Very Bad Decision If Hezbollah Joins Iran-Israel War: US Envoy To Syria
A top U.S. official visiting the Lebanese capital on Thursday discouraged Tehran-backed armed group Hezbollah from intervening in the war between Iran and Israel, saying it would be a "very bad decision".
U.S. special envoy for Syria Thomas Barrack, who also serves as ambassador to Turkey, met Lebanese officials in Beirut as Iran and Israel traded more strikes in their days-long war and as the U.S. continues to press Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah.
After meeting Lebanon's Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, a close ally of Hezbollah, Barrack was asked what may happen if Hezbollah joined in the regional conflict.
"I can say on behalf of President (Donald) Trump, which he has been very clear in expressing as has Special Envoy (Steve) Witkoff: that would be a very, very, very bad decision," Barrack told reporters.
Hezbollah has condemned Israel's strikes on Iran and expressed full solidarity with its leadership. On Thursday, it said threats against Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would have "dire consequences".
But the group has stopped short of making explicit threats to intervene. After Israel began strikes on Iran last week, a Hezbollah official told Reuters the group would not launch its own attack on Israel in response.
Hezbollah was left badly weakened from last year's war with Israel, in which the group's leadership was destroyed, thousands of fighters were killed and strongholds in southern Lebanon and near Beirut were severely damaged.
A U.S.-brokered ceasefire deal which ended that war stipulates that the Lebanese government must ensure there are no arms outside state control.
Barrack also met Lebanese President Joseph Aoun on Thursday and discussed the state's monopoly on all arms.
Barrack is a private equity executive who has long advised Trump and chaired his inaugural presidential committee in 2016. He was appointed to his role in Turkey and, in late May, also assumed the position of special envoy to Syria.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
36 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Latvian president believes NATO will overcome obstacles, meet 5% goal
By Andrius Sytas Latvian president believes NATO will overcome obstacles, meet 5% goal RIGA, - Latvia's president expressed confidence NATO would agree to a new higher defence spending target demanded by U.S. President Donald Trump, despite Spanish objections, saying the alliance had little choice given the growing threat from Russia. Spain on Thursday asked to opt out of the plan to increase members' defence spending to 5% of their gross domestic product, as requested by Trump, a move which could derail next week's NATO summit at the Hague. Any agreement to raise defence spending needs unanimous approval by the 32 member states. Latvian President Edgars Rinkevics told Reuters on Friday he understood why countries further from Russia might have difficulties convincing their voters to spend more on defence. But he said the need was pressing. 'I do hope there is the understanding in Madrid that this is a critical time for the Alliance, both when it comes to its defence capabilities, but also to the Trans-Atlantic relationship,' he said in an interview in Riga. 'I think that they don't have much of a choice,' he added. At an estimated 1.28% of GDP, Spain had the lowest proportion of expenditure on defence in the alliance last year, according to NATO estimates. Latvia and fellow Baltic states Lithuania and Estonia are urgently ramping up their militaries, fearing that their neighbour and former overlord Russia could push on from its 2022 invasion of Ukraine to take more territory. They spent more than 3% of GDP on defence this year, and have committed to top 5% for the next few years. "We are saying that we need to spend as soon as possible now in order to avoid a worst-case scenario, spending much more later," Rinkevics said. "While Russia is stuck in Ukraine, that possibility of a direct military attack is not very high," he said. "But it may change very, very quickly ... if a development in Ukraine leads Russian leadership to believe that NATO is weak, that Ukraine is defeated, that NATO is divided". This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hindustan Times
36 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
‘We understand, our expectation is more': Iranian diplomat on India's stand
NEW DELHI: Iran expects India to condemn 'aggression by Israel' to uphold the principle of sovereignty of countries and international law and to prevent similar actions in other parts of the world, a senior Iranian diplomat said on Friday. Emergency personnel work at an impact site following Iran's missile strike on Israel, amid the Iran-Israel conflict, in Haifa, Israel, June 20. (REUTERS) Against the backdrop of reports that the US is making an outreach to Pakistan for support for possible American strikes on Iran, Mohammad Javad Hosseini, deputy chief of mission at the Iranian embassy, told reporters that Pakistan should stand with Iran in the face of Israel's aggression. 'We believe every country, including India, should condemn this aggression, not because of Iran or because of this conflict, but because it will open the way for other countries who [want] to attack a neighbour on some baseless allegations,' Hosseini said. 'If you don't condemn it, you are giving them an incentive.' Also Read: Iran eases airspace restrictions for 3 Indian charter flights India's actions should be in keeping with its role as the voice of the Global South at key forums such as the G20 and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). 'Our expectation is this voice [will take this issue] not as a matter of bilateral relations with Iran and Israel, but to condemn this aggression, so that international law is respected and everybody knows that if there is any aggression, there will be punishment,' Hosseini said. Iran's deputy chief of mission to India Mohammad Javad Hosseini addresses a press conference, in New Delhi, Friday (PTI) India has sought to take a balanced position on the Iran-Israel conflict because of its close relations with both countries. The Indian government has urged both sides to return to dialogue and diplomacy and insisted a solution cannot be found on the battlefield. India also disassociated itself from a recent SCO statement that condemned Israel's military strikes on Iran. Also Read: The prospect of a wider war | HT Editorial Asked if Iran is disappointed with India's stance, Hosseini replied: 'No, we can say that it is not a matter of disappointment, that we understand. But our expectation is more.' Hosseini said Iran appreciated India's stance of having good relations with Iran and Israel, especially in the context of the SCO statement. 'We have told them it isn't a matter of the Iran-Israel conflict, it's a matter of aggression against a sovereign country, it's a matter of blatant violation of international law, which should be condemned no matter who prepared this plan,' he said. He responded to questions about the US seeking Pakistan's support for possible American strikes on Iran, especially after a meeting this week between US President Donald Trump and Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir, by saying that he hoped Islamabad will stand with Tehran. 'I hope Pakistan won't go for that and will stand with Iran against Israeli aggression,' he said. 'We are in contact with Pakistani officials, they know our stance and they understand us well,' Hosseini said. 'And we hope the decision which is going to be made at the end will be to stand with Iran, to stand with the truth and condemn the aggressors [and] not to give some incentive to the aggressors.' The US, Hosseini said, is engaged in a 'psychological war' against Iran, which is prepared for all scenarios. 'It is a conflict between Iran and Israel, and it's better for a third party not to enter it. If it enters, it would definitely become more complicated and it will have very bad consequences for that third party,' he said.
Economic Times
41 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Missiles, Militants, and Markets: Pakistan's quiet alliance with Iran runs deeper than you think
Few know this, but 'Pakistan' comes from Persian: Pak, meaning 'pure', and -stan, 'land'. In Iran, the name quite literally means 'Land of the Pure'. As tensions flare between Israel and Iran, an unexpected regional realignment is unfolding quietly but unmistakably. While Gulf Arab states walk the tightrope between maintaining ties with the West and managing regional outrage, Pakistan has been bold in its stance: openly condemning Israeli aggression, expressing solidarity with Iran, and strengthening bilateral trade and strategic cooperation with its Shia-majority this is not just about ideology. Behind Pakistan's rhetorical support for Iran lies a complex web of shared threats, historical affinities, economic dependencies, and strategic repositioning that defy easy of the most significant factors linking Pakistan to Iran is geography. The two countries share a 900-kilometre (560-mile) border, primarily between Pakistan's Balochistan province and Iran's Sistan-Baluchestan region is populated by ethnic Baluch, a Sunni Muslim minority group that has long complained of marginalisation in both countries. These grievances have birthed separatist movements and armed insurgencies on both sides of the border. The militant group Jaish al-Adl (Army of Justice), formed by Iranian Baluch and operating from within Pakistan, is just one of several transnational threats both countries confront. According to Reuters, following Israeli strikes on Iran in mid-June, the group issued a call for widespread resistance, stating, 'Jaish al-Adl extends the hand of brotherhood… and calls on the people of Baluchistan to join the ranks of the Resistance.'As Israel targets Iran's nuclear infrastructure with a series of airstrikes, its officials have made no secret of a broader goal: to undermine, if not outright topple, the Iranian regime. In addition to fears of regional instability spilling over from Iran, Pakistan is also alarmed by the precedent Israel is setting by launching strikes on another nation's nuclear facilities. The concern is particularly acute given Pakistan's own rivalry with nuclear-armed neighbour India. The two countries were engaged in an intense four-day conflict as recently as alarmed Pakistani officials, who fear the radicalisation of their own Baluch population and the possibility of a broader, united 'Greater Baluchistan' movement. This scenario was described by Islamabad-based analyst Simbal Khan to Reuters as a real risk. 'They're all going to fight together if this blows up,' Khan warned. 'There's a fear of ungoverned spaces, which would be fertile ground for terrorist groups,' said Maleeha Lodhi, a former Pakistani ambassador to Washington. The fear is not just theoretical. In January 2024, Iran launched unprecedented drone and missile strikes into Pakistan's Balochistan, targeting alleged militant sanctuaries. Pakistan responded with retaliatory airstrikes in Iran's Sistan and Baluchestan province, claiming to have hit "terrorist hideouts" belonging to Baloch separatist insurgents engaged in conflict against Pakistan, specifically the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and Balochistan Liberation Front (BLF). Pakistan stated that these strikes were a manifestation of its "unflinching resolve to protect and defend its national security against all threats." The Iranian government stated nine foreign citizens, including three women and four children, were killed in the instead of spiralling into prolonged conflict, both sides chose de-escalation, suspending cross-border trade temporarily but recommitting to border security cooperation. As senior Balochistan official Qadir Bakhsh Pirkaani confirmed to AFP, border crossings in five districts, including Chaghi, Panjgur, and Gwadar, were response reflects a shared understanding: instability in one country risks fuelling extremism in the other. As Pakistan's military conveyed in its meeting with US President Donald Trump, a collapse of authority in Iran could lead to an influx of militants and refugees. Trump, referring to his conversation with Pakistan Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir, bluntly summarised: 'They're not happy about anything,' referring to Pakistan's views on the Israel-Iran conflict. Beyond security concerns, Pakistan's energy crisis makes cooperation with Iran essential. According to Iran's Customs Administration (IRICA), Iran exported $2.4 billion worth of non-oil goods to Pakistan in the last Iranian calendar year, ending March 20, 2025, making Pakistan its fifth-largest export destination. In the first two months of the new year alone, Iranian exports totalled $322 million, according to the Tehran Pakistan's exports to Iran stood at a meagre $43 million in the same period, down dramatically from $303 million in 2018. This trade imbalance has not dampened ambitions. In May 2025, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif stated a goal of increasing bilateral trade from the current $3 billion to $10 billion in the coming years, a sentiment echoed by Iranian leaders, who acknowledge that current trade levels are "not acceptable" given the potential. At the centre of Pakistan and Iran's energy cooperation lies the long-stalled Iran–Pakistan (IP) gas pipeline, often called the 'Peace Pipeline'. First proposed in 1995, the project gained traction with a formal agreement signed in Ankara in according to the New Delhi-based Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA), the pipeline has been mired in delays for nearly three decades, largely due to US sanctions on Iran and mounting pressure on Iran has already completed its 1,100-kilometre section, Pakistan's 780-kilometre stretch remains mostly unbuilt. The pipeline is intended to transport natural gas from Iran's South Pars field to Pakistan's southern regions, including Gwadar and citing a lack of funds, failed to begin construction on its side. Tehran even offered a $500 million loan to help Islamabad finance the pipeline, estimated at $1.5 billion for Pakistan at the time, but the project still failed to move forward. In a symbolic gesture aimed at pushing the project ahead, then-President Asif Ali Zardari and his Iranian counterpart jointly inaugurated construction in March 2013. That same year, then-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif assured that Pakistan would honour its commitment. But those assurances did not hold for long. By 2014, not only had the project failed to make meaningful progress, but it appeared to be regressing. Pakistan considered abandoning it altogether, prompting Iran to withdraw its loan escalated in 2019 when Iran threatened legal action against Pakistan for non-compliance. After years of inaction, Islamabad finally issued a force majeure notice in June 2023 under the terms of the Gas Sales and Purchase Agreement (GSPA), claiming circumstances beyond its control. Tehran rejected this notice, but the agreement was subsequently amended, giving Pakistan an additional five years to complete the consequences of inaction have been severe. According to ICWA, Pakistan has faced legal action from Tehran for non-compliance and owes up to $18 billion in penalties for breaching the contract as of a cautious step forward, the Pakistani government in February 2024 approved the construction of an 80-kilometre segment of the pipeline near the Iranian border. The project will be financed through the Gas Infrastructure Development Cess (GIDC) and implemented by Interstate Gas Systems (Private) Limited (ISGS).Still, US opposition continues to cast a long shadow over the project. Back in 2013, Washington had warned Islamabad that going ahead with the pipeline could invite economic sanctions, and instead encouraged it to explore liquefied natural gas (LNG) the challenges, the pipeline remains critical for Pakistan's energy needs, and for Iran's ambition to bypass Western-imposed isolation. As reported by Global Energy Monitor and The Diplomat, Islamabad has asked the US for sanctions exemptions for this project, a request that remains the pipeline was once envisioned as a regional connector. In 1999, India was invited to join the project, transforming it into the Iran–Pakistan–India (IPI) pipeline that was to extend all the way to New Delhi. But progress stalled, and India officially withdrew in 2009. Iran had also hoped to include countries such as China and Bangladesh, but those ambitions have yet to was the first country to recognise Pakistan following its independence in 1947. During the Indo-Pakistan wars of 1965 and 1971, Iran stood firmly by Islamabad's side, offering diplomatic and military support. In 1965, Tehran supplied Pakistan with arms and ammunition. During the 1971 war, Iran again backed Pakistan, reportedly even considering the deployment of F-4 Phantom fighter two nations were also strategic allies during the Cold War. Both were founding members of the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), formed on February 24, 1955, by Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. Backed by the West, CENTO aimed to curb Soviet expansion in the Middle East and South Asia. Although the alliance dissolved in 1979 following the Iranian Revolution, the shared threat of communist influence, and later, concerns over drug trafficking, cross-border insurgencies, and smuggling, kept channels of cooperation ties have further deepened the relationship. Persian language, literature, and political philosophy have left a lasting imprint on Pakistani intellectual and cultural life, influencing everything from poetry to statecraft. Even after Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution, Pakistan was among the first nations to recognise the new regime. Despite international pressure, Islamabad extended support to Tehran during the Iran–Iraq War (1980–1988), highlighting the resilience of their strategic calculus. Pakistan's deepening alignment with Iran also reflects a shifting geopolitical calculation. Islamabad has long tried to balance its ties with Saudi Arabia and the United States, both adversaries of Tehran, but changing global dynamics are pulling Pakistan the start of Israel's bombing campaign, Pakistan has positioned itself as one of the few Muslim-majority countries refusing to normalise relations with Israel. Countries such as the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan have formalised ties with Tel Aviv under the Abraham meanwhile, has maintained that normalisation will not occur unless Palestinian statehood is October 2023, Pakistan's Foreign Ministry has repeatedly condemned Israeli airstrikes on Iran, calling them violations of June 20, 2025, Reuters reported that Pakistan's Foreign Office spokesperson Shafqat Ali Khan, speaking at a press briefing, said: 'This is for us a very serious issue... It imperils the entire regional security structures, it impacts us deeply.' He further stated, 'Iran has the right to defend itself under the UN Charter.' According to the same Reuters report, Pakistan's Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar has spoken with foreign ministers of Iran, Turkey, Egypt, the UAE, and the UK, warning that 'Israeli actions against Iran can have dangerous effects in the region and beyond.' Iranian officials have welcomed Pakistan's position. Several Iranian parliamentarians publicly thanked Islamabad, and there have been unconfirmed reports of Pakistani military delegations visiting Tehran. While Pakistan denies supplying military aid, its consistent diplomatic support has signalled a clear strategic emerging alignment brings Pakistan closer to Iran's key allies: China and Russia. All three countries have condemned Israeli actions and share an interest in limiting US influence in West and South Asia. As noted by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), Turkey has also escalated its rhetoric, with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan accusing Israel of 'setting the entire region on fire'.The idea of a growing Iran–China–Pakistan–Russia axis is no longer implausible. For Pakistan, closer ties with this bloc offer diplomatic protection, economic opportunity, and greater strategic leverage, especially as it seeks to expand Chinese investment through the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a project that overlaps with Iranian ambitions at the Chabahar has repeatedly expressed interest in joining CPEC as part of China's broader Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), a vision that depends on regional stability, particularly in Iran and Pakistan. With Gwadar (in Pakistan) and Chabahar (in Iran) positioned as key regional trade hubs, collaboration between the two neighbours becomes even more in 2015, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), then-President Hassan Rouhani publicly expressed Iran's interest in becoming part of CPEC, emphasising the importance of regional connectivity for peace and support for Iran amid Israeli aggression is no knee-jerk reaction. It is a calibrated stance rooted in geography, history, security, economics, and shifting alliances. While some see it as an ideological solidarity with a fellow Muslim nation, the reality is more cannot afford a destabilised Iran. It fears spillover violence, refugee influxes, energy shortages, and economic penalties from unmet obligations. It also sees opportunity: in trade, in diplomacy, and in regional rebalancing.
