The Leader Commander said: “My soul is a ransom for you, O loyal people,” congratulating the Yemeni people, all members of the nation, and Islamic unity on the arrival of this glorious occasion—the memory of the birth of the Seal of the Prophets and the Master of the Messengers.
Sarnia, Canada – June 11, 2017. Trucks and cars make their way across the Blue Water Bridge in Sarnia, Canada.
After trade talks with Ottawa collapsed, US President Donald Trump framed the outcome in his familiar terms: “We don’t need Canada; they need us.” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, however, responded from an entirely different position, saying his country would not accept being treated at the negotiating table as a “subsidiary of the United States.”
The tariff dispute has thus evolved from a trade disagreement between two neighbors into a test of Trump’s strategy of pressuring allies—and of how much the United States can extract when it wields access to its market as a weapon.
The deal had come close enough for Trump to announce that an agreement had been reached, only to unravel before midnight. According to The New York Times, Washington believed it had offered Canada the best deal it had offered any country, while Ottawa concluded that the price being demanded was unacceptable.
After a month of negotiations aimed at avoiding new tariffs and easing existing ones, Carney ended the talks and ordered his team to leave Washington.
In the face of unjustified American tariffs, Canadians have shown resolve, purpose, and strength.
The government is matching that spirit — protecting Canadian workers, businesses, and families. pic.twitter.com/kSqYUNw8ad
The New York Times reported that the outstanding issues became increasingly intertwined in the final hours, ranging from automobiles, steel, and aluminum to rules protecting Canadian and French-language content online, the Keystone XL project, and a US demand that Canada align its tariffs with those imposed by Washington on other countries.
From the Canadian perspective, however, these issues pointed to a single underlying demand: Washington was not merely seeking trade concessions but greater influence over Canada’s own decision-making.
According to the newspaper, the United States wanted to review—and potentially dictate the terms of—Canada’s future trade agreements with other countries. It also wanted Ottawa to impose US tariffs on third parties if Washington changed its policy. For the Trump administration, this would protect the US market from cheaper goods entering through Canada. For Carney, it directly threatened his strategy of reducing Canada’s dependence on the US market and opening alternative trade routes.
The French language also moved to the center of the dispute. Washington pressed until the final hours for the repeal of a law requiring streaming platforms to promote Canadian films and television programs to subscribers.
In a country where French—particularly in Quebec—is central to its national balance, the US demand appeared to go beyond what could be presented as an ordinary economic concession. Carney therefore arrived at a firm conclusion: “We cannot accept what they offered, and we will not give them what they demanded.”
The Cost to the United States
But tariffs do not hurt Canada alone. The Washington Post notes that the two economies are so deeply integrated that a trade war risks hurting both sides at once. Auto parts cross the border multiple times before a vehicle is completed, the electricity grids are interconnected, and Canada supplied US refineries with more than 4 million barrels of oil a day in 2024. Canada is also the largest export market for 32 US states.
The Washington Post editorial board therefore warns that Trump’s 50% tariffs on Canadian cars, trucks, auto parts, and steel will hurt U.S. manufacturers and raise prices in both countries. The trade war is not targeting a separate foreign adversary but a shared production system on which industrial regions in the United States and Canada have depended for generations.
Axios warns that the timing of the escalation makes the situation even more dangerous. The US path toward lower inflation required calm on both trade and military fronts, yet tensions with Canada are emerging alongside renewed tensions with China and Iran. The tariffs and retaliatory measures could therefore put renewed pressure on prices, while the war with Iran adds another energy shock.
The Missing Diplomacy
The weakness, Max Boot writes in The Washington Post, is that Trump is trying to use coercion where persuasion is required. He threatens allies from Canada to South Korea and Oman, relying on public pressure rather than building lasting consensus.
The result, according to Boot, is that allies are not responding as Trump wants. Canada and China have forced him to retreat in more than one confrontation, while the world increasingly sees many of his threats as exceeding his ability to carry them out.
The political cost could also be significant. The Washington Post argues that a trade war with Canada could hurt Republicans ahead of the midterm elections, particularly in closely contested races in Maine, Michigan, Ohio, and Iowa. If tariffs lead to higher prices and growing industrial and agricultural anxiety in these states, Trump may find that his “America First” policy is hurting American voters before it brings Canada to heel.
A Lesson for Allies
Inside Canada, Carney’s refusal has given him a moment of national unity. Axios reported that his challenge to Trump has become a rallying point at home, drawing support from provincial premiers across party lines while boosting his popularity.
That does not eliminate the pain ahead, however. Canada’s economy remains more exposed to the U.S. market, and TD Bank estimates that the tariffs could shave between 0.3 and 0.6 percentage points off Canadian GDP.
The Christian Science Monitor views the moment as a test of the concept of “middle-power” influence in a world where the United States no longer plays the role its allies have come to expect. Canada cannot sever its economic ties with Washington, but it is trying to prevent dependence from turning into subordination.
From Japan and Australia to Britain and Europe, other powers are watching what it means when a longtime U.S. ally is forced to contemplate a future in which its relationship with Washington is far less secure.
Source: Al-Jazeera Net (Edited and translated by Al-Manar English)
Illustrative image showing a missile and the Iranian national flag.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian stressed on Tuesday the need to strengthen unity and cohesion among Muslim countries, saying greater cooperation across the Islamic world is essential to establishing security and stability in the region.
According to the Mehr News Agency, Pezeshkian made the remarks during a meeting on Tuesday afternoon with Faiq Zidan, head of Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council, and his accompanying delegation.
“Islamic countries must expand the scope of their cultural, commercial, social, political, and economic interactions,” Pezeshkian said.
The Iranian president expressed his appreciation to the Iraqi people and government for organizing an extensive funeral ceremony for the martyred leader of the Islamic Revolution and for hosting pilgrims visiting Imam Hussein during the Arbaeen commemoration.
“I am very pleased to welcome the Iraqi delegation to the Islamic Republic of Iran, and I hope this meeting will pave the way for further developing and strengthening cultural, commercial, and economic relations between the two countries,” Pezeshkian added.
Iraqi Supreme Judicial Council President Judge Faiq Zidan arrived in Tehran on Tuesday and met with senior Iranian officials, including President Masoud Pezeshkian, Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei, Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, and Judiciary… pic.twitter.com/jnuReVGOxs
Rezaei to Iraqi Judiciary Chief: No Place for US in the Region’s Future
Major General Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, also received Faiq Zidan, head of Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council.
During the meeting, Rezaei underscored that the United States would have no place in the future of the region.
He stressed that the countries of the region themselves would determine their future while calling for the status of Iran-opposed groups based along the border between Iran and Iraq to be resolved.
For his part, Zidan highlighted the deep historical and cultural ties between Iran and Iraq and expressed appreciation for the Islamic Republic’s support. He conveyed the greetings of Iraqi officials to the Leader of the Islamic Revolution and paid tribute to the late commanders Gen. Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis.
During a meeting with President of the Supreme Judicial Council of Iraq Faiq Zidan, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Major General Mohsen Rezaei stated that the United States will not play any role in the region's future. pic.twitter.com/3oRy0Iw1gp
Zidan also emphasized the importance of regional cooperation, stressing the need to safeguard security along the two countries’ shared border.
According to an official statement issued following the meeting, the two sides reviewed prospects for bilateral cooperation and discussed ways to activate existing judicial and security agreements.
The meeting further stressed the necessity of exchanging information and expertise to strengthen efforts to combat terrorism and organized crime, with the broader objective of consolidating security and stability across the region.
How feasible is Trump’s strategy? Is Iran in as desperate straits as Treasury Secretary Bessent suggests?
The 60-day MoU has expired. The framework of Iranian pre-conditions for any start to negotiations nonetheless lingers on in its comatose state.
Instead of the endlessly touted ‘Iran deal’, the picture is almost the complete opposite of what President Trump sought to create when he adopted the MoU framework (even if it is not clear whether he really intended to pursue the framework through to some sort of real agreement, or whether the framework was simply a device that Trump sought to leverage out as a platform for full American hegemonic pressure on Iran in order to compel Iran to open Hormuz on American terms.)
But talks are not happening. There are zero negotiations. The Strait of Hormuz remains – as at the outset – at the centre of the conflict, and effectively shut. Meanwhile the possibility of escalation has become much closer – one might say almost inevitable – as Iran have indicated its intent to pro-actively escalate against American and Gulf infrastructure targets unless Trump abides over the next 3-4 weeks by the well-known Iranian preconditions.
One early Iranian precondition is no longer implicit, but explicit: The Iranians have specified that the Palestinian arena that must be covered by the ‘the ceasefire for all, or ceasefire for no-one’ precondition. Of course, Israel won’t do this. They are escalating violently – a veritable “land grab” – against Palestinian refugee camps and villages in the West Bank.
Plainly, Iran’s preconditions are unlikely to be accepted by Trump. For, combined, they represent an unmistakable Iranian demand for the wholesale dismantlement of the U.S. military infrastructure of the siege surrounding Iran – effectively U.S. capitulation in West Asia.
Trump, more than anything, detests to be viewed as a ‘loser’.
Worse, from Trump’s perspective, his war on Iran, far from making the Middle East a sea of tranquillity and peace ‘after a thousand years of conflict’, as he claimed, his war on Iran has precisely ignited the regions’ many underlying tensions, setting them on fire. The region today is a tinderbox, rather than an exemplar of peaceful co-existence. Even his erstwhile allies have turned against him.
The most serious bush-fire is that in the Palestinian arena. Primary elections have been held by Likud. And General Elections are set to take place in Israel on 27 October. But already, it’s clear that elements of the political Right in Israel are planning to set the West Bank alight in order to ensure their polling victory – or at least to eliminate the possibility that any other government can be formed. A provocation centred on Al-Aqsa Mosque has been hinted at by Israeli politicians.
The Palestinian arena, of course, remains the combustible detonator which can set the region afire. As Ben Caspit outlines:
“The fanatics’ plan … is to create chaos, to bring about a biblical Gog and Magog war, at the end of which it will be possible to fulfil Smotrich’s “decision plan” and expel the Palestinians … or push them out by definition … The end of this plan will be the end of those who dream of a Riviera in Gaza and of crowds of Gazans leaving in buses for “voluntary immigration” … This will not happen. What will happen is bloodshed in commercial quantities and a greater, more real and threatening danger than anything we have encountered so far …”.
An angry and frustrated Trump called a team meeting last Saturday at Camp David to consider next steps in the wake of the expiry of the 60-day MoU de-escalation period.
Credible reporting from Marjorie Taylor Greene states categorically that Trump again expressed great frustration that he had not achieved his objective in Iran – to force it to surrender, to capitulate.
Trump is bemused and angry that Iran is proving so difficult to bring to capitulation, and so is toying with other ways of achieving their surrender. And so, we read Marjorie Taylor Greene leaking that Trump again discussed the possibility of using tactical non-strategic nuclear weapons against Iran.
This is not the first occasion that Trump has raised such a possibility. Reportedly, he has raised the question on two earlier occasions, the first in April, during the conflict with Iran. Trump’s preoccupation with this question however has older roots. Reportedly, it lay at the crux to his dispute with Rex Tillerson and James Mattis.
Tillerson, at the time, was Secretary of State, and Mattis was Defence Secretary. During the Trump 1.0 mandate, he kept contending that the U.S. should be able to use tactical nuclear weapons more freely. ‘Why not?’, he would ask. Why should we [the U.S.] be held back, or debarred from using them, Trump questioned. And the answer always came back from Tillerson and Mattis too, that nuclear weapons were only for strategic deterrence. They were not to be deployed willy-nilly, as an alternative to other forms of munitions.
Trump was not happy with this answer, reportedly. Well, now we’re back to the same argument, because not only did Trump raise it again at last week’s meeting (this is probably the third time that he suggested it in the context of the Iranian conflict) – but the issue is returning in a new context.
Elbridge Colby, Under-Secretary at the Pentagon, responsible for defence policy, and who played a significant part in the drafting of the National Security Statement, apparently advocates for tactical weapons to be re-categorised as ‘tactical weapons’, and not simply confined to their place as strategic deterrence. Colby argues that U.S. failure in the conventional military arena (i.e. in Iran), could justify the use of tactical nuclear weapons – to compensate for the loss of U.S. conventional deterrence.
This debate that has not finally been settled.
And it is into this context that Netanyahu has been lying about the imminence of a nuclear threat from Iran for which there is no evidence; nor is there solid evidence that Iran is preparing a weapon, Israeli Military Intelligence avers. Netanyahu produced no evidence to support this case during discussions of the 28 February attack on Iran, Israeli journalist investigators collectively believe.
AMAN, Israel’s military intelligence arm, supplied to the Israeli cabinet a completely contradictory opinion. There had been a number of investigations by very senior journalists on which they all agree that the military intelligence indicated there was no evidence that Iran was moving towards a weapon, no intelligence that they were intending so to do, and no intelligence to suggest that something was happening on the ground that might be taken to assume there was a move towards starting a weapons programme.
In short, there is no evidence that would support a preventive tactical nuclear attack by the U.S. ‘to prevent Iran having a bomb’. It would be false to suggest otherwise – shades of the Iraq war.
This comprises the background to the talk about the possibility of the U.S. dropping a nuclear device on Iran. It remains a possibility, but there are several voices in the Trump circle that are adamantly opposed, believing its use would constitute a grave war crime.
So, for now, the Trump strategy has turned to compelling Iran’s defeat by economic means. U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent insists that Iran’s economic circumstances are catastrophic and that (paraphrased) he’s going to put ‘the mother and father’ of all sanctions on Iran.
How feasible is this strategy? Is Iran in as desperate straits as Bessent suggests, or is it not? If you were to take the Tehran Stock Exchange as a good ‘bell-weather’ for the Iranian economy, then since May, it has risen by 58.7%. There is high inflation in Iran, that is true. But the rate of increase of inflation has declined from 7.2% in June to 3.2% today. The loss of value in the Iran Rial, though continuing, is happening at a much slower rate.
Iran had 140 million barrels of oil exports at sea at the outset of the conflict, which brought them resources of about $1 billion. In February between 23rd, February to the 13th April Beesent temporarily lifted oil sanctions. During that period of 66 days, Iran sold some 80 million barrels of oil, as well.
So yes, Iran’s oil export volumes are down, but the price at which they are being sold is higher.
This is not to say that the economic situation in Iran is rosy, but more significantly, in response to Bessent’s assertions of desperation, there is no evidence to date, nor of public unrest because of the economic situation.
The U.S. can attempt to block the sea corridors, but the land corridors from Iran through Pakistan and the Caspian to Russia still function.
So perhaps the Iranian economy may be more resilient than Bessent assumes. Then what likely is Bessent’s plan? He doesn’t say. But the most obvious targets would be to put sanctions on the Chinese ‘teapot refiners’ that have traditionally heavily bought Iranian oil. And possibly to sanction Chinese banks that finance such trade. That seems to be a possible first resort. The second resort might be to expropriate Iran’s crypto and digital assets, wherever possible. And to ask allies to seize any and all Iranian assets in their jurisdiction.
Taken together, this may sound very impressive and threatening for Iran. But circumstances today are very different from 2015 when the JCPOA was first implemented. At that time, the JCPOA was embedded into a UN Security Council resolution, and therefore its provisions were binding on Russia and China.
Largely, Russia and China did observe the JCPOA sanctions, until the latter’s demise following Trump’s pull-out from the agreement in 2018. Now. however, circumstances are very changed. Russia and China are no longer so supportive of sanctions on Iran. On the contrary, they have become transformed into co-belligerents with Iran in this war (co-belligerents in the sense of providing intelligence, providing the technical means by which real-time intelligence can be provided to missile sites and to base stations in Iran, and other support, perhaps in facilitating payment systems that bypass the dollar).
Bessent may have it in mind to target the purchasers of Iranian oil in China, and Chinese banks, too. But this would bring the U.S. into direct conflict with both countries. The last time the U.S. applied sanctions on the ‘teapots’, China activated an Act making it illegal for Chinese entities, domestic and foreign, to comply with American sanctions.
Would they do the same again? Well, in all likelihood, yes. It is a different world from that of 2015 – the U.S. dollar may be still be the most used medium of exchange for settling trade transactions, but it is no longer the world’s main reserve asset. That is now gold.
And today, the reasons why historically the dollar became dominant are slipping away (just as they did for Sterling, where the transformation from its earlier standing occurred unexpectedly fast).
The utility of holding U.S. Treasuries as rainy-day assets plainly vanishes if Bessent prohibits their sale in his desperation to preserve the dollar’s FX value, leaving holders stranded (which is currently the case). Of course, debt-repayment needs will continue to serve as a demand for dollars, but essentially the basis to the dollar’s huge global position lay in the issuance of cheap dollar credit.
That advantage is over. Ten-year Chinese bonds are now 3% cheaper. No surprise then that European Banks now are lending to customers in Chinese Panda Bonds in an ever-deepening renminbi debt market.
And if all Iran’s assets, including crypto, are to be arbitrarily seized by the U.S., whose assets will be safe? Trust in the U.S. currency is already withering as the dollar exchange value falls and volatility seizes hold.
Bessent’s ‘Iran initiative’ may turn out to be self-defeating, both by further weakening the dollar and by effectively persuading states to turn to China’s low-key roll out of its alternative financial super highway for security and stability.
Today, Iran’s allies – although not in full military alliance, but in strategic partnerships of different degrees – undoubtedly have helped Iran and will likely continue to help Iran bypass the U.S. dollar plumbing by opening the door into the evolving ‘global plumbing’ system. They have no interest in seeing Iran defeated.
In a recent interview with Syrian state television, senior Lebanese political analyst Nasser Qandil discusses how the United States has lost its status as the sole power dominating the world, and highlights the rise of China, Russia, and the Iran-led Axis of Resistance as competitors to the U.S. on the world stage.
Source: Syrian TV via Kalam Siyasi (YouTube)
Date: August 14, 2022
( Please help us keep producing independent translations for you by contributing a small monthly amount here )
Transcript:
Host:
We will start with discussing what is happening in more than one area, both in the region and across the world, benefiting from your rich (analysis) pieces and impartial media observations of the reality we live in today. Why did you describe (our current situation) as the darkest and most difficult the region has ever witnessed?
Qandil:
It is clear first that the whole world is going through a state of political chaos resulting from the decline of US domination and the attempt to compensate for this weakness by provoking unrest and small wars, and attempts to create scenarios that could enable the American administration to restore some of its domination, presence, or role, after it has become incapable of ruling the world.
We must remember that in 1990, more than 30 years ago, the United States of America managed to dominate the world alone. The Soviet Union collapsed, Russia was weakened, China was still in the early stages of development, and there was no competitor (for the US) in the world. Even the European Union was established under American auspices as a project that doesn’t (aim) to compete with the US, but to replace the Soviet Union.
However, the country that ruled the world during these three decades has clearly begun to witness a fall since the year 2000. In this year, three (major) events occurred. The first was the liberation of southern Lebanon, that is, the defeat of Israel, the striking arm of the US in our region. The second was the rise or beginning of the rise of Russia with President Vladimir Putin taking over the presidency of the Russian Federation. The third was the blessed Palestinian Intifada (Uprising), which established the return of vitality and life to the Arab peoples. It was part of a general Arab climate that we experienced from the Maghreb to the Mashreq to all the capitals of the region. We must remember that millions of Arab peoples took to the streets in solidarity with the Al-Aqsa Intifada (the second Intifada), with three million demonstrators in Morocco alone.
This situation has (only) developed more and more and has grown more and more, and we are now witnessing its results, which are crystallizing at the (global) political level and not only at the level of certain events. Russia has been acting as a superpower in the world since its involvement in Syria in 2015, all the way to the Ukrainian war. China is also a superpower on a par with the US, after it has approached the stage of surpassing the US in terms of the size of the overall economy. The US is losing its grip over the region. Even though the US threw all its international, regional, financial, intelligence, media, and military weight to bring down Syria, it failed miserably. Syria triumphed and the US project collapsed.
Iran’s steadfastness and its rise as a regional power, the growth of the capabilities of the Axis of Resistance and its rise as an active axis, especially through the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance, in addition to its presence in Yemen, which provided a model for what the Gulf security could be if the US persisted in its aggressive policies…We are witnessing the crystallization of the image of a new world in which the US loses the lead. Therefore, we are seeing these wars, turmoil and signs, like the last Gaza war, that are almost like “death tremors”, i.e., the refusal (of the US) to accept the new reality, and its denial, arrogance, and insistence on (always) being present and proving its power, but to no avail.
Host:
But there are those who say that what appears to be a wallow may be deliberate plans to ignite wars here and there, from Taiwan to Russia. Even the current threat to the unity of the European Union may be part of a plan because the US is still pressing ahead with its plans. As for Syria, (the US) continues to support terrorism and steal Syrian wealth and Syrian oil.
Qandil:
We have to distinguish between two things. Of course, for some people, even if the US admits its defeat, they will still believe that it has the ability to dominate and that it will never be defeated. An example of this is what happened when Israel was defeated in 2006 in its battle and aggression against Lebanon, and some Lebanese, not foreigners, insisted that Israel was not defeated. We will not discuss (the opinion of) such people. They are haunted by an inferiority complex which makes them believe that the US is a destiny that cannot be escaped. The US admitted that it was defeated in Vietnam, and some still see its withdrawal from Vietnam as a plan. So, let’s discuss the main idea.
Let us first look at the internal situation of the United States of America, is it still this major expanding power? No. I am not speaking for myself, let’s look at what the Americans themselves say. They say that ‘the great America’ has lost its greatness because it is no longer a great country. This is what Donald Trump says, these are not the words of anyone outside the US. The title of Joe Biden’s (presidential acceptance) speech was “America’s Return.” Trump used to say, “We are ranked third or fourth in the world. Our infrastructure is incapable of serving a modern economy. We cannot boast that we are the top country, neither in human rights nor in democracy.” The storming of Congress, about which hundreds and even thousands of articles have been written in the US, was a proof of the atrophy and decline of the American democratic model. The racist wars erupting across the US are all part of the reality and facts that Americans, not foreigners, speak of.
