Connect with us

Middle East

Israel’s ceasefire with Hezbollah: ‘From total victory to total surrender’

Published

on

Despite the assassination of senior Hezbollah leaders and the bombing in violation of the laws of war, Israel has failed to achieve its main objectives on the Lebanese front. Hezbollah’s attacks on Israel have not been prevented, nor have the residents of the north returned to their homes. Israel’s tactical successes on the ground were insufficient to achieve its strategic goals, forcing it to agree to a ceasefire.

Ahead of the ceasefire announcement between Israel and Hezbollah, which is expected within hours, both parties have escalated their attacks. Opposition to the ceasefire from Israel’s far-right ministers has raised concerns that the agreement could be cancelled at the last minute.

The ceasefire agreement is anticipated to be announced by the U.S. and France today, according to several news agencies citing Lebanese, U.S., and Israeli officials. Both the Israeli and Lebanese governments are scheduled to meet beforehand to discuss the terms of the ceasefire.

The Lebanese Health Ministry reported that at least twenty-two people were killed in Israeli attacks on Lebanon yesterday. Early this morning, Israel bombed southern Lebanon and targeted buildings in the southern suburbs of Beirut, claiming to have killed a senior Hezbollah commander.

Hezbollah has also intensified its attacks on Israel’s northern regions. Educational activities in some areas have been suspended, and authorities announced new measures in response to the ongoing assaults.

Despite positive signals from Lebanon and the U.S., internal opposition within Israel suggests the ceasefire agreement could face last-minute hurdles. National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir described the deal as a “big mistake” and a “historic missed opportunity to eliminate Hezbollah.” Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich commented, “There is no agreement, and if it is signed, it will be worth no more than a signed piece of paper. We have dismantled Hezbollah and will continue to dismantle it.”

Criticism is not limited to far-right ministers. Members of parliament from Netanyahu’s Likud party, opposition leaders, and northern Israeli mayors have also voiced disapproval. Avi Dichter, a Likud party member and security cabinet member, stated on social media that he lacked sufficient details to support the ceasefire, adding that he would oppose it if it mirrored UNSC Resolution 1701.

David Azoulay, mayor of Metula, referred to the ceasefire as a “surrender deal” during an interview on Channel 12 television. Avichai Stern, mayor of Kiryat Shmona, criticized the agreement on social media, warning that it “accelerates the repetition of the 7 October attack in the north.” Stern remarked, “I don’t understand how we went from total victory to total surrender.”

Benny Gantz, leader of the opposition National Unity Party, urged Prime Minister Netanyahu to publish the full details of the agreement. Similarly, Avigdor Liberman, leader of the Israel Our Home party, labeled the deal as “terrible for Israel.”

The proposed ceasefire includes: Israel will withdraw its troops from southern Lebanon within days. Beirut will deploy troops along the border, and Hezbollah fighters will retreat north of the Litani River and a U.S.-led committee will oversee the ceasefire’s implementation.

The main sticking point remains Israel’s claimed “right to self-defense.” Prime Minister Netanyahu insisted the agreement guarantee Israel’s freedom to act against Lebanon if the ceasefire is not upheld. Lebanon has firmly rejected this demand.

According to The National, a compromise formula has been proposed to address this issue: Israel would present grievances to the international committee monitoring the ceasefire, which would then relay them to the Lebanese army and UNIFIL. A deadline would be set for addressing these grievances before Israel could take further action. This proposal is still under discussion.

Notably, the agreement does not establish a buffer zone, a key objective of Israel’s ground offensive. The buffer zone was intended to keep northern Israel out of Hezbollah’s reach. Additionally, there is no clear plan for the tens of thousands of residents who fled their homes in northern Israel after 7 October.

Despite Israel’s tactical successes, including the assassination of Hezbollah leaders and the ground invasion, it has not achieved its primary war aims in Lebanon. U.S. President Donald Trump, set to take office in January, has urged Netanyahu to conclude the conflict before his inauguration. Meanwhile, the Israeli army’s morale is reportedly low due to heavy casualties and ongoing debates over conscription. Observers note that the military’s reluctance to continue fighting further complicates Israel’s strategic position.

Middle East

US waives human rights terms on $320m military aid to Egypt

Published

on

The US State Department stated that it has waived human rights conditions on more than $300 million in military aid to Egypt.

The statement emphasised that this decision was taken in consideration of Cairo’s “helpful role” since the outbreak of the war against Iran.

Egypt began receiving substantial support from the US after signing a peace treaty with Israel in 1979.

Since the late 1980s, the country has received approximately $1.3 billion annually in US military assistance.

A portion of this aid is subject to conditions related to human rights and democracy, which can be waived on national security grounds.

Withholding funds, including during the administration of former US President Joe Biden, has caused tension between Cairo and Washington in the past.

A letter dated 21 September and addressed to various congressional committees, obtained by Reuters, stated that Secretary of State Marco Rubio “decided to waive the certification requirement under the fiscal year 2025 Foreign Military Financing programme for Egypt of $320 million.”

This waiver was subsequently confirmed by the State Department.

An accompanying memorandum justifying the decision stated that this portion of military aid was “essential for counterterrorism, border security, or non-proliferation programmes, or otherwise important to the national security interests of the United States.”

The memorandum, dated 4 September and bearing Rubio’s signature, stated: “Exercising this waiver authority is critical to the US-Egypt relationship and to US national security priorities, particularly given the helpful role Egypt has played in the aftermath of Operation Epic Fury.”

“Operation Epic Fury” is the designation used by the US military for the campaign launched jointly with Israel against Iran in late February.

The State Department memorandum, whose authenticity was confirmed by two sources in Washington familiar with the letter, did not provide detailed information regarding what was termed Egypt’s “helpful role”.

The State Department’s annual decision on military aid to Egypt typically covers funds allocated for the preceding fiscal year, which ends on 30 September.

A State Department spokesperson stated that Rubio waived the certification in the interest of US national security and that the US continues to cooperate with the Egyptian government across a range of issues.

In an emailed statement, the spokesperson said: “This waiver recognizes the importance of maintaining security cooperation with Egypt at a time of significant security challenges in the region.”

The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not immediately comment on the matter.

The spillover effects of the Iran war have imposed a heavy toll on US security partners, including Egypt.

Owing to rising fuel prices and other disruptions, the Egyptian economy is passing through a difficult period.

Under the Biden administration, the US withheld portions of the annual military allocation on multiple occasions over Egypt’s human rights record.

In 2024, following the Hamas-led 7 October attack on Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza, the Biden administration set aside human rights conditions, disbursing the entire $1.3 billion allocation to Egypt for the first time in its tenure.

Human rights organisations have long accused Egypt, under the administration of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, of widespread human rights abuses, including torture and enforced disappearances.

This week, Egyptian police detained six journalists from a fact-checking and investigative media outlet, accusing them of spreading false information on behalf of the banned Muslim Brotherhood.

Egyptian authorities state that they have taken steps to address human rights issues. Sisi said stability is paramount and that the government supports human rights by working to provide for basic needs.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Britain expands curbs on arms exports to Israel over Gaza risks

Published

on

Britain has significantly broadened its military export restrictions targeting Israel, suspending or rejecting more than 80 licences for items the IDF could use in Gaza.

This figure is nearly triple the number affected when the policy was first introduced in September 2024.

United Kingdom Minister of State for the Middle East Stephen Doughty said that as part of what he described as a “tighter system” for assessing exports to Israel, more than 50 further export applications have been refused since approximately 30 licences were initially suspended.

Under the initial decision taken in September 2024, 30 of roughly 350 licences were suspended after the British government concluded there was a “clear risk” that certain military exports could be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.

The affected equipment included components for military aircraft, drones, naval systems, and targeting gear.

Doughty said additional measures adopted this month established what he termed a “double safeguard” mechanism within the approvals process.

Export applications must now be assessed both against existing international humanitarian law criteria and in light of Britain’s position on the legality of Israel’s presence in the Palestinian territories.

“We have so far suspended or refused more than 80 licences,” Doughty said, adding that he had personally examined each licence.

Despite the wider restrictions, British-origin parts entering the international F-35 fighter jet supply chain continue to be largely exempt.

The UK government argues that preventing British-made components from entering the global F-35 pool could undermine the programme as a whole and have serious consequences for the security of the UK and its allies.

Direct exports of F-35 parts intended specifically for Israel remain suspended.

Doughty defended maintaining the supply of components via the international programme, arguing that halting it could have severe ramifications for the broader European and allied security architecture.

Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Emily Thornberry challenged this position, arguing that the issue was political rather than purely legal.

Thornberry suggested adopting an approach similar to the Dutch model, under which components entering the international supply chain could be flagged as “not intended for aircraft bound for Israel”.

The initial suspension was implemented in September 2024 by then Foreign Secretary David Lammy.

Lammy stressed at the time that the measure did not constitute an arms embargo and applied solely to items assessed as usable in military operations in Gaza.

Since then, the policy has been tightened further under Prime Minister Andy Burnham.

The expanded export restrictions follow the Burnham government’s adoption of a more confrontational policy toward the Israeli government.

Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband drew sustained applause at the Labour Party’s annual conference in Liverpool after delivering a sharp critique of the Netanyahu government’s policies and defending the decision to ban trade with Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

Accusing Israel of committing war crimes in Gaza, Miliband stated that the British government heard public outrage over the conflict, telling delegates: “We hear you. You were right.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu holds secret UAE talks with Saudi Arabia and Arab officials

Published

on

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with representatives of Gulf and Arab nations that lack diplomatic ties with Israel, including Saudi Arabia, during his weekend visit to the United Arab Emirates.

Sources close to the gathering told the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth on Monday that representatives from Morocco, Libya, Jordan, and Qatar also took part in the meeting.

Netanyahu made a unannounced visit to Abu Dhabi on Sunday, where he met with the country’s leader, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

According to Israeli media, this marked the first time the United Arab Emirates officially confirmed a visit by Netanyahu.

The meeting was arranged by Mossad Director Roman Goffman “at the request of Saudi Arabia, which asked for Israel’s assistance against Houthi attacks in the Red Sea region,” according to Yedioth Ahronoth.

The discussions addressed Iran and the Houthi militia. The newspaper added that the Arab states heard from Israel that “Israel is prepared to assist countries in the region with air defence systems, just as it aided the UAE during the conflict with Iran.”

Conflict in Yemen intensified in September when Ansarullah militiamen launched a rapid offensive that seized Yemen’s entire Red Sea coastline, including the vital maritime corridor of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

The Yemeni resistance also imposed a blockade on Saudi Arabia’s energy exports and staged multiple attacks against the kingdom.

Saudi Arabia reportedly sought military assistance from the US to counter Ansarullah.

Washington declined to attack the Houthis directly, but announced that it would provide intelligence and targeting support.

Reporting on the same visit, The Jerusalem Post said Netanyahu spent six hours in the UAE and that the principal subject of his discussions with MBZ was Iran.

Citing sources familiar with the matter, the newspaper added that the trip came “after Netanyahu exerted heavy pressure on the United Arab Emirates to arrange a meeting ahead of the Israeli elections on 27 October.”

Separately, the Associated Press, citing a person with direct knowledge of the meeting, reported that Netanyahu’s visit to the UAE was arranged in part to ask MBZ to deny reports that he had warned the Israeli prime minister of an impending Hamas threat prior to 7 October 2023.

According to Israeli media, Netanyahu’s office denied the AP report, issuing the following statement:

“Fake news. The visit focused solely on strengthening ties between the two countries and on regional issues.”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey