RSS
US Mediation With Israel and Lebanon Is Futile and Destructive
Israeli firefighters work following rocket attacks from Lebanon, amid ongoing cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israeli forces, near the border on its Israeli side, June 13, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Avi Ohayon
The Biden administration maintains the illusion that the nine months of violence between the Lebanese militia Hezbollah and Israel can be de-escalated and defused. The President is keen on preventing the fighting between Hezbollah and Israel from escalating further and engulfing the Middle East in a war. But US planning and thinking about de-escalating and defusing the conflict is pointless and shortsighted.
The administration seeks to configure a new status quo between Israel and Lebanon that cannot be sustained. Future violence is inevitable. If Biden succeeds, the initiator of the conflict — Hezbollah — would go unpunished. The militia would remain unchecked. The reason for the violence at the border would go unaddressed. And by connecting the Hezbollah-Israel conflict to an outcome of the Hamas-Israel conflict, the administration would empower the Lebanese militia.
President Biden dispatched envoy Amos Hochstein to the Middle East after Hezbollah initiated the almost daily cycle of violence with Israel. Hochstein’s shuttle diplomacy has produced several measures to prevent future outbreaks of violence and create greater security for communities inhabiting the border region. A negotiated settlement would entail: 1) officially demarcating the shared Israeli-Lebanese land border with adjustments at 13 disputed locations; 2) deploying additional United Nations Interim Forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL) troops to areas between the Litani River and the Israeli-Lebanese border; 3) deploying the Lebanese army to the Lebanese-Israeli border; and 4) requiring the withdrawal of Hezbollah forces from the Israeli-Lebanese border and relocating them north of the Litani River in Lebanon.
The administration believes the realization of the aforementioned measures is connected to the cessation of violence in Gaza. Witness the words of US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on June 12: “Now, there’s no doubt in my mind that the best way to empower a diplomatic solution to the north, Lebanon, is a resolution of the conflict in Gaza and getting the ceasefire. That will take a tremendous amount of pressure out of the system. It will take away a justification that Hizballah has claimed for the attacks it’s engaged in, and, I think, open a pathway to actually resolve this diplomatically.”
Hochstein affirmed Blinken’s statement during his June 19 visit to Beirut.
But the measures and thinking of Hochstein and Blinken are plagued by problems and dangers.
Firstly, the initiator of the conflict at the Israeli-Lebanese border — Hezbollah — would not be a party to an Israeli-Lebanese settlement. As a non-signatory, the militia is not obliged to formally endorse the agreement or maintain adherence to it. Without making Hezbollah accountable to the agreement, future violence is likely.
Why?
History demonstrates that Hezbollah is indifferent to the concerns, interests, and decisions of the Lebanese state. Hezbollah’s agenda always trumps the state.
For example, the militia ignored the government’s policy of disassociation from the Syrian civil war and entered the conflict in 2012. Similar to what Lebanon is currently experiencing with Israeli retaliatory strikes, the country became a victim of violence because of Hezbollah’s self-interest. The militia’s intervention in Syria precipitated several ISIS suicide bombings perpetrated against the Lebanese public. There is no indication that Hezbollah has learned a lesson and would act differently following a Lebanese government decision to enter into a settlement with Israel.
History also demonstrates the inability or unwillingness of the Lebanese state to keep its word and enforce agreements. A notable example is the resolution to the 2006 33-day Israel-Hezbollah war. Despite endorsing UN Resolution 1701, the state failed to fully implement the resolution’s stipulations. Today’s nine-month conflict is a direct result of that failure.
Secondly, a negotiated Israeli-Lebanese settlement allows Hezbollah to effectively go unpunished for starting the conflict. The measures being discussed are not punishments — at best, they are temporary inconveniences. Hezbollah would be required to move its militia north of the Litani River in Lebanon (roughly 12 miles from the Israeli border), while the Lebanese army and more UNIFIL troops will stand between the militia and Israel.
A similar expectation was stipulated after the fighting in 2006. It never happened. Furthermore, if Hezbollah is convinced to relocate its militia, how can anyone guarantee that it will stay behind the Litani River? Or will Hezbollah just launch missiles and drones at Israel from behind the Litani River — over the heads of UNIFIL and the Lebanese army?
Going relatively unpunished also absolves the terrorist militia of responsibility for initiating the latest round of conflict, and leaves Hezbollah undeterred. An absolved and undeterred Hezbollah entails a more empowered militia. The question then becomes when, not if, future violence will occur.
Thirdly, the proposed settlement between Israel and Lebanon would ignore the reason for the latest round of violence. The diplomacy addresses a land dispute between two countries and the relocation of a militia. Neither are central to why violence erupted on October 8.
Hezbollah’s leadership stated that their October 8 and subsequent attacks on Israel are an act of solidarity with Hamas and the Palestinians of Gaza. Hezbollah maintains that it will not relent until the violence ends in Gaza. The militia is attempting to insert itself into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by working to exact leverage or deterrence over fighting between Israel and the Palestinians. The goal is for the Israelis to think twice about responding to Palestinian terrorism and violence in the future because they will be forced to fight on a second front–southern Lebanon. The proposed Israeli-Lebanese settlement does nothing to prevent this new Hezbollah objective.
Lastly, the Biden administration’s pointless diplomacy also has the makings of becoming damaging. Instead of defusing the conflict, it would lay the foundation for future conflict. As demonstrated by Blinken and Hochstein’s words, they are linking the de-escalation of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict to a ceasefire in Gaza. Linking the conflicts plays into the hands of Hezbollah. It empowers the militia by enabling it to claim a victory of sorts — it maintained its pressure on Israel until Israel conceded to a ceasefire. Linkage also enables future Hezbollah aggression against Israel for the sake of solidarity with Hamas and the Palestinians. For example, Hezbollah would be empowered to act if Israel launches a major operation in the West Bank.
US plans to de-escalate and defuse the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah would do little except make a bad situation worse. A US-mediated settlement between the Israeli and Lebanese governments does not prevent future conflict. It would allow Hezbollah, the initiator of the violence, to go unchecked and unpunished while failing to directly address the new objective of Hezbollah’s aggression. Compounding the predicament is their willingness to empower the militia by connecting the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah to a ceasefire in Gaza. The Biden administration’s mediation is proving to be futile and damaging.
Eric Bordenkircher, Ph.D., is a research fellow at UCLA’s Center for Middle East Development. He tweets at @UCLA_Eagle. The views represented in this piece are his own and do not necessarily represent the position of UCLA or the Center for Middle East Development.
The post US Mediation With Israel and Lebanon Is Futile and Destructive first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
UN Security Council to Meet Over Iran’s Growing Stockpile of Near-Bomb-Grade Uranium
Members of the Security Council cast a vote during a United Nations Security Council meeting on the 3rd anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine at UN headquarters in New York, US, Feb. 24, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/David Dee Delgado
The United Nations Security Council will meet behind closed doors on Wednesday over Iran’s expansion of its stock of uranium close to weapons grade, diplomats said on Monday.
The meeting was requested by six of the council’s 15 members – France, Greece, Panama, South Korea, Britain, and the US.
They also want the council to discuss Iran’s obligation to provide the UN nuclear watchdog – the International Atomic Energy Agency – with “the information necessary to clarify outstanding issues related to undeclared nuclear material detected at multiple locations in Iran,” diplomats said.
Iran’s mission to the UN in New York did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the planned meeting.
Iran has denied wanting to develop a nuclear weapon. However, it is “dramatically” accelerating enrichment of uranium to up to 60 percent purity, close to the roughly 90 percent weapons-grade level, the IAEA has warned.
Western states say there is no need to enrich uranium to such a high level under any civilian program and that no other country has done so without producing nuclear bombs. Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful.
Iran reached a deal in 2015 with Britain, Germany, France, the US, Russia, and China – known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – that lifted sanctions on Tehran in return for restrictions on its nuclear program.
Washington quit the agreement in 2018 during Donald Trump’s first term as US president, and Iran began moving away from its nuclear-related commitments.
Britain, France, and Germany have told the UN Security Council that they are ready – if needed – to trigger a so-called snap back of all international sanctions on Iran to prevent the country from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
They will lose the ability to take such action on Oct. 18 this year when the 2015 UN resolution on the deal expires. US President Donald Trump has directed his UN envoy to work with allies to snap back international sanctions and restrictions on Iran.
The post UN Security Council to Meet Over Iran’s Growing Stockpile of Near-Bomb-Grade Uranium first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Entire Families Killed in Syria’s Military Crackdown, UN Says
A man inspects a damaged car in Latakia, after hundreds were reportedly killed in some of the deadliest violence in 13 years of civil war, pitting loyalists of deposed President Bashar al-Assad against the country’s new Islamist rulers, Syria, March 9, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Haidar Mustafa
Entire families including women and children were killed in Syria’s coastal region as part of a series of sectarian killings by the army against an insurgency by Bashar al-Assad loyalists, the UN human rights office said on Tuesday.
Pressure has been growing on Syria’s Islamist-led government to investigate after reports by a war monitor of the killing of hundreds of civilians in villages where the majority of the population were members of Assad’s minority Alawite sect.
“In a number of extremely disturbing instances, entire families – including women, children, and individuals hors de combat – were killed, with predominantly Alawite cities and villages targeted in particular,” UN human rights office spokesperson Thameen Al-Kheetan said, using a French term for those incapable of fighting.
So far, the UN human rights office has documented the killing of 111 civilians and expects the real toll to be significantly higher, Al-Kheetan told a Geneva press briefing. Of those, 90 were men; 18 were women; and three were children, he added.
“Many of the cases documented were of summary executions. They appear to have been carried out on a sectarian basis,” Al-Kheetan told reporters. In some cases, men were shot dead in front of their families, he said, citing testimonies from survivors.
UN human rights chief Volker Turk welcomed an announcement by Syria’s Islamist-led government to create an accountability committee and called for those investigations to be prompt, thorough, independent, and impartial, the spokesperson added.
The post Entire Families Killed in Syria’s Military Crackdown, UN Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
The Western World Refuses to See the Truth About Syria, the Palestinians, and the Middle East
Rebel fighters holds weapons at the Citadel of Aleppo, after Syrian rebels announced that they have ousted Bashar al-Assad, in Aleppo, Syria, Dec. 9, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Karam al-Masri
Anyone who believed that Syria’s new leader — trading his military uniform for a tailored suit — represented a fresh hope for the Middle East has recently come to a sobering realization: the sea remains the same, the mountains remain unchanged, and the Middle East does not transform overnight.
The harrowing images emerging from Syria lay bare a grim reality. The forces of Abu Mohammad al-Julani, ideological heirs of ISIS, are humiliating, beating, and slaughtering members of the Alawite minority, which until recently ruled the country. As expected, the world — including the United Nations — maintains its usual silence, as long as Israel is not directly involved.
The harsh reality is that Syria has never truly been a sovereign nation. It has always been an open battlefield where global powers, terrorist organizations, and sectarian factions compete to establish facts on the ground. Russia, Iran, and Turkey all vie for influence, while the Alawites find themselves mercilessly hunted, after inflicting mass violence for the decades that they ruled the country.
Like Iraq, Lebanon, and many other Middle Eastern states, Syria was never a unified nation but rather a patchwork of sects, religions, and ethnic groups forcibly bound together by oppressive regimes. The notion of a “Palestinian people” was similarly born out of political circumstances rather than historical continuity or a cohesive identity. As history has demonstrated, those identified as “Palestinians” in the modern era originated from various other regions — Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and beyond. The struggle over Palestinian identity arose from an anti-Zionist political necessity rather than a deep-rooted historical reality.
Today, if someone were to quote former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir’s 1970s assertion that “there is no such thing as a Palestinian people”, they would be labeled as delusional, ultra-right-wing, or even messianic — or all of the above. Yet this famous statement, attributed to a leader of Israel’s leftist establishment, aligns directly with the contemporary reality in Syria. There are tribes, sects, economic and religious interests — but no “nation” in the Western sense of the term.
The shifting realities in Syria and the broader political developments in the region compel us to reconsider the terms we use — “nations”, “states”, “peoples” — which do not always apply to the Middle East in the same way they do in Europe or the United States. The events in Syria are yet another testament to the deep ethnic and religious rifts that prevent the emergence of a united nation — just as we have seen before in Lebanon, Iraq, and other artificially constructed states.
This illusion continues to shatter in fire, blood, and destruction – -yet many still refuse to see the truth. Those who ignore it will inevitably find themselves staring at new ruins, as history continues to dictate the rules of the Middle Eastern game.
Itamar Tzur is the author of The Invention of the Palestinian Narrative and an Israeli scholar specializing in Middle Eastern history. He holds a Bachelor’s degree with honors in Jewish History and a Master’s degree with honors in Middle Eastern studies. As a senior member of the “Forum Kedem for Middle Eastern Studies and Public Diplomacy,” he leverages his academic expertise to deepen understanding of regional dynamics and historical contexts.
The post The Western World Refuses to See the Truth About Syria, the Palestinians, and the Middle East first appeared on Algemeiner.com.