At the European level, the problem is not the disintegration or non-disintegration of the European Union. The problem is the collapse of the European model…Today, Syria has achieved a victory, but the Syrian people say that this victory remains weak and unstable so long as it has not been reflected in (the improvement of) people’s lives. People complain about their hardships, about their livelihood, so what if we are talking about Europe? (Europe is made up of a group of) countries that have been established as a model for a well-off life, countries that offer their citizens what no other citizen can receive in any other country in the world. However, the Europeans today live under energy rationing and promises that, in the winter, they will face bitter cold without heating; and preparations are being made for the closing of thousands of factories, the stopping of hundreds of companies from working, thus directing hundreds of thousands of unemployed people to the streets. This is what European officials are saying to their people about what awaits them in 2023. This does not show the disintegration of the European Union, but rather the collapse of the European model. Thus, this opens the door to social unrest and political transformations that no one can yet predict.
Ansar Allah supporters gather as they celebrate Independence Day marking the end of British rule in South Yemen, in 1967, in Sanaa, Yemen, Nov. 30, 2025 (AP photo/Osama Abdulrahman)
Yahya Saree says Yemen struck the Saudi tanker Amzan and Saudi military positions as Sana’a enforces its maritime ban under the “blockade for blockade” equation.
The Yemeni Armed Forces announced operations targeting a Saudi oil tanker off the coast of Yanbu and Saudi military positions in several areas, as part of Sanaa’s military equation against Saudi Arabia’s aggression.
“The Yemeni Armed Forces were able to target the Saudi oil tanker Amzan in the northern Red Sea, off the coast of Yanbu, with a ballistic missile,” Spokesperson Yahya Saree said in a statement. “The strike was precise and direct, resulting in a fire on the ship, and the escape of several other ships in the area.”
Saree confirmed that this move “is part of the implementation of the Yemeni Armed Forces’ decision to ban maritime traffic for the Saudi enemy and to enforce a blockade with a blockade.”
بيانٌ صادرٌ عنِ القواتِ المسلحةِ اليمنيةِ
بسمِ اللهِ الرحمنِ الرحيم
قال تعالى: {فَلَا عُدۡوَ ٰنَ إِلَّا عَلَى ٱلظَّـٰلِمِینَ} صدق اللهُ العظيم
بعون الله وتوفيقه تمكنتِ القواتُ المسلحةُ اليمنيةُ من استهدافِ السفينةِ النفطيةِ "أمزان" التابعةِ للعدوِّ السعوديِّ شماليَّ البحرِ… pic.twitter.com/WMFsQkuTOV
The spokesperson further added in his statement that the Yemeni Armed Forces conducted two military operations against Saudi forces.
The first operation “targeted Saudi forces consisting of a large military convoy carrying military equipment in the areas of Al-Ubra and Al-Wadi’a, using ballistic missiles and drones.”
Saree noted that this retaliatory action destroyed over ten trucks “loaded with weapons” that were making their way from Saudi Arabia to “target the Yemeni people.”
“The second operation targeted Saudi enemy forces in the Al-Kanais area with ballistic missiles and drones,” Saree stated, “resulting in the deaths and injuries of dozens, including officers and commanders, as well as the burning and destruction of several weapons depots.
The Yemeni Armed Forces’ spokesperson added that Sanaa will continue to move forward with enforcing a maritime ban on Saudi Arabia within the declared area of operations. He also said that Yemen will continue abiding by the military equations of blockade for blockade and meeting escalation with escalation.
“We are ready, with God’s power, to confront any escalation with stronger and more severe strikes, and with broader and larger operations,” Saree stated.
The Yemeni Armed Forces’ announcement follows overnight strikes by Saudi Arabian forces against residential villages in Razih District, Saada Governorate, northern Yemen, with artillery shells, according to Yemen’s Al Masirah TV.
The Saudi attacks came after continued Yemeni military operations in response to violations of the country’s sovereignty, notably Sanaa announcing the downing of a Saudi reconnaissance drone on Sunday after it entered Yemeni airspace over the province of Hajjah.
A Yemeni military source identified the aircraft as a ScanEagle reconnaissance drone, adding it was shot down using an appropriate weapon while carrying out a surveillance mission over the province.
Tensions between Sanaa and Riyadh escalated following the Saudi aggression on Sanaa International Airport in July.
Following the strike, the Yemeni Armed Forces declared that the 2022 peace deal with Saudi Arabia had effectively collapsed and announced the imposition of a naval blockade on Riyadh.
Yemeni Armed Forces Spokesman Brigadier General Yahya Saree in an image from archive.
The spokesman for the Yemeni Armed Forces Brigadier General Yahya Saree announced in a statement on Monday new operations against Saudi targets in the context of the siege-for-siege and escalation-for-escalation formulas.
In this regard, General Saree mentioned that the Yemeni Armed Forces successfully targeted the Saudi enemy’s oil tanker “Amzan” in the northern Red Sea, off the coast of Yanbu, using a ballistic missile, adding that the strike was precise and direct.
General Saree also reported two military operations against the Saudi forces, adding that the attacks inflicted heavy losses.
What follows is full text of the statement:
By the grace and guidance of Allah, the Yemeni Armed Forces successfully targeted the Saudi enemy’s oil tanker “Amzan” in the northern Red Sea, off the coast of Yanbu, using a ballistic missile, the strike was precise and direct, resulting in a fire broke out on the ship and the escape of several other vessels were in the targeted area.
This targeting comes within the framework of implementing the Armed Forces’ decision to impose a maritime ban on the Saudi enemy and to reinforce the equation of “a siege for a siege”.
In another development, the Yemeni Armed Forces, by the grace of Allah, successfully carried out two military operations of which the first targeted a Saudi military convoy, consisting of a large convoy loaded with military equipment, in the Al-Abr and Al-Wadi’ah areas using ballistic missiles and drones, resulting in the burning and destruction of more than ten trucks loaded with weapons that were coming from Saudi territory to target the Yemeni people.
The second operation targeted Saudi enemy forces in the Al-Kanais area with ballistic missiles and drones, which resulted in the death and injury of dozens, including commanders and officers, and the burning and destruction of several weapons depots.
The armed forces, with Allah’s help, continue to impose a maritime blockade on the Saudi enemy within the declared operation zone, implementing the equation of “a siege for a siege” and a comprehensive escalation with a comprehensive escalation.
We are prepared, by Allah’s power, to confront any escalation with stronger and more intense strikes and broader and larger operations.
The Yemeni Armed Forces, while congratulating our great Yemeni people and our Arab and Islamic nation on the occasion of the Prophet’s birthday (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), call upon the people of our dear, valiant country, the people of faith and wisdom, the people of Yemen, to participate honorably in commemorating this great occasion in all designated areas tomorrow, Allah’s willing.
Member of Loyalty to Resistance Parliamentary Bloc, Dr. Hasan Fadlallah, met on Sunday evening in Tehran with the Iranian foreign minister, Dr. Abbas Araghchi, in presence of Hezbollah representative in Iran, Sayyed Abdullah Safieddine.
According to IRNA, MP Fadlallah conveyed the greetings of Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem, hailing the Iranian steadfastness in face of the US war.
Hezbollah lawmaker also praised the Iranian support to the Lebanese people and resistance, stressing that all the Islamic states must confront the Zionist criminality, IRNA added.
“In turn, the Iranian top diplomat underlined the Lebanese resistance against the Israeli war, reiterating that Iran would continue helping the Lebanese people defend their country’s integrity, dignity and sovereignty.”
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in an image from archive.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held separate telephone conversations with his Egyptian counterpart and Pakistan’s Army Chief for talks on the latest regional developments and diplomatic efforts to reduce tensions in West Asia.
In a phone call on Saturday, Araqchi and Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty exchanged views on the latest developments in the region, particularly the situation in the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea.
The two senior diplomats also discussed ongoing diplomatic efforts aimed at reducing tensions and preventing further escalation in the region.
In another phone call, Araghchi and Pakistan’s Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir discussed the latest regional developments and ways to strengthen peace, stability and security in West Asia.
The calls came amid continued diplomatic efforts by regional countries to contain tensions and promote peace and stability in West Asia.
Over the past two decades, hardline Ukrainian ultranationalists have waged an ever-escalating war on history at home and abroad, with dramatic, world-changing consequences. In the country itself, a highly repressive legal apparatus is increasingly enforcing dangerously skewed narratives of Kiev’s near and distant past, with excessive criminal penalties even for those who unwittingly fall foul of the law. A brazenly politicised battle, it has become turbocharged since the Ukraine proxy conflict’s eruption. Despite widespread opposition, Kiev’s aggressive ultranationalist offensive on history is only intensifying.
These are the grave findings of an extraordinary paper by Ukrainian academic Georgiy Kasianov, “To discipline and punish”: A punitive turn in the memory politics in Ukraine, 2006–2025. As the author notes, the weaponisation of law in service of memory politics is common in Central and Eastern Europe. At least nine countries in the region boast legislation prohibiting public displays of Communist and Nazi symbols, which underpins local ultranationalist efforts – eagerly endorsed by the EU – to perversely conflate the two ideologies as comparable totalitarianisms.
Moreover, in many cases – especially the Baltics – these laws are components of wider cultural and legal ecosystems glorifying Nazi collaborators and Holocaust perpetrators as heroic freedom fighters, while strictly limiting discourse about World War II to conceal local culpability for macabre crimes. As such, Kasianov writes, Ukraine’s “punitive model of memory politics” fits into “a broader post-Communist pattern of state-enforced historical narratives.” Yet, “in its severity, selectivity, ideological and bureaucratic instrumentalization,” Kiev’s war on history “represents a particularly radical and revealing case.”
Bandera supporters march in Kiev, January 2015
Today, Ukraine “leads Europe in the number of judicial decisions concerning violations of criminal statutes specifically designed to prohibit certain historical symbols,” with criminal penalties for breaching “memory laws” being the continent’s “most severe.” Kasianov traces this state of affairs to the mid-2000s, when Western-installed President Viktor Yushchenko’s government sought to implement laws “institutionalizing” the Soviet Union’s 1930 – 1933 famine as a deliberate genocide of Ukrainians specifically engineered by Joseph Stalin. It is known within Ukraine, and increasingly internationally, as “Holodomor”.
While the famine and resultant mass death was produced and exacerbated by catastrophic human errors combined with adverse natural factors, few historians consider the horror to have been intentional. Markedly, Kazakhs and Russians also perished in vast numbers. As of November 2022, just 23 UN member states have recognised Holodomor as a genocide – most being Kiev’s close allies, post-Maidan. Nonetheless, prominent Western sources state axiomatically the famine was deliberately inflicted, part of a wider ongoing Russian and/or Soviet effort to erase Ukraine.
Meanwhile,ultranationalist claimsof how many Ukrainians were supposedly killed by the famine have grown ever-wilder, with some sources placing the figure as high as 10 million. This isseveral times the multiethnic death toll typically accepted by scholars, conveniently framing the so-called Holodomor as a greater targeted crime against humanity than the Holocaust. Yuschenko’s foray into memory politics contributed significantly to this warped contemporary informational climate. Still, 2006 legislation formally designating Holodomor as genocidal didn’t include punitive measures for denying or questioning that characterisation.
Kasianov documents how over the next 14 years, 13 separate attempts were made to criminalise “Holodomor denial” by ultranationalist Ukrainian elements within and without government and parliament. Each effort sought to impose “a state-sanctioned historical orthodoxy” around Holodomor, while “[constraining] scholarly debate and freedom of expression.” None received approval from parliament’s “legal analytical department”, but ultranationalist memory politics ultimately prevailed on a cultural and political level locally, and beyond. Notably, many of these initiatives were sponsored by theopenly Neo-Nazi political party Svoboda.
‘Political Repression’
Svoboda played asubstantial role in the Western-orchestrated2014 Maidan coup, which not coincidentally “created a fertile environment for reframing memory politics as an instrument of state security and ideological consolidation.” The government of Petro Poroshenko justified the “rapid passage of a package of laws aimed at condemning [Communism] and institutionalizing a nationalist historical narrative” as a “necessary defensive measure” and “nation-building project,” countering supposed “external aggression” from Russia. This led to the adoption of hitherto unthinkable legislation in April 2015.
Ukrainian ultranationalists tear down Ukraine’s largest Lenin statue in Kharkiv, September 2014
These hastily passed laws equated Communism with Nazism, prohibiting the public display of symbols associated with both ideologies. Yet, Kasianov notes the legislation “also granted legal and moral rehabilitation” to mass-murdering, Nazi-affiliated Ukrainian nationalist factions heavily implicated in the Holocaust. This included Stepan Bandera’s Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists, and its armed Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) wing. Moreover, despite the law’s formal dual condemnation of Communism and Nazism, Kasianov details how “its implementation and symbolic focus reveal a stark imbalance.”
Approximately 90% of the legislation’s text “is dedicated to defining and enumerating Communist symbols, while Nazi symbols are addressed in relatively minimal and largely perfunctory terms.” Nazi-related prohibitions are “limited to the most universally recognized insignia of the Third Reich, such as the swastika.” By contrast, “the law offers an expansive and detailed catalog of banned Soviet insignia, ranging from the hammer and sickle to red stars and Soviet-era street names.” This “obvious asymmetry” extends even further.
Symbols associated with local Neo-Nazi groups, or formal World War II-era collaborationist Ukrainian military units such as SS Division Galicia, are spared from proscription entirely. “Legal and policy experts and Ukrainian and international human rights organizations” have all expressed concerns over the law’s “vague definitions,” and “potential misuse for political repression.” The Ukrainian Rada’s own “expert department” found the legislation conflicted with the country’s established constitution, and several existing domestic laws.
Disproportionately harsh punishments for infringements, with offenders facing prison sentences of up to five years along with property confiscation, also drew widespread criticism. A lawyer and lecturer at Lviv National Universitystrikingly compared the penalties involved to “using a guillotine to treat a headache.” A damningopen lettersigned by a welter of academics and policymakers dubbed the legislation “an instrument of ideological purification, selectively targeting the symbols and narratives associated with the political left while allowing for the implicit valorization of radical nationalist traditions.”
These devastating indictments were dismissed by the law’s advocates as “Kremlin propaganda”, if not outright treason. Kasianov reveals how “principal architects” of Poroshenko’s “Decommunization” agenda were a coterie of ultranationalist “memory activists”, drawn from the Lviv-based Center for Research on the Liberation Movement, and Youth Nationalist Congress. Both maintain “close ideological and organizational ties” with, operating as “facade organizations” for, the Banderite OUN. The pair have long-served as “conduits for nationalist reinterpretation of 20th century Ukrainian history and strong anti-Communist and anti-Russian policies.”
‘Memory Regime’
Post-Maidan, “several leading figures from this milieu assumed influential positions within state institutions, shaping historical policy.” This included extensive infiltration of the Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance (UINP), the state body charged with implementing memory laws. Then-Deputy Prime Minister Oleksandr Sych of Neo-Nazi Svoboda appointed OUN-linked figures to influential positions within UINP. Not coincidentally, Sych cofoundedthe fascist, pro-Maidan Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists, an OUN-B “political facade”. Once their long-sought anti-Communist legislation was enacted, enforcement came thick and fast.
From November 2015 – spring 2016, almost 52,000 toponymical objects, 32 cities, 955 villages and settlements, and 25 administrative districts were renamed, with 2,389 monuments and memorial plaques to “totalitarian leaders” removed. In all, 1,320 were Lenin statues. Between 2015 and 2021 too, Ukrainian police and the general prosecutor’s office registered 334 criminal cases against citizens related to the display of “totalitarian symbols” – “the vast majority of which concerned Communist imagery.” Details were almost invariably farcical.
In May 2017, a student narrowly avoided jail for posting Lenin quotes on Facebook. Under his plea deal, he publicly expressed “sincere remorse”, while his personal copy of Karl Marx’s Capital was destroyed. In June 2019, an unemployed man received a one year suspended prison sentence for wearing an old T-shirt featuring the Soviet coat of arms while washing windows. In March 2021, a Lviv resident was sentenced to one year’s probation after being “detained by politically vigilant local citizens” for wearing a USSR emblem.
In the meantime, further legislation was passed by Kiev sacralising ultranationalist historical narratives. Lack of political pushback was in no small part assured by Ukraine’s Communist party being banned in December 2015. The same openly fascist and Neo-Nazi elements behind Poroshenko’s “Decommunization” push successfullysponsored lawsgranting OUN and UPA genocidaires official combatant status and veteran benefits. Now insulated from legal consequences for any atrocities they committed, Ukrainian state sources universally describe them as “heroes” who fought for Ukrainian “independence”.
Workers prepare to remove the hammer and sickle from Kiev’s Mother Ukraine statue, August 2023
The volume of cases brought under “Decommunization” laws, and severity of the punishments involved, ratcheted significantly following the Ukraine proxy war’s eruption. Authorities were handed an ideal rationale further assaulting history, while waging war on enemies within, under the guise of “derussification and decolonization.” In keeping with the “near-absence of prosecutions for Nazi-related offenses” pre-conflict, in over 300 criminal cases brought to trial 2022 – 2025, fewer than 10 involved Nazi symbols. The vast majority “concerned the dissemination of prohibited [Communist] symbols on social media platforms.”
Today, even simply liking social media posts featuring Soviet symbols can land Ukrainians in court. Kasianov notes how “case materials” have “indicated the emergence of specialized investigators…focused on monitoring digital communications and online content,” within the ranks of both police and the SBU security service. There has concomitantly been a significant rise in “vigilant citizens” reporting acquaintances, coworkers, and neighbours to authorities for breaching Kiev’s stringent memory laws. “Overwhelmingly”, individuals “from marginalized and impoverished segments of the population” have been targeted.
Ever since Maidan, Ukraine’s “punitive memory regime” and “nationalist identity project” has been wholeheartedly embraced and promoted by Kiev’s Western proxy sponsors. No wonder – the legally-enforced distorted narrative Ukraine is fighting a battle for its very existence, and ultimate liberation from “Russian imperialism”, ensures the war will continue in perpetuity. All along, distorted “memory politics” becomes more entrenched and rabid at the country’s highest levels, leaving the population – and the wider world – at the mercy of a dangerous and deranged ultranationalist clique.
The general amnesty law passed by Lebanon’s parliament on 12 August 2026 has been presented as a humanitarian response to the plight of prisoners and detainees, and to the crushing overcrowding inside the country’s jails.
Yet the law reaches far beyond prison overcrowding, touching the basis on which punishment is imposed and the judiciary’s authority to enforce it. Its consequences also extend to victims, public safety, and the standing of the Lebanese army.
Parliament’s vote revives a question the state has evaded for decades: does Lebanon intend to build a functioning justice system, or will political and sectarian bargains continue to manage its collapse?
Under Lebanese law, a general amnesty does more than cancel a sentence. Article 150 of the Penal Code empowers the legislature to declare one and provides for the remission of primary, accessory, and additional penalties.
The 2026 law also extinguishes public prosecutions, proceedings, judgments, and decisions for offenses within its scope. Parliament has therefore reached back into the work of the courts. Acts that were punishable by law, investigated by the security services, or already adjudicated will no longer carry all the same penal consequences.
Parliament has the constitutional authority to enact a general amnesty, though the exercise of that power is not automatically sound or just. In a state governed by law, legislators set general rules and an independent judiciary applies them to cases and defendants through trials that protect the rights of the defense.
When parliament terminates prosecutions or strips judgments of their effect, it overrides work already carried out by the courts. A general amnesty can reach pending cases as well as those that ended in conviction, allowing a political agreement to overtake proceedings that may have taken years.
It also lets the state avoid harder questions about defendants held without judgment, repeated delays, and the deterioration of the prison system. Their release may ease the immediate pressure, but the same failures will continue to produce prisoners and deny victims justice.
Exceptional historical circumstances can make an amnesty necessary. A civil war may have ended, an authoritarian system may be giving way to democratic rule, or a country may be addressing the aftermath of a broad internal conflict.
In such cases, amnesty should form part of a wider process involving truth, accountability, reparations, reconciliation, and guarantees against repetition. Its justification fades when it becomes a recurring cure for judicial paralysis, a concession to political and sectarian forces, or an assurance that influence can ultimately overcome a court ruling.
A history of negotiated impunity
Lebanon has enacted successive amnesty laws since independence. After the 1958 conflict, a law issued on 24 December of that year covered crimes committed up to 15 October 1958. Law No. 8/69 followed on 17 February 1969, granting amnesty for crimes committed before 1 January 1968, alongside other laws covering press offenses.
The defining precedent was Law No. 84 of 26 August 1991, which granted a general amnesty for most crimes committed during the Lebanese civil war up to 28 March 1991. Its declared purpose was to turn the page on the war.
Lebanon did so without a comprehensive account of the truth, serious accountability, redress for victims, or reform of the state institutions that had joined the conflict or ceased to function during it. Special pardons with effects resembling a general amnesty followed between 1991 and 2005.
The problem lies in the way amnesty has become a recurring instrument of government. Whenever the justice system seizes up, and the prisons overflow, political and sectarian leaders negotiate over who should be released.
Each party brings its own constituency and preferred cases to the table, turning the law into another exercise in Lebanon’s system of political apportionment. One group is included to secure the inclusion of another.
The latest law emerged from years of dispute over the so-called “Islamist detainees,” people convicted of drug offenses, Lebanese who fled to “Israel,” and other categories. Agreement became possible only when these competing interests were folded into a single settlement.
The bargain’s public cost
Punishment is intended to deter crime, protect society, and rehabilitate offenders. Repeated amnesties send a very different message. Security agencies may pursue an offender, and the courts may convict him, but powerful factions can still strike a political bargain that opens the way out of prison.
Many beneficiaries are not dangerous criminals. Some detainees have spent years awaiting trial, suffered excessive pretrial detention, or faced deeply unfair procedures. Those injustices require prompt and fair trials, reviews of defective judgments, compensation for arbitrary detention, and accountability for officials who obstruct proceedings. Erasing whole categories of offenses leaves the machinery that produced those abuses firmly in place.
A broad amnesty may also weaken deterrence and raise the risk of reoffending, particularly when it reduces sentences for serious crimes without rehabilitation, post-release supervision, psychological and social support, or access to work.
People who have spent years behind bars are being returned to marginalized communities with no serious reintegration plan. Such releases offer little protection to society or to the former prisoners themselves.
Soldiers left outside the deal
The law is especially sensitive where sentence reductions extend to people convicted over attacks on the Lebanese army. Premeditated murder and several other grave offenses are excluded from the amnesty, yet the legislation allows reduced sentences for some people convicted of killing troops.
This directly touches the morale of the military and the authority of the state. A soldier is expected to confront armed groups, protect civilians, and risk his life while knowing that those who attacked his comrades may later benefit from a political settlement. The state cannot easily preserve the army’s standing when political calculations alter judicial outcomes in cases for which soldiers paid with their lives.
Reductions connected to attacks on the army required a precise public explanation, consultation with the army command and the families of fallen soldiers, and strict safeguards against renewed violence. Folding them into a wider bargain threatens the trust between military personnel and the political institutions charged with protecting them.
Emptying cells, preserving the crisis
Some MPs promoted the law as an answer to severe prison overcrowding, but the available figures show its limits. Prison Directorate data recorded 6,268 inmates on 30 March 2026, while unofficial estimates cited by rights groups put the number closer to 8,500.
Pretrial detainees make up a large share of the population, and the National Human Rights Commission reported overcrowding of 300 percent in 2025. Estimates reported after the vote suggest that about 2,300 detainees may benefit over time, while only 79 would be freed immediately. These numbers were not formally issued with the law and should be treated as provisional.
Even the release of several thousand prisoners will not stop overcrowding from returning while trials remain delayed, pretrial detention is overused, cases continue to accumulate, and prisons lack modern administration and credible rehabilitation programs. The law can relieve pressure in some cells for a time. It leaves the causes of the crisis untouched.
At a minimum, parliament should have paired the law with a binding program of judicial reform. That program should impose effective limits on pretrial detention, fill judicial vacancies, increase court budgets, digitize case files, activate judicial inspection, expand alternatives to imprisonment, and speed up trials.
Lebanon also needs a specialized body to manage prisons and rehabilitation, together with firm guarantees of judicial independence from political forces. A serious plan would identify a timetable, budget, performance measures, and the bodies responsible for carrying it out.
An exceptional amnesty can sometimes serve a national and humanitarian need. Repeated amnesties without truth, reconciliation, or reform amount to an admission that the state cannot deliver justice. Parliament’s vote must not close the prison file.
It should mark the point at which Lebanon finally confronts the system that keeps filling its cells. The country cannot continue opening prison doors every few decades through political bargains while courts remain slow, vulnerable, and starved of resources.
Lebanon needs an independent judiciary that prevents abuse, upholds victims’ rights, and commands public trust. Until then, amnesty will remain part of the political bargain and a prospect hanging over every sentence.
Top Iranian official Mohsen Rezaei says Tehran has transformed its defense strategy, drawing on recent wars and adapting its military, diplomatic, and economic policies.
Iran’s Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, Mohsen Rezaei, said Iran’s defense and political strategies have undergone continuous development, particularly since the third imposed war.
Rezaei said Iran today is fundamentally different from the country that existed before the war, adding that the same applies to the “arrogant” United States. He said the image of the United States as a peace-seeking and idealized power has changed in the minds of Iranian youth.
“Today, the entire world views Iran differently,” Rezaei said.
Iran’s SNSC Secretary, Mohsen Rezaee:
• Trump wants to start a new game called "economic warfare," and we will hold him accountable.
• If countries surrounding Iran join the US in an economic war against us, we will harm their interests. We’ll first warn them, and if they… pic.twitter.com/iEMrjzops4
Rezaei said that after several rounds of negotiations and the US failure to honor its commitments, reforms should be made to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s diplomatic conduct toward the international community.
“We will certainly draw on all the lessons and experiences of the past year in the next confrontation, and the next war will undoubtedly be different from the third imposed war,” he said.
Rezaei added that Iran would make changes to the way it manages future confrontations, accusing the United States of betraying negotiations, diplomacy, and its own commitments.
“The impact of the unity of the Iranian people in confronting the enemy is no less significant than that of launch platforms,” he said, adding that Iran would witness changes in the management of war, diplomacy, and political and social affairs, with new capabilities entering the arena.
In a post on X, Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf stated that Tehran has received numerous communications from neighboring countries seeking to establish new security arrangements and regional economic cooperation.
Rezaei said the world had seen, following the US military aggression against Iran, that a country possessing a nuclear bomb would be more effective than hundreds of F-35 aircraft.
Rezaei also said the American public opposes war against Iran and does not support the US military or government, while claiming that the Iranian people and government remain united behind the country’s armed forces.
He said the United States had become “completely disappointed” with military attacks and now believed it could support military measures through an economic blockade.
“The world has realized that Trump’s threats and displays are nothing but empty words,” Rezaei said, adding that Trump is isolated and has become dependent on NATO and its allies for assistance.
Rezaei further said Iran had learned over the years how to circumvent sanctions and continue selling its oil, portraying economic resilience as another component of Tehran’s strategy for confronting pressure.
On last night's episode of The Grand Standoff: Iran and the World, Professor Mohammad Marandi sharply criticized Western sanctions regimes, characterizing economic blockades as a form of collective punishment designed against civilians, women, and children.
Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf in an image from archive.
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said neighboring countries have sent Tehran messages seeking new regional security arrangements and expanded economic cooperation, arguing that US policies have undermined the security of its own allies.
“We’ve received numerous messages from neighboring countries about shaping new security arrangements and economic cooperation in the region,” Ghalibaf said in a post on X.
1/2 We’ve received numerous messages from neighboring countries about shaping new security arrangements and economic cooperation in the region.
The United States put the security of every single one of its allies at such risk…
— محمدباقر قالیباف | MB Ghalibaf (@mb_ghalibaf) August 22, 2026
He accused the United States of putting “the security of every single one of its allies at such risk” through “bullying and pure disregard for their interests for the sake of Israel,” leaving them briefly fearing for their “entire existence.”
1/2 We’ve received numerous messages from neighboring countries about shaping new security arrangements and economic cooperation in the region.
The United States put the security of every single one of its allies at such risk…
— محمدباقر قالیباف | MB Ghalibaf (@mb_ghalibaf) August 22, 2026
Ghalibaf said the region’s security should instead be built on an independent, locally driven framework.
“A homegrown, independent order is what will actually deliver peace and security,” he said.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi responded to Washington’s latest move — described as “the most crushing sanctions in human history” — by sharing a 14-year-old post from a former US president regarding “the most crippling sanctions in history.”
“14 years ago: ‘Most crippling sanctions in history.’ Failed,” Araghchi wrote on his X account on Friday.
“8 years ago: ‘Maximum pressure.’ Failed. 5 months ago: ‘Unconditional surrender.’ Failed,” he added.
“Today: ‘Most crushing economic operation ever.’ Bound to fail,” he noted.
“We have seen this movie before. Same bull. Different bullies,” Araghchi stressed.
On October 12, 2012, Barack Obama, by posting a message on the social media platform Twitter, had quoted his then-Vice President Joe Biden regarding sanctions against Iran: “These are the most crippling sanctions in the history of sanctions. Period.”
Israeli occupation forces deployed to the West Bank (July 2026 / image by Wafa news agency).
Israeli occupation forces launched a sweeping arrest campaign across the occupied West Bank in the early hours of Wednesday, storming homes and neighborhoods in multiple governorates as fierce confrontations erupted with Palestinian youths.
The large-scale operation stretched from Bethlehem and Nablus to Qalqilya, Hebron, Ramallah, Jenin, Jericho, occupied Jerusalem, and Tulkarm, with Israeli occupation troops deploying heavily in residential areas and detaining numerous Palestinians in a coordinated overnight offensive.
Bethlehem Under Siege
In the Bethlehem governorate, violent clashes broke out in the town of Tuqu’, southeast of the city, after occupation forces stormed the area, firing stun grenades and tear gas at residents. The incursion later expanded to Beit Fajjar, south of Bethlehem, as well as al-Saff Street in the city center and the Dheisheh refugee camp to the south.
Israeli occupation forces abduct Palestinian journalist Abdul Rahman Hassan after storming his home on Al-Saf Street in central Bethlehem, in the occupied West Bank. pic.twitter.com/BTHXlR5j0J
During the raids, occupation troops arrested Palestinian journalist Abdul Rahman Hassan after ransacking his home in Bethlehem. Separately, Israeli settlers conducted provocative tours near the Ush Ghrab area east of the city, further inflaming local tensions.
Clashes Erupt South of Nablus
Further north, confrontations intensified in the village of Madama, south of Nablus, where Israeli occupation forces fired heavy volleys of tear gas and stun grenades during a military incursion. Troops also stormed Beita, south of Nablus, and entered the northern mountain area of Nablus city, in addition to raiding a residential building near the al-Ain refugee camp west of the city.
Two Palestinian brothers, Udai and Mohammad Abu Laban, were kidnapped this morning by Israeli occupation forces after they raided their home in the Karm Ashour neighborhood of Nablus, in the occupied West Bank. pic.twitter.com/TughXPgkhE
Local sources reported that brothers Asim and Yasser Ali Makhlouf were arrested during a raid on the village of Asira al-Qibliya, south of Nablus. In Beit Furik, east of Nablus, a settler from a nearby outpost harassed residents by directing laser beams toward homes, according to local accounts.
Qalqilya and Hebron Raids
In the Qalqilya governorate, occupation forces stormed the town of Habla, detaining Ahmad Issam Odeh during the raid. Troops also entered Azzun, east of Qalqilya, after an Israeli special unit infiltrated the town ahead of a larger military sweep that saw multiple homes raided.
In the southern West Bank, a large Israeli military force accompanied by two bulldozers stormed al-Dhahiriya, south of Hebron. Troops raided homes across several neighborhoods, converting some into military posts, while closing roads and deploying infantry throughout the city in a show of force.
Israeli occupation soldiers abduct two Palestinians during an incursion into the city of Nablus in the occupied West Bank. The two are seen being forcibly taken away, blindfolded and handcuffed. pic.twitter.com/pJYBJjS6tW
Additional raids were reported in the al-Hafr area of Deir Jarir, east of Ramallah; the village of Aaba, east of Jenin; Fasayil, north of Jericho; Kafr Aqab, north of occupied Jerusalem; and Deir al-Ghusun, north of Tulkarm, as the occupation’s dragnet extended across much of the territory.
Escalating Violence
The overnight campaign marks the latest chapter in a sustained wave of Israeli military and settler violence across the occupied West Bank. Recent months have seen a sharp escalation in attacks, including the killing and mass arrest of Palestinians, the demolition and destruction of homes and civilian infrastructure, the burning of mosques and vehicles, the bulldozing of agricultural land, and restrictions preventing farmers from accessing their fields.
Settlement expansion has continued unabated, with outposts encroaching further on Palestinian land, as international calls for de-escalation remain largely unheeded. The West Bank, already reeling from months of heightened tensions, now braces for what appears to be an intensifying occupation campaign with no end in sight.
Iran warns Syria against a potential military intervention in Lebanon, threatening a regional response as Hezbollah prepares for possible escalation.
Iran has thwarted a planned Syrian military intervention in Lebanon that was being prepared at the request of the United States, delivering a direct warning to Damascus that any Syrian military entry into Lebanese territory would be met with a regional response, according to Iranian sources cited by U News.
The Iranian warning included threats to stir up the Syrian–Iraqi border, open a confrontation line in Homs, support Alawite movements in the Syrian coastal region, and encourage the Kurds to return militarily to the outskirts of Aleppo.
The warning was not directed solely at Damascus; it also reached Ankara, Baghdad, Doha, and Riyadh, carrying the message that any Syrian adventure against Hezbollah in Lebanon would not remain confined to the Bekaa Valley but could turn into a broad regional confrontation within Syrian territory.
Iran succeeded in transforming any potential Syrian intervention in Lebanon from a military option that could be marketed to the US into a high-cost regional adventure, sources said. The Iranian warning, which reached Damascus through Turkish channels, included a threat of Iranian ballistic missile strikes that would begin from Damascus and include, in the first wave, more than 100 strategic targets, foremost among them the Syrian presidential palace.
The US-backed scenario: a three-pronged offensive into Lebanon
The scenario promoted by figures linked to the US embassy in Lebanon involves sending Syrian armed units from the Masnaa crossing toward Chtoura in the Lebanese Bekaa and on to the city of Zahle, simultaneously with mobilization from the eastern highlands toward the city of Baalbek.
The proposed scenario also includes declaring the city of Tripoli a Syrian zone of influence, with advancing forces benefiting from local environments, particularly in some Sunni-majority areas.
The presumed goal of the operation is to strike Hezbollah’s rocket infrastructure in the Bekaa and to create military and political pressure that would force the party to withdraw or accept new security arrangements.
Hezbollah prepared, treats potential Syrian operation as US-Israeli pressure
Iran’s warning has prompted regional parties to reassess the cost of the scenario, especially since Syria, emerging from deep military and political transformations, does not appear capable of enduring a new internal war.
Hezbollah is treating the information about a potential Syrian intervention extremely seriously and has taken precautionary measures in the Bekaa in anticipation of any possible Syrian incursion.
Hezbollah does not view the scenario as a separate Syrian operation, but rather as part of US–Israeli–regional pressure aimed at dismantling the structure of resistance in Lebanon from the east, following Israel’s failure to achieve a decisive result in the south.
Iraq’s rejection, UAE’s enthusiasm, and Saudi caution
Iraqi intelligence chief Hamid al-Shatri visited Damascus and informed Syrian officials of Baghdad’s rejection of any Syrian military expansion into Lebanese territory. Al-Shatri warned that Iraqi forces, primarily factions of the Popular Mobilization Forces, might enter Syrian territory if an intervention against Hezbollah occurred.
The Iraqi position added a further layer of deterrence to the Iranian warning, signalling that Damascus could face military pressure not only from within Syria but also from its eastern border.
The UAE is enthusiastic about funding any Syrian military operation in Lebanon, with officials quoted as ready to pay troop salaries as well as finance combat operations. This financial backing suggests that the UAE views the intervention as an opportunity to curtail Hezbollah’s influence in Lebanon, despite the broader regional risks that Iran has highlighted.
Qatar rejects Syrian intervention in Lebanon, while Saudi Arabia does not object to an intervention as long as it is within arrangements that weaken Hezbollah without igniting the region. The divergent positions among Gulf states underscore the complex calculations at play, with Riyadh appearing to balance its opposition to Hezbollah against the dangers of a wider conflict that Iran has explicitly threatened to unleash on Syrian soil.
Israeli Occupation Army Radio correspondent reported that security authorities had confirmed that details of what took place in the Gaza Strip the night before last may be published.
The incident led to a heightened state of alert in the Israeli army and may indicate the complex situation in the Strip in recent days, the correspondent added.
“In the hours before nightfall, the Israeli army received intelligence regarding an armed gathering in the Strip. The Air Force launched a Zik drone to locate the gathering, but nothing was detected on the ground throughout the night.”
“The commanders decided to raise the state of alert in the area. Israeli army positions were reinforced with additional forces, and the troops prepared for various attack scenarios. In the morning, the state of alert was lowered after nothing was detected.”
A senior Iranian source told Al Mayadeen that the Strait of Hormuz remains closed and under Iranian control, stressing that Tehran has made no change to its policy or navigation procedures.
A senior Iranian political-security source told Al Mayadeen that the Strait of Hormuz remains closed and that Tehran has made no change or adjustment to its policy governing the strategic waterway.
The source stressed that the Strait continues to be monitored and managed by Iran, rejecting claims by US President Donald Trump that the US Navy is currently in control of it.
According to the source, vessels seeking to navigate the Strait must comply with the procedures and regulations imposed by Iran. Any ship that fails to follow those measures could encounter technical difficulties or face safety-related risks.
The source further explained that large vessels are currently unable to pass through the Strait because of the dangers surrounding navigation in the area.
Trump makes false claims
Addressing Trump’s repeated statements on the issue, the source said the US president is seeking to influence global market prices and has therefore continued to produce and circulate false reports on a daily basis.
The comments directly refute Trump’s claim that “the only one that has control of the Strait of Hormuz right now is the United States Navy.”
The Iranian position also follows remarks by Major General Mohsen Rezaei, representative of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution and secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, who said Tuesday that the Strait of Hormuz will not reopen unless the United States changes its position and accepts Tehran’s conditions.
Rezaei also stressed that any potential agreement between Iran and the Sultanate of Oman concerning arrangements for ships transiting the Strait should be considered separately from the broader question of reopening the waterway.
Iran says ground attack plan was thwarted
Separately, Ebrahim Azizi, chairman of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, said Tehran had thwarted what he described as plans for a ground attack against the country.
“We nipped the malicious intention to attack us by land in the bud,” ISNA quoted Azizi as saying.
He warned that Iran would respond broadly to any renewed threat to its security.
“The enemies should know that if they miscalculate once again and endanger the security of our people, we will deprive them of security across the world,” Azizi said.
US President Donald Trump in an image from archive (photo by Reuters).
A dramatic secret escape from Ankara, orchestrated to evade Iranian threats, has ignited a major political firestorm, with CNN reporting that President Donald Trump’s clandestine exit from Turkey concealed inside a hydraulic catering truck has severely undermined his administration’s narrative of a decisive military triumph over Tehran.
According to reports initially published by The Washington Post and detailed extensively by CNN, the US Secret Service smuggled Trump out of Turkey last July following a NATO summit. Fearing potential retaliation from Iran, the president was covertly transported to an alternative aircraft, bypassing the heavily fortified Air Force One the standard presidential transport since the 1990s—while his aides and the traveling press corps remained on the decoy plane, unaware of the switch.
‘Drama and Deception’
Describing the operation as a piece of “drama” and “deception,” CNN argued that the risky maneuver has revived damaging stereotypes about an “unpopular war that Trump can’t end.” The network posed a piercing rhetorical question: if the president cannot guarantee his own safety on the soil of a key NATO ally, “how can anyone believe his administration’s claims that it has effectively eliminated Iran’s military capabilities?”
CNN further noted that Iran has secured a significant “propaganda victory” by apparently forcing Trump to retreat. Despite the president’s repeated boasts of crushing the Iranian regime, the network observed that “Tehran does not appear to be on the verge of collapse or desperate for a deal.”
Strategic Chaos and Contradictions
The network pointed to what it termed “American strategic chaos,” citing the irony that the very war Trump declared “victory” in just days has dangerously depleted US military stockpiles—reportedly affecting 80% of the interceptor missiles within a major missile defense system.
CNN also highlighted the administration’s contradictory messaging, noting that Trump insisted just two days ago that the Strait of Hormuz is “open,” despite Tehran’s effective control over the vital waterway. This suggests, the network argued, that US forces are fighting merely to return to the pre-war status quo rather than achieving a decisive breakthrough.
Image vs. Reality
The clandestine departure stands in stark contrast to Trump’s carefully cultivated “self-portrait” as a “victorious and strong man,” CNN noted. While presidents are sometimes compelled to use discreet routes underground garages, back entrances, or service elevators—Trump’s reliance on a “humble hydraulic food truck in Ankara” was deemed particularly embarrassing for the leader of the free world.
Political Backlash
Illinois Governor and potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidate J.B. Pritzker condemned the president’s actions, telling CNN that Trump “put people in danger to save himself.” Pritzker added pointedly: “He snuck away in a catering truck while reporters and his staff were on a plane that was apparently under threat.”
Head of Yemen’s National Negotiating Delegation Mohammad Abdul Salam stressed Yemeni Armed Forces’ “legitimate right to defend the country’s sovereignty, independence, and dignity” against Saudi aggression and military movements, while stressing that Sana’a has never closed the door to dialogue or negotiations.
In a statement on Tuesday, Abdul Salam said the Yemeni negotiating delegation continues to engage with various parties to clarify Sana’a’s position amid the ongoing aggression,
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم تزامنا مع العدوان الذي يتعرض له شعبنا اليمني العزيز، فإن الوفد الوطني المفاوض يواصل اتصالاته ولقاءاته مع مختلف الأطراف الإقليمية والدولية لتوضيح موقفنا من هذه التطورات والتأكيد على أن العمليات التي تقوم بها قواتنا المسلحة ضد سفن السعودي وتحشيداته ومعسكراته…
“Our armed forces are continuing to fulfill their duty in confronting these conspiracies, defending the sovereignty, independence, and dignity of Yemen.”
The chief Yemeni negotiator said Sana’a had adhered to the truce and de-escalation for four years without attacking Saudi Arabia, accusing Riyadh instead of exploiting the truce to intensify economic and humanitarian pressure through restrictions on shipping, measures targeting banks and merchants, and what he described as a tightening blockade.
He said these measures had deepened the humanitarian crisis and driven up prices, accusing Saudi Arabia of rejecting dialogue while using the period of de-escalation to advance military preparations.
Abdul Salam affirmed that Yemen’s armed forces would continue confronting efforts to undermine the country’s sovereignty and independence, while stressing that any future political process must secure Yemenis’ legitimate rights, including reopening airports and seaports, paying salaries, and resuming oil and gas exports with revenues allocated to public services.
“We have never closed the door to dialogue and negotiation, neither before nor after. It is the Saudi side that rejects it.”
“Any future path must result in the realization of our people’s legitimate rights,” he added.
Civil defense teams from the Islamic Health Authority and the Lebanese Civil Defense, with the support of local residents and the assistance of a Lebanese Army helicopter, managed to control and completely extinguish the fires that broke out in the forests of the Western Bekaa, Kfarhouna, and Toumat Niha, after extensive and continuous field efforts that lasted for hours.
The fires erupted as a result of Israeli attacks and shelling targeting the area, leading to the burning of vast areas of forests and mountainous regions. The difficult terrain and strong winds hampered the firefighting efforts at several points, hindering the teams’ access to some of the burning hotspots.
A Lebanese Army helicopter participated in the firefighting operations, conducting reconnaissance flights over the burning areas and contributing to aerial firefighting efforts. This was done in conjunction with the extensive efforts of the civil defense teams on the ground to reach the various hotspots, contain the fires, and prevent their spread.
After hours of continuous work and heightened field readiness, the teams were able to extinguish the fires and bring them under complete control. Monitoring operations continue to ensure that there are no remaining hotspots that could reignite the fires.
Controlling the fires marks the end of arduous field efforts by various firefighting teams in confronting the repercussions of the Israeli aggression and protecting as much as possible of the forest and environmental wealth in the region.
Leader of the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei, has issued separate orders appointing six senior commanders to key positions in Iran’s Armed Forces General Staff, the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC), and the Basij.
Under the appointments, Brigadier General Ali Abdollahi, commander of the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, was appointed Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, while Brigadier General Kioumars Heydari was named Deputy Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces.
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
Amir Brigadier General Kioumars Heydari
In view of your commitment, competence & valuable experience, and upon Chief of Staff's recommendation, I hereby appoint you to the position of Deputy Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces.
— Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei (@MKhamenei_ir) August 10, 2026
Before his latest appointment, Abdollahi served as commander of the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters. He previously commanded the IRGC Ground Forces and served as deputy commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force. He also served as deputy coordinator and later deputy commander of Iran’s Law Enforcement Forces.
Major General Pilot Ali Abdollahi
In view of the proud and glorious martyrdom of LtGen Mousavi at the hands of the Zionist-American enemy, and in consideration of your commendable services and valuable experience, I hereby appoint you as the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces.
— Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei (@MKhamenei_ir) August 10, 2026
Abdollahi also held several civilian positions, serving as governor of Semnan and Gilan provinces before becoming deputy for security affairs at the Interior Ministry.
In separate orders, Khamenei appointed Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi as commander-in-chief of the IRGC, promoting him to the rank of major general. Brigadier General Mostafa Izadi was appointed deputy commander-in-chief of the IRGC.
Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi
In view of the martyrdom of LtGen Pakpour at the hands of Zionist-American enemy, in consideration of your services & experience, I hereby promote you to the position of Major General and appoint you to the position of Commander-in-Chief of IRGC.
— Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei (@MKhamenei_ir) August 10, 2026
Vahidi previously served as Interior Minister under the government of late President Ebrahim Raisi and had earlier headed the Defense Ministry. He is also considered the first commander of the Quds Force and is a full member of Iran’s Expediency Discernment Council.
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
Major General Mostafa Izadi
In view of your commitment, competence & valuable experience & upon IRGC Commander-in-Chief's recommendation, I hereby appoint you to the position of Deputy Commander-in-Chief of IRGC.
— Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei (@MKhamenei_ir) August 10, 2026
The appointments also named Brigadier General Ali Ozmaei, commander of the IRGC Navy, to lead the naval force, while cleric Hossein Taeb was appointed head of the Basij Organization.
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
Rear Adm. Ali Ozmaei
In view of martyrdom of Rear Adm. Tangsiri, in consideration of your commitment, competence & experience, upon recommendation of IRGC's Commander-in-Chief, I hereby appoint you as Commander of IRGC Navy.
— Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei (@MKhamenei_ir) August 10, 2026
Ozmaei previously served as deputy commander of the IRGC’s First Naval District before being appointed commander of the Fifth Naval District, headquartered in Bandar Lengeh in Hormozgan Province. He later became deputy commander of the IRGC Navy.
Taeb previously held several senior positions, most notably serving as head of the IRGC Intelligence Organization.
New appointments follow national security reshuffle
The appointments come a day after Sayyed Khamenei appointed Major General Mohsen Rezaei as his representative to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and named Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr as his political adviser.
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
Dr. Mohsen Rezaee Considering your valuable experience, I am hereby appointing you, who were one of the first commanders in the triumphant 8-Year Sacred Defense, to be my representative in the Supreme National Security Council.
— Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei (@MKhamenei_ir) August 9, 2026
At the same time, Iranian presidential aide for public relations Mehdi Tabatabaei announced that President Masoud Pezeshkian had appointed Major General Mohsen Rezaei as secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, replacing Zolghadr, who assumed a new position after resigning as secretary.
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
Dear respected brother, Dr. Mohammad Baqer Zolghadr,
In consideration of your valuable experience, I hereby appoint you to be my Political Advisor.
— Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei (@MKhamenei_ir) August 9, 2026
The Supreme National Security Council is one of Iran’s key decision-making institutions. It is responsible for determining defense and security policies and coordinating political, military, intelligence, and economic issues related to national security.
Under Article 176 of the Iranian Constitution, the council is chaired by the president and includes senior officials from the country’s various branches of government, the armed forces, and the IRGC. Its decisions take effect after approval by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution.
The latest appointments come as Iran continues to face US-Israeli aggression. In this context, the appointments are presented as a message to the United States that “Tehran will not concede” and that the Iranian system remains in place and will continue.
A Yemeni source says strikes on Al-Mukha and Marib targeted Saudi officers, troop concentrations, weapons depots, and a secret storage facility.
The strikes by the Yemeni Armed Forces on Al-Mukha and Marib decimated Saudi officers and their troop concentrations, targeting a heavy and medium weapons depot alongside a secret storage facility, a senior Yemeni source told Al Mayadeen‘s correspondent in Sanaa.
According to the source, the Yemeni army is maintaining precise, continuous surveillance over all Saudi movements and military build-ups, warning that neither officers nor their forces can escape missile and drone strikes.
Stressing that today’s operations delivered a powerful message, the source affirmed that the Yemeni military will turn every gathering of Saudi officers into a target, while urging everyone to stay clear of weapons depots and any Saudi-affiliated gatherings.
YAF announce targeting of Saudi-backed factions in Mokha
The YAF announced on Sunday carrying out a large-scale strike on Saudi-backed factions in Yemen’s Al-Mukha, causing extensive damage to troop concentrations and weapons depots in the area.
Yemeni Armed Forces spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree said the operation, carried out using a large number of ballistic missiles and drones, came in response to Saudi Arabia’s continued mobilization of its proxies, its supply of weapons and equipment to them, and its ongoing attacks along the western coast and in Taiz governorate aimed at deterring the Yemeni people from confronting the blockade and aggression imposed on them for the past 12 years.
“The strikes were precise and caused extensive damage to the equipment and weapons, killing and wounding dozens, including Saudi nationals”, Saree said on Telegram.
The Yemeni Armed Forces reaffirmed their commitment to the declared equation of “blockade for blockade and escalation for escalation,” vowing to continue targeting any military buildup directed against the Yemeni people and the free governorates.
“We will not allow the Saudi enemy to achieve its objectives of targeting our people and throwing their sons into infernos of death in service of its conspiratorial agenda for the benefit of the nation’s enemies,” Saree said. “The Armed Forces, with the help of God Almighty and reliance upon Him, will continue to monitor and track all Saudi movements and mobilizations and target them precisely and directly”.
YAF target Aramco refinery in Jizan
The strike on Mokha is the second operation carried out by the YAF on Sunday. Earlier in the day, the YAF announced that they targeted a Saudi Aramco refinery in Jizan with a drone, stating that the operation comes as a response to Saudi drone incursions into Yemeni airspace.
Saree announced that the forces successfully targeted the Aramco refinery in Jizan with a drone, achieving a precise hit. He said the operation came in response to Saudi drone incursions into the airspace of Yemen’s Saada and Hajjah provinces.
The announcement came after Saudi Arabia’s Energy Ministry reported earlier that a fire had broken out at a facility belonging to Saudi Aramco’s refinery in Jizan, southwestern Saudi Arabia. The ministry said Aramco’s industrial security firefighting teams extinguished the fire and that there were no injuries.
A major shake-up took place inside Mossad after two senior officials were dismissed over the failure of “Israel’s” plan to change Iran’s government. According to Israeli Channel 12, the plan involved working with minority groups inside Iran to bring about the change and install a new leadership, a strategy allegedly presented to US President Donald Trump but was never implemented. The dismissals reportedly came after the Mossad chief held the two officials responsible for the plan’s failure.
The US military is under intense pressure as the war on Iran stretches its forces and resources across the region. The Washington Post reported that US European Command chief General Alexus Grynkewich warned the Pentagon that current resources are insufficient to continue protecting “Israel”, marking an unprecedented warning that underscores the strain on the US military’s capacity. Meanwhile, Israeli media have also reported that the US war on Iran is pushing US capabilities toward their limits as the United States faces competing global crises and declining domestic support for the war.
The Yemeni Armed Forces says it carried out a drone strike against an Aramco refinery in Jizan after Saudi drones violated Yemeni airspace.
The Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF) stated on Sunday that they targeted a Saudi Aramco refinery in Jazan with a drone, stating that the operation comes as a response to Saudi drone incursions into Yemeni airspace.
Yemeni Armed Forces spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree said the forces successfully targeted the Aramco refinery in Jizan with a drone, achieving a precise hit. He said the operation came in response to Saudi drone incursions into the airspace of Yemen’s Saada and Hajjah provinces.
The announcement came after Saudi Arabia’s Energy Ministry reported earlier on Sunday that a fire had broken out at a facility belonging to Saudi Aramco’s refinery in Jizan, southwestern Saudi Arabia.
The ministry said Aramco’s industrial security firefighting teams extinguished the fire and that there were no injuries.
Over a decade of Saudi blockade on Yemen
The reported strike comes amid a broader escalation between Saudi Arabia and Yemen following the collapse of a 2022 truce, according to the Yemeni account.
In July, the Yemeni Armed Forces announced that the truce with Saudi Arabia had ended and that they would impose a maritime blockade on Saudi Arabia, following large-scale demonstrations in Sanaa and other Yemeni provinces.
The announcement was a result of the incident where Saudi Arabia launched an attack on Sanaa International Airport, which Yemen said was aimed at preventing an Iranian aircraft from landing. The aircraft was carrying a Yemeni delegation that had participated in the funeral of martyred Iranian leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei, as well as Yemeni patients, wounded people, and others stranded abroad.
The aircraft subsequently landed at Hodeidah Airport, according to the Yemeni account. The Yemeni Armed Forces later responded by targeting Abha Airport in Saudi Arabia.
Earlier this week, Mahdi al-Mashat, head of Yemen’s Supreme Political Council, warned that any party joining Saudi Arabia in its aggression and 12-year blockade against Yemen would itself be considered an aggressor, regardless of how such involvement is presented or justified.
“Whoever participates with the Saudi aggressor in its aggression and blockade against our country is an aggressor,” al-Mashat said, stressing that “Yemeni law” sets out “how to deal with hostile states.”
Addressing Riyadh, al-Mashat warned that Saudi Arabia would gain nothing even if it rallied the entire world behind it, stressing that pursuing a just and honorable peace and good-neighborly relations would come at a far lower cost than war.
Al-Mashat further stressed that “agreements do not apply retroactively,” announcing that the “blockade-for-blockade equation” remains in effect until it achieves its objectives.
Yemeni forces report strikes on Saudi-linked shipping
Following the escalation, the Yemeni Armed Forces said they targeted several oil tankers that violated a maritime ban and forced other vessels to alter their routes.
Yemen also reported attacks against Saudi oil facilities, stating that the operations were in response to attacks against Yemen and violations of its sovereignty.
In a statement, Saree said that YAF targeted Saudi troop concentrations at the Sahn al-Jinn military camp following precise monitoring of enemy movements. “These concentrations were struck, along with their warehouses, vehicles, and military equipment,” with barrages of missiles and drones, the statement read, asserting that “the strikes were top-tier and precise”.
Saree warned that any further Saudi mobilization aimed at maintaining the siege on Yemen would face an immediate response.
Reaffirming their policy of “escalation for escalation,” “siege for siege”, and “targeting Saudi military mobilizations wherever they may be,” the Yemeni Armed Forces affirmed that “they will not allow hostile plans against our country to go unanswered,” vowing that “any such aggression will be met with an immediate and forceful response.”
Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) spokesperson Brigadier General Hossein Mohebbi said on Sunday that the United States has admitted defeat in its war on the Islamic Republic, noting that the Strait of Hormuz turns to be a geographical battleground rather than an economic passage.
Addressing at a ceremony marking Journalists’ Day in Bandar Abbas, Brig. Gen. Mohebbi said that the war on Iran is the only war in which the United States has admitted defeat without achieving any gains.
He emphasized that “unwavering resistance and defeating the enemy remain our unchangeable strategy”.
The Islamic Republic “quickly forced its adversaries to abandon their objectives and seek the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz,” he stated.
Brig. Gen. Mohebbi said geography, after years of being sidelined in military calculations, has returned forcefully to the center of warfare.
Strait of Hormuz has become more than an economic corridor, he said, adding that the strategic waterway is now a “tool of power and war” in global confrontations.
Meanwhile, the Iranian commander emphasized the role of media in the latest confrontation.
“Today, the media is not only a narrator of war, but itself one of the main and formative dimensions of the war,” he said, describing journalists as frontline officers in the cognitive battlefield.
Source: Iranian media (translated and edited by Al-Manar)
Independent journalist David Hundeyin has exposed the Pentagon’s new psychological operations unit targeting Africa, “Drongo Company”. Tasked with “expanding the military’s ability to influence foreign audiences” across the continent, its heavily hyped launch occurs against a backdrop of dramatically and irreversibly waning Western influenceand power in every sphere across the continent. As Africans steadily rid themselves of unwelcome foreign occupiers and oppressors, the US is forced to rely on strategies of manipulation to stem the tide, which have already failed spectacularly. They will surely misfire yet again.
Based in Fort Bragg, North Carolina – home to AFRICOM – Drongo Company’s nickname is inspired by a bird native to Africa, known for precisely imitating other species’ warning calls, and using other deception tactics to drive other animals away from food. The Pentagon reportedly “selected the name to reflect the unit’s focus on influencing perceptions and behavior.” Fittingly, a May 2014Science paper found the drongo can mimic other species’ sounds and manipulate adversaries with unparalleled,almost human sophistication.
Task & Purpose notes Drongo Company’s creation “comes amid a shift in US military strategy in Africa,” which is quite an understatement. Washington is on the run across the continent, with combat units and occupation forces being withdrawn from multiple countries over recent years. In September 2024, over 1,000 soldiers departed Niger, while a $100 million drone base was abandoned. An anti-ISIS mission in Nigeria controversially launchedthis March was abruptly terminated in July, due to a cataclysmic inability to achieve its objectives.
Drongo Company is an attempt by the Empire to reassert narrative dominance over Africa, as its military capabilities across the continent and beyond constantly shrink in size and potency. An official US Army report openly states, “the art of psyops relies on persuasion rather than physical force.” This entails the exploitation of “mental factors…to evoke specific emotions, attitudes and behaviors.” The ultimate goal “is to persuade enemy, neutral and friendly nations and forces to take favorable actions toward the US and its allies.”
Drongo Company’s official launch ceremony
An AFRICOM factsheeton psyops claims local campaigns are targeted at militant groups, such as Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, and ISIS. Parenthetical mention is also made to “malign state actors” being targets, in the context of advancing “US interests.” As a Military.com report acknowledges, this is a reference to “competition with foreign governments.” Specifically, “Russia and China have expanded their political, economic and security activities across Africa” in recent years, which the Empire has been singularly unable to counter via military force.
Drongo Company is thus being deployed for “an information contest that extends beyond conventional battlefields.” The Pentagon is extremely sensitive, however, to “skeptical audiences” seeing through their psyops. Military.com further notes while AFRICOM claims its psychological operations adhere strictly to US law and Pentagon policies prohibiting targeting US citizens, these prohibitions only apply to intended audiences. There are no mechanisms in place preventing Stateside spectators being deluged – theoretically illegally – with Drongo Company’s sophisticated, clandestine military psychological warfare offensives, especially online.
Quite some informational assault is planned. Drongo Company will wage its psyops campaigns via “both established and emerging communication technologies…[including] print media, radio broadcasts, text messaging, direct engagement, television programming, social media platforms, and online resources.” These information sources will be blitzed with “persuasive messages intended to change how selected audiences think or act.” The need to “ensure targeted audiences consider…messages credible” is of paramount importance. After all, “adversaries or skeptical audiences” will reflexively dismiss obvious “American propaganda”:
“Drongo Company’s effectiveness will depend on more than its ability to produce messages. Its soldiers will need regional and cultural knowledge, language skills, accurate intelligence and credible African partners capable of reaching communities that may distrust communications associated with the US military.”
‘Role Players’
Strikingly, Drongo Company is formally part of the US Army’s notorious 7th Psychological Operations Battalion. The Pentagon’s premier psychological warfare unit, since May 2022 7th POBhas released a series of disturbing, abstract recruitment videos.In the first, dramatic, rapid cut scenes are interspersed with eerie, monochrome cartoon clips, backed by an aggressive soundtrack. All along, text on the screen proclaims:
“You’ll find us in the shadows, at the tip of the spear. War is evolving, and all the world’s a stage. Anything we touch is a weapon. We can deceive, persuade, change, influence, inspire…We are everywhere.”
Despite such ominous hype, Drongo Company’s activation suggests a longstanding, initially much-vaunted 7th POB unit previously “forged for Africa” operational from 2017 onwards fell far short of its bold objectives. In February that year, the US Army published anessay celebratingthe new psyops division’s launch. It revealed how the unit’s operatives were deployed “into the gray zones of Africa where alliances can be fluid and the people are as diverse as the many landscapes,” following elaborate training exercises in Florida:
“Influencing a population to create lasting change when you don’t look, sound, or dress like that population is a tricky proposition. Cultural training, language proficiency, and an indigenous approach can go pretty far towards closing the gap, but true effectiveness is only achieved through airtight relationships with host nation partners.”
Hence, training saw 7th Psychological Operations Battalion operatives deployed to simulated environments in the fictional African nation of Conch Republic. Under the exercise’s auspices, “the government of Conch had requested support from the US Embassy” to combat “a bevy of societal problems from drug trafficking to domestic terrorism, to combat these ills.” It featured live-action components, in which US police and Navy operatives and African “civic leaders” were “role players”, with detailed characters.
Their roles included “local radio disc jockeys, roving reporters, and even the police” in the fictional African country, who “would ambush teams in broad daylight and attempt to gain information, curry favor, or even solicit a bribe to make a tough situation disappear.” A synthetic local social media infrastructure was also constructed – “a dynamic, reactive and proactive environment…with analogs to Facebook, Twitter, and even Craigslist.” Through this online nexus, the Battalion could “affect and inform” different Conch Republic audiences.
A role-played Conch Republic border security ‘interrogates’ 7th POB operative
The social media simulation reportedly “provided an invaluable feedback mechanism that showed which messages were heard and to what extent they were understood.” Elsewhere, “the unit broke new ground…through the use of new communications equipment and series development software,” utilising a variety of “information transmission devices…useful in influence campaigns.” Resultantly, 7th POB operatives could supposedly “hit the ground” when deployed to Africa, delivering “cogent, impactful” psyops “aimed right at the heart of the population”:
“By all accounts, the juice is worth the squeeze. Community leaders take pride in supporting a high caliber exercise, the partnered agencies have found unique ways to meet their own training objectives through the scenarios, and the teams heading out the door are better prepared; prepared to amplify African solutions to African challenges, and prepared to survive if the world falls down around them.”
‘Indigenous Approach’
The US Army essay on 7th POB’s then-new African assignment revealed, “there’s a saying in the PSYOP community” – “[Army Special Operations Forces] makes change happen. PSYOP makes change last.” A senior military advisor to the division boasted how 7th POB’s activities represented the apotheosis of US psychological operations – “a place where science and technique blend.” The essay bombastically concluded by characterising psyops as “the long game, where changes in behavior are measured not over a deployment, but often over years.”
Judged by this metric, the “long game” played by 7th POB throughout the continent over the past decade has been decisively lost. In May, AFRICOM commander Dagvin Anderson laid bare in Congressional testimonyhow a “75% reduction” in US military and intelligence “posture” regionally during this time – “coupled with a drawdown of allies in the region” – has produced a “black hole” in Africa. He lamented at length how this gaping chasm in Western dominance has been rapidly filled by China, Iran and Russia.
Beijing’s “aggressive investments” in Africa’s “mining, infrastructure, and transportation sectors” have supplanted Western control over “critical minerals and strategic infrastructure.” On top of major profit hits and supply chain disruption, China’s increasing domination in industrial fields reliant on these resources – ranging from “electric vehicles, consumer electronics, and advanced military technologies” – represents “a structural vulnerability for the US Defense Industrial Base.” Meanwhile, Russia’s rising economic and military footprint on the continent is “undermining US influence and limiting NATO’s reach on its southern flank.”
Anderson claimed Russian paramilitary forces “insulate and protect regimes” in Africa with which Moscow has close relations, “under the guise of counter-terrorism operations.” However, the AFRICOM chief contradictorily acknowledged the threat of extremist militancy throughout the region Russian military advisors seek to deter was very real. In particular, Anderson cited how Al Qaeda-affiliate JNIM aims to destabilise the revolutionary governments of Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, to the “extent of securing the resources and trappings of a nation state” in the manner of ISIS.
AFRICOM’s commander neglected to mention how France and Ukraine have heavily supportedJNIM’s counter-revolutionary activities in the Sahel. An April essay published by Militarnyi, Kiev’s most prominentmilitary news site, makes clear the objective of these military and intelligence machinations is out-and-out regime change, explicitly in service of furthering the Empire’s interests in Africa. Drongo Company must be understood as the psychological warfare component of this proxy assault on the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), and continent more widely.
Evidently, Africans must remain vigilant. Counter-revolutionary forces seen and unseen are perpetually on the offensive, determined to shatter national and continental unity, strangle sovereignty, and ensure the region remains dominated by pliant and brutal puppet regimes facilitating untrammelled Western economic rape and pillage. Yet, 7th POB’s supposed “cultural training, language proficiency, and indigenous approach” from 2017 onwards soundtracked an absolutely extraordinary collapse in the Empire’s clout throughout Africa. Drongo Company’s repeat attempt may end with Washington’s final, long-overdue retreat from the continent entirely.
No state or security body offers a single, systematic account of how Israeli agents are used, why they are recruited, or what services they ultimately provide. Outside experienced state institutions, universities and research centers rarely undertake such scrutiny. Israeli academia is the notable exception.
Israeli universities form part of the wider intelligence ecosystem through research, graduates, and seminars conducted with the security services and military. They produce personnel, assess institutional performance – as they have done since Operation Al-Aqsa Flood – and examine intelligence work in detail.
The Second Annual Israeli Conference on Intelligence Studies, held at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem on 28–29 October 2025 under the title “Intelligence Transformations After Failure,” is one open example. No comparable body of work has emerged from Arab and Islamic institutions.
Accounts from current and former security practitioners, alongside cases involving agents both living and dead, reveal an intelligence pyramid: a layered system of recruitment, cultivation, and deployment built around the value of the intelligence sought and the risks demanded of each spy.
