Millions of Books Could Have Been Destroyed in Lebanon During Israeli Bombings
Sputnik – 17.10.2026
BEIRUT – The number of books destroyed by Israeli bombings of libraries, as well as religious and cultural institutions since October 2023, has exceeded 3 million copies, founder and coordinator of the National Network for the Protection of Libraries, Archives, and Cultural Heritage in Lebanon Hadi Bekdash told Sputnik on Saturday.
“There are reports of the burning of more than 700,000 books belonging to Lebanese and Arab publishers, as well as more than 3 million books from homes, libraries, religious centers, family collections, researchers’ libraries, and universities, publishers, cultural institutions, and private collections since 2023,” Bekdash said.
In 2026, practically confirmed information appeared about the destruction of dozens of public and hundreds of private libraries during the conflict with Israel, he added.
These data do not reflect the full scale of losses, since Lebanon still does not have a unified national database of destroyed libraries, archives, and book collections, the coordinator said.
Bekdash added that it will be possible to finally assess the damage only after conducting a nationwide inventory of lost and damaged collections.
A national campaign, A Million Books for Lebanon, is currently underway in the country, aimed at restoring destroyed and damaged libraries.
Israel’s Military Actions in Lebanon Grossly Violate International Law — Lavrov
Sputnik – 12.10.2026
MOSCOW – Russia believes that the use of force by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in Lebanon grossly violate international law, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Monday.
At a press conference with Lebanese Foreign Minister Youssef Raji, Lavrov said that they discussed Israel’s ongoing actions in Lebanon, adding that Moscow has reaffirmed its position in support of Lebanon’s sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity.
“Of course, we are committed to our assessments that the military actions of the IDF, the Israeli army, grossly violate the norms of international law and provoke an additional escalation of tensions in Lebanon,” Lavrov said.
This was part of a broader discussion of the situation in the Middle East, the Russian minister said.
“We certainly discussed the situation in the region and examined issues related to developments in the Gulf, in and around Syria, and, naturally, in Palestine, where Israel’s actions are a source of particular concern, as they create facts on the ground that directly contradict the UN resolution on the establishment of a Palestinian state,” Lavrov said.
How Israel destabilizes the Middle East: Denying sovereignty and the right to exist
By Buğra Sarı | MEMO | October 1, 2026
Israel’s pursuit of security increasingly rests on a destabilizing proposition: that its neighbours become less threatening when their capacity to exercise sovereignty is diminished. Since the Hamas-led attacks of October 7, 2023, this approach has become particularly visible across several distinct arenas. Military operations, territorial incursions and restrictions on political and economic autonomy suggest a conception of security dependent on keeping others vulnerable. The consequences extend beyond individual confrontations. When states cannot control their territory, rebuild institutions or protect their populations, the regional conditions necessary for durable security begin to erode.
The argument is not that Israel created every conflict in the Middle East. Authoritarian rule, sectarian violence, armed groups and competing regional interventions have all contributed to the region’s instability.
The question is whether the means Israel uses to pursue its own security deepen that instability. Repeatedly weakening neighbouring states and political communities may bring short-term military gains, but it can also erode their ability to contain violence and maintain order, making the region more dangerous—including for Israel itself.
This pattern can be understood as the denial of sovereignty. Sovereignty involves more than diplomatic recognition: it requires institutions capable of governing, providing services and exercising legitimate authority over the use of force. When these capacities are persistently degraded, formal independence becomes increasingly hollow.
The cases differ in their circumstances and severity, but together they reveal a troubling hierarchy: Israeli freedom of military action repeatedly takes precedence over other societies’ ability to govern and secure themselves.
Syria offers a particularly revealing example. Following the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in December 2024, Israel launched extensive attacks against Syrian military infrastructure and moved into the separation zone established under the 1974 disengagement agreement. Israel justified the destruction of military assets as necessary to prevent advanced weapons from falling into extremist hands. Yet the targets included airfields, air-defence systems and naval facilities—capabilities relevant to the functioning of a state, whatever government eventually controls them.
The longer-term problem is that preventing a hypothetical future threat can obstruct the reconstruction of an already devastated country. Syria needs accountable security institutions capable of controlling territory, containing armed factions and protecting communities. Destroying military capabilities without a credible framework for rebuilding legitimate state authority risks leaving those functions unfulfilled. In July 2025, Israeli strikes on Damascus, including the defence ministry, further demonstrated Israel’s willingness to impose military limits on the new authorities.
Syria’s transitional authorities must themselves answer for abuses and protect minorities; state consolidation cannot justify repression. Nevertheless, externally imposed military vulnerability is no substitute for accountable governance.
A government expected to prevent threats from emerging within its territory must have the capacity to exercise authority there. Undermining that capacity can preserve the fragmentation through which armed groups survive.
Lebanon exposes a related contradiction. Hezbollah’s independent military power has long constrained the Lebanese state’s authority and its ability to determine questions of war and peace. Reducing that parallel authority could, under appropriate political arrangements, strengthen state sovereignty. But Israeli military action does not automatically transfer power from Hezbollah to the Lebanese government. Bombardment, displacement and violations of Lebanese territory can weaken the institutions expected to assume responsibility for national security.
The distinction is crucial: weakening an armed organization and strengthening a state are separate outcomes. In March 2026, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called both for respect for Lebanon’s sovereignty and for stronger support to its armed forces so that they could become the country’s sole military force. That combination identifies what repeated unilateral intervention overlooks: security requires an institutional successor capable of governing after military operations end.
Where that capacity remains inadequate, another cycle becomes possible. Armed groups invoke external attacks to justify retaining their weapons; the state struggles to establish authority; Israel cites the continuing armed presence to justify further intervention. Hezbollah bears responsibility for its own decisions, but Israeli policies can reinforce the conditions sustaining its claim that the Lebanese state cannot protect the population.
The attack on Doha on September 9, 2025 extended this logic into the diplomatic sphere. Qatar was mediating negotiations involving Israel and Hamas when Israel struck Hamas representatives on its territory. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights condemned the attack as a breach of international law and an assault on mediation. The significance exceeded the violation of Qatari sovereignty: even a state facilitating negotiations could find its territory treated as an extension of the battlefield.
Mediation depends on practical assurances that communication with an adversary will remain possible. Targeting interlocutors in a mediating country makes those assurances harder to provide. It raises the costs of hosting negotiations and can undermine channels needed for ceasefires, hostage releases and humanitarian arrangements. Military reach may expand while opportunities for a political settlement contract.
Israel’s recognition of Somaliland in December 2025 raises a different sovereignty question along the region’s Red Sea periphery. Somaliland has maintained separate institutions for decades, and its claim to recognition has its own history. Nevertheless, Israel’s recognition challenged Somalia’s internationally recognized territorial framework. The African Union rejected the move and warned that such recognition could undermine peace and stability.
Recognition is not equivalent to bombardment, and the cases should not be collapsed into a single legal category. Their connection is political: the territorial arrangements on which other governments rely become subject to unilateral decisions shaped by Israeli interests. In an already contested regional environment, such decisions risk adding another dispute to fragile processes of state consolidation.
The confrontation with Iran illustrates the danger of extending preventive military logic to a powerful regional adversary. On February 28, 2026, Guterres condemned the use of force by the United States and Israel against Iran and Iran’s subsequent retaliation across the region. He warned that these actions undermined international peace and security. The escalation demonstrated how efforts to eliminate threats militarily can expose additional countries to attack.
Iran’s support for armed groups and its own military conduct cannot be excluded from this assessment. Nevertheless, degrading an adversary’s capabilities does not necessarily resolve the political incentives driving confrontation. It may instead encourage dispersal, rearmament or greater reliance on asymmetric methods. Tactical destruction can coexist with a more dangerous strategic environment.
The Palestinian case represents the most profound expression of this problem because it concerns both collective self-government and the conditions of human survival. In the West Bank, withholding revenues owed to the Palestinian Authority weakens the institutions expected to administer daily life.
The World Bank documented how the suspension of transfers in 2025 intensified fiscal distress, reduced salary payments and placed pressure on essential services. These measures undermine the practical foundations of Palestinian self-government.
A political authority cannot provide credible governance indefinitely while lacking reliable access to its own revenues. Weakening public administration also weakens its legitimacy, potentially benefiting actors who argue that institutional politics offers no meaningful route to Palestinian rights. The resulting dysfunction can then be invoked as evidence that Palestinians are incapable of governing themselves. Restrictions on capacity thus risk producing the very incapacity used to justify continued control.
In Gaza, the destruction has reached beyond institutional viability. The devastation of housing, healthcare, water systems and livelihoods, compounded by restrictions on humanitarian access, has endangered the material conditions necessary for life. In August 2025, a joint statement by UN agencies confirmed famine in Gaza Governorate and described a crisis involving starvation and preventable deaths. The issue was no longer merely whether Palestinians could build a state, but whether civilians could survive.
Hence, in Gaza, the denial of sovereignty has escalated into a denial of survival. In September 2025, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry concluded that Israel had committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Earlier, on November 21, 2024, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu, finding reasonable grounds to believe that he bore criminal responsibility for the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution and other inhumane acts. These findings expose the devastating human consequences of denying a population access to the essentials of life. The systematic destruction of civilian infrastructure and deprivation of food, water and medical care undermine Palestinians’ ability to survive as a community in their homeland. Viewed through this analysis, the genocide identified by the UN commission represents the most extreme manifestation of denial: a progression from obstructing a people’s capacity to govern themselves to destroying the conditions necessary for their continued existence.
Taken together, these cases suggest a self-reinforcing cycle. Military intervention and institutional weakening can generate insecurity, displacement and political fragmentation. Those conditions create opportunities for armed actors, whose activities then provide further grounds for intervention. This is a causal risk, not an inevitable outcome of every operation. Its importance lies in the contradiction between immediate military advantage and the requirements of lasting security.
Breaking that cycle requires a different measure of success: whether policies leave behind institutions capable of governing, populations able to live securely and diplomatic arrangements that reduce incentives for violence. Protecting Israeli civilians and respecting neighbouring societies’ sovereignty are mutually reinforcing necessities.
A regional order built around one state’s freedom to intervene and everyone else’s enforced vulnerability cannot offer durable peace. By denying others the capacity to govern—and, in Gaza, devastating the conditions necessary to survive—Israel risks perpetuating the insecurity from which it seeks protection.
Iraqi resistance group rejects disarmament, vows to maintain support for Lebanon
Press TV – September 30, 2026
Iraqi anti-terror resistance group Kata’ib Sayyid al-Shuhada has rejected any surrender of its weapons, with its spokesman stressing that resistance would continue despite pressure and that Iraqi resistance fighters would sustain their support for their fellow fighters in Lebanon.
Sheikh Kazem al-Fartousi, spokesman for the group, which is a subdivision of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) coalition, made the remarks to the Lebanese news website UNews.
“We have not retreated from the resistance, and there will be no surrender of weapons,” he said, the website reported on Tuesday.
“The resistance’s weapons in Iraq are at its disposal and Iraqi resistance would continue supporting the Lebanese resistance,” the official added.
“The pressure has not deterred us from continuing along this path and will not lead us to retreat even a single step in confronting the enemy.”
The statement came as the Iraqi government, headed by Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, has, as a result of US pressure, been seeking to advance a plan to establish a state monopoly over weapons.
A day earlier, Haj Abu Mujahid al-Assaf, the security official of Kata’ib Hezbollah, another member of the PMU, also pointed to the upcoming prospect of expulsion of US-led forces from the Arab country, saying that, upon the occasion, the Iraqi people would celebrate the expulsion, associating the pending development to the efforts made by Iraqi resistance groups.
Al-Assaf further warned that if the restrictions imposed by the United States on Iranian aviation continued after October 1, the Iraqi people would take a clear position, adding that the possibility existed of closing border crossings with countries participating in the Washington’s efforts at targeting the Islamic Republic.
Israeli finance minister calls for genocidal war on West Bank, annexation of south Lebanon
The Cradle | September 27, 2026
Israeli Finance Minister and settler leader Bezalel Smotrich has called on Israel to “go to war” in the occupied Palestinian West Bank and “do there what we did in Gaza,” Israeli media reported on 27 September.
“I certainly have solutions” to the situation in the West Bank, he said. “I think we need to go to war in Judea and Samaria, to do there what we did in Gaza, to dismantle the Palestinian Authority, which is a terror authority.”
The Religious Zionism Party leader also called on Israel to annex the areas of southern Lebanon and Gaza occupied by Israeli troops.
“I would very much like to annex at least up to the Yellow Line in Gaza and up to the Litani [River] in Lebanon,” he says.
As part of its genocide of Palestinians since 2023, Israel has occupied an estimated 70 percent of Gaza, which is divided by a yellow line demarcating areas under direct Israeli occupation from those remaining under Hamas control.
Israel has also occupied territory in Lebanon amounting to 7 percent of the entire country.
Israel carries out demolition campaigns in both, seeking to wipe out any trace of Palestinian and Lebanese villages and cities already largely destroyed by Israeli bombing.
Smotrich made the comments after he was asked on a podcast how to advance Israel’s project in the West Bank amid Palestinian resistance.
Israel has accelerated its construction of illegal Jewish settlements and outposts in the West Bank this year, including in the E1 settlement.
E1 is designed to cut the West Bank in half and separate it from occupied East Jerusalem, making the establishment of a territorially contiguous Palestinian state impossible.
At the same time, Jewish settlers enjoying protection of the army regularly carry out violent pogrom-style attacks on Palestinian villages in hopes of forcing Palestinians to abandon their homes and agricultural lands.
In response, Palestinians have carried out several car ramming and shooting operations targeting Jewish settlers in recent weeks.
Smotrich also repeated his call to dismantle the Palestinian Authority (PA), which provides civil administration to parts of the West Bank, including the Palestinian cities such as Ramallah, Nablus, Jenin and Bethlehem.
The PA was established following the Oslo Accords in 1993 to serve as an interim government until the establishment of a Palestinian state.
However, the PA has in practice served as an arm of the Israeli occupation, assisting the Israeli military in suppressing Palestinian resistance.
Smotrich has previously called on Israel to annex more than 80 percent of the West Bank, which Israel conquered in 1967.
Since then, Israel has established some 160 Jewish settlements and 360 outposts, housing more than 700,000 Jewish settlers as part of a long-term campaign to colonize and Judaize the Palestinian territories.
In his campaign for next month’s Knesset election, Smotrich has touted the expansion of Israeli settlements under the current coalition government, which includes Smotrich, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir.
As head of the Likud Party, Netanyahu is seeking his seventh term as prime minister. Ben Gvir leads a religious nationalist party, Jewish Power, known for its extremism and calls for violence against Palestinians.
Meanwhile, Israeli authorities decided to impose a week-long “comprehensive closure” on the occupied West Bank, closing crossings to the territory until Saturday for the Jewish religious holiday of Sukkot.
The order will prevent Palestinians with work permits from entering Israel and Jewish settlements to go to their jobs.
Local sources told the Wafa News Agency that the entrance gate to Turmus Ayya, north of Ramallah, was closed and residents were “harassed.”
Wafa also reported that entrances to Aboud, Nabi Saleh, Atara and Taybeh were closed, while military checkpoints were set up at the entrances to Yabroud and Ein Sinyah.
French-Lebanese man files war crimes complaint over Israeli attacks
Al Mayadeen | September 23, 2026
Lawyers representing a French-Lebanese citizen have filed a complaint with France’s National Anti-Terrorism Prosecutor’s Office over Israeli war crimes involving the destruction of his home and olive trees in southern Lebanon.
The complainant, who lives in France and whose identity has not been disclosed, says his property was destroyed as part of “Israel’s” hostilities against Lebanon. His lawyers, William Bourdon and Nicolas Busin of Bourdon & Associés, filed the complaint on Tuesday.
“This is a French citizen asking the justice system of his own country to establish the full truth and deliver justice for the war crimes committed against him, in line with a broader context in southern Lebanon that appears to amount to ethnic cleansing,” Busin said on Tuesday at a conference on corruption and accountability in Beirut.
Complaint seeks accountability for destruction in southern Lebanon
Busin argued against the Israeli allegation that the complainant’s home in the south was destroyed due to links to the Resistance, stating that his client has no ties to the group and questioned “the complete absence of any military objective” in what happened to the property.
He described the incident as potentially involving “an act of destruction, damage or even theft”, which he said could constitute a war crime.
The complaint seeks to establish the facts, identify those responsible and pursue prosecution.
Busin also claimed that more than 6,000 French citizens serve in the Israeli military, arguing that French nationals should not be involved in war crimes in southern Lebanon.
The new complaint comes after at least two other cases were filed in France this year over Israeli crimes in Lebanon. In April, French-Lebanese artist Ali Cherri filed a complaint over an Israeli strike in Beirut that killed his parents. In June, another French-Lebanese man filed proceedings after several members of his family were killed in an Israeli strike on a residential building in Sour.
French courts become avenue for Lebanese victims
French jurisdiction provides an avenue for French nationals and dual nationals seeking accountability for international crimes committed outside France. France has previously investigated war crimes and crimes against humanity committed abroad under universal-jurisdiction provisions.
The legal route has taken on greater significance amid the absence of a functioning international accountability mechanism for crimes committed in Lebanon. Lebanon is not a party to the Rome Statute and has not accepted the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
The issue has also become more contentious following the Lebanon-“Israel” framework agreement signed in June.
Article 13 raises concerns over legal accountability
Article 13 of the agreement commits the two sides to take measures including the cessation of “all hostile or adverse actions in international political or legal forums.”
The provision has generated controversy in Lebanon, with legal experts and political figures warning that its wording could restrict efforts to pursue “Israel” through international courts and other legal mechanisms. The Lebanese government has disputed interpretations that the provision amounts to abandoning Lebanon’s legal rights.
The controversy remains particularly significant as Lebanese victims continue pursuing cases abroad.
Busin said proceedings in France and other jurisdictions could eventually strengthen accountability efforts inside Lebanon.
“Proceedings that are being pursued today in France and in other jurisdictions could tomorrow also have a positive impact in Lebanon, where the demand for accountability is also very strong,” he told The National.
A broader legal campaign linked to Lebanon
The complaint is also connected to the wider legal work of Bourdon, a prominent French human rights lawyer who has pursued several cases involving corruption and financial crimes linked to Lebanon.
Bourdon has represented victims and civil-society groups seeking accountability following Lebanon’s 2019 financial collapse. Proceedings involving former Central Bank governor Riad Salameh resulted in asset freezes in Europe and an international arrest warrant, while separate French investigations have involved former Prime Minister Najib Mikati and Lebanese banking groups.
Paris prosecutors have also investigated financial wrongdoing involving French subsidiaries of SGBL Group and Bank Audi, as well as allegations involving banker Antoun Sehnaoui. The banks have denied wrongdoing, while those accused have denied or disputed the allegations.
For the latest complainant, however, the immediate objective is more direct: to establish responsibility for the destruction of his property and seek judicial accountability in France at a time when avenues for pursuing Israeli crimes in Lebanon remain heavily contested.
Lebanese man tells RT how Israeli strike killed his bride
Saja Sharara lost her life when a missile struck the couple’s home just 48 hours after their wedding
RT | September 6, 2026
The husband of a 28-year-old Lebanese woman killed in an Israeli airstrike just two days after their wedding has told RT how he was speaking to his wife on the phone moments before their home was hit.
Saja Sharara was killed at the couple’s home in Arabsalim, southern Lebanon, on August 27. Six other people, including a child, were wounded.
Hussein said he called Saja after hearing about an Israeli strike nearby. Minutes later, she called him back and suddenly said: “A rocket, a rocket is coming towards us, Hussein.”
The connection was lost. “The rocket fell on her,” Hussein recalled. “And then I realized that it was over.”
