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.
Israeli terrorism is getting worse because Western leaders are cowards, hypocrites
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | August 30, 2026
Israeli terrorism against civilians across the occupied West Bank has recently triggered condemnation from Western leadership – this shallow rhetoric is overshadowed by their actions, which are driven by a cowardly refusal to push back against the Zionist lobby.
Condemnations and statements of concern have been recently issued by US, UK, and EU officials alike, in what appears at first glance to be pushback against Israeli settler violence and expansionism in the occupied West Bank. In fact, what we are witnessing is the continuation of a decades-long tradition of hollow statements that act to save face by pretending as if the settlers themselves are somehow rogue elements that can be judged independent of the rest of the Zionist project.
In reality, settlement expansion is a regime project, as the violence of the settlers themselves is too. The Zionist armed forces are hand in glove with the settlers, to the point that military units such as the ‘Desert Frontier’ have been set up to integrate the settler militias into the occupation forces.
Even if the settlement movement was separate from the regime itself – as the EU, UK, and US leaderships like to pretend so that they can continue presenting themselves as capable of criticizing the Israelis – there has been a carte blanche granted to the authorities in “Tel Aviv”, instead of meaningful pushback that would coerce them into curtailing the aggressive project of the settlers.
The moves being made in Western capitals represent the exact opposite of genuine opposition to settler colonial violence and expansionism. US President Donald Trump has refused to impose consequences on the Zionist regime for the killings of 11 American citizens at the hands of settlers.
Instead, its latest move has been to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organization. That means that both Washington and London have designated the activist group as such. This is not a group that engages in armed action; it does not go after targets that are integral to US or UK security, nor has it killed anyone. Palestine Action has been proscribed for the “crime” of organizing actions against weapons factories that supply the components for weapons used to commit genocide.
Interestingly, the news of Palestine Action being added to a US terror list came alongside a declaration from Washington that it was removing Syria from the State Sponsors of Terrorism List. Keep in mind that President Trump has actively acknowledged that the man – whom he claims to have put in power – was formerly affiliated with al-Qaeda. In fact, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which is now the ruling Party in Damascus, is a rebrand of al-Qaeda’s Syrian wing, which was previously known as Jabhat al-Nussra. HTS is no longer considered a terrorist group by the US, as per its recent declaration.
This in itself demonstrates how unserious Western leadership takes the issue of terrorism. Simply put, terrorism is opposing the Zionist settler-colonial project. It can be guaranteed with a degree of certainty that if Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa were to suddenly begin taking measures against the Israelis in southern Syria, or supporting Palestinian Resistance factions, there would be immediate sanctions and proscriptions to follow. But because his administration has signed onto a “joint fusion mechanism” to coordinate with Israeli intelligence, the former face of al-Qaeda in Syria is welcomed across Europe, meets with British officials, and is welcomed with open arms into the White House.
The collective West’s political class is stupefyingly corrupt and has spent nearly three years performing puppet apologetics for a regime committing an active genocide against the people of Gaza. No meaningful action is ever taken. Even Western institutions like FIFA and Eurovision, alongside the International Olympic Committee (IOC), have proven too cowardly to boot out the Israelis, despite FIFA and IOC both taking measures to ban Russia over the war in Ukraine.
Consider the recent threats by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to launch precision strikes on targets in Gaza because it found kites near the separation barrier, forcing children to no longer enjoy a common hobby for Palestinian children in the besieged territory. Most people have considered this an utter outrage, mocking the mere premise of launching airstrikes over children’s kites being flown.
Yet the Israelis were taken seriously when, back in 2018, they began complaining of “terror balloons” and “terror kites” that young Gazans would attach burning objects to, as retaliation for the mass shootings carried out against unarmed protesters during the Great Return March. It may almost seem comical that the Israelis complained about this and that the words terror and balloon were combined in a serious sentence, yet Western leadership adopted the very same language.
Take, for example, the 2021 designation of the Hamas political wing as a ‘terrorist organization’ in the United Kingdom. In their justification as to why they decided to proscribe the political wing – because the Qassam Brigades had long been on their list – the most in-depth example they cited was the use of these balloons. Yes, balloons were used as the most important example as to why Hamas was designated a “terrorist group” in the United Kingdom.
The double standards are so stark that it beggars belief. At the end of the day, it is the utter cowardice that emboldens the Zionist regime to do whatever it chooses, whenever it likes. These Western governments and institutions have allowed the Israelis to erode the post-WW2 international order, destroyed the concepts of human rights and international law, and normalized genocide, even ignoring domestic law, endangering their own populations and undermining the fight against actual terrorism.
They render the international courts ineffective and take measures to punish them for doing their jobs; they stand by and praise the Zionist entity along with its allies in Washington as an alternative body to the United Nations taking over control of the Gaza Strip. International borders and national sovereignty no longer mean anything; embassies are no longer off limits for airstrikes; and journalists can be mass executed with no pushback.
A world that has been turned completely upside down, all so that a small settler colonial regime whose ethno-supremacist cult following of narcissistic psychopaths can have their way at every single turn. All of this, then they turn around and pretend as if their completely shallow statements about settler violence somehow mean anything. In many ways, it would be better if they just closed their mouths. None of the violence they pretend to condemn, without ever doing anything tangible to stop it, would be possible if they had taken action to stop it.
Diplomatic Scandal: Why Did the U.S. Recall Its Ambassador to Turkey?
By Alexandr Svaranc – New Eastern Outlook – August 28, 2026
The U.S. State Department has abruptly recalled its ambassador to Turkey, Tom Barrack, who also served as the President’s Special Envoy for Syria and Iraq. This sharp personnel pivot has raised numerous questions: was this decision a consequence of pressure from the Israeli lobby?
An Unconventional Diplomat
The appointment of Tom Barrack as ambassador to Turkey on May 14, 2025, was an atypical move, even by the standards of Donald Trump’s personnel policy. Barrack is not a career diplomat, but a major real estate investor. As a close associate of Trump and a key fundraiser for his campaign, he secured the post largely due to his personal loyalty to the President.
It was assumed that his proximity to the head of the White House would serve as a “safe conduct” for Barrack in the complex Middle East region. However, it turned out that Trump’s own political unpredictability does not extend to his inner circle: in Washington, the right to be eccentric remains a privilege of the President, not his appointees.
Reason for Resignation: The “Golan Question”
Journalist Laura Loomer was the first to report the ambassador’s recall on August 25. According to her information, the reason was Barrack’s imprudent remarks, which directly contradicted the official course of the U.S. administration. In an interview, the diplomat referred to the Golan Heights as “occupied Syrian territory” and criticized Israel for its “illegal settlement activity.”
These words sounded like a political démarche, especially since Donald Trump had officially recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan back in 2019, during his first term.
Lobby Influence and Political Consequences
Barrack’s position triggered an immediate reaction not only in the White House but also among influential Republicans. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and Senator Rick Scott, whose positions are closely tied to the interests of the pro-Israel lobby in the U.S., made it clear that such statements were unacceptable.
Barrack’s attempts to justify himself—claiming his words were “taken out of context” and that he was merely discussing the historical aspect of the issue—had no effect. It became clear that clouds were gathering over the ambassador: his views on Middle East policy had diverged from the vector dictated by Washington’s strategic allies. Ultimately, the career of the “real estate diplomat” was sacrificed to interests that carry far more weight in American politics than personal friendship with the president.
In Tel Aviv and Washington, dissatisfaction is mounting over the stance of U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack following recent IDF airstrikes on the Abu al-Duhur airbase in Syria. Initially, Barrack labeled Israel’s actions an “unnecessary escalation” on X (formerly Twitter), and later, in an interview, accused Jerusalem of attempting to provoke a conflict with Turkey on the eve of the U.S. midterm elections. According to the diplomat, only Recep Erdoğan’s restraint prevented a full-scale war.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s government viewed these remarks as support for Ankara’s ambitions. The State Department, for its part, acknowledged that Barrack’s statements only deepened Israel’s perception that the U.S. is distancing itself from countering the Turkish threat. Further irritation was caused by the ambassador’s comments regarding negotiations with Lebanon on the disarmament of Hezbollah, which involved Iranian representatives.
Such coordinated criticism of Barrack is the result of efforts by the Israeli Foreign Ministry and intelligence services, leveraging the influence of the Jewish lobby in the U.S. These methods are not new: in his book By Way of Deception, former Mossad officer Victor Ostrovsky described how, in 1979, Israeli intelligence orchestrated the resignation of U.S. Ambassador to the UN Andrew Young due to his contacts with the PLO. At that time, with the sanction of Menachem Begin, a leak was arranged through Newsweek magazine. It is evident that for Mossad chief Roman Hoffman, removing the “inconvenient” diplomat Barrack was a matter of routine.
Consequences of the Ambassador’s Recall: A Shift in U.S.-Turkish Relations
The appointment of businessman Thomas Barrack as U.S. Ambassador to Turkey initially sparked skepticism within the State Department. A barrage of criticism from the political establishment and the expert community, culminating in the emergency recall of the diplomat “for consultations,” effectively sealed his resignation. Currently, the duties of the head of the diplomatic mission in Ankara are being temporarily performed by the U.S. Chargé d’Affaires.
The name of Barrack’s successor has not yet been announced, but experts believe that Marco Rubio will opt for a career diplomat to lower the political temperature surrounding the position. It is expected that the new ambassador will adhere to a firm pro-NATO and pro-Israel line, seeking to balance U.S.-Turkish relations while accounting for Israel’s interests.
Implementing such an agenda amid the acute crisis between Ankara and Tel Aviv appears extremely difficult. Washington will likely resort to harsh pressure on President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, despite his previous personal ties to Donald Trump.
For the Turkish leader, Barrak’s recall was a painful blow. Ankara saw the businessman as “its man” in the Trump administration, whose commercial background allowed for a flexible and pragmatic dialogue. Erdoğan had counted on Barrak’s support in establishing a safe zone in Syria. Now, Turkey is deprived of the unofficial US “umbrella” that protected it from Israeli airstrikes near its borders, and the prospects for modernizing the Turkish army and strengthening Ankara’s military with Washington’s support are becoming extremely uncertain.
The situation clearly demonstrates the risks of relying excessively on fickle American policy. Ankara should reconsider its diplomatic priorities. Playing a game of “giving in” to American “hawks”—for example, on the issue of arms supplies to the Kyiv regime—is fraught with serious consequences for relations with Russia. Such a course threatens Turkey not only with a weakening of its defense potential but also with significant economic losses. Specifically, the question arises: Who will compensate Ankara for the loss of Iran’s $7 billion gas market if the US imposes new anti-Iran sanctions? Given the West’s inconsistency, Turkey is unlikely to escalate relations with its northern neighbor for the sake of dubious foreign policy adventures.
Alexander SVARANTS, Doctor of Political Science, Professor, Turkologist, and expert on Middle Eastern countries
Israel’s New War in Syria: Why Türkiye Is Now in the Crosshairs
By Robert Inlakesh | The Palestine Chronicle | August 22, 2026
What has been happening in Syria should come as a wake-up call for the Turkish leadership: as long as Israel is a major player in the region, you cannot simply compete with them without engaging in violent conflict.
Earlier this week, Israel began bombing Syrian military positions for the first time in around four months, specifically targeting an air base where Turkish military personnel are known to be present – this is not random violence; it is instead part of a concerted pressure campaign that is pushing boundaries that even the United States is not fully prepared to go along with.
Israeli air raids targeted and destroyed air strips and hangars at the Abu al-Duhur Air Base in the Idlib province of Syria, inflicting significant damage and intentionally attempting to curb efforts by Turkiye to revive the largest destroyed Syrian air force and air defense systems.
While Tehran and Moscow were the chief supporters of the former Syrian military, the country now depends on both Washington and Ankara. NATO member Turkiye has therefore taken it upon itself to try and get a military foothold inside Syrian territory, attempting to extract the maximum it can from its relationship with its neighbor.
Like Iran, Turkiye has different interests from its other major partner inside the country, but unlike the Iranians, the Turkish State is not backing resistance to Israel and instead has maintained strong economic ties with the occupying regime. However, the Israeli government does not care that Turkiye presents no military threat to it, nor are there any signs it will; it is only fixated on regional dominance and views Syria as competition.
Turkiye and Israel are both US allies, meaning that the American government will not throw its weight fully behind either side and instead play a balancing game. Yet, the Israelis evidently have much more sway over Washington and seek to crush Turkish regional influence, as they endeavor to achieve their dreams of a “Greater Israel”.
Israeli bombing attacks against military positions – with the exception of a few occasional strikes – largely halted after March, when a series of strikes were carried out. The reason behind most of the attacks carried out against positions affiliated with Damascus-aligned forces has been to send a message. This is precisely why the old Ministry of Defense was even blown to pieces and why Israel launched strikes in the vicinity of the Presidential Palace – they are demonstrating who the boss is and warning the Syrian leadership of the consequences should it step out of line.
The Syrian leadership, under the command of Ahmed al-Shara’a, or Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, has largely capitulated to Israeli demands, such as attempting to disarm Syrians in the south of the country, working to intercept arms shipments to Hezbollah, and even signing a “Joint Fusion Mechanism” with the Israelis. As part of this mechanism, it was clearly written that Syria would even pursue economic projects with the Zionist regime that continues to expand its occupation of southern Syrian lands.
The relationship between Syria, Turkiye, and Israel today is one of a tug of war. The Turkish State is attempting to help Syria revive its air force and hopes to introduce a functioning air defense system to the country, but the Israelis want Syria weak.
It is also clear why Tel Aviv is so paranoid. They know that the future of the Syrian State is not certain and they see the sentiments expressed by the fighters who have formed the new Syrian Army. They are also aware that everyone in Syria is armed and that with a different leadership, or an escalation that spins out of control, they could be in serious trouble.
During the era of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) possessed a large arsenal of strategic weapons, much of which was incinerated during the overthrow of the previous leadership in an enormous Israeli air campaign. However, what Tel Aviv feared just as much was the strength of Syria’s air defense network – regarded as one of the most sophisticated in the region.
Not only did Israel destroy the air defenses of Syria during the regime change transition in December of 2024, but what impacted the nation’s ability to defend its skies even more was the disappearance of the old air defense teams. When it comes to these sophisticated weapons, the humans operating them are just as important as the systems themselves, and it takes a long time to properly train new operators. Under the new Syrian Army, there are no experienced operators who are on hand, meaning that it will take help from their Turkish allies if they are ever going to have a functioning air defense option.
Israel is competing with Turkiye as of now, with the situation not deteriorating into direct confrontation. Although we are far from the point of anything that could resemble war between the two, the Israelis will kill Turkish soldiers and may even explore options using intelligence operatives inside Turkish territory in the future.
Ankara is clearly not willing to respond to Tel Aviv with the use of force, or even using armed factions to carry out operations in the south, despite Turkish soldiers having been killed by Israeli airstrikes in the past. At some point, Turkiye will likely be forced to make a decision to defend its interests that will involve confronting Israel.
Bear in mind that despite the rhetoric of its President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish State never even severed ties or cut off Israel’s flow of cheap gas from Azerbaijan throughout the Gaza genocide. The Israelis have interpreted the behavior of the Turkish leadership as weakness, meaning that they are going to push things to the limit, testing just how far they can go before the regional power decides to finally take concrete measures against it.
Ankara is seeking to become an international trade hub, sitting at the crossroads between Asia and Europe, benefiting immensely from the expansion of the Middle Corridor. Yet, Tel Aviv has been busy forming alliances to ensure it is a thorn in Turkiye’s side, including expanding tripartite relations with Greece and Cyprus.
What has been happening in Syria should come as a wake-up call for the Turkish leadership: as long as Israel is a major player in the region, you cannot simply compete with them without engaging in violent conflict. If Ankara seeks to truly assert its power, it must pursue confrontation and make the Israelis suffer in Syria; if it backs down and refuses to do this, it will end up feeling the consequences of its strategic mistake.
– 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.
Israel’s war minister threatens Turkey as Apache squadron moves north
Press TV – August 20, 2026
Israel has issued a veiled threat against Turkey following airstrikes on a Syrian military airbase near the Turkish border, with war minister Israel Katz warning President Tayyip Erdogan against “dragging Turkey into dangerous adventures in Syria.”
The Israeli air force has completed the transfer of its Apache helicopter squadron from southern Israeli occupied territories to the Ramat David airbase in the north—the first such move in 25 years.
Israeli military officials have acknowledged that the reorganization was prompted in part by the perceived threat from Turkey.
The strikes on the Abu al-Duhur airbase in northern Syria, about 70 km from the Turkish border, come amid mounting tension over Ankara’s role in rebuilding military capabilities of the current regime in Syria.
Israel has accused Syria of allowing Turkish troops to deploy at the base, a charge both Turkish and Syrian officials have denied.
But beyond the immediate dispute, regional analysts and Turkish officials see a broader strategic realignment where Israel now views Turkey as the primary obstacle to its expanding plans in Syria.
Israeli officials have increasingly described Turkey in terms once reserved for Iran. Regime voices in Tel Aviv have referred to Ankara as the “new Iran.”
“Turkey may become the next target,” warned one Turkish expert, cited in Japanese media.
The warning echoes a view gaining traction among international observers that Israel’s strategy in Syria has evolved to containing Turkey’s growing military and political footprint in the country.
At the heart of the dispute lies a fundamental disagreement over what kind of Syrian state should emerge from years of conflict.
“Israel sees the fragmentation of its neighbors as a security strategy,” one analysis noted.
Turkish officials have made clear that any Israeli advance toward their interests in Syria would cross a red line.
Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said Israel’s interest in Syrian territory “has not disappeared” but has been temporarily set aside while Tel Aviv focuses on other priorities.
“When the time comes, they will act,” he warned. “This is a vital interest and security zone for us. We must be prepared for any situation.”
Earlier this year, Ankara and Tel Aviv held rare “technical talks” in Azerbaijan to establish deconfliction mechanisms and prevent accidental clashes in Syria.
Israeli officials made clear during those talks that any Turkish military deployment in Syria, particularly around Palmyra, would be unacceptable.
Analysts and regional observers have linked Israel’s actions in Syria to broader colonial ambitions, noting that Israeli officials have openly declared forces will remain in southern Syria “forever.”
“What Israel wants, with US support, is a submissive Syria, stripped of national identity and armed forces, under Israeli occupation—just like the Golan Heights,” wrote Abdulbari Atwan, editor-in-chief of Rai al-Youm, in a commentary on the Abu al-Duhur strikes.
Greece, Cyprus, and Israel signed a military cooperation agreement in late 2025, forming what Turkish media has dubbed an “anti-Turkish alliance.”
Syria, according to observers, is just one front in Israel’s broader plan to expand its colonial ambitions across the region.
Tel Aviv sees both Iran and Turkey as the most serious hurdles to its “Greater Israel” aspirations—a vision that envisions Israeli dominance stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates.
After dragging the US into a large-scale war which it could not afford to wage alone against Iran, observers say Israel is now positioning itself for a potential confrontation with Turkey.
Turkey denies military presence at Syrian base bombed by ‘Israel’
Al Mayadeen | August 20, 2026
Turkey’s Defense Ministry denied on Thursday that any Turkish military delegation was present at Syria’s Abu al-Duhur air base before or during Israeli attacks on the facility earlier this week, while vowing to continue “resolutely” supporting Syrian sovereignty and territorial integrity.
“We state that there was no Turkish military delegation at the Abu al-Duhur airbase before or during the attack carried out by Israel against that base in Syria,” a Turkish defense ministry official told journalists, per AFP.
The ministry warned against allowing a “perception” to take hold that Israeli military aggression against neighboring countries is “routine and acceptable,” and called it essential for the international community to adopt “more concrete and effective measures” against Israeli actions it said threaten regional peace and stability.
Ankara reiterated that its efforts to protect Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to help build a “stable and secure structure” in the country, would continue. The ministry also affirmed that Turkey will continue supporting Syria’s efforts to develop its own military capability and infrastructure.
Katz, Netanyahu threaten Turkey
Earlier today, Israeli War Minister Israel Katz warned Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, writing in Turkish on X that Erdogan “is dragging Turkey into dangerous adventures in Syria” and that “Israel” will not “allow any actor to threaten its security”.
Katz added that “it would be better” for Erdogan to continue his “reality-detached, fantastical statements” against “Israel” in the Turkish parliament than to “attempt to test Israel’s resolve on self-defense”.
The statement followed remarks by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday night, who said “Israel” will not “tolerate a Turkish military presence in Syria that threatens Israel”.
Netanyahu claimed the Israeli regime had delivered its warning “crystal clear” but that Turkey “didn’t hear it loud enough, so we made sure they understood it better”, an apparent reference to an Israeli attack a day earlier on Syria’s Abu al-Duhur airbase.
Attack on Abu al-Duhur airbase
Netanyahu’s office claimed late on Tuesday that Syria was “on the verge of breaching” a security understanding with “Israel” by allowing Turkish forces to deploy at an airbase near Aleppo, accusing Damascus of ignoring repeated Israeli warnings.
The claim came after Israeli aggression hit Abu al-Duhur airbase in eastern Idlib, the first strike on that base since Bashar al-Assad’s fall in December 2024.
Syria’s Foreign Ministry called the strike “unjustified aggression” and a “dangerous escalation.”
Turkey’s Communications Directorate rejected Netanyahu’s claims, calling them “frivolous allegations” intended to “legitimize Israel’s unlawful airstrikes targeting Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
Ankara said the accusations stem from Netanyahu’s push to pursue “expansionist and destabilizing policies” in the region ahead of elections.
Israel bombs Syrian military base as US praises Damascus’s ‘de-escalatory’ policy toward Tel Aviv

The Cradle | August 18, 2026
Israel launched a new wave of strikes on Syria on 18 August, despite no threat being posed to it by the extremist-led authorities in Damascus, which fought against Tel Aviv’s adversaries for years.
The new Israeli strikes hit the Abu al-Duhur Military Base in the countryside of the northern city of Idlib on Tuesday.
Syria’s Foreign Ministry released a statement condemning the attack.
It described Israel’s strikes as “an unjustified act of aggression and a dangerous escalation threatening regional security and stability.”
“Continued Israeli attacks since 8 December 2024, while Syria exercises restraint and works to consolidate stability and avoid escalation, reveal attempts by the Israeli occupation to undermine those efforts and push the region toward further tension and instability,” the ministry added, according to Syrian state media.
Washington also expressed “concern,” with US envoy to Syria and former Epstein associate Tom Barrack condemning “the unnecessary escalation that does not advance regional stability.”
Barrack also praised Damascus and its forces for posing no threat to Israel, as Damascus itself has repeatedly confirmed.
He posted on X that the government of self-appointed Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa “has neither adopted a predatory posture nor maintained proxy forces. It has, in fact, repeatedly indicated a preference for de-escalation with Israel.”
According to Syrian media, eight Israeli airstrikes hit the base.
“Israeli occupation aircraft early this morning targeted the runway of the Abu Duhur military airport … with eight strikes,” sources told state television.
The attack comes not long after Damascus’s forces were said to have been given access to Washington’s “final” base in Syria, after a several-month process of US withdrawal from the country following years of occupation.
It remains unclear to what extent Washington has withdrawn. Iran recently announced operations targeting what it said were US forces and assets in Syria.
The US for years trained extremist forces at its Al-Tanf Base in Syria. It also armed and financed several other factions in Syria throughout the war, including the Noureddine al-Zinki movement, responsible for the beheading of a 12-year-old boy as well as other war crimes.
Many of these Al-Qaeda- and ISIS-linked groups, including the Noureddine al-Zinki movement, are now brigades in the new Syrian army established after the fall of former president Bashar al-Assad’s government.
This army has killed thousands of Alawites, Druze, and Kurdish civilians since the formation of the new Syrian state – but have not targeted Israeli troops which illegally occupied the country after Assad’s departure.
Damascus has openly declared that it holds no hostility toward Israel and is not looking for confrontation with it. Despite this, Israel continues to attack the country and expand its occupation of Syrian territory.
Since Assad left Syria, Israeli occupation forces have practically encircled Damascus.
Major Syrian military capabilities belonging to the former army were destroyed by Israeli attacks in the first days after Sharaa’s government took power.
Sharaa, the new president, was formerly an Al-Qaeda chief who served as deputy to late ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
The Syrian president is directly responsible for brutal suicide bombings against civilians and holy sites in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq.
Iran blocks US-backed plan for Syrian military intervention in Lebanon
Al Mayadeen | August 13, 2026
Iran has thwarted a planned Syrian military intervention in Lebanon that was being prepared at the request of the United States, delivering a direct warning to Damascus that any Syrian military entry into Lebanese territory would be met with a regional response, according to Iranian sources cited by U News.
The Iranian warning included threats to stir up the Syrian–Iraqi border, open a confrontation line in Homs, support Alawite movements in the Syrian coastal region, and encourage the Kurds to return militarily to the outskirts of Aleppo.
The warning was not directed solely at Damascus; it also reached Ankara, Baghdad, Doha, and Riyadh, carrying the message that any Syrian adventure against Hezbollah in Lebanon would not remain confined to the Bekaa Valley but could turn into a broad regional confrontation within Syrian territory.
Iran succeeded in transforming any potential Syrian intervention in Lebanon from a military option that could be marketed to the US into a high-cost regional adventure, sources said. The Iranian warning, which reached Damascus through Turkish channels, included a threat of Iranian ballistic missile strikes that would begin from Damascus and include, in the first wave, more than 100 strategic targets, foremost among them the Syrian presidential palace.
The US-backed scenario: a three-pronged offensive into Lebanon
The scenario promoted by figures linked to the US embassy in Lebanon involves sending Syrian armed units from the Masnaa crossing toward Chtoura in the Lebanese Bekaa and on to the city of Zahle, simultaneously with mobilization from the eastern highlands toward the city of Baalbek.
The proposed scenario also includes declaring the city of Tripoli a Syrian zone of influence, with advancing forces benefiting from local environments, particularly in some Sunni-majority areas.
The presumed goal of the operation is to strike Hezbollah’s rocket infrastructure in the Bekaa and to create military and political pressure that would force the party to withdraw or accept new security arrangements.
Hezbollah prepared, treats potential Syrian operation as US-Israeli pressure
Iran’s warning has prompted regional parties to reassess the cost of the scenario, especially since Syria, emerging from deep military and political transformations, does not appear capable of enduring a new internal war.
Hezbollah is treating the information about a potential Syrian intervention extremely seriously and has taken precautionary measures in the Bekaa in anticipation of any possible Syrian incursion.
Hezbollah does not view the scenario as a separate Syrian operation, but rather as part of US–Israeli–regional pressure aimed at dismantling the structure of resistance in Lebanon from the east, following Israel’s failure to achieve a decisive result in the south.
Iraq’s rejection, UAE’s enthusiasm, and Saudi caution
Iraqi intelligence chief Hamid al-Shatri visited Damascus and informed Syrian officials of Baghdad’s rejection of any Syrian military expansion into Lebanese territory. Al-Shatri warned that Iraqi forces, primarily factions of the Popular Mobilization Forces, might enter Syrian territory if an intervention against Hezbollah occurred.
The Iraqi position added a further layer of deterrence to the Iranian warning, signalling that Damascus could face military pressure not only from within Syria but also from its eastern border.
The UAE is enthusiastic about funding any Syrian military operation in Lebanon, with officials quoted as ready to pay troop salaries as well as finance combat operations. This financial backing suggests that the UAE views the intervention as an opportunity to curtail Hezbollah’s influence in Lebanon, despite the broader regional risks that Iran has highlighted.
Qatar rejects Syrian intervention in Lebanon, while Saudi Arabia does not object to an intervention as long as it is within arrangements that weaken Hezbollah without igniting the region. The divergent positions among Gulf states underscore the complex calculations at play, with Riyadh appearing to balance its opposition to Hezbollah against the dangers of a wider conflict that Iran has explicitly threatened to unleash on Syrian soil.
Saudi-Turkish-Pakistani military alliance shaped by fear of Israel, not Iran: Analyst
Press TV – August 9, 2026
Underlying regional calculations behind the new military alliance between Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan have been shaped by fear of Israel, not Iran, says an analyst.
Speaking to the Press TV website, Anusar Farooqui, a US-based writer and commentator who is also the founder and CEO of Systematic Portfolios LLC, said the newly signed “Mecca Joint Defense Agreement” is aimed at the Israeli regime.
“The alliance politics of the Sunni Arab powers is driven by fear of Israel, not Iran,” he said.
“The Saudis and especially the Turks are very fearful of Israeli plans,” he added, noting that Israeli discussions about confronting Turkey, including talk of a possible surprise attack intended to cripple the Turkish air force, had contributed to Ankara’s concerns.
The agreement was signed on Friday in Mecca by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.
The three countries said an armed attack against any one of them would be regarded as an attack against all, while describing the pact as a means of strengthening collective deterrence and regional stability.
The agreement did not specify the practical obligations of its members. A Turkish official said it was not directed against any particular actor, remained open to other regional countries and did not replace existing bilateral or multilateral arrangements.
Farooqui said the absence of Egypt from the initial agreement was particularly significant.
“The important thing about the announcement is the conspicuous absence of Egypt,” he told the Press TV website, adding that the possibility of a Turkish-Egyptian military pact was central to understanding the regional balance.
“The Egyptian question is paramount: why has it taken a pass,” the analyst asked.
He added that such a pact would represent a much stronger counterweight to Israel and said the United States understood the implications.
“So it seems to have intervened to prevent the nightmare from happening,” he said.
Egypt’s position, however, has not been presented as permanently outside the arrangement. Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said Saturday Egypt could eventually join the pact after several technical issues were resolved.
He described Egypt as Ankara’s “natural partner” and said other countries had also expressed interest in joining, although the founding members were still discussing how expansion should be handled.
The new military alliance comes amid US-Israeli destabilizing actions in the region. Since October 2023, Israel has waged a genocidal war on Gaza, invaded southern Lebanon and occupied territory in Syria, while also launching two wars of aggression with the United States against Iran that triggered massive retaliatory strikes against US and Israeli assets in the region.
Meanwhile, the regime’s bellicose agenda has raised concerns about the so-called “Greater Israel” scheme that regards Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories as well as parts of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon as part of the Zionist entity.
Israeli regime prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in October 2025 that he feels a deep connection to “this vision”, describing it as “a historical and spiritual mission.”
On the other hand, some analysts have linked the growing Turkish-Israeli rivalry to a broader contest over regional influence. Turkey and Israel have maintained diplomatic relations since 1949 and their strategic and commercial ties have survived tense rhetoric.
Yet tensions seem to have intensified recently over Gaza, Syria, energy routes, maritime issues and Ankara’s expanding regional role.
Pakistan’s position has added another dimension to the emerging security alignment.
Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif said on Saturday, following the signing of the agreement, that Israel was “a threat to the entire Muslim world” and called for “a united military front” against it, while noting that the regime poses a direct threat to countries across the region.
The broader security environment has also been affected by changes in the US military posture. Washington has reportedly withdrawn warplanes and other military equipment from countries including Qatar and the United Arab Emirates following Iranian retaliatory strikes.
Asked whether the new alliance could eventually contribute to a region without US military presence and with Israel more contained, Farooqui said the current arrangement is insufficient.
“Not without Egypt,” he told the Press TV website. “The Saudi-Turkish-Pakistan pact is mostly for show. By itself, it is not an effective balancing coalition against Israel.”



