Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Syria ‘unwilling, unprepared’ to attack Lebanon despite US pressure: Report

Damascus is reportedly prepared to reconsider its position if Tel Aviv were to withdraw its occupation troops from Syria

The Cradle | June 17, 2026

Syrian President and former Al-Qaeda chief Ahmad al-Sharaa is “unprepared and unwilling” to launch a military offensive against Lebanon despite growing US pressure, Israel’s Broadcasting Corporation (KAN) reported on 16 June.

KAN cited an informed Syrian source who said that Sharaa is “concerned” that an attack by Damascus against Hezbollah will be seen across the region as “serving” Israel’s interests.

This could negatively impact Damascus’s “legitimacy.”

For now, the self-appointed Syrian president is ruling out an attack against Lebanon and its resistance forces unless Israel decides to pull its forces out of Syria, the report states.

Israel has rejected withdrawal from both Syria and Lebanon.

KAN also said that Turkiye – a longtime backer of Sharaa since his days as Abu Muhammad al-Julani, founder and leader of Al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front – has urged Damascus against such an incursion.

Ankara is reportedly concerned that a Syrian assault on Lebanon would “embolden” Tel Aviv and “strengthen” its position.

“Trump proposed a framework in which the Syrian military would play a central role in a future effort to disarm Hezbollah,” i24 reported on Wednesday.

Lebanese authorities reportedly felt uneasy about the idea during recent US-backed direct talks with Israeli officials, which have taken place despite Lebanon’s legal restrictions.

Additionally, Israeli authorities are reportedly concerned about the effectiveness of a Syrian attack on Hezbollah.

“Some of the arrangements currently under discussion could ultimately strengthen Hezbollah politically and militarily rather than diminish its influence,” i24 reported.

Sharaa said earlier this week that talk of a Syrian incursion into Lebanon was a “rumor.” “Syria’s approach aims to end the war in Lebanon, not to expand it or get involved,” he stressed.

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly called on Syria to attack Hezbollah.

Iraqi resistance groups allied with Hezbollah have cautioned the Syrian government and its forces that they will act if Damascus initiates an attack on Lebanon.

Syria experienced a significant geopolitical change following the fall of former President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024, as Sharaa’s government aligned with Washington and engaged in discussions with Israel.

The US has largely lifted sanctions on Syria and called Damascus a “partner” in the global fight against ISIS — overlooking Sharaa’s past as an Al-Qaeda leader and earlier as deputy to ISIS founder Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Hezbollah fought in Syria for years with the former government, helping recapture areas from extremist groups like Al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front, Ahrar al-Sham, and others considered by the west as the “Syrian opposition.”

The Nusra Front, led by Sharaa, was rebranded into Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and ended up toppling Assad’s government in 2024.

HTS and other extremist factions with links to ISIS currently dominate what has become the new Syrian Defense Ministry and military.

Tom Barrack, US special envoy to Syria and Iraq, threatened Lebanon last year with a Syrian incursion, and said Damascus would “actively assist us in confronting and dismantling … Hezbollah.”

He also said Syria viewed Lebanon as its “beach resort” and would carry out an assault against the country unless Hezbollah is disarmed.

June 18, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Syria ‘unwilling, unprepared’ to attack Lebanon despite US pressure: Report

Hezbollah thwarts Israeli advances into Kfar Tebnit-Ali al-Taher

Al Mayadeen | June 18, 2026

The Islamic Resistance in Lebanon – Hezbollah released a detailed statement regarding confrontations along the Kfar Tebnit-Ali al-Taher axis in South Lebanon, after four days of failed Israeli attempts to advance toward the area via multiple axes under the cover of aerial surveillance, heavy artillery, and smoke screens.

The Operations Room stated that its fighters have consistently engaged all Israeli advance attempts by targeting troop movements and concentrations with rockets, drones, and FPVs, inflicting significant losses in personnel and equipment among Israeli officers, soldiers, and armored vehicles.

It added that, as a result of these engagements, Israeli occupation forces were compelled to withdraw and conduct nighttime helicopter evacuations under smoke cover and artillery fire to recover casualties.

According to the statement, on Wednesday, June 17, at 8:00 pm, following the detection of an Israeli infantry unit attempting to establish positions on the northeastern outskirts of Kfar Tebnit, Resistance fighters engaged the force using a swarm of drones and Ababil FPV drones, confirming casualties among its members, including killed and wounded. The operation was subsequently followed by rocket salvos and artillery fire directed at the same area.

Several hours later, at approximately 01:50 am on Thursday, June 18, amid enemy attempts to regroup in a crossing area, Hezbollah fighters targeted a Merkava tank with the appropriate weapons, achieving a direct hit and forcing the withdrawal of the Israeli force from the sector.

The Resistance confirmed that Israeli occupation forces remain present on the southern outskirts of Kfar Tebnit toward Arnoun, vowing that the Kfar Tebnit–Ali al-Taher axis will remain inaccessible to enemy advances.

The operations come as Hezbollah defends Lebanese territories from ongoing Israeli violations of the April 17 ceasefire and the memorandum of understanding reached between the United States and Iran, which clearly stipulates “Israel’s” withdrawal and cessation of attacks in Lebanon.

June 18, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , | Comments Off on Hezbollah thwarts Israeli advances into Kfar Tebnit-Ali al-Taher

Lebanon is now part of Iran’s deterrence doctrine

Lebanon is now central to Iran’s deterrence strategy, with pressure on allies treated as pressure on Tehran itself.

By Peiman Salehi | The Cradle | June 17, 2026

“We are consolidating an Iranian equation in the region, one in which Iran will no longer exercise restraint in the face of any aggression or disorder. It will cost the Americans some pain and expense, but they will get used to it.” – Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for Iran’s parliamentary National Security Commission

Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for Iran’s parliamentary National Security Commission, was describing a policy already underway rather than offering a warning.

Lebanon is where that policy is now being tested, and where much of what western analysts thought they understood about Iranian strategic behavior is being quietly dismantled.

A policy already in motion

The most persistent misconception about Iran’s intervention in the defense of Lebanon is that it is driven by ideology – by revolutionary solidarity with Hezbollah, by commitments that rational statecraft would eventually subordinate to national interest.

This reading is not simply incomplete. It mistakes the symptom for the diagnosis. What is unfolding is a deliberate reconfiguration of Iran’s deterrence architecture, one in which the security of key regional partners is no longer a separate file that adversaries can negotiate away in isolation, but a constituent element of Iran’s own national security perimeter.

Something else is also being overlooked. The confrontation over Lebanon marked the first time the Islamic Republic entered a direct military confrontation, primarily in defense of a key ally. The decision points to a broader evolution in Iranian strategic thinking, one whose implications extend far beyond Lebanon.

The limits of strategic patience

For years, Tehran operated under what officials and analysts described as strategic patience. The approach prioritized responses to direct attacks on Iranian territory, personnel, or core interests, while absorbing pressure across other fronts. This framework shaped Iran’s posture through successive crises, from the assassination of Qassem Soleimani to repeated Israeli strikes on Iranian assets across the region.

The approach was internally consistent, but over time its costs became clearer. Acts of restraint were increasingly read as openings to test the next front, while each separately negotiated file encouraged further compartmentalization.

Tehran’s takeaway, formed incrementally, was that this pattern was being used to press its positions rather than stabilize them.

Iranian decision-makers have since drawn a conclusion from that experience, and it is now reflected in their posture. Reuters reported in March that Iran had informed intermediaries as early as mid-March that any ceasefire arrangement must include a halt to Israeli operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon – linking the end of the broader war to a front that Washington insists is a separate matter.

Six regional sources confirm the linkage. One was explicit: “Iran is prioritizing Lebanon; it will not accept Israeli violations in Lebanon like what happened after the 2024 ceasefire.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated the same principle publicly, arguing that a ceasefire between Iran and the US constitutes a comprehensive ceasefire across all fronts, and that any violation on one front is a violation across all fronts.

Washington finds this inconvenient. That, from Tehran’s perspective, is precisely the point.

Reputation as deterrence 

The underlying logic is not difficult to follow, and it is not unique to Iran. Great powers derive influence not from military capability alone, but from reputation – specifically, the reputation for honoring commitments when doing so is costly.

This is why NATO remains the organizing principle of US security strategy in Europe despite its expense and its complications. It is why Washington maintains military installations across five continents that serve no immediate operational purpose.

The function is primarily reputational. Presence signals commitment, and commitment deters. Iranian strategists have reached a similar conclusion regarding their own regional position.

If Tehran abandons Hezbollah under sustained pressure – military, diplomatic, or economic – the signal sent to every other partner would be unmistakable, with Iranian guarantees no longer seen as reliable under sustained pressure.

