RSS
IDF Withdrawal from Lebanon: Is it Feasible by Jan. 26?
A general view shows the Lebanese capital Beirut during the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hezbollah, in Beirut, Lebanon, January 1, 2025. REUTERS/Amr Abdallah Dalsh
JNS.org – Despite the 60-day test period for the northern ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon, at the end of which, the Israeli military is supposed to withdraw from the Land of the Cedars, the Israel Defense Forces remains engaged in frequent operations targeting Hezbollah positions in Southern Lebanon.
For example, on Jan. 12, the IDF conducted what it described as “intelligence-based strikes on a number of Hezbollah terror targets in Lebanon.”
The strikes were preceded by the presentation of intelligence to the ceasefire monitoring mechanism, the military said, consisting of representatives of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), the United States, France and the United Nations, which failed to address the threats posed by the targets.
The targets included “a rocket launcher site, a military site and routes along the Syria-Lebanon border used to smuggle weapons to Hezbollah,” the IDF said, while stressing its commitment to “remove any threat to the State of Israel” and preventing “any attempt by the Hezbollah terrorist organization to rebuild its forces in accordance with the ceasefire understandings.”
As such, concerns are growing about whether the Lebanese Armed Forces can fulfill its obligations to clamp down on illegal Hezbollah activity in Southern Lebanon under the ceasefire agreement.
Brig. Gen. (res.) Yossi Kuperwasser, a senior research fellow at the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy, and former head of the Research and Assessment Division of Israel’s Military Intelligence Directorate, told JNS that the IDF is enforcing the ceasefire not only through its presence in the region but also via surveillance and targeted strikes beyond the immediate areas under its deployment.
“We see strikes in the last 24 hours in areas along the crossings between Syria and Lebanon. We saw strikes on various military targets that were not properly addressed by the Lebanese,” said Kuperwasser.
He added that while these operations aim to prevent Hezbollah from rearming in violation of the ceasefire, they also highlight a key difference from past engagements, which Israel did not actively enforce.
“Unlike the reality under U.N. [Security Council] Resolution 1701 before the [Swords of Iron/Northern Arrows] war, when we refrained from striking Lebanon, now we strike if the Lebanese Army fails to fulfill its obligations. We will report violations to the monitoring committee, and if they act, excellent. If they do not act, we will act ourselves.
“Can this be done 100%? No, because some of these villagers are Hezbollah operatives, and they live in these villages,” he said. “But it must be insured that there is no Hezbollah presence—in the form of armed Hezbollah operatives—in these places.”
Kuperwasser expressed doubts about the LAF’s ability to deliver on its responsibilities, particularly under its new leadership.
“The hope is that the Lebanese Army, especially now that there is a new president and a new government in Lebanon, will fulfill its duties. But we have not yet seen a sufficiently effective deployment of the Lebanese Army,” he said.
He added that while Israel intends to fulfill its side of the signed agreement and withdraw, delays in the IDF withdrawal could nevertheless occur if the LAF is not prepared to take full control. “If the reality proves that they are not ready, it may be necessary to postpone the implementation [of the withdrawal],” Kuperwasser said.
“Israel signed an agreement. It agreed to the understandings, and intends to implement them. If the other side cannot fulfill its part of the agreement, we need to either reopen it, extend the timeline, or find other ways to address the issue,” Kuperwasser said.
Airstrikes not enough
Dr. Yossi Mansharof, an expert on Iran, Hezbollah, the Houthis and Shi’ite militias at the Misgav Institute, argued that the IDF faces a “problematic situation” in which it is enforcing the ceasefire while the LAF fails to take meaningful action.
The IDF, he said, is essentially enforcing the ceasefire without the monitoring mechanism fulfilling its mission or enforcing the ceasefire itself.
“The Lebanese Army is not addressing the information transferred by the IDF regarding Hezbollah’s presence south of the Litani River. The Americans are determined to continue with this outline, and therefore, it seems that the best Israel can do is reconsider whether it can withdraw from areas it took from Hezbollah, which should be a significant bargaining chip in applying the ceasefire agreement.”
Mansharof noted that airstrikes alone cannot provide a long-term solution, adding, “As proven in the wars in Gaza and Lebanon, airstrikes are of limited effectiveness. As long as the Lebanese Army is not fulfilling the role assigned to it by all sides in the ceasefire, the IDF should delay its withdrawal and demand that the Lebanese government acts in line with the agreed ceasefire mechanism.”
The situation is further complicated by international pressure, according to Mansharof.
“Israel is expected to face international, and particularly American, pressure,” he cautioned, referring to a statement made by U.S. envoy Amos Hochstein during a recent visit to Beirut, in which he reiterated Washington’s commitment to ensuring the IDF’s full withdrawal by Jan. 26.
However, Mansharof argued that the LAF, under the leadership of newly elected Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, is ill-prepared to meet the demands of the ceasefire.
“It seems that the Lebanese Army is unable to transition from a period in which it cooperated, in various ways, under Aoun’s command, with Hezbollah, to a situation in which it acts directly against Hezbollah,” Mansharof warned.
He expressed similar concerns regarding the Shi’ite population in Southern Lebanon, which has historically cooperated with Hezbollah.
“It is clear that this raises a lot of concern among the residents of the [Israeli] border communities,” Mansharof said, adding that Hezbollah operatives have used civilian homes to store weapons and ammunition.
The post IDF Withdrawal from Lebanon: Is it Feasible by Jan. 26? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US House Members Ask Marco Rubio to Bar Turkey From Rejoining F-35 Program
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio attends a cabinet meeting at the White House in Washington, DC, US, April 10, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Nathan Howard
A bipartisan coalition of more than 40 US lawmakers is pressing Secretary of State Marco Rubio to prevent Turkey from rejoining the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, citing ongoing national security concerns and violations of US law.
Members of Congress on Thursday warned that lifting existing sanctions or readmitting Turkey to the US F-35 fifth-generation fighter program would “jeopardize the integrity of F-35 systems” and risk exposing sensitive US military technology to Russia. The letter pointed to Ankara’s 2017 purchase of the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system, despite repeated US warnings, as the central reason Turkey was expelled from the multibillion-dollar fighter jet program in 2019.
“The S-400 poses a direct threat to US aircraft, including the F-16 and F-35,” the lawmakers wrote. “If operated alongside these platforms, it risks exposing sensitive military technology to Russian intelligence.”
The group of signatories, spanning both parties, stressed that Turkey still possesses the Russian weapons systems and has shown “no willingness to comply with US law.” They urged Rubio and the Trump administration to uphold the Countering American Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) and maintain Ankara’s exclusion from the F-35 program until the S-400s are fully removed.
The letter comes after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan claimed during a NATO summit in June that Ankara and Washington have begun discussing Turkey’s readmission into the program.
Lawmakers argued that reversing course now would undermine both US credibility and allied confidence in American defense commitments. They also warned it could disrupt development of the next-generation fighter jet announced by the administration earlier this year.
“This is not a partisan issue,” the letter emphasized. “We must continue to hold allies and adversaries alike accountable when their actions threaten US interests.”
RSS
US Lawmakers Urge Treasury to Investigate Whether Irish Bill Targeting Israel Violates Anti-Boycott Law
A pro-Hamas demonstration in Ireland led by nationalist party Sinn Fein. Photo: Reuters/Clodagh Kilcoyne
A group of US lawmakers is calling on the Treasury Department to investigate and potentially penalize Ireland over proposed legislation targeting Israeli goods, warning that the move could trigger sanctions under longstanding US anti-boycott laws.
In a letter sent on Thursday to US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, 16 Republican members of Congress expressed “serious concerns” about Ireland’s recent legislative push to ban trade with territories under Israeli administration, including the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights.
The letter, spearheaded by Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-NY), called for the US to “send a clear signal” that any attempts to economically isolate Israel will “carry consequences.”
The Irish measure, introduced by Foreign Affairs and Trade Minister Simon Harris, seeks to prohibit the import of goods and services originating from what the legislation refers to as “occupied Palestinian territories,” including Israeli communities in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Supporters say the bill aligns with international law and human rights principles, while opponents, including the signatories of the letter, characterize it as a direct extension of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, which seeks to isolate Israel as a step toward the destruction of the world’s lone Jewish state.
Some US lawmakers have also described the Irish bill as an example of “antisemitic hate” that could risk hurting relations between Dublin and Washington.
“Such policies not only promote economic discrimination but also create legal uncertainty for US companies operating in Ireland,” the lawmakers wrote in this week’s letter, urging Bessent to determine whether Ireland’s actions qualify as participation in an “unsanctioned international boycott” under Section 999 of the Internal Revenue Code, also known as the Ribicoff Amendment.
Under that statute, the Treasury Department is required to maintain a list of countries that pressure companies to comply with international boycotts not sanctioned by the US. Inclusion on the list carries tax-reporting burdens and possible penalties for American firms and individuals doing business in those nations.
“If the criteria are met, Ireland should be added to the boycott list,” the letter said, arguing that such a step would help protect US companies from legal exposure and reaffirm American opposition to economic efforts aimed at isolating Israel.
Legal experts have argued that if the Irish bill becomes law, it could chase American capital out of the country while also hurting companies that do business with Ireland. Under US law, it is illegal for American companies to participate in boycotts of Israel backed by foreign governments. Several US states have also gone beyond federal restrictions to pass separate measures that bar companies from receiving state contracts if they boycott Israel.
Ireland has been one of the fiercest critics of Israel on the international stage since the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, amid the ensuing war in Gaza, leading the Jewish state to shutter its embassy in Dublin.
Last year, Ireland officially recognized a Palestinian state, a decision that Israel described as a “reward for terrorism.”
RSS
US Families File Lawsuit Accusing UNRWA of Supporting Hamas, Hezbollah
A truck, marked with United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) logo, crosses into Egypt from Gaza, at the Rafah border crossing between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, during a temporary truce between Hamas and Israel, in Rafah, Egypt, Nov. 27, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Amr Abdallah Dalsh
American families of victims of Hamas and Hezbollah attacks have filed a lawsuit against the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, accusing the organization of violating US antiterrorism laws by providing material support to the Islamist terror groups behind the deadly assaults.
Last week, more than 200 families filed a lawsuit in a Washington, DC district court accusing the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) of violating US antiterrorism laws by providing funding and support to Hamas and Hezbollah, both designated as foreign terrorist organizations.
The lawsuit alleges that UNRWA employs staff with direct ties to the Iran-backed terror group, including individuals allegedly involved in carrying out attacks against the Jewish state.
However, UNRWA has firmly denied the allegations, labeling them as “baseless” and condemning the lawsuit as “meritless, absurd, dangerous, and morally reprehensible.”
According to the organization, the lawsuit is part of a wider campaign of “misinformation and lawfare” targeting its work in the Gaza Strip, where it says Palestinians are enduring “mass, deliberate and forced starvation.”
The UN agency reports that more than 150,000 donors across the United States have supported its programs providing food, medical aid, education, and trauma assistance in the war-torn enclave amid the ongoing conflict.
In a press release, UNRWA USA affirmed that it will continue its humanitarian efforts despite facing legal challenges aimed at undermining its work.
“Starvation does not pause for politics. Neither will we,” the statement read.
Last year, Israeli security documents revealed that of UNRWA’s 13,000 employees in Gaza, 440 were actively involved in Hamas’s military operations, with 2,000 registered as Hamas operatives.
According to these documents, at least nine UNRWA employees took part directly in the terror group’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel.
Israeli officials also uncovered a large Hamas data center beneath UNRWA headquarters, with cables running through the facility above, and found that Hamas also stored weapons in other UNRWA sites.
The UN agency has also aligned with Hamas in efforts against the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an Israeli and US-backed program that delivers aid directly to Palestinians, blocking Hamas from diverting supplies for terror activities and selling them at inflated prices.
These Israeli intelligence documents also revealed that a senior Hamas leader, killed in an Israeli strike in September 2024, had served as the head of the UNRWA teachers’ union in Lebanon, where Lebanon is based,
UNRWA’s education programs have been found by IMPACT-se, an international organization that monitors global education, to contribute to the radicalization of younger generations of Palestinians.