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

France explores Syrian transit routes as alternative oil corridor to bypass Strait of Hormuz

Published

on

France is evaluating the creation of alternative energy routes through Syria to mitigate potential disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz following the resumption of hostilities between the United States and Iran. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot stated that Paris is working on new transit routes for the transport of Persian Gulf oil, with Syria emerging as a prominent option in this context.

“Among the initiatives we have pursued since the beginning of this crisis is the concept of preparing alternative routes, in order to avoid remaining dependent on blockages that could occur here or there,” Barrot said.

Barrot indicated that Syria, which has entered a process of reunification following the collapse of the Bashar al-Assad administration, could become a “new regional hub.” The French minister characterized the country as a strategic corridor that could transport Persian Gulf oil to the Mediterranean, thereby reducing the impact of potential shipping disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz.

Stating that France wishes to expand commercial and economic cooperation with the Damascus administration, Barrot expressed that they aim to establish a secure transit route for Gulf producing nations through this cooperation.

According to Barrot, implementing this plan requires a comprehensive assessment of existing infrastructure and the provision of necessary security guarantees. The French minister noted that these efforts are of critical importance for securing global energy markets.

Barrot’s remarks followed French President Emmanuel Macron’s visit to Damascus on Tuesday. During the visit, Macron met with Ahmed Shara, the former al-Qaeda leader who has declared himself President of Syria.

Patrick Pouyanné, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of TotalEnergies, was among the delegation accompanying Macron. Characterizing Syria as a country situated “at the crossroads of the Middle East,” Pouyanné said it could establish a vital energy link between Iraq and the Mediterranean.

In response to the potential closure of the Strait of Hormuz, Iraq has been shipping its oil via tankers through Syria for export since April.

More than 600,000 tons of fuel were exported through this route between April and June. Last month, Iraqi and Syrian officials discussed the reactivation of the Kirkuk-Baniyas oil pipeline and the establishment of energy transit mechanisms.

TotalEnergies has also signed a memorandum of understanding for an offshore exploration block in the Mediterranean. However, Pouyanné stated that beyond this, the company currently has no concrete projects under development.

Stating that security conditions in the country have not yet stabilized, Pouyanné said, “It is clear today that the security situation does not yet permit us to operate here. However, I believe coming here, to Damascus, is a positive initiative.”

Shortly after Pouyanné’s statements, two bombs reportedly exploded near the Four Seasons Hotel, where the French delegation was staying.

Stating that the Syrian administration must be given time to establish control over the country, Pouyanné said, “We must not demand too much,” adding, “We need to be a little patient.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

Senior US military officers ignored system alerts on obsolete targets, leading to strike on Iranian school

Published

on

Senior US military commanders approved strike lists despite automated system warnings indicating that intelligence on certain targets in Iran was years out of date and required revalidation, according to a CNN report citing three sources familiar with the decision-making process.

The warnings were bypassed to “speed things up” under intense pressure to rapidly designate targets during the opening days of the conflict. One of the targets approved by commanders under these conditions resulted in a strike on a school in Minab.

This military decision is directly linked to the February 28 strike on the Shajara Tayyiba School in Minab, which killed at least 168 children and 14 teachers. The heavy loss of life makes the strike one of the mass casualty events involving the highest number of civilian deaths in the recent history of the US military.

According to the sources, automated system warning messages indicating that the intelligence was obsolete were already integrated into the database used during the target development process. Within this system, a target could only be added to a strike list with the approval of a senior officer. Two sources stated that the decision by senior commanders to ignore these warnings directly contributed to the school being targeted “by mistake.”

Military officials reportedly realized within days of the strike on the school that the error stemmed from outdated information. Despite the passage of months, the Pentagon has not released its investigation report on the incident.

A White House official stated that the investigation remains ongoing, asserting, “As we have said before, the US does not target civilians.”

The Pentagon referred inquiries on the matter to US Central Command (CENTCOM), which declined to comment, citing the active investigation.

School and military facility were located within the same compound

The strike reportedly occurred while the US military was targeting an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) facility located near the Shajara Tayyiba School. Initial military investigative findings also pointed to this conclusion.

Satellite imagery reveals negligence in the target analysis process. Imagery from 2013 shows the school and the IRGC base located within the same compound, whereas imagery from 2016 clearly indicates that the school had been separated from the base by a fence and provided with a separate entrance.

In satellite imagery dated December 2025, dozens of children can be seen playing in the schoolyard.

The strike took place on the first day of operations following Donald Trump’s decision to launch military action, a period during which military officials and intelligence analysts worked under intense pressure to update thousands of targets.

Analysts were unable to update all records in the Pentagon database prior to the operation. As a result, records for multiple targets—including the IRGC facility adjacent to the elementary school—consisted of information that was more than 10 years old.

Due to the accelerated timeline, analysts prioritized updating “high-priority” records, which included moving targets with a high probability of being struck first and locations posing an immediate threat to US forces. Because fixed facilities were deemed a lower priority, the information for the facility near the school was not updated.

Disconnected databases and staffing shortages compounded the error

At the center of the investigation are two separate targeting databases used by the Pentagon. These are known as the Modernized Integrated Database (MIDB), which was built in the 1980s and relies on manual data entry, and the Mitigation and Analysis Reporting System (MARS), a new artificial intelligence-backed digital platform.

Both systems indicated that information needed to be updated before use. However, efforts to fully transition to the MARS system were reportedly years behind schedule, leaving official targeting data still dependent on the legacy MIDB system.

An intelligence analyst had previously noted changes on the ground in a separate digital tool, but because this tool was not connected to the official targeting database, the information did not reach commanders. How this disconnect influenced the targeting of the school is also being examined as part of the investigation.

Following the strike, Donald Trump suggested that Iran might be responsible for the incident, later asserting that responsibility might never be determined. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated that the strike would be thoroughly investigated, claiming that the US takes every possible measure to prevent civilian casualties.

However, due to cuts implemented early in Hegseth’s tenure, Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response (CHMR) teams within CENTCOM were reportedly facing severe staffing shortages.

Under the cuts made by Hegseth prior to the conflict with Iran, the 10-person civilian casualty specialist staff at CENTCOM was reduced to a single full-time employee.

Sources added that while the remaining staff did everything they could, they lacked adequate resources due to the budget and personnel cuts implemented by Hegseth.

Continue Reading

Middle East

US revokes Iran oil license and launches airstrikes following Strait of Hormuz tanker attacks

Published

on

The US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has revoked a general license that permitted commercial transactions involving Iranian oil.

According to a statement issued by the agency, the “General License X” regulation, which had been in effect since June 21, 2026, was fully rescinded as of July 7, 2026, and replaced by the newly introduced “General License X1” regulation.

The statement noted that a wind-down period lasting until July 17 has been granted to allow for the completion of transactions initiated prior to the revocation.

The Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs reacted strongly to the OFAC decision, declaring that Tehran will take all necessary measures to protect its national security and interests.

In a statement shared on the ministry’s official Telegram channel, Iran stated: “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iran decisively condemns the US Department of the Treasury’s decision to revoke the temporary suspension of sanctions on the sale of Iranian oil. This step is a flagrant violation of Article 10 of the memorandum of understanding concerning the cessation of military conflict.”

Following the decision, the US Armed Forces conducted a series of airstrikes targeting Iranian territory during the night of July 8. US officials maintained that the military operation was a response to Tehran’s actions in the region. Washington characterized Iran’s conduct as a violation of the ceasefire regime and a threat to the security of navigation in the region.

The Iranian state broadcaster, IRIB, reported that explosions occurred at various locations across the country. News sources noted that seven explosions were heard near the village of Taherui in the Sirik district, and six explosions were heard near the city of Qeshm.

Previously, US media outlets including The Wall Street Journal and Axios, citing US officials, had reported that despite the active ceasefire, forces of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had attacked oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz.

According to data shared by the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), a tanker off the coast of Oman was struck by an unidentified munition, causing a fire on board. It was reported that the incident resulted in no casualties, injuries, or environmental pollution.

The Wall Street Journal reported that one of the targeted vessels may have been the “Al Rekayyat,” a tanker owned by the Qatar-based shipping company Nakilat.

The vessel sustained damage to its engine room, though the crew was reported to be safe. Axios reported that while the attacked vessels sustained damage, no major destruction had occurred.

On June 18, 2026, the US and Iran had signed a memorandum of understanding that established a two-month ceasefire and envisioned the initiation of negotiations for a more comprehensive agreement.

Following the start of the ceasefire period, the US had also struck targets in Iran on June 27 and June 28, citing Iranian actions against commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.

Following those strikes, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had announced that operations would be launched against US facilities located in Arab countries.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey