Israel says missile launched from Yemen fell in Hebron; at least 5 Palestinians hurt

CAIRO, June 13 (Reuters) - The Israeli military said on Friday a missile that was launched from Yemen towards Israel fell to earth inside the city of Hebron in the occupied West Bank, adding that no interceptors were involved.
At least five Palestinians, including three children, sustained injuries from the missile's sharpnel that fell in Hebron, the Palestinian Red Crescent said in a later statement.
The incident occurred amid an ongoing Israeli military campaign targeting nuclear sites in Iran that wiped out that country's entire top echelon of military commanders and also killed nuclear scientists.
Yemen's Houthis, who usually claim responsibility for missiles launched towards Israel from Yemen, are allied to Iran.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Guardian

34 minutes ago

• The Guardian

US reportedly moving B-2 bombers to Guam as Trump considers Iran strikes

The United States is moving B-2 bombers to the Pacific island of Guam, two US officials told Reuters on Saturday, as Donald Trump weighs whether the United States should take part in Israel's strikes against Iran. It was unclear whether the bomber deployment is tied to Middle East tensions. The B-2 can be equipped to carry America's 30,000lb GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, designed to destroy targets deep underground. That is the weapon that experts say could be used to strike Iran's nuclear program, including Fordow. The officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, declined to disclose any further details. One official said no forward orders had been given yet to move the bombers beyond Guam. They did not say how many B-2 bombers are being moved. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Experts and officials are closely watching to see whether the B-2 bombers will move forward to a US-British military base on the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. Experts say that Diego Garcia is in an ideal position to operate in the Middle East. The United States had B-2 bombers on Diego Garcia up until last month, when they were replaced with B-52 bombers. Israel said on Saturday it had killed a veteran Iranian commander during attacks by both sides in the more than week-long air war, while Tehran said it would not negotiate over its nuclear program while under threat. Israel says Iran was on the verge of developing nuclear weapons, while Iran says its atomic program is only for peaceful purposes. Trump has said he would take up to two weeks to decide whether the United States should enter the conflict on Israel's side, enough time 'to see whether or not people come to their senses,' he said. Reuters was first to report this week the movement of a large number of tanker aircraft to Europe and other military assets to the Middle East, including the deployment of more fighter jets. An aircraft carrier in the Indo-Pacific is also heading to the Middle East.

Telegraph

38 minutes ago

• Telegraph

Hermer is wrong: international law permits Britain to strike against Iran

Israel's recent strikes against military and nuclear targets in Iran – more rapid, efficient and successful than anyone could have imagined – have been an unparalleled game changer in the Middle East. In the words of Germany's Chancellor Merz, Israel is doing the 'dirty work' of striking Iran 'for all of us', acting in resolute defence of the free world against this existential threat. Israel's actions are also potentially creating the circumstances in which the Iranian people may finally free themselves from more than four decades of the most vicious extremist oppression. It is remarkable, one may think, that in these circumstances the predominant discussion of the legal analysis of these developments could have been so resolutely incorrect. As reported in these pages, the UK Attorney General Lord Hermer KC has advised the Government that it may be complicit in an illegal war if it supports a strike on Iran, but apparently drew a distinction regarding 'defensive' support of Israel. Prof Richard Ekins KC and Policy Exchange have pointed out the curious self-contradictory nature of the position: 'It seems very odd that it is lawful to use 'defensive' force by, for example shooting down a missile heading for Tel Aviv, but unlawful to use 'defensive' force to destroy Iranian missile batteries in Iran.' Hermer's advice on the matter seems to fall into this now recognisable pattern of real international law being unceremoniously thrown out of the window by activist lawyers pushing their political agenda and worldview. This is pretty basic. The right to self-defence in international law is inherent, recognised as such in Article 51 of the UN Charter. It is an exception to the general prohibition on the use of force. It is one of the most fundamental norms. Likewise, the doctrine of defence of third parties permits other states to use force to defend another state that is under armed attack. There is debate about the extent to which an appeal by the attacked state is required, but it is hard to imagine the UK assisting Israel without being so requested. The most critical feature of this Iran-Israel war, however, which appears to have been generally glossed over, is its ongoing nature. This is not a new phenomenon. The international armed conflict between these two states has been decades long. The turning point in Iran-Israel relations was the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran. The two states had previously enjoyed a close working relationship as major allies and trading partners. The proclamation 'Death to Israel ' was issued by Ayatollah Khomeini just before the 1979 revolution. After he seized power, this became the policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which has waged its decades-long proxy war against Israel, primarily through the cultivation, support and direction of internationally proscribed terrorist organisations Hezbollah and Hamas. Through these terror armies on Israel's northern and southern borders, and with the more recent inclusion of the Houthis in Yemen, Iran has diligently pursued its annihilistic war aims. The public threats by Tehran to eliminate Israel are a central tenet of Iran's foreign policy and are backed up by a clock in central Tehran, counting down to the date of Israel's destruction as prophesied by the Ayatollah. In the past year, this escalated to direct missile barrages against Israeli civilians. On April 13 2024, Iran launched its first direct attack on Israel, sending around 170 drones, 30 cruise missiles, and 120 ballistic missiles towards Israel, in what was called the most significant attempted drone attack in history. On October 1 2024, Iran launched 200 ballistic missiles at Israel, killing one Israeli civilian and one Palestinian civilian, as well as causing major damage to Israeli homes. These developments, together with the alleged airstrike by Israel on Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps officers near the Iranian Embassy complex in Damascus, Syria, and the elimination of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran last July, are all part and parcel of the ongoing international armed conflict. The existence of this ongoing armed conflict shifts the analysis from the law governing the resort to force – jus ad bellum – to the law governing the conduct of warfare – jus in bello. That is the appropriate lens through which to assess Israel's actions, and its compliance with the key principles governing the conduct of warfare: necessity, distinction, proportionality and precaution. As in other aspects of Israel's armed conflict against Iranian proxies, the targeting of military objectives, based on proportionality assessments and accompanied by precautions that strive to reduce civilian casualties and collateral damage, indicate strict adherence to these rules. The precision and discrimination with which they are conducted remain unprecedented in the history of armed conflict and in many respects exceed the requirements of international humanitarian law – as noted by a letter to the UN Security Council by Israeli foreign minister Gideon Sa'ar last week. The focus of Operation 'Rising Lion' is prompted by the latest critical developments in Iran's covert nuclear weapons programme. This includes the June 12 declaration by the IAEA that Iran was in breach of non-proliferation obligations, which immediately preceded the strikes. The apparent failure by Hermer and others to properly analyse this development in the context of the decades-long international armed conflict is truly inexplicable. It smacks of politics trumping law, where pseudo legal arguments are being advanced to support an agenda that is anti-Israel, anti-Western and fundamentally counter to the UK's national interest.

The Independent

41 minutes ago

• The Independent

British man arrested on suspicion of spying and terrorism offences in Cyprus

A British man has been arrested on suspicion of espionage and terrorism offences in Cyprus. The man is reported to have kept the RAF Akrotiri base on the island under surveillance and is alleged to have links with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, local media reported. A Foreign Office spokesman said: 'We are in contact with the authorities in Cyprus regarding the arrest of a British man.' RAF Akrotiri is the UK's most important airbase for operations in the Middle East. The Philenews website said the man was arrested on Friday following intelligence he was planning an imminent terrorist attack. He is alleged to have lived in a flat in Zakai, Limassol, close to Akrotiri and was observed near the base carrying a camera with a long lens and three mobile phones. Local reports suggested he was Azerbaijani but the UK Foreign Office said they were working with the authorities over the arrest of a Briton.