Israel has not said specifically what it was targeting at the house. It said its wider attacks in the Nabatieh area targeted Hezbollah infrastructure in response to drones launched at IDF troops. No Israeli casualties were reported.
Israeli attacks on southern Lebanon have continued despite a US-mediated ceasefire. More than 4,000 people have been killed and over 12,000 wounded in Israeli attacks on Lebanon since March, according to Lebanese authorities.
Hussein said the continuing Israeli military presence and air operations mean there is no ceasefire in practice.
“There is no ceasefire as long as this enemy is on our land and the aviation is flying above us,” he told RT.
RT’s Steve Sweeney spoke exclusively with Hussein in southern Lebanon about the future he and Saja had planned together.
Hezbollah denies ties to alleged Syria-Lebanon ‘destabilization cell’
Al Mayadeen| September 2, 2026
Hezbollah’s Media Relations Office has categorically denied any connection to a security cell reportedly arrested on suspicion of seeking to destabilize Lebanon and Syria, dismissing the accusations as entirely baseless.
In a statement released Wednesday, the office stressed that Hezbollah has no connection whatsoever, direct or indirect, to any such cell or group. It said certain media outlets, which it accused of a pattern of leveling false accusations against the Resistance, had circulated the claims linking Hezbollah to the alleged cell.
The office said attempts by these outlets to implicate Hezbollah in security-related cases, relying on unnamed sources, are part of a disinformation campaign aimed at tarnishing the group’s image, sowing discord, and undermining security and stability in Lebanon.
It asserted that the reports are part of a broader effort to malign the Resistance through unverified claims attributed to anonymous sources.
A recurring pattern
The denial follows months of similar accusations against Hezbollah from Syrian officials since the fall of the al-Assad government.
In July, Hezbollah rejected claims tying it to an attempt to smuggle weapons and missiles across the Syrian-Iraqi border, after Syrian authorities said they had intercepted a shipment concealed inside a fuel tanker arriving from Iraq. Also in April and May, the group denied allegations linking it to a cell accused of plotting to assassinate a religious figure.
Hezbollah has affirmed on each occasion that it maintains no activity, connection, or presence inside Syrian territory. The group has said the repetition of such claims raises serious questions and points to parties seeking to inflame tension between the Syrian and Lebanese peoples.
Hezbollah has also pointed to similar fabricated allegations emerging from Bahrain and Kuwait, warning of a foreign plot aimed at stoking tensions between Arab nations and the Axis of Resistance and destabilizing the wider region.
The group has consistently framed the recurring accusations as a coordinated effort tied to the broader Zionist-American agenda in the region, arguing that the timing and pattern of the claims serve to isolate the Resistance and strain relations between Lebanon and Syria at a sensitive political juncture.
No Matter Who Is In Power, Israel Will Stay Genocidal.
By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | August 29, 2026
There is a possibility that Benjamin Netanyahu will no longer be Prime Minister of Israel following the upcoming elections in October, with the opposition party Yashar led by former IDF Chief of the General Staff Gadi Eisenkot leading in many polls.
But removing Netanyahu and replacing him with Gadi Eisenkot will not change Israel’s genocidal nature.
In fact, it was Gadi Eisenkot who invented the Israeli military doctrine that functioned as the blueprint for the Genocide in Gaza, called the Dahiya Doctrine.
This Doctrine was invented by Eisenkot when he was Chief of Northern Command during the Israeli assault on Lebanon in 2006.
“What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in every village from which Israel is fired on… We will apply disproportionate force on it (village) and cause great damage and destruction there. From our standpoint, these are not civilian villages, they are military bases… This is not a recommendation. This is a plan. And it has been approved”, Eisenkot said, referring to the doctrine in 2008.
It was exactly this doctrine of collective civilian punishment which was used during Israel’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in 2008, which killed 1,400 Palestinians, including 300 children, and Israel’s Operation Protective Edge in Gaza in 2014, which killed more than 1,500 Palestinian civilians, including 500 children.
This doctrine was eventually applied during the Israeli genocide in Gaza starting in October of 2023.
Gadi Eisenkot was also responsible for the mass slaughter of peaceful Palestinian protestors during the Great March of Return in 2018.
As the Institute for Middle East Understanding documented:
- Eisenkot was chief of staff of the Israeli military in 2018 when Israeli snipers killed at least 189 unarmed Palestinian protesters in Gaza, including 35 children, three paramedics, and two journalists, and wounded more than 6,000 others, during the Great March of Return. As noted by the Israeli rights group, B’Tselem.
- “Over the course of the protests, the Israeli military implemented an open-fire policy of using live fire against unarmed protestors who posed no threat to the well-armored soldiers on the other side of the fence or to anyone else.”
- An independent U.N. commission of inquiry into the protests concluded there were: “reasonable grounds to believe that during the Great March of Return, Israeli soldiers committed violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. Some of those violations may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity.”
Gadi Eisenkot opposes any kind of sovereignty for Palestinians, recently telling Israel Hayom “The two-state solution is a grave mistake” and “Anyone who thinks about a two-state solution after Oct. 7 is simply delusional.”
As for the West Bank, journalist Séamus Malekafzali noted in the Nation that he has espoused support for “maintaining settlements in the West Bank, opposing full annexation not because it is against international law or morally wrong, but because the new Arab population would endanger the Jewish majority in Israel.”
As for Lebanon, Gadi Eisenkot has positioned himself as more extreme than Netanyahu.
Malekafzali noted that, “In some respects, Eisenkot has gone even further than Netanyahu. He criticized the original ceasefire agreement in Lebanon that still allowed Israel almost total freedom of action, and in March, advocated ‘maximum force in minimum time,’ hoping to cause religious strife in Lebanon by ‘humiliating’ the Shia population by forcing them into Christian areas.”
In reality, Gadi Eisenkot, if he is able to win a majority or minority government in October, will be a more suitable face for the Israeli occupation than Benjamin Netanyahu.
While he likely will shy away from the same genocidal rhetoric as Netanyahu and the Likud coalition, this will only be done for propaganda purposes.
In reality, he is the creator of the doctrine the Gaza genocide is based on, and engineered the slaughter of Palestinian protestors during the Great March of Return.
He will put a more respectable face on Israel, while continuing to deny any kind of sovereignty for Palestinians and pushing forward with an Israeli occupation of South Lebanon.
Hezbollah’s Options in Resisting and Why It Decided to Stop Responding
By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | August 29, 2026
As Israel continues to ramp up its destruction of south Lebanon, critics ask why Hezbollah suddenly stopped responding and whether the group is again out of options. The tactical pause on the Lebanese organization’s part will not last, and its options are more numerous than some may expect.
When Hezbollah began responding to 15 months of Israeli daily ceasefire violations in early March of this year, it came as a shock to many who had assumed the group to have been defeated and that its silence was to be taken as a weakness. Although here at the Palestine Chronicle, I and others had argued that Hezbollah was simply rebuilding its stockpiles, the common consensus in international media was to assume it was finished as an effective resistance force.
Since April 16, the group has again chosen to halt its daily operations against the Israelis and abide by a shaky ceasefire agreement which Israel has once again decided to violate on a daily basis. Only when the occupying army attempts to advance further into Lebanon will the organization’s fighters choose to engage, which has again triggered rumors of weakness.
When the US-backed Lebanese government signed its agreement recognizing Israel, taking away its right to appeal to international courts over war crimes committed against its people and permitting an occupation of southern Lebanon, a number of different factors were also present that forced Hezbollah to halt its fire.
The first was that the US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding was already in place and that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) had managed to force the Israelis to stop bombing Beirut and halt its major attacks on southern Lebanese civilian centers.
Another factor at play was the US government’s overt pressure that was being applied to the Syrian leadership to invade the Bekaa Valley and carry out Israel’s dirty work. Then there was a clear-cut escalation on the part of the government in Beirut that sought to legitimize a clash between the Lebanese Army and Hezbollah in pursuit of disarming the resistance group.
When considering the Iran angle, Tehran had managed through the threat of missile fire to get the Israelis to temporarily back off from major air assaults in Lebanon. Although the Trump administration used its puppets in Beirut to sign a meaningless agreement that Tel Aviv couldn’t care less for, the gains were made that at least some pressure had been taken off of the civilian population of Lebanon. This consideration is significant as it allowed for around 350,000 people to return to their homes and halted the large-scale civilian killings.
Then there were the considerations of Hezbollah when it comes to a potential domestic clash and Syrian invasion. Instead of continuing its daily operations against occupying forces, it was given the space to continue to supply itself with more armaments, to reposition assets in preparation for the worst-case scenario of a Syrian invasion, but it also allowed for tensions to simmer between itself and the Lebanese leadership.
Former Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah had long advocated for minimizing the risk of internal clashes and even making compromises in order to allow the group to focus its energies on resisting Israel; it appears that this is the same line of thinking being employed by the group’s leadership today. Although Lebanon is on the verge of a major clash, historically speaking, the resistance group has always had to deal with major pushbacks from domestic players, including significant issues with the Amal movement that are today its close allies.
All of this being said, escalating against the Israeli occupiers can come in two forms, either through proceeding on the path of daily operations that inflict material and soldier losses on the enemy, or to fight in a larger multi-front battle. As demonstrated during the 41-day war earlier this year, fighting alongside its Iranian allies makes Hezbollah much more effective.
When Iranian ballistic missiles are raining down on Israeli targets, and Israel’s air force is preoccupied with striking targets inside Iran, it gives Hezbollah the space to pull off more effective attacks on the Israelis. Keep in mind that the group has demonstrated it possesses a sizable arsenal of ballistic and cruise missiles, alongside its large drone stockpiles, making it capable of striking into Israel’s strategic depth. Doing this alone, however, comes with a higher price than if it is part of a multi-front equation. This is also why Yemen’s Ansarallah threatened to become involved in a war in support of Hezbollah, before Iran’s threats and warning missile fire were enough to coerce the Israelis to back off prior to April 16.
This is all to say that if Hezbollah is fighting the Israelis alone and does not have to worry about a Syrian invasion and civil war, it can very effectively bog down their occupiers and demonstrate their ability to do this for months, absent Iran or any other front being active. Yet, the organization is in a much stronger position should it simply wait for an expansion of the conflict and then unleash a new strategy to bring the fight to the Israelis in ways we have not previously witnessed.
During the lead-up to Israel’s withdrawal from south Lebanon in 2000, Hezbollah would carry out an average of 300 operations per month against the occupiers. At some points during the latest conflict, we saw the group carry out as many as 100 operations in a single day. With this being said, the Israeli leadership’s mindset today is not the same as it was in the late 1990s, meaning that they are willing to go much further than ever before since October 7 of 2023. They have been seeking to accelerate their long-term expansionist vision, not caring about how attacks targeting civilians impact their image whatsoever.
Therefore, it is safe to assume that Hezbollah will begin its operations once again under three different scenarios:
- They are forced to do so defensively due to attacks from Israel, perhaps combined with a Syrian attack and/or domestic clash.
- They will participate in a multi-front war.
- They will wait until they can ensure that they can fight Israel alone and make them pay the maximum price for their occupation when the time is right, seeking to bog the Israelis down for as long as possible and continuously using asymmetric warfare tactics.
– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine.
Why the Iran War is about to Escalate over The Coming Months
By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | August 28, 2026
Nothing is in place to ensure an Israeli-US victory against the Iranians, but Tel Aviv is not backing down and seeks to complete its mission aimed at dealing an enormous blow to Iran’s economy.
This week, the US Trump administration decided to impose another batch of sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran, in what it has labeled ‘Operation Economic Outcast’. Yet, this measure’s viability is about to expire and could end up backfiring tremendously, as all the chips are now in place for Tehran to drag Washington deeper into a fiery regional inferno.
Since April 8, when the US and Iran both agreed to a two-week-long ceasefire, American President Donald Trump has been playing a game designed to manipulate oil markets and has attempted just about every tactic known to man in order to simply off-put the economic iceberg that the global economy is heading straight towards.
See, the problem that the Trump administration faces is that its initial attack on Iran failed tremendously. But now, he cannot simply admit defeat and walk away. If he signs a deal with Tehran, then it will be a de facto surrender agreement that ensures a collapse in US regional hegemony and that Israel is left to face the consequences of its actions, with an empowered and emboldened Iran ready to support Tel Aviv’s downfall.
After around 40 days of war with Iran, the Israeli and American leaderships had come to the realization that the only viable next step was to begin targeting Iranian civilian infrastructure – if they were to have any hope of achieving regime change. This, after all, was the Israeli plot to begin with, as they understood well that the Islamic Republic was not going to fall as a result of the air campaign alone.
Targeting Iran’s civilian infrastructure comes with an evident price; this means that the retaliation is going to destroy the key infrastructure of the surrounding States also, from which the US will be launching its attacks. Included on this target list will be Israeli infrastructure also, which is what gives such an air campaign a specific time limit. Israel will view the price of the campaign against Iran as something they are willing to pay, as long as the Islamic Republic will be weakened significantly in the process.
Therefore, Tel Aviv’s leadership will take the necessary hits until that price becomes too high, at which point they will have to get the US to back off. For Israel, the destruction of the Persian Gulf Arab States is a plus, not a minus, as it eliminates economic competitors, but for the United States and most nations around the world, this is catastrophic.
For these reasons, Trump has gone back and forth between strategies designed to get the Iranians to buckle under pressure. He has implemented a counter-blockade on Iran, attempted to use negotiations and a Memorandum of Understanding to divide the Islamic Republic’s leadership, while also working to carve out an alternate route in the Strait of Hormuz.
When the Iranians saw through the MoU deception and responded forcefully, some may even say proactively, the US military began engaging in a tit-for-tat low-intensity battle with the Iranians that sought to try and degrade Iran’s military capabilities in the south.
Now, the latest move has been to introduce the most extreme sanctions program ever as a last-ditch attempt to pressure Tehran. These sanctions are different because they don’t just target Iran’s economy; they are designed to target its allies and trade partners, since the previous maximum-pressure sanctions already targeted everything imaginable.
There is also a reason why this has never been tried before in this way, because it can potentially backfire. You aren’t only targeting Iran; you are going after a large number of countries in the process, including China. Beijing itself has already threatened to retaliate.
Since early March, for all intents and purposes, the Strait of Hormuz has been closed, with only brief periods during which any meaningful number of tankers have been able to make it out. With the deterioration of the MoU, another card was played by the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance, as Yemen’s Ansarallah-led government announced a counter-blockade on Saudi Arabia.
By reopening the frozen conflict in Yemen, which had remained under a shaky ceasefire since 2022, it meant that the Yemeni Armed Forces would proceed with the project to not only liberate their nation, but to punish Saudi Arabia where it hurts the most. The Red Sea was a Saudi lifeline, allowing them to continue to export 6 million barrels of oil per day; suddenly, that option was cut, and the limited amount it is now capable of getting out of its Western Ports is exported via the Suez Canal, with insurance rates skyrocketing because of the risk.
Iran has demonstrated time and time again that it is capable of surviving under the weight of US sanctions for long periods. The United States, on the other hand, has not started to properly feel the effects of its actions. One way they have managed to offset the economic fallout of the Strait’s closure is to tap into their Strategic Petroleum Reserves, which have just sunk to their lowest levels since 1982, with experts claiming that they only have 41 days of these supplies left. It barely helps that Trump has also picked this time to engage in a declared trade war with its northern neighbor, Canada, nor that he has made outlandish decisions across the board.
Donald Trump has so far doubled down on his decisions and told the American public that they simply have to put up with the rising oil prices, as their contribution to “preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon”. But the people are not buying it and clearly see that this war is being fought for Israel’s interests, not their own.
Desperate to reshape the region in Israel’s favor, the US has quickly attempted to have both the Iraqi and Lebanese governments disarm resistance factions aligned with Iran. Short of triggering catastrophic civil wars, this strategy cannot be implemented quickly and will have little real-world impact. Similarly, in the Gaza Strip, the Trump administration has put pressure on Hamas to suddenly disarm, providing the Israelis with a green light to amp up their strikes on the civilian population.
Nothing is in place to ensure an Israeli-US victory against the Iranians, but Tel Aviv is not backing down and seeks to complete its mission aimed at dealing an enormous blow to Iran’s economy. Their long-term game is to see a deterioration of the Islamic Republic after its infrastructure takes enormous hits, but this is by no means a guarantee.
Even if Israel gets precisely what it wants, the US will not win. The moment of truth is approaching as the walls close in; the US can either decide that it will act in America’s vital interests and end the war, or throw all its weight behind Israel’s desires.
– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.
Featured Video
Iran’s Next Strike May Not Explode. It Could Shut You Down
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archive
Zionism’s Violent Legacy
By Donald Neff | Washington Report On Middle East Affairs | January 1996
On January 4, 1948, Jewish terrorists drove a truck loaded with explosives into the center of the all Arab city of Jaffa and detonated it, killing 26 and wounding around 100 Palestinian men, women and children.[1] The attack was the work of the Irgun Zvai Leumi – the “National Military Organization,” also known by the Hebrew letters Etzel – the largest Jewish terrorist group in Palestine. The Irgun was headed by Revisionist Zionist Menachem Begin and had been killing and maiming Arabs, Britons and even Jews for the previous ten years in its efforts to establish a Jewish state.
This terror campaign meant that at the core of Revisionist Zionism there existed a philosophical embrace of violence. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Trump’s Iran war is on an Israeli leash
- Saudi oil boss issues global supply warning
- Riyadh Says Its Oil System Is Intact. The Numbers Say Otherwise.
- Trump and Netanyahu Want to “Finish the Job” on Iran
- US ‘one-sided dictation’ not Iran’s beliefs makes rational talks impossible: Baghaei
- Iran’s Next Strike May Not Explode. It Could Shut You Down /Col Doug Macgregor
- Iran: US political targets legitimate if assassinations return
- Iraq shuts key border crossing with Iran under US pressure: Report
- Undersea Internet cables could be targeted in retaliation for attacks on Iran: IRGC deputy chief
- EU sending ‘biased’ observers to interfere in Serbian election – president
- If Americans Knew
- The Israel Lobby’s Changing Fortunes
- AIPAC has become such a political liability that it’s shifting to a more “nimble” approach to buying politicians
- At least 160 Israeli settler attacks in 2 weeks
- Will Gaza’s Ancient Christian Community Disappear Forever?
- Israel’s vision of regional security rests on keeping Arab states weak
- Heidi Levine recounts how Palestinian youths helped save her in settler attack
- DAILY UPDATE: Latest essential news on Palestine, Israel, & region
- Trump’s Intensifying Sabotage of the ICC, for Israel’s Sake
- Israeli military detain US and UK volunteers in West Bank including Democratic NY politician Brad Lander
- Americans at National Conservatism Conference held in Israel this year criticize Israel
- No Tricks Zone
- E-Cars Reduce CO2 Emissions By Only 41% Compared To Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles
- Predictions Made By Renowned Climate Professor Over Past Decades Have Been Proven To Be Poor
- New Study Suggests Large Regions Of The Pacific Ocean Have Been Cooling For The Last 80 Years
- Germany’s Green Energy Debacle: High Energy Costs Force Kahla Porzellan to Close After 182 Years!
- New Study: 50 Years Of The Most Aggressive ‘Net Zero’ Policies Can Only Affect The Global Climate By 0.03°C
- US September “Heat” Was No Record…Many Records Set Decades Ago
- Latest European Green Energy Debacle; Portugal’s Largest Flagship Solar Park Insolvent!
- Green Energy Debacle: German Expert Professor Fritz Vahrenholt Warns Of Severe Economic And Social Consequences
- Two More Paleo Reconstructions Affirm Meters-Higher Sea Levels Across Ireland, Brazil 7000-6000 Years Ago
- New Study: Earth And Venus Surface Warmth Largely Explained By Convection And Lapse Rate, Not CO2 Or Radiation
