Latest news with #HassanNasrallah
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Politics
- Sydney Morning Herald
How the innocuous pager set in motion a potentially catastrophic war
Future historians might one day marvel at how a device as innocuous as a pager came to play such a significant role in the destabilisation of the Middle East, and the threat of a potentially catastrophic war radiating across the region. On September 17, Israel's intelligence agency, Mossad, issued an electronic instruction to thousands of pagers it had fed into the hands of unwitting members of Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militia that had embedded itself in Lebanon, posing a constant threat to Israel from its northern border. Two waves of explosions followed, as tiny and powerful charges in the devices detonated. Alongside the civilians killed and injured, the attack removed 1500 Hezbollah fighters from combat, many of them maimed or blinded, Reuters later reported, citing a Hezbollah source. But more significantly than that, its terrible success emboldened Israel. Israeli war planners had for years been concerned that an all-out confrontation with the powerful militia could provoke a devastating barrage of missiles. Hezbollah was known to have stockpiled thousands of the weapons, supplied by Iran. But with the militia in disarray, its communications obliterated, the threat was diminished. The scene for the current crisis was set. Days after what became known as Operation Grim Beeper, Israeli warplanes dropped bunker-buster bombs on what it described as Hezbollah's headquarters in the southern suburbs of Beirut during a leadership meeting, killing 195 people, according to Lebanon's health ministry. Among them was Hassan Nasrallah, the Shiite cleric who had led the group since 1992. This signalled the grim dynamics of the region's geopolitics had shifted. For decades, Iran has advocated for the destruction of Israel, and for decades it propped up proxies to prosecute its conflict, channelling funds not only to Hezbollah in Lebanon, but to Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas in Gaza. Israel and Iran fought by proxy in Yemen, where Iran supported the Houthis, and in the Syrian civil war, where Iran backed the Assad regime. But in recent years, Iran's network of proxies has been battered, leaving it temptingly vulnerable. Israel has largely annihilated Hamas in the vicious war in Gaza unleashed by the group's October 7 terrorist attacks in 2023. The Assad regime in Syria fell a year later. The Houthis have been diminished by an international bombing campaign against them, led by the US in response to that group's attacks on shipping in the Red Sea. All the while Israel has been building its ties with Arab states opposed to Iran's regional ambitions under the so-called Abraham Accords. The nuclear deal In July 2015, after two years of negotiations, Iran and the five permanent members of the UN security council, plus Germany and the EU, signed what was formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, and informally as the Iran nuclear deal. Under the deal, Iran would agree to restrictions on its development of nuclear technologies and uranium enrichment program – and to international inspections of its nuclear facilities – in return for relief from crippling sanctions. Then-US president Barack Obama considered the deal to be a crowning achievement of his administration, but it was bitterly opposed Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as the powerful Israel lobby in the US, which had become increasingly aligned with the US political right. 'It blocks every possible pathway Iran could use to build a nuclear bomb while ensuring – through a comprehensive, intrusive and unprecedented verification and transparency regime – that Iran's nuclear program remains exclusively peaceful moving forward,' the Obama White House said at the time. In his campaign against the deal, Netanyahu visited the US Capitol without a formal invitation from Obama, telling Congress that the deal would 'not prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, it would all but guarantee Iran gets nuclear weapons – lots of them'. The deal's opponents believed that it facilitated the Iranian pretence that its nuclear program was civilian in intent, and noted that its sunset clauses would allow Iran to resume various parts of its nuclear program within 10 to 16 years. Either way, when Donald Trump was inaugurated in 2017, he set about unravelling the Obama legacy. The Iran deal was one of his key targets. He dumped it 2018, describing it as a 'horrible one-sided deal that should have never, ever been made'. It was at this point, says Amin Saikal, emeritus professor of Middle Eastern studies at the Australian National University, that the current crisis became inevitable. The deal contained a 'snap back' clause, nullifying the deal should one side break its terms. At the time, the UN's watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, said there was no evidence that Iran was in contravention of the deal. But with the US out, Iran again ramped up its nuclear program. Israel, having diminished Iran's proxies around the region, prepared for strikes on Iran, which had always been Netanyahu's key target. In October last year, Iran lobbed a volley of missiles into Israel, which responded with a wave of airstrikes later that month. More than 100 Israeli aircraft attacked, targeting military sites including missile production facilities, a drone factory, and most notably, destroying much of Iran's Russian-supplied air defence system. All Israeli aircraft returned safely to their bases. Earlier this month, on June 11, the US pulled personnel out of the Middle East, which Trump said, 'could be a dangerous place'. The following day, the IAEA board declared Iran was in breach of its obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. On June 13, the Israel Defence Forces issued a statement saying it had intelligence that Iran was nearing 'the point of no return' in its race towards a nuclear weapon. 'The regime is producing thousands of kilograms of enriched uranium, alongside decentralised and fortified enrichment compounds, in underground, fortified sites. This program has accelerated significantly in recent months, bringing the regime significantly closer to obtaining a nuclear weapon. 'The Iranian regime has been working for decades to obtain a nuclear weapon. The world has attempted every possible diplomatic path to stop it, but the regime has refused to stop. The State of Israel has been left with no choice.' First strikes Israel's first strikes hit Iran's top military leadership and nuclear facilities on June 12, with Iranian media confirming the attacks killed Iranian Armed Forces General Staff Chief Major General Mohammad Bagheri, Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Commander Major General Hossein Salami, Khatam-al-Anbiya Central Headquarters Commander Gholam Ali Rashid, nuclear scientist and former head of the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran Fereydoon Abbasi, and physicist and president of the Islamic Azad University Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, according to the Institute for the Study of War, a non-partisan US think tank. Since then, Israel has continued its attacks, targeting key personnel as well as dozens of military and nuclear sites. Iran has responded with missile and drone attacks on Israel. Though hundreds of its missiles have been intercepted and destroyed, many have penetrated the nation's Iron Dome air defence system. Israeli air attacks have killed 639 people in Iran, said the Human Rights Activists News Agency. Israel has said at least 24 Israeli civilians have died in Iranian missile attacks. Reuters could not independently verify the death toll from either side. A key site Israel has been unable to destroy is the Fordow uranium enrichment facility buried deep beneath a mountain 30 kilometres north of the city of Quom, and this brings us back to the role of the US. So heavily hardened is Fordow that Israel lacks the capacity to destroy it, and most analyses of the facility suggest that only the US has the technology to do so. Multiple strikes on the facility by US B2 bombers carrying so-called bunker-buster bombs – 13.6 tonne 'Massive Ordnance Penetrators' – would be required, according to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. The madman theory To the extent that Donald Trump has a foreign policy doctrine, he might best be described as an adherent to the madman theory advanced by president Richard Nixon, who believed that if he fostered a reputation for being irrational and volatile, threats that might otherwise be viewed as untenable might carry more weight. Trump is leaning in to Nixon's lessons. When asked by The Wall Street Journal last year if he would use military force to respond to a Chinese attack on Taiwan, Trump said he wouldn't have to because Chinese leader Xi Jinping 'respects me and he knows I'm f---ing crazy'. Trump's response to the current conflict has been, at best, unpredictable. In April, he recommenced negotiations with Iran, demanding it agree to end all uranium enrichment and destroy its stockpile of 400 kilograms of enriched uranium at a 60 per cent purity level. Iran refused, while Israel opposed the talks being held at all. According to Saikal of the ANU, the talks failed because the US kept raising the bar. In keeping with the isolationist views of his MAGA movement, Trump spent the early months of his second term seeking to restrain Netanyahu, reversing course after his abrupt departure from the G7 talks earlier this week. Discussing engaging in strikes on Iran, he told reporters at the White House on Wednesday, 'I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do'. On social media that day, he declared, 'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding. We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now … Our patience is wearing thin.' Three minutes later, he posted, 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!' On Thursday, Trump announced he would give himself two weeks to decide. 'That could be cover for a decision to strike, immediately,' James G. Stavridis, a retired Navy admiral and the former supreme US commander in Europe, said on CNN. 'Maybe this is a very clever ruse to lull the Iranians into a sense of complacency.' Loading Saikal believes Trump is likely to deploy a US bomber to hit Fordow, though he bases this on his years of analysis of the region rather than any specific information. He fears the implications. Even with its weakened network of proxies, Iran could close the Strait of Hormuz, through which a quarter of the world's oil and gas supply travels. He notes that even in its weakened state, Iran maintains close ties with China and Russia. And while Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei remains an unpopular autocrat, leading a nation weakened by years of sanctions, the antibody response of an outside attack could firm his base, Saikal believes. So far, analysts have been surprised by how quickly Israel was able to dominate Iranian skies, suggesting that not only did earlier strikes weaken Iran's defence, but that the regime has been white-anted by corruption and patronage. As sanctions crippled civilian life in Iran over recent years, members of the Revolutionary Guard (which was founded after the revolution to defend the Islamic Republic from internal and external threats) profited from blackmarket oil sales and the development of monopolies over consumer goods, says Dr Kylie Moore-Gilbert. The Australian specialist in Middle Eastern political science, now at Macquarie University, was imprisoned by the regime in an act of hostage diplomacy in 2018. 'I was arrested by the intelligence branch of the IRGC, and I spent a lot of time, unfortunately, talking to them and getting to know them over several years. And clearly, many of them are incompetent. They're in their roles because of ideological affinity, and who their family members are, not because of competence or expertise.' It may well be that the US hopes to eradicate Iran's nuclear program while allowing the regime to survive, but Netanyahu appears to determined to see it fall. Asked on Friday morning if he considered Khamenei a 'dead man', Netanyahu ducked the question. Loading 'Every option remains open, though I would rather not discuss such matters publicly and allow our actions to communicate our intentions,' he said. Moore-Gilbert believes the Revolutionary Guard, rather than some unnamed progressive movement, is the likely successor should the regime be toppled. No alternative exists. Should that happen, Israel might not like what emerges. 'It is a hardline fundamentalist Islamist organisation with a kind of worldview that believes in exporting the ideology of the Iranian Revolution, particularly to other parts of the Shia Islamic world, but more broadly as well. 'It's virulently antisemitic and anti-American, anti-Western. It is conspiratorial and paranoid.' Saikal believes that whatever form of Iranian leadership emerges from the current crisis will be even more determined to secure nuclear weapons. It will, after all, have seen what happens without them.
The Age
3 hours ago
- Politics
- The Age
How the innocuous pager set in motion a potentially catastrophic war
Future historians might one day marvel at how a device as innocuous as a pager came to play such a significant role in the destabilisation of the Middle East, and the threat of a potentially catastrophic war radiating across the region. On September 17, Israel's intelligence agency, Mossad, issued an electronic instruction to thousands of pagers it had fed into the hands of unwitting members of Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militia that had embedded itself in Lebanon, posing a constant threat to Israel from its northern border. Two waves of explosions followed, as tiny and powerful charges in the devices detonated. Alongside the civilians killed and injured, the attack removed 1500 Hezbollah fighters from combat, many of them maimed or blinded, Reuters later reported, citing a Hezbollah source. But more significantly than that, its terrible success emboldened Israel. Israeli war planners had for years been concerned that an all-out confrontation with the powerful militia could provoke a devastating barrage of missiles. Hezbollah was known to have stockpiled thousands of the weapons, supplied by Iran. But with the militia in disarray, its communications obliterated, the threat was diminished. The scene for the current crisis was set. Days after what became known as Operation Grim Beeper, Israeli warplanes dropped bunker-buster bombs on what it described as Hezbollah's headquarters in the southern suburbs of Beirut during a leadership meeting, killing 195 people, according to Lebanon's health ministry. Among them was Hassan Nasrallah, the Shiite cleric who had led the group since 1992. This signalled the grim dynamics of the region's geopolitics had shifted. For decades, Iran has advocated for the destruction of Israel, and for decades it propped up proxies to prosecute its conflict, channelling funds not only to Hezbollah in Lebanon, but to Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas in Gaza. Israel and Iran fought by proxy in Yemen, where Iran supported the Houthis, and in the Syrian civil war, where Iran backed the Assad regime. But in recent years, Iran's network of proxies has been battered, leaving it temptingly vulnerable. Israel has largely annihilated Hamas in the vicious war in Gaza unleashed by the group's October 7 terrorist attacks in 2023. The Assad regime in Syria fell a year later. The Houthis have been diminished by an international bombing campaign against them, led by the US in response to that group's attacks on shipping in the Red Sea. All the while Israel has been building its ties with Arab states opposed to Iran's regional ambitions under the so-called Abraham Accords. The nuclear deal In July 2015, after two years of negotiations, Iran and the five permanent members of the UN security council, plus Germany and the EU, signed what was formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, and informally as the Iran nuclear deal. Under the deal, Iran would agree to restrictions on its development of nuclear technologies and uranium enrichment program – and to international inspections of its nuclear facilities – in return for relief from crippling sanctions. Then-US president Barack Obama considered the deal to be a crowning achievement of his administration, but it was bitterly opposed Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as the powerful Israel lobby in the US, which had become increasingly aligned with the US political right. 'It blocks every possible pathway Iran could use to build a nuclear bomb while ensuring – through a comprehensive, intrusive and unprecedented verification and transparency regime – that Iran's nuclear program remains exclusively peaceful moving forward,' the Obama White House said at the time. In his campaign against the deal, Netanyahu visited the US Capitol without a formal invitation from Obama, telling Congress that the deal would 'not prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, it would all but guarantee Iran gets nuclear weapons – lots of them'. The deal's opponents believed that it facilitated the Iranian pretence that its nuclear program was civilian in intent, and noted that its sunset clauses would allow Iran to resume various parts of its nuclear program within 10 to 16 years. Either way, when Donald Trump was inaugurated in 2017, he set about unravelling the Obama legacy. The Iran deal was one of his key targets. He dumped it 2018, describing it as a 'horrible one-sided deal that should have never, ever been made'. It was at this point, says Amin Saikal, emeritus professor of Middle Eastern studies at the Australian National University, that the current crisis became inevitable. The deal contained a 'snap back' clause, nullifying the deal should one side break its terms. At the time, the UN's watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, said there was no evidence that Iran was in contravention of the deal. But with the US out, Iran again ramped up its nuclear program. Israel, having diminished Iran's proxies around the region, prepared for strikes on Iran, which had always been Netanyahu's key target. In October last year, Iran lobbed a volley of missiles into Israel, which responded with a wave of airstrikes later that month. More than 100 Israeli aircraft attacked, targeting military sites including missile production facilities, a drone factory, and most notably, destroying much of Iran's Russian-supplied air defence system. All Israeli aircraft returned safely to their bases. Earlier this month, on June 11, the US pulled personnel out of the Middle East, which Trump said, 'could be a dangerous place'. The following day, the IAEA board declared Iran was in breach of its obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. On June 13, the Israel Defence Forces issued a statement saying it had intelligence that Iran was nearing 'the point of no return' in its race towards a nuclear weapon. 'The regime is producing thousands of kilograms of enriched uranium, alongside decentralised and fortified enrichment compounds, in underground, fortified sites. This program has accelerated significantly in recent months, bringing the regime significantly closer to obtaining a nuclear weapon. 'The Iranian regime has been working for decades to obtain a nuclear weapon. The world has attempted every possible diplomatic path to stop it, but the regime has refused to stop. The State of Israel has been left with no choice.' First strikes Israel's first strikes hit Iran's top military leadership and nuclear facilities on June 12, with Iranian media confirming the attacks killed Iranian Armed Forces General Staff Chief Major General Mohammad Bagheri, Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Commander Major General Hossein Salami, Khatam-al-Anbiya Central Headquarters Commander Gholam Ali Rashid, nuclear scientist and former head of the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran Fereydoon Abbasi, and physicist and president of the Islamic Azad University Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, according to the Institute for the Study of War, a non-partisan US think tank. Since then, Israel has continued its attacks, targeting key personnel as well as dozens of military and nuclear sites. Iran has responded with missile and drone attacks on Israel. Though hundreds of its missiles have been intercepted and destroyed, many have penetrated the nation's Iron Dome air defence system. Israeli air attacks have killed 639 people in Iran, said the Human Rights Activists News Agency. Israel has said at least 24 Israeli civilians have died in Iranian missile attacks. Reuters could not independently verify the death toll from either side. A key site Israel has been unable to destroy is the Fordow uranium enrichment facility buried deep beneath a mountain 30 kilometres north of the city of Quom, and this brings us back to the role of the US. So heavily hardened is Fordow that Israel lacks the capacity to destroy it, and most analyses of the facility suggest that only the US has the technology to do so. Multiple strikes on the facility by US B2 bombers carrying so-called bunker-buster bombs – 13.6 tonne 'Massive Ordnance Penetrators' – would be required, according to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. The madman theory To the extent that Donald Trump has a foreign policy doctrine, he might best be described as an adherent to the madman theory advanced by president Richard Nixon, who believed that if he fostered a reputation for being irrational and volatile, threats that might otherwise be viewed as untenable might carry more weight. Trump is leaning in to Nixon's lessons. When asked by The Wall Street Journal last year if he would use military force to respond to a Chinese attack on Taiwan, Trump said he wouldn't have to because Chinese leader Xi Jinping 'respects me and he knows I'm f---ing crazy'. Trump's response to the current conflict has been, at best, unpredictable. In April, he recommenced negotiations with Iran, demanding it agree to end all uranium enrichment and destroy its stockpile of 400 kilograms of enriched uranium at a 60 per cent purity level. Iran refused, while Israel opposed the talks being held at all. According to Saikal of the ANU, the talks failed because the US kept raising the bar. In keeping with the isolationist views of his MAGA movement, Trump spent the early months of his second term seeking to restrain Netanyahu, reversing course after his abrupt departure from the G7 talks earlier this week. Discussing engaging in strikes on Iran, he told reporters at the White House on Wednesday, 'I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do'. On social media that day, he declared, 'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding. We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now … Our patience is wearing thin.' Three minutes later, he posted, 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!' On Thursday, Trump announced he would give himself two weeks to decide. 'That could be cover for a decision to strike, immediately,' James G. Stavridis, a retired Navy admiral and the former supreme US commander in Europe, said on CNN. 'Maybe this is a very clever ruse to lull the Iranians into a sense of complacency.' Loading Saikal believes Trump is likely to deploy a US bomber to hit Fordow, though he bases this on his years of analysis of the region rather than any specific information. He fears the implications. Even with its weakened network of proxies, Iran could close the Strait of Hormuz, through which a quarter of the world's oil and gas supply travels. He notes that even in its weakened state, Iran maintains close ties with China and Russia. And while Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei remains an unpopular autocrat, leading a nation weakened by years of sanctions, the antibody response of an outside attack could firm his base, Saikal believes. So far, analysts have been surprised by how quickly Israel was able to dominate Iranian skies, suggesting that not only did earlier strikes weaken Iran's defence, but that the regime has been white-anted by corruption and patronage. As sanctions crippled civilian life in Iran over recent years, members of the Revolutionary Guard (which was founded after the revolution to defend the Islamic Republic from internal and external threats) profited from blackmarket oil sales and the development of monopolies over consumer goods, says Dr Kylie Moore-Gilbert. The Australian specialist in Middle Eastern political science, now at Macquarie University, was imprisoned by the regime in an act of hostage diplomacy in 2018. 'I was arrested by the intelligence branch of the IRGC, and I spent a lot of time, unfortunately, talking to them and getting to know them over several years. And clearly, many of them are incompetent. They're in their roles because of ideological affinity, and who their family members are, not because of competence or expertise.' It may well be that the US hopes to eradicate Iran's nuclear program while allowing the regime to survive, but Netanyahu appears to determined to see it fall. Asked on Friday morning if he considered Khamenei a 'dead man', Netanyahu ducked the question. Loading 'Every option remains open, though I would rather not discuss such matters publicly and allow our actions to communicate our intentions,' he said. Moore-Gilbert believes the Revolutionary Guard, rather than some unnamed progressive movement, is the likely successor should the regime be toppled. No alternative exists. Should that happen, Israel might not like what emerges. 'It is a hardline fundamentalist Islamist organisation with a kind of worldview that believes in exporting the ideology of the Iranian Revolution, particularly to other parts of the Shia Islamic world, but more broadly as well. 'It's virulently antisemitic and anti-American, anti-Western. It is conspiratorial and paranoid.' Saikal believes that whatever form of Iranian leadership emerges from the current crisis will be even more determined to secure nuclear weapons. It will, after all, have seen what happens without them.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
10 hours ago
- Politics
- First Post
Why has Hezbollah stayed out of the Israel-Iran conflict so far?
As Iran and Israel exchange direct attacks, Hezbollah — Tehran's most powerful regional ally — has chosen to stay on the sidelines. The Lebanon-based group, weakened by last year's Israeli strikes and under domestic and international pressure, has publicly pledged loyalty to Iran but held back militarily read more Demonstrators hold pictures of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and late Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, as people gather for a rally in solidarity with Iran, amid the Iran-Israel conflict, in Beirut's southern suburbs, Lebanon, June 20, 2025. File Image/Reuters One player is missing from the recent tensions between Iran and Israel. The lack of military engagement by Hezbollah, Iran's long-time and most strategically placed regional ally is being seen as an anomaly in the recent conflict. Based in Lebanon and once regarded as among the most effective non-state actors in the world, Hezbollah's decision to refrain from joining the hostilities stands in stark contrast to its prior behaviour during regional escalations, particularly following the October 7, 2023, attacks carried out by Hamas on Israel. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Tehran, for decades, has fostered a network of allied militias across West Asia, including in Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon, designed to serve both as deterrents and retaliatory forces in the event of aggression against Iran. Of these, Hezbollah has traditionally been the most heavily armed and strategically located, directly bordering northern Israel. But while Israel and Iran have exchanged attacks for days, Hezbollah's military units have remained in their positions without launching retaliatory strikes. According to a Lebanese government official familiar with the situation, army leaders received internal signals from Hezbollah that the group had no current plans to join the ongoing confrontation. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to Bloomberg due to the sensitive nature of the information. Why Hezbollah has stayed out of the Israel-Iran conflict so far One of the key factors influencing Hezbollah's current posture is the significant damage it incurred during its conflict with Israel in the latter half of the previous year. The group lost many of its senior commanders, including longtime leader Hassan Nasrallah, and faced extensive destruction of its infrastructure. Israel's military employed extensive tactics including drone operations, aerial bombardments and ground offensives across southern Lebanon and parts of Beirut. That campaign, followed by a ceasefire in late November, left large portions of Hezbollah's stronghold areas in ruins. The Lebanese military, which has since increased its presence in the south, was able to seize various weapons caches reportedly abandoned or hidden by the militia. The physical and economic toll of the conflict has been immense. According to World Bank estimates, the direct damages and losses suffered by Lebanon during the Israel-Hezbollah hostilities amounted to approximately $14 billion. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A further $11 billion is expected to be needed for rebuilding, a sum neither the Lebanese government nor Hezbollah appears to have secured. Compounding the situation is Lebanon's severe financial crisis, Iran's economic constraints due to international sanctions and the broader costs of regional instability. These factors have left Hezbollah with diminished operational capacity and growing political pressure at home. Lebanon's newly formed technocratic administration, led by Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and President Joseph Aoun, has pointed out the need to keep the country insulated from external wars. During a cabinet session, Salam stated that Lebanon must avoid 'being dragged or pushed in any way in the ongoing regional war.' How Hezbollah is still batting for Iran While Hezbollah has not taken military action, its leadership has continued to publicly affirm its alliance with Iran. In a speech Thursday night, Hezbollah leader Sheikh Naim Qassem voiced unconditional support for Iran in the unfolding crisis with Israel and the United States. 'Iran has the right to defend itself, and the peoples of the region and the free people of the world have the right to stand with the great leader and with Iran in one trench,' Qassem said. He also highlighted the legitimacy of Iran's nuclear programme, stating: 'It does not harm anyone in the slightest way; rather, it represents a great scientific contribution to the advancement of Iran and the region, relying on its own capabilities without foreign tutelage.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Denouncing international criticism of Iran, Qassem accused world powers of opposing Tehran not for its nuclear capabilities but for its ideological values and resistance posture. 'America is leading the region into chaos and instability, and the world into open crises,' he declared, adding that such policies would 'only bring it shame, disgrace, and failure.' Despite these declarations, the group's operational activity has not matched the intensity of its rhetoric. This marks a significant departure from its behaviour following the Hamas-led assault on Israel in October 2023, after which Hezbollah quickly launched cross-border missile attacks in support of its Palestinian allies. Qassem also warned of consequences stemming from Israeli actions: 'Israel's aggression will have major repercussions on regional stability and will not pass without a response and punishment.' However, no direct retaliatory moves have followed, suggesting that Hezbollah is calibrating its responses based on broader regional and domestic considerations. How Israel & US continue to pressure Hezbollah While Hezbollah has not engaged in new offensive operations, the United States has sent strong warnings to dissuade the group from joining the Israel-Iran conflict. US Special Envoy for Syria and Ambassador to Turkey, Thomas Barrack, visited Beirut and met with Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a known Hezbollah ally. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Following the meeting, Barrack said: 'I can say on behalf of President Trump, which he has been very clear in expressing, as has Special Envoy Steve Witkoff: that would be a very, very, very bad decision.' These comments reflect Washington's position that Hezbollah's involvement would escalate the crisis and possibly provoke a broader war — something few actors in the region currently want. Meanwhile, Israeli surveillance continues with intensity. Drones reportedly conduct near-daily flights over Beirut, and airstrikes on select targets have not ceased. These ongoing threats have limited Hezbollah's freedom of movement and capacity to regroup. Additionally, the Lebanese population, still reeling from last year's devastation, has shown little appetite for renewed conflict. Viral social media videos from cities like Beirut have shown residents filming Iranian ballistic missiles flying overhead during Israeli retaliatory operations — showing how close Lebanon remains to the conflict, even without participating directly. A spokesperson for Hezbollah, speaking to Newsweek, stated the group remains 'committed to the ceasefire agreement' with Israel. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Still, analysts suggest that Hezbollah's current stance is conditional. Political analyst Qassim Qassir, who has close ties to the group, said that Hezbollah may alter its position depending on how events unfold. 'Everything is on the table. Nothing is off limits,' he noted, implying that the group's inactivity may be temporary, especially if Iran's regime comes under more direct threat. With inputs from agencies
Gulf Today
11 hours ago
- Politics
- Gulf Today
Israel is preparing to destroy the fortified Fordow nuclear facility with ‘commando teams'
Israel is prepared to carry out a unilateral strike on Iran's heavily fortified Fordow nuclear facility, according to a senior Israeli military official cited by The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday. 'Israel has a plan for Fordow and the capability to execute it independently,' the unnamed official said, though no specific operational details were provided. The Fordow facility, located roughly 30 kilometers (20 miles) from the city of Qom in north-central Iran, is built deep within the mountains, posing a formidable challenge to any conventional military assault. Ehud Eilam, a former Israeli Defense Ministry researcher, suggested that Israel may consider deploying numerous small penetrator bombs designed to breach fortified underground structures. He also referenced previous Israeli operations, such as the reported assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in a subterranean Beirut bunker last September, as examples of Israel's ability to strike hardened targets. 'Israel could also pursue alternative tactics,' Eilam added, 'including high-risk commando raids, cyberattacks, or targeted assassinations.' Fordow is considered one of Iran's most sensitive nuclear sites. Israel maintains that Iran is nearing the capability to produce a nuclear weapon—an accusation Tehran has repeatedly denied, insisting its nuclear program is strictly for peaceful purposes. Tensions between the two nations have surged since last Friday, when Israel launched a series of airstrikes on Iranian territory, targeting both military and nuclear sites. In response, Iran retaliated with a barrage of missiles. According to Israeli authorities, the Iranian attacks have killed at least 24 people and injured hundreds more. Iranian media, in turn, report that Israel's retaliatory strikes have left 585 dead and over 1,300 wounded.
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
‘There'll Be No Hezbollah': Israel's Katz Declares TOTAL WAR, Cites Nasrallah's Fate As Last Warning
Tensions between Israel and Hezbollah continue to escalate as Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz warned Hezbollah's leadership that the country's patience has run out. Referring to the assassination of former Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, Katz cautioned current leader Sheikh Naim Qassem that any act of terror would trigger a decisive response. Qassem, in turn, issued a fiery statement condemning U.S. and Israeli "aggression" against Iran and pledging Hezbollah's full support for Tehran. He rejected claims that Iran's nuclear program poses a threat and framed Western hostility as a response to Iran's independence and support for resistance movements. The war of words signals a deepening regional confrontation as Hezbollah vows to 'act as it sees fit' in the growing Israel-Iran conflict.
