Middle East
Gaza ceasefire divides the US
As the international media and mediators (US, Egypt and Qatar) have announced, Israel and Hamas have agreed to accept the ceasefire agreement – an agreement that is permanent and not temporary, and if its provisions are implemented, the other parties will not be able to start the war again.
Mohammad bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Qatar, while confirming the finalization of the ceasefire agreement, announced the implementation of its provisions from next Sunday (January 19). Joe Biden, the outgoing President of the United States, has also announced the finalization of the agreement.
Hamas, which is one side of the story, while giving in to the request of the mediators, has also welcomed the establishment of a ceasefire. In the meantime, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, has agreed to accept the agreement, but he has not made his position clear so far, which could indicate his displeasure with the situation.
There are a lot of points and unsaid things about the agreement and it requires to be examined not in one writing but in writings – but what is urgently important is the vacating of the White House by Biden for Donald Trump that will happen on January 20. In this regard, the discussion is that establishing a ceasefire is the result of the work of which of these two (Biden or Trump)? Of course, Trump has registered this achievement in his name by publishing a statement on his social page as saying “we have achieved many successes without even being in the White House. Just imagine the amazing things that will happen when I get back to the White House and my administration is fully confirmed.”
Contrary to Trump’s claim, there are also some media organs that defend the ceasefire in Gaza is not the result of his efforts, but due to Biden’s efforts. Here are their arguments:
First
It is true that Biden has stubbornly supported Israel since October 7 and without this support, Tel Aviv would not be able to continue the war against Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, Iran, etc.
For this reason, the critics of the Gaza war call what Israel has done in this area as a result of Biden’s support, but it should not be forgotten that at the same time, he stopped trying to establish a cease-fire to the extent that, if necessary, he did not avoid putting pressure on Netanyahu. Although he did not make an early impression.
It was Biden who, at the height of the Gaza war (November 24, 2023), forced the parties to agree to a ceasefire for four days – the ceasefire led to the exchange of a number of Israeli hostages with a group of Palestinian prisoners. This current agreement is the result of the plan that Biden presented in May of last year – a plan that was accepted by Netanyahu with disgust now and not at that time.
We have already discussed this once in the previous article, however based on the above plan, the parties stepped on the border of signing the agreement many times, but they went back a little. So, it can be said that Biden had already plowed the ground, but it yielded later (last evening). To say that nothing was done at all, we have spoken exactly to Trump’s taste.
Second
Not only the ceasefire in Gaza, but the end of the war between Hezbollah and Israel (November 27, 2024) was also the result of Biden’s efforts. The war in Lebanon was so intense that ending it was more difficult than establishing a ceasefire in Gaza.
It was after the assassination of Hassan Nasrallah, the former leader of Hezbollah, that the Islamic Republic targeted Israel for the second time (October 1, 2024) with nearly two hundred ballistic missiles – the attack was called “Operation Honest Promise 2”. While for Gaza, compared to Lebanon, he did not do anything serious.
Falling short against Hezbollah was expensive for Netanyahu, but apparently, he had no choice but to accept Biden’s request. Meanwhile, Biden was not as concerned about what happened in Lebanon as he is about the Palestinians.
The 46th president of the United States not only ended the war in Lebanon, but also put an end to the power vacuum in this country – the election of Joseph Aoun as the president.
Lebanon has been without a president since October 30, 2022, which can be said to be practically in a power vacuum. But Biden, in cooperation with France and Saudi Arabia, did something to greatly reduce the severity of the political crisis in Beirut – if it does not sink completely.
If we pay close attention, the difficulty of appointing the president in Lebanon was not less than the difficulty of ending the war, considering the tribal structure of this country. The war and power vacuum in Lebanon was ended without anyone saying anything about Trump’s role in it.
Third
It is true that Trump has always emphasized the need for an immediate end to wars. But he is talking more about Ukraine than Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, etc. Due to his own reasons, he does not like Ukraine and the ruler of this country, and for this reason, he has exposed Biden to serious criticism for the money he gives to Kiev.
He had already claimed that in case of victory, he would end the war in Ukraine for one day – even at the cost of displeasure of Kiev and America’s European allies. Every time he has spoken about the war in Gaza and Lebanon, he has severely criticized Biden on the pretext that he did not support Israel well. He even accused Kamala Harris – the Democratic candidate – of being anti-Israel many times in the heat of the election.
So, if the reader focuses on Trump’s view of the crises in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, he/she will inevitably reach the understanding that he is against the continuation of the war in Ukraine and not in Gaza and Lebanon. The reason is also clear: Israel is important to him. For this reason, many analysts believe that when Trump talks about the end of wars in the world, he considers the Middle East to be an exception to the rule, because Israel is present in it.
Fourth
The end of the Gaza war is the biggest achievement considering the high ceiling of human casualties and financial damage in this strip – an achievement that Biden made in the last days of his presence in the White House.
No matter what Trump claims, this coin was struck in the name of Biden – because he is still the ruler of America. Trump wanted to record this achievement, but luck did not help him. According to reliable reports, Trump told Netanyahu that he should finish his work by January 20. In the sense that he has freedom of action until after Biden leaves the White House and then prepares to sign the ceasefire agreement – an agreement that should have been decorated with the color of his representative’s pen, which was not.
Trump’s attempt to delay the establishment of a ceasefire does not necessarily mean the confirmation of the continued destruction in Gaza, but rather he wanted to put an end to the crisis in this strip and Lebanon after the moment he entered the White House, so that the most benefit from it is Israel and the most loss is for its competitors.
Middle East
UNDP estimates $1.38 billion in building damage across southern Lebanon
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Lebanon’s National Council for Scientific Research have released a rapid assessment report on building damage in southern Lebanon.
According to Lebanon’s Al-Akhbar newspaper, the study relied on satellite imagery and geospatial artificial intelligence (GeoAI) technologies to assess externally visible damage to buildings along the southern border between October 23, 2025, and April 29, 2026.
The report found that a total of 11,095 buildings had been completely destroyed in the areas surveyed. Based on an assumed average apartment size of 150 square metres, these destroyed structures are estimated to correspond theoretically to 17,891 housing units.
The volume of debris generated in the region is estimated at 3,107,756 cubic metres.
In addition to the buildings that were completely destroyed, the assessment identified partial damage to 2,242 buildings and minor damage to 9,311 others.
At the housing-unit level, the report estimates that alongside the approximately 17,891 units that were completely destroyed, around 5,219 homes sustained partial damage and 18,282 suffered minor damage.
The report stressed that these housing figures are not based on direct field surveys but on mathematical modelling using average floor-space assumptions and therefore constitute theoretical estimates.
Preliminary cost of building damage estimated at $1.38 billion
The report calculated reconstruction costs using a standard benchmark value of $450 per square metre. On that basis, the total preliminary cost of building damage was estimated at $1.384 billion.
Geographically, Nabatieh Governorate accounted for the largest share of the damage, estimated at $1.053 billion, while losses in South Governorate were assessed at $331 million.
At the district level, preliminary costs were estimated at $688 million in Bint Jbeil, $333 million in Marjayoun, $315 million in Tyre, $32 million in Nabatieh district and $16 million in Sidon.
The report emphasised that these figures cover only external physical damage to buildings and do not represent the final cost of reconstruction or the total economic losses caused by the war.
In Bint Jbeil district, the highest levels of destruction were recorded in Aitaroun, where 1,658 buildings were destroyed, followed by Bint Jbeil city with 1,076, Ayta al-Shaab with 539, Beit Lif with 371, Yaroun with 242 and Ainata with 227.
In Marjayoun district, 969 destroyed buildings were recorded in Mais al-Jabal, 824 in Taybeh, 285 in Houla, 199 in Markaba, 184 in Blida and 174 in Deir Siryan.
In Nabatieh district, 71 buildings were destroyed in Yahmar al-Shaqif, 69 in Zoutar al-Sharqiya and 37 in Kfar Sir. In Tyre district, 370 buildings were completely destroyed in Burj al-Shamali, 216 in Naqoura, 162 in Abbassiyeh, 80 in Tyre city and 65 in al-Mansouri. In Sidon district, destruction was concentrated mainly in Zirariyeh, where 65 buildings were destroyed, and Arzi, where 62 buildings were levelled.
The report also outlined significant limitations that prevent the findings from being treated as a definitive final assessment.
The study did not cover entire administrative districts but was limited to areas where clear satellite imagery was available.
As a result, the area south of the Litani River constituted the main focus, while only limited data from areas north of the river were included. Some municipalities were fully surveyed, while only selected sections of others could be examined.
For example, all cadastral zones in Bint Jbeil district were surveyed. In Tyre district, 74 of 75 cadastral areas were fully covered, while one was only partially included.
In Marjayoun, 17 of 33 areas were fully surveyed and 21 partially covered. In Nabatieh, only four of 52 areas were fully analysed, while 15 were partially examined. In Sidon, none of the 77 areas underwent a complete survey, with only five areas partially included in the assessment.
The report listed several additional limitations:
Critical infrastructure damage, including roads, bridges, electricity networks, water systems and telecommunications facilities, was not assessed.
Damage to underground shelters, basements and non-visible interior sections of buildings could not be detected.
No clear distinction could be made between residential, commercial and industrial structures.
Buildings with minor damage were excluded from debris-volume and cost calculations.
Structural density, shadows and narrow streets introduced potential margins of error in satellite analysis.
No field visits or on-site inspections were conducted to verify the findings. The assessment was carried out entirely through desk-based analysis of satellite imagery.
Given the scale of destruction and confidence in the methodology employed, no on-site verification procedures were undertaken in cooperation with the Lebanese Armed Forces or the United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS).
UNDP said the findings should be regarded as preliminary planning data and that the scope of the assessment would be expanded as additional satellite imagery and field information become available.
Officials noted that once excluded categories and infrastructure losses are taken into account, the true cost of the destruction in southern Lebanon is likely to be significantly higher than the estimates contained in the report.
Middle East
Iran makes Lebanon ceasefire prerequisite for final agreement with US
Assessments that efforts to restrain Israel in Lebanon are being shaped less in Beirut or Tel Aviv than in closed-door talks between Iranian and American negotiators resurfaced ahead of negotiations in the Swiss town of Bürgenstock.
Unlike the current approach adopted by the Lebanese government, Iran continues to pursue a strategy of leveraging its influence on the ground to secure diplomatic gains.
The Lebanese government, meanwhile, remains committed to a separate negotiating track that critics say facilitates concessions to Israel at the negotiating table in Washington that could not be achieved on the battlefield.
US Vice President JD Vance, who arrived in Switzerland to participate in the latest round of talks, confirmed that efforts to make the ceasefire in Lebanon permanent would be among the negotiations’ top priorities.
According to CNN, citing a diplomatic source familiar with the matter, the US and Iranian delegations agreed to convene an emergency session on the situation in Lebanon as the first item of discussion, placing the issue at the top of the agenda.
US says it faces difficulties over Israeli withdrawal
According to diplomatic sources cited by Al-Akhbar newspaper, US officials informed the Iranian side that Washington had made intensive efforts to persuade the Israeli government to complete a full withdrawal from Lebanon but had encountered significant difficulties in the process.
US officials requested Iranian support in facilitating Hezbollah’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon as part of efforts to enable an Israeli pullout.
The Iranian delegation responded that Hezbollah was an internal Lebanese matter. While indicating that Tehran did not oppose an agreement by the Lebanese authorities on a timetable providing for a rapid Israeli withdrawal, the delegation outlined what it viewed as its own area of responsibility.
Iranian representatives said both Tehran and Washington had committed to implementing measures aimed at ending the war across the region, including in Lebanon, and argued that the United States should exert pressure on Israel not only to uphold a ceasefire but also to withdraw quickly.
Iran reiterates Lebanon condition for final agreement
An Iranian official also told CNN that ending the conflict in Lebanon was the most important item on the Iranian delegation’s agenda.
During the talks, Vice President Vance said Washington would continue working toward peace between Lebanon and Israel and expressed hope that the temporary ceasefire could be transformed into a permanent agreement capable of delivering long-term stability.
Speaking before the session, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said Tehran would not begin negotiations on a final agreement with Washington unless the war in Lebanon was halted, as stipulated in the US-Iran memorandum of understanding.
In a post on X, Baghaei wrote: “It is not possible to move to the negotiation stage for a final agreement unless these provisions are implemented, foremost among them the first clause, which calls for ending the war on all fronts, including Lebanon.”
Military and diplomatic developments ahead of the Bürgenstock talks threatened to undermine the understanding reached between the parties. Following Israeli attacks in Lebanon and what Iran described as an escalation of military tensions in violation of the US-Iran agreement, Tehran announced that it had closed the Strait of Hormuz to traffic.
In a statement, Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters said the closure of the strait was only the first step in a series of measures planned by Tehran. Iran’s Foreign Ministry subsequently announced the suspension of the Geneva negotiations with the United States.
Following those developments, reports indicated that Washington intervened and increased pressure on Israel, leading Israeli military commanders to issue definitive orders for a complete halt to military operations in southern Lebanon for the second time within 24 hours.
Israeli media reports said the decision was not taken solely on Tel Aviv’s own initiative and that military operations were curtailed as a result of intense US pressure following Iran’s move in the Strait of Hormuz.
Middle East
US lifts naval blockade of Iran after ceasefire memorandum signed
The United States has lifted its naval blockade of Iran on the orders of President Donald Trump, ending restrictions on vessels entering and leaving Iranian ports.
Announcing the development, the US Central Command (CENTCOM) said the US military was no longer blocking maritime traffic to Iranian ports and had halted all operations related to enforcing the naval blockade.
The statement added that US warships would remain in the region to monitor compliance with the terms of the agreement.
The decision to lift the blockade follows the memorandum of understanding signed by the United States and Iran on June 18, aimed at ending the war and reopening the Strait of Hormuz to maritime traffic.
After signing the document in France, where he was attending the G7 summit, Trump sent the agreement to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian for approval.
In a statement, Iran’s Foreign Ministry said a formal signing ceremony between the two delegations, previously scheduled to take place in Geneva on June 19, would no longer be held.
Negotiations to continue in Switzerland
According to Axios, citing sources familiar with the matter, the signing process for the memorandum of understanding was accelerated in order to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to shipping as quickly as possible.
A planned meeting between US and Iranian representatives in Switzerland has not been cancelled. The talks are expected to focus on launching negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme, with US Vice President James David Vance and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf set to take part.
According to CNN, the 14-point memorandum calls for an immediate ceasefire on all fronts, the lifting of the naval blockade, the resumption of maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, the removal of oil sanctions on Iran and the withdrawal of US troops from areas surrounding Iran.
The agreement also includes the allocation of $300 billion for Iran’s economic reconstruction, the release of $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets and a 60-day negotiation process aimed at reaching a final agreement on the nuclear programme.
In return, the authorities in Tehran pledged not to develop nuclear weapons.
-
Europe2 weeks agoAfD says Ukraine should compensate Germany over Nord Stream sabotage
-
Asia2 weeks agoPentagon adds Alibaba, Baidu and BYD to list of firms with alleged Chinese military ties
-
Opinion1 week agoA voice rising from New Delhi: BRICS’s manifesto for a new world order
-
Europe2 weeks agoToyota and JLR warn EU ‘Made in Europe’ rules could threaten jobs and investment
-
America2 weeks agoWorld Cup referee from Somalia denied entry to US as immigration scrutiny intensifies
-
Middle East1 week agoMine clearing in Strait of Hormuz could delay shipping traffic for up to 50 days
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoTürkiye calls for Azerbaijan-Armenia peace treaty, highlights normalization steps with Yerevan
-
America7 days agoData leak exposes Peter Thiel’s secret ‘Dialog’ network of politicians, regulators, and tech elites