In a region where Iran is constructing an alternative security architecture, that signal would be more damaging than any battlefield setback.

This is less about Hezbollah as an individual actor and more about the network of relationships of which it is a part. Surrendering one component under pressure does not stabilize the structure. It shows adversaries how much pressure to apply to the next one. Arab states of the Persian Gulf, watching from the sidelines, are drawing their own conclusions about what kind of power Iran is becoming.

From demonstration to leverage

Those conclusions are shaped by more than alliance politics. In two consecutive confrontations, Iran held its ground against the combined military pressure of the US and Israel – the two most powerful militaries operating in the region. That outcome is not lost on anyone in the neighborhood.

Iran has now demonstrated, in practice rather than theory, that it can absorb strikes and continue functioning as a regional actor. The New York Times (NYT), not an outlet inclined toward flattering Tehran, acknowledged that Iran has emerged from this period as one of the powers shaping West Asia’s future. Whatever one thinks of its politics, that assessment is difficult to dismiss.

The Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz reinforce this shift. What once functioned largely as a latent deterrent is now being used more directly. When oil prices jumped sharply on reports that Iran–US negotiations were breaking down, the market was pricing in a reality that policymakers in Washington have spent years avoiding: Iran’s geographic position is a permanent feature of any regional settlement, not a variable that military pressure can eliminate.

Roughly a fifth of the world’s oil supply moves through waters that Iran can reach. This leverage derives from geography and is now being used with a level of deliberateness that was less visible a decade ago.

Writing the next regional order

The Lebanon question cannot be separated from the broader contest over who writes the rules of the next regional order.

For decades, the US set those rules through military presence, alliance structures, and the credible threat of overwhelming force. Iranian officials increasingly assess that this period is shifting – not due to a collapse of American power, but because the conditions that once sustained its dominance no longer exist in combination.

Iran’s objective is to ensure that the next order is not written exclusively on American or Israeli terms, and that Iran participates as a power with recognized interests in shaping what comes next.

In that context, Lebanon becomes a test case. It is where Iran seeks to demonstrate that its red lines are enforceable, that its commitments to partners carry weight, and that the equation described by Rezaei is policy rather than posture.

The ceasefire remains fragile, with negotiations continuing through Qatari and Pakistani intermediaries, while escalation carries risks that Tehran does not dismiss. The direction, however, is no longer ambiguous.

Beyond patience 

Strategic patience remains, but has been superseded by a broader framework.

In its place is a doctrine in which compartmentalization by adversaries is met with deliberate integration by Tehran, in which an attack on a partner is treated as an attack on the order Iran is building, and in which the costs of sustained pressure are designed to accumulate rather than dissipate.

Iran has demonstrated that it can fight. It controls a chokepoint that the global economy cannot ignore. And it has shown it is willing to act before its own territory is directly targeted.

That combination – military credibility, geographic leverage, and a willingness to move early in defense of allies – is what a regional power looks like.

Lebanon is where Iran is making that case.

June 17, 2026 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Comments Off on Lebanon is now part of Iran’s deterrence doctrine

UN: Israel continues to violate Lebanon airspace in defiance of Iran-US MoU

Press TV – June 16, 2026

The United Nations has reported ongoing Israeli military offensives in southern Lebanon, including projectile launches and repeated violations of airspace, though it recorded a decrease in overall violence following a memorandum of understanding between Iran and the United States.

UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said during a news conference on Monday that the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) had “observed a decrease in violence and exchanges of fire” from midnight until 4 p.m. local time.

UNIFIL also documented “133 trajectories of projectiles and 2 airstrikes” conducted by Israeli forces, while noting “no trajectories from Hezbollah or non-state actors.”

Dujarric further explained that peacekeepers had recorded 25 violations of Lebanese airspace by Israeli forces, with a cumulative overflight duration of “approximately 40 hours.”

“Prior to the announcement of the agreement yesterday between the US and Iran, our UNIFIL peacekeepers noted 135 violations of Lebanese airspace by the [Israeli military], with a total overflight time exceeding 222 hours,” he stated, adding that the peacekeeping mission had recorded a total of “1,374 trajectories of projectiles over the weekend, with 1,328 attributed” to Israeli forces.

Regarding the humanitarian situation, Dujarric highlighted the prevailing uncertainty on the ground, stating, ”Some families have reportedly begun to return to their homes or are evaluating the conditions in communities in parts of southern Lebanon, particularly in Nabatieh.”

“However, no large-scale returns have occurred thus far,” he added.

On Monday evening, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council announced that the memorandum of understanding (MoU) reached between Tehran and Washington earlier in the day will bring an end to warfare on all fronts, including in Lebanon.

The SNSC secretariat also announced that the MoU is scheduled to be officially signed on Friday, June 19.

Despite the agreement, the Israeli army conducted demolitions and shelling in several towns in southern Lebanon on Monday. Reports indicated that displaced residents were returning to some southern villages, while local municipalities advised caution and urged residents to postpone their returns.

Since March 2, Israel has been conducting an extensive military offensive in Lebanon, killing 3,783 individuals and injuring 11,699 others, as reported by the Lebanese Health Ministry. Additionally, over one million people have been forced to flee their homes.

Israel maintains its occupation of certain regions in southern Lebanon, with some areas being held for decades and others since the onset of the 2023-2024 war. Israeli troops have also penetrated more than 10 kilometers into Lebanese land.

June 16, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , , , , | Comments Off on UN: Israel continues to violate Lebanon airspace in defiance of Iran-US MoU

Araghchi: Israeli occupation of Lebanese land a violation of MoU

Al Mayadeen | June 16, 2026

In a televised statement, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi affirmed that, from Iran’s perspective, the two parties to the Memorandum of Understanding are the United States and “Israel” on one side, and Iran and Hezbollah on the other.

He also said, contrary to Trump’s overnight statement, that the MoU would be signed on Friday.

Speaking at the opening of a meeting with ambassadors, chargés d’affaires, and heads of foreign and international missions in Tehran on Tuesday, Araghchi stressed that the end of the war in Lebanon is an inseparable part of the complete end of the war, noting that ending the war on Lebanon also includes ending the occupation of Lebanese territory.

Araghchi said that, from now on, any military attack by “Israel” on Lebanon, as well as the continuation of the occupation of Lebanese territories, will be considered a violation of the MoU.

According to Araghchi, the heads of the two delegations from the US and Iran will first sign the memorandum of understanding on Friday before the inaugural round of formal negotiations begins.

Tehran, he said, aims to build on the understandings reached and translate them into a tangible economic opening.

Implementation mechanism amid deep-seated mistrust

The Iranian foreign minister also said that the negotiation agenda and the mechanism for implementing the anticipated understandings will be formulated in light of the prevailing lack of trust in the United States stemming from previous experiences marked by breaches of commitments and failures to uphold obligations.

“Naturally, we do not squander any opportunity in foreign policy, but at the same time, we do not pin our hopes on any opportunity,” Araghchi said, underscoring Tehran’s cautious and pragmatic approach to the forthcoming negotiations.

Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump claimed overnight Monday that a memorandum of understanding with Iran has been signed and that the Strait of Hormuz will be completely reopened by Friday, speaking to reporters upon his arrival in Evian, France, ahead of the G7 summit.

The formal signing ceremony is scheduled for Friday in Geneva, with Vance confirmed to attend.

June 16, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Araghchi: Israeli occupation of Lebanese land a violation of MoU

Hezbollah fighters confront intruding Israeli forces in southern Lebanon

Press TV – June 16, 2026

Fighters from the Lebanese Hezbollah resistance movement have confronted an Israeli military convoy as it was attempting to infiltrate into southern Lebanon despite an Iran-US agreement that includes complete cessation of Israeli assaults on Lebanon.

Hezbollah said in a statement on Monday that its fighters, employing rockets and drones, obstructed an Israeli unit comprising an excavator and two Merkava tanks that was moving forward near the town of Kfar Tebnit, close to the southern city of Nabatieh.

In a subsequent statement later in the day, Hezbollah said, “The enemy army has reorganized its forces in the vicinity of the crossing area by deploying an armored contingent consisting of five Merkava tanks and four vehicles.”

“The combatants of the Islamic Resistance have targeted them with rocket barrages and artillery shells, and clashes are continuing.”

It came after an Israeli drone struck a vehicle in the same region, killing its driver. The air raid marked the first fatal strike since the announcement of the agreement.

Hebrew-language media outlets, meanwhile, reported “a serious security incident” for Israeli soldiers positioned in southern Lebanon.

The outlets added that Israeli rescue helicopters are trying to transport the injured troopers to hospitals in the northern part of the occupied territories.

There were no immediate reports about the number of casualties that the Israeli army suffered as a result of the incident.

Israeli media outlets also reported that a soldier fighting in southern Lebanon committed suicide last night due to mental distress from military offensives.

This comes as the Israeli military is witnessing a continuous and alarming rise in soldier suicides, a trend linked to widespread post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) stemming from Israel’s prolonged and repeated aggressions on multiple fronts.

According to figures published by the Haaretz daily newspaper, at least six active-duty soldiers and three non-active reservists died by suicide in April alone.

‎Earlier this year, the newspaper recorded 22 soldier suicides in 2025, a 15-year high.

A new poll by Israel’s public broadcaster KAN shows that a majority of Israeli settlers believe that the Zionist regime has failed to secure victory in any war since October 2023.

June 16, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Comments Off on Hezbollah fighters confront intruding Israeli forces in southern Lebanon

Iran warns ‘no point’ in deal with US if Israel remains unrestrained

The Cradle | June 14, 2026

Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned in a statement on 14 June that there is “no point” in continuing efforts to reach a deal with Washington if Tel Aviv remains unrestrained, a few hours after a new Israeli attack on Lebanon’s capital.

“The Zionists’ aggression against the southern suburb [of Beirut] once again demonstrated that the US either lacks the will to uphold its commitments or lacks the ability to do so,” Ghalibaf said.

“You cannot gain concessions by giving the [Israeli] regime a green light. The ‘good cop, bad cop’ game has grown old. If you lack the will and the ability to fulfill your commitments, then there is no point in speaking about continuing down this path,” the parliament speaker added.

Meanwhile, Brigadier General Mohammad Jafar Asadi, deputy commander and deputy inspector of the Iranian military’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, said Israel’s attack on Beirut’s southern suburb will not go unanswered.

“If you seek an agreement or understanding, you must discipline the Zionist regime. If this rabid dog is not controlled, it will bite your leg before the ink is dry on the agreement,” said Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesperson for the Iranian parliament’s Foreign Policy and National Security Committee.

The latest Israeli airstrike on the Lebanese capital took place earlier on Sunday afternoon. The attack hit a building in the southern suburb’s Ghobeiry area.

According to the Lebanese Civil Defense, three people were killed and six others injured.

The Israeli army claimed it bombed a “command center belonging to the Hezbollah terrorist organization in Beirut.”

“The targeted command center was being used by Hezbollah operatives to advance terrorist plans against the citizens of the State of Israel,” the Israeli military added, calling its deadly attack on Beirut a “precise strike.”

The new attack on Beirut coincides with intensive Pakistani mediation to secure a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the US and Iran.

Among Tehran’s terms is a full ceasefire in Lebanon and an end to Israel’s wars, attacks, and occupation across the region.

Following an Israeli attack on Beirut earlier this month, Iran carried out a ballistic missile attack on an Israeli air base and vowed harsher retaliation in response to any new attacks on the Lebanese capital.

June 14, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Iran warns ‘no point’ in deal with US if Israel remains unrestrained

Iran is not the one using Lebanon as its bargaining chip

By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | June 12, 2026

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun has claimed that Iran is “using Lebanon as its bargaining chip.” Not only is this blatantly false, but it also implies that Tehran has something material to gain from including Lebanon in its ceasefire agreement.

Several inflammatory statements have recently been issued by the Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, blaming Iran for “Israel’s” mass murder of Lebanese civilians and its illegal invasion of southern Lebanese lands.

These allegations against Iran are not new. For decades, they have been fabricated by Israeli politicians and Zionist think-tanks such as the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP). There is, however, a significant difference when such claims are echoed by a Lebanese president and whose government has been instructed to engage in direct talks with an enemy that, within a matter of months, has killed around 3,600 of his country’s citizens and continues to occupy Lebanese territory.

The mere concept of Lebanon’s “bargaining chip” is factually incorrect in Iran’s case. A “bargaining chip” means that Tehran would use Lebanon to its own benefit, which is patently false. If anything, Iran’s demands that “Israel” withdraw from Lebanese territory and cease its bombing campaign are making the prospect of reaching any deal more difficult.

If we focus solely on what would materially benefit Iran, the other demands it has listed – namely guarantees against future aggression, the withdrawal of US forces from the region, the lifting of sanctions, recognition of its control over the Strait of Hormuz, the unfreezing of assets, and compensation – are tangible gains. By contrast, the demand that any ceasefire apply across all fronts, especially the stipulation of a complete Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory, offers Iran no direct material benefit. This is a matter of principle rather than self-interest.

One could argue that by insisting on Lebanon’s inclusion in the ceasefire agreement, Iran was seeking to strengthen its standing while demonstrating loyalty to its allies. Yet if this were primarily a strategic or symbolic demand, Tehran could simply have accepted a return to the status quo that “Israel” had imposed on southern Lebanon prior to March 2.

Instead, the demand is that “Israel” no longer be permitted to do what it did following the announcement of the November 27, 2024 ceasefire agreement, which, according to UNIFIL, it violated at least 15,400 times. Iran has been clear that it is not interested in a merely symbolic agreement; it wants credible assurances that “Israel” will cease its bombing and retreat from Lebanese territory.

In reality, there are two reasons these kinds of statements are made – The first being that in the event of an Iranian comprehensive deal that forces the Zionist regime to retreat fully, the Lebanese leadership will lose all its remaining legitimacy. The second reason is that this argument closely mirrors a talking point promoted by US officials.

In 2021, Hezbollah facilitated the transfer of Iranian fuel shipments to Lebanon at a time when the country was experiencing a severe energy crisis. The following year, Tehran also offered additional fuel supplies to Lebanon on a free-of-charge basis. More broadly, Iran has historically provided financial support for a range of Lebanese social initiatives, including welfare programs, assistance to low-income communities, and reconstruction efforts.

Despite the Lebanese leadership that took power in February 2025 adopting a generally adversarial stance toward Hezbollah and Iran, Tehran did not seek to obstruct the formation of the government. In fact, Nawaf Salam and Joseph Aoun came to power in a political context in which Hezbollah and the Amal Movement ultimately chose not to block the process, reportedly in the interest of preserving domestic stability.

Allegations that Iran is responsible for the war are simply outlandish. Iran’s ambassador was declared “persona non-grata”, yet the Lebanese government is now sitting down for direct negotiations with the Israelis. All of the accusations made against Iran are simply nonsensical.

If Joseph Aoun and Nawaf Salam truly believed in Lebanese sovereignty, then they would also expel the US ambassador who represents a government that quite literally greenlights Israeli airstrikes against Lebanon. In this sense, the argument against Iran is not new; it draws on longstanding narratives that have circulated for decades and often lack substantive grounding.

It is often argued that a basic requirement of any ceasefire should be the cessation of hostilities and the withdrawal of forces from occupied territory. In this context, Iranian warnings that further Israeli strikes on Beirut would trigger retaliation came amid heightened tensions ahead of the third round of direct Lebanon–”Israel” negotiations, during which a planned Israeli escalation did not proceed.

For 15 months, diplomacy was given a chance. The result: Israelis are still occupying southern Lebanon, and they continue bombing Lebanese territory, while the US has developed a plan for disarming the Resistance instead.

June 12, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , , | Comments Off on Iran is not the one using Lebanon as its bargaining chip

Why Iran’s Retaliation for Israel’s Attack on Beirut is a Regional Game Changer

By Robert Inlakesh | The Palestine Chronicle | June 10, 2026

Iran’s ballistic missile response to Israel’s attack on Beirut is a game-changer for the power dynamics of West Asian politics. The ‘Unity of Squares’ concept has officially led to a NATO-style defense pact developing between the members of the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance.

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu threatened to strike the southern suburbs of Beirut last Monday, the immediate threat issued by the leadership in Tehran forced him to take a step back. Ultimately, the US and Israel would delay the implementation of the decision to attack the Lebanese Capital, then suffering an overwhelming response that outperformed expectations.

The first detail to consider here is that the mere threat of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launching strikes on Israeli targets forced Tel Aviv and Washington to take a step back, meaning that both de facto admitted that Tehran maintains deterrence power. Then came the Israeli strike on the southern suburbs this Sunday, which was extremely limited and nothing of the nature of what Netanyahu had originally advertised.

A weak strike on Beirut’s southern suburbs, which had no actual impact on Hezbollah whatsoever, indicates that the US-Israeli alliance acted in order to save face, seeking to test Iran’s resolve, but also to leave space for it to retreat from all-out war.

Following Iran’s missile waves, which struck Ramat David Airbase – according to satellite imagery evidence – the Israelis decided to launch an attack on Iran. Although they did target at least three radar sites and a petrochemical company, amongst other targets, it was clear that the Israeli attack was lackluster; designed primarily to give them the veneer of having risen to confront the IRGC. No Iranians were killed in the Israeli attack, and the majority of the sites hit were previously struck during the 40-day war earlier this year.

It was clear that the IRGC had prepared for the Israeli counter-strike, not only unleashing an attack of its own on Israeli companies and military sites in response but also coordinating its retaliatory action with Yemen’s Ansarallah.

As the Israelis were playing catch-up, the Iranians were implementing a carefully calibrated phase two of their promised retaliation to Israel’s attack on Beirut– that being the inclusion of new fronts. The IRGC had previously warned Tel Aviv that the war would expand to other fronts; the Yemeni Armed Forces achieved precisely this.

Ansarallah has declared that the Bab al-Mandab Strait is now closed to Israeli shipping, returning to the equation imposed in support of Gaza until October of 2025, when the ceasefire was signed. Yemen then went a step further and vowed to totally close Bab al-Mandab, should the war escalate further. This would represent an enormous economic blow to the global economy, considering the ongoing closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

The concept of the ‘Unity of Squares’ was originally developed by former Secretary General of Lebanese Hezbollah, Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah, and before him Iran’s former IRGC Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani. In essence, it was the idea of linking all of the fronts of the Axis of Resistance so that none would stand alone. On October 8, 2023, Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah put this into action by immediately intervening on the side of the Palestinian resistance in Gaza. Soon thereafter, Ansarallah would follow, and to a lesser extent, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq.

Israel had long bragged that its assassination of Nasrallah had broken this Unity of Squares dynamic, because Hezbollah was forced into accepting a less-than-favorable ceasefire in late 2024. It was because of Nasrallah’s refusal to abandon Gaza “no matter where it takes the region”, that Tel Aviv had decided to kill him. Therefore, it is accurate to say that the former Hezbollah leader quite literally gave his life for Gaza.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s quest to achieve “total victory” in his 7-front war has not proven successful, but one major step towards that was managing to break the idea of the Unity of Squares. Through Iran’s actions this Sunday, that “success” was just undone.

The IRGC has also recently been insisting that Gaza be included in their ceasefire agreement, something that a number of statements released by Hamas also appear to be indicating will be the case. If the Islamic Republic does impose its will on the US-Israeli alliance by setting in stone the equation that an attack on one is an attack on all, the Unity of Squares equation will be imposed fully, as it was originally intended. In the past, it was never fully implemented because of Iran’s absence as a front that could easily open.

The implications of this equation coming to life are that the Iranian-led Axis will undoubtedly be the most powerful alliance in the region. Not because they necessarily possess the most firepower and capabilities, but because they will together be able to cut off key international chokepoints, while battering their adversaries in a way that can achieve strategic deterrence.

It should be noted that this is a direct result of the US-Israeli failure in their war of aggression to achieve any of their goals. Instead of weakening Tehran, their reckless aggression and arrogance may have just undone the tactical victories they previously achieved, pushing Iran into the position that many previously argued it should have assumed sooner after October 7, 2023. Unless Tel Aviv and Washington find a way to reverse this, this will represent a major historic shift in regional power dynamics.

– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine.

June 10, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Iran’s Retaliation for Israel’s Attack on Beirut is a Regional Game Changer

Hamas: Iran seeking end to war on all fronts, including Gaza

MEMO | June 9, 2026

Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassem said the movement highly valued the Iranian and Yemeni responses to what he described as escalating Israeli aggression against the Lebanese people, saying the stance represented a genuine model of solidarity among the region’s nations in confronting Israeli attacks.

In a press statement on Monday, Qassem said Hamas viewed the position as “the true form of solidarity that should prevail among all components of the nation”. He called on regional forces to regard this level of support and backing as a duty at this stage in support of the Palestinian and Lebanese peoples.

Qassem said Hamas had received repeated assurances from Iranian and Yemeni officials that they were seeking to end the war on all fronts, including the ongoing war in the Gaza Strip.

He added that Iran had provided the movement with political, military and financial support and continued to declare its backing for the Palestinian people and their right to resist, while also supporting efforts aimed at securing a ceasefire.

Qassem said Hamas hoped that the current state of solidarity and direct support would extend to Gaza and that the enclave would remain central to regional efforts linked to ending the war and halting the aggression.

June 9, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Hamas: Iran seeking end to war on all fronts, including Gaza

Lebanese Parliament speaker demands full Israeli withdrawal as Hezbollah exposes Trump’s false claims

Press TV – June 9, 2026

Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has stated that Lebanon will accept nothing less than a complete and unconditional ceasefire on land, air and sea, strongly reaffirming the Lebanese resistance’s principled and steadfast position against Israeli aggression.

Berri said on Monday night that only after a full ceasefire takes effect will any discussion on the simultaneous withdrawal of the Israeli occupation army from Lebanese soil and Hezbollah forces from areas south of the Litani River begin.

He categorically rejected the Israeli regime’s so-called “test areas” or any piecemeal arrangements.

“What is being called ‘test areas’ is unacceptable to me. We only accept the withdrawal of Israel and the entry of the Lebanese army into the area, simultaneously with the return of all displaced people,” Berri said.

He also underscored Lebanon’s openness to mediation by any country proving the resistance’s flexibility for genuine peace while maintaining its unbreakable red lines against the Israeli aggressor.

Hezbollah slams Trump’s fabricated claims

In a separate development, Hezbollah has delivered a sharp rebuke to US President Donald Trump’s fabricated claims of direct contact with the Lebanese resistance.

Senior Hezbollah official and Deputy Chairman of the Political Council, Mahmoud Qamati, told AFP that no direct communication whatsoever exists between the resistance movement and Trump, dismissing Washington’s narrative as a deliberate distortion aimed at creating a false impression of diplomatic breakthroughs.

Qamati pointed out that messages are routinely passed through official Lebanese channels, particularly via Nabih Berri’s adviser to the US ambassador.

The senior official suggested that Trump may have intentionally mischaracterized indirect diplomatic channels.

Qamati added that Trump’s misleading suggestions of direct contact expose US readiness to bypass and undermine official Lebanese authorities the moment it seeks engagement with the country’s actual influential power brokers.

The denial comes after Trump boasted last week of holding direct talks with Hezbollah “for the first time in history” to discuss halting hostilities.

Trump made the claims immediately after the Israeli regime escalated threats to resume its brutal carpet-bombing of Beirut’s southern suburbs.

Meanwhile, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, in earlier remarks to CNN, acknowledged that a purely military solution will never bring security to the occupied northern settlements and said Lebanon is negotiating a non-aggression agreement with the Zionist entity.

Aoun also stated he would refuse to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu until the war ends.

However, Aoun’s suggestion that Hezbollah should hand over its weapons or negotiate directly with the government has been met with strong criticism from the resistance.

The unified message from Berri and Hezbollah remains loud and clear that no surrender, no partial ceasefires, and no acceptance of any arrangement that falls short of the complete withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from Lebanese territory.

June 9, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Lebanese Parliament speaker demands full Israeli withdrawal as Hezbollah exposes Trump’s false claims

After Israel strikes Beirut, Iran strikes Israel. What’s Trump’s next move?

By Trita Parsi | June 7, 2026

A fragile arrangement had been reached in Lebanon. Iran had made clear that if Israel continued to strike Lebanon, it would strike at Israel.

The US/Israeli side says that overnight, Hezbollah killed 15 Israeli soldiers. A violation of the arrangement in their view, and a sign that Iran either didn’t or couldn’t control Hezbollah.

At the same time, Israel knew that renewed attacks on Beirut, particularly Dahieh, would either force Tehran to attack or back down, while having the added benefit of further weakening US-Iran diplomacy.

Iran did not back down. An attack on Dahieh, according to the Iranians, is designed to kill as many senior Hezbollah and Iranian officials as possible. So a response was inevitable, in their view.

By now, four waves of missiles have been fired at northern Israel, Haifa, and other areas. Some of the missiles are of higher quality than the ones Iran used during the war.

Israel will strike Iran within the next few hours, and the Iranians don’t have any other expectation.

Whether the US enters the fighting actively as well, or only provides support for Israel, is the big question mark right now.

The US side is deeply frustrated that the MOU has not been signed yet and accuses the Iranians of either playing for time, overnegotiating, or being incapable of getting to yes.

The Iranians, in turn, accuse the US of constantly changing the parameters while being unwilling to release a portion of Iran’s frozen assets at the outset of the MOU as a way to prove their seriousness.

If Trump doesn’t enter the war, he will be accused of abandoning Israel. If he enters the war, he will validate that Israel has an effective veto on the negotiations and on whether the US is at war or not.

A true America First policy would have worked to extricate the US from the Israeli-Iranian rivalry.

Now more than ever, it should be clear why such an exit serves US interest.

June 7, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on After Israel strikes Beirut, Iran strikes Israel. What’s Trump’s next move?

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »