Georges Abdallah returns to Beirut after over 40 years in French prison

The Cradle | July 25, 2025
Lebanese activist and resistance fighter Georges Abdallah has been released from French prison after over 40 years of incarceration, arriving in Beirut to a hero’s welcome on 25 July and renewing his call for armed resistance across the region.
“The resistance is rooted in this land and cannot be uprooted,” Abdallah expressed upon his arrival at Beirut’s Rafic Hariri International Airport.
Speaking from the VIP lounge, he said, “the prisoners’ steadfastness in their prisons depends on the steadfastness of their comrades outside.”
Abdallah, a former member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and the Lebanese Armed Revolutionary Factions (LARF), was arrested in 1984 and sentenced to life in prison in 1987 on charges of involvement in the killings of US military attache Charles Ray and Israeli diplomat Yakov Barsimentov in Paris in 1982.
The Lebanese resistance icon was also accused of involvement in the attempted assassination of US consul General Robert Homme in Strasbourg.
The killings of Ray and Barsimentov were claimed by LARF and framed as a response to Washington and Tel Aviv’s involvement in the Lebanese civil war.
Held at Lannemezan Prison in southern France, Abdallah became eligible for parole in 1999, but 10 successive requests for release were rejected. A 2013 ruling approving his release on condition of expulsion from France was never implemented.
On 15 November 2023, the Paris Court of Appeal again approved his release, conditional on his permanent expulsion, with the decision confirmed on 17 July 2025 by the French Ministry of Justice.
His lawyer, Jean-Louis Chalanset, described the outcome as “a judicial victory and a political scandal,” confirming that repeated US and Israeli pressure had obstructed prior legal decisions.
Abdallah was the longest-held prisoner in western Europe.
Now 74 years of age, Abdallah returned to Beirut on Friday, where he emphasized the need for greater support for resistance, saying, “Our resistance is not weak, but strong.”
He added, “As long as there is resistance, there is a return to the homeland,” and saluted fallen fighters as “the foundation of any idea of liberation.”
He also called for the escalation of resistance in Palestine and condemned Arab governments for their inaction over Gaza.
“They must work to stop the genocide and famine in the besieged strip because they are capable of doing so,” he said, calling on the Egyptian people directly.
Syrian prisoners: A ticking bomb between Beirut and Damascus?
By Mohamad Shamse Eddine | The Cradle | July 23, 2025
A political storm is gathering over a long-festering crisis in Lebanon’s prisons: more than 2,000 Syrians, many detained without charge or trial, remain locked away in overcrowded and crumbling facilities.
The worsening humanitarian conditions are no longer just a domestic issue. It has morphed into a potent diplomatic flashpoint between Beirut and the new interim government in Damascus, with the latter signaling it will not tolerate further delay in resolving the status of its citizens.
The spark came from a Syria TV report quoting an official from the administration of interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa (Abu Muhammad al-Julani), who stated that Damascus is “mulling gradual escalation choices against Lebanon,” starting with the freezing of some security and economic channels if the detainee issue remains unresolved.
Official denials followed, but the message had already landed in Beirut. The prisoner file, dormant for years, is now wide open—and loaded with political implications that stretch far beyond the bars of Lebanon’s Roumieh Prison.
This comes as the Lebanese judiciary teeters on the verge of collapse and its prisons edge into crisis. At the same time, a transformed Syrian state under Sharaa’s Al-Qaeda-rooted administration is recalibrating its regional footing following years of civil war, western isolation, and struggles to assert sovereignty.
Damascus frames the detainee issue as a humanitarian one. However, political observers in Beirut view it as a strategic lever, part of a broader power play unfolding at a time when Lebanon faces internal divisions and competition between Turkiye and Saudi Arabia over influence within its Sunni community.
The detainees also represent more than individual cases—they are a legacy of the previous Syrian order, and a test for Lebanon’s ability to deal with the political costs of its judicial dysfunction.
Who are the detainees?
The Syrian prisoners in Lebanon fall into three categories. First, the political detainees: Syrians imprisoned over the past decade for joining militant factions like the Free Syrian Army (FSA) or the UN-designated terrorist Nusra Front – or for speaking out against the former Syrian government.
Most were never formally charged. Now, with former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad gone and a new government in Damascus, these individuals are being recast not as enemies but as participants in a national cause. Their return is being framed by Damascus as part of Syria’s internal reconciliation process.
Second are the jihadist-linked detainees. These prisoners are accused of ties to terror groups such as ISIS or Al-Qaeda. Some have faced trial, but many continue to be held without verdicts. Legal definitions of terrorism vary significantly between Beirut and Damascus, complicating any coordinated legal handling.
The lack of evidence in many cases has raised questions about the fairness of prolonged detentions, especially in the absence of transparent legal standards or international oversight.
Third are the criminal offenders: Syrians charged with routine crimes like theft or smuggling. In theory, they fall under Lebanon’s legal system like any foreign national. In practice, a broken judiciary and Kafkaesque bureaucracy have left many in legal limbo, detained for years without resolution.
What unites all three groups is Lebanon’s failure to classify or process their cases adequately. Without access to lawyers, interpreters, or diplomatic support, most Syrian detainees are effectively voiceless and invisible. According to legal advocates, some have waited up to seven years for a single court appearance.
Damascus’ extrajudicial demands
The names requested by Damascus include figures deeply linked to past violence on Lebanese soil. Salafi preacher Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir, sentenced in connection with the 2013 Abra clashes that left several Lebanese army soldiers dead, is among them. His case is closed under Lebanese law, so his inclusion signals political calculation, not legal necessity.
Also on the list are Sheikh Omar al-Atrash and Naeem Abbas, both tied to Al-Qaeda’s operations in Lebanon and implicated in the 2013 bombings in Beirut’s southern suburb of Dahieh. Their convictions are firm. Their extradition, if attempted, would ignite a political firestorm.
Damascus is not seeking the return of petty criminals. It aims to influence what it considers political actors tied to the Syrian conflict—individuals it now views as part of its national narrative. Beirut, however, sees potential manipulation.
Syrian sources inform The Cradle that any returnees would undergo formal security and judicial oversight. But victims’ families fear the deals may serve regional interests, not justice. The Lebanese judiciary, lacking independence and burdened by years of foreign and sectarian interference, offers little public confidence.
Roumieh: A prison on the brink
Roumieh Prison was built to house 1,500 inmates. It currently holds over 4,000, including hundreds of Syrians. Many have been held without charges. Conditions in the Islamist wing, “Block B,” are dire—overcrowded, unsanitary, and deprived of basic medical and psychological care.
In February, more than 100 Syrian detainees began a two-week hunger strike. The protest followed months of inaction on promised reforms, including improved legal access and prison conditions. Security officials acknowledge the risk that unrest could escalate into a full-blown revolt, especially as external actors view the prison crisis as an opportunity to stir instability. Lebanese security sources warn that militant groups could exploit grievances inside Roumieh, turning a detention center into a flashpoint for wider conflict.
No legal architecture
Despite the gravity of the issue, there is no formal prisoner exchange treaty between Lebanon and Syria. An older extradition agreement remains on paper, but it does not cover sentenced prisoners. Lebanese law bars deportation unless a detainee has received a final verdict—and even then, not for crimes committed on Lebanese soil with Lebanese victims.
This legal grey zone explains why detainees like Abbas and Atrash remain in Lebanon, at least for now. However, a new judicial agreement is reportedly being negotiated between the justice ministries in Beirut and Damascus that may allow the repatriation of 370 convicted Syrians.
Lebanese judicial sources tell The Cradle that the draft agreement includes provisions for sentence continuation and post-transfer monitoring, but faces political opposition from factions aligned with western interests.
While Damascus demands its citizens back, Lebanon is silent on its nationals imprisoned in the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)-run detention camps in northeast Syria. Hundreds of Lebanese citizens—many detained alongside their families—languish there without trial, without consular access, and without official advocacy. Some have been held since 2019, captured during the final battles against ISIS.
This silence exposes Lebanon’s deeper dysfunction. Its institutions are too eroded to defend their own citizens, let alone negotiate a reciprocal deal with a fragile state like Syria, which now speaks from a position of renewed regional assertiveness. The contradiction is glaring: Beirut is expected to process Syrian cases with care, while ignoring its nationals trapped in US-backed detention zones under the SDF.
Is a deal possible?
Senior political sources tell The Cradle that Beirut may begin by releasing detainees with no political baggage, setting the stage for a broader settlement. This would allow both states to test the waters while avoiding immediate controversy. Some Lebanese officials argue this phased approach could also reduce overcrowding in prisons like Roumieh, while fulfilling Syria’s minimal expectations.
But any lasting resolution requires more than tactical moves. It demands a sweeping overhaul of Lebanon’s judicial architecture, the depoliticization of its detention policies, and a binding bilateral framework. Damascus, for its part, will have to offer clear guarantees that repatriated detainees are not used to settle old scores but reintegrated into a legal system that reflects its new political reality.
Until then, Lebanon’s prisons will remain overstuffed, its judiciary paralyzed, and the Syrian detainee file unresolved—exposing the unfinished reckoning between two states still mired in the legacies of occupation, war, and political dependency.
Al-Tanf and the Yinon Plan for Syria: Israel’s Fortress of Fragmentation
21st Century Wire | July 21, 2025
Oded Yinon, author of the 1982 paper “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s,” is often cited regarding Israel’s aim to divide neighboring Arab and Muslim areas into ethnic mini-states. Yinon was a former advisor to Ariel Sharon, a former senior official with the Israeli Foreign Ministry, and a journalist for The Jerusalem Post. Although Yinon downplays the paper’s direct relevance to current geopolitics, its ideas have arguably become foundational to Zionist policy; balkanization was crucial for Israel’s establishment and continues to be a strategy for its military dominance in the Middle East, especially in Syria. His paper is commonly known as the “Yinon Plan.” Within it, you can read:
“The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi’ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan. This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach today.”
The fragmentation of Syria was always an integral part of the Yinon plan, with its operational headquarters not in Tel Aviv but at the US Al-Tanf base, located at the tri-border area between Syria, Jordan, and Iraq, and along one of the main highways between Baghdad and Damascus.
Syrian journalist and TV presenter, Haidar Mustafa, wrote for The Cradle on December 2, 2024, about the importance of the Al-Tanf base, one of the most strategic military garrisons for the US occupation in Syria, which acted as a launching platform for countless Israeli overt and covert operations:
“The US coalition’s mission against the Islamic State quickly evolved into a broader strategy of occupying parts of Syria, with the Al-Tanf base crucial to securing its influence and supporting Israeli interests amid growing local resistance.”
In a recent post on X, Lebanese analyst Ibrahim Majed articulated several points about the Al-Tanf base and the immense role the American base has played in advancing Israel’s Yinon Plan, describing it as a “Strategic Outpost for Greater Israel and Israel’s Fortress of Fragmentation.” His post inspired the title of our post today.
Recently, we covered the “David’s Corridor”, a land route in Israel that extends from the occupied Golan Heights through southern Syria to the Euphrates. This route represents Israel’s most crucial foothold in the centre of West Asia, which ultimately benefits from the protection provided by the Al-Tanf base. Should Israel manage to gain control over the southern provinces of Syria, it will be considerably closer to connecting with the territories held by the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in the east, through the American Al-Tanf base located near the Iraqi border, achieving several goals including the non-negligible control of the corridor, the fragementation of Syria and in time the replacement of the “Shiite Crescent” by an “Israeli Crescent”. Israel aims to establish a secure route that begins in the Golan Heights, traverses through the Suwayda province, continues across the eastern Syrian desert where the US base at Al-Tanf is situated, and extends to the Kurdish-controlled area of Hasakah, ultimately reaching Iraqi Kurdistan along the Iranian border. This explains the continued US military presence in north-east Syria and why last week, on two occasions, a large CIA delegation found itself at the Qasrak base in Al-Hasakah. This is how Israel intends to permanently cut off the Tehran-Beirut road.
Regarding the Druze community in Syria, Israel uses them primarily as a geographic instrument, a human “Maginot Line” of some sort, where the demographic acts as a human shield that, on one hand, hinders Sunnis’ expansion, while simultaneously stopping the Shiites from consolidating on the other. Local groups like Druze, Kurds and Bedouin tribes are all supported directly or indirectly with Western and Israeli logistics and intelligence, and it will remain so, as long as their presence helps Israel fill the vacuum.
The situation in Syria is no longer up for debate—it is laid bare, with each chapter shedding light on the Greater Israel Plan, or the so-called Yinon Plan. This plan provides neither peace nor solutions, nor does it reflect any sense of humanity; instead, it ensures chaos for geopolitical and financial profit, leading to the downfall of a nation we once recognised as Syria. Lebanon is undoubtedly next on Israel’s fragmentation map, and it is with great concern that one must anticipate Israel’s next move…
Darrin Waller writes Fountainbridge Substack…
Understanding the Yinon Plan: Syria is Gone — Is Lebanon Next?
The fall of Syria marks the beginning of a new era of Levantine chaos.
As I wrote when Assad fell, Syria ceased to exist. Fourteen years of sectarian carnage — unleashed by a Salafist proxy terrorist militia, trained by the US, UK, Israel, and Turkey in camps across Jordan and Turkey, and funded by Persian Gulf petrodollar monarchies to the tune of three trillion dollars — extinguished the last secular Levantine nation in December 2024.
As Hassan Nasrallah warned:
“If Syria were to fall into the hands of these groups, its present and future would spiral into chaos… a scene of endless infighting among factions devoid of reason or culture, drowning in extremism, bloodshed, sectarian rivalries…”
It is done. Sold to us as a revolution. A popular uprising.
Another regime change operation — brutally executed over 14 years — culminated in the installation of a mercenary leader: the Saudi-born takfiri Jolani, now styling himself as President Ahmed al-Sharaa.
What we are seeing is the prosecution of the Yinon Plan — a 1982 geopolitical blueprint calling for Israeli regional dominance through the fragmentation of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt along ethnic, sectarian, and tribal lines.

IMAGE: Project Balkanisation: Oded Yinon and an Enduring Plank of Israeli Foreign Policy (Source: Katehon)
It argues that Israel’s long-term survival hinges on one core premise: “The dissolution of all existing Arab states into small units.”
On the surface, the geopolitical win by the US-UK-Israel military-intelligence trifecta — backed by Turkey and the Persian Gulf monarchies — appears seismic. A Shīʿī-led country now falls under Sunni Salafism, severing the contiguous Shīʿī-controlled corridor linking Tehran to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Another barrier to China’s Silk Road ambitions into the Mediterranean has been firmly set in place. Any revival of the ancient Via Maris — a trade corridor that once ran the Levantine coast, linking Asia to Europe and North Africa — remains a pipe dream.
Severed by the establishment of Israel and now buried beneath the rubble of Syria’s destruction, it ensures that any vision of unity from the Maghreb to the Arabian Peninsula remains just that — a vision.
But perhaps of greater immediate import — Israel’s ethno-supremacists and their vision of a ‘Greater Israel’ have just taken a giant leap forward. Southern Syria — and crucially, Mount Hermon, which overlooks Damascus and the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon, granting strategic military dominance over both — is now firmly under Israeli control. As is the tri-border area between Syria, Jordan, and Iraq — Al Tanf.
Yet there’s more. Israel now moves to establish its self-styled ‘David’s Corridor’ — a contiguous land route stretching from the occupied Golan Heights through southern Syria to the Euphrates. It cuts through the governorates of Deraa, Suwayda, Al-Tanf, and Deir Ezzor, reaching the Iraqi-Syrian border at Albu Kamal — granting Israel a strategic foothold deep in the heart of West Asia.
The corridor was already partially activated during the 12-day war with Iran, enabling standoff air strikes deep into Iranian territory.
With a direct land route to Iraq now viable, expect covert destabilisation efforts within the Shīʿī heartlands of Karbalāʾ and Najaf, alongside renewed backing for Kurdish separatists in both Iraq and Syria. Further vicious sectarian conflict across the region is now being baked in.
Whilst Israel’s bombing of the Defence Ministry and the Presidential Palace in Damascus was supposedly to protect the Druze community from Jolani’s Salafist mercenaries, no such protection was afforded to the Alawites, Armenians, Assyrians, or any of Syria’s other religious or ethnic minorities, who were left to be slaughtered.
The strikes on the Defence Ministry and Presidential Palace were telegraphed well in advance — and were thus performative. A warning to Jolani — Southern Syria is now firmly under Israel’s purview. No Syrian military forces will be allowed.
Meaning: Jolani and his hired guns are expendable, especially now that they’ve completed their task — extinguishing Syria’s sovereignty. As Hadi Nasrallah ruefully put it:
“You mean to tell me the very ones armed by Israel, treated in Israeli hospitals, coordinating with the IOF, shaking Netanyahu’s hand and thanking him for bombing Lebanon — are now being bombed by Israel after serving their purpose? Who would’ve thought?”
And yet, it remains far from clear if Jolani has outlived his usefulness, or if he still has his uses, at least from a US perspective.
Only days ago, whilst Jolani was in Baku, Syrian and Israeli officials were reportedly in talks. Rumours even swirled of a deal wherein Syria would launch attacks against Lebanon’s Shiʿī communities — either independently or in coordination with Israel.
Little wonder, then, that US envoy Tom Barrack warned Lebanon to ‘disarm Hezbollah or risk Syrian occupation’ — signalling that Lebanon, too, is likely slated for division and balkanisation.
The port of Tripoli and the Bekaʿa Valley, Lebanon’s agricultural heartland and a Shīʿī stronghold, are now in play. The only question is whether Ankara or West Jerusalem will seize them first, come to blows over Lebanon’s spoils, or quietly divide them, with Turkey taking the port and Israel the Bekaʿa.
But full control may yet require the chaos of full-on civil war. Syria and Lebanon edge closer — division and balkanisation becoming ever easier to enforce, until little remains but manageable fragments. The Yinon Plan made manifest.
“The attack on Lebanon is going to happen without a doubt… the question is when, and the other question is how. Is Israel going to do a ground invasion at the same time or just attack from the air?” (Ibrahim Majed)
Doubtless, the architects of today’s chaos are already patting themselves on the back, expecting handsome dividends to roll in. More division. More balkanisation. A weaker, fractured Arab world — and a stronger, more dominant Israel.
This is what Netanyahu means when he talks about “redrawing the Middle East”.
Yet the US and Israel are unravelling at an accelerating pace. Their seeming victory over the Levant is no triumph of providence — it courts the abyss and beckons the judgment to come.
US envoy says Hezbollah weapons ‘an internal matter’ during Beirut visit
The Cradle | July 21, 2025
US envoy Tom Barrack said while visiting Lebanon on 21 July that the issue of disarming Hezbollah is an “internal matter,” after months of pressure by Washington on the Lebanese state to secure a surrender of the resistance’s weapons.
“Disarming Hezbollah is an internal matter,” he said, adding that “ideas and assistance” are being offered to the Lebanese state.
“We are not forcing anyone to do anything … we are trying to help,” he added.
He stressed that Hezbollah “is a terrorist organization” in the eyes of the US, and that Washington does not engage in dialogue with it. “We have no skin in the game,” Barrack said.
He claimed Lebanon faces no “consequences” or “threat” if Hezbollah does not disarm, but that it will be “disappointing.”
When asked by a reporter about guarantees that Israel will withdraw its forces from Lebanon and end its attacks on the country, Barrack said, “We cannot compel Israel to do anything, can we?”
Barrack is in Lebanon to discuss with officials Beirut’s response to a US proposal for disarming Hezbollah.
Sources cited by Reuters in early July said that Barrack warned that Hezbollah must be disarmed by November or the end of this year at the latest – in exchange for a withdrawal of Israeli troops from the five points they occupied in south Lebanon after the ceasefire, in violation of the deal. Earlier this month, the US envoy warned that Lebanon risked being occupied by Syria’s extremist-dominated military if Beirut did not move quickly to disarm Hezbollah.
Barrack said during his last trip to Lebanon that he was “satisfied” with Lebanon’s response to the US roadmap, which is expected to be finalized and handed over soon.
Beirut has reportedly demanded that no timeframe for disarmament be set until Israel withdraws and ends attacks.
The resistance group has repeatedly rejected surrendering its weapons. As the government vows to achieve a monopoly over all weapons across Lebanon, Hezbollah says it is ready for internal discussions on the formation of a Lebanese defensive strategy, through which the group’s arms would be incorporated into the state for use in deterring Israel.
The Lebanese resistance group has refused any discussion on the matter until Israeli troops withdraw from Lebanon and end their attacks.
Israeli attacks on Lebanon have continued unabated. Tel Aviv has violated the ceasefire over 3,000 times. More than 200 people have been killed since the deal was signed in November 2024.
Twelve people were killed in an Israeli airstrike in the eastern Bekaa region of Lebanon last week.
Israel has threatened to continue escalating against Lebanon if Hezbollah is not disarmed.
Hezbollah MP Hussein Jachi said on Monday that Hezbollah “will not abandon its weapons for empty US promises.”
“We will not abandon our faith or our strength. We are ready for confrontation. There will be no surrender or submission to Israel, and Israel will not receive our weapons,” Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem said on Friday.
“We know that confrontation is very costly, but surrender leaves us with nothing,” he added, noting that if the “threat is removed, we are ready to discuss the defense strategy and the national security strategy.”
Turkiye backs extremists in Lebanon as ‘blackmail’ over Cyprus ties
The Cradle | July 14, 2025
Turkiye has expressed “deep concern” over Lebanese President Joseph Aoun’s recent visit to Cyprus and has plans to “blackmail” Beirut if it chooses to counter Ankara’s influence in the Mediterranean, a senior Lebanese source told The Cradle on 14 July.
“Ankara expressed deep concern over Aoun’s visit to the Cypriot capital, Nicosia, and viewed it as a worrying sign of Beirut’s potential openness to Mediterranean and European partnerships that are inconsistent with its agenda in the Eastern Mediterranean,” the source said.
“Northern Lebanon is witnessing a worrying increase in the number of displaced Syrians with complex security backgrounds,” the source added, noting an increase in cross-border [weapons] smuggling operations which are taking place “under the direct sponsorship and cover of Syrian and Turkish security agencies.”
According to the Lebanese source, Aoun’s visit to Cyprus “revealed files of political and security blackmail prepared by Turkiye for use later if Beirut decides to pursue strategic options that conflict with Ankara’s interests in Lebanon and the region.”
The source went on to say that Ankara “considers northern Lebanon as its traditional area of influence and will not tolerate any new official positioning by Beirut that threatens its geopolitical position in the Mediterranean.”
Turkiye invaded Cyprus in 1974 and controls the northern part of the island. Ankara views Greek Cyprus as a main regional and geopolitical rival.
The Cradle’s Malik Khoury wrote that Ankara is unlikely to take kindly to an improvement of Lebanese–Cypriot ties, and has strong ambitions for northern Lebanon.
“Turkiye has long-standing historical ties to northern Lebanon,” he said. Citing Lebanese sources, he noted Ankara’s “interest in the port of Tripoli.” Geographically and maritime-wise, this is the largest port in the Mediterranean in terms of potential. “If rehabilitated, it could rival the Israeli port of Haifa. Ankara also has its eye on the Qlayaat Airport, near the Syrian border, as well as large areas of the Akkar Plain, rich in minerals and natural resources,” he added.
Thousands of extremist Islamist prisoners, including Syrians linked to the groups now affiliated with authorities in Damascus, are held in Lebanon’s Roumieh prison.
Reports from after the fall of former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s government said that Syria was planning to request their repatriation.
A day after Aoun’s visit to Cyprus last week, a source quoted by Syria TV threatened to revive the issue of Syrian prisoners in Lebanon, while hinting at the potential closure of the Syrian–Lebanese border. The report said Damascus is unhappy with Beirut’s “handling” of the situation and is planning a political and diplomatic escalation if the issue is not resolved.
“If you want to breathe air via Cyprus, you will suffocate by land from Damascus,” the source said.
The information provided by the Lebanese source to The Cradle comes as there has been growing concern about potential ambitions by Syria’s extremist-dominated military to take over swathes of northern Lebanon.
There have been reports recently that extremist fighters from Syria have been infiltrating Lebanon.
The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) denied these reports on Sunday and said they are working to ensure the security of the border.
Ten people, including two foreign nationals, were detained during an LAF operation in the town of Btebyat in Metn in the Mount Lebanon governorate, according to an army statement Sunday evening. The suspects’ nationalities were not specified.
Initial findings indicated that the individuals were not linked to any extremist organizations. The army’s statement did not acknowledge circulating reports of attempts to stockpile weapons across the country in preparation for attacks.
A report by Israel’s i24 in early July claimed Syria is demanding control over the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli during ongoing talks between Damascus and Tel Aviv.
The concern caused by this report and others like it was compounded on Friday, when US envoy Tom Barrack warned that Lebanon is “going to be Bilad al-Sham (historical name for Greater Syria) again” if Hezbollah does not surrender its arms.
“Syrians say Lebanon is our beach resort,” Barrack added.
The threat of extremist factions, which now make up the bulk of the Syrian state, is not new to Lebanon.
The Syrian army is predominantly made up of what used to be known as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), an extremist Al-Qaeda-linked organization which was headed by Syria’s new President Ahmad al-Sharaa (known back then as Abu Mohammad al-Julani).
HTS was formerly known as the Nusra Front – Al-Qaeda’s official branch in Syria. The organization, responsible for deadly suicide attacks inside Lebanon, took over large swathes of the Syrian–Lebanese border in the first few years of the war in Syria, including the barrens of Arsal and Ras Baalbek.
The organization was eventually fully repelled by Hezbollah and the Lebanese army in 2017 in what is referred to as “The Second Liberation.”
HTS and the other groups, which have been incorporated into the Syrian Defense Ministry, have long operated under the direct tutelage of Turkish intelligence.
US envoy warns Lebanon: ‘Disarm Hezbollah or risk Syrian occupation’

The Cradle | July 12, 2025
Lebanon risks being invaded and occupied by Syria and Israel unless Beirut acts to disarm Hezbollah, US special envoy Thomas Barrack warned on 12 July.
Speaking to The National, Barrack, who is the US special envoy for Syria and ambassador to Turkiye, stressed Lebanon faces an existential threat” from the two US allies on its borders, while urging Beirut to act quickly to disarm Hezbollah.
“You have Israel on one side, you have Iran on the other, and now you have Syria manifesting itself so quickly that if Lebanon doesn’t move, it’s going to be Bilad Al Sham again,” he said, using the historical name for greater Syria, which included Lebanon and Palestine.
“Syrians say Lebanon is our beach resort. So we need to move. And I know how frustrated the Lebanese people are. It frustrates me,” he added.
In December, the former Al-Qaeda offshoot Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) conquered Damascus, bringing Syria under US, Israeli, and Turkish influence.
Syria’s new government, led by former ISIS commander Ahmad al-Sharaa, has reportedly demanded it be given the Sunni-majority city of Tripoli in northern Lebanon while relinquishing the Golan Heights as part of a peace deal with Israel.
Last month, Barrack presented Lebanese officials with a proposal that calls for reconstruction aid and an end to Israel’s attacks if Hezbollah gives up its weapons.
The war between Israel and Hezbollah ended in November with a US-brokered ceasefire. But Israel continues to carry out air strikes and assassinations throughout Lebanon. Israeli ground forces also occupy five points in the south of the country.
In response to the proposal, Lebanese authorities submitted a seven-page document calling for a full Israeli withdrawal from occupied Lebanese territory, including the Shebaa Farms, and pledging to dismantle Hezbollah’s arms in south Lebanon, but not nationwide as Israel is demanding.
When The National asked Barrack why Lebanese President Joseph Aoun has not publicly committed to a disarmament timetable, Barrack said: “He doesn’t want to start a civil war.”
“We don’t have the soldiers on the ground for the [Lebanese Armed Forces, LAF] to be able to do that yet because they don’t have the money. They’re using equipment that’s 60 years old,” he said.
“Hezbollah is looking at it saying, ‘We can’t rely on the LAF. We have to rely on ourselves because Israel is bombing us every day, and they’re still occupying our land,’” Barrack added.
On 6 July, Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem said the Lebanese resistance movement will not disarm or back down from confronting Israel until it ends its air strikes and withdraws from southern Lebanon.
“We cannot be asked to soften our stance or lay down arms while [Israeli] aggression continues,” Qassem told thousands of supporters gathered in Beirut’s southern suburbs on Sunday.
He was speaking during religious gatherings for Ashura, which commemorates the martyrdom of the Prophet Muhammad’s grandson, Imam Hussein, in 680 AD in Karbala, Iraq.
Lebanese President Aoun stated on Friday that Lebanon has no intention of normalizing relations with Israel.
US President Donald Trump is pressuring both Syria and Lebanon to sign the Abraham Accords, which saw the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco normalize relations with Israel in previous years.
Tom Barrack’s project to destabilize Lebanon
The Cradle | July 7, 2025
“A century ago, the west imposed maps, mandates, penciled borders, and foreign rule. Sykes-Picot divided Syria and the broader region for imperial gain-not peace. That mistake cost generations. We will not make it again.”
–Tom Barrack, US ambassador to Turkiye and special envoy to Syria
When US Envoy to Turkiye and Syria Tom Barrack made this declaration last month in Ankara, it suggested Washington was repudiating the colonial-era borders imposed on the Levant by Britain and France. But Barrack’s actual meaning was far more insidious: The Sykes-Picot agreement may be dead, but now the US intends to redraw the region’s frontiers to suit one purpose only – Israeli expansionism.
US envoy’s agenda: Redrawing the region by dismantling resistance
Lebanon’s fate remains tightly interwoven with that of Syria and occupied Palestine. Any imposed resolution to the so-called Israeli-Palestinian conflict will inevitably reverberate through both Damascus and Beirut, forcing their governments to make existential choices. Chief among these is the surrender of arms and capabilities, a demand embedded in the US-led effort to transform the region’s balance of power.
Enter Barrack, the Lebanese-American billionaire and close confidant of US President Donald Trump, now repurposed as a roving envoy to Lebanon and Syria. He has since positioned himself as a chief advocate of pulling both Syria and Lebanon into the Abraham Accords, a euphemism for normalizing ties with the occupation state.
Barrack met with top officials in Beirut today, where he was expected to peddle this political reconfiguration under the guise of regional peace.
Maximum pressure and the threat of force
Lebanon is at the sharp end of a US-Israeli campaign to disarm Hezbollah at any cost and within months. The escalation is not a reaction to local dynamics, but rather a consequence of Washington’s regional failures: from the quagmire in Ukraine to its inability to deter Iran or check Israel’s war crimes in Gaza.
With nothing substantive to offer, the US is leaning on coercion to twist arms at the top. Israeli military threats serve as a blunt instrument to corner Lebanese officials into signing off on the resistance’s disarmament – a fantasy the US is now aggressively chasing.
Trump, seeking a legacy boost, is betting on a high-stakes foreign policy gambit: force Lebanon – the last Levantine Arab state still tethered to the Axis of Resistance – into surrender, and break its last defensive stronghold against Israeli expansion.
A new kind of envoy, a new kind of threat
Barrack’s mission departs from the playbook of previous US envoys who, for all their meddling, took Lebanon’s fragility seriously. Not so today. Barrack, who also serves as US ambassador to Turkiye and envoy to Syria, represents a new breed of imperial proxy, unconcerned with sectarian fault lines or civil strife.
Washington now believes Hezbollah is vulnerable. The plan is to crush it politically, and if needed, militarily, even if that means weaponizing the Lebanese army against its own citizens. The Trump administration has made clear it will trade Lebanese stability for US-Israeli hegemony.
According to a Lebanese official cited by Anadolu Agency, Barrack handed Beirut a five-page proposal in June that centered on three main objectives. The first is the monopolization of all weapons under the Lebanese state’s control. The second involves enacting fiscal and economic reforms, including tighter border controls, anti-smuggling efforts, and boosted customs revenues. The third demands a reconfiguration of ties with Syria by demarcating borders and expanding trade.
No timeline is spelled out in the document, but US pressure suggests an expectation for full implementation by year’s end. Lebanon, the official claims, is drafting a unified response based on the ministerial statement and President Joseph Aoun’s inaugural address.
But Beirut has its own demands, including an end to Israeli violations, a full withdrawal from occupied territories, and the launch of reconstruction efforts in the south.
For now, Hezbollah’s official position remains undisclosed. Its response is expected to surface in the coming days, as Barrack returns to Beirut.
After meeting with President Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri in Beirut today, Barrack announced that he is “satisfied” with the Lebanese authorities’ response to Washington’s request regarding the disarmament of Hezbollah. At the same time, he warned that Lebanon “will be left behind” if it does not move in line with the ongoing regional changes. Barrack also stated that “Hezbollah is a political party, and it also has an armed wing. Hezbollah needs to see that there is a future for them, and that this path is not meant to be only against them, and that there is an intersection between peace and prosperity for them as well.”
Empty promises, no Israeli restraint
During his last visit, Barrack met Lebanon’s three top officials to pitch a phased disarmament plan, divided by time and geography. He hinted at possible US pressure on Tel Aviv to vacate recently occupied points. But when pressed, he admitted there were no guarantees that Israel would halt its aggression.
This is no peace deal. It is an ultimatum.
Barrack’s push marks the culmination of a decades-long campaign to dismantle the region’s anti-imperialist front. With Egypt and Jordan long co-opted, Syria’s Baathist era gutted, and Iraq’s factions fragmented, apart from Yemen’s Ansarallah-aligned army, Hezbollah remains the last major armed deterrent to Israeli expansion.
Washington and Tel Aviv understand this. Disarming Hezbollah clears the path for diplomatic normalization not only with Beirut, but also with Syria’s so-called interim government under de facto President Ahmad al-Sharaa, a former ISIS chief who went by the nom de guerre Abu Mohammad al-Julani, now edging closer to normalization with Tel Aviv.
Capitulation without compensation
The US demands everything and offers nothing. There are no guarantees of Israeli withdrawal. No prisoner releases. No end to airstrikes or assassinations. Not even arms for the Lebanese army or funds for reconstruction.
Instead, Washington continues to throttle the army by blocking weapons transfers and targeting seized stockpiles, cementing its subservience.
Barrack’s so-called solution is a trap. It further strips Lebanon of sovereignty, invites more Israeli strikes across the south, the Bekaa, and even Beirut, and paves the way for sectarian fragmentation under the guise of national reform.
With some domestic factions parroting US-Israeli talking points, the threat is no longer just foreign. Western-backed, right-wing Lebanese elements are gaining narrative traction, openly adopting Tel Aviv’s discourse on resistance weapons. These forces could soon coordinate directly with the occupation state, becoming internal agents of destabilization.
Meanwhile, the proposal ignores the Palestinian refugee question, omits border security mechanisms, and offers no path to deter Israeli incursions. In effect, it sets the stage for a sectarian, security-driven partition of Lebanon.
Divide and conquer: Disarming in stages
Washington’s strategy is clear. It aims to isolate and disarm resistance factions one by one. Last month, the target was Palestinian groups. Now, Hezbollah. The aim is to prevent a unified front by cutting off cross-sectarian solidarity and picking off targets individually.
If these pressures are not absorbed and neutralized, the risks are existential. A major Israeli assault on Lebanon or a manufactured civil conflict is likely. At the same time, extremist groups are resurging in Syria under Sharaa’s watch, a man eager to appease Washington and Tel Aviv at all costs.
Hezbollah and its supporters face a stark choice. They must either surrender to foreign diktats or entrench their defenses and refuse to even entertain a debate on arms as long as threats persist.
This may be the gravest threat to Lebanon’s post-war existence. With the US shedding all pretense of neutrality and openly advocating for a new regional map, the country faces a binary future: resist, or be dismembered.
Lebanon’s salvation hinges on one truth. Only a united front behind the resistance can preserve its sovereignty and shield it from the vultures circling overhead.
BRICS leaders demand ceasefire in Gaza, condemn strikes on Iran
Al Mayadeen | July 6, 2025
Leaders of the BRICS bloc, comprising 11 emerging economies, issued a strong and unified call on Sunday for an immediate, permanent, and unconditional ceasefire in Gaza, as the war enters its 22nd month.
In the final declaration of their summit held in Rio de Janeiro, BRICS leaders urged all parties to engage in good-faith negotiations to halt the war on Gaza and demanded a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Strip and all other parts of the occupied Palestinian territories.
“We exhort the parties to engage in good faith in further negotiations to achieve an immediate, permanent and unconditional ceasefire,” the 11-nation bloc said in a final summit statement.
The statement comes as indirect truce negotiations between the Israeli occupation and Hamas resumed in Doha, with international pressure mounting for a resolution to the war.
BRICS condemns strikes on Iran
The summit also addressed the recent escalation between Iran and “Israel”, during which the latter launched an unprovoked 12-day war on the Islamic Republic, culminating in US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June.
“We condemn the military strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran since June 13, 2025,” the statement read, without directly naming the United States or “Israel”.
It added, “We express serious concern over deliberate attacks on civilian infrastructure and peaceful nuclear facilities, which constitute a violation of international law.”
BRICS demands Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon
Moreover, the statement called for a ceasefire in Lebanon and for all “parties to strictly adhere to its terms and fully implement UN Security Council Resolution 1701,” adding, “We condemn the ongoing violations of the ceasefire, as well as the violations of Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
“We urge Israel to respect the terms agreed upon with the Lebanese government and to withdraw its occupying forces from all Lebanese territory, including the five remaining sites in southern Lebanon.”
BRICS demands Israeli withdrawal from Syria
Regarding Syria, the BRICS leaders reaffirmed their commitment to the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of the country, calling on “Israel” to withdraw troops from Syrian territory without delay, according to the statement.
“We reaffirm our commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity, and territorial integrity of Syria and call for a peaceful and inclusive Syrian-led and Syrian-owned, UN-facilitated political process, based on the principles of Security Council Resolution 2254 (2015), in a manner that ensures the security and well-being of the civilian population, without discrimination,” it read.
The statement further condemned the threat posed by foreign terrorists in Syria and the risk of the spread of terrorists from Syria to regional countries.
“Syria should firmly oppose all forms of terrorism and extremism and take concrete actions to respond to concerns of the international community about terrorism,” it added.
The BRICS leaders welcomed the lifting of sanctions on Syria and expressed their hope that the country’s economy will be rebuilt.
It is worth noting that the next BRICS summit will be held in India in 2026, a final declaration of the Rio De Janeiro summit said.
BRICS encourages diplomatic efforts on Ukraine
On the Ukrainian issue, the leaders expressed hope that ongoing diplomatic efforts, including the African Peace Initiative and the Group of Friends for Peace, would lead to a sustainable resolution, advocating for dialogue and diplomacy to this end.
“We recall our national positions concerning the conflict in Ukraine as expressed in the appropriate fora, including the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly. We note with appreciation relevant proposals of mediation and good offices, including the creation of the African Peace Initiative and the Group of Friends for Peace, aimed at peaceful resolution of the conflict through dialogue and diplomacy. We expect that current efforts will lead to a sustainable peace settlement,” the statement read.
Criticism of Trump’s trade policies
In addition to Middle East affairs, the summit took aim at US economic policy. BRICS leaders expressed “serious concerns” over US President Donald Trump’s recent wave of unilateral tariffs, calling them “indiscriminate” and damaging to global trade.
“We voice serious concerns about the rise of unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures which distort trade and are inconsistent with WTO rules,” the statement said.
The bloc warned that these actions could “disrupt global supply chains” and increase economic uncertainty, particularly as Trump has threatened new tariffs on trading partners unless “deals” are reached by August 1.
Lula urges BRICS action on Gaza
In his opening remarks at the summit, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva drew a parallel with the Cold War’s Non-Aligned Movement, a group of developing nations that resisted formally joining either side of a polarized global order.
“BRICS is the heir to the Non-Aligned Movement,” Lula told leaders. “With multilateralism under attack, our autonomy is in check once again.”
BRICS nations now represent more than half the world’s population and 40% of its economic output, Lula noted in remarks on Saturday to business leaders, warning of rising protectionism.
“If international governance does not reflect the new multipolar reality of the 21st century, it is up to BRICS to help bring it up to date,” Lula added in his opening remarks.
Furthermore, he defended the integrity of Iran’s borders, following the Israeli war and the US bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities, highlighting the failure of US-led wars in the Middle East.
“We cannot remain indifferent to the genocide carried out by Israel in Gaza, the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians and the use of hunger as a weapon of war,” Lula told fellow BRICS leaders, including those from China, India, and other key emerging economies.
The renewed BRICS stance comes as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu prepares to meet with Trump at the White House on Monday. Trump has been pushing for an end to the war and expressed hope for a ceasefire agreement in the coming week.
Putin calls era of liberal globalization ‘obsolete’
In his video statement, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed the formation of a new BRICS investment platform to be developed through the New Development Bank.
“This is a matter of jointly developing harmonized tools to support and raise funds for the economies of our countries and those of the global South and East,” Putin stated, underlining the growing use of national currencies in intra-BRICS trade and calling for further expansion of this practice to reduce dependence on external systems.
Growing global influence
Putin noted that BRICS’ global authority and influence continue to grow each year, surpassing the G7 in terms of purchasing power parity.
“The authority and influence of our association in the world are growing from year to year. BRICS has rightfully established itself among the key centers of global governance,” he said.
He added that BRICS has many like-minded partners in the Global South and East and that the shift away from a unipolar world order is accelerating.
Speaking via video link to the summit in Rio de Janeiro, Putin told BRICS leaders that the era of liberal globalization was obsolete and that the future belonged to swiftly growing emerging markets, which should enhance the use of their national currencies for trade.
“Everything indicates that the model of liberal globalization is becoming obsolete,” Putin said, adding, “The center of business activity is shifting toward the emerging markets.”
Putin also called on the BRICS countries to step up cooperation in a range of spheres, including natural resources, logistics, trade, and finance.
Araghchi mourns Iranians killed by ‘Israel’ in BRICS speech
At the BRICS summit, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi delivered a moving speech where he mourned the Iranians killed by the recent Israeli aggression on Iran.
Araghchi expressed gratitude to fellow BRICS members who recognized the seriousness of recent escalations and condemned the aggression, detailing the destruction of residential areas, military sites, and civilian infrastructure.
The attacks, he said, resulted in the deaths of off-duty soldiers, scientists, university professors, and civilians, including women and children.
Particularly alarming, he noted, was the targeting of Iran’s peaceful nuclear facilities, which are under strict International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) oversight. The foreign minister accused the US of direct involvement in the strikes, reinforcing its complicity in what he called “Israel’s” broader campaign of occupation, apartheid, and regional destabilization.
He warned that these attacks not only inflicted human and infrastructural damage but also delivered a “lethal blow” to diplomacy and the international rule of law, occurring just days before a scheduled round of nuclear talks between Iran and the United States.
Calling for international accountability, the top Iranian diplomat urged BRICS leaders to recognize the dangerous precedent set by what he described as unprovoked, lawless aggression by two nuclear-armed states.
‘Act of terrorism’: Iran urges formation of fact-finding group for 1982 abductees in Lebanon

Press TV – July 5, 2025
The Iranian Foreign Ministry has decried as an “act of terrorism” the 1982 kidnapping of four Iranian diplomats in Lebanon, reiterating the Islamic Republic’s call for the formation of a fact-finding group to determine the fate of the abductees.
The ministry said in a statement on the occasion of the 43rd anniversary of the abduction of the Iranian diplomats that the Israeli regime is responsible for the abduction and hostage-taking of its citizens, and continues to seriously pursue the matter with relevant international authorities.
On July 4, 1982, Ahmad Motovasselian, a military attaché at Tehran’s Embassy in Beirut, Mohsen Mousavi, the Iranian chargé d’affaires in Lebanon, Taqi Rastegar Moqaddam, an employee of the Embassy, and Kazem Akhavan, a photographer for the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), were abducted by Israeli-affiliated armed groups.
“There is ample evidence, as repeatedly stated, and copious indications proving that the Iranian diplomats were abducted by an armed group inside Lebanon during the occupation of Lebanese soil by the Zionist regime, handed over to the occupying forces, and transferred to the occupied territories,” the statement said.
“The abduction of Iranian diplomats on July 4, 1982, in Beirut was not only an act contrary to international law and a flagrant violation of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, but also constitutes an act of terrorism according to the Convention Against the Taking of Hostages (1979).”
The statement also expressed Tehran’s gratitude for the Lebanese government’s cooperation in following up on the status of the four abducted Iranian diplomats, including Beirut’s registration of the issue through correspondence with the then secretary-general of the United Nations in September 2008.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry, as the statement said, once again calls on the authorities of the Lebanese government, as well as the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross and other competent international bodies, to fulfill their legal and humanitarian responsibilities in pursuing the case and to exert all their efforts to clarify the status of the abducted Iranian diplomats.
“In this framework, the proposal for the formation of a joint fact-finding committee between Iran and Lebanon, with the cooperation of the International Committee of the Red Cross, to pursue the matter and clarify the status of the abducted Iranian diplomats is once again emphasized,” the statement said.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry has repeatedly called for the Lebanese government, the UN, and the International Committee of the Red Cross to investigate the incident and determine the fate of the missing diplomats.
Lebanese militiamen from the Lebanese Forces Group admitted to the 1982 kidnapping of the four Iranian nationals who were on a diplomatic mission in North Lebanon. Investigations show that they were last handed to Israel at the time.
Although there is information about those who abducted the Iranian diplomats and their whereabouts, the fate of these Iranians is still shrouded in mystery, with their families and Iranian authorities believing they are still alive and languishing in Israeli jails.
Hezbollah: Israel poses strategic threat to region and beyond
Press TV – July 3, 2025
Sheikh Naim Qassem, the leader of Hezbollah, declared Israel not only an occupier of Palestine but a strategic threat to Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, the broader region, and global stability.
In a televised address on Wednesday, Qassem emphasized that Israel’s ideology, actions, and ambitions endanger Muslims, Christians, and Jews alike, destabilizing both regional and global peace.
He noted that the regime’s ideology, behavior, and vision endanger both regional stability and global peace.
Qassem said that since the ceasefire agreement between Lebanon and Israel took effect, the regime has not stopped its aggression and has violated the agreement more than 3700 times.
He stressed that the regime must adhere to the terms it agreed upon with Lebanon and stop its acts of aggression.
The Hezbollah leader said the movement will not be swayed by threats, nor will it accept surrendering its weapons to Israel.
Qassem firmly rejected calls for Hezbollah to disarm, asserting that Lebanon’s defense and sovereignty are internal matters, immune to external pressures.
“We will not submit to humiliation, abandon our land, or compromise under threats,” he stated, stressing that discussions about Hezbollah’s weapons are a domestic issue, with no role for Israel in dictating terms.
Qassem said Hezbollah’s resistance is a defense against a strategic threat impacting multiple nations, including Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan.
Describing Israel as an existential danger, Qassem noted, “Israel’s threat is not limited to Muslims; it endangers Christians and Jews as well.”
He criticized the regime’s ideology and actions as a risk to global peace and called on those who avoid confronting Israel to resist on humanitarian grounds.
“Coexisting with an expanding, invasive danger is impossible,” he warned, emphasizing Hezbollah’s resistance as rooted in human, Islamic, and national values for future generations.
Lebanese state must address ongoing violations
In late June, Qassem stated that Israel’s continued aggression, including attacks on Nabatieh, the targeting of civilians in southern Lebanon, and strikes on the money exchange sector, is now the Lebanese state’s responsibility to address.
“The state must apply pressure and fulfill its duties,” he urged, rejecting claims that Hezbollah provides pretexts for Israeli attacks.
He cited Israel’s occupation of 600 km² of Syrian territory, destruction of capabilities, and attacks on Iran as evidence of unprovoked aggression.
“You must understand this cannot continue,” Qassem told the public. “Do you imagine we will remain silent forever? All of this has limits.”
Israel used depleted uranium bombs in Iran strikes: Report
The Cradle | June 26, 2025
A well-informed source revealed to Fars News Agency on 26 June that Israel may have used depleted uranium (DU) munitions in its recent airstrikes targeting sensitive sites across Iran.
Initial tests conducted at the impact zones reportedly detected traces suggestive of uranium, although further technical analysis is still underway to confirm the findings.
Depleted uranium, a dense metal used in bombs and tank shells to penetrate armored targets, is not classified as nuclear weaponry, but it poses serious long-term health risks due to its low-level radioactivity and toxic chemical composition.
International health organizations have warned that DU exposure may be linked to increased rates of leukemia, kidney damage, and anemia – especially in children living in contaminated areas.
The US military’s use of DU weapons has been linked to massive increases in cancer rates in Iraq following the US wars on that country in 1991 and 2003.
Military experts are currently examining debris and munitions remnants from bombs dropped by Israel in Iran during the recent 12-day war. More detailed findings will be released once final lab results are available, the source stated, cautioning against premature conclusions.
This would not be the first time Israel has been accused of using prohibited weapons. Human rights groups have previously condemned the Israeli military for its use of white phosphorus and suspected DU-based weapons in past operations in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, raising international concern over repeated violations of international humanitarian law.
On 6 October, the president of the Lebanese Association of Social Medicine stated that Israel had been bombing the southern suburbs of Beirut using banned bombs with uranium warheads.
President of the association, Raif Reda, called for “collecting samples from the bombing sites and sending reports to the United Nations so the world can witness the bloody, criminal history of the Zionist enemy,” according to statements reported by the National News Agency (NNA).
Following Israel’s massive bombing campaign against Lebanon, the Syndicate of Chemists in Lebanon (SCL) warned that “the use of such types of internationally banned weapons, especially in densely populated Beirut, leads to massive destruction, and their dust causes many diseases, especially when inhaled.”