Level one: Building the picture
At the base of the pyramid is information gathering, a task common to almost every category of recruited agent, though the value and type of information vary widely. Israeli services generally separate the agent or cell collecting intelligence from the cell carrying out an operation. The roles sometimes overlap, but collection remains the gateway to action.
An agent may gather information during a probationary phase, without knowing what it will be used for or whether others are working alongside him, simultaneously or in sequence, inside or outside the same organization.
Then come the “mosaic collectors,” who move beyond isolated fragments. They, too, may not see the complete picture, but their assignments are more complex. Instead of passing a single detail or photograph, they may track a person’s movements and relationships in depth, or map an entire process, such as an organization’s purchase of motorcycles or communications equipment.
One recent Lebanese case involved a detainee later released by the judiciary despite the sensitivity of his alleged mission. According to security sources familiar with the file, he was instructed to mount specialized equipment on a vehicle and drive through selected areas, harvesting data from internet routers in homes and institutions and attempting to penetrate them.
A second, recurring example comes from Palestine: the penetration of external training chains. Trainees sent to courses in Lebanon, Syria before the government’s fall, and Iran before the war on Gaza were exposed.
At times, the training bodies themselves were compromised and discovered concealed cameras in equipment covers. The breach then operated at three levels – inside the organization, along the training chain, and within the host institution.
Higher up are agents with access to sensitive files or influence inside a faction’s military or security apparatus. Their task may be to construct a picture of a company, battalion, brigade, division, or specialist unit. No single member normally sees an entire arena or organization; that degree of access is usually confined to a political bureau, military, or jihadi council.
One battalion in northern Gaza was penetrated before the current war, specifically in 2021. The agent held considerable authority and ranked roughly third in its command structure, yet still lacked a complete map of the battalion’s tunnels.
Israeli handlers therefore supplied him with military boots resembling those worn by resistance fighters. A tracking device was hidden inside, and he was told only to walk through the tunnels, allowing Israel to chart the network.
After the breach was discovered – having paralyzed operations in that area during the Sword of Jerusalem battle – the agent fled to Europe. A counterintelligence operation later lured him back to Gaza by making him believe suspicion had passed.
He was arrested, and the source of the breach was exposed. Security sources inform The Cradle that the discovery spared the battalion from destruction in the latest war and helped turn the border area into a persistent problem for Israeli forces until the final stages.
The battalion commander responded through trial and error, creating separate tunnel routes and branches and preventing any one fighter from moving through all of them or taking part in the entire excavation process.
Yet the same agent escaped prison shortly before Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. That extraordinary story lies beyond the scope of this investigation, though one detail is telling: another agent facilitated his escape.
At the top of this first level stands the source of “golden information” – intelligence decisive to a major operation, particularly an assassination. It may reveal a figure who has never been photographed, identify a safe house, or confirm a target’s presence during the final moments before a strike.
Some such agents have been killed by mistake; others, sources say, were deliberately abandoned when Israel judged that they had nothing more to offer or could not be extracted.
Technology has made field agents harder to detect and reduced the need for some older practices. At the beginning of the Second Intifada, for example, agents could be ordered to mark a building with a laser before an airstrike.
Such tasks are less necessary today because Israel already possesses extensive maps of public bodies – municipalities, governorates, and ministries – as well as many overt and covert resistance sites.
Israeli military publications openly use the Hebrew term yediat zahav – “golden information” – for decisive, current intelligence extracted from a mass of raw data. In resistance environments, invoking such intelligence can also fuel suspicion that a senior agent exists, even when the information was obtained through technical surveillance.
Where the source is human, investigations repeatedly show that an Israeli service may spend years and large sums cultivating one person for a single disclosure. The assassination of Yahya Ayyash is a prominent example.
The collaborator who enabled the operation was bound to be exposed because he supplied both the identifying information and the instrument of assassination – a booby-trapped mobile phone. With no plausible alternative suspect, an escape or extraction plan had to be prepared in advance.
Level two: Agents in the field
Information gathering already demands work on the ground – photography, surveillance, communications, and impersonation among them. Direct field missions require a different class of agent. Security sources estimate that nearly all must meet their handlers inside Israel or abroad and receive either task-specific instruction or broader operational training.
At the bottom are what security practitioners describe as “cheap missions”: assignments carrying minimal risk, with exposure more likely to result from chance or a basic mistake than from the work itself. These include leaving communications devices, messages, or cash at “dead drops.” Such tasks usually require little training and are assigned gradually.
A dead drop is selected after studying a country’s geography and population patterns. One agent leaves the material; another retrieves it without knowing the first and sometimes for an entirely different operation. Many recruits with reasonable collection skills can perform these tasks. They remain below the risk threshold reserved for more experienced and intensively trained agents.
The next rung involves logistics. This involves obtaining communications equipment, buying or renting homes and vehicles, or securing other tools later used by operational cells.
From there, the work can become far more dangerous. Agents may tamper with resistance weapons or insert tracking chips into them, including RPG and Kornet anti-armor rounds and even missiles or their explosive warheads. Others plant surveillance devices. At this point, the agent generally understands exactly what the mission entails.
In one prominent example, a single agent working in a manufacturing workshop belonging to an Islamic organization in Gaza was responsible for the deaths of at least 30 operatives between 2008 and 2012 by planting tracking devices in the rockets they launched, as well as weakening the explosive material in the warheads.
Having joined from another organization, he cultivated an image of exceptional devotion to deflect suspicion, even carrying wounded comrades on his shoulders while performing tawaf around the Kaaba.
Although eventually exposed, he escaped Gaza and, according to the same sources, still holds an official post in a Muslim-majority country.
At the summit are the hardest assignments: planting explosives or carrying out assassinations directly. Israel embraced this route only more extensively during the past decade. For years, a basic assumption among Palestinian and Lebanese investigators held that Israel killed only by Israeli hands. That premise often led inquiries to discount a local perpetrator from the outset.
The 2010 assassination of Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai reinforced that belief. The large team seen on Emirati surveillance footage used foreign passports; many were believed to be Jewish. But subsequent cases in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran indicate that Israel has sought to reduce the risks borne by Jewish operatives, Arabic-speaking Israeli agents, and Druze or Bedouin recruits by transferring more of the execution phase to local assets.
The March 2017 assassination of freed prisoner Mazen Fuqaha in Gaza exposed the limits of the old assumption. Fuqaha, a commander in the Qassam Brigades, was responsible for supporting military activity in the occupied West Bank. Investigators faced a missing link. Even after a Palestinian agent confessed, some remained convinced that an Israeli special unit must have entered Gaza to carry out the shooting.
Nearly nine years later, on 5 February 2026, Netanyahu publicly acknowledged Israel’s responsibility for Fuqaha’s assassination. He confirmed that the killing was carried out through recruitment of a Palestinian collaborator, Ashraf Abu Leila, who shot Fuqaha outside his home in the Tel al-Hawa neighborhood in Gaza City.
The disclosure was unlikely to have been casual. Its timing came as Palestinian resistance movements were conducting sweeping reviews of their security and military performance after Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.
The following day, Al Jazeera broadcast an investigation into armed groups in Gaza accused of serving Israel.
The program included material on local militia members used to track targets and carry out armed tasks. One case involved two men assigned to kill a wanted figure with a suppressed weapon. One was captured despite having received little training and not being a long-serving recruit – another departure from the model that prevailed before Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.
During Israel’s June 2025 war on Iran, Israeli messaging sought to portray every ground operation as the work of Mossad officers. Field investigations and sources following the cases point to a different picture. Iranian Jews living abroad, migrants, and their descendants accounted for only a small share of those allegedly involved.
Level three: Re-engineering the enemy
At the highest level, the selection, conduct, and mission of an agent change fundamentally. Israel studies a target organization strategically, seeking to dismantle it or redirect its course. The work demands highly placed, carefully cultivated recruits. An assignment may involve reading a leader’s behavior or tracing ideological currents across an entire movement.
One agent admitted during interrogation that his task had been limited to observing a leader’s social life and political language. He was required to remain close to a figure in an Islamic organization in Gaza who was assassinated in 2003, mapping his community relationships, recording what he said away from the media, and assessing whether he belonged to the movement’s “hawk” or “dove” camp. The findings helped determine Israel’s targeting priorities.
Past Israeli statements and signals support the view that assassinations, particularly of political figures, are not always ordered for immediate military reasons. A killing can create a vacancy in a movement’s hierarchy.
Israeli planners then anticipate who will fill it and whether that successor better suits their objectives. In effect, an organization’s political trajectory can be re-engineered while its members believe they are responding to internal circumstances.
The practice is old. It dates at least to the rivalry between Fatah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). This was a time when Israeli services sought to exploit disputes within and between Palestinian factions and used agents to deepen them.
During periods of intense military escalation, anyone who appears on the radar may be killed as Israel pursues the largest possible number of assassinations. The campaign unleashed after Operation Al-Aqsa Flood marked the largest exception of all.
The US has played a comparable game, sometimes without recruiting a conventional agent. Former CIA officer John Kiriakou described one such method in a podcast released on 29 January 2026, explaining how the agency helped fragment the Abu Nidal Organization.
Unable to penetrate the group directly, the CIA instead planted suspicion. Through direct and indirect contacts, it suggested that a senior member had been recruited. One cadre then killed another on suspicion of betrayal, setting off further internal bloodletting.
The organization was thus driven to destroy itself without the recruitment of a single agent. Its founder, Sabri Khalil al-Banna, better known as Abu Nidal, died in Baghdad in 2002. The author’s security sources maintain that Saddam Hussein had him killed after years of using his organization in external and internal operations, though the circumstances remain disputed and other accounts describe suicide.
A different strategic path requires elevating an agent into the leadership. That person needs achievements to build credibility, even if Israel must allow an operation to appear successful – or announce casualties in its own ranks – to manufacture the necessary record.
A source in Fatah’s Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades reveals to The Cradle that an operative identified as A.N. rose rapidly after an Israeli jeep was apparently destroyed by an explosive along the boundary and Israel announced one death and several injuries. A later transaction involving night-vision equipment exposed him, and he fled into the territories occupied in 1948.
The subsequent investigation found that the jeep had been remotely driven to the site of a bomb reported in advance. The explosion created a filmed “achievement,” giving the agent credibility, quicker access, and a degree of trust that was difficult to challenge.
Once an agent reaches the intended leadership tier, he may be ordered to identify additional cadres for recruitment. Another recurring task is to cultivate financial and moral corruption. The aim is to convince members that their sacrifices are being exploited for private gain. Such tactics work precisely because corruption already exists, to varying degrees, within the structures of several organizations.
One of the starkest cases uncovered by the Palestinian resistance involved a historic leader identified as M.N. He was reportedly not asked to transmit operational intelligence. Instead, his assignment was to magnify organizational failures and obstruct successful work.
Other agents were instructed to arrange commercial deals and partnerships that implicated people who were not directly recruited, widening the perception – and sometimes the reality – of corruption and exploitation.
The effort to create a negative example belongs to the same strategy. Israeli handlers may target the children of leaders whom they have failed to recruit or assassinate. Security pressures and the prolonged absence of a father who once acted as protector and disciplinarian can make those children more vulnerable. Families of martyrs face the same danger.
Palestinian and Lebanese files contain many such examples. The most politically embarrassing involve the sons of a well-known West Bank leader in an Islamic movement, one of whom publicly converted to Judaism and repeatedly entered Israel.
Whether he settled there permanently remains unclear. Such cases are rare, but Israel amplifies them to discredit the movements concerned, dishonor prominent families, and weaken their standing within Palestinian society.
The most dangerous outcome combines two tracks: assassinations designed to reorder an organization and the promotion of an agent into its senior leadership. Together, they open the way to direct influence over decisions and strategy. The danger is greatest after the killing of historic figures who cannot easily be replaced.
Israel’s intelligence services invest for the long term. They study the remaining leaders, their histories of disagreement, and the character of each relationship, then seek to create friction inside the organization. As sources familiar with these files put it, the intended result is to weaken effectiveness, waste effort, and expose structures.
That investment can consume enormous human resources. Specialists may spend a decade or more building a single subject’s biography – from his waking hour and favorite foods to his relationships and most closely guarded secrets.
In several cases, such intimate knowledge has ended in assassination. The spy’s service to Israel is therefore measured by more than the secret he steals or the device he plants. At its highest level, it lies in helping the occupation reshape an adversary from within, long before the target recognizes that its choices are no longer entirely its own.
Menasheh, Asher, Dan, and Naphtali are the names of the Jewish tribes that the Zionist invaders claim that they had settled in South Lebanon, reaching Sidon City, during the alleged Second Temple period.
Such claims aim at securing a “historical right” for the Zionists to return to Lebanon and consider it as the “land of ancestors” just as the case of Palestine.
These claims are no longer theoretical interpretations, yet they have become settler policies implemented by the extremist movements, like Uri Tzafon, with the support of the Zionist government.
Uri Tzafon — whose name means “Awaken, wind from the north” in Hebrew — seeks to push the Zionist entity’s northern border to the Litani River, about 30 kilometers north of the Blue Line. Several figures on Israel’s far right have advocated for the creation of settlements in Lebanon. In May, Israeli “National Security” Minister Itamar Ben Gvir said ‘Israel’ had a “settlement plan for Lebanon.”
The movement has been benefitting recently from the Israeli occupation of dozens of South Lebanon towns in order to carry out several settler activities.
A video showing four women from Uri Tzafon swimming in the Hasbani River in southern Lebanon has circulated widely on social media over the past 24 hours. It marks the second recent incursion by members of this far-right Israeli movement, which brings together several Israeli settler families and advocates for the establishment of settlements in Lebanon.
Youssof Yitzhak Bin David, a member of Uri Tzafon Movement, said: “We consider that South Lebanon is part of the land of Israel, just as Tel Aviv, Ra’anana, and Al-Quds.”
Shinoer Weber, a Zionist political analyst, underlined the importance of building settlements in South Lebanon, where the Zionist soldiers are deployed, in order to defend Israel’s security.
Mohammad Baqer Zolghadr, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said on Saturday that the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed unless the United States changes its conduct toward Iran.
Zolghadr outlined several conditions that Tehran considers necessary for Washington to correct its conduct, including a commitment to never threaten Iran “in any language, and never insulting the sacred values of this nation.”
“Ending the war and aggression against Iran and its allies in Lebanon, Palestine, Yemen, and Iraq, permanently,” Zolghadr added.
Other points include:
Lifting the naval blockade and withdrawing its military forces (naval and air) from around Iran.
Paying, without any reduction or compromise, compensation for the two aggressive wars imposed on Iran.
Lifting the unjust and illegal sanctions imposed on the Iranian people.
Releasing, unconditionally, the assets of the Iranian people that have been frozen and stolen.
“These are the demands of the Iranian people, which they have chanted for 160 days during their presence in the streets and squares,” he added. “The Supreme National Security Council will never back down, neither in war nor in negotiations.”
Iran, Oman make headway toward Strait of Hormuz shipping deal
Zolghadr’s remarks come as Iran and Oman continue discussions over arrangements for maritime navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.
The talks are focused on establishing a framework for navigation involving the two states bordering the strategic waterway, with Tehran maintaining that any maritime arrangement must be coordinated with Iran.
The negotiations have included discussions over the legal and technical mechanisms governing navigation, including the possibility of establishing a new maritime route.
Iranian and Omani military and naval officials have also been holding discussions based on available maps to determine the route.
The talks are ongoing amid Strait of Hormuz tensions and competing approaches to its management. Tehran has rejected the involvement of third parties in determining navigation arrangements and has insisted that any reopening must take into account Iran’s security and sovereignty concerns.
The emerging Iran-Oman understanding therefore represents a parallel diplomatic track to Tehran’s broader demands toward Washington.
While negotiations with Muscat address the practical and technical dimensions of maritime navigation, Iran’s conditions toward the United States concern the wider political, military, and economic circumstances surrounding the Strait.
For Tehran, the question of reopening the waterway is consequently tied not only to shipping arrangements but also to the cessation of military pressure, the removal of sanctions, and the resolution of what Iran considers outstanding violations and losses.
The deal, which establishes that an armed attack on one signatory will be treated as an attack on all three, risks drawing Islamabad deeper into Middle Eastern rivalries
Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif (right), Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (centre) and Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (left) meet in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, on 7 August 2026 to sign a joint defence agreement (Handout/Turkish Presidency Press Office/AFP)
A new security pact between Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey is reshaping the Middle East’s strategic map, bringing together three of the Muslim world’s most influential powers under a collective defence framework.
Named after the holy city where it was signed on Friday, the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement stipulates that an attack against one member is an attack against all three.
Echoing Nato’s Article 5, the clause gives the pact immediate geopolitical significance, even as the joint statement leaves specific military commitments vague.
For Pakistan, the world’s only nuclear-armed Muslim-majority state, the accord marks a striking departure from its traditionally cautious stance as a regional mediator.
By standing alongside Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President , Islamabad is positioning its armed forces as a potential security guarantor at the heart of an emerging axis spanning South Asia and the Gulf.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
The pact signals a potentially significant shift. As the long-standing regional order anchored by Washington comes under increasing strain amid war and shifting alliances, Middle Eastern powers are seeking to take greater control of their own security, with Pakistan’s nuclear and conventional military capabilities potentially providing a new anchor.
The deal also comes as the Middle East’s traditional security order faces unprecedented strain.
The US and Israeli war on Iran has transformed the regional strategic landscape, with direct strikes reaching Saudi territory and commercial shipping severely disrupted across both the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea.
“All three countries have a shared economic and security interest in preventing further escalation, which ultimately compelled them to sign the pact,” a Pakistani security official monitoring the region told Middle East Eye on condition of anonymity.
Disruptions to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz have affected supplies of Saudi energy and fertilisers, sending shock waves through the global economy. Import-dependent countries such as Pakistan and Turkey have been among those particularly exposed to the disruption.
‘All three countries have a shared economic and security interest in preventing further escalation, which ultimately compelled them to sign the pact’
– Pakistani security official
But the security calculus is even more consequential.
Both Saudi Arabia and Turkey have experienced attacks linked to the broader regional conflict, while Islamabad and Ankara remain deeply concerned about cross-border instability spilling over from their lengthy frontiers with Iran.
Ankara faces an additional security dilemma: the prospect that the arming of Iranian Kurdish militias by external powers could unravel its fragile, hard-won peace process with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK.
The wider conflict has also emboldened Iran and its Houthi allies in Yemen, who have escalated direct attacks on Saudi territory.
For Gulf leaders, the failure of traditional US security guarantees to deter such strikes has raised questions about Washington’s reliability as a security partner.
The result is a decisive push by regional heavyweights to construct defence arrangements that rely less on external guarantees.
Former Pakistani ambassador Asif Durrani described the pact as the “first concrete building block of an emerging regional security architecture”, arguing that it signals a move towards greater regional ownership of security.
“If this momentum continues, it could open the door to addressing decades-old conflicts, including the enduring Palestinian issue, through a more regionally driven approach,” Durrani wrote on X.
Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan sign defence pact
Analysts emphasise that the pact is not an isolated development, but rather the culmination of deepening trilateral cooperation.
Michael Kugelman, senior fellow for South Asia at the Atlantic Council, described the pact as “a logical outgrowth of deepening security ties” among the three countries in recent months.
It builds upon existing foundations. Riyadh and Islamabad signed a bilateral mutual defence agreement in late 2025, which saw roughly 8,000 Pakistani troops, fighter jets and air defence systems deployed to the kingdom, while Turkey remains a major defence supplier to both nations.
For Washington, the pact could be particularly welcome.
With its major focus on collective regional deterrence, with an eye to Iran, “it’ll be received well in Washington, which wants to see more burden-sharing from top allies”, Kugelman said on X.
An economic lifeline in military uniform
For Pakistan, however, the pact is about more than geopolitics. It is also deeply connected to the country’s economic vulnerabilities, analysts said.
The pact marks a notable shift for Islamabad, which spent recent months positioning itself as a diplomatic bridge between Washington and Tehran.
While Pakistan helped broker the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding in June to temporarily halt regional hostilities, subsequent escalations narrowed its neutral stance. For a government battling persistent inflation and fiscal distress, strategic defence policy is now increasingly inseparable from financial necessity.
Historically, Pakistan has leveraged its military strength to secure economic backing, particularly from the US and Saudi Arabia.
This collective defence framework institutionalises that model, allowing Islamabad to monetise its operational capabilities, ranging from joint training and troop deployments to arms exports, in exchange for vital Gulf investments, energy concessions and diplomatic support.
For Riyadh, Pakistan offers access to a large, experienced military with decades of combat and counterinsurgency experience. For Islamabad, closer security cooperation with Saudi Arabia offers the prospect of investment, financial assistance and a stronger economic relationship with one of the region’s most powerful states.
“In this sense, Pakistan’s military strength is becoming an economic asset as well as a strategic one,” the security official told MEE.
Saudi money, Turkish technology, Pakistani military power
The emerging partnership also brings together three distinct forms of strategic power.
Sheharyar Khan, a political analyst and senior adviser at Pakistan’s Ministry of Law and Justice, described the emerging combination as one in which Saudi Arabia provides the financial power, Turkey contributes technological innovation, and Pakistan supplies core military capability.
‘Together, the three countries could form a security partnership whose capabilities extend far beyond traditional troop deployment’
– Sheharyar Khan, political analyst
“Together, the three countries could form a security partnership whose capabilities extend far beyond traditional troop deployments,” Khan told MEE.
Each state brings a complementary asset. Saudi Arabia, home to Islam’s holiest sites, provides vast capital, energy market dominance and regional diplomatic weight.
Turkey, which operates Nato’s second-largest military, has an advanced and increasingly self-reliant defence industry, including expertise in unmanned aerial systems, electronic warfare and precision-guided munitions, reducing reliance on foreign suppliers.
Pakistan contributes a massive, combat-hardened army and the Muslim world’s sole nuclear deterrent.
The risk of entrapment
Yet the agreement also carries significant risks for Pakistan, experts said.
Iran’s response to the pact has been swift and critical.
“The Saudis should know that a paper agreement with Turkey and Pakistan does not bring them security, just as years of unilateral milking of the Americans did not bring them security,” Ebrahim Rezaei, a member of Iran’s parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, wrote on X, dismissing the arrangement.
The response underscores Islamabad’s fundamental dilemma: deepening involvement in Gulf defence architecture risks fracturing its delicate, traditionally cautious relationship with Tehran.
Analysts warn of “entrapment”, the danger of Pakistan being dragged into foreign confrontations that do not serve its own national interests.
Historically, Pakistan has avoided direct entanglements in Middle Eastern power struggles. Its parliament famously declined to join the Saudi-led Islamabad Memorandum coalition in 2015 because of domestic political and sectarian concerns.
Home to a large Shia minority, some of whom see Iranian clergy as political and religious guides, Pakistan must also ensure that closer alignment with Saudi Arabia and Turkey is not perceived at home as an anti-Iranian stance that could inflame internal sectarian fault lines.
‘Muslim security bloc’
The agreement has sparked intense debate over whether it could evolve into a broader, multi-nation security bloc across the Muslim world.
Retired senior Pakistani military official Muhammad Saeed suggested that additional Muslim countries from the region, and potentially beyond, could eventually join the framework.
Bab al-Mandeb: US war on Iran gives Houthis new leverage over Saudi Arabia
But he cautioned that military power alone would not determine the success of such an arrangement.
“For Muslim states, the real and collective strength will not come only through military capabilities but primarily through long-term investments and collaboration in knowledge, innovation, discipline, character, and tolerant interpretation of sectarian sentiment,” he wrote on X.
The prospect of a more cohesive security grouping has already attracted attention in Israel.
In February, former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett explicitly warned against Turkey seeking a “hostile axis” with Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities, “to surround Israel”.
Analysts, however, argue that Pakistan’s nuclear status inevitably changes the strategic calculations surrounding the pact.
For Saudi Arabia, closer defence ties with Islamabad could provide an additional layer of deterrence at a time when the kingdom faces threats from Iran while also navigating its relationship with Israel.
The India factor
The pact also has implications far beyond the Middle East.
For Pakistan, closer ties with Saudi Arabia and Turkey could provide a strategic counterweight to India.
While Saudi Arabia maintains extensive economic and trade ties with New Delhi, the collective defence framework further strengthens Pakistan’s role as a security partner for key Gulf powers.
Although India’s Ministry of External Affairs responded cautiously, saying that New Delhi was “closely following developments”, Indian national security analysts are monitoring the situation with growing concern.
“While most are obviously seeing this from a Middle East lens, it impacts other theatres as well. Pakistan’s conflict-laden relationship with India [is] at the top of that list,” Kabir Taneja, executive director of the Middle East programme at the Observer Research Foundation, a New Delhi-based think tank, wrote on X.
Former Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal, in a post on X, described the pact as “a very negative development for Indian interests”, suggesting that India expand its strategic options with the United Arab Emirates, Israel, Greece, Cyprus and Afghanistan.
Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. To learn more about republishing this content and the associated fees, please fill out this form. More about MEE can be found here.
لم يعد الحديث عن الجولة الثامنة من مفاوضات روما يقتصر على البحث في آليات تثبيت وقف إطلاق النار أو توسيع ما يُعرف بـ«المناطق النموذجية». المشهد مختلف تماماً. إسرائيل لا تفاوض على الانسحاب، بل على شكل لبنان الأمني والسياسي بعد الحرب، فيما تبدو السلطة اللبنانية عاجزة عن فرض أي تعديل على قواعد اللعبة التي تُفرض عليها.
وقد خرج وفد السلطة من الجولة السابعة من دون أي اختراق يُذكر. فالرفض الإسرائيلي لإدراج بنت جبيل والخيام وزوطر الشرقية ضمن المرحلة التالية من الخطة لم يكن مجرّد موقف تفاوضي، بل رسالة واضحة بأن تل أبيب تعتبر أن لبنان لم يلبِّ بعد الشروط المطلوبة، وأن أي انسحاب إضافي لن يحصل قبل تنفيذ أجندة أمنية كاملة تتجاوز بكثير حدود القرار 1701. في المقابل، لا تخفي واشنطن تأييدها لهذا المسار، بل تبدو شريكاً كاملاً في رسمه. فالمعادلة المطروحة باتت واضحة: لا إعادة إعمار، ولا انسحاب، ولا استقرار طويل الأمد، قبل الانتقال إلى معالجة ملف سلاح حزب الله بصورة عملية، وليس عبر تعهّدات سياسية عامة.
وبحسب معلومات «الأخبار» فإن وفد السلطة السياسي عمد كما في كل مرة إلى تعطيل عمل الوفد العسكري في المفاوضات، وكاد أن يتورّط في الموافقة على طلب إسرائيل أن يجري توسيع المنطقة التجريبية لتشمل قرى فرون وقلاوية وبرج قلاوية والغندورية، وهي قرى غير مُحتلة أساساً، ويريد العدو أن يقوم الجيش بتفتيش منازلها والتضييق على حركة السكان، وعُلم أن رئيس وفد السلطة السفير سيمون كرم قال للمندوب الإسرائيلي إنه موافق على أن يقوم الجيش اللبناني بتفتيش 40% من منازل اللبنانيين في كامل منطقة جنوب نهر الليطاني، قبل أن تحصل مداخلات أكّد خلالها الوفد العسكري بأن الجيش لا يقوم بأي عمل في أراضٍ تقع تحت سلطته إلا وفق ما ينص عليه القانون، وأنه غير معنيّ بأي بحث في آليات عمله مع الجانب الإسرائيلي، وطلب في المقابل من الجانب الأميركي إقناع إسرائيل بالانسحاب من الأراضي المحتلة مع ضمانة الجيش بأن يتم إلغاء أي وجود عسكري أو أسلحة فيها. لكنّ الجانب الأميركي رفض المُقترح بعدما أعلنت إسرائيل أنها غير مُستعِدّة للبحث في أي منطقة تجريبية جديدة في المدى المنظور.
وبحسب المصادر فإن كلاماً سياسياً قيل على هامش المفاوضات في بيروت وروما وواشنطن، وركّز على أن الإدارة الأميركية لا تجد نفسها «قادرة على الضغط على إسرائيل»، ما دفعها إلى إبلاغ سلطة الوصاية في لبنان بأنه من الأفضل التفاهم على منع أي تصعيد من خلال تمديد قرار وقف إطلاق النار وانتظار نتائج الانتخابات المقبلة في كيان الاحتلال.
على الأرض، تترجم قوات الاحتلال موقفها بالنار. فالاستهداف المباشر لجرافة الجيش اللبناني في المنصوري، خلال قيامها بفتح الطرق وإزالة الركام تمهيداً لانتشار الوحدات العسكرية، لا يمكن قراءته كحادث ميداني معزول، بل رسالة مزدوجة إلى الدولة اللبنانية التي يُطلب منها بسط سلطتها جنوباً، وإلى المجتمع الدولي الذي يروّج لفكرة أن الجيش قادر وحده على ملء الفراغ الأمني. والمفارقة أن المؤسسة العسكرية، التي يطالبها الأميركيون والإسرائيليون بتوسيع انتشارها، تجد نفسها هدفاً مباشراً للنيران الإسرائيلية، فيما لا يصدر عن الجهات الراعية للمفاوضات سوى دعوات فضفاضة إلى ضبط النفس.
وهذا التناقض يكشف أن الضغوط المُمارسة على لبنان لا تهدف إلى تمكين الدولة بقدر ما تهدف إلى فرض وقائع سياسية وأمنية جديدة تحت وطأة القوة. ولم يتوقف التصعيد عند الجيش، بل امتدّ إلى البنى التحتية والخدمات العامة، مع استهداف فرق مؤسّسة مياه لبنان الجنوبي وإحراق محطة ضخ المياه في وادي السلوقي، بالتزامن مع استمرار القصف والتفجيرات في زوطر الشرقية ووادي الحجير وكونين وزبقين وميس الجبل وحداثا وغيرها من البلدات الحدودية. وبذلك، يبدو أن إسرائيل تسعى إلى إبقاء الجنوب في حالة استنزاف دائم، بما يمنع عودة الحياة الطبيعية ويحول دون تثبيت أي وقائع ميدانية قد تعزّز الموقف اللبناني في المفاوضات.
وول ستريت جورنال: نزع سلاح حزب الله ليس سهلاً
في هذا السياق، كان لافتاً المقال الذي نشرته صحيفة «وول ستريت جورنال» الأميركية أمس من أن القوة العسكرية الإسرائيلية وحدها لن تنهي ملف سلاح حزب الله، وأن أي حل يتطلّب تسوية سياسية داخلية، وتعزيز دور الدولة والجيش اللبناني، إلى جانب الحدّ من الدعم عبر الحدود السورية. وأشارت في تقرير أعدّه صحافيان في المنطقة إلى أن أي محاولة لنزع السلاح بالقوة قد تهدّد الاستقرار الداخلي، فيما يبقى تنفيذ القرار 1701 وبسط سلطة الدولة على كامل الأراضي اللبنانية محور النقاش في المفاوضات، وسط تمسّك حزب الله بسلاحه وربط أي بحث به بانسحاب إسرائيل ووقف اعتداءاتها.
وكشفت الصحيفة أنّ مسؤولين في لبنان وأميركا وإسرائيل، يبحثون في مجموعة من الخيارات بعدما تبيّن، وفق تقييمات نقلتها عن مصادر مطّلعة، أن لا حلول سهلة لملف سلاح الحزب، نظراً إلى تشابكه مع الواقع السياسي والاجتماعي والأمني اللبناني. وتصف الصحيفة هذه الأفكار بأنها أصبحت اليوم جزءاً من النقاش بين الأطراف المعنية، بعدما كانت في السابق تُعدّ شديدة الحساسية. ونقلت «وول ستريت جورنال» عن مسؤولين أن واشنطن وتل أبيب تدرسان كذلك سبل الحدّ من وصول الدعم إلى حزب الله عبر الحدود السورية، مستفيدتين من التحوّلات التي شهدتها سوريا وتغيّر السلطة فيها، على أن يترافق ذلك مع ضغوط سياسية واقتصادية وربط بعض ملفات الدعم وإعادة الإعمار بالتقدّم في مسألة حصرية السلاح بيد الدولة.
في المقابل، حذّر التقرير من أن أي محاولة لفرض نزع السلاح بالقوة داخل لبنان قد تكون لها تداعيات خطيرة على الاستقرار الداخلي. ورأى أن حزب الله لا يمثّل مجرّد بنية عسكرية يمكن التعامل معها بعملية أمنية منفصلة، بل يشكّل أيضاً قوة سياسية واجتماعية ذات حضور واسع داخل البيئة الشيعية ومؤسسات الدولة، ما يجعل أي معالجة للملف مرتبطة بالتوازنات اللبنانية الداخلية. وأشارت الصحيفة إلى أن المسؤولين الأميركيين والإسرائيليين واللبنانيين أنفسهم يُقِرّون بعدم وجود خيار سهل أو سريع لتنفيذ عملية نزع شاملة للسلاح.
The Yemeni Armed Forces’ operation targeting Saudi military concentrations was preceded by precise intelligence gathering that enabled a “powerful, accurate, and highly focused strike,” a senior military source stated.
In remarks to Al Mayadeen, the source said the YAF’s preemptive strike caught the “Saudi enemy” by surprise, leaving it in a state of shock, confusion, and disarray.
They also stressed that Saudi Arabia had issued strict orders to withhold the names and numbers of those killed in the operation in an effort to preserve the morale of its “collapsing forces”.
The preemptive strike thwarted the Saudi-planned ground offensive
According to the source, Saudi preparations for a ground offensive had been publicly visible in recent months.
Meetings of Saudi military officers and commanders the brigades mobilized for the offensive had also been openly reported in the media, the source said.
They added that the precise preemptive strike thwarted the Saudi-planned ground offensive, whose preparations had been ongoing for a long time.
The operation also deprived Saudi Arabia of the ability to take any immediate steps to recover from the mighty blow, according to the source.
Sanaa warns KSA as Yemen maintains its ‘blockade for blockade’ stance
Meanwhile, the Sanaa government said on Thursday that the Yemeni Armed Forces’ operation targeted large Saudi military concentrations that were preparing to attack the liberated provinces.
The government affirmed that the equation of “blockade for blockade and escalation for escalation” is an irreversible option until the legitimate and just demands of the Yemeni people are met.
Addressing Saudi Arabia, the government said the “Saudi enemy must know that the Yemeni Armed Forces are on full alert and fully prepared to thwart and strike down all its plans.”
Yemen vows to press ahead as “blockade for blockade” becomes fixed
For its part, Yemen’s Supreme Political Council welcomed the Yemeni Armed Forces’ major and high-impact operation against the “Saudi enemy’s” military concentrations.
The council said that no matter how large Saudi Arabia’s military buildup becomes, it will not stop the Yemeni people from pursuing their legitimate efforts to secure their rights and lift the injustice imposed upon them.
The council also affirmed that the equation of “blockade for blockade and escalation for escalation” has become a fixed and firmly established equation.
YAF launch large-scale op. against Saudi troop concentrations
The remarks came as the Yemeni Armed Forces stepped up their response to continued Saudi aggression and blockade, with spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree announcing a large-scale operation targeting Saudi military reinforcements and reporting hundreds of casualties and significant material damage.
The Yemeni military spokesperson said the operation was a response to continued Saudi actions, stating that “in light of the criminal Saudi enemy’s persistence in continuing the siege and aggression against our dear Yemeni people for nearly 12 years, our Armed Forces monitored large Saudi military concentrations that were in their final stages, aimed at escalating against the free provinces and the Yemeni people to deter them from their position on ending the unjust siege.”
According to Saree, the operation targeted Saudi troop concentrations in the areas of al-Ruwayk, al-Abr, and al-Thaniya, as well as other camps belonging to the so-called First and Third Emergency Brigades, with a large number of ballistic missiles and drones.
This is happening as Yemen continues to confront the Saudi aggression on Sanaa, enforcing a blockade on Saudi oil vessels and conducting operations targeting Saudi assets.
The Yemeni Armed Forces announced the successful targeting of the “Daisy” Saudi oil tanker in the Gulf of Aden, using a ballistic missile that accurately achieved its objective and forced the vessel to retreat.
A statement issued by YAF spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree confirmed that the vessel was struck during the operation, as part of Sanaa’s maritime navigation ban on Saudi vessels under the “blockade for blockade” equation.
According to Saree, the Yemeni Armed Forces are closely monitoring the movements of Saudi oil tankers and will prevent any tanker from passing through the southern and northern Red Sea until the legitimate and rightful demands of the Yemeni people are met and the blockade is lifted.
Nine Saudi vessels struck in total
Earlier today, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported that a Saudi vessel was targeted in a new maritime incident 95 nautical miles southeast of Aden.
The UKMTO said it received a report of an incident involving the vessel in the Gulf of Aden area, but did not immediately provide further details regarding the nature of the attack or possible damage.
“UKMTO has received a report of an incident 95NM southeast of Aden, Yemen. The Master of a tanker reported hearing a loud explosion in close proximity to the vessel. All crew accounted for and safe. There is no environmental impact reported,” the agency said.
This followed another announcement by Saree of the targeting of a Saudi oil vessel in the northern Red Sea, marking the latest in a series of maritime operations targeting Saudi shipping.
The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported that it received a report of an incident involving a tanker 95 nautical miles southeast of Yemen’s Aden.
The vessel’s master reported hearing a loud explosion in close proximity to the tanker, while all crew members… pic.twitter.com/b84MIuGOcI
TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Tens of thousands of mourners took to the streets of Tehran on Tuesday, August 4, to observe Arbaeen in one of the country’s biggest religious gatherings held alongside the annual pilgrimage to Iraq.
Pilgrims from across the Iranian capital walked a 13-kilometer route from Imam Hussein (AS) Square in central Tehran to the holy shrine of Hazrat Abdol Azim al-Hassani (AS) in the city of Rey, commemorating Arbaeen, which marks the 40th day after the martyrdom of Imam Hussein (AS), the third Shiite Imam and grandson of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH).
To facilitate the massive procession, one of the capital’s main roads leading south to Rey was closed to vehicle traffic, allowing worshippers to complete the pilgrimage on foot in a peaceful and organized atmosphere.
The annual march drew participants from all walks of life, including families, young people, elderly pilgrims and children, many carrying black mourning flags and chanting elegies in memory of Imam Hussein (AS).
More than 3,500 service pavilions were set up along the route by volunteers, charities and religious organizations, providing pilgrims with free meals, drinking water, refreshments, medical care, accommodation and other essential services throughout the day.
The Tehran procession has become an important Arbaeen tradition in recent years, especially for residents who describe themselves as the “left behind” because they are unable to travel to Iraq for the main Arbaeen pilgrimage. Instead, they undertake the symbolic journey to Rey as an expression of devotion to Imam Hussein (AS) and the ideals of sacrifice and justice that he represents.
Arbaeen is observed as a national holiday in Iran and is one of the holiest occasions for Shiite Muslims worldwide. The commemoration honors the sacrifice of Imam Hussein (AS), who was martyred along with his loyal companions in the Battle of Karbala in 680 AD after refusing to pledge allegiance to the Umayyad ruler Yazid.
Meanwhile, millions of pilgrims from Iran and dozens of other countries have gathered in the Iraqi holy city of Karbala to participate in the main Arbaeen pilgrimage and visit the shrine of Imam Hussein (AS). Widely regarded as the world’s largest annual religious gathering, the event attracts millions of participants every year, including Muslims and followers of other faiths, who come together to pay tribute to the enduring legacy of the Imam.
أكّد الأمين العام لحزب الله الشيخ نعيم قاسم، اليوم الثلاثاء، أنّ “المقاومة مستمرة ما دام الاحتلال موجوداً”، وأنّه “ستجري مواجهة من ينخرط في المشروع الإسرائيلي”.
وفي كلمة بمناسبة أربعين الإمام الحسين، قال الشيخ قاسم: “نؤمن بلبنان الواحد الموحد غير القابل للقسمة ولا للتنازل عن الأرض”، مشدداً على أنّ “الخيار الوحيد أمام العدو الإسرائيلي هو الانسحاب الكامل.. وسينسحب.. ونحن مع انتشار الجيش جنوب الليطاني”.
وأضاف: “نؤمن بلبنان الواحد الموحد غير القابل للقسمة والعدوان على الجنوب هو عدوان على كل لبنان”، مؤكّداً أنّه “لا يمكن أن يستقر لبنان وجنوبه يتألم ويعاني والاستقرار، إذ إنّ الاستقرار في لبنان مبني على الاستقرار في الجنوب وكل الأراضي.
وفي السياق، أوضح أنّ المنطقة تواجه عدواناً أميركياً إسرائيلياً على لبنان وغزة وإيران والعراق واليمن “من أجل إطفاء جذوة المقاومة واستعمارها”.
وقال الشيخ قاسم إنّ “الهدف من العدوان على لبنان الذي حصل في أيلول/سبتمبر 2024 إنهاء المقاومة واقتلاعها من الأرض والحياة”.
وأضاف: “واجهناهم بمعركة أولي البأس، واستطعنا أن نبقى مستمرين، وأرغمناهم على اتفاق يجعل المقاومة حقاً وسقط هدفهم”، فيما راهنوا بعدها خلال 15 شهراً، “على الإنهاء البطيء واستخدام كل الأدوات الشيطانية لضرب مسيرتنا، وأعدوا لمعركة كبرى كانوا يتوقعون أنها هي ستنهي المقاومة، لكن فوجئوا بالإعداد والالتفاف الشعبي وقوة المقاومين”.
⭕نواجه عدواناً أميركياً إسرائيلياً على لبنان وغزة وإيران والعراق واليمن من أجل إطفاء جذوة المقاومة واستعمار المنطقة
⭕في لبنان كان الهدف من العدوان الذي حصل في أيلول 2024 إنهاء المقاومة واقتلاعها من الأرض والحياة
وفي الإطار، شدّد الشيخ قاسم على أنّ “من أوقف العدوان بوحشيته الواسعة وخفض من مستواه إلى الحد الذي نراه اليوم هو مذكرة التفاهم الأميركية الإيرانية”.
وأشار إلى أنّ “إيران عملت على أن يكون لبنان في البند الأول من المذكرة، واشترطت إيقاف العدوان والانسحاب الإسرائيلي”، مردفاً أنّ “مسار مذكرة التفاهم هو الذي سيحقق الانسحاب الإسرائيلي”.
وشدد الشيخ قاسم على أنّه “لم يكن ليتحقق شيء لولا صمود المقاومة”.
“المفاوضات لم تجلب للبنان إلا العار”
وبالحديث عن المفاوضات المباشرة بين السلطة اللبنانية والاحتلال الإسرائيلي، فأكّد الشيخ قاسم أنّها “لم تجلب للبنان إلا العار والذل والخيبة والتنازلات المتتالية”.
ولفت إلى أنّ “إسرائيل حصلت على مكتسبات سياسية، لكنها لن تحصل على نتائج ميدانية بوجود المقاومة”.
كما بيّن الشيخ قاسم أنّ “السلطة السياسية، وبهذه الوتيرة، لن تحقق شيئاً للبنان، ولن تتمكن من أن تساعد على الأهداف الإسرائيلية الأميركية”.
⭕"إسرائيل" حصلت على مكتسبات سياسية لكنها لن تحصل على نتائج ميدانية بوجود المقاومة
⭕أدعو السلطة في لبنان لإيقاف التنازلات المجانية والحوار مع المقاومة وترميم الوضع الداخلي والاهتمام بالسيادة
وعليه، دعا السلطة اللبنانية إلى “إيقاف التنازلات المجانية والحوار مع المقاومة وترميم الوضع الداخلي والاهتمام بالسيادة”.
وتابع متسائلاً: “ألا يفترض أن يكون التدمير الممنهج الذي يحصل لقرى وبلدات الجنوب سبباً لوقف الحوار مع الكيان الإسرائيلي؟”.
وقال: “تذهبون إلى النقاش وتعقدون الجلسات ولا تسألون عن هذه النتائج المرة تحت القصف والذل والعار وهذا لا ينسجم مع من يريد سيادة الوطن.. قولوا لا للأميركي سيخضع”.
وأكّد أنّ “كل ما حصل من اعتداء على لبنان هو بإشراف أميركي وإدارة أميركية وموافقة أميركية”.
كما أشار إلى أنّ الوحدة الداخلية “مهمة”، مردفاً: “نحن حريصون عليها والوحدة العظيمة بين حزب الله وحركة أمل سد منيع أمام العدو”.
⭕كل ما حصل من اعتداء على لبنان هو بإشراف أميركي وإدارة أميركية وموافقة أميركية
⭕مسار مذكرة التفاهم هو الذي سيحقق الانسحاب الإسرائيلي ولولا صمود المقاومة لما تحقق شيء
⭕الجمهورية الإسلامية الإيرانية انتصرت ولم يعد هناك مجال للحديث عن من انتصر في المواجهة
وشدّد الشيخ قاسم على أنّ “أكثرية الشعب اللبناني مع المقاومة والتحرير والسيادة الوطنية والجيش”، داعياً المراهنين على أميركا و”إسرائيل” أن يلتفوا حول الوحدة الوطنية والسيادة ورفض الاحتلال.
وفي التطورات الداخلية لتبعات الاعتداءات الإسرائيلية، قال الشيخ قاسم: “ندرك أن ما أصاب أهلنا مؤلم ومحزن ونحن نشعر معكم ونعيش معكم، وسنعمل بكل قوتنا على تأمين الإيواء والترميم والإعمار”، مؤكداً أنّ “هذا وعد والتزام”.
“لا مانع من لقاء علني بين حزب الله وسوريا في الوقت المناسب”
كما أكّد أهمية وضرورة العلاقة الأخوية والإيجابية والتعاونية بين دولتي لبنان وسوريا، موضحاً أنّ “سوريا المستقرة هي سند للبنان كما لبنان المستقر هو سند لسوريا”.
وصرّح بأنّه “لا يوجد أي مانع من اللقاء العلني بين حزب الله والقيادة السورية في الوقت الذي يكون مناسباً”.
“إيران انتصرت في المواجهة”
ومتطرقاً إلى الحديث عن الحرب على الجمهورية الإسلامية الإيرانية، أكّد الشيخ قاسم أنّ الأخيرة “انتصرت ولم يعد هناك مجال للحديث عن من انتصر في المواجهة”.
وأضاف أنّ إيران “دولة مهمة مؤثرة أساسية، حيث ينعكس وجودها وحضورها على كل العالم من دون استثناء”.
ورأى أنّ “قيادة آية الله السيد مجتبى خامنئي ستكون سبباً لمزيد من الانتصارات وتحقيق الأهداف المستقبلية”.
وفي ختام كلمته، قال الشيخ قاسم إنّه “لن ننسى غزة وفلسطين، ويجب أن نقف بوجه هذا العدوان الغاشم”، موجّهاً التحية أيضاً إلى العراق واليمن على نصرة قضايانا في مواجهة العدو الواحد”.
Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem in a televised address on the occasion of Arbaeen.
Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem called on Lebanon’s political authority to halt “gratuitous concessions,” urging dialogue with the resistance, national unity, and a commitment to national sovereignty until the Israeli enemy withdraws from occupied Lebanese territories.
Speaking during the Arbaeen commemoration of Imam Hussein (AS) in Baalbek, Qassem criticized the approach of direct talks with the Israeli enemy amid ongoing occupation and attacks in southern Lebanon.
“Direct negotiations have yielded nothing but shame, humiliation, and repeated disappointment for Lebanon, marked by a series of successive concessions.”
He questioned whether the destruction in southern Lebanon was not enough to prompt a firmer stance against Israeli actions.
“Shouldn’t the systematic destruction of villages and towns in the south, most recently the use of this 700-ton bomb, be enough to make the political establishment say: We do not want dialogue with the Israeli entity?” his eminence said, referring to an unprecedented Israeli demolition operation that employed 700 tons of explosives in the southern Lebanese area of Shaqeef last week.
Israeli forces carried out unprecedented bombardment in southern Lebanon, triggering a series of powerful explosions that residents said were unlike anything heard in recent years.
Israeli PM Netanyahu and DM Katz said 700 tons of explosives were used in the bombardment. pic.twitter.com/dNEYYw1DLR
“The political authority in Lebanon must place national sovereignty at the forefront by strengthening the army, ensuring enemy withdrawal, advancing reconstruction, uncovering truth behind Beirut Port explosion, and restoring depositors’ funds.”
Sheikh Qassem argued that Lebanon’s sovereignty requires confronting Israeli aggression and US involvement, saying that “the Americans are complicit” and calling on the political authority to rejects external pressure.
Resistance with Sheikh Spirit
The Hezbollah S.G. said the path of the memorandum of understanding between Iran and the United States was what would secure a ceasefire, crediting the Lebanese resistance’s battlefield steadfastness and its supporters for preventing the Israeli enemy from achieving its objectives.
“Had it not been for the steadfastness of the resistance on the ground and the people rallying around it, nothing would have been achieved, the enemy’s momentum would not have been broken, and there would be no hope of achieving withdrawal in the near future,” he said.
He stressed that “the enemy’s only option is complete withdrawal,” adding that Hezbollah supports the deployment of the Lebanese Army south of the Litani River and would assist in that process.
“Israeli enemy’s only option is withdrawal and it will ultimately withdraw, we support Lebanese Army deployment south of Litani River.”
“The resistance will continue as long as the occupation exists. We will defend our land, our rights, and our homeland with the spirit of Karbala,” Sheikh Qassem said.
Iran-US MoU Led to Lebanon Ceasefire
Addressing developments in Iran, Sheikh Qassem said the Islamic Republic had emerged victorious after confronting US-Israeli efforts to undermine it.
He said Iran’s institutions, people, and leadership stood firm and that the country had demonstrated its regional and international influence despite predictions of its collapse.
Sheikh Qassem praised Iran’s support for regional allies and said Hezbollah was “proud to stand with Iran in confronting enemies of humanity.”
He stressed that “what brought the aggression against Lebanon to a halt was the US-Iran MoU, which made the Israeli withdrawal a prerequisite paving the way for the ceasefire in Lebanon”
Lebanon Internal Politics
The Lebanese resistance leader emphasized the importance of internal Lebanese unity, highlighting Hezbollah’s alliance with the Amal Movement as a key pillar of national cohesion.
“We are together not only as two parties, but as a people, a resistance, a future, and a life,” he said, adding that broader political and sectarian cooperation represented a national shield.
Sheikh Qassem said the majority of Lebanese people supported “resistance, liberation, national sovereignty, and the army,” reiterating the formula of “the army, the people, and the resistance.”
Addressing residents of southern Lebanon, the Bekaa Valley, and Beirut’s southern suburbs (Dahiyeh), Sheikh Qassem praised their sacrifices and acknowledged the hardship caused by displacement and destruction.
“We understand that what has befallen our people is painful and heartbreaking,” he said, pledging that Hezbollah would work to provide shelter, restoration, and reconstruction while calling on the Lebanese state to assume its responsibilities.
Regional Issues
On Syria, Qassem called for a “fraternal, positive, and cooperative” relationship between Beirut and Damascus, expressing hope that Syria would achieve stability and recover its occupied territories.
“There is no objection to a public meeting between Hezbollah and the Syrian leadership at a time appropriate for both sides,” he said.
Concluding his remarks, Qassem reaffirmed support for Gaza and Palestine, calling for opposition to brutal aggression against the besieged enclave, while thanking Iraq and Yemen for their backing of the Palestinian and Lebanese causes.
“We won’t forget Gaza and we firmly stand against the brutal aggression targeting Gaza.”
Talki about the occasion, Sheikh Qassem stressed that Ashura is based on two fundamental pillars: “Defending what is right and fulfilling the religious duty even if it leads to martyrdom and great sacrifices.”
His eminence saluted pilgrims taking part in million-man marches in the holy city of Karbala to express loyalty to Imam Hussein (AS).
“Special greeting to our people in the Bekaa and Baalbek-Hermel for these pioneering and massive marches.”
In this photo releasedby Iranian Foreign Ministry, Iranian Iranian Foreign Ministr Abbas Aragchi, head to venue for talks between Iran and the US, between i Mascat, Oman, Friday, Fabreary 6, 2026 (AP)
Iran is negotiating only with Oman over future arrangements for managing the Strait of Hormuz and has held no talks with the United States, a source close to the Iranian negotiating team told Iran’s Fars News Agency.
The source said Tehran had maintained from the beginning that the southern route created following the “US betrayal of Article Five” was unsafe and illegal.
According to the source, attempts by the United States and some of its allies to make the southern route permanent have faced firm opposition from Iran.
Tehran says US pressure failed to change Hormuz position
The source told Fars that US military attacks and threats have failed to alter Iran’s position regarding the Strait of Hormuz arrangements.
The source added that if the United States and some of its partners had not obstructed Iran-Oman negotiations, the talks would have reached an outcome in a short period of time.
Iran has previously said that discussions with Oman focus on establishing a safe framework for maritime traffic through the strategic waterway.
Iran accuses US of disrupting Oman talks
Fars reported that US officials sent contradictory signals in recent days, directly or through regional partners, causing disruption to the negotiation process.
The agency cited concerns that obstruction by the United States or certain regional parties could prolong the talks or prevent them from reaching an agreement.
The Strait of Hormuz remains a key maritime route for global energy shipments, and any changes to its management could have significant implications for international trade and shipping.
Oman Hormuz agreement within reach
Iran and Oman are close to reaching an agreement on reopening the Strait of Hormuz, provided that US and other foreign interference in the region ceases, according to an informed source cited by Iran’s Press TV.
The source said on Tuesday that the ongoing discussions are strictly bilateral between Iran and Oman, stressing that the United States is not involved in the negotiations.
The remarks come after a senior Iranian source told Reuters earlier that Tehran and Muscat are discussing a plan to reopen the strategic waterway while giving Iran oversight of shipping entering the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran denies US talks
A senior Iranian political and security source told Al Mayadeen that Iran is not holding any negotiations with the United States. The source accused US President Donald Trump of habitually lying and of blaming others rather than taking responsibility for undermining the prior understanding.
According to the source, Iran’s actual negotiations are with Oman, its “permanent neighbor”, given that the Strait of Hormuz lies entirely within the two countries’ territorial waters. “The United States has always been a disruptive and destabilizing force,” the source said, “and cannot present itself as the region’s savior.”
On the strait’s status, the source said whether it stays open or closed “depends on the broader situation in the region,” but stressed it will not reopen “as long as US aggression, the blockade, and other provocative measures against Iran continue.”
The US military presence itself, the source added, is the core problem, since no country in the region wants war. “Everyone in the region understands that Netanyahu and Trump’s recklessness has imposed an enormous and wide-ranging cost on them,” the source concluded.
“The moment has arrived. The evidence is in. The jury has concluded its deliberations and the verdict is clear. Donald Trump’s war against the Islamic Republic of Iran can now be declared a strategic defeat for the most powerful nation on Earth,” The Telegraph mentioned in an article.
“It is with great reluctance and significant anguish that I reach this conclusion. There could not have been a better time for the campaign, coming after the 12-day war last June destroyed the regime’s air defenses and softened up its military.”
“This was driven by the awful truth that the regime would never reform and could only ever be defeated in battle. There was no alternative. This, then, was a case of right war, right time, wrong president.”
“The final nail in the coffin of America’s hopes came on Sunday, when Trump called off “the biggest attack since World War Two” (yeah, right!) amid talks that could hand Tehran at least partial control of the Strait of Hormuz.”
“After six months of on-off fighting which could cost upwards of a trillion dollars, the US and Gulf states now lack sufficient munitions, both offensive and defensive, to impose a decisive strategic outcome.”
The Lebanese Army Commander Brigadier General Rodolph Haykal continued on Monday inspecting the military sites and barracks in South Lebanon amid the ongoing Israeli attacks.
General Haykal congratulated the military servicemen deployed at Mohammad Zgheib barracks in Sidon, affirming that the Army will continue assuming its responsibilities despite the threats and attacks carried out by the Israeli enemy.
In turn, the Zionist occupation forces continued their attacks on the safe towns in South Lebanon, carrying out new bombings between Taybe and Deir Seryan and burning houses in al-Qantara.
Israeli gliders also dropped stun grenades on several towns, including Byout Al-Sayyad.
The Zionist artillery also targeted the area between Al-Mansouri and Majal Zoun.
A new Iranian air defense network and Su-35s… Are US aircraft now at risk? And from where are the strikes launched?شبكة دفاع جوي إيرانية جديدة وSu-35… هل أصبحت الطائرات الأمريكية في خطر؟ ومن أين تقصف؟
No Place Is Safe For Trump’s Soldiers! – Casualties Continue To Rise. | John Mearsheimer
IRGC adviser Mohammad Reza Naqdi says Iran’s resilience, military capabilities and domestic weapons production have strengthened Tehran’s position.
Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Naqdi, Senior Advisor to the Commander-in-Chief of the IRGC, said Monday that the United States would not enter another war with Tehran if Washington sought to make a “rational decision” in line with its interests.
In an interview for Al Mayadeen, Naqdi said most commanders currently in Tehran favor an offensive military doctrine, which is “very interesting, feasible, and highly effective operationally.”
Naqdi attributed the halt in the war to Washington’s inability to continue, the losses it had sustained, and the strikes it had come under.
Iran’s immediate priority
Asked about Iran’s immediate priority, Naqdi said, “Our priority is neither war nor negotiations; the issue is to reach deterrence.”
“We were certain and confident of victory, but we did not expect victory to be achieved this easily,” he said, adding, “Even if they built a concrete wall around Iran and stationed guards along it, Iran would remain steadfast and strong.”
Iran’s advantage and weapons capabilities
Elsewhere in his remarks, Naqdi said Iran’s key advantage in the war was its ability to manufacture all of its weapons domestically.
He said Iran’s facilities had been rebuilt in highly secure locations and were operating with modern and advanced technologies, while achieving higher production rates.
He also said Tehran has hundreds of cities and industrial complexes, as well as the ability to conceal and disperse its production through various methods, both underground and above ground.
Furthermore, Naqdi said the air defenses of Iran’s adversaries had collapsed under the intensity of the Islamic Republic’s drone and missile attacks, adding that even Iran’s older weapons had proven effective against them.
US military is a paper tiger: Naqdi
The top military figure described the US military as “hollow and fragile, a paper tiger, and its actual capabilities are weaker than they appear.”
Naqdi also downplayed the significance of US aircraft carriers and fighter jets that had been publicly promoted, saying, “The whole world saw that the carriers remained 1,000 kilometers from the strait and were unable to move.”
IRGC-government ties
Addressing relations between the IRGC and the Iranian government, Naqdi said they were “at their best, excellent and extremely strong.”
“We are implementing the commitments announced by the Supreme National Security Council, but the enemy must understand that it will pay a heavy price if it attacks us,” he stressed.
“The enemy believed it would seize Iran within three days, but what happened? It has now been six months,” he added.
Naqdi on Trump and the conduct of the war
Speaking about US President Donald Trump, Naqdi said the president “makes his decisions according to his personal interests and the interests of his companies and institutions.”
He accused Trump of adjusting the pace of the war in ways that could generate profits in the stock market or allow his inner circle to benefit from the oil sector.
“Asymmetric warfare means war on Wall Street, in Manhattan, and anywhere and at any time,” Naqdi said.
US support for ‘Israel’
On US support for the Israeli regime, Naqdi said cutting off that support would leave “Israel” unable to continue the war.
He pointed to the Israeli military’s reliance on bombardment, saying, “The ground forces are nothing without that bombardment.”
Naqdi also said the enemies had failed to achieve their objective of “creating a rift between us and the resistance.”
“That rift did not happen; rather, our ties have become much stronger,” he said.
The remarks come as Iran expands its retaliatory response to US aggression on its territory, targeting US military positions across the region and emphasizing Tehran’s stated resolve to impose consequences on Washington’s regional military presence.
Hezbollah’s senior lawmaker MP Mohammad Raad talking to reporters following the meeting with Speaker Nabih Berri (February 20, 2026).
Head of “Loyalty to Resistance” Parliamentary Bloc, Hajj Mohammad Raad, addressed Monday Imam Sayyed Moussa Al-Sadr on the 48th anniversary of his disappearance in Libya, stressing that His Eminence will remain impervious to enforced abesence.
MP Raad recalled the resounding slogan of Imam Al-Sadr calling for fighting the Israeli enemy even with teeth and fingernails, stressing that the meaning is clear and uninterpretable.
What follows is the translation of the full text of MP Raad’s article published by Al-Akhbar Newspaper:
And You Remain Impervious to Enforced Disappearance
Mohammad Raad
Monday, August 31, 2026
Here you are on the thirty-first of August 2026—the inspiring Imam, ever-present in the conscience of the honorable, the minds of the people of integrity, and the hearts of the loyal. Your smiling presence flashes with splendor and warmth, quenching the hearts of sincere, loving believers in a world filled with wolves—as you once said—where political management is dominated by the deceitful, the immoral, and those of Pharaonic methods and paths. In every corner, mandated agents hold sway, bound by neither covenant nor conscience. Meanwhile, in the heart of our divided Arab homeland, an occupying, usurping, and brutal racist entity—descended from a line of manipulators of international law and human rights—threatens whenever conditions permit and the prerequisites for expansion and aggression are met.
Your Eminence, the Imam:
Your history, the philosophy of your existence, and your message are encapsulated in a triangle of three pillars: justice of vision, courage of stance, and integrity of performance. Neither homeland, nor nation, nor future for humanity and its peoples can exist without relying on these three pillars—drawn directly from the chest of the leader of the free and master of martyrs, Abu Abdillah Al-Hussein (pbut).
Your turban, your humanity, and your love were the cloud that carried rain until Lebanon became a state, its sects melted together, and a flag fluttered in its sky signaling liberation, calling for dialogue and national understanding, rejecting sectarian discrimination, oppression, and disenfranchisement, and supporting resistance against occupation, aggression, and threats.
As for your resounding slogan, to which the deprived on their land and those deprived of their land submitted: “Israel is absolute evil; fight it with your teeth and fingernails,” it remains the master of the field, its meaning clear and uninterpretable. There is no recognition of evil nor reconciliation with it, but rather a continuous, relentless resistance against it without surrender or submission to the aggressors. The lack of weaponry is neither a persuasive nor valid pretext for compromisers or cowardly defectors. Teeth and fingernails become the most effective weapons for confrontation when backed by an unyielding will to resist—unwavering against reckless negotiation ploys or foolish wagers on the criminal self-proclaimed friends supporting aggression against Lebanon.
“Israel is absolute evil” is a slogan that cuts off every avenue used by the foolish to evade the duty of defense, steadfastness, and confrontation against this evil, or to rush into submission to the conditions of the aggressive, usurping, and threatening occupier.
Adherence to this slogan preserves the meaning of Lebanon as a final homeland for all its citizens—rich in its diverse sects, yet afflicted by the sectarianism of those governing it.
Because the enemy and its allies realized the true meaning of this slogan, they lay in wait for Your Eminence and conspired to enforce your disappearance. They targeted, and will continue to target, everyone who walks this path in Lebanon, Iran, Palestine, Yemen, and Iraq, and across our oppressed world that will neither tire nor falter. It will persevere in its resistance until the rightful owners reclaim their rights, secure their homelands, and expel the thieves and aggressors from their sanctuaries and lands.
So, O caller of the cry of truth from our country to the oppressors in all lands: rest assured that today you possess an even greater presence in the hearts of all the oppressed and the resistance fighters. Your sons possess a deeper understanding and greater pride in the roadmap you laid out to champion truth, establish justice, and safeguard the homeland for all its people.
We, your sons—the brothers of the Supreme Martyr Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah and His Excellency Speaker Nabih Berri, in Hezbollah and the Amal Movement, alongside our comrades, allies, and partners in the approach you outlined—will not deviate, hesitate, falter, or surrender. We will continue to resist; weapons remain the adornment of men among us, and God is our supporter. This is our pledge, promise, and commitment. The blessed Islamic Revolution in Iran—its leadership, officials, and people—remains the finest support for Lebanon and the Resistance, fulfilling the testament of Imam Khomeini (may his secret be sanctified) before, followed by Imam Khamenei, the leader and martyr, as well as the leader Sayyed Mojtaba (may his protection and glory endure). The land is our land, to be liberated by our people and their hero resistance fighters, while the occupation shall harvest nothing but disappointment and demise.
His Eminence, the vanished Imam Sayyed Musa al-Sadr… Peace be upon you, the peace of the resistance fighters committed to your slogan, and peace be upon your two companions vanished alongside you, as well as the mercy of God and His blessings.
Iran’s IRGC struck two US-operated airbases in Jordan with a combined missile-drone operation, retaliating for Sunday’s US strike on Larak Island.
Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps Aerospace Force struck technical, maintenance and fighter jet infrastructure at two US-operated airbases in Jordan, King Hussein and Al-Azraq, using a combined ballistic missile and drone operation.
The IRGC said the attacks caused “heavy damage” and were launched in direct response to the US strike on Larak Island.
The IRGC warned that “aggression and crime” will not remedy the enemy’s desperation over its weakening control of the Strait of Hormuz, and that every shot fired at Iran will be met with a more crushing response.
The operation follows Sunday’s US strike on Larak Island, the first known US military attack against Iran since late July, which the IRGC said killed and wounded “several of our fighters and compatriots.”
The strike on Larak was launched from Jordan
Fars News Agency reported that flight navigation data traced the Larak drone strike back to Jordan, launched with support from Jordanian bases, a detail that places Amman directly inside the chain of escalation Iran’s retaliatory strikes on King Hussein and Al-Azraq are now responding to.
IRGC spokesperson Hossein Mohebi separately called Washington’s escalating economic and military pressure a “strategic and fatal mistake” that would “change the balance against its architects” and carry heavy costs on both economic and military fronts.
A region-wide wave of retaliation
Iran’s response to Larak has extended well beyond the two Jordanian airbases.
Press TV reported Iranian missile fire toward US ships in the Strait of Hormuz, while Iranian state television, citing Arab sources, reported explosions in the Aqaba area of southern Jordan, including near the US-operated Muwaffaq Salti Airbase. Fars News Agency additionally reported an explosion at Qatar’s Al-Udeid Airbase.
Moreover, activity at Saudi Arabia’s Jeddah airport had been halted early on Monday, IRIB reported citing the Middle East Spectator.
A political warning to Washington
Ebrahim Azizi, chairman of Iran’s Parliament National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, warned Washington directly, saying, “Test our will once more, and pay a heavier price. Retaliation is coming; JUST RUN!”
He said no crime would go unanswered and promised a response that would be “devastating, more painful, and instructive,” telling Washington to wait “in fear and terror.”
The escalation has rattled energy markets. Brent crude rose 2.52% to $90.32 a barrel and US West Texas Intermediate climbed 2.41% to $85.41 a barrel by 2202 GMT Monday, Reuters reported, after the initial Larak strikes marked the first known American military action against Iran since late July.
The U.S.’ designation of U.K.-based activist collective Palestine Action as a global terrorist group is part of a wider project, concocted by far-right pro-Israel strategist Sebastian Gorka, to criminalize left-wing or pro-Palestine dissent against Trump’s rule. MintPress exposes this plan.
The Man Behind It All
The Trump administration announced Wednesday that it was placing Palestine Action on its list of global terrorist groups, as part of what it called a “broader U.S. government effort to address the threat of transnational far-left terrorism.”
The designation is one of the first clear signs that the Trump administration is making good on its promise to reorient its domestic and international strategy towards clamping down on what Secretary of State Marco Rubio described as “far-left terror” groups.
The policy shift was summed up in an ominous 16-page White House document published in May, titled “United States Counterterrorism Strategy.” The policy document was reportedly written by Trump’s counter-terrorism czar, Sebastian Gorka, who stated he was pouring his “life’s work” into making it a “blueprint” for American strategy.
“Currently,” the document claims, “we face three major types of terror groups: narcoterrorists and transnational gangs, legacy Islamist terrorists, [and] violent left-wing extremists, including anarchists and anti-fascists.”
It is, however, the third group that the report appears most concerned with, noting that, “we recognize that a new type of domestic terrorism has emerged, driven by violent extremists who have adopted ideologies antithetical to freedom and the American way of life.” “Our national CT [counterterrorism] activities,” it concludes, will “prioritize the rapid identification and neutralization of violent secular political groups whose ideology is anti-American, radically pro-transgender, and anarchist.”
A former British military intelligence operative, the London-born Gorka has built a wide following among the global alt-right community. He was a controversial pick for Trump’s team, even in conservative circles. Described in Esquire magazine as the most “ridiculous” character in an “endless parade of whackadoos, smackbrains, rockheads, fanatics, lunatics, and general shit-for-brains” following Trump, he has openly flirted with fascism and Nazism, and is considered among the most hardline Islamophobes in the administration.
He was previously fired from his position in the FBI because of his extreme anti-Muslim rhetoric. Yet this sort of speech is creeping its way into official counterterrorism policy when the White House document advises that Europe can only remain strong if it has “honest conversations about Islamism.”
It also states that their priority is to track and crush the supposed “new and evolving alliances between the far-left and Islamists, i.e., the ‘Red-Green’ alliance.” For the White House, Palestine Action, which blends leftism and pro-Palestine agitation, fits this niche perfectly.
Founded in 2020, Palestine Action is a direct action group that attempts to end global complicity in Israeli war crimes by taking direct action against Israeli weapons plants operating in the United Kingdom, occupying their factories and destroying their machinery and inventory. They have proven highly effective, costing Israeli manufacturer, Elbit Systems billions of dollars in damages and lost contracts.
At times, the White House document reads like a far-right manifesto, and even claims that Christians are “the most persecuted people on Earth.”
Like many in Trump’s inner circle, Gorka made a name for himself not as an administrator, but as a media anchor, becoming a popular pro-Trump radio host. This has led to many suggesting he is dangerously underqualified for his position, including his former PhD advisor who stated that he would not consider Gorka an expert in terrorism.
His appointment as deputy assistant to the President of the United States was therefore quite the surprise, not least to Gorka himself, who, just a few years previously, was in the political wilderness, selling fish oil pills to make ends meet.
A deeply Christian man, he is among Israel’s loudest and most passionate advocates in Washington D.C. He has strongly supported its post-October 7 assault on Gaza, and had previously condemned liberal American Jews for their supposed insufficient loyalty towards the Jewish State. On Iran, he is a hardliner, strongly supporting Trump’s campaign against Tehran, and describing, in his typical style, critics of the war as “testicularly challenged” individuals who take a “low-T approach to threats to the United States.”
It is hardly surprising, therefore, that an administration spearheaded by him would take a very dim view of Palestine Action.
Part of a Wider Plan
This summer, the Trump/Rubio State Department has attempted to concoct links between leftist activists on the one hand, and Latin American narcoterrorists and Islamic terrorists on the other. It recently claimed that the George Floyd Protests were secretly driven by a covert Cuban influence campaign, and that American Antifa collectives are connected to Hamas and Iran’s IRGC.
Gorka’s document has been widely interpreted as the administration’s blueprint and legal justification for a crackdown on civil liberties and political opponents, and curtailing the right to oppose Trump’s rule.
Quite apart from the numerous spelling and grammatical errors, there are a number of serious flaws with the thesis. Firstly, the only example of “far-left terrorism” it cites is the assassination of Charlie Kirk by “a radical who espoused extreme transgender ideologies.” But the alleged attacker came from a Utah Republican family and was fascinated by Hitler, Nazism, and Christian nationalism. Thus, his motives and ideology were mixed, at best.
Moreover, left-wing terror in the United States pales into comparison to that of the right-wing attacks, the leading cause of political deaths. The White House, however, is completely uninterested in pursuing those cases, and does not mention the violence from the political right at all, possibly because it draws its most militant support from precisely those ranks.
An Extraordinary Ban
Palestine Action is now sanctioned and will be treated as akin to organizations like ISIS and Al-Qaeda. “Far-left extremists, their fronts, and their enablers should be on notice: We will bring the full weight of our economic tools to bear,” said Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent; “Political terrorism has no place in our society, and we will continue to cut the financial lifelines of these groups until they are eliminated.”
The group, which describes itself as a “direct action movement committed to ending global complicity with Israel’s genocidal apartheid regime” was controversially placed on the United Kingdom’s terrorist list last year (possibly due to pressure from President Trump himself). The designation is currently being debated in the U.K.’s Supreme Court as in February, the High Court ruled that the prescription was unlawful and a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Why a small British group would be considered a threat to the United States was explained in an official press release that noted: “Palestine Action has promoted its violent, criminal, and terrorist acts on social media, encouraging the use of similar tactics internationally, including within the United States and along the U.S.-Mexican border.”
The organization gained notoriety for its direct action technique of occupying military bases and Israeli-owned weapons plants in the U.K. and damaging the machinery in order to disrupt the flow of arms to Israel.
The group’s co-founder, Huda Ammori, was horrified by the designation. “As a Palestinian and Iraqi, the fact the country which destroyed both my homelands is calling me a terrorist, is beyond hypocritical. Trump is the antithesis to everything Palestine Action stands for,” she wrote on Twitter.
Destroying Democracy For Israel
The Trump administration’s actions builds on the United Kingdom’s decision last year to ban Palestine Action and designate it a terror group. Since then, it has imprisoned members and arrested over 3,000 individuals for supporting the group. An inordinate number of these arrests have been of retirees. Images of an 83-year-old priest and a blind, wheelchair-bound 63-year-old man behind led away by police, merely for holding signs, have gone viral around the world. Those convicted of supporting Palestine Action face up to 14 years in prison under the new laws.
The U.K.’s actions have drawn sharp criticism from human rights groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, the latter of whom wrote that, “by equating direct action protest with terrorism, the government is treating dissent as a security threat.” Successive British governments have had to deal with enormous pro-Palestine demonstrations. In both November 2023 and March 2026, an estimated one million people marched on the streets of London to support Palestinian liberation.
There is some evidence that the U.K.’s decision to treat Palestine Action so harshly was influenced by Donald Trump personally. After the group vandalized the Trump Turnberry golf course in Scotland, Trump phoned Prime Minister Keir Starmer to discuss a response. Trump also publicly called for a “harsh” response to the “terrorists” who did “serious damage” to his property, directly echoing the specific wording of the Terrorism Act – a fact that Declassified UKsuggested may have been a deliberate attempt to justify the upcoming ruling.
Today, it was announced that the group’s action spray-painting the walls of the Turnberry clubhouse would be treated by police as an “act of terrorism,” with Ammori herself wondering aloud if Trump’s anger was the reason for its proscription.
Cracking Down on Dissent in America
In the wake of the genocidal Israeli assault of Gaza, universities across the United States saw unprecedented waves of strikes, protests, demonstrations. College campuses across 45 of the 50 states saw major actions, with at least 10% of all college students in the United States estimated to have participated in the overwhelmingly peaceful action.
The response from authorities was overwhelming: thousands were arrested, charged, fined, lost their degrees, or even deported. A MintPress News investigation found that Israeli and pro-Israel billionaire benefactors of the universities were pressuring the institutions to crack heads.
Trump has cracked down on a wide range of dissent across America, identifying groups such as Antifa, pro-abortion rights network, Jane’s Revenge, and those opposing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Border Patrol, and the construction of the giant “Cop City” training center in Georgia as dangerous extremists who must be suppressed.
His administration is also expecting massive, nationwide anti-A.I. riots in the coming years, as the technology destroys communities and industries. Ironically, as another MintPress News investigation found, the government is using A.I. to create a massive security dragnet in order to identify potential hotspots and troublemakers before they happen.
The Trump administration’s labeling of Palestine Action as a terror group, then, should be seen in the wider context of a far-right administration intent on criminalizing protest, opposition, and organizing against its increasingly authoritarian rule. Counterterrorism czar Sebastian Gorka has found a willing ally in Trump. And given that both major parties remain committed to supporting Israel’s expansionist aims, there will be little official pushback to the designation. With an emboldened Trump and an increasingly disjointed economy offering Americans very little, it is likely that we will see more actions such as this one. Palestine Action will likely not be the last group added to the growing list.
Sanaa’s expanding maritime and cross-border campaign is forcing Riyadh to defend the export routes, proxy formations, and southern buffer zones it once took for granted.
Saudi Arabia’s attempt to impose a new military and political balance in Yemen has brought it back to a war it spent years trying to leave behind.
The confrontation now stretches across several connected theaters: mobilizations and missile strikes inside Yemen, operations along the Saudi border, attacks on infrastructure deep inside the kingdom, and a naval contest running through the Red Sea, Bab al-Mandab, the Gulf of Aden, and the Arabian Sea.
Riyadh initiated the war in March 2015, expecting a short campaign that would restore its preferred government in Sanaa. More than a decade later, it faces an adversary with a far larger missile and drone arsenal, experience gained in successive wars, and the ability to threaten the waterways on which Saudi Arabia increasingly depends.
The informal truce that had largely restrained direct Saudi–Yemeni exchanges since 2022 began to unravel in July, when Saudi strikes on Sanaa Airport were followed by Yemeni missile and drone attacks on Abha Airport.
The return to direct confrontation has unfolded amid a wider regional war and severe disruption in the Strait of Hormuz. That setting has magnified every Yemeni move against Saudi shipping. The East–West Pipeline can carry crude from the kingdom’s Eastern Province to Yanbu, bypassing Hormuz, but cargoes bound for Asia must still pass south through Bab al-Mandab. Sanaa has therefore found the point at which Riyadh’s principal escape route becomes another exposed flank.
The Ansarallah-aligned Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF) describe the first stage of their campaign through three linked equations. The first is a “blockade for blockade” extending across the waterways surrounding Yemen.
The second targets Saudi-backed troop concentrations and supply lines “wherever they may be.” The third promises a direct response to attacks or violations of Yemeni airspace by striking strategic facilities inside Saudi Arabia.
Sanaa has warned that continued escalation would bring a second stage. Its demands would then move beyond the long-stalled roadmap, payment of public-sector salaries, reopening of roads, and lifting of restrictions on ports and airports.
The stated objective would become the end of Saudi military influence in Yemen, the withdrawal of support for Riyadh-aligned formations, and Yemeni control over the country’s oil and gas wealth. The question confronting the kingdom is how much of that pressure it can absorb while keeping its own export system intact.
The blockade reaches Yanbu
Sanaa announced its maritime ban on 20 July, warning vessels dealing with Saudi ports against sailing through waters within reach of the YAF. Tankers soon began reversing course or taking longer routes, while some Saudi-linked vessels stopped transmitting conventional tracking signals at certain points in their journeys.
Earlier this month, the campaign had pushed sections of the Saudi fleet into “dark” voyages as operators tried to obscure routes and destinations.
The timing was especially damaging for Riyadh. With Hormuz traffic sharply reduced, Saudi Arabia had redirected much of its crude and condensate exports to Yanbu. Kpler data showed that 75 percent of the kingdom’s 5.29 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude and condensate exports in the first half of July left through the Red Sea terminal.
Yanbu is supplied by the East–West Pipeline, whose nameplate capacity is commonly placed near 7 million bpd. The terminal system, however, can sustainably load around 4.5 to 4.7 million bpd, according to Kpler, leaving far less room than the pipeline figure alone suggests.
Between 20 July and 19 August, YAF spokesman Brigadier General Yahya Saree said Yemeni forces had attacked eight Saudi oil tankers, five in the Red Sea and three in the Gulf of Aden and Arabian Sea. He also claimed that 48 other tankers had been compelled to turn back, including 14 in the Red Sea and 34 approaching through the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean.
Even without sinking a vessel, a credible threat can alter routes, raise insurance premiums, slow deliveries, and force operators to conceal movements. There was a 40 percent fall in Saudi oil-loading volumes at the Red Sea port during the blockade, while maritime reporting placed recent Yanbu crude exports near 3.8 million bpd before the decline. Every diversion adds to the costs borne by Riyadh, shipowners, and buyers.
Saudi Arabia has tried to send more crude north toward Egypt rather than south through Bab al-Mandab. Kpler data show cargoes using the SUMED system rising to 28.79 million barrels in July, compared with 19.52 million in April.
Tankers discharge at Ain Sukhna, after which the crude crosses Egypt by pipeline and is reloaded at Sidi Kerir on the Mediterranean. This route is workable, though it requires spare pipeline capacity, additional vessels, coordinated terminal slots, and buyers willing to accept different delivery arrangements. Kpler estimates that SUMED alone cannot carry all the crude Saudi Arabia has recently exported from Yanbu.
The strike on the Amzan on 24 August brought the confrontation close to the heart of this alternative system. Sanaa said a ballistic missile hit the Saudi tanker off Yanbu. Bahri, the kingdom’s national shipping company, confirmed that the vessel had been involved in an incident and said its crew was safe.
UK Maritime Trade Operations separately reported that a tanker had been struck by an unknown projectile 63 nautical miles west of the port. The significance lay in the location. Yemeni forces had moved from threatening the route to approaching the export hub around which Riyadh built its Hormuz contingency.
Deterrence crosses the border
Maritime pressure has been accompanied by renewed attacks inside Saudi Arabia. The southern provinces of Jizan, Najran, and Asir contain airports, military sites, border installations, and Aramco facilities that supported the earlier war.
In July, missiles and drones were fired at Abha Airport after the strike on Sanaa Airport. By August, the YAF was claiming attacks on a sensitive target at Najran Airport and an Aramco installation in the same city.
Yanbu widens this target map considerably. It sits far from the Yemeni border and serves as the western terminus of the pipeline carrying crude across the kingdom. Pressure on Jizan, Najran, and Abha bears on Saudi military operations in the south; pressure on Yanbu reaches the oil infrastructure that allows the kingdom to operate when the Gulf route is constrained.
Together, these fronts are intended to force Riyadh to defend both the machinery of war and the revenue that sustains it.
Sanaa presents the operations as retaliation for Saudi attacks and an enforcement of Yemeni sovereignty. That framing is central to its deterrence strategy. By linking each strike to a prior Saudi action, the YAF seeks to establish that renewed intervention will incur costs beyond Yemen’s borders.
Riyadh can still inflict enormous damage from the air, but it can no longer assume that the consequences will remain confined to Yemeni territory.
Supply lines under attack
The second equation is being applied to the military build-up inside Yemen. YAF operations have reached convoys and staging grounds from the Wadiah crossing and Al-Abr in Hadhramaut to positions in Marib and the western coast. The purpose is to interrupt the movement of weapons, troops, and vehicles before Saudi-backed forces can concentrate for a larger campaign.
Wadiah is the main land gateway between Saudi Arabia and eastern Yemen, while Al-Abr lies on the route leading west toward Marib. Strikes in this corridor place pressure on reinforcements arriving from the kingdom.
In Jawf, the YAF said it struck Saudi-backed mobilizations and weapons stores at Al-Kanais, a desert position near the administrative boundary with Marib and the Al-Labnat Camp. The surrounding roads connect eastern Jawf with Marib and northern Hadhramaut. The YAF has also struck deployments around Ruweik and other positions east of Marib city.
The heaviest exchanges have unfolded around Marib and Mokha. In early August, missile and drone strikes on government camps in Marib and Hadhramaut killed at least 30 soldiers.
Further attacks hit Marib and the Red Sea port of Mokha in mid-August, while government forces answered with operations on several fronts. On 17 August, Saree said ballistic missiles had struck a Saudi military landing vessel and four accompanying boats off Mokha.
Mokha matters because it is the logistical center of Tariq Saleh’s UAE-backed forces and a potential launch point for operations farther north along the Red Sea coast.
Marib carries a different weight. It is the last major northern stronghold outside Sanaa’s control and sits amid Yemen’s most important oil and gas infrastructure. Pressure on both locations stretches Riyadh’s allies between a coastal theater tied to Bab al-Mandab and an inland theater guarding the road east.
Three pressure points on the ground
The prospective ground battle is forming around western Taiz, the Red Sea coast, and Marib. In the Al-Barh area of Maqbanah district, the front runs across roads connecting Taiz with Mokha. Control of high ground and junctions there shapes the movement of supplies toward the coast.
A sustained advance would not immediately deliver Mokha, but it could narrow the routes available to the forces defending it and expose rear positions to missile and drone attack.
Farther west, the contest centers on Mokha and the coastal strip. Sanaa has combined strikes on military sites with pressure on port activity and reinforcement routes. The aim is to weaken Tariq Saleh’s command structure and separate formations deployed north of the city from their logistical base.
Any attempt to push toward Hodeidah would require the opposing camp to keep that corridor open under fire, a far more difficult task than holding scattered positions during the relative calm that followed the 2022 truce.
Marib forms the third and most consequential axis. Sanaa-aligned forces retain positions west, north, and south of the city, including around Sirwah and the Balaq heights, and control districts taken during the 2021 campaign.
A renewed ground offensive would face fortified positions and could exact a high civilian cost, especially around displacement camps and populated areas. Yet the strategic prize remains clear. Control over Marib would deprive Riyadh’s Yemeni allies of their principal northern base and give Sanaa greater leverage toward Shabwa and Hadhramaut.
A move along the Saudi border remains another option. The mountainous frontier opposite the historic Yemeni provinces of Jizan, Najran, and Asir was an active theater during earlier phases of the war, when Yemeni forces crossed into Saudi territory and seized military positions.
Riyadh’s divided camp
Saudi Arabia also faces a less reliable coalition than the one it assembled in 2015. The UAE-backed southern camp has repeatedly clashed with Riyadh-aligned forces, and Abu Dhabi’s priorities have centered on southern ports, islands, and coastal influence rather than restoring a Saudi-preferred order in Sanaa.
Southern Transitional Council (STC)-linked formations in Al-Dhalea may fight to defend their own front lines, but their willingness to enter a broader war on Riyadh’s terms cannot be assumed. Tariq Saleh’s forces on the western coast are likewise tied closely to Emirati support.
That leaves Riyadh increasingly dependent on Islah-linked networks, Salafi formations, and locally recruited forces in Marib and the east. Reports in April said Washington was reviewing whether to designate Islah and affiliated organizations as terrorist entities after lobbying associated with the UAE.
According to a Sanaa-aligned Yemeni report citing western diplomatic sources, Riyadh subsequently asked Washington to delay any designation of Islah, whose forces it still needs as pressure builds across Yemen’s internal fronts.
These fractures bear directly on the conduct of the war. Each armed faction has its own patrons, territory, and postwar ambitions. Riyadh can supply money, weapons, and air support, but it cannot easily turn this collection into a unified force.
Sanaa, by contrast, is fighting under a centralized command and can move between the maritime, border, and internal fronts according to where pressure produces the greatest return.
Washington keeps its distance
The US has reasons to prevent a permanent Yemeni hold over Bab al-Mandab, yet renewed direct intervention would revive a campaign that failed to end Sanaa’s maritime operations and carried high political and military costs.
Speaking at a panel last week convened by the Sanaa Center and Arab Center Washington DC, former US envoy Tim Lenderking warned that “the Houthis” could consolidate control over Bab al-Mandab, with serious consequences for Saudi Arabia, regional economies, and international trade.
He added that Washington was not currently working actively to prevent such an outcome and criticized the Trump administration for having largely “turned the page” on Yemen. His departing message to US officials in April, he said, had been: “Do not neglect Yemen.”
Riyadh has reportedly explored a large campaign along the western coast, presented as an effort to protect international navigation, alongside pressure from Marib and Jawf. Sanaa’s strikes on Mokha, weapons depots, camps, and reinforcement routes can be read as a pre-emptive effort to disrupt those preparations before they produce a coordinated offensive.
Positions south of Hodeidah would become central if Saudi-backed forces tried to move north along the coast.
Israeli concern adds another layer. Lasting Yemeni leverage over Bab al-Mandab would keep shipping to Eilat exposed and raise the cost of trade between the occupation state and Asia. Egypt is often proposed as the Arab power with the naval weight and direct economic interest to help secure the strait, especially because disruptions also deprive the Suez Canal of revenue.
Cairo, however, remembers the cost of its 1960s intervention in Yemen and has little incentive to assume the ground burden that Saudi Arabia and its allies could not resolve.
The balance now turns on how much retaliation the Saudi economy and its divided coalition can withstand. Sanaa’s three equations reinforce one another. Maritime operations expose the Red Sea outlet on which Saudi exports depend; cross-border strikes compel the kingdom to defend strategic infrastructure; attacks on mobilizations prevent its Yemeni allies from assembling freely.
Saudi Arabia still holds overwhelming advantages in wealth, air power, and access to advanced weapons. Those advantages did not produce victory in the previous decade, and the strategic environment has since turned against another open-ended campaign.
The YAF has emerged with longer reach, tighter command, and a clearer understanding of the pressure points surrounding the kingdom. If Riyadh chooses renewed military intervention, it may find that restarting the war is far easier than controlling what follows.
UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM 