Connect with us

Middle East

US envoy Tom Barrack in Beirut to discuss Hezbollah disarmament plan

Published

on

US special envoy for Syria, Tom Barrack, traveled to Beirut to meet with officials regarding Hezbollah.

Barrack’s statements followed a meeting with Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam during his visit to Lebanon on Monday.

Barrack asserted that the disarmament of Hezbollah is a Lebanese internal matter, adding that while the organization continues to be designated a “foreign terrorist organization” by the US, Washington’s current role is to “provide advice, facilitate dialogue, and prevent the escalation of tension.”

The US diplomat also said that they “cannot force Israel to do anything,” only “have influence.”

Barrack explained that his return to Lebanon stems from US President Donald Trump’s renewed interest in ensuring regional stability and that Lebanon plays a key role in this effort.

‘The Syrian government should be held responsible for recent acts of violence’

The US official emphasized the importance of supporting the Lebanese government’s reform efforts and maintaining security and institutional stability.

Barrack also highlighted the failure of the ceasefire agreement between Lebanon and Israel, stating that efforts are ongoing to understand and resolve the agreement’s collapse.

Comparing Lebanon’s situation to Syria’s, the envoy described the conflict in Syria as a “disaster” and stressed that the Syrian government must be held accountable.

Regarding potential military intervention, Barrack clearly stated that the US has no intention of sending more troops to any conflict zone “under hostile conditions.”

This marks Barrack’s second visit to Lebanon in two weeks. Lebanon and the US are “exchanging ideas” on a proposal that would ultimately lead to the disarmament of Hezbollah and the transfer of all its weapons to the control of the Lebanese state.

Hezbollah rejects the American plan

Beirut is also demanding that Israel halt its daily attacks on the country and withdraw from five strategic points it occupies in southern Lebanon.

Hezbollah’s Secretary-General Naim Qassem accused Barrack of encouraging the Lebanese army to disarm the group and incite a civil war.

Qassem also adopted a firm stance on the issue of weapons, arguing that in Hezbollah’s absence, Israel would expand its territorial control in parts of Lebanon.

“We will not surrender or give in to Israel; Israel will not be able to take our weapons from us,” Qassem said in a video address at a memorial for a senior Hezbollah commander killed in last year’s war with Israel.

Barrack blackmails Lebanon and Hezbollah through the new HTS administration

During his previous visit, Barrack said he welcomed Lebanon’s response to the US plan for Hezbollah’s disarmament and stressed that Lebanon should not be “left behind” in the “rapidly changing region.”

In response to the US proposal, Lebanese officials submitted a seven-page document demanding Israel’s complete withdrawal from disputed territories, including the Shebaa Farms, and reaffirming state control over all weapons.

The government also pledged that Hezbollah’s weapons in Southern Lebanon would be destroyed.

In an interview with The National, Barrack said that time is of the essence. “Honestly, I think they will say, ‘the world will pass us by.’ Why? On one side there is Israel, on the other there is Iran, and now Syria is also emerging so quickly that if Lebanon does not act, it will become Bilad al-Sham again,” he said, using the historical name for the “Greater Syria” region.

This comment by Barrack was interpreted as Lebanon being at risk of being absorbed into Greater Syria, but the envoy later clarified that he only intended to praise “Syria’s impressive steps.”

“I can guarantee that the Syrian leaders only want coexistence and mutual prosperity with Lebanon, and the US is committed to supporting this relationship between two equal and sovereign neighboring countries living in peace and prosperity,” Barrack said.

Barrack says there is no ‘Plan B’ besides the current Damascus administration

Meanwhile, Barrack reiterated Washington’s support for the new government in Syria, stating there is no “Plan B” other than cooperating with the current authorities to unite the country.

Speaking to the Associated Press in Beirut, Barrack took a critical stance on Israel’s recent intervention in Syria, saying its timing was wrong and complicated efforts for regional stability.

Barrack told the Associated Press that the “murders, acts of revenge, and massacres committed by both sides” are “unacceptable,” but argued that “Syria’s current government, as a new government with very few resources to solve a wide variety of problems, is doing its best.”

Regarding Israel’s attacks on Syria, Barrack said, “The US was not consulted on this matter, did not participate in this decision, and the US has no responsibility for matters that Israel deems necessary for its own defense.”

The envoy added that Israel’s intervention “created another very confusing chapter” and “happened at a very bad time.”

Barrack noted that when the recent clashes erupted, Israel’s view was that southern Damascus was a “suspicious” area and that any military developments there should be discussed and agreed upon with them. “The new government [in Syria] was not exactly of this view,” he said.

The envoy also stated that the ceasefire declared between Syria and Israel on Saturday was a limited agreement that only addressed the conflict in Suwayda. He underlined that the agreement did not address broader issues between the two countries, including Israel’s claim that the area south of Damascus should be a demilitarized zone.

According to the envoy, Israel favors a divided Syria

In talks leading to a peace agreement, Barrack said that “both sides did their best to reach an agreement on specific issues related to the movement of Syrian forces and equipment from Damascus to Suwayda.”

Stating that “whether or not to accept Israel’s intervention in a sovereign state is a separate issue,” Barrack suggested that Israel would prefer Syria to be fragmented and divided rather than controlled by a strong central state.

Barrack noted that strong nation-states, especially Arab states, are seen as a threat to Israel. “[But in Syria] I think all minority communities are smart enough to say that we will be better off together, in a central structure,” he said.

‘A Syria-Türkiye defense agreement is a matter for those countries’

When asked whether the violence in Suwayda had deepened distrust in the new government in Damascus and what would become of the SDF agreement, Barrack said he did not think the incidents in Suwayda would derail these talks and that progress could be made “in the coming weeks.”

Barrack had met with Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) leader Mazloum Abdi over the weekend.

When reminded that Türkiye had offered to provide defense assistance to Syria, Barrack appeared to give a green light to a possible Damascus-Ankara agreement.

Barrack said the US has “no position” on the possibility of a defense agreement between Syria and Türkiye, adding, “It is not the job or in the interest of the US to tell neighboring countries what they should do to each other.”

Middle East

UNDP estimates $1.38 billion in building damage across southern Lebanon

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Iran makes Lebanon ceasefire prerequisite for final agreement with US

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading

Middle East

US lifts naval blockade of Iran after ceasefire memorandum signed

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey