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
Switzerland Moves to Close Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s Geneva Office Over Legal Irregularities
Palestinians carry aid supplies received from the US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation in the central Gaza Strip, May 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ramadan Abed/File Photo
Switzerland has moved to shut down the Geneva office of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a US- and Israeli-backed aid group, citing legal irregularities in its establishment.
The GHF began distributing food packages in Gaza in late May, implementing a new aid delivery model aimed at preventing the diversion of supplies by Hamas, as Israel continues its defensive military campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group.
The initiative has drawn criticism from the UN and international organizations, some of which have claimed that Jerusalem is causing starvation in the war-torn enclave.
Israel has vehemently denied such accusations, noting that, until its recently imposed blockade, it had provided significant humanitarian aid in the enclave throughout the war.
Israeli officials have also said much of the aid that flows into Gaza is stolen by Hamas, which uses it for terrorist operations and sells the rest at high prices to Gazan civilians.
With a subsidiary registered in Geneva, the GHF — headquartered in Delaware — reports having delivered over 56 million meals to Palestinians in just one month.
According to a regulatory announcement published Wednesday in the Swiss Official Gazette of Commerce, the Federal Supervisory Authority for Foundations (ESA) may order the dissolution of the GHF if no creditors come forward within the legal 30-day period.
The Trump administration did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the Swiss decision to shut down its Geneva office.
“The GHF confirmed to the ESA that it had never carried out activities in Switzerland … and that it intends to dissolve the Geneva-registered branch,” the ESA said in a statement.
Last week, Geneva authorities gave the GHF a 30-day deadline to address legal shortcomings or risk facing enforcement measures.
Under local laws and regulations, the foundation failed to meet several requirements: it did not appoint a board member authorized to sign documents domiciled in Switzerland, did not have the minimum three board members, lacked a Swiss bank account and valid address, and operated without an auditing body.
The GHF operates independently from UN-backed mechanisms, which Hamas has sought to reinstate, arguing that these vehicles are more neutral.
Israeli and American officials have rejected those calls, saying Hamas previously exploited UN-run systems to siphon aid for its war effort.
The UN has denied those allegations while expressing concerns that the GHF’s approach forces civilians to risk their safety by traveling long distances across active conflict zones to reach food distribution points.
The post Switzerland Moves to Close Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s Geneva Office Over Legal Irregularities first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Key US Lawmaker Warns Ireland of Potential Economic Consequences for ‘Antisemitic Path’ Against Israel
US Sen. James Risch (R-ID) speaks during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Washington, DC, May 21, 2024. Photo: Graeme Sloan/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman James Risch (R-ID) issued a sharp warning Tuesday, accusing Ireland of embracing antisemitism and threatening potential economic consequences if the Irish government proceeds with new legislation targeting Israeli trade.
“Ireland, while often a valuable U.S. partner, is on a hateful, antisemitic path that will only lead to self-inflicted economic suffering,” Risch wrote in a post on X. “If this legislation is implemented, America will have to seriously reconsider its deep and ongoing economic ties. We will always stand up to blatant antisemitism.”
Marking a striking escalation in rhetoric from a senior US lawmaker, Risch’s comments came amid growing tensions between Ireland and Israel, which have intensified dramatically since the Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel on October 7, 2023. Those attacks, in which roughly 1,200 Israelis were killed and more than 200 taken hostage, prompted a months-long Israeli military campaign in Gaza that has drawn widespread international scrutiny. Ireland has positioned itself as one of the most vocal critics of Israel’s response, accusing the Israeli government of disproportionate use of force and calling for immediate humanitarian relief and accountability for the elevated number of Palestinian civilian casualties.
Dublin’s stance has included tangible policy shifts. In May 2024, Ireland formally recognized a Palestinian state, becoming one of the first European Union members to do so following the outbreak of the war in Gaza. The move was condemned by Israeli officials, who recalled their ambassador to Ireland and accused the Irish government of legitimizing terrorism. Since then, Irish lawmakers have proposed further measures, including legislation aimed at restricting imports from Israeli settlements in the West Bank, policies viewed in Israel and among many American lawmakers as aligning with the controversial Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
While Irish leaders have defended their approach as grounded in international law and human rights, critics in Washington, including Risch, have portrayed it as part of a broader pattern of hostility toward Israel. Some US lawmakers have begun raising the possibility of reevaluating trade and diplomatic ties with Ireland in response.
Risch’s warning is one of the clearest indications yet that Ireland’s policies toward Israel could carry economic consequences. The United States is one of Ireland’s largest trading partners, and American companies such as Apple, Google, Meta and Pfizer maintain substantial operations in the country, drawn by Ireland’s favorable tax regime and access to the EU market.
Though the Trump administration has not echoed Risch’s warning, the remarks reflect growing unease in Washington about the trajectory of Ireland’s foreign policy. The State Department has maintained a careful balancing act, expressing strong support for Israel’s security while calling for increased humanitarian access in Gaza. Officials have stopped short of condemning Ireland’s actions directly but have expressed concern about efforts they see as isolating Israel on the international stage.
Ireland’s stance is emblematic of a growing international divide over the war. While the US continues to provide military and diplomatic backing to Israel, many European countries have called for an immediate ceasefire and investigations into alleged war crimes.
Irish public opinion has long leaned pro-Palestinian, and Irish lawmakers have repeatedly voiced concern over the scale of destruction in Gaza and the dire humanitarian situation.
Irish officials have not yet responded to The Algemeiner’s request for comment.
The post Key US Lawmaker Warns Ireland of Potential Economic Consequences for ‘Antisemitic Path’ Against Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israel Condemns Iran’s Suspension of IAEA Cooperation, Urges Europe to Reinstate UN Sanctions
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar at a press conference in Berlin, Germany, June 5, 2025. REUTERS/Christian Mang/File Photo
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar on Wednesday condemned Iran’s decision to halt cooperation with the UN’s nuclear watchdog and called on the international community to reinstate sanctions to curb Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.
“Iran has just issued a scandalous announcement about suspending its cooperation with the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency),” Saar wrote in a post on X. “This is a complete renunciation of all its international nuclear obligations and commitments.”
Last week, the Iranian parliament voted to suspend cooperation with the IAEA “until the safety and security of [the country’s] nuclear activities can be guaranteed.”
“The IAEA and its Director-General are fully responsible for this sordid state of affairs,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote in a post on X.
The top Iranian diplomat said this latest decision was “a direct result of [IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi’s] regrettable role in obfuscating the fact that the Agency — a full decade ago — already closed all past issues.
“Through this malign action,” Araghchi continued, “he directly facilitated the adoption of a politically-motivated resolution against Iran by the IAEA [Board of Governors] as well as the unlawful Israeli and US bombings of Iranian nuclear sites.”
The Parliament of Iran has voted for a halt to collaboration with the IAEA until the safety and security of our nuclear activities can be guaranteed.
This is a direct result of @rafaelmgrossi‘s regrettable role in obfuscating the fact that the Agency—a full decade ago—already…
— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) June 27, 2025
On Wednesday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian approved a bill banning UN nuclear inspectors from entering the country until the Supreme National Security Council decides that there is no longer a threat to the safety of its nuclear sites.
In response, Saar urged European countries that were part of the now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal to activate its “snapback” clause and reinstate all UN sanctions lifted under the agreement.
Officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), this accord between Iran and several world powers imposed temporary restrictions on Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.
During his first term, US President Donald Trump withdrew from the deal and reinstated unilateral sanctions on Iran.
“The time to activate the Snapback mechanism is now! I call upon the E3 countries — Germany, France and the UK to reinstate all sanctions against Iran!” Saar wrote in a post on X.
“The international community must act decisively now and utilize all means at its disposal to stop Iranian nuclear ambitions,” he continued.
The time to activate the Snapback mechanism is now!
I call upon the E3 countries- Germany, France and the UK to reinstate all sanctions against Iran!
Iran has just issued a scandalous announcement about suspending its cooperation with the IAEA (International Atomic Energy…— Gideon Sa’ar | גדעון סער (@gidonsaar) July 2, 2025
Saar’s latest remarks come after Araghchi met last week in Geneva with his counterparts from Britain, France, Germany and the European Union’s Foreign Policy Chief Kaja Kallas — their first meeting since the Iran-Israel war began.
Europe is actively urging Iran to reengage in talks with the White House to prevent further escalation of tensions, but has yet to address the issue of reinstating sanctions.
Speaking during an official visit to Latvia on Tuesday, Saar said that “Operation Rising Lion” — Israel’s sweeping military campaign aimed at dismantling Iran’s nuclear capabilities — has “revealed the full extent of the Iranian regime’s threat to Israel, Europe, and the global order.”
“Iran deliberately targeted civilian population centers with its ballistic missiles,” Saar said at a press conference. “The same missile threat can reach Europe, including Latvia and the Baltic states.”
“Israel’s actions against the head of the snake in Iran contributed directly to the safety of Europe,” the Israeli top diplomat continued, adding that Israeli strikes have set back the Iranian nuclear program by many years.
The post Israel Condemns Iran’s Suspension of IAEA Cooperation, Urges Europe to Reinstate UN Sanctions first appeared on Algemeiner.com.