Violent Clashes Erupt in Libya After Top Official Assassinated
Rival gunman exchanged fire in Libya's capital following the killing of a local militia leader in clashes which have prompted international calls for calm.
The violence followed the killing of Abdel Ghani al-Kikli, also known as "Gheniwa," who is the head of the powerful Stability Support Authority (SSA) militia.
The SSA is under the Presidential Council, which came to power in 2021 with the Government of National Unity (GNU) through a United Nations-recognized process.
The U.N. called for a de-escalation on Tuesday after heavy gunfire and explosions rocked Tripoli's southern districts on Monday evening, Al Jazeera reported.
This is a developing story and will be updated shortly.
Related Articles
Maximalism Will Doom Diplomacy With Iran | OpinionJudge Says Trump Deportations to Libya, Saudi Arabia Violate Court OrderTwo More Countries Could Take Deported U.S. Migrants: ReportItaly's Meloni Under Probe for Releasing ICC-Wanted Libyan Officer
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Los Angeles Times
4 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Israel hits an Iranian nuclear research facility and says it's preparing for a long war
TEL AVIV — Israel's military said Saturday it struck an Iranian nuclear research facility overnight and killed three senior Iranian commanders in targeted attacks, while emphasizing it was preparing for the possibility of a lengthy war. Smoke rose from an area near a mountain in Isfahan, where Isfahan province's deputy governor for security affairs, Akbar Salehi, confirmed the Israeli strikes damaged the facility but said they caused no casualties. The target was two centrifuge production sites, according to an Israeli military official speaking on condition of anonymity under army guidelines to brief reporters. It was the second attack on Isfahan, which was hit in the first 24 hours of the war as part of Israel's goal to destroy Iran's nuclear program. The International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, confirmed the latest attack. Iran launched a new wave of drones and missiles at Israel but there were no immediate reports of significant damage. A Magen David Adom rescue service official said a drone hit a two-story building in northern Israel, with no casualties. The official called it a 'small barrage' that was largely intercepted by Israel's defenses. The official estimated that Israel's military has taken out more than half of Iran's launchers. 'We're making it harder for them to fire toward Israel,' he said. 'Having said all that, I want to say the Iranian regime obviously still has capabilities.' The Israeli military's chief spokesman, Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin, later said that Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir told the army to be prepared for a 'prolonged campaign.' President Trump is weighing active U.S. military involvement in the war. On Saturday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said, 'I think that it would be very, very dangerous for everyone.' He spoke on the sidelines of an Organization of Islamic Cooperation meeting in Turkey. Barring a commando raid or even a nuclear strike, Iran's underground Fordo uranium enrichment facility is considered out of reach to all but America's 'bunker-buster' bombs. Trump said he would put off his decision on direct military involvement for up to two weeks. The war erupted June 13, with Israeli airstrikes targeting Iran's nuclear and military sites, top generals and nuclear scientists. At least 722 people, including 285 civilians, have been killed in Iran and more than 2,500 wounded, according to a Washington-based Iranian human rights group. One Tehran resident, Nasrin, writhed in her hospital bed as she described how a blast threw her against a wall in her apartment. 'I've had five surgeries. I think I have nothing right here that is intact,' she said Saturday. Another resident, Shahram Nourmohammadi, said he had been making deliveries when 'something blew up right in front of me' at an intersection. Iran has retaliated by firing more than 450 missiles and 1,000 drones at Israel, according to Israeli army estimates. Israel's multi-tiered air defenses have shot down most of them, but at least 24 people in Israel have been killed and hundreds wounded. Iran has long maintained its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but it is the only nonnuclear-weapon state to enrich uranium up to 60% — a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. Israel is widely believed to be the only Middle Eastern country with a nuclear weapons program, but has never acknowledged it. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said Israel's military operation will continue 'for as long as it takes' to eliminate what he called the existential threat of Iran's nuclear program and ballistic missile arsenal. Talks in Geneva on Friday failed to produce a breakthrough. European officials expressed hope for future discussions. Iran's foreign minister said he was open to further dialogue while emphasizing that Tehran had no interest in negotiating with the U.S. while Israel continues to attack. 'Iran is ready to consider diplomacy once again, and once aggression is stopped and the aggressor is held accountable for the crimes committed,' he told reporters. No date was set for a new round of talks. For many Iranians, updates remained difficult. Internet-access advocacy group said Saturday that limited internet access had again 'collapsed.' A nationwide internet shutdown has been in place for several days. Israel's opening attack killed three of Iran's top military leaders: Gen. Mohammad Bagheri, who oversaw the armed forces; Gen. Hossein Salami, who led the paramilitary Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps; and the head of the Revolutionary Guard's ballistic missile program, Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh. Israel's defense minister said Saturday the military has killed a Revolutionary Guard commander who financed and armed Hamas in preparation for the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel that sparked the ongoing 20-month war in the Gaza Strip. Iranian officials did not immediately confirm Saeed Izadi's death, but the Qom governor's office said there had been an attack on a four-story apartment building and local media reported two people had been killed. Israel also said it killed the commander of the Quds Force's weapons transfer unit, who it said was responsible for providing weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. Behnam Shahriyari was killed while traveling in western Iran, the military said. Iranian leaders say IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi's statements about the status of Iran's nuclear program have prompted Israel's attack. On Saturday, a senior advisor for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamanei, Ali Larijani, said in a social media post, without elaboration, that Iran would make Grossi 'pay' once the war is over. Grossi warned Friday at an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council against attacks on Iran's nuclear reactors, particularly its only commercial nuclear power plant in the southern city of Bushehr. 'In case of an attack on the Bushehr nuclear power plant, a direct hit would result in a very high release of radioactivity,' Grossi said, adding: 'This is the nuclear site in Iran where the consequences could be most serious.' Israel has not targeted Iran's nuclear reactors, instead focusing its strikes on the main uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, centrifuge workshops near Tehran, laboratories in Isfahan and the country's Arak heavy water reactor southwest of the capital. Iran previously agreed to limit its uranium enrichment and allow international inspectors access to its nuclear sites under a 2015 deal in exchange for sanctions relief. But after Trump pulled the U.S. out of the deal during his first term, Iran began enriching uranium up to 60% and restricting access to its nuclear facilities. Iran has insisted on its right to enrich uranium — at lower levels — in recent talks over its nuclear program. But Trump, like Israel, has demanded Iran end its enrichment program altogether. Rising and Mednick write for the Associated Press and reported from Dubai and Tel Aviv, respectively. AP writers Mehmet Guzel in Istanbul, Josef Federman in Jerusalem and Farnoush Amiri and Jon Gambrell in Dubai contributed to this report.


The Hill
5 hours ago
- The Hill
If he wages war unilaterally, Trump will only be the latest of many presidents to do so
Twenty-four years ago this week, I represented a group of bipartisan members of Congress in challenging the Obama administration's decision to attack Libya without a declaration of war. It is a curious anniversary of the litigation, because many of the politicians and pundits who supported (or remained silent on) the action of President Barack Obama are now appalled that President Trump is considering an attack on the Iranian nuclear facility at Fordow, which is buried deep in a mountain. Later, some Democratic members would move to expand presidential powers to launch attacks without approval. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), the drafter of the current legislation to limit Trump's authority, drafted legislation in 2018 to put the authorization for use of military force on virtual autopilot. That was during the first Trump administration, and I testified against that legislation as a virtual authorization for 'endless war.' In 2011, Obama approved a massive military campaign that not only attacked Libya's capital city but also armored columns of the Libyan military. The clear intent was regime change supported by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who also rejected the need to consult with Congress, let alone secure approval before launching a massive attack on another nation. Today, Trump is contemplating the use of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator or 'bunker buster' bomb, to destroy the facility. It may be the only weapon that can reach the underground enhancement areas, and it can only be delivered by American B-2 Spirit stealth bombers. It takes courage to oppose such actions by a president of your own party or against an unpopular foe. Notably, among my clients 24 years ago was Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), the father of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) who also believes that a president should secure approval of Congress before any such attack occurs. The other group that would demand such approval was the Framers themselves. They saw foreign entanglements and military interventions as the markings of despots and tyrants. At the Constitutional Convention, delegate Pierce Butler insisted that a president should not be able to 'make war but when the nation will support it.' Nevertheless, he did not even receive a second to his motion because the Framers demanded real checks on this power. They imposed that limit by only allowing the nation to go to war with the express declaration of Congress. Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 states that the 'sole' authority to declare war rests with Congress. In 1793, George Washington supported the denial of this power to a president as a clear and binding promise that 'no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.' The Framers thought that they had solved the problem. In the Pennsylvania ratification convention, James Wilson explained the need for congressional approval as a guarantee that no one will 'hurry us into war [since] it is calculated to guard against it.' The purpose of such approval is not just to limit foreign wars but to secure the support of the people before such wars are commenced. After all, presidents get the glory of wars, but citizens pay the cost in lives and treasure. Politicians, however, quickly became leery of taking such ownership over wars. Congress became increasingly passive in the face of popular military engagements, using ambiguous 'authorizations' to preserve the ability to later insist that they were never really in support of wars. While some of us opposed the Iraq War, politicians like then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) were all-in on the invasion. Yet, when he ran for president, Biden insisted that he had opposed the long, drawn-out war. Then there was Sen. John Kerry. During the Democratic primary in 2004, Kerry portrayed himself as against the Iraq War, even though he had also voted for it. Later, when confronted by George Bush in the general election over his vote against spending $87 billion to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, he offered his notorious response that 'I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it.' Despite the clear text of the Constitution, courts have repeatedly allowed this circumvention of Article I. Congress has only declared 11 wars while allowing more than 125 military operations, including Vietnam, Korea and Afghanistan. Congress has not declared war in the 80 years since World War II. In my case, the Obama administration would not even refer to an attack on another nation as a 'war.' It insisted that it was a 'time-limited, scope-limited military action,' or a 'kinetic action.' The court allowed the war to proceed. Both Congress and the courts have effectively amended the Constitution to remove the requirement of war declarations. As a result, the precedent favors Trump in arguing for his right to commit troops unilaterally. Whereas Kaine and others insist that there has been no attack by Iran on the U.S., Trump can cite the fact that Iran has killed or wounded thousands of Americans directly or through surrogates, including attacks on U.S. shipping through its Houthi proxy forces in Yemen. More importantly, he can cite decades of judicial and congressional acquiescence. For my part, I think the Framers were right then and they are right now. We have shown just how right they were with decades of undeclared wars and so little accountability. The fact that these actions are presumptively unconstitutional is an inconvenient fact buried in decades of war hype and hypocrisy. That is why Trump is unlikely to go to Congress and, as a matter of precedent, he does not have to. He will assume the same power his predecessors enjoyed, including recent Democratic presidents. With that history and politics on his side, Trump could turn Fordow into the most expensive hole in history. Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of 'The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.'

Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Israel presses ahead with strikes as Trump's 2-week deadline looms
Israeli officials insisted Friday that they will keep up their bombing campaign against Iran, even as President Donald Trump has given Tehran a two-week deadline to come to some sort of diplomatic deal that reins in its nuclear program. Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, laid out his country's case at the U.N. Security Council, facing off Friday with Iranian representatives who urged the world to stop the Israeli strikes. 'We will not stop. Not until Iran's nuclear threat is dismantled, not until its war machine is disarmed, not until our people and yours are safe,' Danon declared. The Israeli assertions highlight how Trump's statement that he'll decide 'in the next two weeks' whether to strike Iranian nuclear sites provides an opportunity to Israel as much as it puts pressure on Iran. For Iran, it's two weeks to come to some sort of diplomatic deal with the U.S. that constrains its nuclear, and possibly other, programs. For Israel, it's a focused timeframe to do as much damage as it can to Iran's nuclear and broader military infrastructure before the U.S. may pressure it to accept a diplomatic solution. The more damage Israel does, the more it could weaken an enemy and improve the odds that Iran will capitulate to U.S. demands in the diplomatic process. The strikes themselves couldthreaten the survival of Iran's Islamist regime. Trump told reporters on Friday that he wasn't about to push Israel to halt its assault in Iran while he weighs what the U.S. should do. 'It's very hard to make that request right now,' Trump said. 'If somebody is winning, it's a little bit harder to do than if somebody is losing, but we're ready, willing and able, and we've been speaking to Iran, and we'll see what happens.' A senior administration official, granted anonymity to speak about the president's thinking, said 'everything is still on the table." "This is about giving this a little time and seeing if things look any different in a couple weeks," the official said. Trump's 'two-week' window was delivered Thursday by press secretary Karoline Leavitt, who said, quoting Trump, that his delay in determining whether to join Israel's attack on Iran was 'based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.' Trump often says he'll make decisions in two weeks, only to extend his deadline again or never follow through. Still, Israel and Iran appear to believe the next two weeks will be a crucial phase. Iranian officials showed up for nuclear talks with European officials on Friday in Geneva; Israel pressed ahead with its bombing campaign against Iran, which is responding with missiles. Iranian officials met Friday with European envoys in Geneva in an attempt to revitalize the diplomatic process. The talks ended on an ambiguous note. Iranian officials have said their participation in future talks would hinge on Israel stopping its attacks. Some European representatives said talks should continue regardless, even as they urged both sides to avoid escalation. "We invited the Iranian minister to consider negotiations with all sides, including the United States, without awaiting the cessation of strikes, which we also hope for," French foreign minister Jean-Noel Barrot said. For Israel, the most critical, but perhaps toughest, official objective is eliminating Iran's nuclear facility at Fordo. That facility is buried deep underground, and Israel has been hoping Trump will enter the fight and use special, massive U.S. bombs to destroy it. There are concerns, however, including among Republicans, that Iran could retaliate against U.S. assets if America enters the conflict on any level, dragging America into another Middle Eastern war. Trump campaigned on avoiding such wars. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has hinted that Israel has means to destroy Fordo on its own. It's not clear what those methods could involve, but Israel has significant intelligence operations inside Iran and it has often surprised even Washington with its capabilities. Either way, current and former Israeli officials said they saw no reason for Israel to back off its strikes now, despite calls for deescalation from some world capitals. The more Israel degrades Iran's capabilities, the less able Tehran will be to mount retaliatory attacks on Israel or the United States, should the latter choose to enter the war. From the beginning, 'the Israeli planning was based on the assumption that we have to do it alone,' said a former Israeli diplomat familiar with the situation. The person, like others, was granted anonymity to discuss highly sensitive issues. It's unclear whether there is any deal with Iran that Israel would deem strong enough. There is tremendous distrust of Iran's Islamist regime within Israel's security establishment, leading to a sense that Iran would cheat on any deal. Another unsettled question is whether a deal with Iran will cover only its nuclear program or also curb its ballistic missile initiative and support for proxy militias in the region. Some analysts have argued that Netanyahu decided to begin attacking Iran last week because he was worried earlier nuclear talks between Iran and the Trump administration would yield too weak a deal. If new efforts at diplomacy yield fruit, Trump could pressure Netanyahu to accept whatever deal emerges, potentially even by threatening to withhold weapons and other equipment Israel needs to defend itself against Iran. The war is costly for Israel, which has been fighting on multiple fronts — in particular against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip — since October 2023. As one Israeli official said, Iranian missile attacks feel like 'Russian roulette' to Israeli citizens. CORRECTION: The caption on an earlier version of this article incorrectly located a U.N. Security Council meeting.