Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

How real is the U.S. rhetoric of a ‘Unified Syria’?

By Erkin Oncan | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 7, 2025

The recent statements by the U.S. Special Envoy for Syria, Thomas Barrack, may at first glance appear to reflect diplomatic commitment, but developments on the ground and the U.S.’s covert alliances reveal that this rhetoric is largely a propaganda maneuver.

Speaking to the Associated Press, Barrack emphasized that the “deaths and massacres” on both sides of the conflict in southern Syria are unacceptable, stating: “I believe the current Syrian government, which is a new government with very few resources to address the emerging issues, is doing the best it can.”

However, if we are to speak of “territorial integrity” in the context of a new Syria, it is clear that the U.S.’s de facto policy in Syria actually serves to strengthen structures that weaken the country’s territorial unity. On the ground, the U.S. has established a fragile balance between Syria’s new government and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). While this balance may give the appearance of localized stability in the short term, it carries the potential to pave the way for Syria’s long-term fragmentation. These entities are ideologically, ethnically, and politically at odds, with starkly conflicting expectations for a new Syria.

Red Lines in the Damascus—SDF Talks

The Damascus administration’s plans to integrate the SDF into the New Syrian Army, dismantle its autonomous structure, and transfer control of northeastern resources (oil, borders, educational institutions) to the Syrian state are clear.

The SDF, meanwhile, although it continues its contacts with the new Syrian administration, maintains a series of “red lines”: preserving autonomous administration, integrating its forces into the army independently of the central command, receiving a share of resources, and maintaining control over the borders.

In this scenario, the U.S. — a power that has provided extensive military and political support to both sides over time — appears to be attempting to “gloss over” this deeply uncertain process with diplomatic statements and messages of goodwill.

Israel’s Proxy Strategy

Israel, which has effectively “entered” the Syrian arena through the Suwayda clashes, likely sees the criticisms voiced by its greatest ally’s special envoy as a mere formality. Israel’s main strategy here is to sever southern Syria from Damascus and create new zones of control via proxy forces under the pretext of border security.

In other words, while there is rhetorical emphasis on a “Unified Syria,” what is being built on the ground is an increasingly entrenched multi-structure reality. A possible agreement between the SDF and HTS (Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham), for example, is not just about two armed groups sitting at the negotiating table; it encapsulates the conflicting interests of regional and global actors.

The negotiations between the SDF and HTS do not only involve these two actors; the balance includes the intervention of the U.S., Israel, and Turkey. Turkey, operating on the assumption that these negotiations will proceed parallel to the PKK’s disarmament process, seeks to secure its “share” in the governance of the new Syria.

The SDF, which received the most comprehensive support from the U.S. during the Trump era, is aware that such direct military and political backing may not continue under the Democrats. Furthermore, Washington’s regional priorities have shifted. Therefore, the SDF is striving to secure a balanced but strong position against HTS, with the primary goal of ensuring its continued existence. It is among the claims reported in Israeli and regional media that the group has engaged in a series of meetings not only with the U.S. but also with Israel.

Israel, for its part, is determined to exploit the “power vacuum” emerging in the new Syria to the fullest extent. What began under the guise of border security has now merged with Israel’s structural expansionist policy. Should Israel decide to “accelerate” its operations in Syria, it is well aware that Damascus may not be able to mount a serious resistance.

Is the Damascus Government Falling Short?

The new government led by Shara has so far failed to demonstrate the capacity to bear the role of “new leadership.” It faces a governance crisis, ethnic massacres that have sparked international condemnation, ongoing clashes with Israel, and severe economic issues.

Thus, the Damascus government finds itself compelled to “find middle ground” with the SDF, the U.S., and even Israel in order to secure its hold on power.

Within this equation, the perception of Iran as the “primary threat” on a regional level offers significant clues about the future of current power struggles.

The “Iran Threat” Will Determine the Balance

Despite suffering a severe blow with the fall of the Assad regime, Iran remains one of the strongest actors in the region. The SDF’s potential to serve as an “independent balancing force” against Iran perfectly aligns with the interests of the Tel Aviv—Washington axis. Therefore, in negotiations between the SDF and Damascus, the scenario in which the SDF’s demands gain weight and the central government’s power is curtailed is highly probable.

Despite the U.S.’s diplomatic calls for “unity,” the SDF’s de facto autonomy, its capacity to continue negotiations with Damascus thanks to current power balances, and the U.S.—Israel strategy of positioning against Iran all stand in the way of any real unification of Syria. Under current circumstances, it is nearly impossible for the new Syrian government under Shara to evolve into a stable and functioning structure. Ongoing military, political, and economic crises, coupled with the overarching “main threat is Iran” strategy, necessitate the continuation of the existing fragmented structure.

In conclusion, Washington’s rhetoric of a “Unified Syria” is largely propagandistic when viewed in light of the multilayered web of interests and covert alliances on the ground. With the U.S. and Israel seeking to expand the anti-Iran front, the scenario in which the SDF continues to play a strong role outside the framework of the central government remains the most likely outcome.

August 7, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Zionism without borders: Annexation and normalization as tools of Arab subjugation

By Mohamad Hasan Sweidan | The Cradle | August 1, 2025

Four weeks after Israel signed the US-brokered Abraham Accords with the UAE and Bahrain on 15 September 2020, Tel Aviv’s Higher Planning Council approved 4,948 new settler units in the occupied West Bank. No public fanfare.

No tanks rolled in – just signatures authorizing another layer of occupation. The first wave of expansion advanced quietly, legitimized by the language of “peace.”

This sequencing deliberately reflects the core logic of Zionist expansion: Normalize when the region submits, colonize when the world blinks.

Where possible, the occupation state’s army conquers land directly. Where resistance or scrutiny makes that unfeasible, the occupation government builds a web of security pacts, trade routes, and intelligence partnerships that extend its reach without a single uniformed soldier. This dual formula, territorial conquest and hegemonic integration, has underpinned Israeli strategy since 1967, and today stretches unimpeded from the Jordan Valley to the Atlantic coast.

Two paths, one destination

“Greater Israel” represents the settler-colonial ambition to annex, settle, and absorb land across historic Palestine and beyond. It is rooted in the Zionist vision of Jewish dominion over the so-called “biblical Land of Israel.” In contrast, “Great Israel” describes the imperial design to dominate the surrounding region through proxies, economic leverage, and security alignments.

Where occupation is costly, Tel Aviv turns to influence. Through deals, destabilization, or coercion, it reshapes the sovereignty of its neighbors. Greater Israel devours land. Great Israel neutralizes independence. Together, they are one project.

Zionist literature makes this plain. Ze’ev Jabotinsky, founder of Revisionist Zionism, demanded sovereignty over all of Mandatory Palestine and Transjordan – “Greater Israel on both sides of the Jordan River” – and rejected compromise with Arabs. In The Iron Wall (1923), he declared that only an unyielding Jewish force could compel Arab acquiescence:

“Zionist colonization, even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in defiance of the will of the native population.”

The occupation state’s first prime minister and Labor Zionist leader, David Ben-Gurion, publicly accepted a partition plan in 1937, but privately described it as “not the end but the beginning.” In a letter to his son, he wrote that a Jewish state on part of the land would strengthen the Zionist project and serve as a platform to “redeem the entire country.” In a June 1938 meeting of the Jewish Agency executive, he said:

“After the formation of a large army … we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine.”

Early Zionist leaders did not view borders as final, but as phases. During its first two decades, Israel lacked the military strength or western backing to expand beyond its 1949 borders. Direct confrontation with Arab states risked catastrophe. Instead, Tel Aviv pioneered a subtler doctrine of peripheral infiltration.

Through the “periphery doctrine,” it cultivated covert ties with non-Arab states and oppressed minorities – Shah-era Iran, Turkiye, Kurdish groups in Iraq, and Christian separatists in Sudan. This strategy sowed chaos among Israel’s Arab rivals while embedding Israeli influence in strategic corners of West Asia and Africa. Most recently, the occupation state has made overtures to Druze communities in southern Syria, seeking to replicate this strategy amid renewed instability.

The corridor to colonization

Israel’s integration into the Arab world is now deeper than ever before. Through normalization, Tel Aviv has converted former enemies into partners economically, diplomatically, and militarily. While Egypt and Jordan first formalized ties through Camp David and Wadi Araba, it was the Abraham Accords that opened the floodgates. What followed was a deluge of tech deals, weapons transfers, and commercial partnerships linking the occupation state to the Persian Gulf.

By 2023, Israel’s trade with the UAE had reached $3 billion annually. That figure rose by 11 percent the following year, even as Israel waged genocide in Gaza. Israeli Consul General Liron Zaslansky described trade relations between Abu Dhabi and Israel as “growing, so that we ended 2024 at $3.24 billion, excluding software and services.”

In 2022, Morocco purchased $500 million worth of Israeli Barak MX air defense systems. Rabat also partnered with BlueBird, an Israeli drone firm, to become the first UAV manufacturer in West Asia and North Africa.

This has created a “corridor of influence” that grants Tel Aviv access to new markets, air and sea routes, and intelligence spaces stretching from Casablanca to Khor Fakkan.

On the ground, the war continues

While trade flourishes, colonization accelerates. In 2023, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ultranationalist government approved 12,855 settler homes – a record for any six-month period. More than 700,000 settlers now occupy the West Bank and East Jerusalem. That figure has grown sevenfold since the early 1990s.

In May 2025, Defense Minister Israel Katz confirmed cabinet approval for the construction of 22 new West Bank settlements, including multiple previously unauthorized outposts. Katz framed the move as necessary to “strengthen our hold on Judea and Samaria” and to “prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.”

These settlements are not arbitrary. They are connected by Jewish-only bypass roads, fortified by the occupation army, and strategically designed to fragment the occupied West Bank into isolated Palestinian enclaves. This is de facto annexation, defined by a matrix of irreversible facts that eliminates the territorial basis for any future Palestinian state, while avoiding the international fallout of formal annexation.

The “logic” of expansion has also spilled beyond Palestine. In Syria, Tel Aviv now occupies 250 square kilometers across Quneitra, Rural Damascus, and Deraa – territory seized during the collapse of former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s government by Al-Qaeda rooted terrorists – Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) – who now occupy the seat of power in Damascus. HTS was under the leadership of former ISIS chief Abu Mohammad al-Julani. Upon ousting Assad, Julani began using his government name, Ahmad al-Sharaa, and became the de facto president of Syria.

In Lebanon, Israeli forces maintain a presence over 30–40 square kilometers, including Shebaa Farms, Kfar Shuba Hills, and the northern half of Ghajar. Additional outposts and buffer zones stretch along the so-called Blue Line.

Occupation rebranded

Israel’s expansion today is no longer confined to bulldozers and soldiers; it is mediated through trade, tech, and treaties. But make no mistake: normalization has not replaced occupation. It has enabled and accelerated it.

Every Emirati deal, every Moroccan drone line, every Bahraini handshake fuels Tel Aviv’s capacity to deepen its military presence and Judaize more land. Plans are underway to double the number of settlers in the Golan Heights and to deploy armored units along the demilitarized zone.

The ripple effects are already destabilizing the region. Egypt has begun constructing a concrete wall on its border with Gaza to prepare for mass displacement or military spillover. Jordan faces existential peril in the Jordan Valley, where settler expansion is displacing Bedouin communities and draining natural aquifers. Syria and Lebanon remain hemmed in by fortified Israeli positions, with both countries facing increasing pressure from Washington to normalize relations.

Greater Israel devours Arab land. Great Israel colonizes Arab decision-making. One swallows borders. The other swallows sovereignty.

August 2, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

MI6’s man in Damascus: Jonathan Powell, Inter-Mediate, and the Al-Qaeda-linked gov’t in Syria

By Kit Klarenberg | The Cradle | July 24, 2025

On 19 July, the Mail on Sunday revealed that Inter-Mediate, a shadowy firm founded by Jonathan Powell, now National Security advisor to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, brokered the re-establishment of diplomatic relations between Damascus and London.

This included a heavily publicized meeting between UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy and Syria’s self-appointed President Ahmad al-Sharaa, two weeks earlier. The outlet also exposed how the British state-funded Inter-Mediate operates a dedicated office in Syria’s Presidential Palace.

Britain’s opposition Conservative party has demanded a formal inquiry into Powell’s use of Inter-Mediate “to run back channels to terrorist groups” and the conflict of interest created by his unelected role.

As Starmer’s national security advisor – described as wielding “more influence over foreign policy than anyone in government after the prime minister himself” – Powell operates entirely outside parliamentary accountability. A Whitehall source told the Mail on Sunday:

“These are essentially outsourced spies and spooks undertaking ‘back channel’ discussions with political leaders and armed groups to reach negotiated settlements.”

Terrorists to technocrats

Inter-Mediate’s central role in assisting former Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) leader Sharaa’s rise to power in Damascus was first revealed in May by Independent Arabia. This followed disclosures from former US ambassador to Syria Robert Ford (2011 – 2014), that in 2023 a British “non-governmental organization” sought his personal assistance in transforming HTS – in particular Sharaa, who went by the nom de guerre Abu Mohammad Julani when he was an ISIS chief – from “terrorists” into politicians. While Ford did not name Inter-Mediate, Independent Arabia did – and mainstream media ignored it entirely.

Now that Inter-Mediate’s embedment with Damascus’s post-Bashar al-Assad government has been confirmed, western media has belatedly begun describing Syria’s new rulers as comprised of barbarous extremists linked to Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Yet few are willing to interrogate the far graver implications of a British intelligence-linked firm enjoying intimate access to Syria’s seat of power – and the extraordinary leverage that affords London over the HTS-led administration and its leadership.

Compounding this is the deeply suspicious timing: Powell assumed his advisory role just days before HTS violently seized Damascus. Starmer immediately declared that Assad’s ouster heralded “a more active role” for Britain in West Asia and dispatched top diplomats to meet with HTS officials. The media acknowledged these summits were completely illegal, as HTS was a proscribed terror group under British law.

Since taking office, Sharaa has announced Syria’s once-independent economy is fully open for western exploitation, ordered massacres of Alawites and other religious minorities, while seeking to normalize relations with Israel.

Despite the occupation state routinely executing highly destructive airstrikes against government and military infrastructure since former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s fall, HTS appears undeterred. We are thus left to ponder whether the Al-Qaeda-rooted government’s brutal internal repression, and concerted inaction over Tel Aviv’s military bombardments and incursions into its territory, are ultimately directed by MI6.

‘Deny responsibility’

Inter-Mediate’s website offers few clues to its real agenda. It lists a cadre of former western diplomats and military officials as staff and board members, and vaguely claims to facilitate “backchannels with hard-to-reach conflict actors” where “direct negotiations are impossible or inadvisable.” It boasts of creating space for political solutions “in some of the world’s most intractable conflicts.”

Syria was quite some “intractable conflict” – not least because Assad’s “popular” and sovereign government steadfastly refused to relinquish power to mass-murdering CIA and MI6-backed foreign elements that invaded the country in 2011.

Leaked emails of former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton indicate Inter-Mediate was active in Damascus from the first stages of the foreign-fomented “crisis.” In March 2012, Clinton’s senior aide Jake Sullivan contacted her, announcing Powell had “launched a new NGO that has already initiated some very interesting work below the radar.”

An attached email from Powell noted Inter-Mediate had “[set] up secret channels between insurgents and governments” in several countries, was preparing to start work in Burma, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen, and sought to pitch its services to senior US State Department officials.

He added his firm “work[ed] closely” with the British Foreign Office, National Security Council, and MI6. At this time, it was well-understood in Washington that Syrian “insurgents” were affiliated with Al-Qaeda, among other ultra-extremist entities.

The evidence suggests Inter-Mediate’s relationship with the forces that became HTS dates back over a decade, and that London’s project to replace Assad with a compliant Al-Qaeda-linked regime has been in motion ever since. Its operational office inside Syria’s palace is not a recent development, but the culmination of years of quiet penetration. Nor is Inter-Mediate the only British intelligence cutout embedded in West Asia’s corridors of power.

As The Cradle has previously documented, Lebanon’s security and intelligence apparatus is heavily penetrated by the British, to the extent that Foreign Office contractor Torchlight maintains a dedicated office within Beirut’s Military Intelligence Directorate.

Leaked documents related to this infiltration noted London’s presence was a highly effective means of “rapidly developing relationships of trust” with the agency’s high-ranking staff, and ensuring they were “unlikely to say ‘no’” to further involvement of British personnel and technology in the Directorate’s sensitive operations.

Other leaked files related to the Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD), a British clone of the US CIA front the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), reveal the organization maintains offices in Lebanon’s parliament building.

An official review of WFD’s activities explicitly states its “central rationale” is to conduct “controversial” projects overseas that London “could not or would not wish to undertake directly,” therefore limiting “damage to official government-to-government relationships,” while “avoiding the danger” of “British government presence [being] interpreted as foreign interference.”

“[WFD’s] arm’s length relationship … provides the [Foreign Office] with the best safeguard … the less the [Foreign Office] seeks to exercise control the more it can deny responsibility … The Foundation provides a necessary and valuable instrument over and above those which the [Foreign Office] can provide for itself.”

Powell’s warpath 

The Mail on Sunday’s editorial accompanying the Inter-Mediate exposé highlights another key concern: the outsized power wielded by former UK prime minister Tony Blair-era figures in Starmer’s government. Powell is not alone – Peter Mandelson, now the UK’s ambassador to Washington, is another. The editorial bluntly states that these Blairites “are the real forces in British diplomacy,” while Lammy plays “an effectively ceremonial role,” executing policies scripted by Powell and others behind the scenes.

While the pair were said to maintain “formidable private networks they are able to mobilize” to influence British government action and policy, “some within Downing Street” were reportedly “growing increasingly wary about the influence of these smooth Blairites.” As one official put it, “at what point does ‘experience’ and ‘guidance’ become ‘control’?”

That question also applies to Inter-Mediate’s relationship with the new Syrian government. Is Powell, via his company and government position, finally realizing Blair’s long-standing dream of reshaping West Asia in Britain’s image? The former prime minister’s Institute for Global Change has openly called for regime change in Iran and boasts of nurturing anti-government networks across the region.

Powell’s history is instructive. In September 2002, he pressed the UK’s Joint Intelligence Committee to exaggerate Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction (WMD) to justify the illegal Anglo-American invasion six months later.

He believed it a “bit of a problem” that the assessment did not conclude Iraq posed an urgent, imminent military threat, insisting its wording be changed to ensure maximum impact on media reporting, and public perceptions. A recent profile of Powell suggests he remains committed to Blair’s mission:

“The historical record shows [Powell] had doubts about Iraq’s WMDs, but thought Saddam Hussein had to go ‘because he was a ruthless dictator suppressing his people’. This was, as Blair named it, ‘liberal interventionism’, which called for the west to ‘get actively involved in other people’s conflicts’ … [Powell] has the same instincts today. After Iraq, and Afghanistan, he still wants to save the world.”

If Starmer’s unelected security chief is indeed scripting foreign policy through Inter-Mediate, then Britain is no longer merely meddling in West Asia but is also governing it by proxy. And if Powell’s loyal Al-Qaeda client in Damascus is the new face of “liberal interventionism,” it is clear the colonial playbook has not just returned – it never left.

July 24, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

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.

July 23, 2025 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , | Leave a comment

‘Peacemaker’ Trump beats Biden’s bombing record since return to office: Report

The Cradle | July 23, 2025

US President Donald Trump has ordered hundreds of airstrikes across West Asia and Africa since his return to office, carrying out more attacks in the first five months of his second term than former president Joe Biden did during his entire presidency, according to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data (ACLED).

“In just five months, Trump has overseen nearly as many US airstrikes (529) as were recorded across the entire four years of the previous administration (555),” said ACLED President Clionadh Raleigh.

Among the countries bombed by Trump are Iran, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen. The majority of strikes were carried out against Yemen.

“The US military is moving faster, hitting harder, and doing so with fewer constraints. Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and now Iran are all familiar terrain, but this isn’t about geography – it’s about frequency,” Raleigh added.

The surge in attacks contradicts Trump’s campaign promises, which framed him as “anti-war.”

In March this year, Trump renewed the Biden government’s campaign against Yemen with much greater intensity.

Months of brutal and deadly attacks struck the country in response to the Yemeni Armed Forces’ (YAF) naval operations against Israeli interests and its missile and drone strikes in support of Palestine.

Yemeni forces consistently responded to US attacks by targeting US warships in the Red Sea, during both Biden and Trump’s terms.

A ceasefire between Sanaa and Washington was reached in May, after the US campaign burned through munitions and failed to impact Yemeni military capabilities significantly.

However, the campaign took a heavy toll on civilians and compounded the humanitarian crisis the country has faced due to over a decade of war.

An investigation released by Airwars last month revealed that Trump’s war on Yemen killed almost as many civilians in less than two months as in the last 23 years of Washington’s military action in the country combined.

“In the period between the first recorded US strike in Yemen to the beginning of Trump’s campaign in March, at least 258 civilians were allegedly killed by US actions. In less than two months of Operation Rough Rider … at least 224 civilians in Yemen [were] killed by US airstrikes – nearly doubling the civilian casualty toll in Yemen by US actions since 2002,” it said.

In Iraq, Syria, and Somalia, Trump has also continued to strike what Washington says are ISIS and Al-Shabab targets.

Despite vowing to end “forever wars,” Trump has recently threatened to expand them.

On 22 July, the US president threatened to launch new attacks on Iran, after late June bunker-buster strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities which were carried out on behalf of Israel.

July 23, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

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.

July 21, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

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.”

July 21, 2025 Posted by | Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Leave a comment

We reject ‘Israeli protection’: Druze spiritual leader

Press TV – July 18, 2025

The spiritual leader of the Druze ethnic minority in Lebanon says the community rejects the Israeli regime’s request to supposedly “protect” the minority.

Sheikh Sami Abi al-Muna made the remarks at a gathering of Druze officials in the Lebanese capital Beirut on Friday.

He was referring to the regime’s repeated deadly and destructive violations of the Syrian territory, which it has undertaken under the supposed pretext of “protecting” the Druze, who also form a minority in Syria.

The request on the part of Tel Aviv “is harmful to our history and identity,” al-Muna added.

Observers rated the remarks as a warning to the regime against its trying to associate itself with the minority in order to advance its expansionist regional goals.

‘Don’t provide Israel with an excuse’

The spiritual leader, meanwhile, addressed the recent clashes in southern Syria between members of the Druze community and Bedouin tribes that had so far claimed the lives of hundreds of people.

He cautioned that the sectarian clashes “give an excuse for Israeli intervention and for blowing up the situation in the region.”

The regime has intensified its assaults on Syria since last year, claiming it seeks to prevent an outpouring of violence from the Arab country into the occupied territories.

On Wednesday, the escalation took a significantly more violent turn, when the regime hit various parts of Syria, including the capital Damascus, with intense airstrikes.

The attacks came amid the deadly fighting between the Druze and the Bedouins, fueling fears that the Israeli involvement under the pretext of supporting the Druze was aimed at intensifying the confrontations and further destabilizing Syria.

Amid the situation, al-Muna called for all parties to rather resort to national dialogue to address the issues among different communities in Syria.

Lebanese Druze leader Walid Joumblatt addressed the same gathering, calling for formation of an investigative committee to probe violations against both Druze and Bedouins in the Arab country.

A day earlier, he had also warned in remarks to France’s RFI radio station that “Israel is using the Druze to tear Syria apart.”

He said “Israel’s intent to divide the country” was visible from the clashes that had erupted between the dual communities in Syria.

July 19, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , | Leave a comment

Seyed M. Marandi: Israel Attacks Syria – Prelude to Balkanization

Glenn Diesen | July 18, 2025

Seyed Mohammad Marandi is a professor at Tehran University and a former advisor to Iran’s Nuclear Negotiation Team. Prof. Marandi discusses Israel’s efforts to Balkanise Syria. Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen: Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/

X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_DiesenPatreon:   / glenndiesen  

Support the channel: PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenn…

Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng

Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f

July 18, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

World rallies behind Syria as Israel tears away at it

Press TV – July 18, 2025

International organizations and a whole host of countries have expressed outright condemnation of the Israeli regime’s escalating deadly and destructive attacks against Syria under the pretext of protecting the country’s Druze minority.

A torrent of statements followed the regime’s attack on various areas in the country on Wednesday, including areas lying in its south, in reported support for the Druze.

The attacks came as fighting between members of the minority and Bedouin tribes has killed hundreds of people, with the Israeli involvement being feared to be aimed at intensifying the confrontations and further destabilizing Syria.

UNSC calls for end to Israel’s ‘impunity’

Addressing the situation, Pakistan, which holds the United Nations Security Council (UNSC)’s rotating presidency, denounced the Israeli aggression.

Ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad noted that the attacks resembled Tel Aviv’s atrocities against the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, Iran, and Yemen, all of which violated the international law. The envoy also called for an end to the regime’s impunity.

Mohamed Khaled Khiari, UN assistant secretary-general, denounced the Israeli escalation on the part of the world body’s chief, Antonio Guterres.

He said the attacks amounted toa violation of Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and further destabilized the country amid the already sensitive situation.

The official also advised that Tel Aviv respect the 1974 agreement that has mandated its refusal to conduct violations against the Arab nation.

China calls for Israeli withdrawal

Geng Shuang, China’s deputy UN ambassador, said Beijing called on “Israel to immediately cease its military strikes on Syria and withdraw from Syrian territory without delay.”

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian also said the attacks amounted to a flagrant violation of international law and Syria’s sovereignty, saying the Arab country had to be spared of whatever measure that could lead to further crisis and tension.

Turkey: ‘Terror state’ Israel using Druze as excuse

Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called the Israeli regime a “terror state.”

“Israel, using the Druze as an excuse, has been expanding its banditry into neighboring Syria over the past two days,” he said in a televised speech.

Erdogan said Turkey would not allow Syria’s partition, saying Tel Aviv’s actions showed it was not after peace.

PGCC: Israel after irresponsible escalation

The Persian Gulf Cooperation Council’s Secretary-General, Jasem Mohammed Albudaiw,i also said the Israeli regime’s atrocities indicated its efforts at irresponsible intensification of standing tensions.

The Israeli aggression, he added, also showed the regime’s disregard for the international community’s efforts at realizing stability and ensuring security in Syria.

Hamas: Israeli aggression ‘systematic terrorism’

The Palestinian resistance movements, Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, called the atrocities “organized terrorism.”

The latter also said Tel Aviv was trying to fragment the region through violence, reaffirming solidarity with Syria and supporting its right to resist by all means.

Ansarullah: Israeli attacks part of ‘imperialist scheme’

Yemen’s Ansarullah resistance movement denounced the Israeli strikes as part of a larger “imperialist scheme” to dominate the Arab and Muslim world.

It called for a unified Arab-Islamic response and an end to silence in the face of the aggression.

Muslim states hold intensive talks

Foreign ministers from various regional Muslim countries have, meanwhile, held intensive talks concerning the state of affairs.

The talks were held among top diplomats from Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Lebanon, and Egypt.

The discussions that were held with the aim of helping the countries in question adopt a unified stance in the face of the situation saw the officials reiterate support for Syria’s security, unity, stability, and sovereignty.

They called on the UNSC to assume its legal and moral duties towards guaranteeing the withdrawal of the Israeli regime from Syria, and bringing about an end to its aggression by obliging it to abide by the 1974 agreement.

Malaysia: Israel threatening international peace

Malaysia also called for the international community “not to tolerate the continued aggression by the Israeli Zionist regime against other countries, threatening regional and international peace and security.”

Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said after decades of hardship, the Syrian people deserved peace, not further violence and external interference.

Norway’s foreign minister has also said he was “deeply concerned about recent Israeli airstrikes and rising domestic tensions.”

July 18, 2025 Posted by | Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israel’s Druze policy in Palestine and Syria

By Ahmet Vefa Rende | MEMO | July 17, 2025

Israel, with its small population, has a socially and politically fragile structure due to its different minority groups. The fact that Arabs are the largest minority group has led Israel to establish more careful relations with other groups and to try to strengthen the ties between these minorities and Jewish elements. In this context, Israel’s relations with the Druze, its efforts to integrate them into society, and how this group is used as a political lever should be examined.

There are approximately 150,000 Druze in Israel; they live mainly in the Carmel, Galilee, and Golan regions. Druze, which emerged in Egypt in the 11th century, is seen as a common interpretation of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. The Druze, who do not intermarry with other religious groups, have a very closed social structure. The exact number of Druze is unknown, but today they live as a small minority group in Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan.

The Druze are being integrated into Israeli society

After the Ottoman Empire withdrew from Palestine, Zionist leaders sought to establish close relations with the Druze in order to benefit from their support in the process of establishing a state. These leaders positioned the Druze as a group distinct from the Arabs and attempted to gain the support of this minority by claiming that there was a religious connection between them.

Although a paramilitary alliance between Jews and Druze began in the late 1930s, it cannot be said that this alliance encompassed the entire Druze minority. This is because part of this minority participated in the Arab uprising that began in 1936 and then fought against the Jews in 1948.

Israel, given its demographic structure, sought to strengthen its ties with small minority groups other than Arabs. The state’s policies and privileges toward the Druze were intended to separate this community from the Arab community and bring it closer to the Jewish community. In this context, the Druze were defined as a separate nationality in 1962 and separated from their Arab identity. This situation has created a perception that the Druze are favoured both in state institutions and in Jewish society. In addition, in 1976, a separate Druze education sector was established to protect the Druze culture, and this community was made subject to compulsory military service.

Israel applied this policy against the Palestinian Druze and, after occupying the Golan Heights, also applied it to the Syrian Druze. After occupying the Golan, Israel forced a large part of the 130,000-strong population to migrate, while allowing 6,396 Druze to remain in the region, adopting a moderate approach similar to that toward the Palestinian Druze in order to separate them from the Arabs. However, the Syrian Druze did not respond in kind to Israel’s policy. Although they did not like the Syrian regime, they continued to see themselves as part of Syria and dreamed of becoming part of Syria again.

Role of the army in establishing special relations with the Druze

In Israel, the army is seen as an institution that unites different segments of society. The army serves to strengthen the ties between the state and both Jews who have immigrated to Israel and minority groups who are drafted into military service. In particular, members of minority groups who serve in the military are viewed with a certain degree of respect by the Jewish community. Therefore, the conscription of the Druze minority has been part of Israel’s policy to integrate them into Jewish society. After October 2023, many Druze soldiers served in the Israeli army that entered Gaza, and more than 430 Druze lost their lives as a result of Hamas attacks.

In response to Israel’s policy of separating the Druze from the Arabs and integrating them into Jewish society, Druze leaders have also been receptive to serving in the army in order to gain certain advantages. Through this approach, Druze leaders hoped to overcome structural issues such as insufficient investment in Arab and Druze villages and employment problems resulting from the state’s institutional discrimination.

Israel lifts the veil of institutionalised discrimination against Druze

Despite the Israeli government’s policy toward the Druze, they continue to face discrimination from the Jewish community. Although the Druze sought to escape discrimination by serving in the army, they reported that they were subjected to discrimination by the Jewish community after leaving military service. Indeed, Druze Member of Parliament Said Nafaa said, “We hoped that serving in the army would give us equal rights with other Israelis. However, we soon discovered that this was an illusion.” For this reason, some Druze men today refuse to enter military service. For example, although Druze do not face problems in terms of education, most encounter difficulties in finding employment. Additionally, Druze who wish to live in Jewish areas are required to pay above-average rent. These and similar problems faced by the Druze do not currently pose a security threat in Israel. However, if Israel does not improve its policy toward the Druze, there is a possibility that the Druze could become a security threat by separating themselves from Jewish society. Israel’s latest move to address this issue has been the approval of a five-year plan worth $1.1 billion to solve the housing problem of the Druze minority living in the north of the country.

Israel’s intention to use the Druze as leverage in Syria

Just as it did during its occupation of the Golan Heights, Israel is currently attempting to intervene in areas of Syria with a high Druze population. On the one hand, Israel is inciting the Druze population in the region against the new Syrian government, while on the other hand, it is attempting to gain their support by offering them certain opportunities. In this context, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz recently announced that Syrian Druze would soon be allowed to enter the country for work purposes. In addition, during the recent tensions in the Druze neighbourhood of Cermana in Damascus, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered to send military forces to Cermana to protect the Druze. However, the Druze rejected this offer. In the recent events in Suwayda, Israel launched attacks on the Syrian army to support the Druze in their conflict with the Syrian army. Israel wants to use the Druze in Syria for its own strategic purposes, just as it has done with the Druze in Palestine, by offering them various opportunities. Thus, Israel, which sees stability in Syria as a threat to its interests, is stirring up the Druze issue that has arisen in the new Syria and supporting the Druze in order to destabilise the region and prepare it for its own occupation.

July 17, 2025 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

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.

July 14, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »